Right now the Rams have a problem in PAYING the wrong players

[dieterbrock]

Well, they likely would either have gotten a comp pick, or losing him to free agency would have made it more likely that they would still get high comp picks for Watkins and Johnson.

I don't remember how his contract extension affected his cap hit in 2017 (I suspect it was fairly neutral) but it does cost the Rams $6.4 million in cap space for 2018, which is the money for a solid but not star starter at linebacker, for instance. Or money that could go to pay AD. The question is whether the Rams are better off losing that cap space and the future 7th rounder they traded with him while gaining a late 4th and a 6th this year, or whether they would have been better off having more cap space and more likely to have several decent comp picks in 2019. I don't think it's clear either way.

I guess what I'm saying is that while the Rams ended up doing okay dumping a player they decided they didn't want right after signing him to a big contract, it isn't exactly a huge win over not extending him in the first place, and may actually be a bit of a loss overall. So they shouldn't make a habit of it, if possible.

This idea that you get a comp pick for every lost FA is just not accurate.
5 games in to the season they didn't know what they had in Tree, and I'm sure they would have been happy had it worked out. But it sure protected them from a compensation standpoint. They will be active in FA and if they lose Tru and Watkins they will certainly not be getting 2 3rd rounders. And had Tree been lost as well? Doubtful they get 3 picks.
In hindsight, its a smart move, if they didn't see him as a long term fit. (Which shocks me, as I'm a huge fan of his)

 

[Akrasian]

I suspect they had been working on the contract for a while, and momentum got to the point where offers had been made, and backing out would have had negative effects on team morale, so they finalized it instead. Then after realizing it was a mistake, made the best of it.

 

[Akrasian]

This idea that you get a comp pick for every lost FA is just not accurate.
5 games in to the season they didn't know what they had in Tree, and I'm sure they would have been happy had it worked out. But it sure protected them from a compensation standpoint. They will be active in FA and if they lose Tru and Watkins they will certainly not be getting 2 3rd rounders. And had Tree been lost as well? Doubtful they get 3 picks.
In hindsight, its a smart move, if they didn't see him as a long term fit. (Which shocks me, as I'm a huge fan of his)

I didn't say they would get a pick for each player lost.

However, losing Ogletree in free agency would have balanced off at least one free agent signing, so that they would have been more likely to get high picks for Watkins and Johnson. Now if they sign a replacement for Ogletree, that will diminish their compensation. So you can't just point to the picks he got in trade, and say that they are wins - there is a loss also, especially in a year where they have several free agents likely to get big contracts.

 

[bwdenverram]

In fairness they locked Tree up when it was a 4-3 and he was an OLB.. Which he was really good in.

 

[dieterbrock]

I didn't say they would get a pick for each player lost.

However, losing Ogletree in free agency would have balanced off at least one free agent signing, so that they would have been more likely to get high picks for Watkins and Johnson. Now if they sign a replacement for Ogletree, that will diminish their compensation. So you can't just point to the picks he got in trade, and say that they are wins - there is a loss also, especially in a year where they have several free agents likely to get big contracts.

Moving the goal posts now.
Letting him go in FA could have left them with nothing. And now they get a 4th and 6th. That's smart

 

[dieterbrock]

In fairness they locked Tree up when it was a 4-3 and he was an OLB.. Which he was really good in.

Well actually they locked him up in October when he had played about 5 games in the 3-4

 

[Akrasian]

Moving the goal posts now.
Letting him go in FA could have left them with nothing. And now they get a 4th and 6th. That's smart

I didn't move the goal posts. Re-read the very first line in the original quoted post. I stated explicitly that having him go free agent would have made it more likely that they would get comp picks for Watkins and Johnson.

And at worst, not signing him would have meant $6.4 million in additional cap room, for signing our own or others' free agents. Cap room matters. They spent a bunch, which has a negative effect. It's not clear that a late 4th and a 6th outweighs that.

 

[LesBaker]

Merlin like I said in another thread..........risk and vision.

This is a group that is bold.

From Wiki:

Fortune favors the bold is the translation of a Latin proverb, which exists in several forms with slightly different wording, where Fortuna is the goddess of luck, such as

• audentes Fortuna iuvat (literally: "fortune favors the bold")[1]
• audentes Fortuna adiuvat ("Fortune comes to the aid of those daring")[citation needed]
• Fortuna audaces iuvat (from the adjective audax, audacis, from the verb audeo), literally: "Fortune helps the bold".[citation needed]
• audentis Fortuna iuvat is used by Turnus, the antagonist of Aeneid[2]

 

[Jacobarch]

Not even going to get into Tavon here. But Tree in particular demonstrates that they locked up yet another guy who cannot produce in their scheme, and then had to orchestrate a trade to clean up the mess.

Meanwhile guys who DID excel in their scheme are yet to be signed to include Joyner needing to be tagged. And while I hear a lot of "relax man, the period just started" comments from other posters, there is a history with the secondary in particular where this organization has bled good talent, so it's not a reach to be concerned that it might continue.

I am not trying to light this front office on fire here. I have faith in them. But RIGHT NOW they have a pretty poor track record in terms of retaining their own. And this is something I genuinely hope turns around here real soon.

Try following most teams. This is common. Teams have to work with what the players will accept contractually and what will work with the FO. It's a tricking balancing act.

 

[Rambitious1]

Not even going to get into Tavon here. But Tree in particular demonstrates that they locked up yet another guy who cannot produce in their scheme, and then had to orchestrate a trade to clean up the mess.

Meanwhile guys who DID excel in their scheme are yet to be signed to include Joyner needing to be tagged. And while I hear a lot of "relax man, the period just started" comments from other posters, there is a history with the secondary in particular where this organization has bled good talent, so it's not a reach to be concerned that it might continue.

