Jalen Ramsey a Ram....

[2_0_6]

Agreed, I don't. :irishdrinkers:

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

That's WAY too much to give up, especially with him wanting a massive contract. They just gave huge money to Mr. Glass Gurley and fold like a tent Goff. Hell of a player, but not worth the risk of giving up two 1st rd picks and a 4th.
I can't imagine Hawks fans being happy about giving up that much for a guy like that. He's a ticking time bomb, basically quit on the Jags, oh but look his back is magically healed now :roll:

You really dont know his situation on why he didn't want to play for that team. Look at Duane Brown, he quit on his team w/ the holdout but he's been great w/ us.

Sometimes a nice change in scenery works great for players. I think he would have been awesome for us.

There's a difference between a holdout for more coin or to force a trade (Brown, Trent Williams) and goldbricking in season with a fake injury (Ramsey).

 

[Fade]

This trade actually makes sense for the Rams. They have a top 5 run defense and a bottom 20 pass defense. If Ramsey can stabilize the back end, then they can effectively hide Goff behind their defense the same way the 49ers are hiding Jimmy.

It doesn't appear that cap space will be a major issue for them going into next season. They have 40 million in cap space, and it's unlikely they'd extend Whitworth to anything close to what he's making this season. They'll be fine.

They robbed Peter (Peters) to pay Paul (Ramsey). They should have kept both, then it would have made some sense.


2020 Rams Salary Cap: $24.1M in cap (with rollover factored in, but only 38 players on the roster.)

The Ramsey contract hasn't come in yet on OTC, but he is under contract in 2020 for $13.7M APY. He of course is going to want a lot more.


They have nowhere near $40M in cap space next year.

I think you are looking at their cap space post Ramsey trade. They have roughly 37.8 million next season, subtract Ramsey's 13.7M and you arrive near your number of 24.1.

How should I look at it? Pre-Ramsey trade? LOL :lol:. They have 24.1M in cap space next year going into the off-season. Not $40M.

They have the flexibility to cut both Matthews and Weddle in the off-season to free up another 8M if they need it.

They have 8 of 22 starters upcoming UFA. With Cooper Kupp & John Johnson needing extensions. They need more than $8M.

On top of that, the highest paid corner in the league is earning on average 15M/year. Let's assume the Rams pay Ramsey 17M/year, that would put their cap space at just under 20M next season without making moves.

Ramsey holds all the leverage in this negotiation. They just traded two 1sts, and a 4th. He can ask for $20M APY. They can't afford to let him walk, after giving up all that they did. $17M? LOL :lol:.

The only legitimate concern for the Rams is whether or not they can salvage Goff and Gurley behind a crumbling offensive line. If they can, cap space and draft picks won't be an issue.

They have no 1st, 4th, or 5th, in the upcoming draft. Unless they plan on having 8 starters walk out the door, and cut two more starters in Matthews & Weddle. While playing with a 38 man roster. They have no cap space either.

The Rams do not have the resources to fix their primary issue.

 

[DomeHawk]

Seahawks should have done that, we don't do anything with 1st rounders anyway.

This could be a potentially season changing move by the Rams.

 

[RolandDeschain]

?

So then the assumption is you aren't really giving up the future because you can trade/dump all those other contracts?

That seems convoluted to me. The strategy is if getting Ramsey doesn't fix everything when the problem clearly wasn't CB then you will blow up everything anyway?

That makes no sense to me.

Take your lumps this year, draft/sign 3-4 O-Linemen in the offseason, make another run. Goff isn't perfect, but he can be the puppet in McVays Puppet show if you protect him.

They are a missed field goal away from being 4-2. The 49ers crushed their offense, but NEWSFLASH: they've done that to everyone this year. They were good for three weeks, then they got Jimmie Ward back at FS and for two weeks they've been ludicrous. They've allowed a net 126 yards passing (pass yards minus sack yardage) in the last two weeks. That's not an average. That's TOTAL. 15 of those yards were a pass from Odell Beckham. Vs the Steelers, Rudolph had 160 yards, but 81 of them were on a single play where the other FS (Tarvarious Moore) took a bad angle, which he has been prone to do.

In the offseaon, so much was made of Jimmy G sucking in practice and once throwing 5 INTs. THIS IS THE D HE WAS PLAYING AGAINST.

