JT: RG3 Trade - 1 Year Later

[Thordaddy]

Washington ENDED up with RG
We ended up with 3 firsts and a second

That was the deal , what each surrendered for the other.
There is no discreet measure that can be computed for the actual difference. They got RG we got whatever we get for those picks .

And we made out like a bandit,IMA start calling Snead, El Guapo

 

[CGI_Ram]

How can you not include Brockers?

My logic; we had a first round pick in 2012. We didn't gain one, just swapped spots.

So, Brockers was in effect OUR first round pick. Not a pick gained.

that doesn''t make a lick of sense.

brockers was part of the deal.

so the rams could have had rg3.

instead they got - brockers, jenkins, pead, watkins, 2013 round 1 pick, 2014 round 1 pick.

.

You're not the only one to respond this way. But I'm just as puzzled by your logic .

Take the names out of it;

The Rams gave up 1 pick

The Skins gave us 4 picks (their 1st, 2nd, 2013 1st, 2014 1st)

Net gain = 3 picks

 

[Thordaddy]

How can you not include Brockers?

My logic; we had a first round pick in 2012. We didn't gain one, just swapped spots.

So, Brockers was in effect OUR first round pick. Not a pick gained.

that doesn''t make a lick of sense.

brockers was part of the deal.

so the rams could have had rg3.

instead they got - brockers, jenkins, pead, watkins, 2013 round 1 pick, 2014 round 1 pick.

.

You're not the only one to respond this way. But I'm just as puzzled by your logic .

Take the names out of it;

The Rams gave up 1 pick

The Skins gave us 4 picks (their 1st, 2nd, 2013 1st, 2014 1st)

Net gain = 3 picks

If all the picks are the same AND you aren't including what we got FOR one of those picks from Dallas which ups the gain by one pick .
But the picks aren't all equal so if you want to make it numbers you have to go to the draft value board OR if you use the names it's the people we draft.

We have ALREADY IMO gotten very close to the break even point in tallent acquired,if we NOW parlay their first this year for more picks it can be a franchise builder of Hershal Walker proportions.
One of the players listed ,I think Pead was drafted with OUR original 2nd so it's really 5 picks SO FAR not 6.

 

[Thordaddy]

IF you go by the draft chart numbers
We switched 2 for 4 the difference is 800 points.
The value of Washingtons first this year is 800 points
So we profited from that trade NOT considering what we did with them,last years second and next years first.
About 1200 points,we made out real well

<a class="postlink" href="http://walterfootball.com/draftchart.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://walterfootball.com/draftchart.php</a>

 

[kurtfaulk]

How can you not include Brockers?

My logic; we had a first round pick in 2012. We didn't gain one, just swapped spots.

So, Brockers was in effect OUR first round pick. Not a pick gained.

that doesn''t make a lick of sense.

brockers was part of the deal.

so the rams could have had rg3.

instead they got - brockers, jenkins, pead, watkins, 2013 round 1 pick, 2014 round 1 pick.

.

You're not the only one to respond this way. But I'm just as puzzled by your logic .

Take the names out of it;

The Rams gave up 1 pick

The Skins gave us 4 picks (their 1st, 2nd, 2013 1st, 2014 1st)

Net gain = 3 picks

Yeah but we're not talking about the net gain, we're comparing the difference between staying at #2 and taking rg3 and trading him away for that bounty of picks, which brockers was part of.

.

 

[shaunpinney]

One guy does not make a team - if we picked RGIII last year he would have been smashed into the ground behind our o-line. RGIII is a talent and a half, but I think the 'Skins had more in place for him to have made a difference - the way I look at it, we traded RGIII for the chance to get Brockers and Jenkins, and an extra first rounder this year and next year so to simplify my way of thinking...

You're Jack, you know the one with the beanstalk and you're taking the cow to market, and 2 guys come up to you and want to buy the cow -

One of the guys has one bean to trade, and he says its the best bean in the whole wide world and it will produce a lot.

The other guy has 2 beans for you now, but promises more beans next year and the year after, and he says that his beans are really good and will keep producing, year after year after year...

Stick with me guys, the way I look at it, they are both risks, because you guarantee production from anyone, but if I had the choice of 6 beans to 1, I'd have to take the 6. I call it an a**-coverer. What happens if that 1 bean fails? You're screwed, if one 2 or 3 of the beans fail from your 6, you're still producing...

RGIII's way of playing is electric, but I worry about his longevity in the NFL, this year will be a test for him and Defences are going to hit him hard....

[hil]Ohh and lets not forget we beat the Skins last year!!! [/hil]

 

[Ramhusker]

The way I think you have to look at this trade is how it affected your decision making afterwards. If you were able to trade down like the Rams did with the #6 pick and gain another pick, you would have to count that as part of the net gain. And of course, Brockers would be part of the package because you have to look at who you have after the dust settles. Of course, you can look at it from a different angle and say the Rams got Brockers and Pead and the Cowboys got Claiborne. Who do you think won that one?