clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Did the Rams get fleeced in their trade with the Titans?

New, comments
Kirby Lee-USA TODAY Sports

The Los Angeles Rams made a big splash in the draft by trading to the very top. All it cost them was this year's first, two second round picks, a third round pick as well as 2017's first round pick and third round pick. The Rams did receive more than the first pick overall, they also received this year's fourth and sixth round picks. By jumping to the first overall pick, the Rams now have their choice of quarterback between North Dakota State's Carson Wentz and Cal's Jared Goff.

Owners of the second pick overall are the Cleveland Browns. They have a new head coach. New head coaches generally bring along their own quarterback in the draft when the possibility exists, and it exists. This is why the Rams vaulted to the very top.

Yet, exactly how do we know just how fleeced the Rams got? We need a second point of reference to be able to compare and contrast. All we need to do is go back to a few years to 2012. There is have something common between the two trades, the Rams and Browns are involved once again.

Déjà vu!

In 2012, we see a similar feat play out in 2016, the race for the quarterback. Andrew Luck and RGIII are the top quarterback talents in 2012. The Rams already drafted a potential franchise quarterback in 2010 in Sam Bradford and owners of the second pick overall. Cleveland had Colt McCoy and Seneca Wallace in 2011. It was obvious the Browns needed a quarterback. The Washington Redskins denied the Browns of that opportunity to draft RGIII (although it is bittersweet to see RGIII in a Browns' uniform).

Washington gave up the 6th overall (first round), 39th overall (second round), a first round pick in 2013, and a first round pick in 2014 in exchange for the second overall pick held by the Rams.

Common Metric

Now how exactly do we compare these trades such that we are comparing apples to apples? Simple, we are going to use the Meers table. The table is not an exact science, but it utilizes an extensive amount of data based upon Pro Football References' Career Appoximate Value (CAV) and transposed that to the draft selection. Here is the link to Kevin Meers' research:  How to Value NFL Draft Picks.

Allow me to explain the chart. The red line represents the Dallas Cowboys' trade chart draft pick value. The blue squiggly line that looks as though it were measuring the aftershocks from a massive earthquake, well, that is the plotting of players' CAV% in respect to that draft selection - meaning they type of value a player you draft at that particular selection can possible have. The black, thin line is a cleaner version of the seismic movement of the Blue line. It is that black, thin line where Meers, the guy who did all this research, created a new table away from the Dallas Cowboys' trade chart.

Comparing trades

There is a caveat to the comparison: we know where the picks from 2012 are now, but we do not know where exactly they will be for this current trade between the Rams and the Titans. So just like most draft pundits who predict a mock two years down the line, I will use similar picks for this comparison. Also note, there will usually be an overpayment in trades. In comparing the two trades, we are going to compare the differentials.

Rams - Redskins Trade, 2012
Meers Value
Rams Receive Redskins Receive
Year Round Pick Meers Value Round Pick Meers Value
2012 1 6 342.4 1 2 435.7
2 39 164.1
2013 1 22 232.1
2014 1 2 435.7
Total 1174.3 435.7
Differential 738.6

What made this differential so high was the fact the Redskins ended up giving away the second overall pick.

Rams-Titans Max Value

Rams - Titans Trade, 2016
Meers Value - MAX VALUE
Titans Receive Rams Receive
Year Round Pick Meers Value Round Pick Meers Value
2016 1 15 264.7 1 1 494.6
2 43 157.5
2 45 154.3
3 76 116.4
4 113 86
6 177 50.4
2017 1 1 494.6
3 65 128
Total 1315.5 631
Differential 684.5

So at Max value, the deal is under the value of what Redskins gave up.  Still, that is a very high value to give up.

Rams-Titans Min Value

Rams - Titans Trade, 2016
Meers Value - MIN VALUE
Titans Receive Rams Receive
Year Round Pick Meers Value Round Pick Meers Value
2016 1 15 264.7 1 1 494.6
2 43 157.5
2 45 154.3
3 76 116.4
4 113 86
6 177 50.4
2017 1 32 200.3
3 96 98.6
Total 991.8 631
Differential 360.8

That is a much lower value traded. Essentially, it is an extra first round pick, ninth overall, to swap picks from 15th to 1st overall. That would be cheap if the Rams won it all in 2016.

Rams-Titans Middle Value

Rams - Titans Trade, 2016
Meers Value
Titans Receive Rams Receive
Year Round Pick Meers Value Round Pick Meers Value
2016 1 15 264.7 1 1 494.6
2 43 157.5
2 45 154.3
3 76 116.4
4 113 86
6 177 50.4
2017 1 15 264.7
3 76 116.4
Total 1074 631
Differential 443

443 value points is equivalent to the second overall pick.

Conclusion

Washington moved up four spots for 738.6 value difference. The Rams moved up 14 spots, with a max value of 684.5 and minimum of 360.8, except the Rams jumped to the first pick overall. Maybe it is just me, but I think the Rams made out like bandits from a numbers point of view of jumping 14 spots to the first overall pick while giving up less than what the Redskins gave up to move up four spots. Oh, and the Browns simply have terrible luck.

Per Jump Spot Value
2012 v 2016 Trade up into top two spots
Trade Overpayment Jump Spot "per jump spot" VALUE
2012 Rams - Redskins 738.6 4 184.65
2016 Titans - Rams (MAX) 684.5 14 48.89
2016 Titans - Rams (Middle) 443 14 31.64
2016 Titans - Rams (Min) 360.8 14 25.77

What does this article have to do with Bucs Nation? It could give us fans a glimpse of what cost it might take to jump up higher than 9th overall and the cost may not be as much.