2019 NFL Trade Deadline

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Rams trade Aquib Talib and a 2020 5th rounder for a 7th rounder in 2022.

 

Rams continue to make make curiously idiotic moves in an attempt to "go for it." I mean, I get that Ramsey is good. But ... I'm guessing that some of the same people that thought the deal they made for Ramsey was great also thought that the deal they one made for Talib was great. Now they have to give up value just to rid themselves of his contract. That is not good roster and cap management. The rams are setting themselves up to fall off a cliff at some point.

[MrTPlush]

Talib could have been a 49er, but he essentially blocked it from happening threatening to not show up.

 

Now, a Miami Dolphin.

 

Then again being a rich football player in Miami is prooooobably a decent gig.

[nodakfan17]

Rams trade Aquib Talib and a 2020 5th rounder for a 7th rounder in 2022.

 

Rams continue to make make curiously idiotic moves in an attempt to "go for it." I mean, I get that Ramsey is good. But ... I'm guessing that some of the same people that thought the deal they made for Ramsey was great also thought that the deal they one made for Talib was great. Now they have to give up value just to rid themselves of his contract. That is not good roster and cap management. The rams are setting themselves up to fall off a cliff at some point.

Rob Demovsky replied to your tweet!

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Rams trade Aquib Talib and a 2020 5th rounder for a 7th rounder in 2022.

 

Rams continue to make make curiously idiotic moves in an attempt to "go for it." I mean, I get that Ramsey is good. But ... I'm guessing that some of the same people that thought the deal they made for Ramsey was great also thought that the deal they one made for Talib was great. Now they have to give up value just to rid themselves of his contract. That is not good roster and cap management. The rams are setting themselves up to fall off a cliff at some point.

Rob Demovsky replied to your tweet!

 

I saw that

 

It doesn't make any sense to to for them to activate Sternberger over Campbell if Campbell is healthy, at least to me. Campbell was a solid contributor last year in his short time healthy.

[HiAndTight]

Rams trade Aquib Talib and a 2020 5th rounder for a 7th rounder in 2022.

 

Rams continue to make make curiously idiotic moves in an attempt to "go for it." I mean, I get that Ramsey is good. But ... I'm guessing that some of the same people that thought the deal they made for Ramsey was great also thought that the deal they one made for Talib was great. Now they have to give up value just to rid themselves of his contract. That is not good roster and cap management. The rams are setting themselves up to fall off a cliff at some point.

 

 

I don't get why you're comparing trading a 24 year elite Corner for multiple 1sts with a 32 year old corner that they traded for a 5th?

 

Just two totally different scenario's.

[HiAndTight]

I never quite understand why NFL teams don't just unload their players at the trade deadline when they have no chance in competing. I mean, why not grab as many picks and such as you can for players that have no future with you?

 

NFL GMs are playing checkers for the most part, while smart MLB GMs are playing chess.

 

 

It's just two different sports.

 

In one of them, you have to know what the other 10 guys are doing on every single play. Chemistry actually is important. The other sport is just basically a team sports comprised from individual matchup's.

 

So it's a lot easier to throw a guy into LF in the middle of the year than it is to throw a guy out there at Tackle for instance in the middle of the year.

 

I really don't think it's because people in baseball are just smarter than those in football.

[HiAndTight]

They’ll likely get a 3rd rounder as compensation if he leaves, so I assume the asking price would be at least a 3rd rounder (which converts the uncertainty of a compensatory to a known commodity).

 

 

I think Brown has made it clear he plans on retaining Green. If nothing else they have either or both the franchise and transition tags they can use this year. They tag him and they can potentially get more without having to wait a year or just bring him back at 15-17 million per year.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Rams trade Aquib Talib and a 2020 5th rounder for a 7th rounder in 2022.

 

Rams continue to make make curiously idiotic moves in an attempt to "go for it." I mean, I get that Ramsey is good. But ... I'm guessing that some of the same people that thought the deal they made for Ramsey was great also thought that the deal they one made for Talib was great. Now they have to give up value just to rid themselves of his contract. That is not good roster and cap management. The rams are setting themselves up to fall off a cliff at some point.

