The trading by Snead ain’t done. The Rams now has the draft capital to move anywhere they want in rounds 2 and 3 to pick up the remaining guys they want. Of course it involves a trade partner but they hotheadedness capital.
Rams trade No. 31 pick to the Falcons
- Thread starter BonifayRam
- Start date
-
To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.
NFL drafts are usually won and lost in the 2nd & 3rd rounds. It appears that the Rams have set themselves up to have a successful 2019 draft.
Here are some of the "bigger" names still available:
OT Jawaan Taylor
S Nasir Adderley
DB Chauncey Gardiner-Johnson
C Erik McCoy
OT Greg Little
OG Cody Ford
CB Trayvon Mullen
CB Julian Love
S Taylor Rapp
CB Rock Ya-Sin
OG Dalton Risner
EDGE Joquai Polite
...plus, some decent WR and RB prospects, not to mention Lock, Stidham, and a couple of good TE prospects.
We can also bundle a couple of picks to move up a bit. Should be interesting.
In order to win, you need enough all pro talent on your roster. After that, you need the right role players to complement them. Some teams lose because those role players come on day 3 and just aren't good enough. We've got extra day 2 picks to find some quality starters who can be the right role players.
And who knows? Maybe a couple of those role players become more than that. Kupp was a 3rd rounder and he's a pro bowl caliber receiver. Johnson, another 3rd rounder is on the verge of being a pro bowler if he isn't already there. Noteboom is very talented.
I think we're in good shape to stock our roster with solid players for the future. I like the move to trade down for extra picks. I always felt there is a bigger drop off in talent from picks 100 to 125 than picks 75 to 100.
And who knows? Maybe a couple of those role players become more than that. Kupp was a 3rd rounder and he's a pro bowl caliber receiver. Johnson, another 3rd rounder is on the verge of being a pro bowler if he isn't already there. Noteboom is very talented.
I think we're in good shape to stock our roster with solid players for the future. I like the move to trade down for extra picks. I always felt there is a bigger drop off in talent from picks 100 to 125 than picks 75 to 100.
It's not 80%. Where the Rams currently sat at 31, they had, historically, a 54% chance of finding an instant contributor. Given one of our needs was center, which is a position that is typically very plug and play, the number was probably closer to 75% had we gone that route.
What the Rams traded down to, that number dips to 46% and the extra pick they picked up is at 35%. So we're slightly less than a coin flip on our best pick now, and little more than a throw at a dart board with our extra pick. For a team that was just one bad gameplan away from winning the Super Bowl and with a closing window (look at our free agent list next year - yikes!), this is probably going to be the team's best shot to win it all for a couple of years. They should have focused on finding a piece that will help them *right now* rather than to go trolling for as many pairs of arms and legs as possible in the hopes of striking it rich with one. I said it in another thread - I *LOVE* what Pittsburgh did. They're a team much in the same boat as us in terms of having to go for it right now with a window that's not going to remain open very long. They recognized it and, as a team that's usually very passive in the draft, they got aggressive, moved up, and grabbed a guy to help put them over the top *NOW*.
Trading down is for teams that feel like they don't really need anything or for teams who need as many people in camp as possible. THis is a team with an already strong 53 man roster. Adding more mid-level guys isn't going to drastically alter that.
London_Ram
Rookie
Without wanting to get too technical but happy to share the workings if you want... based on your %s above with our 2 picks we now have the following:-
16.1% chance of 2 instant contributors
35.1% chance of 0 instant contributors
48 8% chance of 1 instant contributor
In total we therefore have 64.9% chance of at least 1 instant contributor compared to 54% of a maximum of 1 instant contributor had we stayed put in round 1.
Using your figures the probabilities of us having an instant contributor are increased now.
I say great trade down.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #28
After having 8 (5th/6th/7th round) late 3rd-day draft selections in the 2018 draft plus he had three in 2017, Snead must be bored with them now..... he is trading them away. Anyway, 9 of those late rounders in 2017/2018 are on the roster now....how many 6th round picks do we need?
Using them to acquire 2nd-day draft ammo looks good to me. I suspect he wants to balance out the roster some
Last edited:
MrRiceGuyRJ
Let's Make the Rams Great Again
Not that I don't value the 2nd and 3rd rounds, but to say the first round has a higher bust rate, I feel that may be ignorant. Heck, look at most of our skilled players or "stars" and defensive starters, almost all first rounders... Goff, Gurley, Cooks, Donald, Peters, Talib, Brockers, Fowler, Clay Matthews, etc. 1st round definitely has a value. The majority of the best players in history are first rounders (at least Hall of Fame talents).
