Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Just How Good Is Steven Jackson (Too good to keep?)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Just How Good Is Steven Jackson (Too good to keep?)

    Right now, Steven Jackson is 3rd in the NFL in rushing yards and 2nd in yards from scrimmage. Alone, those numbers are impressive. But, when considered in the context of the lack of playmakers around Jackson, they are downright amazing. I think one could safely argue that Jackson is one of the top 5 skill position players in football today.

    He is only 26, so he should have another 3-4 years of "prime" play (absent an injury). He is signed for that period, so the Rams can keep him if they wish.

    It is inevitable, however, that the question will arise this offseason: should the Rams consider trading Jackson?

    The argument in favor of trading him is certainly compelling. Does it make sense to put all the team's eggs in Jackson's basket, or should they try to "cash in" the asset for multiple players/draft choices (See the Hershel Walker trade).

    The argument against trading Jackson is equally compelling. There is no guarantee that draft choices will pan out (See the Eric Dickerson trade), while Jackson is a known commodity that can be the foundation to build around.

    If it were my decision, I'd publicly state that Jackson will not be traded, but leave a phone line open. Everyone has a price, after all.

    My price? It would have to be a combination of an established RB, and either: (a) a top-half of the first round pick + a 3rd round pick, or (b) a bottom-half of the first round pick + a 2nd round pick.

    Ironically, the team most likely to offer such a deal might be the hated Patriots. They have been stockpiling picks for years, and could offer the picks desired along with a guy like Lawrence Maroney. If the Patriots fail to make it back to, at a minimum, the AFC Championship game, I could see them making a bold move to get a guy like Jackson.

    Whatever happens, though, Jackson is a big key to the Rams' future.
    Last edited by AvengerRam_old; -10-29-2009, 08:46 AM.

  • #2
    Re: Just How Good Is Steven Jackson (Too good to keep?)

    I think I'm of a similar mind to you - if our goal were to maximize the odds the Rams win a SB in the next 10 years, I think a trade would do that. Jackson is amazing, but like you said he's got only 3-4 years left. And we're probably not going to be a SB contender in that time frame. A trade helps us rebuild. 4 years from now we'd probably have 2-3 additional starters in their prime because of it.

    But there are a lot of other considerations. Publicity, for one - would it hurt season tickets to get rid of our only star? Also, how would our current players feel about it? Would free agents want to come to a team that has proved it will trade its best player, even when that player has played his heart out for you?

    In the end, like you said everybody has a price. I just hope our threshold for a trade is a high one.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Just How Good Is Steven Jackson (Too good to keep?)

      Originally posted by AvengerRam View Post
      Right now, Steven Jackson is 3rd in the NFL in rushing yards and 2nd in yards from scrimmage. Alone, those numbers are impressive. But, when considered in the context of the lack of playmakers around Jackson, they are downright amazing. I think one could safely argue that Jackson is one of the top 5 skill position players in football today.
      Originally posted by AvengerRam View Post
      The argument against trading Jackson is equally compelling. There is no guarantee that draft choices will pan out (See the Eric Dickerson trade), while Jackson is a known commodity that can be the foundation to build around.

      I think that's just it. What are the odds of getting someone of that caliber in return for Jackson? There are how many players in the nfl, and only a small handful who can be in the same argument as Jackson. Our odds of failing to reach his equal are far greater than achieving that.

      And without Jackson, we really have nothing left to build around on offense. Having Jackson in our backfield will ultimately speed up the rebuilding process, because he'll make the players around him better. He'll take pressure off our QB, whoever that may be in the future, and he'll open up the receiving game. We need Jackson now more than ever, because without him we have zero chance of winning games.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Just How Good Is Steven Jackson (Too good to keep?)

        If I thought we were miles away from winning I would consider a Jackson trade but... I think we are just missing a couple of pieces to the puzzle and Spags just needs a little more time to get his system into play.

        We haven't won a game this year Ram how can you say we are close?

        I offer the Titans and the Dolphins as exhibit A and B. Two teams that changed very little but have drastically different records than last year.

        But Ram learning a new system shouldn't make that big of a difference?

        Exhibit C would be the fact that Bill Belichick took over the Patriots in 2000 and coached them to a losing record. They then won the Superbowl the next year.

