The Follies of Free Agency
by Eric Nagel on Mar 9, 2010 5:13 PM CST
in 2010 St. Louis Rams offseason
Email
PrintI don't know what you think, but in my eyes, it has been a rough week since free agency started for the Rams.
First of all, we learned that the Rams decided to semi-tender O.J. Atogwe. We haven't heard much news from that story recently, but if it turns out their isn't much interest for him, the Rams either have to get a long-term deal done (doesn't seem that likely, considering they've only had two years to do it) or they will keep him for another year before he probably jumps ship. Any loyalty bonus the Rams might have had was probably lost when reports came in that the Rams were looking at Brodney Pool.
Second, we have the lack of activity in the free agency. The Rams have been thought to be under a guise of "don't spend any of the new guy's money." I'm sure the Rams new owner is well aware about the costs of buying a football team and while I wouldn't expect the Rams to spend like it's going out of style, Mr. Khan probably wouldn't mind if they found somebody who wasn't drafted below the 6th round. I also find it funny to think that many think of Kyle Boller 2.0 as a "veteran of the offensive system," the Rams employ when the OC only has one year of experience. It's obvious Pat Shurmur (among other coaches) knows A.J, and A.J. can probably fill in the holes in his playbook memory quickly, but they aren't the same.
Fred Robbins seems like a good rotation tackle and a decent pickup. But the Rams might lose both James Hall and Leonard Little to the Saints (or another team, such as the Panthers). They'd hope to bring him back, but they've said the same thing about Atogwe and that situation has already made many scratch their heads.
Besides the two pickups, the Rams have been relatively silent. One thing I've thought about quite a bit is what would have happened if Darren Sproles hit the market. If he had come for a visit, I highly suspect the Rams wouldn't have let him leave without at least seeing a contract. But the Rams have let players that could have helped them slip away. There is no sense in throwing money away (Nate Burleson, Julius Peppers, Dunta Robinson). But players like Aaron Kampman (who signed a four year, 26 million dollar deal with 11 million guaranteed) could really help the Rams out.
I think the problem (at least with me) is that I'm hoping the Rams hit a home run in free agency. You don't need to snag Julius Peppers for a bajillion dollars a year, but retain the players who should be retained (Daniel Fells- hello?) and try and add one or two worthwhile players in free agency (Robbins could fit the bill here, but the Rams need more then just him).
It's all well and good to build through the draft; that how the good teams do it. But it isn't a sin to find help through trades and free agents. You don't need the scorched-Earth-Scott-Linehan approach to free agency to be successful.
Above all, make it count. If this draft doesn't pan out, it's game over for the coaching staff.
31 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
The only things that I disapprove of
are the Atogwe and Fells situations.
The Rams are right not to jump headfirst into the pool because overpaying for B and C-list free agents hamstrings the Rams when the owners and PA strike up a new deal. Aaron Kampman is heading into his age 31 season with a questionable knee. He would be a pretty good player for the Rams in 2010, but would be a tremendous waste in the likely event of no football in 2011.
Unless the Rams are a Kampman away from reaching the Super Bowl, they need to slow their roll and wait for later in the spring.
Whats wrong with Atogwe?
I think they’re doing a good thing there. Rams aren’t out anything by letting him test his market value.
yeah the only problem i could see someone having with the atogwe situation
is that you feel for the guy cuz he could have had a big deal last year but we just franchised him and now he’s not gonna get paid.
but that’s the business
Atogwe
Wait isn’t it if a team really wanted him they could offer him a big contract and then the Rams could match the offer or let him go to that team if I understand it correctly and if that is the case then he could get paid but apparently no other team wants to pay him big money
it seems
From what I have seen, it looks like it Atogwe doesn’t sign the tender by June 1st (which he won’t) The Rams can release him or sign him to the $7 million deal.
I would imagine they work out a long term deal in the mean-time.
So, any way you look at it Atogwe is going to get paid.
Future Redbirds! www.futureredbirds.net
Rams Gab! www.ramsgab.com
now he’s not gonna get paid?
Oh I think he’ll make millions per year, no doubt. Hard to feel for the guy when he has more money than 99.999% of the people on Earth.
by CoachConnors on Mar 10, 2010 8:36 AM CST up reply actions
Atogwe will stay in St. Louis
No way the brain trust lets him go unless someone pays a heap for his talent. He is not worth a 6-7 mill contract a year and my guess is no one will cough that up. We sign him for a more reasonable number.
