Matthew Stafford Contract Status

[El Chapo Jr]

Depends on the price.

What price would you consider reasonable? I wouldn't give up more than a 6th if I were any team trading for him.

 

[jrry32]

What price would you consider reasonable? I wouldn't give up more than a 6th if I were any team trading for him.

A 5th round pick.

 

[PhillyRam]

He’s young and the clavicle can easily be rehabbed with oversight from medical professionals. Shouldn’t be much of a concern

It's likley that it never truly
healed from the first break and thus he broke it twice. Also broke his fibula though. The kid needs to drink more milk.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

You know why a lot of fans in general tend to "overvalue draft picks a bit?" Because actual NFL teams place such a high value on them. Why is that? Because they are valuable in team building. They are extremely important in this salary cap era and provide the best chance at adding young talent to the team.

An injury to a 37 year old QB is far more likely to be career ending than a younger QB. And it doesn't even have to be a career ending injury. Just a mere decline in abilities is far more likely as we age. Getting proven stars (most of whom are in their prime) when you have selections at the bottom of rounds is better as a draft classes blue chip talent is usually long gone by then and the success rate of players selected later in the 1st round drops significantly. But, I struggle to recall any NFL trade in the salary cap era where a 37 year old player was dealt for a pick as high as #3 overall in any draft class. And especially not a 37 year old player that the acquiring team STILL HAS TO SIGN TO A HUGE CONTRACT. Aaron Rodgers who has/had a better resume than Stafford couldn't even garner anything close to that type of value in return.

And any smart team would offer a lower compensation package and if a deal couldn't get done, move on to other possible options. And contrary to what may be popular belief they do exist. My guess is the Rams wouldn't even consider any type of trade AT ALL if other options didn't exist. It shouldn't take much to upgrade the QB position from Daniel Jones.

BTW, I'm a Rams fan that doesn't believe the Rams Super Bowl window closes if Stafford is traded. Not if Sean McVay is the offensive genius everyone says.

I understand the value of draft picks when it comes to cheap contracts. No need to explain. You may undervalue proven talent. I’m talking about trading one draft pick, not all of them, not even two of them. Trading one pick for a proven player. Trading picks has worked well for Les Snead in the past.

The Giants are in a bad situation. Sacrificing the number three pick won’t make them any worse, trading it for Stafford would clearly make them better. Daboll is in a bad spot as well. Stafford allows him to showcase his ability to coach at a high level. Stafford could save his job.

It may be an unprecedented trade, but sometimes situations call for thinking outside the box. If the Giants like a QB in this draft, then don’t make the trade. I don’t believe there is a QB that will save Daboll’s job in the draft. I don’t see a single pick at #3 that saves Daboll’s or Shoen’s job at number 3.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

I can't believe there is so much bandwidth to people thinking that Stafford alone could fetch the #3 pick. 0% chance.

Makes me remember that the word fans is short for fanatics.

It has nothing to do with being a fanatic. That’s lame.

It’s the situation. The Rams don’t want to trade Stafford. So if a team is desperate enough to make a deal, they meet demands. That’s how it works. The Rams wanted Ernest Jones off the team. So they didn’t get anything reasonable for him.

When a team doesn’t want to trade a player then it takes a lot to pry that player away. If I’m Snead, I don’t want to trade Stafford so the only way I entertain the idea is if a team makes an incredible offer, like a top ten pick? Getting a fourth round pick and losing Stafford hurts the Rams more than it will help them. Especially in a weak draft.

Do I think it’s likely to happen? No. But I think a certain team should entertain the idea. A team with a desperate head coach and GM should definitely consider it in a draft devoid of QBs. If this was last years draft, then no way would I suggest it. But right now, Joe Shoen is looking pretty bad by having a top five pick and passing on Penix and Nix in the 2024 draft. What would you do if you had one year to save your job and your head coaches job? Who in this draft is going to do that?

 

[Da-Rock]

It has nothing to do with being a fanatic. That’s lame.

It’s the situation. The Rams don’t want to trade Stafford. So if a team is desperate enough to make a deal, they meet demands. That’s how it works. The Rams wanted Ernest Jones off the team. So they didn’t get anything reasonable for him.

When a team doesn’t want to trade a player then it takes a lot to pry that player away. If I’m Snead, I don’t want to trade Stafford so the only way I entertain the idea is if a team makes an incredible offer, like a top ten pick? Getting a fourth round pick and losing Stafford hurts the Rams more than it will help them. Especially in a weak draft.

Do I think it’s likely to happen? No. But I think a certain team should entertain the idea. A team with a desperate head coach and GM should definitely consider it in a draft devoid of QBs. If this was last years draft, then no way would I suggest it. But right now, Joe Shoen is looking pretty bad by having a top five pick and passing on Penix and Nix in the 2024 draft. What would you do if you had one year to save your job and your head coaches job? Who in this draft is going to do that?

Lol....a fan who states what the Ram front office is thinking responds with, "that's lame" to a post about fanatics.

 

[Memphis Ram]

It has nothing to do with being a fanatic. That’s lame.

It’s the situation. The Rams don’t want to trade Stafford. So if a team is desperate enough to make a deal, they meet demands. That’s how it works. The Rams wanted Ernest Jones off the team. So they didn’t get anything reasonable for him.

The only thing is that typically when a team doesn't want to trade a player that story dies a quick death with the team making it clear that said player is unavailable (See Trevor Lawrence). That hasn't happened with Stafford. Plus, there were rumors of him possibly being dealt before the turnaround from the 2-4 record last year.

 

[Memphis Ram]

I understand the value of draft picks when it comes to cheap contracts. No need to explain. You may undervalue proven talent. I’m talking about trading one draft pick, not all of them, not even two of them. Trading one pick for a proven player. Trading picks has worked well for Les Snead in the past.

