Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 29
  1. #1
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,491
    Rep Power
    167

    I didn't think Rodger Saffold was likely to be traded, until...

    Despite the initial reports from Saffold's agent that Rodger would oppose moving to the right side...

    Despite the recent revelation that Saffold has not been returning calls...

    I really didn't think there was much chance at all that the Rams would trade Saffold.

    The reason? From the Rams' perspective, Saffold is a highly cost effective player for 2013, and yet probably would not yield more than a Day 3 selection in the trade market.

    From Saffold's perspective, he's in no position to become an overt malcontent and force a trade on the eve of his potential FA payday.

    So, looking at the "signs," I didn't see any real foreshadowing of a trade.

    That is, until today.

    Today, the Rams apparently signed Chris Williams, a likely back-up swing OG/OT, to a one year deal worth as much as $2.75M.

    That's more than 4 times Saffold's 2013 of $655K. Even if his base is the veteran's minimum, and that's all he receives, that would mean Williams would be paid $855,000 ($200K more than Saffold).

    Now, while I can certainly would not expect the Rams to consider how Saffold would react when they were recruiting Jake Long, who is clearly a superior player, I find it difficult to believe that they would sign Williams for that much more $ without considering how it might impact Saffold's state of mind.

    Perhaps the Rams have had their fill of Saffold's ambivalence and are ready to move on by taking a guy like D.J. Fluker in Round 1, or one of the several OG/RT prospects that should be there in Round 2.

    I have to say, I'm warming to the idea. One addage I've repeatedly heard is that OLs that play together year after year tend to become better units. That makes perfect sense, and does not reconcile with the notion of Saffold sticking around for one more year before jumping to some team that is willing to overpay for a veteral OT in the FA market.

    Maybe I'm reading this all wrong...

    Maybe not.
    Last edited by AvengerRam; -04-01-2013 at 02:58 PM.


  2. #2
    Rammed's Avatar
    Rammed is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    403
    Rep Power
    8

    Re: I didn't think Rodger Saffold was likely to be traded, until...

    I completely agree but only if we remove the name Saffold with Dahl. I think this is a move where Dahl gets cut and Mikell and Smith get brought in. Drafting Fluker seems very likely in this scenario as guard. Moving him outside next year when Saffold is FA.

  3. #3
    laram0's Avatar
    laram0 is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Age
    57
    Posts
    9,153
    Rep Power
    107

    Re: I didn't think Rodger Saffold was likely to be traded, until...

    Quote Originally Posted by Rammed View Post
    I completely agree but only if we remove the name Saffold with Dahl. I think this is a move where Dahl gets cut and Mikell and Smith get brought in. Drafting Fluker seems very likely in this scenario as guard. Moving him outside next year when Saffold is FA.
    Harvey Dahl gets cut? Why?

  4. #4
    Rammed's Avatar
    Rammed is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    403
    Rep Power
    8

    Re: I didn't think Rodger Saffold was likely to be traded, until...

    Quote Originally Posted by laram0 View Post
    Harvey Dahl gets cut? Why?
    Injuries, hefty capnumber plus an old guy not brought in by this regime. Could see him being cut when that opens up space for the two mentioned above. Especially as they might think a guard or tackle will be there when drafting that they like.

  5. #5
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,491
    Rep Power
    167

    Re: I didn't think Rodger Saffold was likely to be traded, until...

    Quote Originally Posted by Rammed View Post
    I completely agree but only if we remove the name Saffold with Dahl. I think this is a move where Dahl gets cut and Mikell and Smith get brought in. Drafting Fluker seems very likely in this scenario as guard. Moving him outside next year when Saffold is FA.
    That really does not make much sense, as I see it. Dahl was probably our most consistent OL last year, and his price (around $4M). Why create a hole where you already have a quality player?

    Staying on the topic, anyone think I'm reading the tea leaves correctly on Saffold?

  6. #6
    Rammed's Avatar
    Rammed is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    403
    Rep Power
    8

    Re: I didn't think Rodger Saffold was likely to be traded, until...

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    Staying on the topic, anyone think I'm reading the tea leaves correctly on Saffold?
    No, I think he stays and plays out his contract. Might hurt his ego a little but it's business and I think both parties know this. I do however have a feeling there might be mutations along the OL

  7. #7
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,300
    Rep Power
    153

    Re: I didn't think Rodger Saffold was likely to be traded, until...

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    Staying on the topic, anyone think I'm reading the tea leaves correctly on Saffold?
    Perhaps. I suspect the escalators in Williams' deal that take it up to the top dollar value likely deal with the playing time that Williams may be able to see if Saffold holds out or is traded. He very likely is insurance in the event that Saffold isn't here in 2013.

  8. #8
    Rambos's Avatar
    Rambos is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Cali
    Age
    50
    Posts
    8,956
    Rep Power
    74

    Re: I didn't think Rodger Saffold was likely to be traded, until...

    What do you think we could get for him? The guy has been hurt a lot and is in his last year of his rookie contract. I don't see a sign and trade with his injuries. I don't think we could get more then a 4th myself and if that's the case. Why not keep him one more year like you said, he is a highly cost effective player for 2013. Heck when you look at all the one year FA deals out there it might make more sense to get a starter on the cheap, while we develop someone behind him.

  9. #9
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,491
    Rep Power
    167

    Re: I didn't think Rodger Saffold was likely to be traded, until...

