Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

7-1 Rams Trade for Von Miller


Mr.Debonair
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, runthepost said:

Chiefs get Robinson and Mack for piece of Mahomes hair and DNA

 

I would gladly buy low on Allen Robinson for the Colts and give up a 3rd rounder if the Bears want to part with him. They are not going anywhere anyways. Then re-structure a bunch of contracts and Robinson's as well before the trade.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only somewhat related to this thread.

Up to date (prior to trade) odds to make the playoffs.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/upshot/nfl-playoff-picture.html

 

Maybe I'm missing something, but I was looking at the odds of making it to the Superbowl and noticed that all AFC teams add up to 51% and all NFC teams add up to 61%.   Shouldn't they both be at 100% total?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are they going to put SoFi Stadium up for trade, too?

 

Talk about putting all the chips on the table.  It reminds me a bit of what Huizenga did with the Marlins many years ago -- and what various NBA franchises have done (Heat, Lakers, etc).

 

I feel like that's a riskier proposition in the NFL, though.  The Pats won 6 Lombardis in the span of about 20 years, which is simply unbelievable in a league designed for parity.  And they didn't do it by betting the farm on a short-term window.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Makes sense for both teams.

 

Von is 32 and the Broncos have some work to do to rebuild that team. They are .500 right now but not close to being a serious contender so it's better to get something for Von now, imo.

 

The Rams already went all in and are continuing to do so. They have a great opportunity to win the Superbowl over the next couple years (that will quickly close once some of the star power fades) so they might as well do what they can now to make it happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, luv_pony_express said:

Are they going to put SoFi Stadium up for trade, too?

 

Talk about putting all the chips on the table.  It reminds me a bit of what Huizenga did with the Marlins many years ago -- and what various NBA franchises have done (Heat, Lakers, etc).

 

I feel like that's a riskier proposition in the NFL, though.  The Pats won 6 Lombardis in the span of about 20 years, which is simply unbelievable in a league designed for parity.  And they didn't do it by betting the farm on a short-term window.

The Patriots had the greatest QB ever. Time to stop using them as an example 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Myles said:

Only somewhat related to this thread.

Up to date (prior to trade) odds to make the playoffs.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/upshot/nfl-playoff-picture.html

 

Maybe I'm missing something, but I was looking at the odds of making it to the Superbowl and noticed that all AFC teams add up to 51% and all NFC teams add up to 61%.   Shouldn't they both be at 100% total?

 

 

Add the NFC up again as I get right around 50% rather than 61%. If I'm correct , it does add up to 100% as you are also counting the less than 1% teams as 1%.

Also , these odds are not betting site odds as those would add up to around 130-140% . Reason for that is the bookmakers have big vigorish in theses type bets.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, luv_pony_express said:

I feel like that's a riskier proposition in the NFL, though.  The Pats won 6 Lombardis in the span of about 20 years, which is simply unbelievable in a league designed for parity.  And they didn't do it by betting the farm on a short-term window.

 

It is like pushing the problem to the future with the short term compromise that draft picks are not as valuable in the future as much as the short window of winning right now. Heck, for a franchise, that hasn't won a SB since the 1999 season (Rams), and our franchise that hasn't won since 2006, if you feel like you have a stacked team, it is worth taking the risks.

 

Broncos fans, a lot of them still remember the 2015 SB they won with Peyton and all those free agents in Talib, Ware, T J Ward, Sanders etc. that came there to win a ring. They will make that tradeoff for 10 years without playoffs, IMO. Consistent winning happens based on the window you have with your QB and if it is just 2-3 years, you act accordingly like Elway did then, Les Snead is doing it now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Myles said:

Only somewhat related to this thread.

Up to date (prior to trade) odds to make the playoffs.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/upshot/nfl-playoff-picture.html

 

Maybe I'm missing something, but I was looking at the odds of making it to the Superbowl and noticed that all AFC teams add up to 51% and all NFC teams add up to 61%.   Shouldn't they both be at 100% total?

I think its based off an average from a lot of computer simulations.  It should be close but the sum may not be 100 like that 

 

There is probably some rounding in there that we dont see 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nesjan3 said:

Lol id love to see Ballard and the Rams GM in a debate about team building philosophy. Ballard preaching we will get there one day, delayed gratification. Rams GM were going to get there today screw the draft.

Les Snead has been the Rams GM is 2012.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, JediXMan said:

 

Broncos are paying 9mil out of 9.7 mil. They got fleeced lol.

Nah, final year of deal, plus pretty unlikely to make any noise. And even more so, the 2nd round and 3rd round pick are big, worth eating cost.

 

 

3 hours ago, Myles said:

Only somewhat related to this thread.

