Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Sign in to follow this  
Soulfly3

Brandin Cooks is... AN LA RAM!???

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, Bojang0301 said:

While everyone suckles on the Pats teet, I would like to credit Les Snead for being a beast of a GM this offseason. Marcus Peters, Aqib Talib, Ndamakong Suh and Brandin Cooks in one offseason.

Absolutely incredible offseason where it would have been easy to sit back after last years success.  As a lifelong Rams fan I almost couldn’t have asked for a better offseason.  I say almost as all its missing is the AD extension.  I’m a bit nervous that we haven’t yet locked up the best defensive player in the league.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Bojang0301 said:

:rolleyes: I would like to know what you would call highly productive then considering that was #11 in recieving yards in the entire NFL. Pretty doofus statement if you ask me.

:lmao:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, bostonfred said:

Cooks wasn't a great fit with Brady but he was a big part of the offense and did a great job while Edelman was out.  He'll be missed but it was a fair deal and the pats have other more pressing needs after all their off season losses

Love this for Goff, not sure about the other rams receivers. They might all end up being over priced by the time the season rolls around. 

Agreed.  As a dynasty cooks owner I watched every snap last year.  Brady’s deep ball was terrible and he under threw cooks countless times.  Now a few of those drew PI’s so it’s a net gain for the offense but many of those Cooks had steps on his guy and woulda walked in TD’s.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, dkp993 said:

Agreed.  As a dynasty cooks owner I watched every snap last year.  Brady’s deep ball was terrible and he under threw cooks countless times.  Now a few of those drew PI’s so it’s a net gain for the offense but many of those Cooks had steps on his guy and woulda walked in TD’s.  

But isn’t that Goffs weakness as well? Looks like a lateral move. A qb that is best throwing short or medium and a lot of reliable targets to compete with.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bojang0301 said:

So, no retort then? You are quite the analyst.

Yes, because "Pretty doofus statement if you ask me" is highly analytical. He only averaged 4 catches for 68 ypg on the #1 offense in the entire NFL, no I would not call that "highly productive".

You didn't address the rest of my post or the numerous other ones responding to your original post either. He is going into the last year of his contract and his cap hit is increasing by $7 mil this year. The Pats got back more than they gave up for him for a season where he was moderately productive and had a much lower salary, and assuming Edelman comes back it isn't likely Cooks was going to have a larger role with them next year. There are several reasons why this move could make sense for the Pats outside of dealing for OBJ.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, humpback said:

I wouldn't necessarily call 65/1082/7 highly productive in the #1 offense in the NFL, and he was in the last year of his rookie contract so his cap hit is going to jump by ~$7 mil this year.

Which is still a million dollars less than moncrief, $3 million less than ARob. 

He was very productive. Not elite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Belichick is already dealing with a PIA QB and a PIA TE, zero chance he is dealing for OBJ to make it a PIA trifecta on offense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, fruity pebbles said:

Love this for Cooks. He was gonna be lucky to get 100 targets in New England.

I would be shocked if he exceeds the numbers he did in NE last year with the Rams. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, kyoun1e said:

Brady threw for 500 yards in the super bowl and Cooks was concussed.

Who needs him.

And lost....

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, King of the Jungle said:

I would be shocked if he exceeds the numbers he did in NE last year with the Rams. 

I would be shocked if he does not exceed the numbers he did in NE last year with the Rams.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meh on the Pats. With Brady's clock running.....dumping relatively proven skill position players for draft picks is a questionable move for immediate success. 

 

ETA:  With the smoke around the Gronk situation.....this doesn't seem like great planning by the Pats. 

Edited by Thunderlips
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, King of the Jungle said:

I would be shocked if he exceeds the numbers he did in NE last year with the Rams. 

I wouldn’t. There’s 4000 yards there and he’s the most talented target by a good margin. Could he be Watkins again? Sure but they are not the same guy. Rams aren’t exactly overflow with receiving talent.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, humpback said:

Yes, because "Pretty doofus statement if you ask me" is highly analytical. He only averaged 4 catches for 68 ypg on the #1 offense in the entire NFL, no I would not call that "highly productive".

You didn't address the rest of my post or the numerous other ones responding to your original post either. He is going into the last year of his contract and his cap hit is increasing by $7 mil this year. The Pats got back more than they gave up for him for a season where he was moderately productive and had a much lower salary, and assuming Edelman comes back it isn't likely Cooks was going to have a larger role with them next year. There are several reasons why this move could make sense for the Pats outside of dealing for OBJ.

