Say you're St. Louis...

[hepcat]

This probably won't happen since they play in the NFC West and will surely grab a few wins against their equally dismal divisional opponents. But let's say you're St. Louis and you get the #1 pick. Sam Bradford played well for a rookie last year and they were a game away from a playoff spot. This year, he seems to have regressed and the team is struggling.

Would you draft Andrew Luck and trade Bradford? They probably couldn't get as much for Bradford as they could for Luck. But who could pass up "the next Peyton Manning?"

[Future of the Funchise]

if they could find a willing trade partner that would be beneficial for them because with the new rookie wage scale they could obtain Luck for a fraction of what Bradford's contract is worth. Freeing up cap space to obtain weapons to place around Luck.

[Verge]

Hold on playa.

You are suggesting Rams should draft Andrew Luck because they cannot protect their current qb who has no one to throw to and a star rb who is always injured, and just sliding all those issues over to a new young quarterback and trading your best player will solve anything? Lol.

Trade the first pick, select Kalil, get a receiver in the second round and sign a couple of solid olb and you have upgraded the crap out of your team. Drafting Luck fixes nothing.

[frash.exe]

[pantherclaw]

IF the rams are sitting #1 overall, they pick andrew luck.

They hold all the cards then. They would be able to entertain even more trade options than if they were to just trade the pick.

[Swarly]

lol no team in the NFL is going to take on Sam Bradford's $80 million dollar($50 mil GUARANTEED) contract

even then, contract aside, why would they trade Bradford? it's not his fault he has literally zero play makers around him and gets like 2 seconds in the pocket before he has to run for his life every play. Luck is a great prospect, but that's all he is at this point, a prospect. Bradford has proven he can be successful and win in this league, something Luck hasn't. it'd be idiotic to trade him for any draft prospect.

[Jangler]

sheeeeesh...

okay, I'm St.Louis.

[pantherclaw]

Don't see anybody suggesting trading bradford.

Although, that could also be done, he'd have to rework his contract, which isn't a big deal considering the signing bonus he got...lol

But no, is ya have the player that is most desired (luck), ya hold the power...getting more teams involved should they want da man.

[JawnyBlaze]

I'd have to think long and hard about it, Bradford looks solid, and looked solid coming out of college but he never looked like Luck. Luck is already further along than Bradford even though Bradford has a season and a half in the NFL down.

HOWEVER, they could probably fleece the holder of the #2 or 3 or 4 pick for their whole draft and pick a LOT of help to make Bradford a better player. That's probably the route I'd take.

[JawnyBlaze]

But if they could somehow convince someone in the top 5 or so to trade their 1st pick for Bradford, I'd take Luck then Blackmon or Kalil with that other pick in a heartbeat. I could see the Dolphins making that trade. They could use their pick on Jones or Barkely and not be sure of what they're getting, or use the pick to trade for Bradford who's already shown he can at least compete at the pro level.

[pantherclaw]

But if they could somehow convince someone in the top 5 or so to trade their 1st pick for Bradford, I'd take Luck then Blackmon or Kalil with that other pick in a heartbeat. I could see the Dolphins making that trade. They could use their pick on Jones or Barkely and not be sure of what they're getting, or use the pick to trade for Bradford who's already shown he can at least compete at the pro level.

definately. The rams could expand their options greatly, by drafting luck. Is there going to be a left tackle that's going to have the value of a franchise qb? Nope.

[Verge]

Seriously, what the hell are you guys smoking?

Bradford is an incredibly good, young, FRANCHISE QUARTERBACK. You don't trade a proven franchise player for a prospect. You just don't do it.

[JawnyBlaze]

I guess where we disagree is that Bradford is incredibly good. I think he's shown that he can be "good", but not "incredibly good" yet. In general I agree with your point, but if you were to agree that Bradford has shown that he can be a good but not great QB (yet), would you rather have proven good (but not yet great) over completely unproven (but much higher ceiling) QB PLUS a potential all star WR or LT?

[Matt Foley]

Bradford wasn't a bust, but he's teetering on being a disappointment. Then again, so was Stafford.

If I'm the Rams braintrust, I don't tank any games to get that top spot, but I sure as hell maximize its value if I happen to be there. Almost every GM in the League would be calling you. You could get three number ones from a team that annually drafts in the 20s but doesn't have the QB it needs to get over the hump. You could get a high one and two and maybe even a WR from a team that sucks ass this year and badly needs not only a franchise QB but a face for the future (Miami). Or you could see what Indy brings to the table.