Robert Woods Traded to Titans

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.

dieterbrock

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
24,053
I dont get this logic. We saved 3.5 million against the 15 millionish we were paying. So 11.5 million was still paid. Then we paid 4.3 million (2022 cap hit, an increase of 1 million) for Robinson. Who has a different skillset, but no history of the same leadership and willingness to get dirty for the team. I like Robinson on the team, but I *hate* losing Woods.
Well, we have to see the accurate breakdown on this, because it really doesnt make sense that Woods was traded, when he was traded, if the Rams are still on the hook for the 3.5 mill roster bonus.
There is 8.4 mill in dead money from his restructure
He was due to make 13.5 mill in 2022. 10 mill salary + 3.5 mill
So in theory, it should have "saved" them 5.1 mill in cap space, then Robinson's 4.3 mill hit would put them ahead

On the flip side, if the Rams paid the 3.5 mill (which would make zero sense) they would only "save" 10 mill, cap hit would be 11.9 mill, would be a net 1.9 mill on Woods
In effect the Rams go from Woods to Robinson with a net increase in cap hit of 6.2 mill.
Still would make sense financially, but the trade value at that point is completely illogical.
 

1maGoh

Hall of Fame
Joined
Aug 10, 2013
Messages
3,957
Well, the trades have resulted in 2 Superbowl appearances, with 1 Championship ring, so I'm not sure how they arent getting much return
I meant assets from trades.
haha, are u forgetting Whit, Ramsey, and Stafford? or they don't count?
train
Whit was a free agent, so I'm not the one forgetting stuff. I mentioned Stafford, so I'm not sure if you read my whole post. Ramsey is a fair point. Responses were all over the place in terms of whether we paid too much, but premium players require premium picks so I can't argue that the Ramsey trade wasn't fair.

My point was when we trade a player away or most of the time when we trade for a player, the general consensus is we paid too much of didn't get enough back. We just won the super bowl, so every trade and move was worth it in retrospect. Do y'all remember when the Patriots were reading for players and picks, and every team just seemed intent on giving them the best deal ever? They would routinely get so much for so little, it was crazy. My point is, that's not us. It all worked out though, so who gives a crap.
 

blackbart

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
6,293
Name
Tim
Trading Woods before we signed OBJ was a mistake, I called it as soon as it happened. I wasn't against the trade but rather the timing. Because if OBJ decided not to re-sign with us, we get weaker at WR in 2022. Once Von left I figured there was a very good chance we lose OBJ too, those guys are best friends.


View: https://twitter.com/brgridiron/status/1506484918578126848?t=2svbk19Da4rH66cw-ybzpA&s=19

He’s a luxury signing who won’t be back to full speed until next season if ever. And now he or his agents are playing games in the media.

Have fun losing in Cleveland
 

dieterbrock

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
24,053
I meant assets from trades.
A Superbowl Trophy isnt an asset?
With the method of trading for expiring contracts, and the way that Sneed trades picks, you could essentially look at any drafted player as an "asset"
 

Elmgrovegnome

Legend
Joined
Jan 23, 2013
Messages
22,780
Robinson is the replacement for Woods though, that's why the move was made now. Woods contract after 2022 was going to be an issue, whether he was injured or not. They replaced the #1b spot that Woods held, replace his contract around same dollar figure but with a younger more productive player. They may or may not add another WR, I dont see any guarantee of OBJ returning. Raised cap or not, there's only room for 2 highly paid WR and Cooper Kupp is due for a whopper or an extension
I don’t think so. I think OBJ was the replacement for Woods. Allen Robinson is a different type of receiver. Robinson never happens if Miller signs, or so we are led to believe. So then the plan goes back to Woods, Kupp and OBJ. Which is the trio that Jourdan said the Rams intended to have next season and I think she even said something about it being McVay’s dream.

