Quote
zn
Quote
Scottish Ram
Don't forget that the success we have had over the last 2 seasons is also helping to attract FA Vet's like Weddle and Matthews.
The trades have all helped to get us where we are and I am pretty happy where we are right now.
I have a different opinion on this. Where they are right now is that they have 2 players on expensive 1 years while at the same time they are coming up on extending Goff.
They don't even know if they should keep either Fowler or Peters and yet they cost 21+ M combined in 2019.
Signing veteran free agents has nothing to do with that. They obviously did not trade for those veteran FAs, and they don't have to decide on whether to extend them long term. They are proven players and leaders so everyone knows that they bring (as opposed to being uncertain about 2 players which together cost just over 21 M.) Signing vet free agents is something they do well I think. No complaints there. But it's a different thing from trading high picks for short rookie contracts.
...
I'm not Scottish Ram and am risking being wrong by piping up here, but I think you may have missed his point.
I believe it was more that the trades helped them turn their record around from 4-12 to the playoffs one year and then helped propelled them to the SB the next year, and by being a winning team now they are more attractive to free agents.
So to the extent that the trades helped change the attractiveness and perception of the team to agents and future free agents, it was worth it even though it was costly in terms of draft picks. It's a salient point IMO...but that's probably because I share the viewpoint.
