Caesar Rayford Traded

[jvan1973]

you know what I mean. But also, it's just really upsetting that we've lost Nevis, Boyett, & Rayford in a total of about 3 days.

two depth players, and a reserve military guy. Plus they just brought in Cam Johnson. I think you need to switch to decaf

[Brock Easley]

I don't like that!! I don't like that at all!!!!

[chrisfarley]

This is the kind of stuff they are saying on the cowboys.com forum. 

Posted
Today, 10:19 PM

From what I have read surfing around. This guy is a match up nightmare with his combination of speed, reach, size, and motor. For a conditional 2015 draft pick, we may have gotten a steal here. 

 

You Think !!!!

[aliveon2legs]

On it's face, we turned a UDFA into a late draft pick (I'm assuming it's a late pick, what else would we get for an unproven preseason performer?) so it's not a bad deal. 

 

I've seen this logic posted several times in this thread, and it's just... illogical.

 

Jeff Saturday was an undrafted free agent.  Should we have traded him for a 6'th or 7'th round pick after his first pre-season and said, 'Yay, we turned and undrafted free agent into a draft pick!!!'?

 

Robert Mathis was a 6'th round pick.  I'm sure there was a point where we could have easily turned him into a #1 overall pick by trading him for Jamarcus Russell.  Would that have been a big upgrade?

 

Once a guy has made it to the NFL, how he got there is completely irrelevant.  Don't misunderstand me, I'm not opposed to this conditional trade, if the conditions are right.  If Rayford tallies up 20 sacks over the next 2 years and all we get is another 6'th or 7'th round pick, I'm going to be pretty agitated. We got shafted on the Shipley trade, imo.  Okay, so what could we get in return with a 6'th or 7'th rounder?  Well, here is Grigson's brief history with those rounds:

 

LaVon Brazill - Serving 4 game suspension after multiple incidents with substance abuse

Justin Anderson - Injured Reserve

Chandler Harnish - Practice Squad

John Boyett - Arrested, Cut

Kerwynn Williams - Practice Squad

Justice Cunningham - Practice Squad

 

I'll reserve judgement until we know how Rayford plays out and what we get in return.  If he plays well, though, I just hope that we're compensated accordingly.

[Nobody]

Wow. Come on Grigs

[House]

This board falls in love with mediocre players, and builds them up to be superstars faster than anything I've ever seen.

Fans: Polian make a trade!!!!!!

Two years later.

Fans: Grigson stop making trades!!!!!!

Wake me when a player of consequence leaves our roster for next to nothing, and I'll start to worry about Grigs trading. People are acting like the season hinged on this guy.

Relax. Our core is solid. We are also lucky enough to have a front office right now, who is determined to keep us a competitive team in all phases. We are fine.

[BOTT]

Indianapolis Colts: Although undrafted rookie Caesar Rayford led the Colts 3-4 outside linebackers in total pressure with 11, and sacks with five, his Pass Rushing Productivity of 9.7 was the worst of the five Colts outside linebackers with 25 or more snaps.

Screw that dude! I saw the highlights on ESPN.....Rayford is a BEAST

[House]

This is the kind of stuff they are saying on the cowboys.com forum.

Posted

Today, 10:19 PM

From what I have read surfing around. This guy is a match up nightmare with his combination of speed, reach, size, and motor. For a conditional 2015 draft pick, we may have gotten a steal here.

You Think !!!!

^Said every fan of any franchise who recieved a player via trade.

Everyone thinks they're getting a steal.

[House]

Screw that dude! I saw the highlights on ESPN.....Rayford is a BEAST

This BEAST post is BEAST!

Grigs is a trading BEAST!

[Franklin County]

One thing I said about Rayford is that he got a lot of pressures and at least three sacks because of his length. He has no polish as a pass rusher. He might have been able to do something on special teams, block a couple of kicks or something. But he's not a special pass rusher.

