Lions shopping Stafford. Perfect trade partner

[bostondolphin]

My first read on this deal was that Rams got screwed. However, I think that’s maybe a case of not scrutinizing the 1st rounders enough (which I think we are also doing with regard to trading #3 for Watson).

The Rams are in all likelihood a top 10 team with Stafford, if not even better. Those picks are very likely to be late, and at least almost guaranteed NOT to be top 10. So, is it still that much an overpay? Maybe, but I think it looks a bit different when you play out likely results.

This is also why I say #3 for us has so much value. It is at least two “1st round picks”, at least, wrapped in one. If the Texans come out and say “we want 3 first rounders for DW”, #3 should get us 2/3 of the way there, at least.

 

[Mach2]

I won't regurgitate the Tom Foolery that was taking place on this site before the draft...

Just know that some knowledgeable people were saying some outlandish things...WITH CONVICTION in regards to us drafting Tua, among other things.

Given the context, I'm not sure how "knowledgeable" they were, but yeah, there were several willing to give their first born to move up 3 spots to insure we got Tua.

There are still.ppl who unquestioningly believe Tua will be an elite, top 3 QB.

I mean it's possible, but if there aren't questions at this point, it's denial, and hard to explain.

To me, the most rational position is get some weapons that suit Tua's strengths, and give him another year to see how he progresses.

I'm not a fan of extreme positions on either side of the arguement. We can't change what's already done, andd "knee jerk" reactions seldom make for good choices.

 

[DPhinz_DPhinz]

Given the context, I'm not sure how "knowledgeable" they were, but yeah, there were several willing to give their first born to move up 3 spots to insure we got Tua.

There are still.ppl who unquestioningly believe Tua will be an elite, top 3 QB.

I mean it's possible, but if there aren't questions at this point, it's denial, and hard to explain.

To me, the most rational position is get some weapons that suit Tua's strengths, and give him another year to see how he progresses.

I'm not a fan of extreme positions on either side of the arguement. We can't change what's already done, andd "knee jerk" reactions seldom make for good choices.

I just told a poster that as strange as it sounds, I was 100% behind drafting Tua, minus the bloodshed it would have taken to move up....

I just couldn't be more disappointed with a player than I am with Tua. Even with the shortage of talent, I didn't see the guy I thought we were drafting.

 

[juniorseau55]

I won't regurgitate the Tom Foolery that was taking place on this site before the draft...

Just know that some knowledgeable people were saying some outlandish things...WITH CONVICTION in regards to us drafting Tua, among other things.

I remember the times that people here thought Ray Lucas was a god.

 

[Mach2]

I just told a poster that as strange as it sounds, I was 100% behind drafting Tua, minus the bloodshed it would have taken to move up....

I just couldn't be more disappointed with a player than I am with Tua. Even with the shortage of talent, I didn't see the guy I thought we were drafting.

Yeah, I wasn't big on drafting Tua to begin with, the reasons for which I argued ad nauseum.

Once he was our pick, I am behind him until he gives me reason not to be. He wasn't horrible. There were many contributing factors to his struggles that were beyond his control.

He's never going to be the prototypical, stand tall in the pocket, rifle I prefer, but if he can make reads at a high level, make the proper decisions and deliver the ball on time accurately, he will be a good QB.

Bottom line is we don't know yet.

 

[DPhinz_DPhinz]

I remember the times that people here thought Ray Lucas was a god.

He played good twice a year...versus the Dolphins.

The Phins did with Lucas what the Yankees did with Johnny Damon (Bosox). He killed us so many times, we just signed him to make sure it would never happen again.

 

[NBP81]

Did the Rams even try to get Watson instead?

 

[ABFinsfan]

Now the question is, do the Lions stick with Goff or do they see what they can get for him? I was hoping to have the Lions as a trade partner but that is not looking good right now.

 

[superphin]

Very true but I'm not sure how sustainable it is. May be they don't care about that. Is a few years in the limelight better than always being middle of the pack ? Like I said in my post earlier, their cap is a mess right now.

Yes I rather have a few years as a legitimate SB contender and make a SB regardless of outcome than be middle of the pack for a decade. Middle of the pack is purgatory in the NFL.

 

[Ferretsquig]

My first read on this deal was that Rams got screwed. However, I think that’s maybe a case of not scrutinizing the 1st rounders enough (which I think we are also doing with regard to trading #3 for Watson).

The Rams are in all likelihood a top 10 team with Stafford, if not even better. Those picks are very likely to be late, and at least almost guaranteed NOT to be top 10. So, is it still that much an overpay? Maybe, but I think it looks a bit different when you play out likely results.

This is also why I say #3 for us has so much value. It is at least two “1st round picks”, at least, wrapped in one. If the Texans come out and say “we want 3 first rounders for DW”, #3 should get us 2/3 of the way there, at least.

I think Goff was a net negative in the trade and the Rams were paying for both Stafford and dumping a contract. I doubt anyone was giving two firsts for Stafford, late picks or otherwise.

It will be fascinating to see what they get in return for Watson, assuming he gets his way. I'm skeptical that any of these mega trades is going to materialize. There aren't many NFL GMs out there that share that gambler's mindset, willing to throw away the future for the present.

 

[Mach2]

Did the Rams even try to get Watson instead?

I wondered that myself.

I have to believe the Rams had to find a team willing to take on Goff's contract. I doubt Houston was up for that. Their fan base would probably burn down the facility at this point.

 

[NBP81]

I wondered that myself.

I have to believe the Rams had to find a team willing to take on Goff's contract. I doubt Houston was up for that. Their fan base would probably burn down the facility at this point.

Good point!

 

[BahamaFinFan78]

Did the Rams even try to get Watson instead?

I doubt it. Their new GM scouted Goff

 

[BahamaFinFan78]

Sorry. I meant Detroit was familiar with Goff

 

[circumstances]

Now the question is, do the Lions stick with Goff or do they see what they can get for him? I was hoping to have the Lions as a trade partner but that is not looking good right now.

The more I think about it, the more I think having to take Goff was a deal breaker from the Rams side (whether the Lions wanted him or not).

The Rams had to keep upping the offer until the Lions couldn't say no.

I think they are still in play for Fields or Wilson at #3 (if they fall in love with one of them).