PDA

View Full Version : fair trade for Green?


sandman
04-18-2001, 12:08 AM
There's been a lot of debate about this topic...I remember way back when he first went on the block, we wanted a first and a second (kind of a joke now)...and then the demand has been a first and third, with the Chiefs refusing to do the trade without getting a pick in return. I, as a Ram fan primarily, believe that just a number one isn't enough for Green (b/c how many proven nfl quarterbacks are you gonna find at the 12 pick that are ready to play now?), but I realize that the Chiefs aren't gonna give that third rounder to us. So I propose a different idea: what about a conditional pick? We get the first now, and if Green lights up scoreboards all over the league, makes the pro bowl and in general has a great year, we get as high as a second rounder next year. However, if Green goes down with an injury, we give you guys that third rounder we got for Vermeil back. Every other scenario would fall in between.

keg in kc
04-18-2001, 12:39 AM
I've stated the following from the beginning.

The Hasslebeck trade is the precedent here. Green may have more experience, but he's currently injured, and is 6 years older than Matt.

With that in mind, the key to this entire situation, IMO, is not the value of Green, but rather the value of our #12 pick. For that reason, and judging by the fact that several teams have indicated interest in the pick, including most recently the Jets, I will not accept any trade less than #12 and #77 for Green and #42.

Compare that to the Hasslebeck trade:

7 and 72 for 17 and Hasslebeck. That's a drop of 10 spots in the first round, plus a high third round pick for a back-up QB who will come in to start.

12 and 77 for for 42 and Green. That, on the other hand, is a drop of 30 spots, plus an equivalent third round pick for a back-up QB who will come in to start.

I'm not thinking of this in terms of getting the "Vermeil pick" back, rather I'm thinking of this in terms of recent precedent combined with the likely value of the #12. This deal, in my opinion, clearly favors the Rams, and I am frankly purplexed as to why they apparently won't accept it.

The other deal I would consider is #12, #74 and a 5th round pick for #29 and Green, for the same reasons discussed with the other potential trade. A drop of 17 picks in the first round, plus two other picks seems a fair trade for Green, in my opinion.

All-in-all, I don't think this trade will be done until KC is on the board, if at all.

As for your idea, regarding the conditional picks, I think it has merit, but with the difficulties the two franchises are having making even the most basic trade, I just don't know how feasible that is.

In any event, It's going to be very interesting to see what happens on Saturday. At least then this entire situation will be over and we can start to talk about something new... ;)

sandman
04-18-2001, 12:48 AM
Rob Johnson was a backup when he was traded to Buffalo....Brad Johnson was a backup when he was traded to Washington. Both drew a first and a third rounder. Neither had the numbers Green has had. (And both had the injury concerns too, as well as little experience at the time). Food for thought....

JOhn
04-18-2001, 12:50 AM
Originally posted by sandman
(b/c how many proven nfl quarterbacks are you gonna find at the 12 pick that are ready to play now?),

Sorry but correct me if I'm mistaken, but what exactly has he proven? this is a guy who was an 8th round pick, who so far has shown that he might be worth a little more but not a #1 round pick.
Lets sumerize

1993- inactive for all 16 games
1994-waived, sat entire season without a team
1995- signed with Redskins, didn't take a snap
1996-again inactive for all 16 games
1997- played 1 game in relief for the Hoss,0/1 attempts
1998-Played in 15 games with 14 starts, yards (3,441), and touchdowns (23) led them to a 6-3 record
1999-missed entire season
2000-5 starts, 8 games with a 4-4 record 60.04% completions.

Ok in 7 years he's had 1 good season, and 1 so/so. sorry that is not worthy of a first round pick. I mean 8 years in the league and 2 seasons to judge him worthy of a first rounder? NO WAY!!!!

heck he has what 5 maybe 6 years left? sorry for a #1 pick I want a qbotf.

sandman
04-18-2001, 12:55 AM
I'm just saying that's Green's value, like it or leave it. If you would even consider picking Drew Brees with that pick, then Green is easily worth it, b/c he's worth far more than Brees right now.

milkman
04-18-2001, 12:55 AM
OK, looking at those trades in retrospect, seems that neither DC or Buff got fair returns on their investments, although the jury is still out on Rob Johnson. But, in using those two as guides, one would have to question whether an unproven QB is worth a 1st and 3rd. Even without those trades to look at, my answer would be no.

sandman
04-18-2001, 12:59 AM
it doesn't make a difference in Green's value. We have no idea if the Hasselback trade will be good for Seattle or not either, but Hasselback was worth considerably less than either Johnson or Trent Green. Two out of the last three major qb trades have been for a first and a third, and Green is arguably better than either Johnson. The Rams have a right to demand fair market value, and they have leverage due to the fact that the Chiefs didn't make any earlier moves in the qb market.

JOhn
04-18-2001, 01:06 AM
Originally posted by sandman
The Rams have a right to demand fair market value, and they have leverage due to the fact that the Chiefs didn't make any earlier moves in the qb market.

ROFLMAO.....
see the first part of that staement almost carried wieght, untill you read the last part. Which is what it all really boils down to. The Rams think since we have not made a QB, why not stick it to us.

