Rams Team Building Strategy Will It Be Duplicated or a Rareity

[corta765]

18 minutes ago, 13 Second Prevent Defense said:

What would the take be in the Bengals held on and won the game.  You should draft and sign mostly lower priced FA's and rarely trade your pics?  In short, the Rams went for it and it worked out for them.  But it did not have to.  Generally teams that have signed/traded for superstars have not had SB success.  I dont think there will be a huge movement towards this approach. However, with younger coaches and GM's I think we will see more player movement than in the past.  I dont expect the Bills to take this approach on scale the Rams did which I know will be disappointing to many.

 

I think the Bills need to be careful to not give too many moderate contracts to average-ish players.

 

One of the things I appreciate with the Rams is the contracts they gave on defense or moves made were literally to guys who were top 5 positionally ie Donald, Ramsey, Whiteworth, etc.. I would rather pay a few top guys then have a bunch of moderate contracts. The talent for the top players gives you greater margins to win with then a collection of slightly above average players.

[clearwater cadet]

I thinks the trades are good, but players need to be on board with the idea as well to some degree.  Seems like accepting a trade to LA is more desirable then some places.

[hondo in seattle]

I think Beane (and McD) are looking for sustained success.

The more times you get into the playoffs, the greater the likelihood that you make a run all the way to the SB.

[Ed_Formerly_of_Roch]

1 hour ago, corta765 said:

With the LA Rams winning the super bowl it brings up an interesting question as in sports in general whoever wins the title the rest of the league mimics to some extent the following season. The really interesting thing with the Rams is they in many ways put together a dream team and it actually worked. If you ever played Madden one of the fun things to do is just go all out with no regard to the cap or picks for the title. Now that is putting it loosely as even though the Rams don't have a 1st round pick until 2069 (I Kid), they are actually 2nd in total draft picks since 2017. So the Rams are using their 1st/2nd round picks for established talent, but they do have players they draft and develop. Kupp himself was a 3rd round pick (#69 no joke). With that said the Rams are not a perfect team as they do have some holes, but they basically bet that their talented players would cover those gaps and with Stafford as an upgrade at QB it could mask the flaws even greater. For a long time it has seemed that GM's value picks over anything and carefully planning their window. One of the things I appreciate with the Rams winning is it validates to some extent a just go for it and worry about the rest type strategy.

 

My question to you is if you think more GM's might be a bit more inclined to trade some future for immediate success or will the Rams stay an outlier?

 

1 hour ago, wjag said:

 

If your goal is to be one and done, sure.  The Rams will be in purgatory for some time to come.  But the trophy on their home field sure looks nice in the trophy case.

 

Agree.  Think it will take a couple of years to decide based on what the Rams do in the next 2 to 3 seasons.  Recall reading an article about 3 weeks ago listing the top 50 potential FA available.  The Rams, Chiefs, and Bucs must have easily had a dozen between them on the list.  Add in that the Rams also don't have many draft picks sounds like a recipe for disaster.  They also have an aging QB, plus a couple others who are mulling retirement.

 

So if the Rams can figure out how to retool or resign many of these guys, then may be more duplicated.  If they fall apart, then likely not. 

 

Lets throw a conspiracy theory out there.   Do wonder if the plan came from up on high as in Kronke.  LA hasn't exactly been a great city for fan base.  Not sure how ticket sales have gone since the Rams returned, but did they do this to lock in season ticket sales to help pay for his share of the stadium he just built?

[Greg S]

Just now, Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said:

 

 

Agree.  Think it will take a couple of years to decide based on what the Rams do in the next 2 to 3 seasons.  Recall reading an article about 3 weeks ago listing the top 50 potential FA available.  The Rams, Chiefs, and Bucs must have easily had a dozen between them on the list.  Add in that the Rams also don't have many draft picks sounds like a recipe for disaster.  They also have an aging QB, plus a couple others who are mulling retirement.

 

So if the Rams can figure out how to retool or resign many of these guys, then may be more duplicated.  If they fall apart, then likely not. 

 

Lets throw a conspiracy theory out there.   Do wonder if the plan came from up on high as in Kronke.  LA hasn't exactly been a great city for fan base.  Not sure how ticket sales have gone since the Rams returned, but did they do this to lock in season ticket sales to help pay for his share of the stadium he just built?

 

Even though LA isn't a great football market I don't think they will have trouble selling out the stadium. It seemed like every Rams and Chargers game had a decent amount of visiting fans. I imagine that will always be the case as a road trip to LA will always be a popular. I can't wait to see the Bills there next season. I bet at least half the crowd will be wearing Bills blue.

