Jalen Ramsey Traded to Rams

[C.Biscuit97]

5 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

 

You're asking if we want 4 blue chip players (or players who are looking to turn into blue chipers) on cheap deals and a rotational piece vs. 3 blue chip players making giant contracts? 

 

It's not a question of if they're getting value, it's a question of the sustainability of buying expensive players while getting rid of the #1 way of adding cheap players. 

Of course if all of our guys turn out to blue chippers, we will have some cap issues as well. 

[whatdrought]

Just now, NewEra said:

The rams are super bowl or bust.  The only thing that matters to them over the next 1-2 years is bringing home a title.   They are closer to that with Ramsey as opposed to not having Ramsey.

 

replacing peters with Ramsey is a HUGE upgrade.  

 

Yep. That's definitely what they're doing, and they are closer for having Ramsey, but the problem is that I don't think they were all that close to begin with. They have massive issues and would likely have been better off keeping those picks and the money and trying to build a more solid foundation to lengthen their time to compete. 

[thenorthremembers]

6 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

 

You're asking if we want 4 blue chip players (or players who are looking to turn into blue chipers) on cheap deals and a rotational piece vs. 3 blue chip players making giant contracts? 

 

It's not a question of if they're getting value, it's a question of the sustainability of buying expensive players while getting rid of the #1 way of adding cheap players. 

No I am asking if you want two proven blue chip players or 1 proven blue chip players and 3 maybes. 

 

Edmunds, Allen, and Oliver are all potential.  None of them have proven a thing in the league to this point.

 

Honestly, its kind of a push.   Do you want 100k or 50k with three more chances at 200k?

[whatdrought]

1 minute ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

Of course if all of our guys turn out to blue chippers, we will have some cap issues as well. 

 

True enough, but its spread out over 5 years as opposed to all at once. And the idea is that you use draft picks to be replacing guys as they become blue chippers so you aren't forced to keep them if you can't do it. That's the hardest part of it- knowing when to keep the money, or when to keep the players. The Seahawks, who are pretty good right now, had those down years after the SB loss cause they struggled to know how to move on from stars, but they weren't able to pay everyone. Some of that is the natural ebb and flow of the NFL, some of it is management difficulties. 

[PetermansRedemption]

2 minutes ago, thenorthremembers said:

No I am asking if you want two proven blue chip players or 1 proven blue chip players and 3 maybes. 

 

Edmunds, Allen, and Oliver are all potential.  None of them have proven a thing in the league to this point.

 

Honestly, its kind of a push.   Do you want 100k or 50k with three more chances at 200k?

50k for sure. Even if the chance to hit on the 200k is 25% our expected value is the 100k. I would argue Oliver and Edmunds are better than 25% to reach great potential. Edmunds, if he keeps up his play, is already there. 

Edited October 16, 2019 by Bills2ref

[C.Biscuit97]

Just now, whatdrought said:

 

True enough, but its spread out over 5 years as opposed to all at once. And the idea is that you use draft picks to be replacing guys as they become blue chippers so you aren't forced to keep them if you can't do it. That's the hardest part of it- knowing when to keep the money, or when to keep the players. The Seahawks, who are pretty good right now, had those down years after the SB loss cause they struggled to know how to move on from stars, but they weren't able to pay everyone. Some of that is the natural ebb and flow of the NFL, some of it is management difficulties. 

Good post and I agree.  Seattle is only good now because Wilson turned out to be a top 5 qb. It could have been a Flacco situation there otherwise. 

[whatdrought]

6 minutes ago, thenorthremembers said:

No I am asking if you want two proven blue chip players or 1 proven blue chip players and 3 maybes. 

 

Edmunds, Allen, and Oliver are all potential.  None of them have proven a thing in the league to this point.

 

Honestly, its kind of a push.   Do you want 100k or 50k with three more chances at 200k?

 

Edmunds is a blue chipper- he's still growing but in the past 2 months he's been a top 5 off-ball backer. 

 

Allen and Oliver both look like good players who can be great players. 

