Peter King: Rams Must Trade Up, Draft Quarterback

[Akrasian]

I think that would be to much 2#1 and a 2 yes but that's it.With the preset salary on rookies now top 5 picks are not as expensive as they used to be Imo.

The lower rookie wage scale should actually increase the value of high draft picks, not reduce them.

I figure if the Rams are at 18, then it would normally take their first, both seconds, and maybe a little more to move up to #5. The problem is that the niners will be around there, and need a QB, so it would take more to hurdle them. Frankly, if the Rams fall in love with a particular QB I'm figuring this year and next year's firsts, plus both seconds this year at a minimum to get him.

 

[jrry32]

I think that would be to much 2#1 and a 2 yes but that's it.With the preset salary on rookies now top 5 picks are not as expensive as they used to be Imo.

If you're willing to give that much up, I don't see the point in drawing the line at another pick. If he's a franchise QB, he's worth it.

 

[MountainRam]

I'm not so sure they are. We need a couple WRs and would be smart to upgrade on Cook. But beyond that, it's mainly just the QB.

A new QB, 2 Wrs, a new TE ;Vola! the chemistry is not there the first 8 games of the season. It's a downward spiral to start the season this way.

Given how shrewd Fisher is. this is what he will do. He will draft a QB in 2nd round. Will tell the world the QB is not ready to start this season. Will start Keenum. If Keenum fails, he will go to Mannion.

Assuming another failed season (a non playoff season is failed season), the national media and local media will sympathize with Fisher and will say Fisher needs time to develop the QB he drafted.

How do I know next year will be a failure? I don't. I hope not. The probability for a winning and non-winning seasons are same in a 16 game schedule (assuming 8-8 is successful/failure)

 

[JackDRams]

I think that would be to much 2#1 and a 2 yes but that's it.With the preset salary on rookies now top 5 picks are not as expensive as they used to be Imo.

Yeah but we'd be moving up 16-18 spots. It would take a lot. Whoever trades with us would be giving up on a blue chip prospect. And our team is on the verge of the playoffs, so if we move up for a franchise QB, the first we give up next year is likely another later pick. I think it would take more then two firsts and a second. Quite a bit more actually.

 

[jrry32]

A new QB, 2 Wrs, a new TE ;Vola! the chemistry is not there the first 8 games of the season. It's a downward spiral to start the season this way.

Given how shrewd Fisher is. this is what he will do. He will draft a QB in 2nd round. Will tell the world the QB is not ready to start this season. Will start Keenum. If Keenum fails, he will go to Mannion.

Assuming another failed season (a non playoff season is failed season), the national media and local media will sympathize with Fisher and will say Fisher needs time to develop the QB he drafted.

How do I know next year will be a failure? I don't. I hope not. The probability for a winning and non-winning seasons are same in a 16 game schedule (assuming 8-8 is successful/failure)

The chemistry doesn't have to be there. We've won a number of games this year with a passing attack that put up less than 200 yards. We need the threat of a passing attack to keep the defense honest and players that can make plays when the opportunity presents itself. Anything beyond that and we're golden.

I think what you're expecting Fisher to do is the opposite of shrewd.(maybe that is your way of saying he's not shrewd) But that's just my opinion.

I also don't think anyone will sympathize with Fisher if he can't get the team to the playoffs after 5 years.

 

[Memphis Ram]

Rams must trade up to draft QB?

Such a blanket statement is foolish. Sure, the Rams may need a QB (though we haven't seen Mannion yet), but must trade up?

That assumes that there is some guaranteed answer at the position waiting for the team and there may not be one. And at what cost? Some have their favorites, but I haven't seen anyone ranking or raving about any potential QBs in this draft class like they did about Elway, Luck, the Manning brothers, etc...

 

[NateDawg122]

Only one problem: this year's qb class is very underwhelming. Lynch screams bust to me and Goff just doesn't do it for me either. I really like Wentz but I would prefer we go Treadwell with our first and then trade back into round one for Wentz. I'd like to see what Mannion can do, as many do, but I'm afraid this regime just cannot afford to gamble with Mannion if they want to keep their jobs. With Wentz, maybe it buys these guys an extension if he performs adequately? Idk...

We happen to be in a tricky situation with our two, among others, weak areas on the team, qb and oc. Do we roll with Keenum or try out the kid behind him? Do we draft a guy instead and roll the dice on a rookie? Do we search for a new oc or stick with Boras?

I wish I had the answers, but that's the "fun" part of the off season. Believe or not, I think we're close!

You're wrong about Goff, he is brilliant. His bowl performance the other day was probably the best I've ever seen from a QB. He was throwing dimes all day long. He is probably the surest thing since Andrew Luck at that position.

 

[jrry32]

Rams must trade up to draft QB?

Such a blanket statement is foolish. Sure, the Rams may need a QB (though we haven't seen Mannion yet), but must trade up?

