Rams Offering Two (Future) Firsts for Burns

[Mr. Scot]

3 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

Im sure they will , as long as Waldron doesnt take him with him. There have been rumblings that if Waldron gets a HC job (which I think he will based on the amount of jobs there will be this coaching cycle) that he and Geno would be a package deal.

I've heard that too, but even with this season on the books, how much would you really pay Smith?

[mrcompletely11]

Just now, frankw said:

Saying we can wait two years might sound okay at this moment but the buyers remorse will set in quickly when some of the flip flop types here get a load of our new pass rush in the meantime. You can't have it both ways.

But we are not winning this year and probably not next year either so it all works in our favor

[mrcompletely11]

1 minute ago, CRA said:

I’m not looking at in from our GMs perspective.   No doubt future picks have less value to him.  To teams in general.  He needs to win.  Most teams do.   He has been part of a lot of slop of late.   It all gets weird when you have a bunch of random parts and no real vision on the future and path. 

I would take the trade.  I also want a new HC and a new GM that want to build something from the ground up. 

Getting extra firsts is a clear vision and path for the future.  Like I said, it aligns with our timeframe perfectly  

[frankw]

Just now, mrcompletely11 said:

But we are not winning this year and probably not next year either so it all works in our favor

I'm not trying to be rude but in truth you are one of the more reactionary people here so we both know you will not make it two seasons without expressing frustration with our defense minus Burns. It's going to happen. All I'm saying is just know what you're advocating for here.

[thunderraiden]

You don't give up a DE on a rookie deal for peanuts (and 2 first rounders is peanuts) for the potential Burns still has at a position of importance to winning the division and Super Bowl. I want 3 first round picks AND 2 promising young players at a position other than RB or 2 2nd's and I MIGHT consider it.

Edited November 1, 2022 by thunderraiden

[Brooklyn 3.0]

18 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

The roster doesnt have enough holes for us to need those picks. We would be trading one great player for 2 unknown players. We have 15 picks between now and 2024 as it is. We dont have a need for more draft picks. We have a need for a QB , LB, WR and Dline depth. 

If only they allowed us to send some of all these picks we have to move up in a draft. Now THAT would be something.

[ForJimmy]

1 minute ago, thunderraiden said:

You don't give up a DE on a rookie deal for peanuts (and 2 first rounders is peanuts) for the potential Burns still has at a position of importance to winning the division and Super Bowl. I want 3 first round picks AND 2 promising young players at a position other than RB or 2 2nd's and I MIGHT consider it.

[thunderraiden]

2 hours ago, CRA said:

I mean you take that deal.  You say goodbye to Burns. 

is Burns talented? Yes.  But to date he has been an incomplete DE.  A pass rush specialist that has never hit double digit sacks. 

Especially when your win horizon is down the road and have to draft a QB to build up. 

Yall crazy this man has never played with a double digit lead in his career xD

[mrcompletely11]

1 minute ago, frankw said:

I'm not trying to be rude but in truth you are one of the more reactionary people here so we both know you will not make it two seasons without expressing frustration with our defense minus Burns. It's going to happen. All I'm saying is just know what you're advocating for here.

We are 2-5 this year.  We arent winning poo this year.  We are more then likely going into next year with a rookie qb to get up to speed.  Historically rookies dont win.  So again instead of paying him a poo ton of money for really nothing it makes perfect sense to move him even if it comes at the expense of double digit sacks.   I wouldnt be frustrated as it would finally show a clear plan on how to get better as a franchise

[ForJimmy]

Just now, Brooklyn 3.0 said:

If only they allowed us to send some of all these picks we have to move up in a draft. Now THAT would be something.

Our GM only trades down. (Kidding)

[Wundrbread33]

A lot of people keep saying “we aren’t competing anytime soon.”

 

Too much randomness and parody in the NFL to say that. 
 

Hell, this team is an extra point away from being 2-1 with PJ Walker and Wilks. 
 

We have cornerstone players at the most premium positions outside of QB. 

 

This team isn’t ass. 

[mrcompletely11]

3 minutes ago, thunderraiden said:

You don't give up a DE on a rookie deal for peanuts (and 2 first rounders is peanuts) for the potential Burns still has at a position of importance to winning the division and Super Bowl. I want 3 first round picks AND 2 promising young players at a position other than RB or 2 2nd's and I MIGHT consider it.

Much like cmac I think a lot of you are way overvaluing the impact of burns.  Yes he is good, yes he could be great but he is not worth nearly what you are proposing above

[Mr. Scot]

1 minute ago, ForJimmy said:

Our GM only trades down. (Kidding)

Our GM may be following orders in this case.

[SameDamnThing]

Cash out on those picks. It sucks they will be so far in the future, but the Rams are due for a MAJOR fall off. it has already started but they're trying to trade their future to get back to the SB. those picks could be from a non-playoff team if Stafford is starting to lose it and Kupp starts aging. Burns isn't going to turn the tide by himself and he's a pass rusher only.