Trade our first

  • 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.
WiscRam

WiscRam

UDFA
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
7
ROD Credit 2025
0
Assuming we fill at least two of our ol positions through FA, we don't have a pressing need going into the draft that can't be addressed after round the first round. It appears as though great vaule will drop to us (I.e. Cooper/white/Schaefer). While hard to pass on, we don't have our long-term QB under contract for next year; the most important position on the field. Next year's draft is loaded with top QB prospects. Trading our first this year for a first next year and change would set us up next year with two 1's and two 2's to move up, almost regardless of where we are slotted to draft from.

I understand Snisher are under pressure this year, but it seems the prudent move at this juncture to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fancents86 and leoram
I'm not sure the talents there in this draft for anyone to give us a 1st next for our 10 this year. While the draft's not that great, we should still be able to get a blue chip player at 10, maybe even 12-13. White or Cooper, Scherff, there are going to be some good players there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leagueofshadows and Ramrocket
We have the tenth pick. If some team wanted to trade their first round pick next year+, there's no guarantee that 2016 first round pick will be better then the 10th pick we have now. Which is why this won't happen. Not when we can get a solid player this year. What if we trade our first for a first and second next year and that pick next year ends up being a late 20s pick? We just got trade raped. Stay still and make the pick at 10 this year. Trade back by all means, but don't jump out of the first all together.
 
  • Like
Reactions: iBruce
Maybe trade back and get more 2nd or 3rd round picks for next year that can be used to move up. Eliminate or lessen need to give up future 1st to get in range for a QBOTF.
 
JackDRams said:
We have the tenth pick. If some team wanted to trade their first round pick next year+, there's no guarantee that 2016 first round pick will be better then the 10th pick we have now. Which is why this won't happen. Not when we can get a solid player this year. What if we trade our first for a first and second next year and that pick next year ends up being a late 20s pick? We just got trade raped. Stay still and make the pick at 10 this year. Trade back by all means, but don't jump out of the first all together.
Click to expand...

Well, the trade would be to move back in the first and get a first next year. However a pick the following year is devalued by a round. So that would be equal to a second this year. I could see it but would not like it.

Snead is trying to set them up to be able to go the BPA at a position of need route. If he fills all of the glaring needs in free agency, then he could just go straight BPA, with future needs in mind, like corner, WR, ILB, DE, DT whatever.

I would not want to pass up Cooper or White. I could see trading back if it was any other player though. If they don't sign Barksdale, then the need will be RT and Lael Collins would work there and they may be able to drop back a little for him. Cossell said that there is not n offensive tackle in this draft that he would take at ten. I suppose if they liked him enough they could take Scherf to play ORT and move him to Guatd after a few years.
 
  • 4Like
Reactions: Mojo Ram, BuiltRamTough, Ramsey and 1 other person
It sounds like this is a pretty good OL and receiver draft so I would say that if we could get an additional 1st next season for maybe a late 1st this season or an extra 2nd and 3rd, I'd be listening to offers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WiscRam
Let's just pick the best player, our team is almost complete, I think this year's draft will help complete the team and we need to stop playing games and just get our guys.
 
I'd agree Sleepy but consistently picking up draft picks in subsequent years gives you options. Though I hate to give any kudos to the patsies, they've done a pretty good job of that over the years. And especially with the new rookie contracts, it is a recipe for building the main blocks of your team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sostl
Thanks to those who replied as I appreciate the dialogue and perspectives shared.

I am really excited about the talent being assembled and truly don't feel we are too far away. I am, however, concerned about a few factors. First, I look around and see that very often consistently strong teams have a very, very good QB. Second, successful teams always seem to retain their own good players as opposed to losing them in FA and we have quite a few of our own to retain next year, meaning any cap space saved will likely be valuable later. Third, should Nick end up to be to "mediocre," it could force the Rams into a tough situation; overpay for him on the open market for the long-term or have no viable option for a QB and no draft capital to get one without mortgaging the future.

In my mind, we can do something about the QB scenario THIS year. Yes, we would possibly bypass one of two highly touted WR's in a deep WR draft (IMO, they won't be available) as well as a highly touted OG in a deep OL draft. We have a team right now that can be very competitive, likely even playoff bound, but is an unlikely Super Bowl candidate. Additionally, we would not need to spend a 2nd-4th round pick to reach for a QB in a terrible QB draft in hopes they might sometime turn into something. Use the pick on the OL, CB, WR, or LB this year and "spend" it next year as part of a trade up. I think the team should protect itself long-term.

If one of Cook, Jones, or Hackenburg are deemed to be "franchise" QB's next year, I would like to see the Rams at least have the ammunition to get them. I also suspect we'll be drafting outside of 20 next year, thus needing quite a bit of draft capital to do so. I don't believe that pick and anyone we might get at 10 this year would do it. I do think, however, that our 10 this year would fetch a first next year and quite a bit more (in this year's draft or next). Some have alluded we wouldn't know what pick it would be next year and that is true, although there could be some educated guesses based on whom the trading partner is. I suspect trading our own first, one acquired for this year's pick and one of our two seconds next year would give us enough draft capital to move up quite far next year regardless of where we would be starting from. If that's the price for a franchise QB, I take it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mojo Ram and xander47
I wouldn't mind doing some sort of a trade to get two firsts next season. I know everyone wants cooper or white, but every year I hear people wanting some "must have" receiver.
 
I would not mind if the stars aligned, and MM fell to 10 and we could field RG4 type offers. The absolute truth of the matter is that these guys have had 3 years and a ton of premium draft picks to right the ship, and it hasn't happened yet. Sure there are reasons/excuses, but at some point you have to win to continue to have a job. If the team decides to take the first part of the season off again next year, and the Rams are a middling also ran they could and should be replaced! Trading out of the ability to draft what should be a starting player, (and perhaps a difference maker) at 10 is a luxury that this regime might not have anymore.
 
Elmgrovegnome said:
Well, the trade would be to move back in the first and get a first next year. However a pick the following year is devalued by a round. So that would be equal to a second this year. I could see it but would not like it.

Snead is trying to set them up to be able to go the BPA at a position of need route. If he fills all of the glaring needs in free agency, then he could just go straight BPA, with future needs in mind, like corner, WR, ILB, DE, DT whatever.

I would not want to pass up Cooper or White. I could see trading back if it was any other player though. If they don't sign Barksdale, then the need will be RT and Lael Collins would work there and they may be able to drop back a little for him. Cossell said that there is not n offensive tackle in this draft that he would take at ten. I suppose if they liked him enough they could take Scherf to play ORT and move him to Guatd after a few years.
Click to expand...

Dude! I hope you are right. I agree with everything you said, (except for minor misspellings) But hey, ewe'r heart and your ram-horny brain are thinking righteously. I hope Sneed is thinking like you...I do, I do!
 
jrry32 said:
No. The odds of us getting the #10 or better pick next year in return are heavily against us.

Take Amari Cooper. He's special.
Click to expand...

Thank you for pointing out Cooper. I'm with you. In any scenario where he and white are both there at 10 I pick cooper 10 out of 10 times.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back