To me the exchange is Woods/OBJ once Robinson entered the picture. So Woods is gone and the Rams think they’ve got OBJ. Only OBJ is butthurt that the Rams signed ARob and is floating the idea of not returning. ( Which is lame since Woods accepted OBJ with open arms)
 

Merlin

Damn the torpedoes
Rams On Demand Sponsor
ROD Credit | 2023 TOP Member
Joined
May 8, 2014
Messages
39,714
I think that if they felt OBJ was out of the picture they’d have tried to make it work with Woods and Robinson.
I disagree Elm. That contract was ugly. Rams overpaid him and had to get out from under it.
 

dieterbrock

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
24,053
Robinson never happens if Miller signs, or so we are led to believe
Led by whom?
I don’t think the Rams were surprised by Miller departure, they didn’t have the $$ to spend.
In any event, I believe 2022 was going to be Woods last season as a Ram due to his contract, and OBJ was signed to replace him.
Then the injuries occurred.
Neither guy can be counted on at this point, so that accelerated Woods departure & the need to look elsewhere.
They needed a legit #1 type WR and got the best available (at the time)
If OBJ doesn’t get hurt, he’s the replacement.
But he did so they turned to Robinson.
It’s that simple.
The part being left out of all the conversations is that Cooper Kupp will be getting extended. So there’s no money left for WR unless it’s someone on a cheap deal who won’t see many targets
 

dieterbrock

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
24,053
I disagree Elm. That contract was ugly. Rams overpaid him and had to get out from under it.
I think the Rams overpaid Woods knowing he was done by ‘22 ‘23 at the latest and front loaded that restructure to get him paid since he was vastly underpaid in his previous contract.
Just my .02. I get hes a class act and all but so far Woods hasn’t cast aspersions on the Rams in any way because I think they did right by him
 

1maGoh

Hall of Fame
Joined
Aug 10, 2013
Messages
3,957
A Superbowl Trophy isnt an asset?
With the method of trading for expiring contracts, and the way that Sneed trades picks, you could essentially look at any drafted player as an "asset"
I mean assets in the trade. We gave the Lions picks and Goff, they have us Stafford. They did not give us a super bowl or the trophy. We earned those after the trade. And yes picks and players (and salary, in the case of Miller) are the assets in the trade.
 

dieterbrock

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
24,053
I mean assets in the trade. We gave the Lions picks and Goff, they have us Stafford. They did not give us a super bowl or the trophy. We earned those after the trade. And yes picks and players (and salary, in the case of Miller) are the assets in the trade.
You're rather have players than SB Trophy?
They dont get to the SB in 18 without trading for Fowler, Cooks, Talib etc.
They dont may not even make the playoffs in '21 without Stafford & Michel and surely needed Von Miller to win NFC Championship game and Superbowl
That's the Rams way, they'll get what they need to win then and there
And it all works out.
 

1maGoh

Hall of Fame
Joined
Aug 10, 2013
Messages
3,957
You're rather have players than SB Trophy?
They dont get to the SB in 18 without trading for Fowler, Cooks, Talib etc.
They dont may not even make the playoffs in '21 without Stafford & Michel and surely needed Von Miller to win NFC Championship game and Superbowl
That's the Rams way, they'll get what they need to win then and there
And it all works out.
No. And I didn't say that I would want it any other way. I just said that's the way it is.
 

Elmgrovegnome

Legend
Joined
Jan 23, 2013
Messages
22,780
I disagree Elm. That contract was ugly. Rams overpaid him and had to get out from under it.
I get the contract problem. However Jourdan got her info from somewhere. She said it before Von shuffled off to Buffalo. That changed everything.

If Von signs then they trade Woods, they’d have No Woods, and No ARob who do they roll with for most of the season while OBJ rehabs? It would be Kupp, and Van Jefferson, then Skowronek, Tutu and Harris? I can’t see McVay willing to play that group for an entire season.

Plus trading Woods before OBJ signed would have been even more risky. Having ARob changed everything.
 

Merlin

Damn the torpedoes
Rams On Demand Sponsor
ROD Credit | 2023 TOP Member
Joined
May 8, 2014
Messages
39,714
I get the contract problem. However Jourdan got her info from somewhere. She said it before Von shuffled off to Buffalo. That changed everything.

If Von signs then they trade Woods, they’d have No Woods, and No ARob who do they roll with for most of the season while OBJ rehabs? It would be Kupp, and Van Jefferson, then Skowronek, Tutu and Harris? I can’t see McVay willing to play that group for an entire season.

