Rams Offering Two (Future) Firsts for Burns

[Mr. Scot]

39 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

Seahawks

- No QB on the roster

You sure about that part?

[Manna]

If they aren't going to pay him a monster contract that he'll probably demand, then trade him before we get there. I don't know how we'll be able to pay Burns, Brown, and Chinn. Best to trade him now if he doesnt make sense financially so we can get something in return. 

[WUnderhill]

3 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

I am not saying that... Im saying you cant claim that the injury bug hits old age teams with certainty. There is no statistical evidence to support that. 

There is no certainty except that time and age are undefeated. The older a roster gets, the worse the odds. With the Rams I’m betting on the decline, and that’s the logical bet. Could they get better and make a SB run? Sure. Heck, the Panthers could make a SB run this year. 

[TheCasillas]

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

You sure about that part?

Yup.. No QB under contract next year.

 

Proof: https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/seattle-seahawks/cap/2023/

[Mr. Scot]

1 minute ago, TheCasillas said:

Yup.. No QB under contract next year.

 

Proof: https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/seattle-seahawks/cap/2023/

I wouldn't be too surprised if they keep Smith.

[TheRumGone]

I was on the fence until last game. I’d do it because he’s going to get an 80-100 mill contract. He’s not a complete player. He is a very very good pass rusher but he has a strength issue and is constantly not able to get guys to the ground to become that dominant player. It’s year 4. We should’ve seen it by now. I get the risk that we’d have to replace him though and we can certainly draft someone much much worse. I’d pull the trigger though.

[Mr. Scot]

12 minutes ago, Wolfcop said:

Sorry, but they are idiots if they turn down 2 firsts. Brian Burns is not enough of an impact player to pay him what we are going to have to pay him. 

Don't think it's been mentioned, but we probably have to consider that this is one of those deals high profile enough that it might not be entirely up to Fitterer

[TheCasillas]

Just now, WUnderhill said:

There is no certainty except that time and age are undefeated. The older a roster gets, the worse the odds. With the Rams I’m betting on the decline, and that’s the logical bet. Could they get better and make a SB run? Sure. Heck, the Panthers could make a SB run this year. 

But making a super bowl run this year doesnt matter in the context of this entire conversation. The picks are 2024 and 2025. 

This year Rams arent going to be more than an edge playoff team because they have lost almost their entire starting oline for the year. They still field a top5 defense and have excellent coaches on both sides of the ball. 

 

we are trying to hedge our bets, but there are more stats that favor the Rams winnning next year than losing. Their division turnover is already enough to put the Rams in favor.

[Samppson]

I've been against trading him for multiple firsts in other threads, but this is one I would seriously consider purely due to them being picks in a few couple years. There is a legitimate chance those picks could be very high as they are strapped for draft picks already, and have an aging core with Stafford.

 

[WUnderhill]

It sucks the Rams have already played the 9ers twice or this would be a pretty good hedge on that CMC trade. Missed the chance to give the Rams enough to beat the 9ers and improve our CMC draft picks.

[TheCasillas]

2 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

I wouldn't be too surprised if they keep Smith.

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.

[Panther53521]

We will not hear the results until almost 4pm …. Fitts want more, just like me. If it happens it will be later today.

if Chubb would go early, that would help us.

[frankw]

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.

[CRA]

20 minutes ago, stirs said:

Pie for you for understanding how the draft is viewed by GMs

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. 

and Burns is not the type DE I would want to sign to a big deal anyway.  So why keep him.  Because then you have to dump a bunch of money into a guy thats just a pass rusher…..and he might not fit the next D scheme anyway.