calumnus said:
Over the last 4 years with Goff at QB the Rams have been 43-21
Over the last 4 years with Stafford at QB the Lions have been 23-40
Now they have switched places. We will see which team improves.
First Rounders can be extended to a fifth year on their initial contract. All other draft choices cannot be signed to a fifth year on their initial deal. That is a huge advantage to the teams and is a big reason why #1's are so valuable.BearGoggles said:Having an extra first round pick may not save money. Depends on who that player is replacing on the roster. Or stated differently, the contract for the extra first round player could well be higher than the cost of the alternate players.ColoradoBear said:heartofthebear said:Those are interesting perspectives but they are likely not the Lions' perspectives. It is almost universally believed that the 49ers #12 pick this season is more valuable than any a Rams pick a year from now. In other words, I don't think the Lions are going to be picking earlier the next year than they would have this year with the 49ers picks. It's hard to say what would be the case in 2023, which is why that pick is even worse. You have to factor in the opportunity cost of waiting an extra year for your picks. That is why interest is charged on loans. It is the cost of waiting for a return on your investment. The Lions paid one year of interest on their investment compared to what it would have cost them getting the SF picks. Furthermore, this 2021 draft has almost unprecedented depth and talent that is likely to be unmatched for many years. There are probably close to 200 players entering the draft that have a decent chance to see playing time as NFL players next season. That is 6 rounds worth of players out of the 7. The Lions are not likely to have that advantage in 2022 and 2023.BearGoggles said:From Detroit's perspective:heartofthebear said:One way to make sense of this trade is that Detroit really wanted Goff. They had a chance to get much better picks from SF as well as Jimmy G. and went with LA instead. Remember LA had no 2021 first round picks to offer Detroit. They had already traded that pick to the Jets.BearSD said:McVay and Snead must really hate Goff, because they gave him the Brock Osweiler treatment.Bearly Clad said:
Even if you're a Goff hater you've gotta admit the Rams just got fleeced. They just got a younger QB on a comparable contract and high quality draft pick ammo.
Four years ago, Houston got out from under Osweiler's contract by sending him plus a 2nd round pick and a 6th rounder to Cleveland in exchange for a low 4th round pick. Houston essentially gave Cleveland a 2nd rounder to get them to take Osweiler's contract.
The Rams-Lions deal is really two trades in one. The first deal is LA sending a 1st and 3rd round pick to Detroit for Stafford, which is in line with other offers Detroit received for Stafford. The second deal is LA sending Goff and another 1st round pick to Detroit just to get the Lions to absorb Goff's contract. It took a 1st rounder to do that, whereas Houston only had to give up a 2nd round pick along with Osweiler, because Goff's contract is so much larger.
Cleveland cut Osweiler a few months after they traded for him, before the start of the regular season. Goff will probably be with the Lions longer than that, though it would be surprising if he is there for more than two years.
Another way to make sense of this trade is that they really really didn't want Jimmy G.
1. Counterintuitively, the fact that the rams first round picks are in 2022 and 2023 is a positive. I think there's a good chance one of those picks is top 5. Stafford gets hurt, McVay gets exposed, lack of OL and other holes not filled, etc. In contrast, 49rs with Stafford are likely to be picking at the very end of the first round so their 2022 and 2023 picks are less valuable.
2. Detroit is rebuilding. If Goff is a complete flop there (which I don't expect), it just helps their rebuild. Worst case scenario is Goff is placeholder qb for 2 years or an expensive backup for part of that time. No matter who their qb is the next 2 years, Detroit is not going to the super bowl. They will be getting younger and the salary cap implications are probably no big deal.
3. I think their are a lot of red flags with the rams in terms of coaching staff turnover, horrible GM decisions, and possibly McVay's ego in dealing with players and staff. Whatever the dynamic is, Brad Holmes knows. So the fact that he's willing to take on Goff says something positive about Goff.
Your last 2 points I agree with. But that is just agreeing with my point that they liked Goff more than Garrapolo.
I also disagree that, just because the Lions have new decision makers, means they know what they are doing with respect to Goff vs. Garappolo.
Reports were that the 49ers only offered 2nd and 3rd rounders (2 each). I don't think that included Garrapolo, likely due to the fact he has a no trade clause and could be cut anyway at virtually no cost. It might make sense for Jimmy G to refuse a trade unless his final 2 years become guaranteed, but at the same time, another team may feel like they could just get him on the open market for less if the 49ers do end up cutting him
2021 draft pics are also more valuable than most years because of the salary cap pressures this year - if a team can get a plug and play starter, that's money saved.