Up to date (prior to trade) odds to make the playoffs.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/upshot/nfl-playoff-picture.html

 

Maybe I'm missing something, but I was looking at the odds of making it to the Superbowl and noticed that all AFC teams add up to 51% and all NFC teams add up to 61%.   Shouldn't they both be at 100% total?

Nahh, since you go to remember it is chance to win SB. So it is 112% but many teams are less than 1% so in reality it isnt an actual 112% but 98/99% with 12 teams less than 1% total chance, also some other roundings

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Mr.Debonair said:

The Patriots had the greatest QB ever. Time to stop using them as an example 

 

Actually, that was kinda my point -- or, at least, part of it.

 

They won all those rings -- over an extended period of time (that's key here) -- not by blowing the bank on all-star teams, but by building around a strong core.  And I don't think it's unfair to say that Brady was that core.

 

But how many super-duper blockbuster trades can you remember them making?

 

If you don't like that example, go back to the Cowboys/Viking trade for Herschel Walker.  It was the Vikings who gave up the farm for Walker...it was the Cowboys who ended up winning 3 Super Bowls in the years following.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, chad72 said:

 

It is like pushing the problem to the future with the short term compromise that draft picks are not as valuable in the future as much as the short window of winning right now. Heck, for a franchise, that hasn't won a SB since the 1999 season (Rams), and our franchise that hasn't won since 2006, if you feel like you have a stacked team, it is worth taking the risks.

 

Broncos fans, a lot of them still remember the 2015 SB they won with Peyton and all those free agents in Talib, Ware, T J Ward, Sanders etc. that came there to win a ring. They will make that tradeoff for 10 years without playoffs, IMO. Consistent winning happens based on the window you have with your QB and if it is just 2-3 years, you act accordingly like Elway did then, Les Snead is doing it now.

 

But what if it doesn't happen?  That's what I mean when I say that this seems risky for the NFL as compared to MLB and NBA.

 

I'm not saying it can't produce a winner.  But....it better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, luv_pony_express said:

 

But what if it doesn't happen?  That's what I mean when I say that this seems risky for the NFL as compared to MLB and NBA.

 

I'm not saying it can't produce a winner.  But....it better.

 

Rather swing to miss than not swing at all. It almost did happen for the Jaguars who went all in and it got them to the 2017 AFCCG. The REASON it did not happen, they did not have an elite QB, thank you Bortles. IF you believe you have the elite QB and lots of quality players on your roster, there is nothing wrong with the "go all in" approach. Stafford plus Ramsey plus Donald and so many other pieces on the Rams squad makes them feel they are very close. Both the HC and GM have to be on board, most importantly.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like what the Rams do. They gave up 2 lower 1st round picks for Ramsey, both of those picks busted for the Jags and he's a superstar. They gave up 2 picks for Stafford, the Rams can win it all with him, the Lions will end up with two bottom of the 1st round picks and a horrible QB.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

These are the kinds of moves I would have liked to see more in the Peyton Manning era by one Bill Polian rather then saving a 2nd-3rd round pick to bring in the next Ben Ijalana, Idrees Bashir or Quinn Pitcock.  

 

Personally think that, in general, these draft picks (especially mid round) are way overvalued by teams. 

 

We traded Marshall Faulk for what amounted to Mike Peterson and Brad Scioli.  Tell me on what planet that is anywhere close to an equal swap of talent?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, chad72 said:

 

Rather swing to miss than not swing at all. It almost did happen for the Jaguars who went all in and it got them to the 2017 AFCCG. The REASON it did not happen, they did not have an elite QB, thank you Bortles. IF you believe you have the elite QB and lots of quality players on your roster, there is nothing wrong with the "go all in" approach. Stafford plus Ramsey plus Donald and so many other pieces on the Rams squad makes them feel they are very close. Both the HC and GM have to be on board, most importantly.

 

Of course there’s something wrong with it, if it doesn’t pan out.  How has Jax fared?  How have the Texans fared?

 

I’m all for swinging bats.  And it’s true that Miller didn’t cost them a bunch.  But if you go for all the marbles like this and miss, you could find yourself wandering the wilderness for a while.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every years at least half of the 1st rounders bust, and much more or the second, and even more of the third rounders do. Salary cap is the only issue, and the Bronco's are paying 85% of his salary. The late George Allen build the Redskins by trading away draft picks for proven players, it just makes sense.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, DougDew said:

When you've got an elite team, those drafted college players have a harder time making any contribution and even have more problems making the roster.  Draft picks do become less valuable to an elite team than to a rebuilding team. 

Its like what Bruce Arians said about the bucs last draft. Cant remember the exact quote but something along the lines of "it doesnt matter, our team is so good none of those rookies will be playing". That bucs team was built pretty fast too. We had a chance at Brady and Stafford, but here we are with wild Wentz and fully dependent on the draft picks becoming studs. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...