I';m not saying all this to brag about my Niners (well at least, not 100% about that). What I'm saying is that the move is total desperation because they won't play SF every week and the trade didn't address the real problem.

If I'm the Rams, I suck it up for a week and reset.

This move is desperation and IMO made for a number of Non-Football reasons and that is how you end up a bad team.

I completely agree. Idiotic decision by the Rams, and they will be paying heavily for it in a couple years.

 

[DomeHawk]

It always perplexes me when people equate 1st round picks to proven NFL players, especially pro-bowlers. A 1st round pick has the potential to go to multiple pro bowls 17% of the time. Given that Ramsey is a 1st team "all-pro" that percentage goes way down.

So you are getting a proven all-pro compared to giving up two players who might be all-pro players but according to the statistics, is high unlikely.

Like I said previously, given our terrible history with 1st rounders that sounds like a deal, for us at least.

 

[Marvin49]

It always perplexes me when people equate 1st round picks to proven NFL players, especially pro-bowlers. A 1st round pick has the potential to go to multiple pro bowls 17% of the time. Given that Ramsey is a 1st team "all-pro" that percentage goes way down.

So you are getting a proven all-pro compared to giving up two players who might be all-pro players but according to the statistics, is high unlikely.

Like I said previously, given our terrible history with 1st rounders that sounds like a deal, for us at least.

As I said before, how do you know he's "proven"? We know he was good in Jacksonville in a different system and we are assuming he'll be good in LA.

That could be right.

You don't know what you are giving up with those picks, but what you DO know is that you will be unable to address problems you see on the team through the draft in a meaningful way for a few years. Those needs can also change and you now have zero flexibility.

Moreover, you are giving up effectively TEN YEARS of cheap contract for a guy that effectively pouted his way out of town.

What if he does it again?

How many teams have made the exact argument you made above and then regretted it later. To me, the "known commodity" is a myth. Herschel Walker was a known commodity. Nnamdi Asomugha was a known commodity. Percy Harvin was a known commodity.

One pick? I can see that...particularly 2nd round or later. A first? If its a really good player without a personality issue, maybe.

2 first? Can someone give me a single example of someone giving up multiple 1s for a "proven" player and not regretting it later? There may well be one, but I can think of it. In the draft, Julio Jones comes to mind, but for a vet player?

Not worth it.

 

[Maulbert]

It always perplexes me when people equate 1st round picks to proven NFL players, especially pro-bowlers. A 1st round pick has the potential to go to multiple pro bowls 17% of the time. Given that Ramsey is a 1st team "all-pro" that percentage goes way down.

So you are getting a proven all-pro compared to giving up two players who might be all-pro players but according to the statistics, is high unlikely.

Like I said previously, given our terrible history with 1st rounders that sounds like a deal, for us at least.

:sarcasm_on: And we should have grabbed N'Keal Harry instead of trading down for D.K. Metcalf. :sarcasm_off:

 

[Rat]

It always perplexes me when people equate 1st round picks to proven NFL players, especially pro-bowlers. A 1st round pick has the potential to go to multiple pro bowls 17% of the time. Given that Ramsey is a 1st team "all-pro" that percentage goes way down.

So you are getting a proven all-pro compared to giving up two players who might be all-pro players but according to the statistics, is high unlikely.

Like I said previously, given our terrible history with 1st rounders that sounds like a deal, for us at least.

As I said before, how do you know he's "proven"? We know he was good in Jacksonville in a different system and we are assuming he'll be good in LA.

That could be right.

You don't know what you are giving up with those picks, but what you DO know is that you will be unable to address problems you see on the team through the draft in a meaningful way for a few years. Those needs can also change and you now have zero flexibility.

Moreover, you are giving up effectively TEN YEARS of cheap contract for a guy that effectively pouted his way out of town.

What if he does it again?

How many teams have made the exact argument you made above and then regretted it later. To me, the "known commodity" is a myth. Herschel Walker was a known commodity. Nnamdi Asomugha was a known commodity. Percy Harvin was a known commodity.

One pick? I can see that...particularly 2nd round or later. A first? If its a really good player without a personality issue, maybe.

2 first? Can someone give me a single example of someone giving up multiple 1s for a "proven" player and not regretting it later? There may well be one, but I can think of it. In the draft, Julio Jones comes to mind, but for a vet player?

Not worth it.

