Rams talk contract with Fisk/Jackson, RFAs resigned

[tomahawk247]

Rams | Team talking contract with G. Jackson
Thu, 27 Apr 2006 20:52:10 -0700

Jim Thomas, of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, reports the St. Louis Rams have held contract talks with free agent DL Grady Jackson (Packers). Signing him probably wouldn't affect the team's NFL Draft plans.


Rams | Team talking contract with Fisk
Thu, 27 Apr 2006 20:51:51 -0700

Jim Thomas, of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, reports the St. Louis Rams have held contract talks with free agent DL Jason Fisk (Browns). Signing him probably wouldn't affect the team's NFL Draft plans.

Rams | B. Green re-signed
Thu, 27 Apr 2006 20:55:12 -0700

Jim Thomas, of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, reports the St. Louis Rams have re-signed restricted free agent DE Brandon Green (Rams) to his one-year, $721,600 tender offer.

Rams | Contract update: K. Curtis
Thu, 27 Apr 2006 15:22:20 -0700

St. Louis Rams WR Kevin Curtis signed his one-year, $1.573 million tender offer to remain with the team.


Rams | Contract update: S. McDonald
Thu, 27 Apr 2006 15:21:32 -0700

St. Louis Rams WR Shaun McDonald signed his one-year, $721,600 tender offer to remain with the team.


Rams | Contract update: D. Groce
Thu, 27 Apr 2006 15:19:09 -0700

St. Louis Rams CB DeJuan Groce signed his one-year, $721,600 tender offer to remain with the team.

[tomahawk247]

Possibilities of signing both Fisk and Jackson? That would give us some very good depth at DT, and also allow us to play a 3-4, since fisk is an experienced NT in that alignment, and Jackson is big enough.

[RealRam]

Interesting. Signing BOTH Fisk and Jackson WILL PROBABLY NOT affect draft plans?!? hone: What!

[majorram]

Interesting. Signing BOTH Fisk and Jackson WILL PROBABLY NOT affect draft plans?!? hone: What!

Agree Realram... hhmmmm I surpose you can never have too many Good DT's in your rotation... Kennedy, Glover, Jackson, Fisk, Bunkley...yep I'm liking that

If they come cheap get them both signed....


steve:clanram:

[Varg6]

I'd like to see them with horns on this year, I hope if we do sign they it doesn't lead to even more of a "lets get Cutler!" idea

[RAMMAN68]

If they are both signed I don't see a need to draft a DT in the first round. IMO a first round pick should be someone who will make an immediate impact. I can't see paying a player first round money to be a back-up. I would rather see them take a DB or LB in the first.

[txramsfan]

Hear me out for a moment. Just a moment. Too me, the first round is all about the BPA. Why? First round is the blue chipper, the long term guy. Rounds 2-4 to me are the immediate impact players. Players who have talent but not maybe the blue chipper type of pedigree. Round 5-7 are take a flyer rounds.

So, IMO, I would take whoever has the most upside no matter what position in the first round. You never know when Bulger may take that one hit that makes him a mall walker. Then, you take your LB's and O lineman in the second.

[Goldenfleece]

Hear me out for a moment. Just a moment. Too me, the first round is all about the BPA. Why? First round is the blue chipper, the long term guy. Rounds 2-4 to me are the immediate impact players. Players who have talent but not maybe the blue chipper type of pedigree. Round 5-7 are take a flyer rounds.

So, IMO, I would take whoever has the most upside no matter what position in the first round. You never know when Bulger may take that one hit that makes him a mall walker. Then, you take your LB's and O lineman in the second.

I can understand that perspective, but I don't believe BPA all the way is a good philosophy. If it were true that players of the same level of talent came out at each position equally when you looked at the numbers over time, you might say it averaged out over time, but 1) the talent isn't divided evenly over all positions and 2) you can't wait for the averages to work out when putting together a football team. I believe that BPA and need have to work on a sliding scale:

So in the first round it's maybe 75:25 (talent:need), second and third round it's maybe 60:40 or whatever, and the late rounds you just take anyone you think can contribute...but I don't think you can make the call without at least thinking about what it's going to do for your team. Like you said, this is the blue chipper, so what would make the team best over the longhaul? Would having a team full of blue chip receivers because they represented good player value be productive? Ask the Lions. That's a perfect example of BPA gone wrong. Even if their receivers were playing like Arizona's young guys, it would be a poor waste of resources. Would having a Pro Bowl QB and a first round QB really improve your team? Ask the Chargers. That's a big chunk of the team's salary cap that has been just holding the clipboard. The bottom line to me is that part of a player's value will always be what he can do for your team.

[theodus69]

O-line , O-line,O-line. that's all I got to say. well maybe not but that's all I got to say .:tongue:

[supachump]

You never know when Bulger may take that one hit that makes him a mall walker.

hahaha

LOL

[RAM-BO]

I don't know much about fisk but I hear that he is a beast.