 

I don't think it's a push for two reasons- 1, we're building this team with these guys intentionally. We know them, we (the staff) believe them to be blue-chip players who are going to be top of their position groups. That's how you build a contending team. Secondly, I think the Bills model is better because we have money. We'll know in the next 2-3 years if these guys are the blue chipper we think they are- and then we'll have money to pay them, or money and draft picks to move on from them as needed.

 

It's less about the actual players, and more about the team building philosophy.

 

 

4 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

Good post and I agree.  Seattle is only good now because Wilson turned out to be a top 5 qb. It could have been a Flacco situation there otherwise. 

 

Yup, which has helped them keep relevant and has given them a building point for the soft rebuild that they just did. Carrol has been really impressive the past couple years- it looked like he would retire when the strength of that roster was gone, but he's retooled and they look like a team that could be in the mix for February. Having what I would argue is the best QB in the league doesn't hurt one bit. 

Edited October 16, 2019 by whatdrought

[NewEra]

7 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

 

Yep. That's definitely what they're doing, and they are closer for having Ramsey, but the problem is that I don't think they were all that close to begin with. They have massive issues and would likely have been better off keeping those picks and the money and trying to build a more solid foundation to lengthen their time to compete. 

Tell that to the owner of the team that lost the SB last year

[C.Biscuit97]

1 minute ago, whatdrought said:

 

Edmunds is a blue chipper- he's still growing but in the past 2 months he's been a top 5 off-ball backer. 

 

Allen and Oliver both look like good players who can be great players. 

 

I don't think it's a push for two reasons- 1, we're building this team with these guys intentionally. We know them, we (the staff) believe them to be blue-chip players who are going to be top of their position groups. That's how you build a contending team. Secondly, I think the Bills model is better because we have money. We'll know in the next 2-3 years if these guys are the blue chipper we think they are- and then we'll have money to pay them, or money and draft picks to move on from them as needed.

 

It's less about the actual players, and more about the team building philosophy.

Allen has a long way to go still.  Not ready to say he’s good until he has more tds than ints.  I know our expectations for qb has been driven to the ground for the last 20 years but I’m going to need more than a 75 qb rating before I say he’s good.  But the potential certainly is there. 

[whatdrought]

5 minutes ago, NewEra said:

Tell that to the owner of the team that lost the SB last year

 

I will. I'll also tell him that getting to the Superbowl at all is about 80% chance, and 20% having a great team and that in order to try and win a superbowl, the best bet is to be competitive each and every year by building a good team with great components, instead of going all in on having a team that's "great" for 2 years. This really isn't that difficult to see played out... The Patriots are the blueprint. They have never done anything in year x that compromises their ability to build a solid team in year y or z- even if it gives them an edge in year x. 

 

It's all relative until we see how the Rams turn out, but my guess on that would be under 10 wins and not playing past the first round of the playoffs. I could be way off, we'll see. 

 

4 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

Allen has a long way to go still.  Not ready to say he’s good until he has more tds than ints.  I know our expectations for qb has been driven to the ground for the last 20 years but I’m going to need more than a 75 qb rating before I say he’s good.  But the potential certainly is there. 

 

It's true, and that's unfortunately the crap shoot that is team building in the NFL- do everything right and if 1 23 year old kid doesn't turn into a star, it's all worthless. That being said, I like Allen's potential and I think he'll get there, and when he does, I think we'll have one of the best all around rosters in the NFL. 

Edited October 16, 2019 by whatdrought

[thenorthremembers]

1 minute ago, whatdrought said:

 

Edmunds is a blue chipper- he's still growing but in the past 2 months he's been a top 5 off-ball backer. 

 

Allen and Oliver both look like good players who can be great players. 

 

I don't think it's a push for two reasons- 1, we're building this team with these guys intentionally. We know them, we (the staff) believe them to be blue-chip players who are going to be top of their position groups. That's how you build a contending team. Secondly, I think the Bills model is better because we have money. We'll know in the next 2-3 years if these guys are the blue chipper we think they are- and then we'll have money to pay them, or money and draft picks to move on from them as needed.

 

It's less about the actual players, and more about the team building philosophy.