You also ignore his 4000 yds recieving before age 25. Your statement was a doofus statement. 68 yds per game is over 1000 yards so you took his yearly stats and broke it down to by game... good job, glad you can do math. The Pats traded a WR1 before his prime because they didn’t want to pay him. He was much more than moderately productive. The fact that you keep pressing that narrative Is ridiculous. 10 other WRs/TE’s had more yards than him, that’s it. That’s HIGHLY PRODUCTIVE. As is his career numbers. The Pats and their loyal band of peter puffers will justify anything they do. He may have been in a contract year and that increases his cap number to re-sign him but so what. That’s what the franchise tag is for. They will not be able to replace him without another trade. Hogan is a good WR but Edleman was already looking on his last legs leading into last year where he tore his ACL and Mitchell has been a bust to this point. This was a bad deal for a team that only had so many years left to compete with Brady. The man is going to be 41. If the Pats are doing this for the long term they should have done the real right thing last offseason which was to move on from Brady. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, fruity pebbles said:

I wouldn’t. There’s 4000 yards there and he’s the most talented target by a good margin. Could he be Watkins again? Sure but they are not the same guy. Rams aren’t exactly overflow with receiving talent.

I feel like he will fill the role that Watkins did last year and I feel like Watkins is a better route runner compared to Cooks. Not sure why he would see that many more targets when this offense is run through Gurley and Goff is most comfortable with Woods and Kupp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, voiceofunreason said:

But isn’t that Goffs weakness as well? Looks like a lateral move. A qb that is best throwing short or medium and a lot of reliable targets to compete with.

Honestly I know that’s said about Goff at times but I haven’t seen it.  But I also didn’t say it wasn’t a lateral move for Cooks, just that I didn’t like his fit in NE.  I’m not sure how I feel about this yet for Cooks specifically.  I love it for the Rams as I know a field stretcher is important for McVay’s O but I could easily see Sammy’s 2017 numbers as Cooks 2018 which would obviously not be good for his dynasty outlook.  

This does keep Kupp and Woods outlook as positive thought. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, King of the Jungle said:

I feel like he will fill the role that Watkins did last year and I feel like Watkins is a better route runner compared to Cooks. Not sure why he would see that many more targets when this offense is run through Gurley and Goff is most comfortable with Woods and Kupp.

For some reason he and Watkins never really meshed. Not sure why but I don’t think there’s really a Watkins role ie a decoy. Just missed Watkins a lot and never seemed to be on the same page. I wouldn’t automatically assume the same of Cooks.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, -OZ- said:

Which is still a million dollars less than moncrief, $3 million less than ARob. 

He was very productive. Not elite.

There are WRs who make less than Cooks who put up better numbers as well, but not sure how that's all that relevant. ARob has a 1400 yd, 14 TD season catching passes from Blake Bortles under his belt- that is highly productive.

In any event, we can agree to disagree about the semantics- even if he was "highly" productive, there are still several reasons why the this trade could make sense for the Pats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, King of the Jungle said:

I feel like he will fill the role that Watkins did last year and I feel like Watkins is a better route runner compared to Cooks. Not sure why he would see that many more targets when this offense is run through Gurley and Goff is most comfortable with Woods and Kupp.

Not to mention the fact that the Rams will likely be playing ahead so often.  I could see Gurley approaching 325 carries this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, jeaton6 said:

I would be shocked if he does not exceed the numbers he did in NE last year with the Rams.

Fingers crossed and I’d love it but if I was betting right now I’d bet with @King of the Jungle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, humpback said:

There are WRs who make less than Cooks who put up better numbers as well, but not sure how that's all that relevant. ARob has a 1400 yd, 14 TD season catching passes from Blake Bortles under his belt- that is highly productive.

In any event, we can agree to disagree about the semantics- even if he was "highly" productive, there are still several reasons why the this trade could make sense for the Pats.

That’s ONLY 86 yds per game though... how do you justify that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, King of the Jungle said:

I feel like he will fill the role that Watkins did last year and I feel like Watkins is a better route runner compared to Cooks. Not sure why he would see that many more targets when this offense is run through Gurley and Goff is most comfortable with Woods and Kupp.

Also Sammy was a red zone beast and that’s not Cooks game.  But the other side is Sammy got into camp very late and never developed much chemistry with Goff.  Cooks will have all the offseason stuff which is huge.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, fruity pebbles said:

I wouldn’t. There’s 4000 yards there and he’s the most talented target by a good margin. Could he be Watkins again? Sure but they are not the same guy. Rams aren’t exactly overflow with receiving talent.