I am not trying to light this front office on fire here. I have faith in them. But RIGHT NOW they have a pretty poor track record in terms of retaining their own. And this is something I genuinely hope turns around here real soon.

I agree, however I would say I raised a similar issue as it relates specifically to Tavon some time ago and I got lit up like a Christmas tree.

 

[FrantikRam]

But the concern here is that they actually PAID Tree before they knew how he'd transition into the scheme, making the same mistake they made with guys like Tavon.

The more mistakes like that you make, the more you have to eat trades and take on additional risk to counter them. Peters was an end result of some of that, where they painted themselves into a corner and had to take on some risk and rightly so to ensure the talent was there. It was a good move that I supported, but still.

I think it's worth discussion. That this organization isn't yet at that elite point. Will they get there? Maybe. But they still got some kinks they need to work out and IMO they should start with ensuring they're locking down the right guys not kicking cans down the road. Do that BS for the lesser talents.

Oh and btw what looms for next offseason is the OL as we're all aware. So for me to feel like they're transitioning out of that type of thing I'd have to see them find a way to sign Joyner, Donald, and do something on the OL to preclude desperation next year. Not panicking here dudes, but again it's something that certainly warrants discussion.

Right, but from the Rams FO point of view - what if Tree had a Joyner-esque season? That's the point I'm trying to make. We had TruJo, Joyner, and Tree all becoming free agents at the same time. My guess is that this FO offered all of them a deal, and Tree was the only one to take it. It is difficult to sign someone early when they think (or know) that they're better than what you're offering.

 

[OldSchool]

Isn’t hind sight and second guessing great! So far McSnead has done very very little that hasn’t worked out. Personally what they did so far this off season has been amazing.

 

[shovelpass]

This idea that you get a comp pick for every lost FA is just not accurate.

'Comp picks" seem to get thrown around often in the offseason like it's a sure thing. How many comp picks have the Rams had in the past decade? I'm willing to bet that I can count them on 1 hand.

 

[RamFan503]

I didn't say they would get a pick for each player lost.

However, losing Ogletree in free agency would have balanced off at least one free agent signing, so that they would have been more likely to get high picks for Watkins and Johnson. Now if they sign a replacement for Ogletree, that will diminish their compensation. So you can't just point to the picks he got in trade, and say that they are wins - there is a loss also, especially in a year where they have several free agents likely to get big contracts.

I think the point is that we couldn't assume getting a 4th round comp pick and also let that control what we did in the future. It doesn't appear that the contract really hurt us and was really the only way we were going to get any trade value. As it is, we got a 4th and a 6th and the chance to see if he would be a fit. Makes sense to me.

 

[8to12]

This “organization” is barely a year old. Fisher called the shots previously.

Who gave Ogletree his ridiculous extension? ...not FIsher, and not McVay.... McVay may have been around, but maybe went off of Snead's recommendation

 

[dieterbrock]

I didn't move the goal posts. Re-read the very first line in the original quoted post. I stated explicitly that having him go free agent would have made it more likely that they would get comp picks for Watkins and Johnson.
.

Lol. That is moving the goal posts, you said "explicitly" "Well, they likely would either have gotten a comp pick, or losing him to free agency would have made it more likely that they would still get high comp picks for Watkins and Johnson"
So you lead with getting a comp pick for him, or....

In any event, I'm done here. I would have preferred to have kept Tree, but that's why I'm on the interwebs and McVay/Snead in the NFL pulled off a beauty by guaranteeing draft picks and not risking getting nothing at all.

 

[OldSchool]

Who gave Ogletree his ridiculous extension? ...not FIsher, and not McVay.... McVay may have been around, but maybe went off of Snead's recommendation

Personally I feel they did it feeling that if he didn’t work out they would be able to trade them. Signing him to this tension put them at one less free agent to worry about. Yes they still had to spend time trading him but it alleviated some of the free agent tension. It sure gave the worry warts one less thing to panic over heading into the off season.

 

[dieterbrock]

'Comp picks" seem to get thrown around often in the offseason like it's a sure thing. How many comp picks have the Rams had in the past decade? I'm willing to bet that I can count them on 1 hsnd.

Right. There's only 32 given out per year, and this year for instance only 4 of them are in round 3. So not only is it thrown out that will get comp picks, but will get the 3rd rounders too.
Lol

 

[Billy Baroo]

Who gave Ogletree his ridiculous extension? ...not FIsher, and not McVay.... McVay may have been around, but maybe went off of Snead's recommendation

Well, it netted Rams a 4th rounder and a 6th v 7th so not too sure how ridiculous extension was.

 

[1maGoh]

Well, they likely would either have gotten a comp pick, or losing him to free agency would have made it more likely that they would still get high comp picks for Watkins and Johnson.

I don't remember how his contract extension affected his cap hit in 2017 (I suspect it was fairly neutral) but it does cost the Rams $6.4 million in cap space for 2018, which is the money for a solid but not star starter at linebacker, for instance. Or money that could go to pay AD. The question is whether the Rams are better off losing that cap space and the future 7th rounder they traded with him while gaining a late 4th and a 6th this year, or whether they would have been better off having more cap space and more likely to have several decent comp picks in 2019. I don't think it's clear either way.

I guess what I'm saying is that while the Rams ended up doing okay dumping a player they decided they didn't want right after signing him to a big contract, it isn't exactly a huge win over not extending him in the first place, and may actually be a bit of a loss overall. So they shouldn't make a habit of it, if possible.

We actually gained cap space, not lost it. We have an extra 5.2 ish million.