Is This TOO Wacky to Happen??

[FrankenRam]

There seems to be a little thinking that perhaps the Rams could stand a little help on the OL.

And a large majority of the discussion revolving around how to resolve the need(s) involves signing some combination of the 'Group of 3' FA's or......., drafting OL first, last, & only in the upcoming Suspect Draft.

But what if we could make a trade to fill at least one of those spots? Who would I trade? My first thought was draft picks. But given we don't have a full complement of picks this year, that idea seems unlikely.

My next thought was someone on Defense? But who? And then I stumbled on the idea of trading CLong for a starting quality OL.

Why Long? Mostly because I'm thinking he's the most easily replaceable. I.e., there are at least 3 DE's whose names are consistently mocked in the Top 10 in the upcoming draft. If we could grab one of those with the #10 pick, we could have Long's replacement and a starting OL.

The obvious question is.......is there a team out there rich in OL who might be interested in Long....AND his contract? It's probably a long shot, but I'd just throw it out there and see if maybe it sticks.

 

[OJM]

I think the most likely thing that should and will happen, is for one of the young guys to fill one of the spots. I think that spot will be C. You can't keep trying to patch the line with these FAs

 

[BriansRams]

I would make that trade that you just described. For sure.

 

[GabesHorn]

Lets trade the Browns out of their Stud Center. They are the only team dumb enough. Lets trade JJ and his gambling CB play. Yet the Browns have a couple good CB's already. Just not sure who we could trade . This week we will sign a FA OL. Just have no clue who it will be. None. Someday these FA lineman will sign somewhere. Things are getting silly now with no movement anywhere except the rare released swing OL'men.

 

[Ballhawk]

I think that this would be highly unlikely, but not too long ago I would have said the same thing about trading Bradford.
We would have to get a lot of value for Long and we would also have to make sure that we weren't just bringing in another injury looking for a place to happen as well.
There is some merit to the idea though as a rookie DE would be easier to get up to speed over a rookie O line and they could save some money as well.

 

[Zombie Slayer]

Barron is a free agent still right?

 

[Mojo Ram]

I threw out a hypothetical trade last year involving C.Long and generally got blasted for it

 

[jrry32]

I don't think it would be a wise move. If we want to go that route, just trade a draft pick(4th) for Evan Mathis or another OG. Really don't see the point in trading C. Long for an OL then using the #10 pick to draft a replacement when we could simply keep C. Long and use the #10 pick to draft an OL...or trade down, gain another pick, and use that pick to draft an OL. Most of the top pass rushers in this draft aren't ideal fits for our scheme while the top OLs are.

Something else to keep in mind, OLs are one of the lowest risk positions early in the draft. I.E. OLs drafted in the first round have a high success rate. DLs are one of the highest risk positions early in the draft. I.E. DLs drafted in the first round have a low success rate relative to other positions.

So we'd be making a more risky pick if we used our first on a DL in a class with less DL depth than OL depth.

I just don't see it as a wise move to make.

 

[Robocop]

no.. not cool. how did that defense do while he was gone last year? you must have him as extremely underrated or have a solid replacement idea. without him your no longer a top defensive line or possibly a top defense. After all the hard work to build the top defense AND the top line just to trade it away? not happening

 

[Jorgeh0605]

I threw out a hypothetical trade last year involving C.Long and generally got blasted for it

This is me blasting anyone trying to trade C Long.

 

[Mojo Ram]

This is me blasting anyone trying to trade C Long.

It's all good. I have no desire to trade Chris at this time. He was missed last season when out w/injury. Looking forward to his leadership and production in this defense in 2015.

 

[lockdnram21]

no.. not cool. how did that defense do while he was gone last year? you must have him as extremely underrated or have a solid replacement idea. without him your no longer a top defensive line or possibly a top defense. After all the hard work to build the top defense AND the top line just to trade it away? not happening

He wasn't the reason our line start playing well it was Donald. We're still a top defense without him . He pretty good imo he's overrated

 

[Merlin]

Not a fan of creating a hole that you need to fill and might whiff on, particularly with a key piece like Chris Long. Every pick is a crap shoot why induce more opportunity to fail?

Granted I really like Fowler. But I feel the same about Gordon and both are luxury picks.

Rams need impact return on their picks. OL gives that. WR does too if it is Cooper. IMO keep it simple and draft value/need combination.

 

[FrankenRam]

I threw out a hypothetical trade last year involving C.Long and generally got blasted for it

That's sorta the reaction I was anticipating as well.

 

[RAGRam]

Here's my wacky off the wall idea for fixing the OL, what we do is we draft talent at the position, taking 2 in the top 3 rounds, and then start them. I know, I know, people don't want to start 2 rookies on the offensive line, but imagine the dividends a line of:

Robinson / rookie (Cann?) / Jones / Saffold / rookie (Scherff?) would pay in 2018 when all but Jones are still under contract and they've all developed chemistry together over 48+ games, sure we'll take our lumps early by starting such an inexperienced line, but you can't convince me it would be worse than watching Wells and Joseph for a year, and that it won't be worth it when it does pay off.

 

[DaveFan'51]

There seems to be a little thinking that perhaps the Rams could stand a little help on the OL.

