Was the Rams-Redskins trade lose-lose?

Discuss any and all NFL-related topics and matters of interest here. RATING: PG-13
Was the Rams-Redskins trade lose-lose?
Fri Sep 27, 2013 9:58 am
  • I know that it's too early to tell, but hey, we like to discuss things here, and I saw this article and I chuckled because I thought that someone might make this point sooner or later:

    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/why-rober ... 42615.html

    I mean, the argument is there. The Redskins have a bad defense. They could have picked up three starters on defense - where the Rams actually DID pick up three starters.

    Meanwhile, Sam Bradford sucks. I know there are Rams fans lurking this board that will be saying, "Bradford FINALLY has the weapons, and 2017 is going to be the year he becomes elite!" in four years, but the dude is not good. That team with RGIII, a presumably-healthy RGIII that hasn't been run into the ground by a moron head coach that ruined Terrell Davis' career too early by running him into the ground, might make the playoffs this year and maybe even threaten to win the division.
    "He's a *****. It's not that he was a *****, he is a *****, and that's why he hasn't won anything."
    User avatar
    Smelly McUgly
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3624
    Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 2:30 pm
    Location: God's Country AKA Cascadia AKA The Pacific Northwest


Re: Was the Rams-Redskins trade lose-lose?
Fri Sep 27, 2013 10:06 am
  • The Redskins started really slow last year, so this year could be a repeat.

    Remember one thing about Shanahan, the reason he was out of Denver was he refused to really improve the defense.

    PeHawk said it best when he talked about shitty ownership. Which is really at the root of those two team's struggles.
    SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 10807
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


Re: Was the Rams-Redskins trade lose-lose?
Fri Sep 27, 2013 10:10 am
  • Scottemojo wrote:The Redskins started really slow last year, so this year could be a repeat.

    Remember one thing about Shanahan, the reason he was out of Denver was he refused to really improve the defense.

    PeHawk said it best when he talked about shitty ownership. Which is really at the root of those two team's struggles.


    I wouldn't consider 3-3 averaging nearly 30 points a game to be slow. They hit a skid in the middle of the season and then went on a tear at the end.
    Image

    RolandDeschain - noted Dorito eater wrote:If you want to come prove your smack talking capabilities in person, stop by Gold's Gym in Kirkland any night around 5-6pm and say hi.
    User avatar
    Dtowers
    * Fat Stoner Nerd *
     
    Posts: 847
    Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 12:30 pm


  • Great thread topic.

    I've already voiced my feelings about the subject, so won't do so again here, but I think the answer to the question, is in the question, itself.

    I will say that I was very concerned about the Rams getting all those picks. Much more concerned than I was about the possibility of Griffin coming to our division. Now, other than Ogletree, I am not overly concerned about what the Rams will do with those picks. ...that is, as long as jeff Fisher is coaching and has a voice in the matter.

    The Skins? They have a better version of Kaep. That's what they got after selling the farm. I am very happy with the trade. It's clearly win-win. ; )
    User avatar
    HawkWow
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5083
    Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 6:20 pm
    Location: The 5-0


  • The team in Washington would be better if they didn't try and ruin RG3
    Image
    3elieve
    User avatar
    Throwdown
    * NET Baller *
     
    Posts: 19073
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:02 am
    Location: Graham, WA


  • ..as in, they should have only drafted him for his ability to QB from the pocket?
    User avatar
    HawkWow
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5083
    Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 6:20 pm
    Location: The 5-0


  • HawkWow wrote:..as in, they should have only drafted him for his ability to QB from the pocket?


    He shouldn't of been playing after the initial injury, thats just me though.
    Image
    3elieve
    User avatar
    Throwdown
    * NET Baller *
     
    Posts: 19073
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:02 am
    Location: Graham, WA


  • I can't argue that and according to Andrews, that goes on Shanahan (which never surprised me). But I think it stopped being on Shanahan (and Snyder) when Griffin demanded to play, using the clearance from the same surgeon (and media), to bolster his position. Now they're all screwed and I'd be lyin' if I said I that makes me unhappy.