Didnt Cam block a kick on special teams, recovered for a TD.   We hopefully got the best end of the stick.

[Balzer40]

I've seen this logic posted several times in this thread, and it's just... illogical.

Jeff Saturday was an undrafted free agent.  Should we have traded him for a 6'th or 7'th round pick after his first pre-season and said, 'Yay, we turned and undrafted free agent into a draft pick!!!'?

 

Robert Mathis was a 6'th round pick.  I'm sure there was a point where we could have easily turned him into a #1 overall pick by trading him for Jamarcus Russell.  Would that have been a big upgrade?

 

Once a guy has made it to the NFL, how he got there is completely irrelevant.  Don't misunderstand me, I'm not opposed to this conditional trade, if the conditions are right.  If Rayford tallies up 20 sacks over the next 2 years and all we get is another 6'th or 7'th round pick, I'm going to be pretty agitated.  The Eagles completely shafted us on the Shipley trade, imo.  We got a 7'th round pick for a guy that is going to be their starter.  Okay, great, so what will we get in return?  Well, here is Grigson's brief history with the 6'th and 7'th round:

 

LaVon Brazill - Serving 4 game suspension after multiple incidents with substance abuse

Justin Anderson - Injured Reserve

Chandler Harnish - Practice Squad

John Boyett - Arrested, Cut

Kerwynn Williams - Practice Squad

Justice Cunningham - Practice Squad

 

I'll reserve judgement until we know how Rayford plays out and what we get in return.  If he plays well, though, I just hope that we're compensated accordingly.

 

 

 

...And what if Cam Johnson turns out to be an all-pro? Since we essentially just swapped one for the other, will that alleviate your pain and anguish over an undrafted guy who more than likely will never turn out to be more than a backup? People are blowing this way out of proportion considering none of us knew who the guy was 6 weeks ago. 

[ColtsFanMikeC]

I think Cam is a much better fit for our defense.

 

Rayford showed glimpses of pass-rush skills against back-ups (sometimes back-ups' back-ups).  He never looked good to me against the run, and never really looked like he new what was going on in coverage (IMO).  I would not feel comfortable at all if we ever had to use Rayford on anything other than 3rd and long on pure pass-rush.  If we needed him to come in as an every down LB (knock wood that our starters will stay healthy), I think that we'd be doomed.

 

Cam has some real season NFL experience, he can rush the passer and from what I am reading about him, he seems much more solid as an overall LB.  I still hope he doesn't have to see the field much, but I would be a lot more comfortable with Cam than Caesar if we had an injury or 2 and needed to count on a guy as a multiple down LB .

 

Also, with Werner and Mathis on the roster, I think that Rayford was at best our 3rd best OLB (Walden might be better, if healthy maybe Sidbury) for pure pass-rush anyway, so I don't think we would have seen a whole lot of him even in blitz packages. 

[aliveon2legs]

...And what if Cam Johnson turns out to be an all-pro? Since we essentially just swapped one for the other, will that alleviate your pain and anguish over an undrafted guy who more than likely will never turn out to be more than a backup? People are blowing this way out of proportion considering none of us knew who the guy was 6 weeks ago. 

 

My anguish?  Did you even read what I posted?  I just want the Colts to be compensated accordingly and will reserve judgement until that is known.  I'm simply pointing out that it's faulty logic to think that because you traded a guy for someone that was drafted higher, you're automatically getting the better player, which seems to be the logic a lot of people are spouting in this thread.

 

The Johnson trade and Rayford trade can each be evaluated on their own merits.  One does not have anything to do with the other, in that sense.

[jvan1973]

This is the kind of stuff they are saying on the cowboys.com forum.

Posted

Today, 10:19 PM

From what I have read surfing around. This guy is a match up nightmare with his combination of speed, reach, size, and motor. For a conditional 2015 draft pick, we may have gotten a steal here.

