Jones on Trading Block? yep he was traded

Zooey wrote:

To me…they got so little in return that they would have been better off keeping him for the year, and letting him go for nothing at the end of this season. I would rather have one more year of Jones, and nothing in return, than give him up for the difference between a 6th and 5th rounder.

Agreed, Zooey.

InvaderRam wrote:

Zooey wrote:

Would they have got a 6th rounder for him anyway? Or something?

yeah. that’s what i want to know. cuz that would piss me off even more. even if speights is better than jones. then start both or keep one for depth. i want to understand why.

Wouldn’t they have received a comp pick based on his new salary with his new team? That means it could have been as high as a 3rd.  I think a 4th was doable for a starting linebacker, on the cusp of being a pro bowler. At least a 5th. Oh, well.

Hopefully, Jourdan will have some insights soon enough.

zn wrote:

Sean McVay on Ernest Jones trade: “Football decision. What we felt was best for the football team. Amazing guy. He was great for us for a few years. But we felt that this was best for our football team.”

i’m watching the interview right. he got a little testy when a reporter tried to follow up on “best for our football team” quote. which i understand. i don’t think i would feel comfortable elaborating on that statement regardless of what the real reasons were. we’ll likely never know the full reasons behind why the rams did what they did.

also doesn’t sound like speights is the starter. at least not immediately.

InvaderRam wrote:

also doesn’t sound like speights is the starter. at least not immediately.

True

InvaderRam wrote:

i’m perplexed.

There has to be more to this story. I suppose maybe it’s the combination of Jones asking for an extension while also being out and not contributing. Could it be that that rubbed McV the wrong way? Not defending it (if that’s what happened) or criticizing it, just speculating.

…

InvaderRam wrote:

they do have 11 dbs.  is that unusual?  does this mark a shift in philosophy?  how many dbs did they carry last year?

I don’t remember last year. But 11 is unusual. But then they also have 5 ILBs which is also unusual.

Zooey wrote:

InvaderRam wrote:

InvaderRam Moderator zn wrote: Could it be that that rubbed McV the wrong way? if this is true, then i would tend to criticize him for making this decision. i’m not saying this is true. but if it’s true. i don’t agree with it.

Yeah, you don’t get to be “rubbed the wrong way” if you are the coach, not by contract shit. He can get rubbed the wrong way about attitude towards coaching and teammates and effort and all that, but not by contract stuff. Whatever. This looks like an error to me, a bigger error than trading Woods which didn’t turn out to be all that bad in the end. But I dislike this one even more because of Jones’ youth and value. He was under contract for this year, and he would have played this year. So it’s a “value of Jones this year” vs. “value of the trade long term” equation, and I think Jones had more value to the Rams immediately than this trade does for the long term. That’s all. No biggie. I will root for the Rams just the same, but this doesn’t pencil out, imo.

I still feel something’s going on here, more than meets the eye. It’s nothing like not signing London Fletcher. But still…. And they kept 5 ILBs, an unusual number, which suggests they’re not all that certain about that position and the players they have. I agree that the coach should never act like he’s been “rubbed the wrong way,” but then, every once in a while, McV shows that he can have that kind of tendency, so it wouldn’t surprise me.

It could be something as simple as the Rams don’t want to keep a leader around who gripes about not getting an extension….and Jones did gripe a bit.

I know this is not one of those boards where a minor criticism of a popular coach can lead to death threats and outraged accustations of treason. Nevertheless let me quickly add that I rank McV very high as a coach overall. As you guys know. (I have residual trauma reactions from old poster wars so I reflexively feel compelled to add that I am a long way from being on the fire McVay! bandwagon………)

zn wrote:

I still feel something’s going on here, more than meets the eye.

i definitely feel that way. nothing adds up. mcvay was clearly not comfortable with the line of questioning. his answers were full of holes. again. i don’t think it was a place to air his grievances. so i don’t see that as any fault of mcvay.

i would see it as a fault of mcvay that he could be so reactive to trading jones for some kind of perceived insolence. if it’s true. but we don’t know that it’s true. everything is speculation at this point. so it’s hard for me to even comment. i just find it hard to believe that jones could rub anyone the wrong way. it would just seem so out of character. but then his frustration with goff and akers also baffled me.

i’ll be curious to hear or read what jones has to say about it.

InvaderRam wrote:

zn wrote:

So the answer is obvious if people got out their emotions.

well then my guess is jones’ health isn’t right. his knee is worse than we know. the titans know this as was possibly disclosed by the rams thus the extremely low compensation. but then why would the titans want jones? possibly a better scheme fit?

I don’t think it;s that the knee is bad, but recovering from the knee meant he couldn’t practice and keep up with the younger guys.

As with all trades, if he doesn’t pass a Titans physical, the deal is probably off.