 

 

I don't get why you're comparing trading a 24 year elite Corner for multiple 1sts with a 32 year old corner that they traded for a 5th?

 

Just two totally different scenario's.

 

Talib and Peters were hyped as a shutdown CB duo for them after they acquired both via trade last year. Now both are gone, and they actually had to pay a team to take Talib's contract. All I'm saying is that is not good management. And that I believe the huge haul they are giving up for ramsey is going to turn out poor for them as well.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Unloading players in the NFL would require a buyer that is already most likely winning and that needs that specific position and can pay him. That is a very limited number of teams. It is also by far the least plug-n-play sport of the major three. The schemes are complex and suited to the roster. It's much harder to just shove a guy in the lineup.

[LouisEly]

I think the salary cap plays a big role in how many trades can take place.

It's a big reason. Competing teams are usually short on cap space so they can't take on much, and trading players with respect to signing bonuses is the same as releasing a player in that any prorated signing bonus gets allocated all to the following season just like dead money from cutting a player.

[FVBrewerFan]

Right, a trade can hurt the cap by both teams in the trade. Also sellers realize in the NFL, you can fairly easily go worst to first in a year. So unless a player is in their final year, hesitant to trade good players. Determining value is also much tougher, there's not objective stats like baseball.

[HiAndTight]

Rams trade Aquib Talib and a 2020 5th rounder for a 7th rounder in 2022.

 

Rams continue to make make curiously idiotic moves in an attempt to "go for it." I mean, I get that Ramsey is good. But ... I'm guessing that some of the same people that thought the deal they made for Ramsey was great also thought that the deal they one made for Talib was great. Now they have to give up value just to rid themselves of his contract. That is not good roster and cap management. The rams are setting themselves up to fall off a cliff at some point.

 

 

I don't get why you're comparing trading a 24 year elite Corner for multiple 1sts with a 32 year old corner that they traded for a 5th?

 

Just two totally different scenario's.

 

Talib and Peters were hyped as a shutdown CB duo for them after they acquired both via trade last year. Now both are gone, and they actually had to pay a team to take Talib's contract. All I'm saying is that is not good management. And that I believe the huge haul they are giving up for ramsey is going to turn out poor for them as well.

 

Ok...but they did end up in the Super Bowl last year and it certainly wasn't because of their Super Bowl that they lost. I think everyone can agree on that, right? It's pretty hard to argue with those results.

 

Arguing that Ramsey isn't going to work out is too vague for me. What means it hasn't worked out? Did the Bears trade for Mack not work out because a year after the Bears went 12-4, they're not struggling?

I don't know what people would expect him to suddenly start to struggle, but it does seem like that's what you're hinting at by conflating the Talib acquisition and the Ramsey one. Again, 32(now nearly 34) vs a just turned 25 year old 1st Team AP.

[HiAndTight]

Unloading players in the NFL would require a buyer that is already most likely winning and that needs that specific position and can pay him. That is a very limited number of teams. It is also by far the least plug-n-play sport of the major three. The schemes are complex and suited to the roster. It's much harder to just shove a guy in the lineup.

 

 

And at some positions it can be devastating. You trade for a OL and you don't get the blocking scheme down and you can end your QB's season. Even at a position like CB, they move around so much and they have so many different plays and looks, you're often left changing up your entire scheme in order to simplify it until the guy gets up to speed.

 

And if you have a QB like Rodgers, you add a whole other level of complications to it. I knew after Shepard slipped and that ball went off his facemask he was pretty much done in GB. It seems like a real battle for him to gain a WR'ers trust and next to impossible to get it back if you lose it. So bringing in a skill position player other than RB in-season for players like that...that's tough. With Favre, it was much easier. So I'm sure teams factor that in.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Ok...but they did end up in the Super Bowl last year and it certainly wasn't because of their Super Bowl that they lost. I think everyone can agree on that, right? It's pretty hard to argue with those results.

 

Arguing that Ramsey isn't going to work out is too vague for me. What means it hasn't worked out? Did the Bears trade for Mack not work out because a year after the Bears went 12-4, they're not struggling?

I don't know what people would expect him to suddenly start to struggle, but it does seem like that's what you're hinting at by conflating the Talib acquisition and the Ramsey one. Again, 32(now nearly 34) vs a just turned 25 year old 1st Team AP.