You Think !!!!

yeah, the guy was so awesome it took him until grigs pulled him from the arena league at 27 years old , to get a shot at playing in the nfl

indeed

[Balzer40]

My anguish?  Did you even read what I posted?  I just want the Colts to be compensated accordingly and will reserve judgement until that is known.  I'm simply pointing out that it's faulty logic to trade one guy for a guy that was drafted (or drafted higher) and assume that you're getting the better player, which seems to be the logic a lot of people are spouting in this thread.

 

The Johnson trade and Rayford trade can each be evaluated on their own merits.  One does not have anything to do with the other, in that sense.

 

 

 

Jeff Saturday don't have anything to do with this either, but you used him as an example in your post. Nobody and I mean NOBODY knew Saturday was going to turn out the way he did. The biggest majority of UDFA's turn out to be utterly useless. So when 1 of the very small percentage of those that do turn out good, it's not really a logical argument to use on why you shouldn't trade them away.

[jvan1973]

My anguish? Did you even read what I posted? I just want the Colts to be compensated accordingly and will reserve judgement until that is known. I'm simply pointing out that it's faulty logic to think that because you traded a guy for someone that was drafted higher, you're automatically getting the better player, which seems to be the logic a lot of people are spouting in this thread.

The Johnson trade and Rayford trade can each be evaluated on their own merits. One does not have anything to do with the other, in that sense.

you do realize every team in the league has had an opportunity to sign rayford from the afl for several years now and grigs is the only one to do it. He got compensation and a younger player out of the deal. Seems like a no brainer

[aliveon2legs]

Jeff Saturday don't have anything to do with this either, but you used him as an example in your post. Nobody and I mean NOBODY knew Saturday was going to turn out the way he did. The biggest majority of UDFA's turn out to be utterly useless. So when 1 of the very small percentage of those that do turn out good, it's not really a logical argument to use on why you shouldn't trade them away.

 

I used Saturday to prove a point that it's ridiculous to suggest that trading a guy for another guy that was a higher pick is a great move.  I could have chosen from thousands of examples of that.  It's faulty logic and has everything to do with much of what has been posted in this thread.

 

And again, I NEVER said that we "shouldn't trade him away".  Those are YOUR words.  I said that I just want to make sure that we're compensated fairly.

 

Make sense?

[aliveon2legs]

you do realize every team in the league has had an opportunity to sign rayford from the afl for several years now and grigs is the only one to do it. He got compensation and a younger player out of the deal. Seems like a no brainer

 

And you could have said the same thing had we traded away Saturday after his first pre-season.  We don't even know what compensation we're getting for Rayford.  How can that be judged as a victory?

[jvan1973]

And you could have said the same thing had we traded away Saturday after his first pre-season. We don't even know what compensation we're getting for Rayford. How can that be judged as a victory?

i was unaware Saturday was 27 his first year in the nfl

[NewEra]

So we swapped Johnson for rayford. One guy being much older, the other projected as a 2nd rounder. Dropped due to the cell thing. Sounds like a win. Grigson never sleeps.

[aliveon2legs]

i was unaware Saturday was 27 his first year in the nfl

 

Age is irrelevant to my point.  Rayford has several years of youth left that he can play at a high level, IF he's capable of playing at a high level.  IF that turns out to be the case, I just hope that we're compensated accordingly.  Why is that so hard to understand?

[Balzer40]

I used Saturday to prove a point that it's ridiculous to suggest that trading a guy for another guy that was a higher pick is a great move.  I could have chosen from thousands of examples of that.  It's faulty logic and has everything to do with much of what has been posted in this thread.

 

And again, I NEVER said that we "shouldn't trade him away".  Those are YOUR words.  I said that I just want to make sure that we're compensated fairly.

 

Make sense?

 

 

 

Whenever any trade is made, there is NEVER a guarantee on who is getting the better deal. It's a gamble, were getting a pick either way and Rayford could be sacking groceries in 6 months for all we know. Just because the dude had a decent preseason against 3rd string nobodies doesn't mean he's going to do anything against the big boys. 