Eric Dickerson? I dunno, doesn't happen often, but not a lot of players go for that anymore. Early returns on the Khalil Mack trade are positive. We've benefitted big from those kind of deals twice (Young, Galloway).

EDIT: I guess Jim Everett wouldn't count since he didn't play for his original team.

 

[bigskydoc]

I love this trade (as a Seahawks fan). Even if it does them a year or two of good, they will be back in the NFCW basement for a long time, trying to recover from having no draft picks.

If I were them, I would trade Goff to get one of those 1st rounders back, and bring in Kaep. I think Kaep would do better at surviving behind that sieve they call an offensive line, and I think he would be pretty effective in that system.

 

[Marvin49]

It always perplexes me when people equate 1st round picks to proven NFL players, especially pro-bowlers. A 1st round pick has the potential to go to multiple pro bowls 17% of the time. Given that Ramsey is a 1st team "all-pro" that percentage goes way down.

So you are getting a proven all-pro compared to giving up two players who might be all-pro players but according to the statistics, is high unlikely.

Like I said previously, given our terrible history with 1st rounders that sounds like a deal, for us at least.

As I said before, how do you know he's "proven"? We know he was good in Jacksonville in a different system and we are assuming he'll be good in LA.

That could be right.

You don't know what you are giving up with those picks, but what you DO know is that you will be unable to address problems you see on the team through the draft in a meaningful way for a few years. Those needs can also change and you now have zero flexibility.

Moreover, you are giving up effectively TEN YEARS of cheap contract for a guy that effectively pouted his way out of town.

What if he does it again?

How many teams have made the exact argument you made above and then regretted it later. To me, the "known commodity" is a myth. Herschel Walker was a known commodity. Nnamdi Asomugha was a known commodity. Percy Harvin was a known commodity.

One pick? I can see that...particularly 2nd round or later. A first? If its a really good player without a personality issue, maybe.

2 first? Can someone give me a single example of someone giving up multiple 1s for a "proven" player and not regretting it later? There may well be one, but I can think of it. In the draft, Julio Jones comes to mind, but for a vet player?

Not worth it.

Eric Dickerson? I dunno, doesn't happen often, but not a lot of players go for that anymore. Early returns on the Khalil Mack trade are positive. We've benefitted big from those kind of deals twice (Young, Galloway).

EDIT: I guess Jim Everett wouldn't count since he didn't play for his original team.

I can't even say that Eric Dickerson was a good trade for the Colts, he was good, but 2 1s? He only had 2 more 1000 yard seasons and it didn't end well in Indy.

Mack? Its really early, but early returns would say that was a good one for the Bears. If he can keep playing as he is, that one might be worth it.

 

[2_0_6]

I love this trade (as a Seahawks fan). Even if it does them a year or two of good, they will be back in the NFCW basement for a long time, trying to recover from having no draft picks.

If I were them, I would trade Goff to get one of those 1st rounders back, and bring in Kaep. I think Kaep would do better at surviving behind that sieve they call an offensive line, and I think he would be pretty effective in that system.

They have a decent back up in Bortles, who I would take over Kaep at this point.

 

[knownone]

I think you are looking at their cap space post Ramsey trade. They have roughly 37.8 million next season, subtract Ramsey's 13.7M and you arrive near your number of 24.1.

How should I look at it? Pre-Ramsey trade? LOL :lol:. They have 24.1M in cap space next year going into the off-season. Not $40M.

They have the flexibility to cut both Matthews and Weddle in the off-season to free up another 8M if they need it.

They have 8 of 22 starters upcoming UFA. With Cooper Kupp & John Johnson needing extensions. They need more than $8M.

On top of that, the highest paid corner in the league is earning on average 15M/year. Let's assume the Rams pay Ramsey 17M/year, that would put their cap space at just under 20M next season without making moves.

Ramsey holds all the leverage in this negotiation. They just traded two 1sts, and a 4th. He can ask for $20M APY. They can't afford to let him walk, after giving up all that they did. $17M? LOL :lol:.

The only legitimate concern for the Rams is whether or not they can salvage Goff and Gurley behind a crumbling offensive line. If they can, cap space and draft picks won't be an issue.

They have no 1st, 4th, or 5th, in the upcoming draft. Unless they plan on having 8 starters walk out the door, and cut two more starters in Matthews & Weddle. While playing with a 38 man roster. They have no cap space either.

The Rams do not have the resources to fix their primary issue.

