I just realized the Rams haven't had a 1st rounder since...

Maulbert · May 29, 2021

...they drafted Goff in 2016, and because of their deal for Stafford, they aren't set to have one again until 2024. That's a 7 year drought, which would tie the 2nd longest stretch in NFL history. Their first rounders since 2016:

2017: Dealt to Tennessee in the Jared Goff trade.
2018: Dealt to New England for Brandin Cooks.
2019: Dealt to Atlanta for a 2nd and 3rd.
2020: Dealt to Jacksonville for Jalen Ramsey.
2021: Dealt to Jacksonville for Jalen Ramsey.
2022: Dealt to Detroit for Matt Stafford.
2023: Dealt to Detroit for Matt Stafford.

Considering how people bitched about us dealing for Jamal Adams, surely they would expect this to come back and bite Sean McVay in the ass?

Own The West · May 29, 2021

I've thought about this quite a bit over the years. Every year there are 10-12 blue chippers, and then after that it's more of a numbers game. If you aren't picking in the top half of the first, statistically you would have more success trading down and getting more rolls of the dice.

The limiting factor is roster size. If you could carry an infinite number of players, then you could basically run your own internal farm system. Instead you have to decide to carry a project another year that may turn into a quality player, or cut them and try someone else with similar risk/reward.

In recent years we've had position groups (e.g. OL, DE, WR) 'logjams' with a few guys on the cusp, but none that could outright win the job. It's got to be about the worst position to be in from a personnel standpoint. If your group sucks, then you can dump them all and get new ones -- this is what PC/JS did in their first years of the program. But if you have 3 guys that each do 2 of the 3 things they need to do well, what do you do? You can't predict which one is going to click and become a complete player, but you can't keep 3 guys for one spot.

We've seen PC/JS:
- overload a position group in training camp to increase competition, this seems to work with DL and WR, but muddy the waters with OL
- bring in an expensive FA to 'anchor' the group, the seems to have worked well with the OL recently
- have guys learn multiple positions to keep more projects active, seems to work better with DBs than OL

The Rams tend to blow firsts in bunches looking for QBs, which seems like gambling your franchise. But for us, I like the idea of trading out of the 1st to get more dice rolls or using our first to trade for an 'anchor' player every year. More draft picks keeps our roster young and inexpensive, and bringing in those anchor vets breaks those log jams.

Picking like we do in the bottom of the 1st every year, it's unlikely we will ever have a blue chip first rounder. As long as that's the case, I'd be happy if we never picked in the first again.

chris98251 · May 29, 2021

Own The West":3qpvh38f said:
I've thought about this quite a bit over the years. Every year there are 10-12 blue chippers, and then after that it's more of a numbers game. If you aren't picking in the top half of the first, statistically you would have more success trading down and getting more rolls of the dice.

The limiting factor is roster size. If you could carry an infinite number of players, then you could basically run your own internal farm system. Instead you have to decide to carry a project another year that may turn into a quality player, or cut them and try someone else with similar risk/reward.

In recent years we've had position groups (e.g. OL, DE, WR) 'logjams' with a few guys on the cusp, but none that could outright win the job. It's got to be about the worst position to be in from a personnel standpoint. If your group sucks, then you can dump them all and get new ones -- this is what PC/JS did in their first years of the program. But if you have 3 guys that each do 2 of the 3 things they need to do well, what do you do? You can't predict which one is going to click and become a complete player, but you can't keep 3 guys for one spot.

We've seen PC/JS:
- overload a position group in training camp to increase competition, this seems to work with DL and WR, but muddy the waters with OL
- bring in an expensive FA to 'anchor' the group, the seems to have worked well with the OL recently
- have guys learn multiple positions to keep more projects active, seems to work better with DBs than OL

The Rams tend to blow firsts in bunches looking for QBs, which seems like gambling your franchise. But for us, I like the idea of trading out of the 1st to get more dice rolls or using our first to trade for an 'anchor' player every year. More draft picks keeps our roster young and inexpensive, and bringing in those anchor vets breaks those log jams.

Picking like we do in the bottom of the 1st every year, it's unlikely we will ever have a blue chip first rounder. As long as that's the case, I'd be happy if we never picked in the first again.

Metcalf, Lockett, Wilson, Wagner, all were not first rounders, others that have come and gone were not first rounders, if you can evaluate talent that fits your system you can flourish.

sutz · May 30, 2021

It's been pointed out before, anything past the 1st half of the first round is basically a 2nd rounder anyway in terms of talent. So unless the guy is special in a way where the 5th year option might be a consideration, might as well trade back and pick up some extra picks in later rounds. Too many fans have that Fantasy Football mentality, where there is something magical about being drafted in earlier rounds, when in truth there is a lot of talent in later rounds as well. Seattle's drafting history bears that out. Sure, there have been misses, but that happens with every team all over the league.

TwistedHusky · Jun 1, 2021

They look like they will go farther in the playoffs than we will.

They also have a better shot at the division than us.

For at least the next few years, they are in much better position than us...and likely have a better future past the point.

Clearly they found a way to do this without those draft picks.

Ramfan128 · Jun 4, 2021

It's so fascinating to track.

Since the Goff trade, the Rams and Titans have the same record and same number of playoff wins. Rams played in a Super Bowl.

Titans got Derrick Henry, Corey Davis and a few other players in the deal. Goff isn't even a Ram anymore.

But despite all that, we had slightly more success than them and look like we will be better than them this year too.

The Ramsey trade is complete now too - Chaisson and Etienne for a top 2 or 3 CB. Be interesting to see how that one plays out.

Fair to say that these trades will work out for both parties though, in the Jags case because Ramsey just wanted out so they had to trade him AND they bottomed out and got Lawrence.