        I'm not suggesting we are going to win it all next year but I just think we are in a great position to build on solid ground instead of trying to find the answers in desperate moves.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Just How Good Is Steven Jackson (Too good to keep?)

          Interesting thread Av, this is a scenario that could quite easily play out if this trend of losing continues. SJ is getting no younger and could very well be tempted to join a contender. I believe SJ on a good team, would be unstoppable. Whether this would benefit the Rams depends on the front office. Who, as of today, I am losing confidence in!
          :|
          Last edited by GroundDog39; -10-29-2009, 12:46 PM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Just How Good Is Steven Jackson (Too good to keep?)

            Unless we're made an offer we can't refuse Jackson stays in the Horns.
            sigpic :ram::helmet:

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Just How Good Is Steven Jackson (Too good to keep?)

              I look at it this way: I don't really care what the Rams record is in 2010, I don't see them making the playoffs and I'm not focusing my decisions on making the playoffs in 2010. They (unofficially) wiped this season off as a rebuilding year and I think 2010 will be that as well but 8-8 is still a possibility. The franchise is going young to build for 2011, 2012 and beyond. With your eye on 2011, does keeping Jackson versus trading him make the playoffs easier to attain? If you can get 4 draft picks over the next 3 years versus having a guy who will be 29 when you need him, I'm thinking trade.

              JMO but keeping him means you think the team is very close to the playoffs. Let's be serious, they are 0-7 and have lost 17 in a row. They have lost their games this year by an average margin of over 21 points. This team isn't a step or two away from the playoffs. They need a QB, WR, DT, DE, SLB, WLB, TE. Adding RB to the list of needs doesn't make it easier but if it means adding 4 draft picks, it might make it easier.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Just How Good Is Steven Jackson (Too good to keep?)

                In Denmark we have a saying: It is better to have one bird in the hand than 10 on the roof.

                I am all for keeping Jackson. In the NFL big change can happen fast both to the good and/or to the worse. Just look at the Broncos and Titans this year.

                If our O is going to work we need Jackson so that our young WR's gets room because defences have to focus on Jackson.

                If we want to reduce the time where the opponents can rack points up against our D and keep games closer so that we at least have a small chance of winning, we need Jackson to run for us and grind the clock. Jackson seems to be one of the few RB's in the league that can run even when defenses but everything in the box, just like Jacobs can do for the giants.

                And last but not least, how big are the chances that high draft pick will become quality players? Lets say we get 3 good pick the probability that 2 of them are busts is high. So we might get one good player in exchange for Jackson, and thats not even a sure thing. I don't think it is worth the risk.

                So I think we should keep the one elite player we have and build our team around him.

                In my opinion we should rather discuss if he should be used less this year to make his career with us last longer.

                Go Rams!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Just How Good Is Steven Jackson (Too good to keep?)

                  Originally posted by clarasDK View Post
                  In Denmark we have a saying: It is better to have one bird in the hand than 10 on the roof.

                  I am all for keeping Jackson. In the NFL big change can happen fast both to the good and/or to the worse. Just look at the Broncos and Titans this year.

                  If our O is going to work we need Jackson so that our young WR's gets room because defences have to focus on Jackson.

                  If we want to reduce the time where the opponents can rack points up against our D and keep games closer so that we at least have a small chance of winning, we need Jackson to run for us and grind the clock. Jackson seems to be one of the few RB's in the league that can run even when defenses but everything in the box, just like Jacobs can do for the giants.

                  And last but not least, how big are the chances that high draft pick will become quality players? Lets say we get 3 good pick the probability that 2 of them are busts is high. So we might get one good player in exchange for Jackson, and thats not even a sure thing. I don't think it is worth the risk.

                  So I think we should keep the one elite player we have and build our team around him.

                  In my opinion we should rather discuss if he should be used less this year to make his career with us last longer.

                  Go Rams!
                  Agreed, trading Jackson is not an option.

                  After Peterson he is the best RB in the league period....Never know how DPs pan out. Jackson has to be what we build around

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Just How Good Is Steven Jackson (Too good to keep?)

                    Originally posted by 3STL9 View Post
                    Jackson has to be what we build around
                    Are you building around Jackson or are you building around Jackson with the goal of replacing him when everything else is in place? By the time this franchise is re-built it's 2011. Are we still expecting him to be the same player?