    EDIT: Had to re-read my previous response. My comment about drafting him as a pocket passer was in consideration of the injury he suffered in college. I think he went too high and they obviously gave up too much, unless they thought he could be successful from the pocket (alone). I misunderstood your sentiment about them playing him after the NFL injury. Again, you are 100% correct.
    User avatar
    HawkWow
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5083
    Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 6:20 pm
    Location: The 5-0


  • No trade will help if the ownership/management can't draft well with what they get.
    GO HAWKS!!!

    Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!

    Follow me on Twitter at @17power
    User avatar
    MontanaHawk05
    * 17Power Blogger *
     
    Posts: 11247
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am


  • MontanaHawk05 wrote:No trade will help if the ownership/management can't draft well with what they get.

    Any trade where picks trade hands are pretty much impossible to evaluate for years, aren't they?
    SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 10807
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


  • Scottemojo wrote:
    MontanaHawk05 wrote:No trade will help if the ownership/management can't draft well with what they get.

    Any trade where picks trade hands are pretty much impossible to evaluate for years, aren't they?


    Are you saying that we cannot declare Austin a bust after 4 games?
    User avatar
    CALIHAWK1
    *PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
    *PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 9182
    Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 7:00 pm
    Location: Is Everything


  • Scottemojo wrote:
    MontanaHawk05 wrote:No trade will help if the ownership/management can't draft well with what they get.

    Any trade where picks trade hands are pretty much impossible to evaluate for years, aren't they?


    Are you saying that we cannot declare Austin a bust after 4 games?
    User avatar
    CALIHAWK1
    *PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
    *PLATINUM SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 9182
    Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 7:00 pm
    Location: Is Everything


  • It's too early to evaluate this trade. The 3 players the Rams picked up are all looking like good picks so I'm not sure what they did wrong. All Sam Bradford needs to do is become an above average QB and they can win. He's not at that level now but he's still young.

    As for the Skins, it's not the coach's fault they have such a crappy field which tore up RGIII's knee. They gave up a lot but it it's probably worth it if he develops into a great QB. Again, too early to tell because he's only in his 2nd year and still coming back from an injury.
    Image
    Sturm
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2345
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 3:11 pm


  • That field is without question a killer. But let's not forget Griffin had a knee while at Baylor, too.

    The Skins gave away the farm for a running QB with knee history (LMAO). If it didn't happen at FedEx, with his style of play, it likely would have happened elsewhere. That is not to diminish the point that FedEx is a POS, but you can't blame the Skins for his injury unless you are going to blame Baylor, too. Injuries come with the territory when playing running QBs.

    Injury aside, Like Cam Newton, I felt early (and often) that Griffin was more hype than substance (when being discussed as a surefire NFL sensation). In the Alamo bowl against the Dawgs, Griffin wasn't even the best QB on the field. Sure, he threw up some huge numbers IN COLLEGE. ....but mostly against inferior competition (like Nick Holt).

    So now the Skins have a running QB that has suffered 2 knees and he's barely in his 2nd season. Now they will likely need to make him a pocket QB. If and when it is ascertained by NFL defenses that Griffin is no longer a threat to run, the Skins would be as well off, if not better off, with their 4th rd pick, Kirk Cousins.

    It is not too early to evaluate this trade. The Skins were stupid. Period. There is no way I would have used even a single 1st rd pick on a running QB that had knee history (WTF?) and I said that before last year's draft. Do I think I'm smarter than every NFL team that wanted Griffin? Hell no. But we don't even know how many teams would have used a 1st on him to begin with. Seriously.

    Comparable players, like Eric Crouch, weren't even drafted (as QBs). I guess the NFL was smarter back then. The frenzy surrounding Griffin was the bi-product of FOs thinking more about putting ass' in seats than creating a lasting, quality product. I look forward to Griffin having a very Vick like Career.
    User avatar
    HawkWow
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5083
    Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 6:20 pm
    Location: The 5-0


  • I think it was win-win, sort of.

    It was a win for the Rams if you accept the premise that they were not even considering drafting a QB. Trading a high pick for two extra 1sts and two extra 2nds just to move down 4 spots is every GM's wet dream. Taking RG3 would have meant giving up on Bradford after just 2 seasons. I would have done it, specifically I would have called Indy to see how little it would take to move from #2 to #1 (Indy was said to be almost undecided between RG3 and Luck). But making a move like that would have taken some balls, and I'm not even sure it was the GM's call to make (Fisher claims that he chose St. Louis in large part because of Sam Bradford). Also, one of those picks from Washington might be high enough to get a very good QB in 2014. So this trade could end up a MASSIVE win for the Rams, if they can avoid missing a layup next spring.

