RG3 Trade? Was it worth it?

[zeke2829]

I know, it's a little early to tell. Here is an article I found with a breakdown of what we have received so far for RG3. We no longer have ROK, but I'm hoping Pead can make a comeback. I'm optimistic that this trade could take us over the top! We still got next year too! Thoughts?




Originally, this is how that deal looked. Washington obtained the second pick, which eventually became Robert Griffin III. Meanwhile, Daniel Snyder and company sent three first-round picks as well as a second-rounder to the Rams, per The St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

Patrick McDermott/Getty Images
With no need for RGIII, Snead was able to get quite the bounty in return.


St. Louis sent the sixth overall pick it acquired from Washington for the 14th pick (Michael Brockers) and a second-round pick (Janoris Jenkins). The Jenkins selection was utilized after a trade down with Chicago that enabled the Rams to pick up both Isaiah Pead and Rokevious Watkins later in the draft.
In essence, Snead picked up two immediate contributors who were first-round talents for RGIII. He was also able to keep the other two first-rounders he acquired in the deal.
As of now, this is how the deal breaks down with a first-round pick in the 2014 NFL draft still coming the Rams way.

YearRoundPlayerPositionTeam2012FirstMichael Brockers Defensive TackleLouisiana State2012SecondJanoris JenkinsCornerbackNorthern Alabama2012SecondIsaiah Pead Running BackVanderbilt2012FifthRokevious WatkinsOffensive TackleSouth Carolina 2013FirstAlec Ogletree LinebackerGeorgia2013ThirdStedman BaileyWide ReceiverWest Virginia2013SixthZac StacyRunning BackVanderbilt

The parameters are a bit convoluted here. St. Louis traded down in the first round with the pick it originally acquired from Washington and selected Alec Ogletree this past April. It also picked up the pick that it used for Stedman Bailey in that deal as well as a sixth-round. That sixth-rounder was eventually dealt to move up about a half of round to get running back Zac Stacy.
The St. Louis Post-Dispatchbreaks the entire trade down in a much less confusing manner than I just did.
However, that's essentially the bounty that Snead has been able to get in return for RGIII. While it's too early to tell how many of these players will pan out, trades like this have been successful around the NFL in recent history.

 

[Rambunctious]

I think it was the right trade to make at that time. If Bradford has a good season it will erase all questions...

 

[fastforward]

The Redskins paid a fair market price for RG3.

It's way too early to tell whether it was a good trade for us. The Redskins have had 1 year of RG3 whilst we've had 1 year of Brockers, Jenkins, Pead, and Watkins. I don't think this is the right way of analysing things. It would be better to evaluate our Drafts as a whole and then assign a proportion of that as a return for RG3. There's no way to know for sure who our sole 2nd round pick would have been if we hadn't traded RG3. We may well have stuck with Quick but it's possible that we'd have selected Jenkins based on value and need. With multiple picks the team were able to exercise options that wouldn't have been available. It just blurs the analysis even further. I thought we were wasteful with the 2012 Draft which continued our trend of picking raw athletes over proven players.

 

[shopson67]

Wasn't the first round trade down in 2012 with the Cowboys, who drafted Patterson?

With Bradford in place, I'll definitely take Brockers/Jenkins/Pead/Ogletree/Bailey/2014 1st rounder over a QB that has already shredded his knee in his first season. Watkins already moved on, so that addition was a non-factor. Since the 6th rounder was only part of the move up to get Stacy, I'll leave that out too. 3 stud young defensive starters and two depth offensive weapons, of which one or both could ascend to starters, amounts to a great haul so far. One more 1st rounder to go...

 

[Forty_Sixand2]

As a Redskins fan, I really see this as a true football trade that will end up benefitting both teams. The Skins needed a franchise quarterback and RG3 (so far) has that it factor. The Rams have utilized the picks to bolster the roster and appear as a NFC West contender already. Maybe both teams can meet in a conference title game or two in the next decade.

 

[mutigers1fan]

RG3 has now had multiple major knee injuries. If the Rams don't have 2 1st's this past year they may not move up to pick Tavon because they don't have the number of picks they need. This trade was a great move and is without a doubt worth it.

 

[jacobarch]

I say yes it was definitely worth it. We still have two more 1st round picks and if I know Snead and Fisher they will use those picks as leverage to get the players they want in next years draft. I still think we're a year or two away from legitimately contending as a top tier team but in the long run it's worth it. Of course it all matters on how the rams draft and their previous draft turn out. But so far it looks good. Of course we'll still have to fill some holes in at Guard/Tackle/RB (if no one steps up this year)/OLB in the near future but we've filled some holes nicely over the last couple of drafts.
This year will tell us a lot on what positions we need to address next year.