                    I don't believe he'll be traded because the salary cap hit next year would be prohibitive. Assuming they sign some sort of one-year salary cap agreement. I can't believe the players association would allow a lone cap free season for teams to dump all their veterans before a potential walk out.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Just How Good Is Steven Jackson (Too good to keep?)

                      Originally posted by 3STL9 View Post
                      Agreed, trading Jackson is not an option.
                      Agree. You wouldn't get anywhere close to what he's worth in return.


                      You think we're bad now? Trade that guy. Then see, that it can get much, much worse.

                      He gives us a chance to compete with anyone we play, during the rebuild. (obviously, the turnovers and penalties by the O MUST stop before this can happen) He's a very unique talent. One this team can't do without, currently. You build around that, not use it for high-stakes roullette
                      Last edited by #39 Fan; -10-29-2009, 01:16 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Just How Good Is Steven Jackson (Too good to keep?)

                        Was LT too good to keep?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Just How Good Is Steven Jackson (Too good to keep?)

                          Originally posted by rams4life88 View Post
                          Was LT too good to keep?
                          Well, one could argue that the Chargers would have been better off trading him two years ago and keeping Turner...

                          As for the notion that trading Jackson is "not an option," I think that's an overstatement. I'm not sure if any player (certainly any non-QB) is too valuable to trade. It just depends on the price.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Just How Good Is Steven Jackson (Too good to keep?)

                            I said it other threads about SJ trade it make no sense, unless teams is going to give you a pair of 1’s and other player or picks. I don’t think they will he is the only star player the rams has the face of the team. As I try to get though this season he is one of a small list of players I am proud of. My boys can say the rams sucks I say yes but we got SJ then they give me pound. What’s in the best interests of the team I wish I knew but Devaney don't think trading Jackson is.


                            I can't begin to tell you how dumb it would have been to trade Jackson. Devaney has repeatedly said publicly that the notion of trading away his star running back was too asinine to even dignify with a comment.
                            Last edited by eldfan; -10-29-2009, 03:26 PM.
                            :ramlogo:

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Just How Good Is Steven Jackson (Too good to keep?)

                              The problem with trading him (in my mind) is that roughly you have to take a $12 million cap hit. I'd rather the Rams spend that $12 million on 3 young free agents who have a known skill base.

                              Comment

                              Related Topics

                              Collapse

                              • Bralidore(RAMMODE)
                                Trading Steven Jackson
                                by Bralidore(RAMMODE)
                                Now im aware im about to catch a huge amount of verbal abuse for this post but i ask the reader to hear me out. Steven Jackson is a great runningback currently in this league i think we can all agree there. My point is this. The rams are a rebuilding team. By the time we get to the point where we want to be as an organization, the way sjax is running now and being used, he'll be old and tired. If we traded sjax now we could get some first round picks are some other big names in free agency. Remember the story of jimmy johnson and the cowboys, we can no longer afford one good player and the everyone else sucks. We need stars all over the roster and guys for the future. Id appreciate your thoughts
                                -12-06-2009, 02:58 PM
                              • sosa39rams
                                Steven Jackson
                                by sosa39rams
                                Some say he has lost a step, he is slower, he goes down to easily, and just isn't the same back that he used to be. If this is true, shouldn't we go out and acquire a new back? Well, none of us can prove that this is true.

                                Anyways, he isn't doing great this season. I am not too sure whether its him or the porous play by the offensive line; specifically Adam Goldberg.

                                So here is my question. Do you guys think we should trade him? He will be a free agent in a few seasons, and is only decreasing year after year. I am not too sure where I stand on this topic but in a couple years we will probably get nothing for SJAX. I would prefer to keep him though. He is the soul and heart of this team, and has done tons for this organization.

                                Also, what offers do you guys believe we would get? I'd assume somewhere like 2nd-4th ...most likely being a 3rd.
                                Y
                                12.50%
                                8
                                No
                                87.50%
                                56
                                -11-28-2010, 08:44 PM
                              • sosa39rams
                                Rams Tried Trading Jackson
                                by sosa39rams
                                Last year the Rams offered Steven Jackson to the Packers.