It's worth noting that part of the Titans doing well off that trade was the Rams going 4-12 the next year and handing them pick 5, and for the Jags, if Chaisson and Etienne are decent, they'll have done okay, but moreso because this trade triggered a sequence of events that led them to Lawrence.

For Detroit, they did right by Stafford - but from a team building perspective, those first round picks are likely to be mediocre or flat out busts. So unless this trade leads them to bottoming out like the Jags did, I don't think this will go well help them all that much.

Maulbert · Jun 4, 2021

Ramfan128":b1drvmk8 said:
It's so fascinating to track.

Since the Goff trade, the Rams and Titans have the same record and same number of playoff wins. Rams played in a Super Bowl.

Titans got Derrick Henry, Corey Davis and a few other players in the deal. Goff isn't even a Ram anymore.

But despite all that, we had slightly more success than them and look like we will be better than them this year too.

The Ramsey trade is complete now too - Chaisson and Etienne for a top 2 or 3 CB. Be interesting to see how that one plays out.

Fair to say that these trades will work out for both parties though, in the Jags case because Ramsey just wanted out so they had to trade him AND they bottomed out and got Lawrence.

It's worth noting that part of the Titans doing well off that trade was the Rams going 4-12 the next year and handing them pick 5, and for the Jags, if Chaisson and Etienne are decent, they'll have done okay, but moreso because this trade triggered a sequence of events that led them to Lawrence.

For Detroit, they did right by Stafford - but from a team building perspective, those first round picks are likely to be mediocre or flat out busts. So unless this trade leads them to bottoming out like the Jags did, I don't think this will go well help them all that much.

Dude, Stafford is not Tom Brady. Don't go counting Lombardis you think you'll win. Stafford played with the best receiver in the NFL for 6 years and only has a career passer rating of 89.9. His only season with a rating above 100 he missed half the year. I am far from convinced he's going to play like the god most people think he will in LA.

Maelstrom787 · Jun 5, 2021

Draft picks are overvalued assets outside of the top picks used to attain franchise signal callers, and I think smart teams are figuring that out.

Still need them to fill out the roster because veterans are expensive, but at the end of the day, acquiring talent is the name of the game. Teams, especially those already successful ones picking in the crapshoot range of 17 back, are smart to be more willing to devote premium capital towards obtaining established talent.

Day 2 and 3 are where good talent evaluators make the difference.

Ramfan128 · Jun 8, 2021

Maulbert":2e3mbplu said:
Ramfan128":2e3mbplu said:

It's so fascinating to track.

Since the Goff trade, the Rams and Titans have the same record and same number of playoff wins. Rams played in a Super Bowl.

Titans got Derrick Henry, Corey Davis and a few other players in the deal. Goff isn't even a Ram anymore.

But despite all that, we had slightly more success than them and look like we will be better than them this year too.

The Ramsey trade is complete now too - Chaisson and Etienne for a top 2 or 3 CB. Be interesting to see how that one plays out.

Fair to say that these trades will work out for both parties though, in the Jags case because Ramsey just wanted out so they had to trade him AND they bottomed out and got Lawrence.

It's worth noting that part of the Titans doing well off that trade was the Rams going 4-12 the next year and handing them pick 5, and for the Jags, if Chaisson and Etienne are decent, they'll have done okay, but moreso because this trade triggered a sequence of events that led them to Lawrence.

For Detroit, they did right by Stafford - but from a team building perspective, those first round picks are likely to be mediocre or flat out busts. So unless this trade leads them to bottoming out like the Jags did, I don't think this will go well help them all that much.

Click to expand...

Dude, Stafford is not Tom Brady. Don't go counting Lombardis you think you'll win. Stafford played with the best receiver in the NFL for 6 years and only has a career passer rating of 89.9. His only season with a rating above 100 he missed half the year. I am far from convinced he's going to play like the god most people think he will in LA.

I'm not - I was referencing that we made the Super Bowl in 2018 in comparing the Rams and Titans after the trade up for Goff.

I know Stafford isn't Brady, although I expect him to have a better passer rating than the 102 that Brady had last year.

He did have Calvin - but never the threat of a run game and going from Patricia to McVay is a difference that I don't think can be quantified.

I'm thinking this will be a Favre to the Vikings type of deal - despite Favre putting up higher yards and TDs with the Packers, his first year in Minnesota he put up his most efficient season.

SoulfishHawk · Jun 8, 2021

The same Rams who where handed a super bowl by the refs........

Ramfan128 · Jun 8, 2021

SoulfishHawk":y7s7095l said:
The same Rams who where handed a super bowl by the refs........

Two sides to every story.

Patriots fans insist they never cheated.

Saints fans didn't think bountygate was an issue. And they had no problem with the officiating in their NFCCG win over the Vikings, even though the NFL also apologized to Minnesota.

Seahawk fans mostly didn't have a problem with the failmary.

Me? It was a bad call, but the Saints were up 3 with under two minutes to go and they couldn't stop a garbage QB from carving them up to get to FG range. They had a better than 70% chance to win after the no call. I'd imagine most fanbases would want a 70% chance to win after the worst officiating gaffe to ever happen to them.

Given the officiating in the Seahawks/Steelers Super Bowl, what percentage did Seattle have of overcoming it? 10%?

Not really in the same league.

I just realized the Rams haven't had a 1st rounder since...

Maulbert

Well-known member

Own The West

Well-known member

chris98251

Well-known member

sutz

Well-known member

TwistedHusky

Well-known member

Ramfan128

Active member

Maulbert

Well-known member

Maelstrom787

Well-known member

Ramfan128

Active member

SoulfishHawk

Well-known member

Ramfan128

Active member

Similar threads

Latest posts