Sandman, read the stats on Green, I can think of at least one other QB right off, who is a journeyman like Green who has alot better numbers wins etc...but is not worthy of a #1 guess who? Gus Frerotte, whould you give a 1 & 3 for him? Yet he has better numbers.

Sorry but I would accept Green but not for a 1st round pick, he simply has NOT PROVEN himself. 1 good season does not make him a proven QB

JOhn
04-18-2001, 01:15 AM
Now as for Fair?

#3 round pick and a conditional pick would be worthy. but anything more than that would be extremely premature.

sandman
04-18-2001, 01:18 AM
He hasn't played much (although certainly more than anyone else you're going to get with that number 12 pick), but in the time he has played, he has been good, great or spectacular. You can't say that about Gus Frerotte. You definitely can't say that about Trent Dilfer. You can't say that about Drew Brees in the NFL, yet. And while Beuerlein has been good....you want a QBOTF, right? 38 Years Old??? In '98, Green took over for a Skins team that was falling apart (replaced Frerotte, btw) and put up very good numbers, considering the situation: 3400 yds, 23 tds, 11 ints. And this was on a very, very bad team, with a very, very bad offense. No Stephen Davis, no running game to speak of. No wide receivers....he was their passing game. That's why the Rams brought him to St. Louis in the first place. Then, when he got injured and Warner became the NFL's Roy Hobbs, some in Rams Park were saying that Green would've been better than Warner. Then last year he took the field in six different games. Two of those he had a healthy Marshall Faulk. He still put up a qb rating of 100+. He's won with nothing around him before, or at least performed very well (better than one would expect) in those situations. That is how he has proved himself.

sandman
04-18-2001, 01:20 AM
And everyone on this board talks about how that was a great deal! Green has DEFINITELY proven more than Hasselback.....why shouldn't he be worth more than Hasselback, especially when the Chiefs are so short on options??

Sorry, back to my previous stance.....his value is set, take it or leave it.;)

JOhn
04-18-2001, 01:21 AM
hehe,
you know when you describe his situation in DC, he sounds alot like a QB we just lost. was he worth a first round?

Sorry, but I have seen way to many 1 or 2 year wonders to bet the farm on another one.

Besides doesn't he only have 1 year left on his contract? if so do you really think the Rams will be able to keep him? then were will you be?

sandman
04-18-2001, 01:23 AM
obviously to the Ravens, he was worth a whole bunch more than a first rounder....

BTW, Green has two years left on his contract.

JOhn
04-18-2001, 01:27 AM
More to the Ravens?
Have you checked out his contract? 1 Year, yes that right 1 year, with alot of clauses, so obviously he's not worthy of a first rounder.

Ok 2 years, and what kind of bonus next year? Sorry but again you state the value relates to KC's situation, and this leds me to believe this has more to do with getting even, than has to do with "fair value"

JOhn
04-18-2001, 01:29 AM
Also what about the 3rd this year and a conditional next? I mean if he is truely proven and good QB this would show the Rams were right. But if not, then it would show the trade for what it is, another way to get even?

keg in kc
04-18-2001, 06:30 AM
Yes, but....

Rob Johnson was a backup when he was traded to Buffalo....Brad Johnson was a backup when he was traded to Washington. Both drew a first and a third rounder. Neither had the numbers Green has had. (And both had the injury concerns too, as well as little experience at the time). Food for thought....

I've considered that. However, there were extenuating circumstances at the time which allowed the Bills and the Redskins to make such high trade offers: Buffalo held an early pick in the second round and Washington held two first round picks (including the the number 5 which they eventually traded for all of New Orleans' picks...). Kansas City, on the other hand, has neither the will nor the means to approach St. Louis with a similar offer, and, even more importantly, once again, a direct precedent has been set this very offseason with the Hasslebeck trade.

Green has DEFINITELY proven more than Hasselback.....why shouldn't he be worth more than Hasselback, especially when the Chiefs are so short on options??

Getting the #12 and #75 at the expense of Green and #42, which I proposed in my earlier response, is a significantly better deal for the Rams than the Hasslebeck deal was for the Packers, who received #7 and #72 for Matt and #17. The Packers essentially traded up 10 spots, while the Rams would be trading up 30...

As for KC being short on options, I think you'd better realize who you're dealing with here - like him or not, the fact of the matter is that Carl Peterson's ego will not allow him to give in. The Chiefs will start the 2001 campaign with Tommy Maddox or Jim Druckenmiller behind center before he'll back down from his publically-stated position that Kansas City will not give up a 1st and a 3rd for Green. He's drawn the line in the sand, so to speak, and history indicates strongly that he won't back down. Whether he's right or wrong is not an issue, nor is Green's value in the eyes of the St. Louis front office, the only thing that matters now is machismo and he will not take what he considers a fall in the public eye.

Believe me, it's frustrating sometimes, but I believe he is correct in this instance. I think the trade is being held-up because of hurt feelings on the St. Louis side, and although I understand those feelings, it's time to move on and act like the businessmen these folks all are...