1) Obviously, I was looking at the figures before the Ramsey trade. I was clarifying that point, we just framed it differently.

2) That's your opinion of his contract situation, not a fact. Here's a fact; the franchise tag for corners last season was 13M. If the tag follows historical trends, it will be roughly 15M by the time Ramsey's contract runs out. So, if Ramsey decides he wants to break the bank and force the Ram's hands, he doesn't have a great deal of actual leverage just superficial leverage.

This is a similar concept to the Russell Wilson deal. Wilson had superficial leverage and could have theoretically used that leverage to force Seattle into paying him 40M/year. The problem is that by using that leverage he'd take on a great deal of asymmetrical risk that favors the team. Taking that risk rarely plays off well for the player.

I'm not going to pretend I know the future. It's certainly possible the Rams pay him 20M, but if they do, I think it will be because of the market and not because of Ramsey's post-trade leverage.

3) Seattle's future cap situation/draft capital was in a similar place as the Rams; We're 5-1. That's the important thing to remember, don't overreact to a small outcome in a rapidly changing system; opinion's about the future are ex ante, not ex post. And ending your statements with 'lol' doesn't make you any better at predicting future outcomes, just at framing the current circumstances . I'll own it if/when I am wrong; I'd encourage you to laugh at me then.

 

[DomeHawk]

It always perplexes me when people equate 1st round picks to proven NFL players, especially pro-bowlers. A 1st round pick has the potential to go to multiple pro bowls 17% of the time. Given that Ramsey is a 1st team "all-pro" that percentage goes way down.

So you are getting a proven all-pro compared to giving up two players who might be all-pro players but according to the statistics, is high unlikely.

Like I said previously, given our terrible history with 1st rounders that sounds like a deal, for us at least.

:sarcasm_on: And we should have grabbed N'Keal Harry instead of trading down for D.K. Metcalf. :sarcasm_off:

N'Keal's been hurt but yes, he's still a better possession receiver than DK.

But this is a Ramsey thread. Are you a troll?

 

[DomeHawk]

It always perplexes me when people equate 1st round picks to proven NFL players, especially pro-bowlers. A 1st round pick has the potential to go to multiple pro bowls 17% of the time. Given that Ramsey is a 1st team "all-pro" that percentage goes way down.

So you are getting a proven all-pro compared to giving up two players who might be all-pro players but according to the statistics, is high unlikely.

Like I said previously, given our terrible history with 1st rounders that sounds like a deal, for us at least.

As I said before, how do you know he's "proven"?

Lol, in his short career he's already been an all-pro, that's not proven? He is generally regarded as a top-3 CB in the league.

It may not be worth it for the Rams but I still think it would be for us because we don't draft well in the 1st round anyway.

 

[Marvin49]

It always perplexes me when people equate 1st round picks to proven NFL players, especially pro-bowlers. A 1st round pick has the potential to go to multiple pro bowls 17% of the time. Given that Ramsey is a 1st team "all-pro" that percentage goes way down.

So you are getting a proven all-pro compared to giving up two players who might be all-pro players but according to the statistics, is high unlikely.

Like I said previously, given our terrible history with 1st rounders that sounds like a deal, for us at least.

As I said before, how do you know he's "proven"?

Lol, in his short career he's already been an all-pro, that's not proven? He is generally regarded as a top-3 CB in the league.

It may not be worth it for the Rams but I still think it would be for us because we don't draft well in the 1st round anyway.

I ask again....show me a trade like that where to acquired player has been just as good with new team and the team acquiring the player didn't regret the move.

Khalil Mack is about the only example I can think of and Khalil didn't force his way out of town.

I didn't ask you for his resume. I'm telling you that the idea of a player moving to a new team being just as good isn't a given. That's been proved over and over and over.

I don't doubt Ramsey. This really has nothing to do with him as a player. I just reject the entire notion of known vs unknown. They are both unknowns.

 

[RolandDeschain]

 

[DomeHawk]

It always perplexes me when people equate 1st round picks to proven NFL players, especially pro-bowlers. A 1st round pick has the potential to go to multiple pro bowls 17% of the time. Given that Ramsey is a 1st team "all-pro" that percentage goes way down.

So you are getting a proven all-pro compared to giving up two players who might be all-pro players but according to the statistics, is high unlikely.

Like I said previously, given our terrible history with 1st rounders that sounds like a deal, for us at least.