Maybe Snead can find the next later round star. Maybe even future HOFer. I'd be stoked to find the next Larry Allen in the 2nd round
Maybe Snead can find the next later round star. Maybe even future HOFer. I'd be stoked to find the next Larry Allen in the 2nd round
I don't think you're looking at this the way teams actually do.
Those "pairs of arms and legs" are actually REAL people that have potential to do special things. They might not be great at everything, but perhaps they are great at 1 or 2 things that the team really values for particular circumstances.
Or perhaps they are simply not valued as highly because of the position they play...or maybe they had an injury that really affected their play last year.
This...
Snead has said on multiple occasions that they rank players in tiers for the draft. Had an upper tier player somehow slipped to them in the first round, we would have him. Since this didn’t happen, they know they will get one of the next tier and pick up an extra one in the third tier.
Sorry Pop I don’t think you are keeping up with the thread. You would be correct if Snead trades down down down but he now has the capital to trade up down and all around in the all important rounds 2 3 and 4. I bet he trades up in round 2 if his tier 2 picks start fading.
First thing I thought when I saw the terms of the trade. Les Snead without a sixth rounder (much less, without multiple sixth rounders)? That's like the Stones without Mick Jagger ... like Motley Crue without tattoos ... like the Hell's Angels without Harley Davidsons ... like politicians without corruption ... I just have a hard time wrapping my head around it.
What kind of crazy world are we living in?!?!?!?!???!?!?!???!?
A lot of blue chip prospects on the 2nd and 3rd round this year. If Snead plays his cards right and the coaching staff develops them properly, we'll be good to go when the older guys hang their cleats.
It's hard to believe CGJ and Adderly are still available. Those two dudes won't last long in this round, unless there's some sort of dirt teams know about. I still think they're the best two safeties in this draft.
Excited about tonight. Lot of options at positions of need for us in the next two rounds.
Excited about tonight. Lot of options at positions of need for us in the next two rounds.
If he trades up, he gives up other capital to do so.
Oddly enough, the 30th-32nd picks have historically been pretty good players, but even moreso since 2010. Excluding last year, because rookies taint the numbers, since 2010 those 3 picks have yielded 17 real contributors, only 5 busts, and 1 (Jahvid Best) who suffered career ending injuries before reaching potential (keeping in mind that in 2016, there were only 31 1st round picks). Dating back from 2009 to 2002, when we went from 31 to 32 teams, and then back to 1999, when we went from 30 to 31, things get more dicey and draw the historical average down. As a matter of fact, aside from the top 5 and 14-17, 29-32 are the best positions in the entire draft.
The speculated reasoning on this is this is prime territory for a team to move in and grab a guy who's unnecessarily fallen for one reason or another. Teams recognize that somebody is on the board who, by all rights, shouldn't be, and want to snag that person before resetting the draft order. These fallers typically only last to the first 4 or 5 picks of the 2nd round. The rationale towards staying in those selections is you will almost always see at least one player with top 10 or top 15 level talent sitting there (this year, it's the OT from Florida; last year, it was Lamar Jackson; the year before, Reuben Foster, etc.). Teams that stay in these slots typically do very well with them because they can afford a BPA strategy, rather than look at need. As a result, they almost always get a value proposition.
If one is to apply some math (considering teams in these last 3 spots are typically the best teams in the league), the proper value of trading out of these 3 positions is a future year's 1st round pick as well as a low round (mid-low 6th) selection, which is A) almost certainly going to be an improvement in standing and B) a luxury top teams can institute, since they are typically more complete organizations.
If you go back through history of teams that have traded out of low 1st round positions for later picks in the same draft, the results are overwhelmingly negative. Only the Patriots have shown relative success doing this, because they have a tendency of turning those 2nd round picks they pick up for getting out of the 1st round....for future 1st round picks. The logic in trading out of the 1st round entirely is that one should go no more than 4 or 5 picks deep into the 2nd round.
Is this flawless math? No, this study we're doing at work as part of a machine learning application still has 5 years to go. But the numbers don't bear out what we did yesterday as being a wise decision. The obsession with accumulating as many picks as possible is going to be considered a relic-level thought process within 10 years.