 

I'm not advocating that Ramsey will struggle. I actually think he'll be ok. I just think that the acquisition cost was WAY too high ... to the point where he pretty much has to operate at an All-Pro, defensive MVP level to justify it. But I wouldn't have done the Mack deal, either. The Bears in my opinion are even further away than the Rams, and while stars win regular season games, teams with solid depth typically win championships. I guess overall I'm just not a fan of the Rams philosophy on team-building.

[MrTPlush]

LeVeon Bell claims both the Packers and Steelers tried to get him at the deadline.

[adambr2]

Can't have been anything more than a due diligence inquiry. Expensive, devalued position, and we're fine with Jones and Williams at the position. Doesn't make a lot of sense as a fit to me.

[RollieTime]

LeVeon Bell claims both the Packers and Steelers tried to get him at the deadline.

 

Seems extremely odd if true. He held out for all of 2018 because the Steelers wouldn’t give him a long term deal. But now the Steelers would be willing to pick up the 3/$38 million or so left on his deal, plus the rest of his salary for this season while also trading away draft capital and/or players to get him back?

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

LeVeon Bell claims both the Packers and Steelers tried to get him at the deadline.

 

Seems extremely odd if true. He held out for all of 2018 because the Steelers wouldn’t give him a long term deal. But now the Steelers would be willing to pick up the 3/$38 million or so left on his deal, plus the rest of his salary for this season while also trading away draft capital and/or players to get him back?

 

Add to it that James Conner is arguably better anyway, and WAY cheaper.

[HarveysWBs]

LeVeon Bell claims both the Packers and Steelers tried to get him at the deadline.

 

I imagine Gute probably talks about a lot of things with a lot of teams, as any good GM should. That being said, I’ll believe the Packers actively tried to get Bell when, to paraphrase Chief O’Hagan, my poop turns purple and smells like rainbow sherbet.

[HiAndTight]

LeVeon Bell claims both the Packers and Steelers tried to get him at the deadline.

 

Seems extremely odd if true. He held out for all of 2018 because the Steelers wouldn’t give him a long term deal. But now the Steelers would be willing to pick up the 3/$38 million or so left on his deal, plus the rest of his salary for this season while also trading away draft capital and/or players to get him back?

 

Add to it that James Conner is arguably better anyway, and WAY cheaper.

 

 

I guess...in the same way that Dee Ford is "arguably," better than Mack maybe. It you're just playing devils advocate.

 

 

But it actually makes perfect sense. The Steelers don't have to pay the guaranteed money and they get him for far less than he was demanding before holding out last year.

 

The Steelers were TRYING to sign him. He wanted to be paid like a WR'er and a RB...and to be fair, he's such a unique talent, he was being undervalued. And then he went out and signed a really head scratching contract when you'd have thought he'd get at least 1 more year and 20 million more total.

 

But the Steelers get him for relatively cheap compared to what they were reportedly prepared to offer him with a chunk of that money already paid, and the Jets get a pick for a player that their Head Coach didn't think made sense for them anyway since he wasn't likely to be part of their rebuilding schedule.

 

 

The Packers make sense also in that you see how good this team is with a versatile back in this offense, one who can run the zone stretch and catch the ball out of the backfield, something nobody does better than Bell(maybe more often, but he does almost run routes like a WR'er). But not at that price.

 

 

But while on the topic of RB's, this has made me think about the Packers and Taylor. I definitely want to see a OT picked early as well as a quicker, more sudden WR'er, but if there isn't a great one available, or Taylor fell to the 2nd round, he'd be a PERFECT fit in this offense and the type of guy who you could rotate in and not miss a beat for if Jones went down.

 

Williams does not have great vision(and Dexter Williams is even worse). That's pretty huge in this scheme. So being able to keep guys healthy out there at RB would be enormous.

 

But I wouldn't be spending more than 4-5 million per on a back and I would definitely prefer to find one in rounds 3-5.

[HiAndTight]

Ok...but they did end up in the Super Bowl last year and it certainly wasn't because of their Super Bowl that they lost. I think everyone can agree on that, right? It's pretty hard to argue with those results.

