Bears Rams Trade Rumor

[Athos]

Probably all about the cap-hit if anything.

Face it, our D-line is going to be super pricey at some point. We just aren't going to be able to keep Brockers/Donald/Quinn all together for ever. Too much money. And you can't rob from the poor (offense) to feed the rich (defense).

Tough decisions will have to be made at some point.

 

[Memento]

Probably all about the cap-hit if anything.

Face it, our D-line is going to be super pricey at some point. We just aren't going to be able to keep Brockers/Donald/Quinn all together for ever. Too much money. And you can't rob from the poor (offense) to feed the rich (defense).

Tough decisions will have to be made at some point.

What cap hit? We have him until 2016 on his rookie deal. He apparently wants to stay with the Rams if he wants a multi-year deal.

This isn't a tough decision if it's made. It would be a stupid decision.

 

[Athos]

What cap hit? We have him until 2016 on his rookie deal. He apparently wants to stay with the Rams if he wants a multi-year deal.

This isn't a tough decision if it's made. It would be a stupid decision.

That'd kinda be the point. They avoid giving Brockers a big multi-year deal (which he may want) which would impact the cap by the time our other good D players have new deals coming up.

How expensive you think Donald is gonna be? Very fucking if he stays healthy.

They'd probably view it as getting something.

If it was just Brockers to move up and a late pick, I'm fine with that. I wouldn't give up Brockers and a 3rd or a 4th.

 

[Memento]

That'd kinda be the point. They avoid giving Brockers a big multi-year deal (which he may want) which would impact the cap by the time our other good D players have new deals coming up.

How expensive you think Donald is gonna be? Very freaking if he stays healthy.

They'd probably view it as getting something.

If it was just Brockers to move up and a late pick, I'm fine with that. I wouldn't give up Brockers and a 3rd or a 4th.

None of us even know how much he wants. For all you know, he wants to stay at a reasonable deal like Kendricks did. I hate creating holes when there is nobody who is qualified to fill in. Fairley, regardless of what the Internet says, is not even close to qualified.

I'm okay with Fairley as a backup defensive tackle. I'm sure as shit not okay with him being a starting nose tackle.

 

[Ramsey]

I'm sorry Ramsey Id have to argue any point on us making a trade remotely close to this for a LB that is anything less than a Lawerece Taylor type of talent. We use a Sam LB hardly any ( Dunbar barely seen the field last year) because of our 3 safety scheme we run. Not only that but we now have Ayers, j Lau, ogle tree and Dunbar. With us 75% running 2 LB's who is this new LB going to beat out to play in those two spots and even if he does is his upgrade of play even warrant that high a pick? The answer would be no. I'd have to say no.

I respect your viewpoint Corbin...Of the 7 players which would be available at #7, Beasley is my least favorite.

Maybe the decision to limit Dunbar's playing time had more to do with the fact that our extra safety was an upgrade over Dunbar.

Just because Ram's went with 3 safeties for one year, doesn't mean that's how Greg William's prefers to run his defense. Perhaps GW wanted the 11 best players on the field no matter what their position designation? LB or S? Whoever gets the job done.

Yet, maybe you are spot on correct Corbin and G. Williams prefers 3 safeties over 3 LB's on the field in passing situations. I think if Rams drafted Beasley, we'd still see 3 safeties- just less often and Rams would run more 4-3 then last year... And when we went to passing situations with two linebackers, we would play faster Ogletree and Beasely, and let JL rest. Beasley can cover passing lanes and he's more of a blitz threat then JL. Don't get me wrong JL is a true leader and more experienced. I like JL a lot.

 

[FrankenRam]

Those two are superstars....totally different. those are "untouchable" types, if there are untouchables anymore...

Exactly right. Those are the only 2 untouchables on the Rams, IMO. I could throw in GRob on potential, but that would be it.

 

[Corbin]

I respect your viewpoint Corbin...Of the 7 players which would be available at #7, Beasley is my least favorite.

Maybe the decision to limit Dunbar's playing time had more to do with the fact that our extra safety was an upgrade over Dunbar.

Just because Ram's went with 3 safeties for one year, doesn't mean that's how Greg William's prefers to run his defense. Perhaps GW wanted the 11 best players on the field no matter what their position designation? LB or S? Whoever gets the job done.

Yet, maybe you are spot on right Corbin and G. Williams prefers 3 safeties over 3 LB's on the field in certain situations. I would think if Rams drafted Beasley, we'd still see 3 safeties- just less often and Rams would run more 4-3 then last year, and when we went to passing situations with two linebackers, we would play faster Ogletree and Beasely, and let JL rest. Beasley can cover passing lanes and he's more of a blitz threat then JL. Don't get me wrong JL is a true leader with more experience. I like JL a lot.

Very nice and well put together post Ramsey. I see your point your making and TBH with Fisher it's hard to discount him on pass rusher and defense accurement. I don't see them passing up OL in the first pick unless one of those WR's are there tbh!
I'm so curious to see! Maybe in sports book we should bet or have a bet for if we use a first pick on a defensive player! @RhodyRams I <3 u! Lol

 

[HitStick]

Sure, they can handle Fairley until he bitches them out for having them use him as a nose guard and decides to leave for more money. You're talking about getting rid of a class act who also happens to be a very important player for this team for basically nothing. Because White and Cooper are not going to be there.

Then they don't make the trade.....

 

[WestCoastRam]

That'd kinda be the point. They avoid giving Brockers a big multi-year deal (which he may want) which would impact the cap by the time our other good D players have new deals coming up.

How expensive you think Donald is gonna be? Very freaking if he stays healthy.

They'd probably view it as getting something.

If it was just Brockers to move up and a late pick, I'm fine with that. I wouldn't give up Brockers and a 3rd or a 4th.