And a large majority of the discussion revolving around how to resolve the need(s) involves signing some combination of the 'Group of 3' FA's or......., drafting OL first, last, & only in the upcoming Suspect Draft.

But what if we could make a trade to fill at least one of those spots? Who would I trade? My first thought was draft picks. But given we don't have a full complement of picks this year, that idea seems unlikely.

My next thought was someone on Defense? But who? And then I stumbled on the idea of trading CLong for a starting quality OL.

Why Long? Mostly because I'm thinking he's the most easily replaceable. I.e., there are at least 3 DE's whose names are consistently mocked in the Top 10 in the upcoming draft. If we could grab one of those with the #10 pick, we could have Long's replacement and a starting OL.

The obvious question is.......is there a team out there rich in OL who might be interested in Long....AND his contract? It's probably a long shot, but I'd just throw it out there and see if maybe it sticks.

Very flawed thinking! Chris is in no way easily replaceable, he brings too much to the table, in the game and the locker room!

I threw out a hypothetical trade last year involving C.Long and generally got blasted for it

And deservedly so!

no.. not cool. how did that defense do while he was gone last year?

This^!!

I have no desire to trade Chris at this time. He was missed last season when out w/injury. Looking forward to his leadership and production in this defense in 2015.

And this^!!

That's sorta the reaction I was anticipating as well.

So you posted this because you wanted to get "Beat-Up"!?

 

[FrankenRam]

The reason I make this proposal is not because I want to get rid of CLong (I don't really). It's about trying to fill a need on the OL. And the reality of making trades is that, if you expect to obtain something of quality, you have to give something of quality.

The rationale follows something like this...

1. The Rams don't seem to be all that enthused about the existing FA OL that are available as of now....at least not at the players' current asking price.

2. Chances are, we will wind up signing at least one FA before all is said and done...even if it's not from the currently postulated Group of 3 (Wiz, JBarks, Blalock). I seriously doubt we wind up signing all 3 (cap buster?), but at least one seems likely, and 2 is possible. But no matter how we slice it, there's a high likelihood we'll still have at least one spot on the OL to fill that won't occur via FA. More likely 2.

3. I just don't see Fisher starting more than 1 rook on the OL. Anything is possible, but some are much more probable. And with GRob being barely more than a rookie, I would be just dumbfounded if he was willing to start 2 from this year's draft class.

4. Given all the above, there seems a reasonably good chance we'll sign one FA that will start, and draft one SUSPECT that will start. Leaving one hole yet to fill.

5. Look at the OL available in the upcoming draft. Scherff is the only name I see mocked consistently in the top 10. I've seen Peat once or twice and Collins maybe once. But in general, there doesn't seem to be the 1 or 2 outstanding suspects this year. Supposedly, it's a deep draft for OL overall, but there doesn't seem to be the GRob/Matthews level suspects.

6. By contrast, look at the DE's that are consistently mocked in the top 10. There's a choice of at least 3 (Gregory, Fowler, SRay) and possibly 4 if we include Beasley. Is there not 1 amongst that group that could fall to us at 10? Seems like better odds of that occurring than Scherff being there at 10.

7. CLong is the elder statesman of the Rams' D, and if I'm not mistaken, will turn 30 during the '15 season. And does have one of the bigger contracts.

As mentioned in the op, there are probably more reasons to think this won't happen than will. I.e., is there a team that would be willing to give up a starting quality OL for Long? And just as importantly, of the DE's consistently mocked in the top 10, what are the chances one would fall to the Rams at 10.....AND would any of them fit the Rams' scheme and fill CLong's role on the DL.

 

[FrankenRam]

Very flawed thinking! Chris is in no way easily replaceable, he brings too much to the table, in the game and the locker room!

Not easily replaceable is not the same as irreplaceable.

I do agree that the D performed better with CLong in the lineup last yr than without. But a LOT of that had to do with the entire D getting used to Williams' scheme, and ADonald becoming a regular part of the rotation as much as it had to do with CLong.

So you posted this because you wanted to get "Beat-Up"!?

No, obviously not. I posted it because we have needs to fill on the OL that may not be able to be met via FA or draft. Plus.....I just wanted to see how many here might be willing to think a little outside the box for other avenues to fill those needs. Seems there's evidence at least one member is willing to stay locked into the current box.

 

[Faceplant]

Something else to keep in mind, OLs are one of the lowest risk positions early in the draft. I.E. OLs drafted in the first round have a high success rate. DLs are one of the highest risk positions early in the draft. I.E. DLs drafted in the first round have a low success rate relative to other positions.

So we'd be making a more risky pick if we used our first on a DL in a class with less DL depth than OL depth.

I just don't see it as a wise move to make.

Someone please tell that to the Rams FO then, ahem Smith... Ahem... Barron. And yet CLong was taken a year earlier in same draft position as Smith and continues to produce. Maybe the Rams are the bizarro to this rule...

 

[Dr C. Hill]

It is not that far fetched, if the value is there you take it. Do you think those cheating scumbags in New England are still crying about giving up Mankins? Coming of an injury, being on the wrong side of 30, and in a bad contract should make you the target of speculation. The grave yards are full of people that can't be replaced.