[LABILLBACKER]

As far as giving up 1st & 2nd round picks for proven impact players, I say absolutely. But that still doesn't navigate us away from foolish coaching. 

[Don Otreply]

Most teams that have gone the same route as the rams have failed in their quest, for a while there it looked like the rams were going to fail as well, but their offense scored enough points to win, and their defense had the key stops when it mattered the most, cough cough…, 

 

Go Bills!!!

[JohnNord]

1 hour ago, corta765 said:

With the LA Rams winning the super bowl it brings up an interesting question as in sports in general whoever wins the title the rest of the league mimics to some extent the following season. The really interesting thing with the Rams is they in many ways put together a dream team and it actually worked. If you ever played Madden one of the fun things to do is just go all out with no regard to the cap or picks for the title. Now that is putting it loosely as even though the Rams don't have a 1st round pick until 2069 (I Kid), they are actually 2nd in total draft picks since 2017. So the Rams are using their 1st/2nd round picks for established talent, but they do have players they draft and develop. Kupp himself was a 3rd round pick (#69 no joke). With that said the Rams are not a perfect team as they do have some holes, but they basically bet that their talented players would cover those gaps and with Stafford as an upgrade at QB it could mask the flaws even greater. For a long time it has seemed that GM's value picks over anything and carefully planning their window. One of the things I appreciate with the Rams winning is it validates to some extent a just go for it and worry about the rest type strategy.

 

My question to you is if you think more GM's might be a bit more inclined to trade some future for immediate success or will the Rams stay an outlier?

 

If anything, I think it shows that the draft is a crap shoot.  Is there a better chance that you hit on that 2nd or 3rd round pick?  Or a better chance that the proven veteran that you trade for makes a big impact?   What good is a second round draft pick if you get Zay Jones, Cody Ford, or AJ Epinesa?

Edited February 14, 2022 by JohnNord

[TheFunPolice]

I wouldn't mind seeing it here and there.

 

for example, if the Bills traded a 1st round pick for a DE who could actually make plays in big moments like a Von Miller that would be cool!

Edited February 14, 2022 by TheFunPolice

[Don Otreply]

13 minutes ago, ScottLaw said:

Picture a Rams like approach with Josh Allen as your QB…. Nobody is beating you.

And that right there is why most teams fail when going that route, they generally don’t have the QB to make it happen,  or the buy in from the players they sign, but if we had the Rams defense we would be celebrating a Super bowl victory, but alas…., we don’t.

 

Go Bills!!!

[TheFunPolice]

I wouldn't mind trading for a superstar type RB either. We need SPEED and playmaking in that spot, as much as I do still like Singletary. 

 

Singletary paired with a speedster and we're set at RB. 

[Matt_In_NH]

1 hour ago, Mark Vader said:

Over the years we have seen teams get into "salary cap hell", and then all of a sudden they are fine, and they are able to still sign players.

 

This is simply not true.   Have you heard the term "cap casualty", its not a myth.  The Saints have had to let good talent go several times over the years, as have all teams.  Last year they were in a terrible position, made a bunch of moves, lots of releases and restructures.  And now they are in the same position again this year.  They were not able to "sign all their guys".   For instance during their run, they had to let their All Pro Guard and TE go in one offseason as one example, moves they would have liked to not have had to do.

 

https://www.nola.com/sports/saints/article_7144f39e-8671-11eb-b0ae-4788896c6439.html#:~:text=The first move the Saints,was to restructure Brees' deal.&text=Brees' cap hit was originally,veteran minimum of %241.075 million.

[msw2112]

42 minutes ago, hondo in seattle said:

I think Beane (and McD) are looking for sustained success.

The more times you get into the playoffs, the greater the likelihood that you make a run all the way to the SB.

This is the Bills philosophy and it's probably a good one.  Among other things, there is some level of luck involved.  For example, if Butker misses the 49 yard FG at the end of regulation, the Bills would have moved on.  I won't delve too deep into the subsequent kickoff and 13 seconds, but if one variable changes there, the Bills move on.  That's probably not luck, but the margins of victory are razor thin.

 

Had the SF defensive back not have dropped the sure interception right in his hands at the end of the NFC Championship game, the Rams would have been done.  Had the refs not called some of the close PI/defensive holdings that they did on the Rams' final drive, they may have been done.

 

The Rams were not the 85 Bears who dominated their way through the playoffs.  They had a narrow escape against the 49ers and beat a not-so-great Bengals team by 3.  It could have very easily gone the other way.