I understand the team building thing and I prefer the way the Bills are going about.  However, I think the Rams have thought this out pretty well in terms of selling out to win games with Goff.

 

They are building the best team they can for the next two years with Goff.    I think their plan is to go all in with Goff this year and next.   The way they set his and Gurley's contract up, they have outs on both contracts in 2021.   If they designate Goff as a Post June 1st cut in 2021, they only have 15 million in dead cap with 78.5 million dollars in saving over the last three years of the contract.   It's the same for Gurley, they have him for this year and next, but if they designate his as a post June 1st cut in 2021 they have 8.4 Million in Dead Cap with over 40 million dollars in cap savings on the last three years of his contract.

 

They seem to have a pretty decent five year plan.  Load up on talent to go all in between 2018-2021, and if they fail they can reload at QB in the 2022 draft.

[whatdrought]

1 minute ago, thenorthremembers said:

I understand the team building thing and I prefer the way the Bills are going about.  However, I think the Rams have thought this out pretty well in terms of selling out to win games with Goff.

 

They are building the best team they can for the next two years with Goff.    I think their plan is to go all in with Goff this year and next.   The way they set his and Gurley's contract up, they have outs on both contracts in 2021.   If they designate Goff as a Post June 1st cut in 2021, they only have 15 million in dead cap with 78.5 million dollars in saving over the last three years of the contract.   It's the same for Gurley, they have him for this year and next, but if they designate his as a post June 1st cut in 2021 they have 8.4 Million in Dead Cap with over 40 million dollars in cap savings on the last three years of his contract.

 

They seem to have a pretty decent five year plan.  Load up on talent to go all in between 2018-2021, and if they fail they can reload at QB in the 2022 draft.

 

It's not a bad idea and it could work for them... The place it gets risky is if you aren't hitting on later picks and you have no depth/no talent on your team by the time you're ready to reboot and you end up having to do a full Dolphin. 

[thenorthremembers]

2 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

 

It's not a bad idea and it could work for them... The place it gets risky is if you aren't hitting on later picks and you have no depth/no talent on your team by the time you're ready to reboot and you end up having to do a full Dolphin. 

I wouldnt be so sure thats not the 2022 plan.   My guess is they are betting on themselves not to fail.  Snead and McVay dont come across as guys who have little faith in their plans.  Probably one of McVay's weaknesses as a coach, it sure was in the superbowl.

[NewEra]

29 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

 

I will. I'll also tell him that getting to the Superbowl at all is about 80% chance, and 20% having a great team and that in order to try and win a superbowl, the best bet is to be competitive each and every year by building a good team with great components, instead of going all in on having a team that's "great" for 2 years. This really isn't that difficult to see played out... The Patriots are the blueprint. They have never done anything in year x that compromises their ability to build a solid team in year y or z- even if it gives them an edge in year x. 

 

It's all relative until we see how the Rams turn out, but my guess on that would be under 10 wins and not playing past the first round of the playoffs. I could be way off, we'll see. 

 

 

It's true, and that's unfortunately the crap shoot that is team building in the NFL- do everything right and if 1 23 year old kid doesn't turn into a star, it's all worthless. That being said, I like Allen's potential and I think he'll get there, and when he does, I think we'll have one of the best all around rosters in the NFL. 

Having the best coach and best QB ever on the same team is the blueprint?  Well, they aren’t ever going to achieve that with Goff under center,  so might as well try a new route

[whatdrought]

1 minute ago, NewEra said:

Having the best coach and best QB ever on the same team is the blueprint?  Well, they aren’t ever going to achieve that with Goff under center,  so might as well try a new route

 

It doesn't hurt, but it's also relative. You become the best coach and QB by winning. You win by being competitive year after year. You become competitive year after year by not leveraging the future for the now. 

[Captain Hindsight]

1 hour ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

Of course if all of our guys turn out to blue chippers, we will have some cap issues as well. 

Not if they continue to draft and sign FAs well. There is a ton of depth on this roster right now as evidenced by guys getting claimed and traded at the end of PS. Its one of the reasons the Patriots are so successful every year. They always have some UDFA start at a key position and play well for peanuts

 

Not unlike Levi Wallace

[YoloinOhio]

Hope he can block too 

 

 

[Chicken Boo]

Two very late 1st round picks for a top 3 DB, to a team that is in "win now" mode.