The Giants are in a bad situation. Sacrificing the number three pick won’t make them any worse, trading it for Stafford would clearly make them better. Daboll is in a bad spot as well. Stafford allows him to showcase his ability to coach at a high level. Stafford could save his job.

It may be an unprecedented trade, but sometimes situations call for thinking outside the box. If the Giants like a QB in this draft, then don’t make the trade. I don’t believe there is a QB that will save Daboll’s job in the draft. I don’t see a single pick at #3 that saves Daboll’s or Shoen’s job at number 3.

I don't think I undervalue proven talent or overvalue draft picks. Last year I was very open to the Rams dealing a 1st rounder and another selection for a franchised Brian Burns. But, I was reminded by some here and others in the media that teams aren't going to pay such draft compensation AND sign a player to a huge contract at the same time. They were right. And that's a kid in his prime.

I believe you undervalue how a player's age and contract demands factor into his value.

 

[Allen2McVay]

The only thing is that typically when a team doesn't want to trade a player that story dies a quick death with the team making it clear that said player is unavailable

That's a reasonable comment. However, there is an on-going negotiation here.
If the Rams were to publicly state Stafford is 'Unavailable', that could damage their negotiation position.

(See Trevor Lawrence).

Not a good example because Lawrence signed a $275M extension eight months ago.
Lawrence is essentially un-tradeable. The Dead-$ would be $100M

That hasn't happened with Stafford. Plus, there were rumors of him possibly being dealt before the turnaround from the 2-4 record last year.

Fair point.

 

[Memphis Ram]

That's a reasonable comment. However, there is an on-going negotiation here.
If the Rams were to publicly state Stafford is 'Unavailable', that could damage their negotiation position.

Would it really affect negotiations that much? He's already under contract. Him being available for trade only would be an issue if he really doesn't want to be traded. And even then he should understand that the team trading for his services is going to want to talk to him first about his future plans. A conversation in which he could kill any deal.

Not a good example because Lawrence signed a $275M extension eight months ago.
Lawrence is essentially un-tradeable. The Dead-$ would be $100M

While not likely, from what I understand it would still be possible and would involve a contract restructure and Lawrence paying the team back bonus money that he could get back at a later date.

 

[PARAM]

Stafford is injury prone? How so? He missed 6 games his rookie year (2009), 13 games his second year (2010) and 17 games over the next 14 years (8 in 2019, 8 in 2022, 1 in 2023). He only misses time when he's injured and the team sucks. Read: He's a tough SOB who plays injured and despite that, performs better than a lot of healthy QBs. It happened this season with the ribs at the end. Labeling him "injury prone" is like labeling him "old". There are caveats to understand. If the guy wanted to, he could play another 4 or 5 years (injured or not).

 

[Allen2McVay]

Would it really affect negotiations that much?

Yes ... as I said ... it "could"
Tell me how saying Stafford is unavailable "could" help the Rams in negotiations.

While not likely, from what I understand it would still be possible and would involve a contract restructure and Lawrence paying the team back bonus money that he could get back at a later date.

'Not Likely' or Never Happens?

Restructure ... Sure.
Eight months after signing the deal ... ?
When was the last time that happened? ... huge contract signed ... restructured within one-year, plus a bonus pay-back.

 

[majrleaged]

The only thing is that typically when a team doesn't want to trade a player that story dies a quick death with the team making it clear that said player is unavailable (See Trevor Lawrence). That hasn't happened with Stafford. Plus, there were rumors of him possibly being dealt before the turnaround from the 2-4 record last year.

The Rams are real good at keeping things in house and aren't in the habit of responding to rumors.

 

[ottoman89]

Is anyone else exhausted with this stuff? Seems like every off-season.

 

[den-the-coach]

Is anyone else exhausted with this stuff? Seems like every off-season.

Nah, as the snow cascades down in Upstate, NY I look forward to reading the stuff after hours of snow removal, while I enjoy a fine Columbian Beverage.

 

[Memphis Ram]

Yes ... as I said ... it "could"
Tell me how saying Stafford is unavailable "could" help the Rams in negotiations.

Can't. I don't believe that either should have much, if any effect.

'Not Likely' or Never Happens?

Restructure ... Sure.
Eight months after signing the deal ... ?
When was the last time that happened? ... huge contract signed ... restructured within one-year, plus a bonus pay-back.

Not likely or never happens. But, the only point being made is that it's possible. At least it is according to a twitter post by some salary cap guy I read awhile back when some other big name was being discussed as a trade possibility.

 

[WestCoastRam]

I may have missed it, but has anyone tried to come up with a contract for Stafford here.

Like, it's probably gonna happen, what do you think it takes?

Word from Charles Robinson is that McVay doesn't want the 1 year thing. So guessing it's a contract for 2-3 years (regardless if it's structured for longer).

I imagine Rams could get a slight discount but have to think it's around the 50-55 mill a year average, no?

 

[Allen2McVay]

... according to a twitter post by some salary cap guy I read awhile back

Well, why didn't you say so from the beginning ...

How can anyone argue with some 'twitter post' by 'some guy' from 'a while back'?!?

 

[majrleaged]

How about 140m for 3years. 100 guaranteed.
probably have to eat 46m of dead money, but they have dealt with worse. I think it would be worth it.

 

[Memphis Ram]

Well, why didn't you say so from the beginning ...

How can anyone argue with some 'twitter post' by 'some guy' from 'a while back'?!?

View attachment 69859

Sorry it was the guy that either owns or posts on the overthecap.com website.
So I guess you can argue with him if you'd like.