As I said before, how do you know he's "proven"?

Lol, in his short career he's already been an all-pro, that's not proven? He is generally regarded as a top-3 CB in the league.

It may not be worth it for the Rams but I still think it would be for us because we don't draft well in the 1st round anyway.

I ask again....show me a trade like that where to acquired player has been just as good with new team and the team acquiring the player didn't regret the move.

Khalil Mack is about the only example I can think of and Khalil didn't force his way out of town.

I didn't ask you for his resume. I'm telling you that the idea of a player moving to a new team being just as good isn't a given. That's been proved over and over and over.

I don't doubt Ramsey. This really has nothing to do with him as a player. I just reject the entire notion of known vs unknown. They are both unknowns.

You asked how I knew he was "proven" and I replied. Now you want to change it to something else. Stay out of politics, you are terrible at spin.

 

[DomeHawk]

It always perplexes me when people equate 1st round picks to proven NFL players, especially pro-bowlers. A 1st round pick has the potential to go to multiple pro bowls 17% of the time. Given that Ramsey is a 1st team "all-pro" that percentage goes way down.

So you are getting a proven all-pro compared to giving up two players who might be all-pro players but according to the statistics, is high unlikely.

Like I said previously, given our terrible history with 1st rounders that sounds like a deal, for us at least.

As I said before, how do you know he's "proven"? We know he was good in Jacksonville in a different system and we are assuming he'll be good in LA.

That could be right.

You don't know what you are giving up with those picks, but what you DO know is that you will be unable to address problems you see on the team through the draft in a meaningful way for a few years. Those needs can also change and you now have zero flexibility.

Moreover, you are giving up effectively TEN YEARS of cheap contract for a guy that effectively pouted his way out of town.

What if he does it again?

How many teams have made the exact argument you made above and then regretted it later. To me, the "known commodity" is a myth. Herschel Walker was a known commodity. Nnamdi Asomugha was a known commodity. Percy Harvin was a known commodity.

One pick? I can see that...particularly 2nd round or later. A first? If its a really good player without a personality issue, maybe.

2 first? Can someone give me a single example of someone giving up multiple 1s for a "proven" player and not regretting it later? There may well be one, but I can think of it. In the draft, Julio Jones comes to mind, but for a vet player?

Not worth it.

Any trade is a gamble as is any draft pick. This isn't an exact science by any stretch of the imagination.

These kinds of trades are rare in recent history BUT ask any Chicago Bears fan if what they gave up was worth acquiring Mack.

Tampa Bay Buccaneers acquire WR Keyshawn Johnson from New York Jets for two first rounders. It's hard to argue with the Buccaneers' trajectory after making this trade. They made the playoffs in each of the next three years with Johnson as their leading receiver, capped by a victory in Super Bowl XXXVII. The Jets turned to less vocal targets in their passing game, primarily Laveranues Coles and Santana Moss, in the process of making four playoff appearances during the next six seasons.

Indianapolis Colts acquire RB Eric Dickerson from Los Angeles Rams. The Colts got an immediate bump from this mid-season trade, clinching a playoff berth for the first time since 1977. Dickerson went onto win the NFL rushing title in 1988 but injuries slowed him down after that, and the Colts did not return to the playoffs before he moved on after the 1991 season. The Rams were able to restock their roster, and they made the playoffs in 1988 and the advanced to the NFC Championship Game in 1989. But overall the impact was limited. They missed the playoffs for the next nine consecutive years.

And, there were other trades that went just the opposite. But, the point I was making was it could have been a good trade for the Seahawks because of our ineptitude draftting in the first round.

 

[Ramfan128]

Rams really knew what they were doing - getting Ramsay and throwing an L at the Seahawks by giving the Ravens Marcus Peters

Trade doesn't bother me at all. First round picks are overrated.

Haven't had a first round pick since we drafted Goff, and have managed some decent drafts.

The only comp for this type of move is Mack - and that obviously has paid off for Chicago. Only real downside is the cap situation - this means John Johnson will not be re-signed, and shortly after Kupp gets extended (a year or two), either Cooks or Woods will have to go.



This will allow Wade to actually play his scheme - huge change for the defense, which were the primary reason we lost two games.

People keep saying that the Rams problem is the OL - and that may be true - but our offense has been very good in every game except that Niner game, and I could see that game turning out to be an aberration.