The idea of trades "crippling" the future (kinda long but let's talk ALL the QBs peeps)

[OldhamA]

2 hours ago, jackson113 said:

So " risk it to get the biscuit " ? Where have I heard that?

Fired Up!

[Davidson Deac II]

Interesting thing for the Rams is that if SF ends up with Watson, the Rams will still have the third best qb in their division.  Both Watson and Wilson are better than Stafford.  And if Kyler improves, he might be the fourth best.  

Edited January 31, 2021 by Davidson Deac II

[kungfoodude]

20 minutes ago, Davidson Deac II said:

Interesting thing for the Rams is that if SF ends up with Watson, the Rams will still have the third best qb in their division.  Both Watson and Wilson are better than Stafford.  And if Kyler improves, he might be the fourth best.  

The more interesting thing is that right now Stafford is the second best and Jimmy G. is a very distant fourth.

If SF doesn't make a big move in the draft or for Watson, they may end up in the dust bin of the best division in the NFL.

Edited January 31, 2021 by kungfoodude

[Waldo]

Yall are discounting the risk the Rams are taking. They are also dumping their last drafted QB. I don't want to take the Rams path, seems like a lot of unnecessary risk. If Stafford went down with an injury this can blow up in their faces.

KC spending 2 first and a 3rd on Mahomes, yes please! I just like the KC approach more. Some drafting, some dealing pucks for players and some free agency acquisitions. This approavh and its well roundedness vs the Rams all in gamble, I would choose KC all day. 

[CRA]

2 minutes ago, Waldo said:

Yall are discounting the risk the Rams are taking. They are also dumping their last drafted QB. I don't want to take the Rams path, seems like a lot of unnecessary risk. If Stafford went down with an injury this can blow up in their faces.

KC spending 2 first and a 3rd on Mahomes, yes please! I just like the KC approach more. Some drafting, some dealing pucks for players and some free agency acquisitions. This approavh and its well roundedness vs the Rams all in gamble, I would choose KC all day. 

But Rams are sitting on a roster that arguably features the best front 7 defender and best back end defender in all the NFL.    

I’d choose KC’s overall approach to.  But you got to try to win now with Donald and Ramsey. 

[Waldo]

3 minutes ago, CRA said:

But Rams are sitting on a roster that arguably features the best front 7 defender and best back end defender in all the NFL.    

I’d choose KC’s overall approach to.  But you got to try to win now with Donald and Ramsey. 

It's a talented roster for sure. I was just notating that they have leaned towards a gamblers approach in recent years and that's fine sporadically but not something I would be happy with they way the Rams roll with it. 

 

[Ricky Spanish]

Hurney has conditioned this franchise to believe that 1st round picks are the only valuable pick that the team has. 

Years of missfires in all other rounds have rendered the importance of our first round picks as priceless, when other franchises can have success without drafting a stud in round one because they find contributors in other rounds instead. 

If our GM is good, then he can still put together a solid team without a 1st rounder. Will it be a bit more difficult? Possibly, but again, if he's good, he can make it happen. 

Which is why keeping Hurney around for so long just pisses me off even more. 

[LinvilleGorge]

3 minutes ago, Ricky Spanish said:

Hurney has conditioned this franchise to believe that 1st round picks are the only valuable pick that the team has. 

There's a LOT of truth to this. Don't get me wrong, 1st round picks are VERY valuable, but due to our history I think Panthers fans have a skewed concept of that value because of how bad Hurney was in the mid-rounds. Everyone is throwing darts at the board in the later rounds, but you need to be filling out the meat of your roster with those mid-rounders. 

[NanuqoftheNorth]

Every pick is sacred 

Every pick is great

If a pick is wasted

Dave gets quite irate 

Edited January 31, 2021 by NanuqoftheNorth

[MilkyCastles]

2 hours ago, Waldo said:

It's a talented roster for sure. I was just notating that they have leaned towards a gamblers approach in recent years and that's fine sporadically but not something I would be happy with they way the Rams roll with it. 

 

Yea I don’t think this post will age well. Between Gurley, Cooks and Goff they are about 35m over the cap next year. That’s the issue with trading for proven round 1 talent- you’re buying high so to speak. Nothing wrong with a blockbuster trade to put your team over the top, but it’s just a fact that you also have to supplement those huge contracts with good draft picks. They’ve got about a two year window to win it all, after that they’re gonna have some big problems. 

[Aussie Tank]

Why are the Texans no good if they have an Elite QB? I thinks it’s because there’s nothing around him 

[Scott12345]

https://www.thebiglead.com/posts/texans-beat-writer-reveals-asking-price-deshaun-watson-trade-rumors-01exckh7tqga

Houston beat writer
 

John McClain (@McClain_on_NFL) Tweeted:
The Rams-Lions trade will have nothing to do with a Watson trade if the Texans do it. They'll want 2 ones, 2 twos and 2 young defensive starters, at the least. Watson, 25, under contract, great QB, team leader, beloved by fans, pillar of the community. Start with the Jets.

Edited February 1, 2021 by Scott12345

[Waldo]

1 hour ago, MilkyCastles said:

Yea I don’t think this post will age well. Between Gurley, Cooks and Goff they are about 35m over the cap next year. That’s the issue with trading for proven round 1 talent- you’re buying high so to speak. Nothing wrong with a blockbuster trade to put your team over the top, but it’s just a fact that you also have to supplement those huge contracts with good draft picks. They’ve got about a two year window to win it all, after that they’re gonna have some big problems. 

I agree. Not sure about which post you are referring to in regards to aging well.

The Rams are dealing away 1st to get to a SB. The Seahawks trade back and go for volume to get a SB. Both look like viable options but when done regularly it's a little suspect. 