Fells is not our long term answer as we need receiving skills at the position. We have no threat out of the position know so focusing on a better option should be the goal.
the reasoning for atogwe's tender
is the Rams know that no one is going to overpay for Atogwe. (If someone does, then fine, they can can have him). They wait for someone to make an offer to Atogwe, and they match it, in hopes that the deal is a lot lower than what Atogwe and his agent might try to squeeze out of the rams if it was a direct contract negotiation
btw i know this might be a few days late
but i remember reading something about Bulger to the Cardinals if we let him go? i forget where, i think it might have been on espn rumors (in which case, disregard this entire post immediately)
I agree most of the high priced free agents would not have
been worth the price for the Rams. However, I continue to maintain they should have gone after Chester Taylor to back up SJ and give him more rest than he got last year. I heard Devaney one night on radio say he was afraid every game last year that SJ would get hurt since we didn’t have a decent backup RB. Why didn’t he take care of that by signing Taylor if he was so worried about it? We can’t fill all the holes on the team through the draft this year.
I think I said it somewhere else
but do you really think Taylor would have signed with the Rams over the Bears.
He’ll be the #1 running back in Chicago. He’d have been the #2 running back behind an absolute workhorse in St. Louis.
Why would he sign in St. Louis? For more money? That’s the only plausible reason I could think of. But for how much more money?
Nevertheless, it’s not as if the Rams didn’t try to acquire another running back at the start of free agency. They had Sproles all lined up to visit Rams Park (where there’s about a 95% chance he would have signed with the Rams that day…barring some catastrophe). Unfortunately, the Chargers changed tune when they found out which was hours before Taylor landed in Chicago to sign his deal.
Taylor had his mind made up about Chicago before San Diego pulled Sproles out from under the Rams. There really was no chance for the Rams to get into a bidding war with the Bears for Taylor since he was already signed.
It always amazes me when people just assume a GM can do anything they want. If they want Player A, then Player A has no choice but to sign with that team. Forget taking into consideration there are 31 other GMs who might want Player A and the fact that maybe Player A sees one team as a better fit or more attractive sitaution.
Who cares about that stuff. Just sign him.
Life is tough, but it's tougher if you're stupid.
- John Wayne
this is a deep draft for RBs
and I think you can find competent running backs without having to dole out big dollars. Tackle Box, your point about Taylor’s role in St. Louis is spot on, IMO. I think that’s an issue the Rams are going to face with some of the free agency possibilities at RB, what few there really were.
Turf Show Times
by Ryan Van Bibber on Mar 10, 2010 8:38 AM CST up reply actions
I'm not just assuming the Rams could have signed Taylor.
I find that statement very offensive. I do not go off the deep end, nor do I make crazy statements. To me the statement that doesn’t fit reality is that Sproles would have signed with the Rams. He wants to be a starter, or at least in a 1 and 1a situation. He knows SJ is the starter in St. Louis and the best he would see is 20% to 25% of the plays. I think it is very unlikely he would have signed with the Rams. We heard they had him scheduled to come in for a visit, but how many other teams also had visits scheduled with him? And why didn’t the Rams have a backup plan in case something happened with Sproles? Once San Diego pulled him back, we should have immediately gotten with the other decent RBs out there and scheduled one or two of them to come in instead of sitting on our hands and saying “we tried”?
Why do you assume Taylor will be the starter is Chicago? They do still have Forte, and he has been very good except for some of last year. By no means does Taylor have the starting job in Chicago locked up.
My point is that the Rams needed to get a decent backup to SJ. Devaney said he was very worried about that issue. There were several decent running backs out there, but we got none of them. So we say we will fill it through the draft. Let’s see, we need a backup RB, a QB, a DE, a DT, two OLBs, a TE and more. We can’t possibly fill all of them with quality players through the draft this year. Why aren’t we filling a couple of them with decent FAs? That’s my point.
FAs that schedule "visits" to other teams the morning of the Free Agency period's first day
aren’t going there to take a tour. 99 times out of 100 they’re going to put ink to paper. So, that’s how I can assume Sproles was ready to sign. Why would he sign to not be the number 1? I’m not sure. But it would be the best type of role for him.
As for the whole “you assuming Taylor would sign”, I was referencing this comment.
Why didn’t he take care of that by signing Taylor if he was so worried about it?