How's this for a trade since the Lions and 49ers have been talking - 49ers give up a few 2nd and 3rd rounders for Goff. Lions have have an even bigger stash of picks to rebuild. Can find a serviceable cheap QB for the short term - they certainly aren't winning much in the near future anyway.
The best way to get cheap players is to accumulate picks after the second round.
Whether Jimmy G. Is cut/traded before or after 6/1 is of little consequence...ColoradoBear said:philbert said:Jimmy G has a no trade clause, so he would've had to agree to be part of a supposed trade to Detroit (why would he?),71Bear said:The Lions/Jimmy G. stuff is mere speculation. No one here has any idea whether SF offered Garappolo to the Lions. As for Stafford having options, that is not true. Detroit kept him in the loop but did not give him a choice. They took LA's offer because it yielded the additional #1. Of course, that extra #1 came with a huge price - Goff's contract.CALiforniALUM said:
If Goff has an Eli Manning career because he doesn't look the part, I'll enjoy watching him win his next two Super Bowls.
In response to the Lions not wanting Jimmy G and went to the Rams for Goff, another way to look at this is that the Lions may have given Stafford a choice between equal offers. Stafford is well liked in Detroit and there were lots of reports of his cooperation and support for moving on.
I would think that restructuring that contract to include guaranteed money for the last two years would help. Niners can cut JG after 6/1 for minimal cap impact if they find another way to get a QB. Not sure he could get the same $$$ if cut that late as most team will have lined up QB by then.
Young, healthy, rich, and good lookin- - poor, poor Jared.bonsallbear said:
JJared got a huge payday a couple years back and so he set for life. Not so bad right?
Peter King's haiku says it all...bipolarbear said:Young, healthy, rich, and good lookin- - poor, poor Jared.bonsallbear said:
JJared got a huge payday a couple years back and so he set for life. Not so bad right?
71Bear said:Whether Jimmy G. Is cut/traded before or after 6/1 is of little consequence...ColoradoBear said:philbert said:Jimmy G has a no trade clause, so he would've had to agree to be part of a supposed trade to Detroit (why would he?),71Bear said:The Lions/Jimmy G. stuff is mere speculation. No one here has any idea whether SF offered Garappolo to the Lions. As for Stafford having options, that is not true. Detroit kept him in the loop but did not give him a choice. They took LA's offer because it yielded the additional #1. Of course, that extra #1 came with a huge price - Goff's contract.CALiforniALUM said:
If Goff has an Eli Manning career because he doesn't look the part, I'll enjoy watching him win his next two Super Bowls.
In response to the Lions not wanting Jimmy G and went to the Rams for Goff, another way to look at this is that the Lions may have given Stafford a choice between equal offers. Stafford is well liked in Detroit and there were lots of reports of his cooperation and support for moving on.
I would think that restructuring that contract to include guaranteed money for the last two years would help. Niners can cut JG after 6/1 for minimal cap impact if they find another way to get a QB. Not sure he could get the same $$$ if cut that late as most team will have lined up QB by then.
Dead money pre 6/1: $2.8 million
Dead money post 6/1: $1.4 million
Source: Over the Cap
There are many sure things in life but one of them is if Garappolo is still in a Niner uniform on June 1st, he will play for SF this fall.ColoradoBear said:71Bear said:Whether Jimmy G. Is cut/traded before or after 6/1 is of little consequence...ColoradoBear said:philbert said:Jimmy G has a no trade clause, so he would've had to agree to be part of a supposed trade to Detroit (why would he?),71Bear said:The Lions/Jimmy G. stuff is mere speculation. No one here has any idea whether SF offered Garappolo to the Lions. As for Stafford having options, that is not true. Detroit kept him in the loop but did not give him a choice. They took LA's offer because it yielded the additional #1. Of course, that extra #1 came with a huge price - Goff's contract.CALiforniALUM said:
If Goff has an Eli Manning career because he doesn't look the part, I'll enjoy watching him win his next two Super Bowls.
In response to the Lions not wanting Jimmy G and went to the Rams for Goff, another way to look at this is that the Lions may have given Stafford a choice between equal offers. Stafford is well liked in Detroit and there were lots of reports of his cooperation and support for moving on.