Agreed, Watkins got traded a couple of weeks into training camp, not much time to build any rapport or fit into the offense. Goff and Cooks will have most of the offseason and all of training camp. I think you still have to hope that Goff can take the next step, 3800 yards in 15 games in his 2nd year was a pretty huge improvement over a disaster first season so there's a good chance he can continue to improve. Also have to worry if Goff & McVay's offense really is the spread it around kind or if its just that Watkins never really fit.

Staying in New England you had to hope that Brady kept beating back father time every year, especially with no heir apparent at QB there anymore. Plus Edelman is coming back this year to take away a lot of targets.

Edited by Buckna

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dynasty it’s hard to not see this as a positive. Young QB, one of the highest scoring offenses in the league, innovative offense,  they want to extend him. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only Odell, Mike Evans, Davante Adams and Marquise Lee are still with their original teams from the 2014 draft class (first two rounds). I expect this to become more par for the course with the rookie contracts from the last CBA.

Edited by Bojang0301

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has there ever been a player traded for a 1st round pick...twice? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, fruity pebbles said:

Dynasty it’s hard to not see this as a positive. Young QB, one of the highest scoring offenses in the league, innovative offense,  they want to extend him. 

Positive for Cooks longterm. Not sure about this next year though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rams threw more to their receivers than NE did too. Can they pump out three 1000 yard receivers through? You would think they'd have to throw for significantly more yards overall than they did last year. 

Edited by Milkman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Bojang0301 said:

You also ignore his 4000 yds recieving before age 25. Your statement was a doofus statement. 68 yds per game is over 1000 yards so you took his yearly stats and broke it down to by game... good job, glad you can do math. The Pats traded a WR1 before his prime because they didn’t want to pay him. He was much more than moderately productive. The fact that you keep pressing that narrative Is ridiculous. 10 other WRs/TE’s had more yards than him, that’s it. That’s HIGHLY PRODUCTIVE. As is his career numbers. The Pats and their loyal band of peter puffers will justify anything they do. He may have been in a contract year and that increases his cap number to re-sign him but so what. That’s what the franchise tag is for. They will not be able to replace him without another trade. Hogan is a good WR but Edleman was already looking on his last legs leading into last year where he tore his ACL and Mitchell has been a bust to this point. This was a bad deal for a team that only had so many years left to compete with Brady. The man is going to be 41. If the Pats are doing this for the long term they should have done the real right thing last offseason which was to move on from Brady. 

Why did the Saints trade him for even less when they had him under cheap control for even longer the year before? Maybe, just maybe, there's a reason other than "the Pats are idiots"? I'm not a Pats fan in the least btw, but you have to be blind to not see that they generally are a pretty well run organization. Your idea that they obviously completely screwed this up and some keyboard warrior knows better is funny schtick. :thumbup:

8 minutes ago, Bojang0301 said:

That’s ONLY 86 yds per game though... how do you justify that?

:lmao:

Yeah, you might want to do the math. There's a huge difference, and that's not even accounting for the fact that one was catching passes from Blake Bortles on the 18th ranked offense and the other was catching passes from Tom Brady on the #1 offense (and Drew Brees prior to that).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This feels like the rare win-win deal. I know that isn't as exciting for fans to talk about, everyone likes to have pulled one over so to speak, but this truly makes a ton of sense for both sides. Cooks is much more reliable than Watkins, or likely any WR at #23 would have been, and the Pats essentially got a year of Cooks for just pushing a 1st down a year. 

My gut instinct says Pats trade for Beckham, as they have more than enough ammo for it, but its possible they go for a QB of the future. 2 1sts and 2 2nds gets them pretty high depending who they'd want. I could see the Giants taking that offer, if they aren't going QB. 

I do wonder if Cooks maybe isn't all that good a WR though. 2 teams have dealt him in 2 years, and he's been highly fortunate to have Brees/Brady as his QBs. Its possible without an elite QB, he's just a solid WR and nothing special, ala Mike Wallace once he left Big Ben.

In NE, everyone is mentioning Hogan, but I think the real play there is Edelman. Better rapport with Brady, and better track record. Probably call Gronk a winner too, as he could see a career high in targets, especially since they may no longer care about keeping him healthy long term, if his retirement talk has merit.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, humpback said:

Why did the Saints trade him for even less when they had him under cheap control for even longer the year before? Maybe, just maybe, there's a reason other than "the Pats are idiots"? I'm not a Pats fan in the least btw, but you have to be blind to not see that they generally are a pretty well run organization. Your idea that they obviously completely screwed this up and some keyboard warrior knows better is funny schtick. :thumbup:

:lmao:

Yeah, you might want to do the math. There's a huge difference, and that's not even accounting for the fact that one was catching passes from Blake Bortles on the 18th ranked offense and the other was catching passes from Tom Brady on the #1 offense (and Drew Brees prior to that).