 

[ANGELAKERAMS]

Wasn't the first round trade down in 2012 with the Cowboys, who drafted Patterson?

With Bradford in place, I'll definitely take Brockers/Jenkins/Pead/Ogletree/Bailey/2014 1st rounder over a QB that has already shredded his knee in his first season. Watkins already moved on, so that addition was a non-factor. Since the 6th rounder was only part of the move up to get Stacy, I'll leave that out too. 3 stud young defensive starters and two depth offensive weapons, of which one or both could ascend to starters, amounts to a great haul so far. One more 1st rounder to go...

Shopson

That was the 2nd trade that year. They traded #2 for #6 with the Skins ( plus a 2nd and 2 firsts ). Then, when Jacksonville jumped them to take Blackmon, the Rams traded with the Boys for #14 and #45 and selected Brockers. Then, they traded #45 for #50 and a 5th rounder that was used on Watkins ( who is now gone ).

 

[Clayton]

This is what I posted in the 'RG3 trade tracker' thread right after the draft. I think its mostly the trade give/take semantics. And its hard to tell how 'worth it' the trade is because we don't know what we would have gotten for Bradford and we don't know how many healthy years RG3 will be in the league. Strictly as a trade, it was worth it.



Robert Griffin III QB, Mychal Rivera TE and Chris Jones DT

for

Michael Brockers DT
Janoris Jenkins CB
Isaiah Pead RB
Rokevious Watkins G
Alec Ogletree OLB
Stedman Bailey WR
Zac Stacy RB
Washington's 2014 1st Round pick
Atlanta's 2015 7th Round pick

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

*Brockers, Pead and Watkins were gotten from the trade down with Dallas and then trading down again with Chicago.

*Ogletree, Stedman Bailey, 198, 2015 7th rounder gotten from using Washington's pick and trading down with Atlanta.

*Jenkins and the 2014 1st rounder are directly gotten from Washington

*Pick 198 was traded with Pick 184 to the Texans for Zac Stacy RB

 

[ANGELAKERAMS]

As for the trade, it is still too early to say for sure.

Yes, the extra picks have helped the Rams maneuver the draft board, but if Bradford doesn't step up and become that franchise QB we all think he can be, and RG3 overcomes his knee surgery and continues to become a franchise QB, then you will have people questioning the trade regardless of what other players they drafted with the other picks because they would still be missing that pivotal position guy, a franchise QB.

That is why they say you can't grade a trade/draft for at least 3 years.

I will say this though. Beyond what RG3 did in taking them to the PO's last season ( which was huge for that franchise ), what he has done to reenergize that fan base and the revenue the team has made off of him already more than makes up for those picks they gave up. Most experts thought the Rams were going to end up with a top 10 pick the next year, and it ended up being #22 instead. If they are as successful as they were last season, it will be another late round pick. Who wouldn't trade a 2nd and 2 late first round picks for a franchise QB?

How many franchises have been looking for a franchise QB for a long time? Cleveland, Buffalo, Miami, KC, Oakland just to name a few.

 

[RamCub]

Of course the trade was worth it - for both sides!

Our two first rounders next year will be OT and DT - just wait and see!

 

[Clayton]

The only way we win think about winning the trade is if we get a HOF player out of it or 2 borderline HOF players out of it.

The trade can certainly end up being a push if Ogletree, Brockers and next year's first become productive starters for their whole career. I think its probably going to be a win/win

 

[ANGELAKERAMS]

This is what I posted in the 'RG3 trade tracker' thread right after the draft. I think its mostly the trade give/take semantics. And its hard to tell how 'worth it' the trade is because we don't know what we would have gotten for Bradford and we don't know how many healthy years RG3 will be in the league. Strictly as a trade, it was worth it.



Robert Griffin III QB, Mychal Rivera TE and Chris Jones DT

for

Michael Brockers DT
Janoris Jenkins CB
Isaiah Pead RB
Rokevious Watkins G
Alec Ogletree OLB
Stedman Bailey WR
Zac Stacy RB
Washington's 2014 1st Round pick
Atlanta's 2015 7th Round pick

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

*Brockers, Pead and Watkins were gotten from the trade down with Dallas and then trading down again with Chicago.

*Ogletree, Stedman Bailey, 198, 2015 7th rounder gotten from using Washington's pick and trading down with Atlanta.