I would think that restructuring that contract to include guaranteed money for the last two years would help. Niners can cut JG after 6/1 for minimal cap impact if they find another way to get a QB. Not sure he could get the same $$$ if cut that late as most team will have lined up QB by then.
Dead money pre 6/1: $2.8 million
Dead money post 6/1: $1.4 million
Source: Over the Cap
Right, it has little consequence to the niners' cap whether Jimmy G is cut after 6/1. But I'm saying it might have a large consequence to JG - he's going to have a harder time finding a team the later it happens.
Other than Stafford, who had a roster bonus coming in March, a lot of potential trades for QBs would best be executed after 6/1 for cap reasons.
There's also the draft on 4/29 - another reason to wait to see how things shake up.
All I'm saying here is that JG can be held in limbo for monthals, so if the opportunity presented itself, he might waive the no trade clause for guaranteed money. Because he could end up released in June with no guaranteed money, and potential landing spots will have filled their qb slot in the draft or elsewhere.
A couple thoughts...Bearly Clad said:
Ndamukong Suh played his first five years in Detroit and later called Goff "the best QB I've ever had"
A couple of interesting points in King's column. King mentioned that Washington offered a 1st and 3rd for Stafford, and the 1st was the #19 pick in this year's draft. He said he'd heard that one team offered two 1st round picks, but he couldn't confirm which team it was. Also, the Lions wanted to get as part of this deal a QB who could start for them in 2021, and they liked Goff better than the other options (presumably Bridgewater from Carolina, maybe Lock from Denver). And, they wanted to do Stafford the favor of sending him to one of his preferred destinations, and out of those the Rams were the only ones to put a serious offer on the table.71Bear said:Peter King's haiku says it all...bipolarbear said:Young, healthy, rich, and good lookin- - poor, poor Jared.bonsallbear said:
JJared got a huge payday a couple years back and so he set for life. Not so bad right?
Stafford-Goff. Who won?
Rare, after a swap, to say:
Love the trade for both.
I agree 100%
Yeah, as I mentioned in another post, the key was the extra #1 from LA for taking on Goff's contract, and, of course, as you indicated, LA was Stafford's preferred destination because he owns a home in Newport Beach. In essence, Stafford gave the Lions his best and they wanted to reciprocate.BearSD said:A couple of interesting points in King's column. King mentioned that Washington offered a 1st and 3rd for Stafford, and the 1st was the #19 pick in this year's draft. He said he'd heard that one team offered two 1st round picks, but he couldn't confirm which team it was. Also, the Lions wanted to get as part of this deal a QB who could start for them in 2021, and they liked Goff better than the other options (presumably Bridgewater from Carolina, maybe Lock from Denver). And, they wanted to do Stafford the favor of sending him to one of his preferred destinations, and out of those the Rams were the only ones to put a serious offer on the table.71Bear said:Peter King's haiku says it all...bipolarbear said:Young, healthy, rich, and good lookin- - poor, poor Jared.bonsallbear said:
JJared got a huge payday a couple years back and so he set for life. Not so bad right?
Stafford-Goff. Who won?
Rare, after a swap, to say:
Love the trade for both.
I agree 100%
71Bear said:Yeah, as I mentioned in another post, the key was the extra #1 from LA for taking on Goff's contract, and, of course, as you indicated, LA was Stafford's preferred destination because he owns a home in Newport Beach. In essence, Stafford gave the Lions his best and they wanted to reciprocate.BearSD said:A couple of interesting points in King's column. King mentioned that Washington offered a 1st and 3rd for Stafford, and the 1st was the #19 pick in this year's draft. He said he'd heard that one team offered two 1st round picks, but he couldn't confirm which team it was. Also, the Lions wanted to get as part of this deal a QB who could start for them in 2021, and they liked Goff better than the other options (presumably Bridgewater from Carolina, maybe Lock from Denver). And, they wanted to do Stafford the favor of sending him to one of his preferred destinations, and out of those the Rams were the only ones to put a serious offer on the table.71Bear said:Peter King's haiku says it all...bipolarbear said:Young, healthy, rich, and good lookin- - poor, poor Jared.bonsallbear said:
JJared got a huge payday a couple years back and so he set for life. Not so bad right?
Stafford-Goff. Who won?
