Patriots trade WR Brandon Cooks to Rams

[ET80]

Just now, Non-Issue said:

I am not ignoring it. I am just considering it no different than any other year for the Pats. When have the Pats EVER made WR any sort of priority? When have they ever acted like WR was a concern?

Again, we are talking about a completely unique team when it comes to WRs. So trying to apply traditional logic to the scenario isn't logical. We are talking about the Pats. Bill Belichick. Tom Brady. And whoever they can scrape from under the wheel well at WR. I have absolutely no doubt that Belly thinks he can make it work without Cooks. Do you doubt that he thinks he can make it work without Cooks?

Look at my edit for my thoughts on this. This wasn't a "go or no-go" decision. Let Cooks play out his contract year, franchise tag, transition tag weird and obscure tags that Belicheck has used before - get had a full year to make a decision, but didn't.

[Non-Issue]

1 minute ago, N4L said:

The links have nothing to do with my statements regarding the LA culture. Care to address the points I made? I said nothing about ogletree nor did I accuse anyone of bias...? 

That was the point the person you were responding to was making. That we "drink our own kool aid" more-so than other fans. As if we just cheer every move. And cheer our players until they leave, and then we call them bums and say they sucked.

That was what you bolded. That was what you agreed with.

[Non-Issue]

1 minute ago, EliteTexan80 said:

Look at my edit for my thoughts on this. This wasn't a "go or no-go" decision. Let Cooks play out his contract year, franchise tag, transition tag weird and obscure tags that Belicheck has used before - get had a full year to make a decision, but didn't.

He didn't have a full year to get a 1st round pick for Cooks. The trade was a "go-no go" trade.

[Non-Issue]

32 minutes ago, Kiltman said:

Wasn't there issues with the other guys in NO? Like the other wideouts didn't like him or something?
I remember hearing some of those guys were very "don't let the door hit ya" when he left.

If there was, I haven't heard it. But it isn't like I have followed the kid.

[Non-Issue]

Gotta go back to work.

Later, guys.

[stl4life07]

32 minutes ago, Kiltman said:

Wasn't there issues with the other guys in NO? Like the other wideouts didn't like him or something?
I remember hearing some of those guys were very "don't let the door hit ya" when he left.

Yeah I don’t think he liked his role in NO. Can’t fault him though because even Payton treats Ingram really bad. He fumbles one time then gets benched the entire game. So maybe sometimes Payton rubs people the wrong way. Just like that choke gesture to Freeman in the Falcons game. The media asked Payton about it and he claimed he didn’t remember doing that. Like I’m not saying Payton is a bad coach but sometimes coaches can rub the players the wrong way and most blame the players for being the bad person.

Cooks isn’t a character concern at all but people want to write that narrative just because he got traded twice in a short span. The Pats didn’t want to pay Cooks big bucks and with the Saints maybe Payton rubbed Cooks the wrong way and he wanted out. I’m surprised Ingram hasn’t gotten fed up with the antics Payton have pulled on him. 

The Rams are perfect for Cooks as he has a good relationship already with Goff, they have the same agent along with Kupp and they work out together in the offseason. The back up QB Mannion was a teammate of Cooks at Oregon State. Reports were McVay wanted Cooks last year and tried to trade Tru for Cooks but nothing happened. So again I think it’s being way overblown with the character concerns.

[jrry32]

2 minutes ago, Non-Issue said:

If there was, I haven't heard it. But it isn't like I have followed the kid.

The guy has the same character concerns that Watkins had when we acquired him.

[Forge]

1 minute ago, Non-Issue said:

Gotta go back to work.

Later, guys.

C'mon man, priorities. 

[ET80]

5 minutes ago, Non-Issue said:

He didn't have a full year to get a 1st round pick FROM THE RAMS for Cooks. The trade was a "go-no go" trade.

Added a bit to spice it up. If Cooks does what he does as the (likely) #1 target for the team, he tags and trades him for that 1st round pick (much like he did with Matt Cassell in 2007). If he doesn't do what is expected of him, he strengthens his own position in negotiations, utilizes the Transition Tag (as the Bears did with Kyle Fuller) and gets him at the cost he wants.

Letting him play the year provides him more leverage, as well as additional opportunity to keep him around. 

If all he was looking to do is negotiate with the Rams (and only the Rams) then you're onto something.

[ET80]

15 minutes ago, Non-Issue said:

When have the Pats EVER made WR any sort of priority? When have they ever acted like WR was a concern?

Last year, when they traded FOR Cooks. 

[jrry32]

Brandin Cooks is one year older than Calvin Ridley.

[BAConrad]

Idk if its been brought up but does anyone remember a time where any player was traded in back to back seasons for a 1st round pick both times?

Heres why I dont like this signing for LA:

1. You just traded away your first round pick for a WR who, while very talented, has been traded TWICE in last two years by two different teams, with two different head coaches considered the best in the league (BB) and among the best (Payton). That could be a red flag.

2. Your team mostly used Watkins, a similar kind of player as cooks but with more athleticism, as a decoy/downfield receiver who opens up things underneath for the teams other WRs. People act as if Goff threw the ball deep a lot last year. But he didnt!!! He threw it, IIRC, 20 yards or more just 149 times over the season. Which was not very much compared to the rest of the league. A lot of their completions come on short/intermediate throws, screens, and underneath stuff. 

Cooks created discord in NO because he felt he wasnt being used enough and didnt like that he wasnt getting enough targets. So now he goes to a team, where he will no longer for the first time in his career, be playing with a HOF QB, and where we just saw McVays offense and how he seems to use his #1. 

