Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Stafford to Rams, Goff and picks to Lions
Purple_Pills
Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 2,017 
in NFL Talk
Wow! Per Schefter Stafford to Rams.
Comments
Goff is roughly equal to Stafford. Giving up two first round picks on top of Goff is crazy. Lions fleeced them.
Credit to LA for wanting to win and paying to do it. The first round picks they gave up are going to be very low 1st rounders. Teams reading for Watson are giving up a high-end 1st round pick.
It's definitely steep and I think the Rams paid too much but they're going to be a much better team in 2021.
They do save like $12 million next year verses keeping Goff and paying him.
It's basically a wash.
They can restructure Stafford's contract and move a lot of that money from this year's cap to next year if they want (or even into 23 and beyond if they extend him). But of course they could have done that with Goff as well.
Obviously as a Seahawks fan I hope you are correct.
I'd equate Stafford to Carson Palmer ... both talented dudes with crappy franchises that later in their career will jump up big time with a change in scenery. Don't be shocked if Stafford and some MVP discussion shows up for the first 1-2 months of the season next year.
Goff's biggest problem is that he's just not that tough (physically or mentally). If everything is working right for him he's very good. As soon as shit goes sideways he's a complete dear in the headlights kind of guy. Stafford on the other hand shows up and plays weekly regardless of what's bothering him and his toughness is fairly obvious.
With the Rams cap situation, the extra picks for the Lions taking on Goff is 2 fold because not only did they need to shed Goff's contract, but they needed to make sure that they weren't bringing on big contracts with rookies that they didn't have room for. The fact that the picks are in future drafts just pushes down the immediate value anyway.
Rookie contracts aren’t very expensive either, especially when those picks fall in the late first round.
I had an argument/discussion discussion about how teams pay big money for QB’s that aren’t needle movers.
Stafford was somebody I said I wouldn’t pay big money too. Matt Ryan was another and he’s been better and more successful than Stafford. Kirk Cousins is another. It’s status quo to pay a QB big money when the time comes if he isn’t a disaster. I would argue it’s not really the optimal way to become a real contender and not just a 10-6 team, but 10-6 keeps coaches and gm’s around for a year or two longer.
The Rams wanted a new QB. They jumped the gun, talked themselves into, and settled for Stafford after being turned down for Rodgers. Now they are in a new marriage with another mid tier QB and gave up first rounders to go so.
Stafford has to be markedly better and the Rams need to win a Super Bowl for the trade to be worth it.
I think McVay is a very good coach and knows QB’s, but Stafford is an old guard, arm talent QB that isn’t actually good.
If Stafford gets the Rams back to the Super Bowl it's a successful trade for the Rams.
You talk about Goff being tough with a broken thumb ... Stafford played through a broken back this year. Stafford's ability to play through injuries and at a high level is well known.
As for rookie contracts ... you're not wrong. That said, with what the Rams cap situation looks like at the top of the roster makes every $$$ that they can save matter. Whether it's the right way to build a roster is a complete different discussion.