 

Because of all of the variables being involved, I would argue that getting as many shots as you can is the better philosophy than loading up for one shot.  It's probably better to be an 8 or 9 every year than a 10 one time, as there are too many variables that can cause the 10 to lose.  The Rams loaded up for the one shot and they hit, but the chances of that happening again are very slim.  I guess we'll have to see how they fare over the next decade.

 

 

[jahnyc]

I do worry about big market teams like LA being able to sign players at a discount or players forcing a trade/release because players want to be there.  This can result in a competitive advantage.  Josh Allen should attract talent, but I don't know if it will be enough, particularly since we will be competing with some other good QBs that also can attract talent (i.e., Mahomes, Herbert, Burrows and Rogers).

[ngbills]

Last two super bowl winners - traded/signed a vet legit QB. Prior to that is has been a bunch of Mahomes, Brady, Manning, etc. You either have a franchise QB or you do whatever you need to have one for the season. 

[corta765]

46 minutes ago, JohnNord said:

 

If anything, I think it shows that the draft is a crap shoot.  Is there a better chance that you hit on that 2nd or 3rd round pick?  Or a better chance that the proven veteran that you trade for makes a big impact?   What good is a second round draft pick if you get Zay Jones, Cody Ford, or AJ Epinesa?

 

100%. IMO what the Rams were able to prove is that teams overvalue the draft vs actual production. Look at the impact Diggs had by trading a 1st, sure maybe Buffalo drafts Jefferson but Diggs has been a homerun trade. I don't know that teams will be as aggressive as the Rams have been, but I would expect more teams to be a little looser with their draft picks as a way to ensure getting players who have a guaranteed level of production. The real advantage with draft picks is cost control for a certain period of time where you basically are paying pennies on the dollar for good talent. The thing is your maybe hitting on 30-40% of your draft picks so are you really coming that far ahead?

[BarleyNY]

2 hours ago, corta765 said:

With the LA Rams winning the super bowl it brings up an interesting question as in sports in general whoever wins the title the rest of the league mimics to some extent the following season. The really interesting thing with the Rams is they in many ways put together a dream team and it actually worked. If you ever played Madden one of the fun things to do is just go all out with no regard to the cap or picks for the title. Now that is putting it loosely as even though the Rams don't have a 1st round pick until 2069 (I Kid), they are actually 2nd in total draft picks since 2017. So the Rams are using their 1st/2nd round picks for established talent, but they do have players they draft and develop. Kupp himself was a 3rd round pick (#69 no joke). With that said the Rams are not a perfect team as they do have some holes, but they basically bet that their talented players would cover those gaps and with Stafford as an upgrade at QB it could mask the flaws even greater. For a long time it has seemed that GM's value picks over anything and carefully planning their window. One of the things I appreciate with the Rams winning is it validates to some extent a just go for it and worry about the rest type strategy.

 

My question to you is if you think more GM's might be a bit more inclined to trade some future for immediate success or will the Rams stay an outlier?

It’s what a lot of teams do when their window is closing.  The Rams needed some pieces, including a QB.  They pushed in.  New Orleans pushed in at then end of Brees’ career and Philadelphia did it when their roster was aging and they were coming off a SB win.  It didn’t work out well for either.  Those two teams are dealing with the aftermath now and the Rams will be soon.  It’s easier to handle the rebuilding years if your team wins it all, but there’s no guarantee.  The ugly rebuilding years are the price of trying. 

[Chandler#81]

This morning, the Champion Rams find themselves with 25 Unrestricted Free Agents and are STILL $8Million over the Cap. They likely won’t even be in the playoffs next season. Its Piper-paying time in ‘Nawlins’ as well. It’s the other side of the coin when you push ALL your chips in. Sean Payton is getting out, rather than go full rebuild and there’s rumblings Sean McVay is contemplating it as well. ‘Here ya go, Fans! See Ya!’

 

The new model? I don’t think so. Too risky and completely debilitating to the team and it’s Fanbase in the aftermath.

jmo

 

 

[FilthyBeast]

1 hour ago, hondo in seattle said:

I think Beane (and McD) are looking for sustained success.

The more times you get into the playoffs, the greater the likelihood that you make a run all the way to the SB.

 

Every franchise wants this in theory, but after four straight superbowl losses and 17 years of utter failure before the current regime what hardcore Bills fan out there wouldn't take the Rams approach if it meant at least one guaranteed SB win even if there was another 5 - 10 years of sucking that followed in the years after?

[Solomon Grundy]

IMO, if I had a roster comprised like the current Bills roster I would look for a difference making defensive player. Offer a 1-3 year deal with team options. In the Super Bowl last night those disruptors(Miller, Donald) showed up