    It's a win for the Redskins if RG3 can adapt to playing the game in a more conservative manner. He's a smart dude, he'll get it down. I'm stunned to see otherwise intelligent people rush to judgement with him. I would say, at the very least, I'd wait til the end of the 2014 season before judging the RG3 acquisition a failure. He just needs time to heal and to adapt. Also, the Redskins are still recovering from Snyder's cap mismanagement from years past (the 2011 cap penalty from the NFL didn't help things). The bigger problem for the Redskins might be Mike Shanahan's inability to draft for defense. He needs to bring in a talented GM prospect, and a DC who knows what he's doing and let those guys handle the other side of the ball. He also needs to stop being an idiot with his RBs. Roy Helu is his most talented back, yet he won't use him just so he can wear out an NFL average RB in Alfred Morris instead.

    It always amazes me how some coaches can be so brilliant with the complicated stuff but miss obvious things right in front of their noses (Pete has this characteristic as well).
    Last edited by kearly on Fri Sep 27, 2013 8:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 10691
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


  • I remember Racist-Skins fans chortling last year about their field being their "homefield advantage". Really? They have to play on it too...and for at least 8 games every year.

    But then intelligence has never been a requirement to be a fan.
    Image
    "John Schneider is...half ninja assassin, half shark. This
    man does not screw around...So glad he is our GM."
    - PGunning101
    User avatar
    gargantual
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1114
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:17 am
    Location: Lewiston, CA (but Seattle native :)


  • I'm glad RGIII isn't in our division.

    Especially RGIII on a team that isn't handcuffed for three years, unable to build around him.

    Maybe they can't trade Bradford because of the contract. But RGIII in this division would've been tough.
    User avatar
    theENGLISHseahawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7942
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:13 am


Re: Was the Rams-Redskins trade lose-lose?
Sat Sep 28, 2013 11:10 am
  • Imagine if RGIII actually played for a smart coach (no Shanny isn't that smart, he was just lucky to have Mr Ed at Qb) in a dome and on turf. The kid should be as pissed with the rams as rams fans should be. I'm with English, I'm glad RGIII isn't in our division he could be great with Fisher.
    CPHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2184
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:49 pm


  • Sturm wrote:The 3 players the Rams picked up are all looking like good picks so I'm not sure what they did wrong. All Sam Bradford needs to do is become an above average QB and they can win.

    What 3 players?

    Alec Ogletree is the only first round pick the Rams have gained so far in their trade with the Redskins.

    In 2012, the Redskins and Rams swapped first round draft picks.. with St Louis getting Washington's #6 overall selection in exchange for the #2 overall selection.

    In 2013, the Rams received Washington's 22nd overall selection, which they traded down to #30 and selected Ogletree.

    In 2014, the Rams will also receive the Redskins 1st round pick.
    drastik
    NET Practice Squad
     
    Posts: 79
    Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 9:11 pm


  • So far, St. Louis has used its Washington picks on defensive starters Michael Brockers (via a draft-day trade with Dallas), Janoris Jenkins and Alec Ogletree – The Rams still get Washington’s first-round pick next year too.
    Opinion has caused more trouble on this little earth than plagues or earthquakes.
    -Voltaire
    User avatar
    HawkMeat
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 401
    Joined: Fri Mar 22, 2013 6:56 am
    Location: Kidnap County


  • HawkWow wrote:That field is without question a killer. But let's not forget Griffin had a knee while at Baylor, too.

    The Skins gave away the farm for a running QB with knee history (LMAO). If it didn't happen at FedEx, with his style of play, it likely would have happened elsewhere. That is not to diminish the point that FedEx is a POS, but you can't blame the Skins for his injury unless you are going to blame Baylor, too. Injuries come with the territory when playing running QBs.