 

[Peon Awesome]

20 hours ago, davos said:

I'm stuck in a blizzard so f it, I'm going for a long post.  How to say this directly and out in front:

--statement--

Trading a lot of assets, including multiple firsts, is simply not as disruptive to a franchise's future as it seems.

--food, thought--

Just food for thought:

The Rams had recently relocated & finally left Jeff Fisher when they last had a first round pick.  With the Stafford trade, Sean McVay's only 1st round pick will have been Goff, who they traded up for.  And they were pretty quick about looking elsewhere after just a few years with a #1 overall pick and even making a SB with him. 

In this time, with super spotty QB play, a zero, ZERO 1st round picks:

They have traded away 1st rounders, even trade out of the first, made the Super Bowl.  Made the playoffs multiple times.

11-5 (playoffs)

13-3 (SB appearance, NFCC)

9-7

10-6 (playoffs)

That's the Rams last 4 seasons.

--elsewhere--

Kansas City spent two 1sts and a 3rd for Mahomes

New Orleans spent two 1sts and a 5th for Marcus Davenport

Eagles used two 1sts, a 2nd, 3rd, & 4th for #2 to land Wentz

The Bears have haven't had a losing record since 2017 and went 12-4 with Mitch lol. Oh Mitch.

--thoughts--

The funniest part of this is that 3 of these QBs didn't even work out...yet in the that time, all four have made the playoffs, two of those teams managed to make the SB.  One actually won it.  Another squad in KC found a stud and is looking at a potential 2nd title in a row.

All circumstances are different and all these franchises were at different stages, BUT, all I'm saying is that using an extra 1st or two to land the guy you want does not ruin a future.  Heck, it doesn't ruin your future even if it doesn't work out.

You shoot and you will either hit or miss.  In these cases, the likes of Spencer Drango, Rashaun Penny, DeAndre Baker, Corey Coleman, Shon Coleman, Jack Conklin were on the other side of the equation in some of these picks received.  Yikes. One could argue those misses on abundant picks still did nothing for teams like the Browns.  We actually landed one of the random extra picks of these deals and guess who that treasured 3rd rounder was?: Daryl Worley.

However, I admit, look at the Titans & Bills though.  I give them props, they helped set up great futures in their trade downs (KC-BUF, LAR-TEN). 

This is why if we don't land Watson, I am fully supportive of a trade up if we want Fields or Wilson. DO IT.   It's not like we're giving up a full draft class, we'll have 4-5 more picks to land linemen, defenders, and/or a skill position dude.  Just go for it. DO IT.

The Rams are in a constantly aggressive win-now mode when they have a super young coach and a generation of his career ahead of them.  They figure out the player they want, they go get him.  They've also have been very smart in letting the right guys walk like Trumaine Johnson, McCleod, Gurley, etc.

--conclusion--

My conclusion here is that I foresee a massive quarterback drought with a generation retiring and guys from 2010-2019 busting left & right, years taking a toll/Cam-ified, or being entirely inconsistent.  Tua, D. Jones, Trubiski, Goff, Wentz, Rosen, Paxton Lynch, Bortles, Darnold, Cam's near the end, Luck retired.  I don't even know if Jackson or Mayfield really have it going strong.  They're good right now, but good long term? I dunno.

2000s QBs going goodbye: Ryan, Rivers, Ben, Rodgers, Brady, Brees.  6 long term, SB level starters. 

That is going to leave SUCH a huge void at QB league wide.  Right now, there's basically ~4-5 teams safely w/ a QB who they know will give them a shot next year:

TEN Ryan Tannehill

KC Pat Mahomes

BUF Josh Allen

SEA Russ Wilson

DAL Dak Prescott (injured/future sorta questionable?)

--

Young but looking good/still early:

Kyler Murray, Joe Burrow, Justin Herbert

It entirely makes sense why a 33 y/o Stafford was worth this much.  He's got ~4-5 years to go and the league (particularly the NFC) will be prime for new perennial contenders.  It's open season, I see no team really standing out in front in the NFC and that's what LAR is trying to do.

In the likely event we don't land Deshaun Watson, I fully support a trade up for Zach Wilson, Justin Fields, or dare I say Trey Lance.  His potential is super freaking high.  He's not some Jordan Love scrub and if Goff was a recent #1, Carson Wentz was a #2, Mitch T was #2, then why the F not.  Give it a shot, maybe we still win a SB and the guy busts lol.  Sometimes the right coach can get you there, sometimes it's a generational QB, but most of the time, it's a balanced combo of all of the above.  But if you want to find the QB, you've gotta take the shot.

 

The problem is that trading 1st rounders doesn't cripple your immediate future if you're ready to compete. It's 3 or 4 years afterwards you have to worry about. Philadelphia is seeing the after effects of losing that 1st round capital. They didn't have the cheap talented players from the 1st round to maintain their super bowl caliber team after their veterans either aged out or became too expensive to keep. New Orleans is about to enter complete cap hell plus their 2 1sts are like late 20s. Chicago didn't trade multiple 1st; they gave like a 4th round pick to move up 1 spot. Imagine if they didn't trade anything and took Watson or Mahomes at their spot. Kansas City is obviously the model, but they again traded 2 picks in the late 20's and already had a playoff team. 

As far as the Rams, do you really want to use them as an example? They just used multiple 1st round picks to get rid of the qb they used multiple 1st round picks on. Imagine if they were smarter, they could have won multiple super bowls in that time.

You can also point to a team like the Redskins, who've spent years recovering from the Robert Griffin fiasco. Or even look at the Panthers and how much trading 2 1sts for Sean Gilbert set us back.