3. Your team already has limited draft capital. It still has some holes. Namely edge rusher, LB, and depth in general. This has been THE healthiest team in the NFL the last 3 seasons. And was the least injured team last year. They are tying up not only cap space but also draft capital to sign expensive starters. Not only that, but they're giving up valuable picks that net you starting (ideally) players on cost controlled deals. Itd be one thing if Cooks had 3 seasons left on his rookie deal. But now they get him in his last season at his highest price as a rookie at 8.9 million. And they JUST gave up a 2nd a year ago for 1 year of Watkins. I just dont understand this logic by their FO here. 

Oh I know I know...they have 90 million in cap space. After paying Goff, Gurley, and Donald what will that be? Half? Theyll still have to pay Joyner, Suh (if they want him back), Peters, Cooks....and then thats not even mentioning the fact that they're relying on a 35 or 36 year old LT and 33 year old C. Meaning at any time they might have to replace one or both of those guys. And oh there's the fact that they have to sign depth players. Because ya know, 53 guys on a team and stuff.

I like this for LA because it does fill a big hole for them at #1 WR. I just dont like what they gave up. 

Theyre really, really pushing all their chips in for 2018 and 2019. I can see this team being in either cap hell in two years, or having some cap space but limited talent surrounding Goff/Gurley/Donald because of these picks theyre giving up. 

They very well may end up losing Cooks next offseason like they did with Watkins despite having given up a very valuable draft pick for them. Or not.

Ill say this, Im both scared of this Rams team and also a part of me isnt. Im scared because if they stay totally healthy, and dont regress offensively too much, theyre easily one of the SB contenders. But if this whole offseason experiment doesnt work out..and they lose some guys, or have major issues internally due to all the combustible personalities they are bringing in...then they could very well just flounder completely. They're the very definition of a boom or bust team. And Ive seen firsthand how awry it can go.

[ET80]

23 minutes ago, Non-Issue said:

If there was, I haven't heard it. But it isn't like I have followed the kid.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000845934/article/brandin-cooks-frustrations-led-to-saints-sending-him-to-patriots

Take this for what it's worth. It's why I'm of the belief that there's more to this than simply recouping value. 

Final thought (not really) but if there wasn't this sort of chatter during the last trade, I wouldn't think twice of this. If this was merely a case of the Pats making an offer on a player, the Saints acting on said offer, and then seeing he didn't fit - I'd be much more comfortable with this move. Took a shot, didn't work, on to the next one. 

But - the appearance is that the only reason the Saints moved him was because of personal issues. He goes to New England, and he was very productive in his role, basically matched Gronk's production. Yet, they move him...in a year where they're losing a ton on offense (their leading rusher and OL, and potentially losing their All Pro TE). 

This isn't a move that you make as you're losing other parts elsewhere.

[Kiltman]

1 minute ago, stl4life07 said:

Yeah I don’t think he liked his role in NO. Can’t fault him though because even Payton treats Ingram really bad. He fumbles one time then gets benched the entire game. So maybe sometimes Payton rubs people the wrong way. Just like that choke gesture to Freeman in the Falcons game. The media asked Payton about it and he claimed he didn’t remember doing that. Like I’m not saying Payton is a bad coach but sometimes coaches can rub the players the wrong way and most blame the players for being the bad person.

Cooks isn’t a character concern at all but people want to write that narrative just because he got traded twice in a short span. The Pats didn’t want to pay Cooks big bucks and with the Saints maybe Payton rubbed Cooks the wrong way and he wanted out. I’m surprised Ingram hasn’t gotten fed up with the antics Payton have pulled on him. 

The Rams are perfect for Cooks as he has a good relationship already with Goff, they have the same agent along with Kupp and they work out together in the offseason. The back up QB Mannion was a teammate of Cooks at Oregon State. Reports were McVay wanted Cooks last year and tried to trade Tru for Cooks but nothing happened. So again I think it’s being way overblown with the character concerns.

yea could see that, 

I don't think he's irregular at all...a lot of great players aren't the easiest to like as a teammate.
Like if Brady wasn't Brady would anybody deal with him? 

So it's not crazy that the other Saints wideouts were glad he left and didn't miss him when he got moved last year.
But I don't think that means he's cancerous in anyway.

I think the only "personality" concerns the Rams will have with him is that he probably thinks he's a top 5/10 receiver and wants to be paid as such.
So at that point you ask is Cooks so much better than Sammy that he was worth a 1st round pick and $15+ million more  (with noting the waste of the 2nd used to trade for him)

But again, what player doesn't think he's one of the best?

 

Cooks is the least of their problems

[BAConrad]

1 hour ago, EliteTexan80 said:

I think a few of us are illustrating that Cooks might actually be a headcase. Not in the OBJ/Peters/Talib mold, but something to worry about. Talented WRs who outplay their draft position and salary aren't traded in consecutive years by two HoF coaches unless there is something to be worried about. 

Where there is smoke...there is fire in most cases.

Not to mention the fact that Cooks threw fits in NO when he wasnt being thrown to enough, and that McVay used Watkins last season more as a decoy (though I hate that term it does sort of apply) to get other guys open. 

If Cooks is used the same way Watkins was...then the Rams might be in for some drama. And they only have him on a one year deal. Normally Id say that its better that way, but because they gave up the 23rd pick for him on a one year deal, that makes it worse.