 

Arguing that Ramsey isn't going to work out is too vague for me. What means it hasn't worked out? Did the Bears trade for Mack not work out because a year after the Bears went 12-4, they're not struggling?

I don't know what people would expect him to suddenly start to struggle, but it does seem like that's what you're hinting at by conflating the Talib acquisition and the Ramsey one. Again, 32(now nearly 34) vs a just turned 25 year old 1st Team AP.

 

I'm not advocating that Ramsey will struggle. I actually think he'll be ok. I just think that the acquisition cost was WAY too high ... to the point where he pretty much has to operate at an All-Pro, defensive MVP level to justify it. But I wouldn't have done the Mack deal, either. The Bears in my opinion are even further away than the Rams, and while stars win regular season games, teams with solid depth typically win championships. I guess overall I'm just not a fan of the Rams philosophy on team-building.

 

 

Yeah, we just see it 100 pct differently. Teams with "solid depth," typically do well in the regular season, teams with Superstars who are among the best in the NFL at their position if not THEE best win Championships.

 

The Bronco's won the Super Bowl because they had a dominant pass rusher in Von. The Bears went 12-4 because they had a dominant pass rusher in Mack.

 

The Seahawks have won because of their secondary and ground game. They've had rather poor depth and OL play.

 

 

The Rams now have arguably the best WR'ing core in the NFL, the best interior pass rusher in the NFL and reigning DPOY and the best shutdown corner in the NFL.

 

Doesn't mean I think all their moves have been smart, but you have to search pretty hard to find two players the Bears could have drafted that could have elevated their defense the way Mack has. Now Eddie Jackson is one of the best Safeties in the NFL. Hell, Clinton-Dix is an elite safety now playing in their downhill style. Fuller...these guys all broke out once Mack got there.

 

 

I am absolutely confident if the Bears stick with Mack, they'll have ONE year in the next 6-7 where they have a season like '85 in which their defense is so good, it carries them with a average QB and a couple of good skill players.

 

Ramsey being a CB is a little bit different, Corner is probably 4th on the list of most important positions behind QB, Edge/Tackle and then CB. But a great one can have such a rippling impact on your defense...you can leave him on a guy like Hopkins all game long and then shade your coverage to other positions.

 

 

But yeah, I guess we just fundamentally disagree. I think teams with great players, even if they have less depth are much-much better in the biggest games while the deeper teams with depth but not the front line talent are far more suited for the regular season.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

It doesn't matter if Mack has a season with 30 sacks. If they are still trotting out Mitch Trubisky types they won't do anything. Their defense is great now and they still suck. It was the most predictable thing ever. He is an absolute stiff. It made much more sense for the Packers to pair a guy like that with the twilight of Rodgers career than for the Bears to get him.

[True Blue Brew Crew]

All that glowing talk about Mack and not one mention of Akeem Hicks. Since Hicks went down, keeping Mack in check has become a much easier task. Perhaps Mack isn't on his own the difference maker many want to proclaim him to be. Lol at HaHa playing like an elite safety. If anything the Bears are proving what should be a hard and fast rule by now - only QBs are worth mortgaging the future for. And few of them are worth it at that. The Bears are going absolutely nowhere in the next (6-7 years!) unless they pull a QB out of their rear. Mack is 28 years old. Such an odd timeline to grant them (6-7 years!) to have an '85-type season because of Mack. By the time they have the draft capital and cap room to fix their gaping holes at QB, OL, and TE, Mack will be nearing the end of his contract and pushing his mid 30s.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Other guys have remained good pass rushers past 33ish so I'm not convinced he'll fall off a cliff, but he's a great player. I agree with with your main point but Mack is a generational talent. It still really sucks we couldn't get him.

 

But I couldn't care less about the Bears. They're the same team they've been for most of the last 25 years.

[True Blue Brew Crew]

Other guys have remained good pass rushers past 33ish so I'm not convinced he'll fall off a cliff, but he's a great player. I agree with with your main point but Mack is a generational talent. It still really sucks we couldn't get him.

 

But I couldn't care less about the Bears. They're the same team they've been for most of the last 25 years.

 

I'm not assuming he'll drop off either, but he's not likely to get much better. And current, in his prime Mack is taking them nowhere.