Donald is the one that makes Brockers expendable. We can't tie up that much money in the Dline. Memento makes a good point that we don't know if we can sign Brockers to a mid-level deal but even a mid-level deal would be more than what we would pay a rookie to take his spot eventually. Because we drafted Donald and moved to a 3-Tech/nose-tech DT scheme (we were Left-DT/Right-DT), I would argue that Brockers got even more devalued. We wouldn't be looking for a 3-4 nose to replace him (which are the hardest DTs to find), we would be looking for a run-stuffing two-gapper who plays as a part time player (in nickel, and dime we're already using DE's to replace him and sometimes just using 3-down lineman).

This is not a bad idea. It's just a risky idea.

 

[Merlin]

Lotta drama here for no reason IMO.

First, we don't know the specifics of the conversation IF the rumor is true. My own suspicion is the Rams inquired about that pick (to jump NY for Scherff) with the idea the Bears would consider it since they could get Shelton (the NT they need to go to a 3-4) at 10. The Bears probably have issues with Shelton's endurance and countered with Brockers who could play that position for them.

Second, if for whatever reason Brockers is being dangled Snead/Fish aren't going to get ripped off. They're gonna get good value for their guy because they're savvy at this whole trade thing for those who haven't been paying attention. But I don't think the Rams are dangling Brockers, I think teams want Brockers and are hoping that's the case since the Rams didn't manage to sign him long term.

If there is truth to it things should clear up fast since we're so close to the draft.

 

[WestCoastRam]

And, I agree with everyone that getting one of the LBs at 7 isn't ideal. Cooper, White or Scherff will be there at 7. Which is interesting... may mean that they really like Scherff then.

Top 7 "elite" in draft in no paticular order?

Williams
Winston
Mariota
Fowler
Cooper
White
Scherff

 

[Memento]

Donald is the one that makes Brockers expendable. We can't tie up that much money in the Dline. Memento makes a good point that we don't know if we can sign Brockers to a mid-level deal but even a mid-level deal would be more than what we would pay a rookie to take his spot eventually. Because we drafted Donald and moved to a 3-Tech/nose-tech DT scheme (we were Left-DT/Right-DT), I would argue that Brockers got even more devalued. We wouldn't be looking for a 3-4 nose to replace him (which are the hardest DTs to find), we would be looking for a run-stuffing two-gapper who plays as a part time player (in nickel, and dime we're already using DE's to replace him and sometimes just using 3-down lineman).

This is not a bad idea. It's just a risky idea.

A mid-level deal for a proven player and an important cog in our defensive line is...bad? I just don't get that logic.

 

[WestCoastRam]

A mid-level deal for a proven player and an important cog in our defensive line is...bad? I just don't get that logic.

I think we're not understanding each other. Which sucks, cause that never happens in an online forum.

If we're looking ahead in regards to team building, we have continuously replace veterans with draft talent because it's cheaper. We can argue who to replace, what contracts can look like. I'm not saying that we shouldn't sign Brockers to a mid-level deal but without knowing if that will be feasible (given what he'll want and what the market will bear), it's not a bad idea to explore trading him, getting a possible "elite" talent and cheaper talent, over the course of say 5 years, at that.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

It was a good move and your using hindsight to justify saying it was a bad one. If we didn't have Shitenheimer refusing to use Tavon properly we wouldn't be having this conversation. Tavon hasn't failed us, the play calling has did.

What? I am not using hindsight for either. I hated both of those moves when they happened. I was screaming at the television when they traded down in the second round to get a fifth round pick back. I wanted them to pick either Wagner or Kendricks. I didn't think they had a shot at either when they moved down.

I never wanted Tavon. Several of the posters here that migrated from RRF know that. Trading up to get him was a bad choice and I never liked it.

 

[Zombie Slayer]

This trade doesn't make sense to me. Their strategy all these years is to sign guys in free agency going into their second deal and prime of their careers. They have avoided signing many older veterans. Trading Brockers or not resigning him when his deal is up goes against what they've been doing all along.

 

[thirteen28]

Sniff ..... sniff sniff ....

Smells like bullsh!t to me ... just like the rumors last year about us drafting Johnny Rehab.

 

[Moostache]

The best way to evaluate a proposal like this is to read some of the Bears Fans forums...every single post in the first page was screaming DO IT NOW!!!! That's not a good sign if you're a Rams fan! No way would I do that deal with the team the Rams have. The only deal I'd consider would be their Long and #7 for Brockers, #10 and throw in a warm body from the Rams to even it out a bit, but Brockers and #10 for #7??? Not unless you're sniffing glue!

 

[RamWoodie]

You don't trade Brockers...PERIOD!!!

 

[Memento]

The best way to evaluate a proposal like this is to read some of the Bears Fans forums...every single post in the first page was screaming DO IT NOW!!!! That's not a good sign if you're a Rams fan! No way would I do that deal with the team the Rams have. The only deal I'd consider would be their Long and #7 for Brockers, #10 and throw in a warm body from the Rams to even it out a bit, but Brockers and #10 for #7??? Not unless you're sniffing glue!

I just looked at a Bears site. Every single post in there said, "DO IT NOW!"

 

[12intheBox]

The best way to evaluate a proposal like this is to read some of the Bears Fans forums...every single post in the first page was screaming DO IT NOW!!!! That's not a good sign if you're a Rams fan! No way would I do that deal with the team the Rams have. The only deal I'd consider would be their Long and #7 for Brockers, #10 and throw in a warm body from the Rams to even it out a bit, but Brockers and #10 for #7??? Not unless you're sniffing glue!

That actually might be the worst way to evaluate a proposal like this.

Fans are idiots (except for the fine fans in this forum, of course)