    Ok, I had no idea that RGIII had a history of knee injuries at college. I'm surprised the person who wrote the article didn't bring this up.
    Image
    Sturm
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2345
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 3:11 pm


  • RG3 is not a 100%. He will be fine as time goes on and he feels better with his surgical repairs. If any of you have had a significant injury it takes time not just physically but mentally to get used to playing on something that feels different and not,quite right. You learn to compensate, and your mechanics become a mess. He just needs time to trust his body again.

    I agree about the coach in DC. When he was with SF he coached under the defensive wizard of the Walsh regime George Seifert. He said that during Shanahan's interview he would throw out defenses and ask him how he would attack. It was after that Seifert hired him to run the SF offense. He was never known for his defensive expertise; he works best when he has a a strong defensive coach he can rely upon.

    I think PC gets it he is a defensive first coach. He was a great DB coach at SF and it shows in our D backfield. He relies a lot on the OC and Cable to run the offense and realizes what he does best. He delegates where he feels others are better suited without letting ego get in the way.
    User avatar
    Happypuppy
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1859
    Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2010 5:40 pm


  • I still find it a win/win.

    Washington was a sub par team for more than a decade. They'd gone through a litany of bad QBs. They needed a franchise QB in the worst way.

    St. Louis was still in the 'we hope our #1 overall works out' phase. 2 seasons is too early to judge him.

    Washington got what it hoped for when they made the trade. Becoming a team that matters within their division. St. Louis has added a lot of talent. And are in a position now, where if they determine that Bradford won't ever be that guy -- they can move to a succession plan with the picks they have.

    The Redskins problem isn't the trade. It's the fact that they generally don't draft well outside of the first round. Alfred Morris notwithstanding -- they don't have a good player evaluation group there. They've been pretty fortunate on their day 1 picks, although they've mostly been in the first half of the rounds. Losing the 2 first round picks hurt them some, but I wouldn't say whomever they could have taken would have had better returns for them. Especially if they were reduced to starting Rex Grossman for another year.

    St. Louis has started to draft well. That team is talented and is building rapidly. If Bradford is holding them back, they are in a position not unlike we were last year. A ready built team to compete but missing the QB element.
    Attyla the Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 691
    Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 2:38 pm


  • Answer will not be known this year.

    Right now I think it's Shotty who is the issue, maybe Bradford. Either way....that will be fixed. Snead and FO will take advantage and draft picks won't be known for value for two or so years yet.

    Go get your Lombardi this year. This topic does not affect you this year.
    Los Angeles Rams' fan who lives in San Diego.

    "They call it Sack City because you'd rather live in a SACK."
    User avatar
    RedAlice
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 625
    Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2012 11:47 am
    Location: San Diego


  • Any trade that keeps Bradford a Lamb is a win (for us). Especially if they insist he is starter material.
    43-8...it's all about that action boss....
    next man up.
    User avatar
    MizzouHawkGal
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 6807
    Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 11:46 pm
    Location: Kansas City, MO


  • RedAlice wrote:Answer will not be known this year.

    Right now I think it's Shotty who is the issue, maybe Bradford. Either way....that will be fixed. Snead and FO will take advantage and draft picks won't be known for value for two or so years yet.

    Go get your Lombardi this year. This topic does not affect you this year.

    Classic deflection Alice...I figure you know elite quarterbacks? (Warner). Wilson is younger and BFF is coming soon......:)

    Oh yeah, said BFF is his EXACT age,.,,,hmm. (If you fantasize Wilson being a FA let me educate you. Both Harvin/Wilson will be Seahawks for life). Interestingly Irvin is back and Bennett is ok.......
    Last edited by MizzouHawkGal on Tue Oct 01, 2013 9:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    43-8...it's all about that action boss....
    next man up.
    User avatar
    MizzouHawkGal
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 6807
    Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 11:46 pm
    Location: Kansas City, MO


  • KCHawkGirl wrote:Any trade that keeps Bradford a Lamb is a win (for us). Especially if they insist he is starter material.


    Wish so much I could disagree with you.

    My Sunday morning dream is to see him benched.
    Los Angeles Rams' fan who lives in San Diego.

    "They call it Sack City because you'd rather live in a SACK."
    User avatar
    RedAlice
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 625
    Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2012 11:47 am
    Location: San Diego


  • KCHawkGirl wrote:
    RedAlice wrote:Answer will not be known this year.

