Rams tried to trade up for Ashton Gillotte in round 3

  • 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.

methomas50

Starter
Joined
Jan 18, 2024
Messages
661

View: https://x.com/TheRamsWire/status/1917262692546490461


They offered their 2026 2nd round pick to Jacksonville but Gillotte ended up in KC at pick 66 and never reached pick 70. Interesting they ended up with Stewart who is more edge/LB and considerably smaller than Gillotte. Gillotte had a better year in 23 than 24 but the Rams apparently liked what they saw enough to give up a high picks next year.
 

methomas50

Starter
Joined
Jan 18, 2024
Messages
661
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #3
B Young on notice?
Not sure. This guy is 6 foot 3 and 276. Much bigger than Young or the guy they just drafted. More towards Hoecht size. This guy is a 3 down DE with pass rush ability. Had double digit sacks in 2023. KC who is good at picking D Lineman apparently liked him a lot too.
 

Hram

UDFA
Joined
Feb 3, 2013
Messages
98
Give me that number 64 next year for number 70 this year seems like a decent trade if they’ve been able to make it work :)
 

XXXIVwin

Legend
Joined
Jun 1, 2015
Messages
5,283
Also shows how much we on ROD underestimated the Rams' desire to get an EDGE player.

Michael Hoecht was a big loss, understandably so. And apparently Nick Hampton isn't nearly the player that Hoecht is.
 

Elmgrovegnome

Legend
Joined
Jan 23, 2013
Messages
24,447
Also shows how much we on ROD underestimated the Rams' desire to get an EDGE player.

Michael Hoecht was a big loss, understandably so. And apparently Nick Hampton isn't nearly the player that Hoecht is.
Yeah, I wasn’t even looking at the edge guys. I figured they’d pick up a Hoecht replacement. I just thought it would be later in the draft.
 

jjab360

Legend
Joined
Jan 21, 2013
Messages
6,845
Give me that number 64 next year for number 70 this year seems like a decent trade if they’ve been able to make it work :)
Yeah as much as I don't want to give up future picks, a future 2nd of a perennial playoff team for a pick at the top of the 3rd definitely sounds like a bad trade for the Jags. I'm sure we would've had to give up some capital this year to finalize the trade.

Glad it didn't go down though, held onto our future 2nd and I'm pretty sure I like Stewart better than Gillotte as a player anyway.
 

So Ram

Legend
Camp Reporter
Joined
Jun 18, 2014
Messages
15,997
Glad the Chiefs took him first.
I think The Draft worked out perfectly for The Rams!!

I was upset The Rams traded away there 1st rd pick.Jihaad Campbell was a player I liked.

That said TE was Ferguson & MaSon Taylor.Same type of players though. Happy with Ferguson.

Next a DE / yeah seems like a great fit.The Rams needed to Replace Hoecht.

A RB - like TE there were a couple nice players.This Hunter is a solid pick4.

Anyway all 6 ended up being pers
 

Elmgrovegnome

Legend
Joined
Jan 23, 2013
Messages
24,447
Sounds like the Rams tried to trade up or down in every round of this draft.
It makes sense. Snead explained it. If you have a good roster, there are fewer spots to be filled. So if they trade back for volume most of those players don’t make the starting roster. So trade up for quality.

Plus, this draft was not loaded with good prospects. So, in that case trading up for the best player they have graded made more sense.
 

jrry32

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 14, 2013
Messages
30,661
Explain please. Do you like Stewart better or aren’t sold on Gillotte.

Or you don’t think Gillotte was worth giving up next years second round pick for?
I'm not a fan of trading future 1sts or 2nds. The prospect has to be pretty special to warrant it imo.
 

FaulkSF

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Aug 9, 2016
Messages
6,138
Name
FaulkSF
I'm not a fan of trading future 1sts or 2nds. The prospect has to be pretty special to warrant it imo.
Were you a fan of the Fiske trade? He had a good season and finished 3rd place for defensive rookie.
 

fearsomefour

Legend
Joined
Jan 15, 2013
Messages
17,965
Also shows how much we on ROD underestimated the Rams' desire to get an EDGE player.

Michael Hoecht was a big loss, understandably so. And apparently Nick Hampton isn't nearly the player that Hoecht is.
Hoecht is a physical freak.
The role can be filled but who knows to what affect. Will be interesting to see.
Hampton, Jackson, Thomas....there will be competition for that back of edge roster depth this year for sure.
 

Mojo Ram

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Feb 3, 2013
Messages
23,917
Name
mojo
Hoping the offense is ready to play football week 1 this year for a change, because I feel like our D is going to wreck QB’s this year. Several of these good young guys are entering year 2, 3 and 4. Less thinking and more wrecking.
 

snackdaddy

Who's your snackdaddy?
Joined
May 6, 2014
Messages
13,335
Name
Charlie
Interesting they want Gillotte more. The NFL scouting report has him as "Eventually will be an average starter". Stewart's scouting report has him as "Eventually will be a plus starter". Could be another one of those times where a deal that couldn't be made turned out better.
 

Memento

Your (Somewhat) Friendly Neighborhood Authoress.
Joined
Jul 30, 2010
Messages
19,442
Name
Jemma
I honestly think that Stewart is a better prospect than Gillotte, even though he went later.

This could be another situation where our "loss" turns into a huge gain.