Deal in Place to Trade Jason Smith

[-X-]

Actually I said it was about money. I still think that way. They gave Smith a pay cut because he wasn't performing up to par, and then they put a clause in there so that they wouldn't have to pay him next year too. And then .... poof.

There's also Boudreau housing Smith with his dogs and then ... poof.

I have no idea why he's gone. I too think Smith's play against Richardon's was lateral, all things considered. I can't imagine Richardson being some sort of asset in pass pro based on what I've seen, and I can't see that out of Smith either. Maybe Richardson is more coachable? Maybe Smith didn't have the right attitude for Boudreau? Truth is, none of us know. I do know Demoff likes to save coin though. And I do know that Fisher likes his players on the line to be mean and nasty.

At this point, however, it's fruitless for any of us to try and convince anyone else that our opinions on this are infallible. Because, again, none of us know the whole story. And does it really matter anyway? What can we do about it? We really only have two choices. Trust that Fisher & company are doing what they feel is best for the Organization, or raise arms against the entire regime and storm Rams Park.

I dunno about the rest of you, but I'm too tired to storm Rams Park. :shifty:

 

[Anonymous]

At this point, however, it's fruitless for any of us to try and convince anyone else that our opinions on this are infallible.

Well, I think of our opinions more as invulnerable.

Kind of like the crew of the Black Pearl.

Cursed, invulnerable--but, you know, for all that, pretty good at discussing line play.

Richardson played better than Smith. That is all I know. The coaches and GM agree with me on that. And then the loser of that competition got traded. That is fact

Well, it's opinion. I disagree with it. But it's not like it's a qb controversy--meaning, it's not that heavy duty, as disputes go. Either way this is just one of those kinds of issues that's open to different interpretations.

Either way I think everyone agrees Saffold is playing well, and as long as that stays true, and he stays healthy, a less than ideal ROT is something they can work around.

 

[DR RAM]

At this point, however, it's fruitless for any of us to try and convince anyone else that our opinions on this are infallible.

Well, I think of our opinions more as invulnerable.

Kind of like the crew of the Black Pearl.

Cursed, invulnerable--but, you know, for all that, pretty good at discussing line play.

Richardson played better than Smith. That is all I know. The coaches and GM agree with me on that. And then the loser of that competition got traded. That is fact

Well, it's opinion. I disagree with it. It's just one of those things--open to interpretation.

Either way I think everyone agrees Saffold is playing well, and as long as that stays true, and he stays healthy, a less than ideal ROT is something they can work around.

So, Smith didn't get traded? Link please.

 

[Anonymous]

At this point, however, it's fruitless for any of us to try and convince anyone else that our opinions on this are infallible.

Well, I think of our opinions more as invulnerable.

Kind of like the crew of the Black Pearl.

Cursed, invulnerable--but, you know, for all that, pretty good at discussing line play.

Richardson played better than Smith. That is all I know. The coaches and GM agree with me on that. And then the loser of that competition got traded. That is fact

Well, it's opinion. I disagree with it. It's just one of those things--open to interpretation.

Either way I think everyone agrees Saffold is playing well, and as long as that stays true, and he stays healthy, a less than ideal ROT is something they can work around.

So, Smith didn't get traded? Link please.

We disagree on the meaning of the trade, the cause for it, and the idea that it was simply a matter of competition with a straight up clear winner and loser. I think there's more to it than that and that it's not that cut and dried. I said why I think that--I don't think there was a clearcut on the field difference between them. On the other hand I don't need there to be. Boudreau has a knack for putting lines together that have good chemistry. In my mind, his idea of that had as much to do with it all as anything else. In terms of lines that have good cohesion and chemistry, he may be doing it again. Or maybe he went a bridge too far this time. To coin a phrase, we;ll see.

 

[BatteringRambo]

I'm surprised anyone,no offense intended, spends any of their time on that Stl PD garbage. All it took was a PM from X and I was here. I have not even browsed the other site in over 2 years. I don't think it complements one over another to use both sites. I find everything I'll ever need on ROD, the forums,members,and most staff writers on that other site are much too negative and nauseating.

Ahhh if only a virtual clam bake session could happen all would be calm.

 

[Username]

Imma ban all your asses baitchersz :tooth: :amped:

 

[RamFan503]

I'm surprised anyone,no offense intended, spends any of their time on that Stl PD garbage. All it took was a PM from X and I was here. I have not even browsed the other site in over 2 years. I don't think it complements one over another to use both sites. I find everything I'll ever need on ROD, the forums,members,and most staff writers on that other site are much too negative and nauseating.

Ahhh if only a virtual clam bake session could happen all would be calm.

My sentiments EXACTLY.... seriously... EXACTLY.

 

[ramsince62]

I think their evals were based on their play on the field. Why wouldn't it be?

You're probably right. Still, coaches are people, too, and people get caught up in subjective stuff. That's not an indictment, nor is it a conspiracy theory. Just curious speculation.

