Trade for a WR instead of drafting one (or more)?

  • 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.
1Rampage1

1Rampage1

UDFA
Joined
Jan 14, 2016
Messages
7
Name
Rampage
We have a good defense, RB, and our OL has been addressed/improved. We will soon be drafting a QB, so were going to need a quality WR(s) (other that Austin) to catch the ball. Instead of drafting a WR who may or may not end up being productive in the NFL, why not trade for an already established WR? That seems to me to be the best way to finally find a WR that we have needed for many years. We already gave up draft picks for our QB, might as well finish this off by giving up more of them to finally resolve our WR problem. Your thoughts?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ramsey
We already gave up most of our draft picks. What we have left would be better spent on the draft than a WR that another team doesn't want anymore.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mikey Ram and Akrasian
We emptied out the cupboard to trade up for a qb. Trading for a wide receiver doesn't seem realistic
 
I wouldn't trade for a WR that another team doesn't want. Have to give up quality to get the same in return. Just seems like a waste to draft a QB and not have the weapons to do his job.
 
1Rampage1 said:
I wouldn't trade for a WR that another team doesn't want. Have to give up quality to get the same in return. Just seems like a waste to draft a QB and not have the weapons to do his job.
Click to expand...
You would have to because a team will not trade a WR that they want to keep
 
They need to go HARD after Anquan Boldin on a short term deal, plain and simple. I'll bet they're wining and dining him now as a matter of fact.

This offense does have some weapons. Boldin gives them what they have lacked for a long time now: a possession option. Then they roll the dice on a couple rooks in round 4 and maybe hit on a receiving option or two and this offense is in business.

Next year they get one or two more WRs depending on how the rooks play this year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaveFan'51 and Limey
I don't expect us to sign a vet WR or any vets until after the draft.

Once we get Wentz, I think there will be some people who look at the Rams and think we finally have all the pieces in place to make some serious waves even with a rookie QB. Veteran WRs have a tendency to help rookie QBs look good and vice versa.

I like our secondary depth enough that I'd rather have Boldin than Whitner.
 
Merlin said:
They need to go HARD after Anquan Boldin on a short term deal, plain and simple. I'll bet they're wining and dining him now as a matter of fact.

This offense does have some weapons. Boldin gives them what they have lacked for a long time now: a possession option. Then they roll the dice on a couple rooks in round 4 and maybe hit on a receiving option or two and this offense is in business.

Next year they get one or two more WRs depending on how the rooks play this year.
Click to expand...
Bold in wants to play with a contender and doubt he wants to play with a rookie or start the year off catching passes from keenum
 
Elmgrovegnome said:
Resign Welker and stick with what they have if there is nothing in the fourth round of the draft.
Click to expand...
I'd rather see them find another TE. Welker was open quite a bit last year and an accurate passer could have taken advantage of that. I expect Gurley and Harkey to more involved in the passing game this year. I've seen others talk of a TE that could be available in the 4th, can't think of his name. Plus there was one that should drop because of trouble. Might be worth a look see.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Elmgrovegnome
Mackeyser said:
I don't expect us to sign a vet WR or any vets until after the draft.

Once we get Wentz, I think there will be some people who look at the Rams and think we finally have all the pieces in place to make some serious waves even with a rookie QB. Veteran WRs have a tendency to help rookie QBs look good and vice versa.

I like our secondary depth enough that I'd rather have Boldin than Whitner.
Click to expand...
You spelled Goff wrong :whistle:
 
  • 3Like
Reactions: DaveFan'51, Mackeyser and RamFan503
1Rampage1 said:
I wouldn't trade for a WR that another team doesn't want. Have to give up quality to get the same in return. Just seems like a waste to draft a QB and not have the weapons to do his job.
Click to expand...
Got any scenarios that fit what you are suggesting? Like who or what we would trade for whom? I'm not opposed to the idea personally but I'd like to see what you think we'd be giving up and what receiver you think we could get for it.
 
I just went and looked at the Roster of WR's at the Rams web site, and boy! that scares me, and not in a good way!! "IF we resign Welker, and count Bailey, just for fun! We only have 6 receivers with more than 1 year in the NFL, Then Colter (1 yr. exp.) and 4 rookies!! Man WE NEED HELP!! more than I realized!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: JUMAVA68
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back