 

Not a bad trade at all.

 

 

2 hours ago, Bills2ref said:

The big difference is the cap space. I’m too lazy to look it up, but nearly certain all 5 of those Bills players combined salary equals less than the salary of Goff alone. Probably less cap than what Ramsey will command as well. That’s the big thing. Sure using 5 1st rounders for a starting QB, top CB and top WR is good value in a vacuum. But you also have to factor in the opportunity cost of losing about 65 million in cap to Goff, Cooks and Ramsey. 

 

But the Rams are perennial Super Bowl contenders.  

[In Summary]

16 hours ago, JaCrispy said:

No CB is worth that imo

I so agree.  Only give two 1st round picks for a QB and only because of the absolute necessity of having a top 16 QB if you want to be a contender.  Poor use a draft capital by LA IMO. 

[SCBills]

18 minutes ago, Chicken Boo said:

Two very late 1st round picks for a top 3 DB, to a team that is in "win now" mode.

 

Not a bad trade at all.

 

 

 

But the Rams are perennial Super Bowl contenders.  

 

Are we sure those 1st rounders will be "very late". 

 

NFC is tough and they're currently 2 games back of San Fran and Seattle in their own division. 

 

Nevermind the fact they have a ton of money tied up in two guys with the jury out on their ability... Goff/Gurley.

 

Edited October 16, 2019 by SCBills

[IDBillzFan]

2 minutes ago, SCBills said:

 

Are we sure those 1st rounders will be "very late". 

 

It doesn't matter if they're late picks or not. Two first round picks for Ramsey is ridiculous.

 

He's not going to help Goth throw more than 78 yards in a game like he did vs. SF.

[PetermansRedemption]

8 minutes ago, IDBillzFan said:

 

It doesn't matter if they're late picks or not. Two first round picks for Ramsey is ridiculous.

 

He's not going to help Goth throw more than 78 yards in a game like he did vs. SF.

UNLESS Jalen Ramsey is ? The Next McVay 

[Chicken Boo]

1 hour ago, SCBills said:

 

Are we sure those 1st rounders will be "very late". 

 

NFC is tough and they're currently 2 games back of San Fran and Seattle in their own division. 

 

Nevermind the fact they have a ton of money tied up in two guys with the jury out on their ability... Goff/Gurley.

 

 

Gurley's ability isn't in question.  His availability, however, is.

 

Goff is a very good QB,  but falls in line with about 85% of the QBs in the league, in that he needs to be aided by a strong running game.

 

There are currently maybe 4 QBs in the league who can carry a team (Wilson, Mahomes, Rodgers, Watson?)

[Rochesterfan]

4 hours ago, thenorthremembers said:

Not sure the Rams were fleeced.   Goff withstanding, of the 5 1st round picks they gave up they have 2 Pro Bowl/All Pro Level players.    They used the draft picks, just not on draft night. 

 

Depends on how you want to build your team.  But I think using 5 1st rounders and getting a starting QB, a #1 wide out, and a All Pro Cornerback in return is kind of a high rate of success.

 

If you look at the Bills last five 1st rounders would you prefer what the Bills have or the Rams:

 

Bills: Ed Oliver, Josh Allen, Tremaine Edmunds, Tre White, and Shaq Lawson

Rams: Jalen Ramsey, Brandin Cooks, and Jared Goff

 

I'd still take the Bills but it's not an easy choice.

 

The problem as I see it is not with either the player or the return - it is where in the the contract the player is and how your team is made.

 

Ramsey being in the last year of his contract and wanting (as he has stated) to be the top paid CB puts a ton of pressure on the front office to make that happen.  They already have the highest paid DT, RB, and QB for next year and one of the highest paid WRs.  Add to that 17-20 million for a CB and you will potentially have 5 guys taking up 112+ million of your salary cap next year.  That is close to 60% of your cap space on 5 guys.  ?
 