*Jenkins and the 2014 1st rounder are directly gotten from Washington

*Pick 198 was traded with Pick 184 to the Texans for Zac Stacy RB

It's hard to include Pead and Watkins in the trade because that was more of a result of Jacksonville's trade up to get Blackmon ahead of the Rams. That forced the Rams to trade down for better value in selecting Brockers vs taking him at #6 ( which was reported they would have had the Boys not traded up ).

So, Brockers can be counted, but the other players that were drafted via further trades can't be included because they were the result of what Jacksonville did. Had they not traded to #5, the Rams would've drafted Blackmon. Now, had the Jags trade not happened and the Rams still chose to trade down, then those players drafted as a result of the trade can be counted.

But the Rams 2nd trade was a result of what the Jags did. The draft strategy changed as a result.

Therefore, this is the trade:

Brockers
Jenkins
Ogletree
Bailey
Stacy
2014 1st ( Wash ), 2014 7th (Atl)

 

[Clayton]

Therefore, this is the trade:

Brockers
Jenkins
Ogletree
Bailey
Stacy
2014 1st ( Wash ), 2014 7th (Atl)

What I posted is the end result of the trades. You have to keep following the trades that resulted because of the initial trade

 

[Jikkle]

You're not taking in all the components into account.

If the Rams draft RGIII that means they trade Bradford.

Alex Smith went for a 2nd and a next year late 2nd/early 3rd round pick so Bradford would've commanded more.

Also if you trade Bradford you dump his salary and have RGIII locked up the same amount of years as you would Bradford but at a far less of a cap hit. Which in that time you could've used the space to lock up guys to extensions and front load their contracts before you hooked RGIII up with his big pay day.

But ultimately it depends on Bradford and RGIII.

-If Bradford plays at an elite level the trade is a win even if RGIII is elite as well. You have an elite QB and you got a great draft pick haul out of your pick.

-If RGIII is elite and Bradford is just average to above average the trade is a loss because having an elite QB is the most important part of your team not to mention you would've missed the chance to dump Bradford when he stock would've been still somewhat high. So in that scenario you lose out on an elite QB, the draft picks you would've gotten from a Bradford trade, the cap space of dumping Bradford's contract, and the wasted time of having an average to above average guy behind center.

-If RGIII isn't elite you win the trade regardless of Bradford's performance because of the massive haul you got for trading that pick away.

 

[mutigers1fan]

Bradford didn't have the same trade value as the pick because of the cap hit. So that's a tough argument to make as well.

 

[Clayton]

You're not taking in all the components into account.

If the Rams draft RGIII that means they trade Bradford.

Alex Smith went for a 2nd and a next year late 2nd/early 3rd round pick so Bradford would've commanded more.

Also if you trade Bradford you dump his salary and have RGIII locked up the same amount of years as you would Bradford but at a far less of a cap hit. Which in that time you could've used the space to lock up guys to extensions and front load their contracts before you hooked RGIII up with his big pay day.

But ultimately it depends on Bradford and RGIII.

-If Bradford plays at an elite level the trade is a win even if RGIII is elite as well. You have an elite QB and you got a great draft pick haul out of your pick.

-If RGIII is elite and Bradford is just average to above average the trade is a loss because having an elite QB is the most important part of your team not to mention you would've missed the chance to dump Bradford when he stock would've been still somewhat high. So in that scenario you lose out on an elite QB, the draft picks you would've gotten from a Bradford trade, the cap space of dumping Bradford's contract, and the wasted time of having an average to above average guy behind center.

-If RGIII isn't elite you win the trade regardless of Bradford's performance because of the massive haul you got for trading that pick away.

I'd agree with a lot of this but its hard to say what we would have gotten from Bradford. A 1st and a 3rd maybe? We would be selling low at that point. The problem with getting rid of Bradford is that it would send a bad message to the whole organization because most people probably think that Bradford has never really had the weapons to succeed in the first place.

 

[jacobarch]

Bradford didn't have the same trade value as the pick because of the cap hit. So that's a tough argument to make as well.

Logic????? Whats this????? does not compute.

 

[UnrealTerm04]

I like it was a good move... but we'll see in the long run if it was the right move. Some one above said if we have an elite year from Bradford it will erase all questions. I agree with that statement. This is Bradford's 4th year in the NFL yet its only his first year with the same OC as the year before. He should play better than last year but if you ask me, a lot of the INTs were not on him but the terrible WR corps we had. Bradford has a better offense now than he ever had and this is the time for him to shine.

GO RAMS!

 

[Clayton]

I'm pretty sure the pitch to Jeff Fisher to take the job was also based around being able to build a team around Bradford while having a lot of resources. He could have gone to Miami and tried to bring in a rookie QB. I know Steve McNair was an MVP once but the Titans were built around defense and running the football.