Trade scenario with the Browns at the top of the 2nd round

[WestCoastRam]

In a draft with less overall talent, the value of the picks is diminished. The trade chart is not an exact scale. In years like this is tougher to get full value.

Yeah, I mean, my preference would be to get commensurate value for the pick but in a trade down scenario where the talent is somewhat flat (if that's the way the Rams feel!) I'd be okay taking a slight discount if I felt I could pick from a bucket of a few guys that I had graded similarly at various positions of need.

Though in this scenario, dropping 7 spots might be a lot to get a guy you like from a "bucket" of picks rated similarly.

Snead basically said we could draft someone to get us over the top or a QB in his last comments but it was interesting that he lead with a scenario where a team trades up with them for a QB. And we know they like to get as many bites at the draft apple as they can. Wonder if that's their preferred option.

 

[dang]

Yeah, I mean, my preference would be to get commensurate value for the pick but in a trade down scenario where the talent is somewhat flat (if that's the way the Rams feel!) I'd be okay taking a slight discount if I felt I could pick from a bucket of a few guys that I had graded similarly at various positions of need.

Though in this scenario, dropping 7 spots might be a lot to get a guy you like from a "bucket" of picks rated similarly.

Snead basically said we could draft someone to get us over the top or a QB in his last comments but it was interesting that he lead with a scenario where a team trades up with them for a QB. And we know they like to get as many bites at the draft apple as they can. Wonder if that's their preferred option.

Rams putting the possibility of them drafting a QB with R1.26 should only increase the desire for teams that want a “good” QB before the inevitable run on R1 to mid R2 QBs (see Dart/Milroe/ Howard/Ewers) concludes.

 

[Londoner]

Rams putting the possibility of them drafting a QB with R1.26

Where have they done this?

Apart from in the world of internet clickbait, that is.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

Yeah, I mean, my preference would be to get commensurate value for the pick but in a trade down scenario where the talent is somewhat flat (if that's the way the Rams feel!) I'd be okay taking a slight discount if I felt I could pick from a bucket of a few guys that I had graded similarly at various positions of need.

Though in this scenario, dropping 7 spots might be a lot to get a guy you like from a "bucket" of picks rated similarly.

Snead basically said we could draft someone to get us over the top or a QB in his last comments but it was interesting that he lead with a scenario where a team trades up with them for a QB. And we know they like to get as many bites at the draft apple as they can. Wonder if that's their preferred option.

Yep. It is entirely possible that Snead talking about the Rams wanting a QB is purely them trying to either get teams to jump them to push talent down the board or to trade with them.

 

[DzRams]

Rams putting the possibility of them drafting a QB with R1.26 should only increase the desire for teams that want a “good” QB before the inevitable run on R1 to mid R2 QBs (see Dart/Milroe/ Howard/Ewers) concludes.

If teams really believe the Rams may draft a QB, wouldn't that mean a team interested in moving up would have to leapfrog the Rams pick?

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

If teams really believe the Rams may draft a QB, wouldn't that mean a team interested in moving up would have to leapfrog the Rams pick?

Or, give more up in a trade to convince the Rams to give up said QB.

 

[dieterbrock]

Where have they done this?

Apart from in the world of internet clickbait, that is.

Im pretty sure Snead has basically given the opposite impression

 

[dang]

Where have they done this?

Apart from in the world of internet clickbait, that is.

Most everything on the internet is clickbait. However, the possibility of the Rams selecting a QB this draft has been mentioned semi regularly. I personally don’t see it happening this year as they seem set with Stafford/G-string/Bennett but a more desperate team may want get a top 3-5 QB but not willing to use their early R1 pick. Also , I’m biased because I would love a trade down with CLE to get their R2 and late R3 picks.

 

[El Chapo Jr]

Let's say the Browns want to come up, possibly for a QB at 26. The offer includes the 33rd pick (1st pick in the 2nd round), what is the LEAST amount you would trade down for?

What I mean is, with the conventional wisdom that the draft class is relatively flat between 15 and 50, a team will probably be offering less than the trade chart, what would you be willing to take to drop down to 33?

Remember, 33 itself, comes as a premium as it's the first pick on day 2 with teams knowing who's left on the board and you may be able to recoup some draft value with teams willing to pay a premium for that spot.

The Rich Hill draft chart puts the value of the 26th pick at 223 and the 33rd pick at 180. The difference: the value of the 92nd pick in the 3rd round.

Browns have the 104 pick, 2nd pick in the 4th round, that they could offer; but what if they wanted something back from us like a 6th or more?

I'd want a late 3rd and a 5th at worse but would push for their early 3rd if it's for a QB as they hold more value

 

[fanotodd]

1) the idea of drafting Stafford’s replacement has been floated and bandied since 2022. That’ has failed to be accurate so far.
2) who, besides Dart, might the browns be interested in at #26?
3) This scenario plays better with the raiders wanting to get back into the 1rst round. They need a RB, WR, and a CB or Safety. They can knock out 2 of those in the 1rst easily with those positions still being in play at #26 regardless of who they take at #6.

 

[I like Rams]

Is it a smart move for the Browns? If yes they will take it.

Is it a dumb move for the Browns? Then yes, they will take it.

 

[Neil039]

1) the idea of drafting Stafford’s replacement has been floated and bandied since 2022. That’ has failed to be accurate so far.
2) who, besides Dart, might the browns be interested in at #26?
3) This scenario plays better with the raiders wanting to get back into the 1rst round. They need a RB, WR, and a CB or Safety. They can knock out 2 of those in the 1rst easily with those positions still being in play at #26 regardless of who they take at #6.

I truly doubt Dart will be there. He may even be gone by the 10th pick in the draft. Rumors ( the scrooge of off season football) have been floating around that after his pro day multiple teams have been trying to find trade partners into the top 10. I like the player, not sure he's worth all this (famous last words when he's an all pro).

Sorry, to address your 3 points.
1). You are correct!
2). My initial statement refers to the Jets, Browns, Giants, Raiders, Saints, Steelers, and the RAMS. *** All based on internet rumors***
3). If the Raiders make a solid offer (day 2 & 3 picks) and the Rams feel they can get a player on their big board. Heck Yeah.

 

[WestCoastRam]

I truly doubt Dart will be there. He may even be gone by the 10th pick in the draft. Rumors ( the scrooge of off season football) have been floating around that after his pro day multiple teams have been trying to find trade partners into the top 10. I like the player, not sure he's worth all this (famous last words when he's an all pro).

Sorry, to address your 3 points.
1). You are correct!
2). My initial statement refers to the Jets, Browns, Giants, Raiders, Saints, Steelers, and the RAMS. *** All based on internet rumors***
3). If the Raiders make a solid offer (day 2 & 3 picks) and the Rams feel they can get a player on their big board. Heck Yeah.

curious, who said Dart at 10