They also have a ton of FAs that they will potentially lose after the season and part of their decline this year (and yes they have declined from last year - some what significantly) was the loss of O-Line and D-Line talent due to paying their other top players.

 

I think realistically they have this year and they are good enough to make a run, but with their recent struggles and losing 2 division games and a 3rd NFC game - it looks like a long road to get into and win again this year.  Then they lose more quality players and depth and even with top end talent they will begin to decline faster and faster.

 

I get the sentiment of the Rams got talent in the trades, but the NFL is about the team and team is about more than 5-6 guys taking up most of your cap.

 

 

 

 

[thenorthremembers]

25 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

The problem as I see it is not with either the player or the return - it is where in the the contract the player is and how your team is made.

 

Ramsey being in the last year of his contract and wanting (as he has stated) to be the top paid CB puts a ton of pressure on the front office to make that happen.  They already have the highest paid DT, RB, and QB for next year and one of the highest paid WRs.  Add to that 17-20 million for a CB and you will potentially have 5 guys taking up 112+ million of your salary cap next year.  That is close to 60% of your cap space on 5 guys.  ?
 

They also have a ton of FAs that they will potentially lose after the season and part of their decline this year (and yes they have declined from last year - some what significantly) was the loss of O-Line and D-Line talent due to paying their other top players.

 

I think realistically they have this year and they are good enough to make a run, but with their recent struggles and losing 2 division games and a 3rd NFC game - it looks like a long road to get into and win again this year.  Then they lose more quality players and depth and even with top end talent they will begin to decline faster and faster.

 

I get the sentiment of the Rams got talent in the trades, but the NFL is about the team and team is about more than 5-6 guys taking up most of your cap.

 

 

 

 

 

I took this on a few pages back.  With the cap going up next year they can afford it.  They have Ramsey's 5th year option for next year.  If they dont like what Goff and Gurley are doing by 2021, they can get out of both contracts cheap and save close to 80 million or so against the cap over the next three years.   Ramsey wont need a new contract until 2021.  

[Rochesterfan]

1 minute ago, thenorthremembers said:

 

I took this on a few pages back.  With the cap going up next year they can afford it.  They have Ramsey's 5th year option for next year.  If they dont like what Goff and Gurley are doing by 2021, they can get out of both contracts cheap and save close to 80 million or so against the cap over the next three years.   Ramsey wont need a new contract until 2021.  

 

You honestly believe that Ramsey- who has made it clear (see Brinks truck) - will play on the 5th year option?  I do not see anyway when he just forced his way out of Jacksonville by skipping games with a “bad back” that he suddenly is ok with the option year.  So that really leaves the Rams paying him or trading him ala Bell.  I could easily see him waiting to sign his option - then claiming bad back issues and sitting out the year to force a new contract.  He has already shown himself to be a me first player.

 

Yes they can get out of Gurley and Goff’s contracts in 2021 with still dead cap hits and no 1st RD picks in 2020 or 1st and 4th in 2021 - meaning they have no way to replace them.

 

The Rams are stuck in a win this year window because even as the cap goes up - so does the cost of retaining and bringing in players and you have traded away the cheapest way of replacing them.

 

 

[Rochesterfan]

16 minutes ago, thenorthremembers said:

 

I took this on a few pages back.  With the cap going up next year they can afford it.  They have Ramsey's 5th year option for next year.  If they dont like what Goff and Gurley are doing by 2021, they can get out of both contracts cheap and save close to 80 million or so against the cap over the next three years.   Ramsey wont need a new contract until 2021.  

 

In reality with dead cap hit - only Cooks is a potential out in 2021.  Gurley and Donald are really locked in until 2022 and Goff is 2023 before the dead cap is really acceptable.

 

This is the team for the next couple of years and if Ramsey isn’t gong to get paid then I will be shocked because that is all he talked about before the season began.  Even if he does play on the option those 5 players still account for 109 million of a 200 million cap - they are going to lose a lot of good depth after this year.

