Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
RamRod

Rams attempted a trade for Mack

Recommended Posts

Interesting. I bet the deal could’ve been similar to what the Bears offered. Looks like our draft picks potentially being too low turned them away. 

Not much of a cap expert so how would we have even been able to give him a new extension?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sad thing is the Rams could’ve had both in the 2014 draft. Mack 2nd and Donald 13. Plus Fisher tried to trade back into the 1st round to get Martin. He called the Ravens to see if they would be interested in trading their 17th pick but Martin was taken 16th to the Cowboys.

Can you imagine having Mack, Donald, and Martin all in the 2014 draft? The only downside is the Rams would’ve never had the opportunity to draft Gurley in the 2015 draft because they would’ve given up the 2015 1st round pick in the deal if they did trade with the Ravens had Martin fell and the Ravens agreed to trade. 

The Rams did come away with Donald, Cooks, and Easley from that 2014 draft class evenually. I hope Easley stays healthy because he is talented and moving him to OLB should help him not constantly take a pounding on the line. If he stays healthy then the Rams will be even scarier on defense. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, RamRod said:

Interesting. I bet the deal could’ve been similar to what the Bears offered. Looks like our draft picks potentially being too low turned them away. 

Im pretty skeptical of how "lucrative" our offer was. Sooo many teams reached out to the Raiders, and we knew that the Rams were one of them. And sending Mack to the Bears makes the chance of their Pick being higher than the 20s much lower. Not to mention Oakland sent a 2nd rounder back, so they didnt really get 2 Firsts.

I wouldnt be shocked if we offered a 1st and potentially a 3rd (because we are looking at the Comp picks we are getting in the next 2 years). But I dont think anyone was close to what the bears offered, and they only offered that much because they got to have Contract talks.

10 hours ago, RamRod said:

Not much of a cap expert so how would we have even been able to give him a new extension?

Speaking of Contract talks, Im not sure we would have given him that extension. We may have been looking at these next 2 seasons and said were just pushing for the Super Bowl right now (potentially Tagging him next year)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I'm very curious what our package was and if we could have locked him up long term. We would have had to of traded a big contract, maybe Brockers? Maybe Joyner?

 

Mack, Donald, Peters, Suh, Talib is just some Madden $hit. Salary cap is going up and Snead is a magician so If we offered a 1st, a 3rd, and Brockers I would have been okay with it. But as the article says, our 1st is likely going to be too low compared to a mid rounder from Chicago as i see them as 6-10/8-8 at best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, RamRod said:
Looks like our draft picks potentially being too low turned them away. 

Raiders got one thing right.

Low-key burn on the Bears.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Insane. Can you imagine?

 

No way it would've worked with the salary cap, likely either Barron or Brockers would've been gone just so we could make it work short term. But the two top defensive players in the league on the same team? With the most talented overall secondary? And Suh is like your 5th best defender? Ridiculous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Raiders apparently declined our offer because our picks would be too low. The Bears picks could be low too if they keep this up, especially if the Rodgers injury is significant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RamRod said:

So Raiders apparently declined our offer because our picks would be too low. The Bears picks could be low too if they keep this up, especially if the Rodgers injury is significant.

This post didn't age well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say it's for the best it didn't work out. Mack would have been incredible on this defense, but that would have been a ton of money between him and Donald.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Adam Schefter said that the plan was to give the Raiders a 1st and 3rd for Mack then sign him and go after a Superbowl this season then trade him away for picks. So getting him wasnt a long term plan but the Rams did have a plan which is brilliant on their part to always think of ways to put this team in the best position to succeed.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎9‎/‎10‎/‎2018 at 6:29 PM, stl4life07 said:

Adam Schefter said that the plan was to give the Raiders a 1st and 3rd for Mack then sign him and go after a Superbowl this season then trade him away for picks. So getting him wasnt a long term plan but the Rams did have a plan which is brilliant on their part to always think of ways to put this team in the best position to succeed.

 

That's the ballsiest thing I've ever heard. If teams knew that, we would not get what he should demand in return, but could still get something if there was a bidding war. I love it. Snead is the man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  



×