[Malakai432]

This board falls in love with mediocre players, and builds them up to be superstars faster than anything I've ever seen.

Fans: Polian make a trade!!!!!!

Two years later.

Fans: Grigson stop making trades!!!!!!

Wake me when a player of consequence leaves our roster for next to nothing, and I'll start to worry about Grigs trading. People are acting like the season hinged on this guy.

Relax. Our core is solid. We are also lucky enough to have a front office right now, who is determined to keep us a competitive team in all phases. We are fine.

 

[Dark Superman]

I was shocked by this trade at first and wasn't very happy..

But I dont see these guys on a everyday basis..

I'm confident we made the right decision.

Or atleast I hope..

[jvan1973]

Age is irrelevant to my point. Rayford has several years of youth left that he can play at a high level, IF he's capable of playing at a high level. IF that turns out to be the case, I just hope that we're compensated accordingly. Why is that so hard to understand?

he won't have a monster year this year. So if we get a sixth its a win. If he has a break out year four years from now, it won't matter anyway

[jvan1973]

Whenever any trade is made, there is NEVER a guarantee on who is getting the better deal. It's a gamble, were getting a pick either way and Rayford could be sacking groceries in 6 months for all we know. Just because the dude had a decent preseason against 3rd string nobodies doesn't mean he's going to do anything against the big boys.

Jon Chick anyone

[Superman]

I've seen this logic posted several times in this thread, and it's just... illogical.

 

Jeff Saturday was an undrafted free agent.  Should we have traded him for a 6'th or 7'th round pick after his first pre-season and said, 'Yay, we turned and undrafted free agent into a draft pick!!!'?

 

Robert Mathis was a 6'th round pick.  I'm sure there was a point where we could have easily turned him into a #1 overall pick by trading him for Jamarcus Russell.  Would that have been a big upgrade?

 

Once a guy has made it to the NFL, how he got there is completely irrelevant.  Don't misunderstand me, I'm not opposed to this conditional trade, if the conditions are right.  If Rayford tallies up 20 sacks over the next 2 years and all we get is another 6'th or 7'th round pick, I'm going to be pretty agitated. We got shafted on the Shipley trade, imo.  Okay, so what could we get in return with a 6'th or 7'th rounder?  Well, here is Grigson's brief history with those rounds:

 

LaVon Brazill - Serving 4 game suspension after multiple incidents with substance abuse

Justin Anderson - Injured Reserve

Chandler Harnish - Practice Squad

John Boyett - Arrested, Cut

Kerwynn Williams - Practice Squad

Justice Cunningham - Practice Squad

 

I'll reserve judgement until we know how Rayford plays out and what we get in return.  If he plays well, though, I just hope that we're compensated accordingly.

 

I didn't say it was a great move. I just said that we turned nothing into something. A UDFA costs you nothing but a roster spot and a small signing bonus, and we turned him into a draft pick. If he goes on to star, then we'll reevaluate, but as of right now, that's an upgrade in value. (I actually didn't realize this was a 2015 pick, so I'm less bearish on the upgrade now, but still, that's what my point was.)

 

As for Rayford, I like him as an underdog "I'm here now!" kind of prospect, and he made some plays in preseason, but I don't think he's that good of a player. He really didn't beat any blockers, he used his length to create trouble. And that's fine, because length can't be taught, but to my untrained eyes, there's nothing special about Rayford. And I'd be saying that even if he was a mid round draft pick instead of a UDFA.

 

If he becomes something more than just a deep reserve / special teamer, then I think we can talk about the Jeff Saturday angle, a guy who won a starting job in camp and held on to that job for over a decade. For now, all he is is a deep reserve / special teamer, and to me (again, my untrained eye, lest anyone thing I'm asserting myself as some kind of expert), he's just nothing to get too upset over.

