As long as firsts are as overvalued as they are, the best teams are gonna keep moving them more frequently.
Last year, I went through the 17-32 range in the past 4/5 drafts to evaluate player by player, and confirmed that the hit rate on an above-average starter is about 50%, with the chance of finding a Pro Bowler being 1 in 10. If you can trade those lottery tickets for an actual established Pro Bowler, why the hell not? Good teams have that figured out, and great teams draft well anyway in the later rounds.
Wow! Lol established Pro Bowler? Matt went to the Pro Bowl once and that was 10 YEARS AGO! So what happened in that 5th draft that you won't share the info.. Did that mess with the narrative?
Even with flawed info, if its 1 in 10 with 1 pick, its 1 in 5 with 2 picks. Add in that 3rd rounder and maybe 1 in 4 chance of pulling a Pro Bowler.
So the trade went like...
1 old Pro Bowler
1 young Pro Bowler + a 1 in 4 chance of another young pro bowler.
No matter how you slice it, this was a bad trade. Unless of course you add in the...
Rams Staff: We sunk the ship with contracts, we gave away 7 first rounders, we have zero Super Bowl wins to show for it...but Boss, at least we were able to get rid of the guy that we asked you to pay a ton of cash to...you are welcome.
Fyi...Rams staff means Rams staff. Yes, scouts are depended on to make evaluations that will heavy in the overall choice...and some need fired.
I'll just respond point by point here, perhaps not in perfect order.
1. Bullcrap. You weren't talking about scouts, you were talking about those who make personnel decisions, and scouts are absolutely entirely irrelevant to the fantasy conversation you made. Either you think scouts trade picks, or you're lying. Honestly, lying probably looks better, at this point.
2. "Sunk the ship?" Bud, I know you might've just started paying attention, but the Rams haven't picked first round in what is about to be 5 drafts, regardless of what contracts they've signed. Do you honestly think this has sunk their ship? They look pretty damn impressive to me. Good thing for LA that you're nowhere near the organization, otherwise you'd be trying your damnedest to go 3-13 after firing a successful staff. Laughable. Do you remember the Rams prior to McVay? Picking high every year? Oh yeah, that was way better for them. They were rolling in wins. All those picks definitely helped them fight for championships. After all, first round draft picks are the only thing that makes a team successful, as proven by the pre-2017 Rams. Might as well hire Jeff Fisher back. Sure, they'll go 7-9 yearly, but at least they'll have those precious picks!
3. The post you've quoted from me is more aimed at the overall philosophy the Rams (and most other successful teams to a less extreme extent) have followed with first rounders, because that's what the tweet was in reference to. They've traded them for Brandin Cooks and Jalen Ramsey, too... both established Pro Bowlers. The bulk of this trade compensation was likely to offload Goff's salary - which I've criticized multiple times in multiple threads. Bearing the cap relief and the premium valuation of quarterbacks in mind, the trade compensation here is less of a direct trade-off, making it harder to properly evaluate because there are multiple types of compensation involved.
4. The fifth draft in my referenced post was too recent to evaluate properly, because its players had too few chances to make the Pro Bowl. If I did include it, it would have included less Pro Bowlers, which'd skew the numbers in the favor of the argument I'm making. Fortunately, I try not to be an absolute weasel and aim to find the truth, regardless of what it is. Probably should've taken you about 4 seconds to realize that, but I'm happy to clarify for you as needed. Here's a link if you want to read it yourself and then come back to make another meandering reply that completely misses the point: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=168115
5. Bad trade? For a top-10 quarterback with years left to go on a team that was a hair away from a Super Bowl a couple years back, and a hair away from a championship game with absolute doodoo at the position this year? At this point, I'm starting to think you value draft picks more than you value actual contention for a championship. The process here is fine, save for the fact they paid Goff to begin with. That was the biggest mistake. Best thing to do here is to offload his salary and get what talent they can at the spot, and Stafford fits the bill. Unless, of course, you have a better alternative. (spoiler alert: you don't.)