The first part is a non-sequitor - it's possible that it was a mistake to send a second for him. It's possible that the Rams' situation has changed since sending a second for him, and so it doesn't make sense to spend that much for him. Would they have sent a second if they'd have known that Woods would break out, and Kupp would be an outstanding WR his rookie season?
The full off season argument is getting old. Yes, he'll pick up more (hopefully) this offseason - but it seems that he didn't particularly improve as the season went along, when he should have been learning the offense better and better. There also seems to have been times when he gave up on his routes, which doesn't seem like something a franchise tag level player would do. I'm not sure how McVay sees his learning the system, and whether he feels that Watkins gave up on routes. McVay knows far more about it than any of us. I suspect that while he wants Watkins' talents, given limited resources he may not want to spend $16 million for another year of him.
I do agree that the 2017 Rams' offense was better for having Watkins. I'm not sure that between the likely improved production from TEs, and the improvement of young WRs already on the team, and the possible addition of someone to replace Watkins, that Sammy is going to be more valuable to the team than an upgrade to other positions made possible with the extra cap space.
I'm sure the Rams are negotiating with Watkins and would like to keep him. I'm much less confident that the Rams feel he is worth the franchise tag. It may be the case that Sammy is valuable to the Rams, but is just worth more to another team.