    Right now I think it's Shotty who is the issue, maybe Bradford. Either way....that will be fixed. Snead and FO will take advantage and draft picks won't be known for value for two or so years yet.

    Go get your Lombardi this year. This topic does not affect you this year.

    Classic deflection Alice...I figure you know elite quarterbacks? (Warner). Wilson id younger and BFF is coming soon......:)


    Not really deflecting. I'd like to see Bradford benched and Shotty fired.

    Of course I miss Warner...

    I have no answer for this mess. Still love the team, but just.....um. No clue.
    Los Angeles Rams' fan who lives in San Diego.

    "They call it Sack City because you'd rather live in a SACK."
    User avatar
    RedAlice
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 625
    Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2012 11:47 am
    Location: San Diego


  • When that time comes, Alice will be elated and giggling, and we'll all be like "Damnit."
    Image
    "VICTORYYYYYYY!" -Johnny Drama
    User avatar
    RolandDeschain
    *NET FCC Liaison*
     
    Posts: 24826
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
    Location: Kirkland, WA


  • RedAlice wrote:
    KCHawkGirl wrote:
    RedAlice wrote:Answer will not be known this year.

    Right now I think it's Shotty who is the issue, maybe Bradford. Either way....that will be fixed. Snead and FO will take advantage and draft picks won't be known for value for two or so years yet.

    Go get your Lombardi this year. This topic does not affect you this year.

    Classic deflection Alice...I figure you know elite quarterbacks? (Warner). Wilson id younger and BFF is coming soon......:)


    Not really deflecting. I'd like to see Bradford benched and Shotty fired.

    Of course I miss Warner...

    I have no answer for this mess. Still love the team, but just.....um. No clue.

    I apologize Alice I like you and from what I have sern you are a level headed fan. But it's our year despite what Denver is doing (personally it's going to fun watching that Chiefs win in Arrowhead against them later this year...but what do I know? ).
    43-8...it's all about that action boss....
    next man up.
    User avatar
    MizzouHawkGal
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 6807
    Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 11:46 pm
    Location: Kansas City, MO


  • Sometime this week I was asked right out bed my SB pick....

    I said Denver, and um....well, I was sleepy, I said I thought would be SJAX team....now maybe Hawks? maybe....

    I was sleepy. But he agreed.
    Los Angeles Rams' fan who lives in San Diego.

    "They call it Sack City because you'd rather live in a SACK."
    User avatar
    RedAlice
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 625
    Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2012 11:47 am
    Location: San Diego


  • It's ok, Denver is sexy....Seattle is brutal just ask my friend who insisted the Texans are serious players...while losing MONEY to me, real money to a person that NEVER bets unless the odds are in her favor.:)

    (Hint, the odds ARE always in our favor as long as Russell Wilson is our quarterback.....yes?). He "tilts" the playing field. He just does. I can't explain it though. It's that Brady/Brees/Manning factor with Montana mentality. Just insanity.
    43-8...it's all about that action boss....
    next man up.
    User avatar
    MizzouHawkGal
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 6807
    Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 11:46 pm
    Location: Kansas City, MO


Re: Was the Rams-Redskins trade lose-lose?
Tue Oct 01, 2013 10:01 pm
  • RolandDeschain wrote:When that time comes, Alice will be elated and giggling, and we'll all be like "Damnit."

    Stop being Les dammit! These aren't the usual Seahawks. Alice, though I like her WILL be sad.:)
    43-8...it's all about that action boss....
    next man up.
    User avatar
    MizzouHawkGal
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 6807
    Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 11:46 pm
    Location: Kansas City, MO


Re: Was the Rams-Redskins trade lose-lose?
Tue Oct 01, 2013 11:13 pm
  • Hey, I resent you calling me Les! We can admit the Rams will be tougher to beat when they move on from Bradford without being an old fuddy duddy expecting losses every week; there IS middle ground!
    Image
    "VICTORYYYYYYY!" -Johnny Drama
    User avatar
    RolandDeschain
    *NET FCC Liaison*
     
    Posts: 24826
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
    Location: Kirkland, WA




It is currently Sat Aug 30, 2014 10:46 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ NFL NATION ]




Information
  • Who is online