That assumes that there is some guaranteed answer at the position waiting for the team and there may not be one. And at what cost? Some have their favorites, but I haven't seen anyone ranking or raving about any potential QBs in this draft class like they did about Elway, Luck, the Manning brothers, etc...

Must is an exaggeration but odds are that the Rams will need to move up at least a few spots.

 

[Akrasian]

You're wrong about Goff, he is brilliant. His bowl performance the other day was probably the best I've ever seen from a QB. He was throwing dimes all day long. He is probably the surest thing since Andrew Luck at that position.

In which case it will likely take trading up to #1 to get him. On the draft value charts, if the Rams draft #18, that would likely be their firsts through 2018, both seconds this year, and possibly something else just to get in the conversation. Since teams need draft picks that hit to stay under the cap and do well, it basically would cripple the rest of the team, as productive players get too expensive to keep and there aren't as good players waiting behind them. And Goff would not have anybody to throw to, unless the Rams just don't resign most of their defense in order to sign free agent wide receivers.

Somehow, I don't see the Rams doing that.

 

[MountainRam]

The chemistry doesn't have to be there. We've won a number of games this year with a passing attack that put up less than 200 yards. We need the threat of a passing attack to keep the defense honest and players that can make plays when the opportunity presents itself. Anything beyond that and we're golden.

I think what you're expecting Fisher to do is the opposite of shrewd.(maybe that is your way of saying he's not shrewd) But that's just my opinion.

I also don't think anyone will sympathize with Fisher if he can't get the team to the playoffs after 5 years.

You have an interesting take.

The closest team that Fisher wants to emulate is Seattle. In 2013 and 2014 (Seattle's super bowl years), their passing never ranked better than 25th. So I believe your argument is valid on surface. The one dimension missing from this is Russel Wilson's running threat.

It's great defense (rams are comparable), great running game (Gurely comparable to Lynch), great special teams (both teams very good) + read option QB with decent accuracy (Rams don't have it) on the run and in the pocket was what made all of this happen for Seattle.

So, 200 yards or less passing yards per game (without QB running) is not a consistent winning formula. They need to find either a good pocket QB (like Joe Flacco) or a read option QB like Russell Wilson. Once they have either of these QB pieces, Rams need to have a good TE ( i don't know if Rams have one the roster), an OK #1 WR (compare to Golden Taint of Seattle). On top of this one has to hope Boras is on the level of Darell Bevell.

So it is a lot more than just adding a QB.

 

[jrry32]

You have an interesting take.

The closest team that Fisher wants to emulate is Seattle. In 2013 and 2014 (Seattle's super bowl years), their passing never ranked better than 25th. So I believe your argument is valid on surface. The one dimension missing from this is Russel Wilson's running threat.

It's great defense (rams are comparable), great running game (Gurely comparable to Lynch), great special teams (both teams very good) + read option QB with decent accuracy (Rams don't have it) on the run and in the pocket was what made all of this happen for Seattle.

So, 200 yards or less passing yards per game (without QB running) is not a consistent winning formula. They need to find either a good pocket QB (like Joe Flacco) or a read option QB like Russell Wilson. Once they have either of these QB pieces, Rams need to have a good TE ( i don't know if Rams have one the roster), an OK #1 WR (compare to Golden Taint of Seattle). On top of this one has to hope Boras is on the level of Darell Bevell.

So it is a lot more than just adding a QB.

Pretty sure I made that clear earlier in the thread (although, "a lot" is an exaggeration). But adding a talented passer is the #1 priority.

We shouldn't be emulating Seattle. We should make Seattle emulate us.

 

[MountainRam]

Pretty sure I made that clear earlier in the thread (although, "a lot" is an exaggeration). But adding a talented passer is the #1 priority.

We shouldn't be emulating Seattle. We should make Seattle emulate us.

I see it. My second response should have been my first response if I make any sense. All cool.

 

[Merlin]

Only one problem: this year's qb class is very underwhelming. Lynch screams bust to me and Goff just doesn't do it for me either. I really like Wentz but I would prefer we go Treadwell with our first and then trade back into round one for Wentz. I'd like to see what Mannion can do, as many do, but I'm afraid this regime just cannot afford to gamble with Mannion if they want to keep their jobs. With Wentz, maybe it buys these guys an extension if he performs adequately? Idk...

We happen to be in a tricky situation with our two, among others, weak areas on the team, qb and oc. Do we roll with Keenum or try out the kid behind him? Do we draft a guy instead and roll the dice on a rookie? Do we search for a new oc or stick with Boras?

I wish I had the answers, but that's the "fun" part of the off season. Believe or not, I think we're close!

A ridiculous claim in my opinion. If you don't like this class you are probably never going to draft a QB.

It's been some years since I've seen four QBs who could go first round without being a clear need-based reach. The Rams cannot afford to F this up, they need to decide which one they want and go get him.