Besides, X asked zn for his opinion and he gave it. I didn't read any distrust in the opinion, or even blame to either Boudreau or Smith. Just an acknowledgement of human nature.

IMO, Smith was the easiest to trade of the tackles they were willing to trade, primarily because of his age. Hunter was chosen because Schotty knew him and Hunter knew his system. And it could be a fresh start for both tackles.

I don't care about spin or Jets' fans' invective. I'll wait to see how Hunter plays here.

RQ is right. I didn't blame, or criticize, or look for anything nefarious. This has NOTHING to do with dark things like distrust, or conspiracy theories, or bashing--or any of that. I mean I feel like I said I prefer the burgers ay my favorite local grill over McDonalds and then someone takes me to task for bashing corporations.

I just begin with a completely different assessment of the players than you, doc, and then branch out from there. To me they were just not that far apart in terms of performance. And there are a lot of different people out there debating that, all over Rams land, and I am just not alone in that view--so it's not quirky. Doesn't mean it's right but it's not quirky. Okay so when you start from there, you can bring in other things--for example, I really do see Smith as having better potential, even this year, as a pass blocker. That enters into my view. I don't see Richardson as any kind of night and day improvement. I then ask--well, why the trade then. And what's driving that question, on my part, is just ordinary dumb fan curiosity. Plus it's fun to talk about it & throw ideas around.

And for what it's worth I ain't convincing a whole lotta folks. But that's okay.

Anyway. As with any player, we can;t even say with certainty that their assessment was based on their play on the field. That's granting that we can even agree on what that was--and there are different assessments of their play on the field.

Attitude, chemistry, perceived coachability, "fit," all sorts of things enter in when basically all things are equal. Maybe Smith was just not that good at seeing what he needed to see in film. I dunno, could be anything. Heck they may have thought Smith was a different person after the concussions, or they may have not wanted the concussion shadow lingering over them, or they may have thought that Richardson fit their idea of a right run blocker better as a body type, or maybe Boudreau saw Richardson as being more "his guy"...it goes on and on.

See cause their play was simply not so distinctly different in quality that there is no room for debate. I mean it's not like comparing Saffold to Ojinakka at left tackle. This is much closer to an "all things being equal" situation and when those happen, the deciding factor could be any number of things. Truth is we don't really know.

Richardson played better than Smith. That is all I know. The coaches and GM agree with me on that. And then the loser of that competition got traded. That is fact. I predicted that Smith would not make the roster. That is fact. It was NOT about money as you said earlier. That is fact. Richardson overtook Smith during training camp. That is fact. Smith had chances to win the spot back and didn't. That is fact. Truth is, if you pay attention to the details, you should have known. I proclaimed that we will not keep 2 RT only players, that is fact. I had no horse in the race. I want to field the best team, without bias. THAT IS FACT. I trust this regime. That is fact. My trust is not blind...that is fact. I will support this regime and ALL the players, even the newly acquired ones, and that is fact, whether I'm here or sitting at home discussing the Rams with my friends.

Smith, another screw up by the front office and the coaching staff (of old)...That is fact.

 

[Thordaddy]

I'm surprised anyone,no offense intended, spends any of their time on that Stl PD garbage. All it took was a PM from X and I was here. I have not even browsed the other site in over 2 years. I don't think it complements one over another to use both sites. I find everything I'll ever need on ROD, the forums,members,and most staff writers on that other site are much too negative and nauseating.

Ahhh if only a virtual clam bake session could happen all would be calm.

My sentiments EXACTLY.... seriously... EXACTLY.

Last time I was there Linehan was still considered a breath of fresh air and Bernie was carping about closed practices.

 

[RamFan503]

I'm surprised anyone,no offense intended, spends any of their time on that Stl PD garbage. All it took was a PM from X and I was here. I have not even browsed the other site in over 2 years. I don't think it complements one over another to use both sites. I find everything I'll ever need on ROD, the forums,members,and most staff writers on that other site are much too negative and nauseating.

Ahhh if only a virtual clam bake session could happen all would be calm.

My sentiments EXACTLY.... seriously... EXACTLY.

Last time I was there Linehan was still considered a breath of fresh air and Bernie was carping about closed practices.

Yeah - I have to admit. Laziness brought me there as it would be obvious the St Louis paper would have a Rams forum. As soon as Paul (Stl Rams X was it then?) announced he was building a site for us fans, I was there. That sunk into the swamp so he built another one. And I followed him there (here) too. Been here and only here pretty much ever since. I knew at the time his mind set was where I was as well.

 

[cfin5256]

I'm surprised anyone,no offense intended, spends any of their time on that Stl PD garbage. All it took was a PM from X and I was here. I have not even browsed the other site in over 2 years. I don't think it complements one over another to use both sites. I find everything I'll ever need on ROD, the forums,members,and most staff writers on that other site are much too negative and nauseating.

Ahhh if only a virtual clam bake session could happen all would be calm.

Is that the St Louis times board? I browse here and clanram usually. Peeked at that other one and it's insane.