Originally Posted by sherck (Post 62463)

I think a lot of guys are getting hung up on the "3 year rebuild" thing.

In 2017, as bad as the team played, we lost 6 games by 7 points or less.

1 point loss
3 point loss
3 point loss
4 point loss
6 point loss
7 point loss

If we would have had one player different in 2017 (Andew Luck instead of Jacoby Brissett), how many of those games do you think we would have won?

Just swap out QBs and play the exact same team. How many?

Just by adding Luck back into the mix (along with Hooker, Wilson, Anderson, a healthy Kelly and hopefully a healthy Mewhort) move the needle a TON even without a single draftee.

Sure, we may be 3 years away from being competitive with winning the SB, but I could easily see a 10 win season in 2018 if Luck comes back strong, we draft well and Ballard can fill in with some cap cut veterans prior to the regular season.

I really don't think we are only going to be a 4 or 6 win team next year.

Walk Worthy,

Originally Posted by sherck (Post 62467)

Quote from MMQB by Rams GM Les Snead:

That is the road we are looking at, Freaks.

Walk Worthy,

Originally Posted by rm1369 (Post 62468)

I’m not sure I get the same thing as you do from that exchange. The parts you leave out are:

Me: “You’ve basically looked at draft choices as tools in the toolbox. That's how I kind of look at your thing: You’re not wedded to your draft picks.”

Snead: “Right. You should be my interpreter.”

That sounds like the opposite of what Ballard has been preaching. Yes Snead says they made th RG3 trade and built a core, but other than that he’s devaluing draft picks. “.......you have to really look at what historically draft picks bring you in reality over time...” I assume you are referencing the building the core. The trade down from 3, etc. I agree with that, but I’ve heard nothing from Ballard to indicate he thinks draft picks are over valued. Quite the opposite.

Originally Posted by sherck (Post 62463)

I think a lot of guys are getting hung up on the "3 year rebuild" thing.

In 2017, as bad as the team played, we lost 6 games by 7 points or less.

1 point loss
3 point loss
3 point loss
4 point loss
6 point loss
7 point loss

If we would have had one player different in 2017 (Andew Luck instead of Jacoby Brissett), how many of those games do you think we would have won?

Just swap out QBs and play the exact same team. How many?

Just by adding Luck back into the mix (along with Hooker, Wilson, Anderson, a healthy Kelly and hopefully a healthy Mewhort) move the needle a TON even without a single draftee.

Sure, we may be 3 years away from being competitive with winning the SB, but I could easily see a 10 win season in 2018 if Luck comes back strong, we draft well and Ballard can fill in with some cap cut veterans prior to the regular season.

I really don't think we are only going to be a 4 or 6 win team next year.

Walk Worthy,

Originally Posted by sherck (Post 62470)

You make a good point.

I was focused on the "build through the draft, add free agent pieces to contend" part of the interview rather than the latter.

However, honestly, trading a draft pick for the "right" veteran in terms of what they will bring to the team and their cap hits does not really devalue the draft pick; it just changes how it is used.

I dont' see Ballard being big into trading picks but I do see him as someone who, when the time is right, will spend big on free agents whom he things are the "right" guy.

We will see. I think we will be a winning team inside of 3 years (in 2018, personally), and I think we will use the first part of free agency in the future when we are closer to contending.

But now? Yeah, I want holes filled and Ballard has a different plan than how I wanted it to be. I need to get over it.

Walk Worthy,

Originally Posted by rm1369 (Post 62471)

To some extent I agree. My argument has always been that Luck changes everything. But many seem to want to have it both ways: they aren’t rebuilding because with Luck the team will be competitive, but Ballard’s playing it smart with free agency cause the roster sucks and you aren’t winning anything anyway. To me both those things can’t be true. Either Luck (and the others you mentioned) give you a chance to compete or he doesn’t. If you are in a 3 yr rebuild then maybe you can justify the mediocre free agency period and unused cap space. But if Luck makes you competitive then I don’t see how you can justify it.

Originally Posted by rm1369 (Post 62468)

I’m not sure I get the same thing as you do from that exchange. The parts you leave out are:

Me: “You’ve basically looked at draft choices as tools in the toolbox. That's how I kind of look at your thing: You’re not wedded to your draft picks.”

Snead: “Right. You should be my interpreter.”

That sounds like the opposite of what Ballard has been preaching. Yes Snead says they made th RG3 trade and built a core, but other than that he’s devaluing draft picks. “.......you have to really look at what historically draft picks bring you in reality over time...” I assume you are referencing the building the core. The trade down from 3, etc. I agree with that, but I’ve heard nothing from Ballard to indicate he thinks draft picks are over valued. Quite the opposite.

Originally Posted by Racehorse (Post 62485)

Nobody here is arguing that at all. You are taking what one person is saying and what another is saying and putting the thoughts of two completely different posters together as one idea. Maybe that is because you are new here and cannot wade through who said what, but some of us here think we are closer to winning than others and some of us like Ballard's approach better than others do.

Originally Posted by Racehorse (Post 62485)

Nobody here is arguing that at all. You are taking what one person is saying and what another is saying and putting the thoughts of two completely different posters together as one idea. Maybe that is because you are new here and cannot wade through who said what, but some of us here think we are closer to winning than others and some of us like Ballard's approach better than others do.