Sounds to me like you’re saying “just sign him”. I don’t know….maybe I’m wrong.
Besides, Taylor was in Chicago and signed had his contract signed by 8 am Central time.
Anyway, Taylor will be the feature back in Chicago. Matt Forte is serviceable but he can’t carry the load and shouldn’t be the feature back. Plus, when it gets right down to it, Taylor is the superior running back. He’s not going to be the next Steven Jackson in terms of workload there, but he’ll be the starter and #1 back with Forte being the compliment.
Life is tough, but it's tougher if you're stupid.
- John Wayne
If you say so.
I’ll be interested to see how it works in for the Bears.
What I was saying was that the Rams made on effort to get Taylor, Thomas Jones or any of the other RBs after San Diego pulled Sproles back. It was like they didn’t have a backup plan. I’m surprised you say Taylor was signed early on the first day of the free agency period, since it seems to me no such signing was announced last Friday. Show me if I’m wrong and I’ll admit you are right on that point.
The real issue is that we can’t fill all the holes on our roster from this year’s draft, so why not try to fill some of the non-starter roles in FA? We did fill two spots that way, but why not RB also?
Maybe they still will?
Not to butt in but, to be fair, no body signed Thomas Jones yet. Maybe he’s asking too much. Maybe the Rams are negotiating with his agent even as we speak. Who can tell.
by CoachConnors on Mar 10, 2010 3:22 PM CST up reply actions
Here's the Taylor link
Courtesy of Windy City Gridiron.
I know Jones signed with KC today (or last night), and honestly he was one I was definitely interested in, but as far as “quality” RBs, I simply don’t see any out there right now. Westbrook and Tomlinson are still available, but I’m not really interested in them. Heck, I didn’t think Tomlinson would be intersted in a backup role anyway but it looks to me that a lack of interest has changed his mind.
Guys will still shake lose once the draft is over. I think in this offseason (no cap), that’s not a bad place to find something of value.
Life is tough, but it's tougher if you're stupid.
- John Wayne
I haven't thought about Derek Anderson in at least 2 years
and I don’t really plan on thinking about him in the near future.
Life is tough, but it's tougher if you're stupid.
- John Wayne
What "Souts Inc." thinks of Derek Anderson
“His arm strength is far and away his best attribute. Anderson doesn’t put enough touch on his underneath throws and overall, isn’t particularly accurate. When bodies are falling around him, his downfield focus is often compromised and he doesn’t do well when the play doesn’t go to script.”
And
“He is also a terrible athlete for the position with heavy feet and the inability to avoid rushers. In his defense, Anderson’s receivers did not help his cause in 2008.”
Wow – I can’t remember ever hearing that someone is “a terrible athlete for the position” before!
by CoachConnors on Mar 10, 2010 11:44 AM CST up reply actions
Atogwe
I like O.J. too and hope he doesn’t leave.
My best guess is they have been trying to work on a long term contract for a couple of years now and haven’t been able to bet one done. Maybe the FO figured they would tender him at the lowest offer thus not scaring other teams off by the higher tender and then let the other teams to the contract negotiations for them. I’m sure his agent thinks he’s worth X and the FO thinks Y. They sort of let him test the market and when nothing pans out at X they smile (as do we) and sign him long term for Y.
Also it isn’t like he won’t get paid. I thought I read that eventhough they tendered him at the lowest level his salary would still be 110% of what it was last year. Not sure if I read that correctly or not though.
I also agree with the other readers in that we are not a Kampman away from winning so why bother shelling out the dough to get the guy. Sproles would have been great IMO but he never became available. All in all I don’t think this is a very exciting FA class. So keep the $ and use them to sign all the picks and get them in camp.
Kampman
I liked the idea of pursuing Kampman too, but why spend that kind of money on a 30-year-old who, though still good, is past his prime? Once again, I think they have options to find a guy in the draft to groom for a big role on the DL and get the prime years out of the guy.
Turf Show Times
by Ryan Van Bibber on Mar 10, 2010 8:40 AM CST reply actions
Not to mention he'll be spending the first year recovering from injury
Usually takes a year before you’re all the way back, assuming you do actually come all the way back
by CoachConnors on Mar 10, 2010 8:56 AM CST up reply actions
can someone please elaborate a little on how the tender situation works?
How long does that tender stick for? or can it be changed at a later date?
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Turf Show Times
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