Rare, after a swap, to say:
Love the trade for both.
I agree 100%
The Rams massively mismanaged the QB position. They gave up 2 first round, 2 second round, and 2 third round picks to get Goff. He was never worth that. Was never going to be worth that. Then they gave him a giant contract he was never worth when they didn't need to do it. Now that contract is an anchor, so they gave up a third round and 2 first round picks for a marginal upgrade that is 6 years older.71Bear said:Yeah, as I mentioned in another post, the key was the extra #1 from LA for taking on Goff's contract, and, of course, as you indicated, LA was Stafford's preferred destination because he owns a home in Newport Beach. In essence, Stafford gave the Lions his best and they wanted to reciprocate.BearSD said:A couple of interesting points in King's column. King mentioned that Washington offered a 1st and 3rd for Stafford, and the 1st was the #19 pick in this year's draft. He said he'd heard that one team offered two 1st round picks, but he couldn't confirm which team it was. Also, the Lions wanted to get as part of this deal a QB who could start for them in 2021, and they liked Goff better than the other options (presumably Bridgewater from Carolina, maybe Lock from Denver). And, they wanted to do Stafford the favor of sending him to one of his preferred destinations, and out of those the Rams were the only ones to put a serious offer on the table.71Bear said:Peter King's haiku says it all...bipolarbear said:Young, healthy, rich, and good lookin- - poor, poor Jared.bonsallbear said:
JJared got a huge payday a couple years back and so he set for life. Not so bad right?
Stafford-Goff. Who won?
Rare, after a swap, to say:
Love the trade for both.
I agree 100%
Not to mention all the money they threw at Todd Gurley when most people now know that running backs don't tend to age well (though they were a bit unlucky with how quickly his injury destroyed his production).OaktownBear said:The Rams massively mismanaged the QB position. They gave up 2 first round, 2 second round, and 2 third round picks to get Goff. He was never worth that. Was never going to be worth that. Then they gave him a giant contract he was never worth when they didn't need to do it. Now that contract is an anchor, so they gave up a third round and 2 first round picks for a marginal upgrade that is 6 years older.71Bear said:Yeah, as I mentioned in another post, the key was the extra #1 from LA for taking on Goff's contract, and, of course, as you indicated, LA was Stafford's preferred destination because he owns a home in Newport Beach. In essence, Stafford gave the Lions his best and they wanted to reciprocate.BearSD said:A couple of interesting points in King's column. King mentioned that Washington offered a 1st and 3rd for Stafford, and the 1st was the #19 pick in this year's draft. He said he'd heard that one team offered two 1st round picks, but he couldn't confirm which team it was. Also, the Lions wanted to get as part of this deal a QB who could start for them in 2021, and they liked Goff better than the other options (presumably Bridgewater from Carolina, maybe Lock from Denver). And, they wanted to do Stafford the favor of sending him to one of his preferred destinations, and out of those the Rams were the only ones to put a serious offer on the table.71Bear said:Peter King's haiku says it all...bipolarbear said:Young, healthy, rich, and good lookin- - poor, poor Jared.bonsallbear said:
JJared got a huge payday a couple years back and so he set for life. Not so bad right?
Stafford-Goff. Who won?
Rare, after a swap, to say:
Love the trade for both.
I agree 100%
So they gave up 4 first round picks, 2 second round picks, 3 third round picks for 5 years of Goff and 2 years of Stafford. Plus an overpriced contract for a couple of years.
This trade may have made sense, but the overall set of transactions was a disaster. Goff isn't the problem. He is a decent QB. Significantly over spending for Goff was the problem.
I'm not going to debate football either, but I can't be the only one who saw the McVay "at home" segments on Hard Knocks this fall. Case closed.okaydo said:
When did the word "pricckly" become unwelcome here?71Bear said:A couple thoughts...Bearly Clad said:
Ndamukong Suh played his first five years in Detroit and later called Goff "the best QB I've ever had"
1. He said that before teaming up with GOAT this season.
2. Other than one year with LA and this season, he has play for some miserable teams.
Regardless, I got the impression from Suh's comments that got along well with Goff. That speaks highly of Goff because Suh is known to be a *****ly personality - a good reminder that Goff is a good guy. If his play on the field had matched his ability to get along with all types of individuals off the field, he would still be in LA because the Rams would have realized that he is a unique talent.