[ColoradoBills]

10 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

You honestly believe that Ramsey- who has made it clear (see Brinks truck) - will play on the 5th year option?  I do not see anyway when he just forced his way out of Jacksonville by skipping games with a “bad back” that he suddenly is ok with the option year.  So that really leaves the Rams paying him or trading him ala Bell.  I could easily see him waiting to sign his option - then claiming bad back issues and sitting out the year to force a new contract.  He has already shown himself to be a me first player.

 

Yes they can get out of Gurley and Goff’s contracts in 2021 with still dead cap hits and no 1st RD picks in 2020 or 1st and 4th in 2021 - meaning they have no way to replace them.

 

The Rams are stuck in a win this year window because even as the cap goes up - so does the cost of retaining and bringing in players and you have traded away the cheapest way of replacing them.

 

 

 

Excellent points.  I also want to let people know that the 20 million cap # includes a 10 million in a cap raise.

Rams have a number of players in FA to re-sign/replace next year too.

 

This whole debate is about how teams (GMs and HCs) want to build a team.

Buying "proven" players and shelling out big money on a handful of players has been tried many times before with varying degrees of success.

Will it work out for the Rams now one knows yet.  It could and then it could cause future problems.

 

For my money I believe that a more methodical approach along with an occasional big name trade/signing is the way to go.

I doubt Beane and company believe the Rams method is correct for their situation.

[plenzmd1]

Sorry if this has been mentioned before, but i really think this trade came down to Marrone or Ramsey..and man I am sure ole Tommy not happy with this answer

 

 

 

[Gugny]

 

Coughlin is a dinosaur and the Jags are idiots for continuing to employ him.

[london_bills]

21 hours ago, KingBoots8 said:

Wayyyyyyyyy too much. Sorry, but I just could not justify that heavy a price. He’s good but he’s a distraction and he’s beatable. You spend that on a QB, or a Left Tackle to protect your QB.

 

Thank God he isn’t coming here.

1st and a 4th max!

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

...pretty BIG tariff for a potential one year rental...didn't someone post Rams may not have a 1st round pick for FIVE years?......

[TheFunPolice]

Rams are going to crash and burn, and I am going to laugh. McVay is overrated. Someone has to say it.

 

His vaunted offense was a total no-show in the Super Bowl. Yet he's still a "genius." 

 

Everyone loves to bash and mock Andy Reid, but his offense scored 31 points in the AFC Title Game vs NE and Belichick, all in the 2nd half showing he made adjustments.

 

McVay just stood there like a zombie and watched his offense get curb stomped. 

 

At least show up and take a swing. No shame in losing to NE and BB, but at least do something. 

[PetermansRedemption]

The important question, is Ramsey’s back injury career ending?

[CommonCents]

7 minutes ago, PetermansRedemption said:

The important question, is Ramsey’s back injury career ending?

I’d guess he plays Sunday.

[CommonCents]

I’m not sure in what depth this has been discussed but the trade isn’t about the Rams or Ramsey. This is another situation where the player decided he wanted to play elsewhere and was granted his wish. I can deal with terrible officials, the pussification of the game and Tom Brady. I can’t deal with the NFL mirroring the NBA and letting the players control the league.

 

I’m a Redskins fan, let big Trent sit there and rot.

[PetermansRedemption]

1 hour ago, CommonCents said:

I’d guess he plays Sunday.

Oh for sure. His “injury” was magically cured when he was traded. Better doctors in LA I guess ?

[Orlando Tim]

1 hour ago, TheFunPolice said:

Rams are going to crash and burn, and I am going to laugh. McVay is overrated. Someone has to say it.

 

His vaunted offense was a total no-show in the Super Bowl. Yet he's still a "genius." 

 

Everyone loves to bash and mock Andy Reid, but his offense scored 31 points in the AFC Title Game vs NE and Belichick, all in the 2nd half showing he made adjustments.

 

McVay just stood there like a zombie and watched his offense get curb stomped. 

 

At least show up and take a swing. No shame in losing to NE and BB, but at least do something. 

I actually think Mcvay is a good coach with a bottom 5 starting QB who he coached up. But no coach in the NFL can win with a QB who throws 78 yards so he either hides the defects of his QB again or he will be done.