 

[JUMAVA68]

If you're willing to give that much up, I don't see the point in drawing the line at another pick. If he's a franchise QB, he's worth it.

Well that can go on and on that's like saying what's another 4th or 5th.The line has to drawn somewhere so 2#1 and a 2 would be the limit for me.And that's provided were getting 1st dibs on Qbs That extra 3rd,4th or 5th can turn out to be a good player EJ Gaines type.

 

[jrry32]

A ridiculous claim in my opinion. If you don't like this class you are probably never going to draft a QB.

It's been some years since I've seen four QBs who could go first round without being a clear need-based reach. The Rams cannot afford to F this up, they need to decide which one they want and go get him.

We may not agree on Manziel but we are in 100% agreement here. Well said.

 

[jrry32]

In which case it will likely take trading up to #1 to get him. On the draft value charts, if the Rams draft #18, that would likely be their firsts through 2018, both seconds this year, and possibly something else just to get in the conversation. Since teams need draft picks that hit to stay under the cap and do well, it basically would cripple the rest of the team, as productive players get too expensive to keep and there aren't as good players waiting behind them. And Goff would not have anybody to throw to, unless the Rams just don't resign most of their defense in order to sign free agent wide receivers.

Somehow, I don't see the Rams doing that.

Nah. You're overstating things. The RGIII trade was truly one of a kind. You almost never see that sort of value. I think, at most, it would cost us what RGIII cost Washington. Might cost us less considering the lack of competition.

But I don't see us trading up to #1.

 

[NateDawg122]

In which case it will likely take trading up to #1 to get him. On the draft value charts, if the Rams draft #18, that would likely be their firsts through 2018, both seconds this year, and possibly something else just to get in the conversation. Since teams need draft picks that hit to stay under the cap and do well, it basically would cripple the rest of the team, as productive players get too expensive to keep and there aren't as good players waiting behind them. And Goff would not have anybody to throw to, unless the Rams just don't resign most of their defense in order to sign free agent wide receivers.

Somehow, I don't see the Rams doing that.

It wouldn't take trading up to #1. The Titans have Mariota so there is no way they would take a QB at #1. At most you would have to trade up to #2 with the Browns and that's only if they are going away from Manziel. We would probably have to give up two 1st, one 2nd round, one 3rd, and possibly another, lower pick to move up to #2.

We use the rest of this year's picks to bolster positions of need. We could use our remaining 2nd round pick to get a receiver. Ideally we would have already signed a quality receiver in free agency. Also, your cap space argument doesn't really make sense since we would be using less high round picks in total. Cutting guys like Cook, Foles, and Saffold would add to an already good cap space.

 

[jrry32]

Well that can go on and on that's like saying what's another 4th or 5th.The line has to drawn somewhere so 2#1 and a 2 would be the limit for me.And that's provided were getting 1st dibs on Qbs That extra 3rd,4th or 5th can turn out to be a good player EJ Gaines type.

Me, personally...I'd be willing to do the RGIII trade. And would be elated if they only were asking 2 1sts, a 2nd, and a 4th.(Eli trade)

 

[Dodgersrf]

Me, personally...I'd be willing to do the RGIII trade. And would be elated if they only were asking 2 1sts, a 2nd, and a 4th.(Eli trade)

If Goff is that good, it's worth the trade just to keep him out of Frisco.

 

[Akrasian]

It wouldn't take trading up to #1. The Titans have Mariota so there is no way they would take a QB at #1. At most you would have to trade up to #2 with the Browns and that's only if they are going away from Manziel. We would probably have to give up two 1st, one 2nd round, one 3rd, and possibly another, lower pick to move up to #2.

We use the rest of this year's picks to bolster positions of need. We could use our remaining 2nd round pick to get a receiver. Ideally we would have already signed a quality receiver in free agency. Also, your cap space argument doesn't really make sense since we would be using less high round picks in total. Cutting guys like Cook, Foles, and Saffold would add to an already good cap space.

Since the Browns almost certainly are going to take a QB, it would require trading in front of them. The Browns are NOT going to trade out of getting a top QB, not after they've been trying to get one for years. And keep in mind that if Goff really is all that, then the Browns and the 49ers at least will be trying to trade up to get him, meaning that the cost to get him will be higher. And if the Browns have the #2 pick, they would have to give up relatively little in addition to get him, since Tennessee would still be guaranteed the best non-QB.

And in terms of cap space, you apparently don't realize that first round picks are now less expensive than vets. Having more firsts means you can draft good players, and have them under control for years at below market rates. There is the occasional stinker, but overall teams are far better off having players before free agency than after, at least financially. And cutting some of the current overpriced players is going to be necessary anyway - just to re-sign all the defensive free agents. Smart teams keep their financial leeway by having inexpensive young players always ready. Trading away a ton of high picks makes that difficult at best.