 

And end of the day, I figure the Colts had Rayford at the bottom of the roster, so he might have been cut sooner rather than later. That's the only way moving him for a conditional pick in 2015 makes a whole lot of sense. 

[Doomsday]

Cowboy fan here.

 

First off, this is a trade for a fringe roster player in all likelyhood, so nobody should get too upset or too excited about it.

 

Beyond that, it really is a trade that makes sense for both teams.

 

The Colts traded a guy who cost them nothing and showed a little something rushing the passer in the pre-season.  Rayford was probably never going to stick on the Colts roster because frankly, he doesn't have the quickness or the lateral movement skills to play OLB in a 34 defense.  He just doesn't.  He's too long to change directions very well.

 

What Indy did was get a guy from San Francisco that was better suited to the duties of a 34 OLB.  Someone who can drop and cover as well as rush the QB.  He's a better fit for you guys.  It makes perfect football sense.

 

Rayford, on the other hand, is a better fit at DE in Dallas' 43 scheme.  He doesn't have to drop into coverage like he would in Indy.  In Kiffin and Marinelli's defense, he can pin his ears back, and play the run on the way to the QB... which suits his physical skills much better than what he'd be doing for the Colts.  So, while he would be a liability in some aspects in your defense, the Cowboys defense plays mainly to his strengths.

 

So, good move for your front office and a good move for Dallas' front office.  A win-win situation, as they like to say.

 

Either way, Cam probably won't see the field much in Indy and Rayford probably won't see the field much in Dallas, so, as happens so often on Pro Football message boards... this seems to be a case of much ado about nothing.

 

Good luck this year guys... I absolutely love your new QB and envy you for being able to get him.

[jvan1973]

Cowboy fan here.

First off, this is a trade for a fringe roster player in all likelyhood, so nobody should get too upset or too excited about it.

Beyond that, it really is a trade that makes sense for both teams.

The Colts traded a guy who cost them nothing and showed a little something rushing the passer in the pre-season. Rayford was probably never going to stick on the Colts roster because frankly, he doesn't have the quickness or the lateral movement skills to play OLB in a 34 defense. He just doesn't. He's too long to change directions very well.

What Indy did was get a guy from San Francisco that was better suited to the duties of a 34 OLB. Someone who can drop and cover as well as rush the QB. He's a better fit for you guys. It makes perfect football sense.

Rayford, on the other hand, is a better fit at DE in Dallas' 43 scheme. He doesn't have to drop into coverage like he would in Indy. In Kiffin and Marinelli's defense, he can pin his ears back, and play the run on the way to the QB... which suits his physical skills much better than what he'd be doing for the Colts. So, while he would be a liability in some aspects in your defense, the Cowboys defense plays mainly to his strengths.

So, good move for your front office and a good move for Dallas' front office. A win-win situation, as they like to say.

Either way, Cam probably won't see the field much in Indy and Rayford probably won't see the field much in Dallas, so, as happens so often on Pro Football message boards... this seems to be a case of much ado about nothing.

Good luck this year guys... I absolutely love your new QB and envy you for being able to get him.

this is exactly right

[Balzer40]

Cowboy fan here.

 

First off, this is a trade for a fringe roster player in all likelyhood, so nobody should get too upset or too excited about it.

 

Beyond that, it really is a trade that makes sense for both teams.

 

The Colts traded a guy who cost them nothing and showed a little something rushing the passer in the pre-season.  Rayford was probably never going to stick on the Colts roster because frankly, he doesn't have the quickness or the lateral movement skills to play OLB in a 34 defense.  He just doesn't.  He's too long to change directions very well.

 

What Indy did was get a guy from San Francisco that was better suited to the duties of a 34 OLB.  Someone who can drop and cover as well as rush the QB.  He's a better fit for you guys.  It makes perfect football sense.