    I think he'd get us a 4th or 5th round pick.

    The reason to make the move now, as I noted above, is continuity. If the Rams were, for example, to draft Fluker and plug him in at RT, and then give the LG job to Williams or Watkins, they could be in a position to have the same starting 5 for the next 2-3 years. If Saffold starts, it will likely be a one and done proposition.

  10. #10
    TheBritishRam's Avatar
    TheBritishRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Oxford
    Age
    26
    Posts
    1,139
    Rep Power
    31

    Re: I didn't think Rodger Saffold was likely to be traded, until...

    I think it's more a reaction to Turner signing with the Titans. Fisher wants some veteran depth on the O line and that's what Williams brings. Hell, I don't think this evens guarantees him a place on the roster come September

  11. #11
    MauiRam's Avatar
    MauiRam is offline Pro Bowl Ram
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Maui, Hi.
    Age
    70
    Posts
    4,785
    Rep Power
    79

    Re: I didn't think Rodger Saffold was likely to be traded, until...

    Quote Originally Posted by TheBritishRam View Post
    I think it's more a reaction to Turner signing with the Titans. Fisher wants some veteran depth on the O line and that's what Williams brings. Hell, I don't think this evens guarantees him a place on the roster come September
    Rams re-signed G/T Chris Williams to a one-year contract.

    The deal is worth "up to" $2.75 million, but Williams' base salary should be near the veteran's minimum. The former first-round bust appeared in six games between the Rams and Bears last season, playing 88 snaps. He won't be guaranteed a roster spot. Apr 1 - 1:49 PM
    Source: Adam Schefter on Twitter

  12. #12
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,491
    Rep Power
    167

    Re: I didn't think Rodger Saffold was likely to be traded, until...

    The fact that he's not guaranteed a roster spot (which is true for most players) is not really relevant to my point.

    If he is on the roster, no matter how much he plays, and even if his base is the veteran's minimum, he would still be paid at least $200K more than Saffold.

    Take this a step further. Three of our starting OL: Long, Dahl and Wells, will make a lot more than Saffold will this year. If the Rams have a rookie/1st round pick starter at the other OG spot, that player would make a lot more than Saffold.

    The only potential starter on the OL who could make less than Saffold is Rok Watkins.

    I just wonder if the combination of the move to RT, along with this dynamic, may be more than Saffold's ego (as stroked by his Grima Wormtongue agent) can take.

  13. #13
    mde8352gorams's Avatar
    mde8352gorams is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Age
    61
    Posts
    1,679
    Rep Power
    19

    Re: I didn't think Rodger Saffold was likely to be traded, until...

    I just posted on the Draft & FA Board that Roger may go in a trade based on the visit of Terron Armstead. Granted pre-draft visits are frequently smoke screens, but I hadn't read about the Williams deal until this thread. If you're going to trade Saffold, now is the time as he has a low cost contract. I think his value is better than a 4th or 5th rounder. Remember, has played LT and there are quite a few teams looking for that valuable spot. Take a team like the Lions, they would probably love to not have spend their #5 pick on a LT when they have so many other needs. The other point about Saffold he was considered a first round value that was taken in the 2nd round. If he's healthy and its likely he is, he could fetch a 2nd or 3rd round pick based largely on the position he plays. Look at what Alex Smith got the *****. I know, he's a QB, but LT's are not far behind in terms of value.

    As for the comment about cutting Harvey Dahl, he may get restructured if he's not cut. He is valuable based on his play, but we need the $ to sign players. Plus I heard Jeff Fisher is singing, "I'm going to wash those Dahls right outta my hair"

    Go Rams!

  14. #14
    Rambos's Avatar
    Rambos is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Cali
    Age
    50
    Posts
    8,956
    Rep Power
    74

    Re: I didn't think Rodger Saffold was likely to be traded, until...

    I can see why he is not a happy camper, but that's the business. His agent should be telling him you need to go in and put your best season together. Then we can test free agency.

    My fears is he does not show up to OTAs and drags this fit into camp. If we start seeing those signs Fisher will cut ties with him I'm sure. They need to find out where his head is before the draft.

  15. #15
    general counsel's Avatar
    general counsel is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    atlanta, georgia
    Age
    52
    Posts
    5,514
    Rep Power
    80

    Re: I didn't think Rodger Saffold was likely to be traded, until...

    I think this signing is about optionality and depth, nothing more and nothing less. It's too early to tell what will happen with Saffold. The question of his attitude is up in the air. The question of his market value is up in the air. If a team makes an offer of a third rounder, i think saffold is gone for sure. We may or may not draft fluker, he may or may not be available or there may be something better available. This signing fills a need and gives us greater flexibility as we evaluate various personnel moves and how those moves impact each other.

    Ramming speed to all

    general counsel


Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Rodger Saffold
    By ZiaRam in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: -03-19-2013, 01:33 AM
  2. Rodger Saffold to ask for Trade?
    By sosa39rams in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: -03-13-2013, 06:50 PM
  3. Rodger Saffold recovery?
    By mcpeepants232003 in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: -10-09-2012, 12:20 AM
  4. Rodger Saffold limited in practice... but practices!
    By tomahawk247 in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: -09-12-2012, 08:54 PM
  5. Any news on Rodger Saffold??
    By RAMarkable in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: -10-17-2011, 08:21 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •