Heresy in the age of Free Agency

[LesBaker]

It doesn't have anything to do with how good he is, it has to do with what he's is worth financially in a capped environment. His cost/value is what's being evaluated.

 

[Mackeyser]

You do realize that NONE of this is anyone saying they WANT AD traded, right?

This is merely an acknowledgment that AD may want terms that the Rams wont' agree to under any circumstances. One I can immediately think of is a player opt-out after 3 years.

That just doesn't cut it if he wants a Mega-contract with record-setting guarantees. It's a recipe to ask to be paid essentially $30M per season and that's not going to happen.

That was Brees' cap hit last year, iirc, and even at the QB position, it really hurt them.

I don't want to trade AD.

The point is that he may want terms that are untenable. IF, IF, IF that's the case, it's really pretty binary: either pick up his 5th-year option and then tag him for 2-3 years in which there's no chance he attends any off-season anything or we trade him while the trade is there for what could be a treasure trove.

I don't want to trade AD. I don't think the compensation package is unworkable.

If I had to guess, I think his team is INSISTING on a 3-year opt-out. That's my guess.

And I support the Rams saying an absolute NO to that.

Any trade or the path the Rams take with AD is really up to AD. We're just spectators and in a very real sense, so are the Rams.

 

[Mackeyser]

I picked the Colts because they have the cap room AND the high picks.

It's not a matter that AD isn't AD and a havoc wrecker.

I wouldn't want to play against him...ever. I get your point that if his demands are a net negative, put it on your rivals.

That said, every team's cap situation is different. SF, for example, doesn't have a bunch of expensive contracts coming up where dealing with an opt-out after 3 years would potentially kill their cap.

We do. So it isn't as simple as saying that AD's demands would affect every team the same, thus trade him to a rival because OUR cap situation would make a 3 yr opt-out untenable.

 

[Mackeyser]

I don't disagree with any of that.

The bottom line is that it's not about wheeling and dealing with AD.

If my guess is correct, it's about a 3rd-year player opt-out.

Thus, it'll be the Rams having to choose between keeping him for a few years or making longer term decisions.

I dunno which is better because a bird in the hand and all that.

 

[PhillyRam]

Donald is having a DPOY worthy season. He would be our biggest loss on defense. No other player is as disruptive or makes as many plays as he does. Hopefully we don't have to be without him for an extended period.

And yet our run defense, which he should dominate, sucks. So in other words the greatest DT, which he is, can still be neutralized in the run game.

Again it comes down to his position. For years it has been stated that DE, LT, CB, and QB are the key positions. Last week we saw what happens when you lose a starting CB.... Dallas showed what happens when you lose a LT.

Heck, right now I would think hard if I would rather lose Donald for a game or Havenstein just because he would be tough to replace.

That's the key, you can scheme to get effective play without him at DT, but not so at OT or CB and certainly QB.

 

[Mackeyser]

And yet our run defense, which he should dominate, sucks. So in other words the greatest DT, which he is, can still be neutralized in the run game.

Again it comes down to his position. For years it has been stated that DE, LT, CB, and QB are the key positions. Last week we saw what happens when you lose a starting CB.... Dallas showed what happens when you lose a LT.

Heck, right now I would think hard if I would rather lose Donald for a game or Havenstein just because he would be tough to replace.

That's the key, you can scheme to get effective play without him at DT, but not so at OT or CB and certainly QB.

And with all that, I'd pay him IF, IF, IF what he wanted wasn't something like an opt-out clause.