 

Rayford, on the other hand, is a better fit at DE in Dallas' 43 scheme.  He doesn't have to drop into coverage like he would in Indy.  In Kiffin and Marinelli's defense, he can pin his ears back, and play the run on the way to the QB... which suits his physical skills much better than what he'd be doing for the Colts.  So, while he would be a liability in some aspects in your defense, the Cowboys defense plays mainly to his strengths.

 

So, good move for your front office and a good move for Dallas' front office.  A win-win situation, as they like to say.

 

Either way, Cam probably won't see the field much in Indy and Rayford probably won't see the field much in Dallas, so, as happens so often on Pro Football message boards... this seems to be a case of much ado about nothing.

 

Good luck this year guys... I absolutely love your new QB and envy you for being able to get him.

 

 

 

Thanks for the reasonable and well thought out post, but good luck trying to explain to people here about scheme fit. It is something largely ignored by many here.

[Doomsday]

Thanks for the reasonable and well thought out post, but good luck trying to explain to people here about scheme fit. It is something largely ignored by many here.

 

 

Thanks man.

 

That is pretty much universal, I believe.  On the message board I frequent, I spent half the summer trying to tell people that Anthony Spencer (6-4, 265) is way too big to play OLB in Monte Kiffin's Tampa 2 4-3 defense.  They just couldn't grasp that Demarcus Ware at 6-5, 260 was an OLB last year and that this year we needed OLB's that are 6-1, 230.

 

It was frustrating to say the least.

[Gavin]

Good pick up for the Cowboys, I liked Rayford as a pure pass rusher, In that respect he could develop into a pass rushing nightmare but every time he would have potentially been subbed in teams would have been foolish to NOT do the ole "run at Rayford he cant stop it"....just like what teams did some in the preseason, Cam is stronger and more disciplined, Not the athletic freak that Rayford appeared to be but plenty of room to grow as a player, There was a couple instances where Rayford did hold contain so maybe they could have developed him. Its a clear statement that we are serious about holding contain responsibilities even at the expense of having pass rushing freaks on on our team, If we can continue to get pressure up the middle from our ILB's when it comes time to pass rush (I loved what I saw in Harvey in regards to that)and hold contain then we will be good with that but our Linebackers have to not flow sideline to sideline as hard as they do, if your able go back to the Bengals game, there was several instances of what proper run contain is suppoed to look like from a Linebacker perspective

[crazycolt1]

Ryan Grigson is trigger happy on trades.

I think he wakes up everyday thinking 'Who can I trade/Trade for today'?

After years of no moves from Polian, Grigson can almost frustrate you by never stopping.

After years of having a less than average defense? The years of a less than average running game after Edge left? After years of having one of the most pitiful special teams in the NFL?  Years of the whole Colts team riding on Mannings back? No thank you. We have seen the results of not going after players and I am glad the Colts have an active GM.

[buccolts]

@KBowenColts: The Colts have signed tight end Dominique Jones to the 53-man active roster. TE-Justice Cunningham has been signed to the practice squad

 

Now that's funny.

[jameszeigler834]

I have seen people that have raw talent like he does not do anything at all he earned the right to be on the roster and a 2015 conditional pick sorry not worth it bad trade grigson.

[jameszeigler834]

I saw him play 2 games this preseason and he was moving really well getting really low and going right around OT so I don't know where your getting this but it is incorrect.

[jvan1973]

I have seen people that have raw talent like he does not do anything at all he earned the right to be on the roster and a 2015 conditional pick sorry not worth it bad trade grigson.

[Gavin]

Now that's funny.

good move, Jones is a much better blocker at this point in his career and thats what we really need to help out with the O Line, Cunningham clearly did not know who to block out there(missed assignments) on more then a few occasions, He did make some good blocks but there was alot more bad ones

[MR. Blueblood]

I'm shocked there was even a forum left to come to after this trade, I figured it would have completely  by now.

 

I'm just waiting for them to break in with a special news bulletin that Grigson's house is surrounded by 

[jameszeigler834]

Also he was playing the run well too that's also incorrect. bad trade.