                                "St. Louis tried trading running back Steven Jackson to the Packers last year for a seventh-round draft choice, but Thompson didn't want to assume his contract."

                                Position-by-position: Running backs - Packers' rookie RBs expected to carry the load

                                Interesting to think that SJ was only worth a 7th rounder, not even (due to his contract). I thought we'd be able to get a 3rd/4th for him at least. I guess this goes to show how badly Fisher wants a committee approach, and I approve of one. Not even Adrian Peterson is great at all parts of the game. For most of his career he did not play 3rd downs (Chester Taylor and Toby Gerhart did) because he is not a good receiver and wasn't a great blocker/blitz pickup back either. You have a few guys who all excel in different areas so why not use them accordingly?

                                Stacy is a tough and thick in between the tackles runner, he's a goal-line back and probably someone out there on 3rd downs. DRich is a talented runner with juice who is well rounded; a guy you want to give the ball in space. Pead is the best receiving back and most explosive runner. Ganaway is a pure bruiser. Use them and make them successful in the way that you use them.
                                -07-21-2013, 07:21 AM
                              • BEER
                                Why,why,why, did we not trade Jackson?
                                by BEER
                                I said three years ago we needed to trade Jackson for the reason of worth. Now I see I was wrong. The reason, our Gm, Vp, Hc, dont know how to pull in talent. It sucks that jackson could have had a superbowl or superbowl chance with someone else. I hope that when he does go elsewhere he does get the ring he deserves. I was hated on then for posting we need to trade him and let him move on back then, o well, lets see if a new regime can change our bad habits. Rams moving forward, I hate to look back.
                                -12-28-2011, 05:48 PM
                              • r8rh8rmike
                                Burwell: Jackson Rumors Remain Just That
                                by r8rh8rmike
                                Burwell: Jackson rumors remain just that

                                1 hour ago • BY BRYAN BURWELL • Post-Dispatch Sports Columnist

                                Regardless of the sport, it's so easy to grasp at the gossip that swirls all over the place in the final hours before any trade deadline and regard it as gospel. Too often, though, the chatter is as unsubstantial as cheesecloth.

                                With the NFL's midseason trade deadline extended by 48 hours to Thursday afternoon, that leaves us 48 extra hours to ponder the silly idea that the Rams have placed Pro Bowl running back Steven Jackson on the trading block and can't wait to dump him on anyone who calls.

                                Well, technically, Jackson is on the trade block.

                                Then again, who in the NFL isn't available?

                                All it takes is a phone call. All it takes is one panting general manager or overexcited coach not all that concerned about price being an object, and a deal could be done before lunch time. And that's not just for Jackson, but for Robert Griffin III, Eli Manning, Megatron or for that matter, a wild night out on the town with The Gronk.

                                If someone's willing to pay — or more accurately, overpay— then you, too, can be the proud owner of anything on your most outlandish wish list.

                                But now let's talk a little reality.

                                Neither the Jackson rumor nor any of those other fantasy-league daydreams are coming true, at least not any time in the near future.

                                Yes, the rumors are flying, and that means there have been conversations by a lot of teams about Jackson, most notably the running-back-starved Green Bay Packers. But wanting something and being ready, willing and able to pay for something are two entirely different things. It's the difference between dizzy dreams and stone-sober reality.

                                Dream: I want a mansion on a lavish golf course in Hawaii.

                                Reality: Public course. Coupons. Twilight rate.

                                It's what you can afford, or more accurately, what you're willing to pay that determines trades. And right now the only way Jackson is gone before that trade deadline is if the Rams desperately want him out of here at any cost, and that just doesn't seem to be the case. This isn't fantasy football, despite all the goofy fantasy-sports conversations that are dominating the public discourse on the blogosphere. Don't tell me you have to let him go if someone comes up with a first- or second-round draft pick in trade, because that's never going to happen.

                                Smart organizations don't give up high draft picks for 29-year-old running backs whose contracts are on the verge of expiring. I'm not sure that dumb organizations will do that, either. So that means no matter how many teams are calling — or how many smoke signals the Rams have subtly or not so subtly sent out that Jackson is available for the right price — he's worth far more to the Rams than the teams pursuing him.
                                ...
                                -10-30-2012, 11:37 AM
                              Working...
                              X