Plus trading Woods before OBJ signed would have been even more risky. Having ARob changed everything.
Maybe so. Or maybe not. It makes sense that losing Von allowed them to pivot to another problem area, that being wideout, and addressing it. But then again it shows they had a problem at wideout. Also I don't know that it's important IF they were willing to stick with Woods assuming they get Von done.

I think that move was pending regardless. That's an ugly contract for a guy of Woods ability and age. Woody is a good team guy, good all around wideout. But he wasn't gonna live up to that contract and the Rams knew it after seeing this offense with Odell.

So for me it's a universal truth with this team and org that if you get paid you live up to it or you get moved. And another way to get moved is to be a passing game weapon that wants the ball more. IMO if you complain about touches on this team you're likely to get a ticket out. With Woods he came in under a team friendly deal. Then wasn't happy with it so the team paid him. Then he wasn't happy with touches reportedly with 9 at QB and got hurt. Then the team won the Super Bowl with an offense that looked better with a better receiver in there in his spot. I mean you look at the trend it was there IMO.

So who knows. But either way I think this team is significantly better with Robinson at wideout in Woods' place. ARob is a significant upgrade.
 

Neil039

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Apr 3, 2020
Messages
4,048
Led by whom?
I don’t think the Rams were surprised by Miller departure, they didn’t have the $$ to spend.
In any event, I believe 2022 was going to be Woods last season as a Ram due to his contract, and OBJ was signed to replace him.
Then the injuries occurred.
Neither guy can be counted on at this point, so that accelerated Woods departure & the need to look elsewhere.
They needed a legit #1 type WR and got the best available (at the time)
If OBJ doesn’t get hurt, he’s the replacement.
But he did so they turned to Robinson.
It’s that simple.
The part being left out of all the conversations is that Cooper Kupp will be getting extended. So there’s no money left for WR unless it’s someone on a cheap deal who won’t see many targets
IMO the Rams should have set up a safety net in the Miller trade. If the Rams failed to sign him they retain a pick(3rd likely). I am baffled that Snead didn’t get some type of fall back. I know a bunch of people will disagree. Try not to slam your keyboards or type so aggressively your fingers hurt while responding.
 

Kupped

Legend
Joined
Aug 5, 2021
Messages
8,694
Name
Kupped
IMO the Rams should have set up a safety net in the Miller trade. If the Rams failed to sign him they retain a pick(3rd likely). I am baffled that Snead didn’t get some type of fall back. I know a bunch of people will disagree. Try not to slam your keyboards or type so aggressively your fingers hurt while responding.
They'll only get a 5th in 23.

But, I disagree with the "safety net" thing.. they were going for the Super Bowl.. they got it. Period.
Snead's safety net is the league and the organization's willingness to make moves in-season. They acquired edge pass rushers for draft picks midway through both of their last two Super Bowl seasons and if they don't acquire a decent one in the offseason, I'd expect they'd be taking a swing this year as well.
 

dieterbrock

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
24,053
IMO the Rams should have set up a safety net in the Miller trade. If the Rams failed to sign him they retain a pick(3rd likely). I am baffled that Snead didn’t get some type of fall back. I know a bunch of people will disagree. Try not to slam your keyboards or type so aggressively your fingers hurt while responding.
Frustrated Keyboard GIF
 

Ram Ts

Hall of Fame
Joined
Mar 23, 2020
Messages
2,265
They'll only get a 5th in 23.
But, I disagree with the "safety net" thing.. they were going for the Super Bowl.. they got it. Period.
Snead's safety net is the league and the organization's willingness to make moves in-season. They acquired edge pass rushers for draft picks midway through both of their last two Super Bowl seasons and if they don't acquire a decent one in the offseason, I'd expect they'd be taking a swing this year as well.
The 3rd he referred to was from Denver in the original trade package. Not the resulting FA comp
 

Allen2McVay

Legend
Joined
Mar 29, 2020
Messages
8,814
Name
Jim
The 3rd he referred to was from Denver in the original trade package. Not the resulting FA comp
Curious what the Rams would have given-up in the Miller-trade had the Broncos not provided the cap relief.