I don’t think they screwed it up, I think they’re making a mistake. Clearly turning last years 32 into this years 23 and getting a year of production is value but at what cost? The only keyboard warrior making asinine statements is the one thinking 1000 yds in a season is moderately productive. 

Here is some active players yardage before age 25:

Evans 4579

Fitz 4544

Hopkins 4487

Odell 4122

Cooks 3943

DJax 3124

Dez 2871

AB 2062

But, please, continue to bend your narrative about yards per ####### game.

Edited by Bojang0301

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, -OZ- said:

Which is still a million dollars less than moncrief, $3 million less than ARob. 

He was very productive. Not elite.

For one season.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, fruity pebbles said:

I wouldn’t. There’s 4000 yards there and he’s the most talented target by a good margin. Could he be Watkins again? Sure but they are not the same guy. Rams aren’t exactly overflow with receiving talent.

There's always the possibility that Watkins is a bum. Not sure why he keeps getting a free pass. Cooks, at least, has produced.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Bojang0301 said:

I don’t think they screwed it up, I think they’re making a mistake. Clearly turning last years 32 into this years 23 and getting a year of production is value but at what cost? The only keyboard warrior making asinine statements is the one thinking 1000 yds in a season is moderately productive. 

Here is some active players yardage before age 25:

Evans 4579

Fitz 4544

Hopkins 4487

Odell 4122

Cooks 3943

DJax 3124

Dez 2871

AB 2062

But, please, continue to bend your narrative about yards per ####### game.

Yet he’s been traded twice. If he isn’t a locker room cancer I’ll be shocked. That was confirmed in New Orleans and feels like he didn’t change with the pats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Concept Coop said:

For one season.  

Sure. Then we'll see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, voiceofunreason said:

Yet he’s been traded twice. If he isn’t a locker room cancer I’ll be shocked. That was confirmed in New Orleans and feels like he didn’t change with the pats.

Never heard anything around here about him being a problem with the Pats. Just don’t think the Pats wanted to pay him long term and they saw an opportunity to pick up a 1st

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, I think it goes without saying that Edelman goes back to the slot and Hogan is on the outside. Who is the value between Mitchell, Britt, Dorsett and Patterson? That’s quite the motley crew but Britt has produced in the past, Mitchell and Patterson have flashed at times and Dorsett is a workout warrior. Seems like there may be some value to be had somewhere.

Edited by Bojang0301

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Andy Dufresne said:

Bump...Malcolm Mitchell?

If only the guy could get and stay healthy it would b an emphatic yes....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bojang0301 said:

So, I think it goes without saying that Edleman goes back to the slot and Hogan is on the outside. Who is the value between Mitchell, Britt, Dorsett and Patterson? That’s quite the motley crew but Britt has produced in the past, Mitchell and Patterson have flashed at times and Dorsett is a workout warrior. Seems like there may be some value to be had somewhere.

Mitchell if he's healthy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cooks easily could have had 1300 yards and 10 tds. Brady missed him deep lots. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, voiceofunreason said:

Yet he’s been traded twice. If he isn’t a locker room cancer I’ll be shocked. That was confirmed in New Orleans and feels like he didn’t change with the pats.

Reports were all good with the Pats...you didn’t hear anything bad about him...BB is notorious for moving a player a year early rather than a year late and this feels like that scenario...he helped them last year but was not the difference-maker it was hoped he would be and I did not see any way they were going to give him the type of money he is going to get...getting a #1 in an off-season where they have a lot of holes to fill makes a ton of sense for them...with 2 1’s and 2 2’s they now have more flexibility to fill those holes...what comes next is anyone’s guess...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Milkman said:

Cooks easily could have had 1300 yards and 10 tds. Brady missed him deep lots. 

Funny, Watkins truthers were blaming His struggles on Goff missing him deep.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, humpback said:

There are WRs who make less than Cooks who put up better numbers as well, but not sure how that's all that relevant. ARob has a 1400 yd, 14 TD season catching passes from Blake Bortles under his belt- that is highly productive.

In any event, we can agree to disagree about the semantics- even if he was "highly" productive, there are still several reasons why the this trade could make sense for the Pats.

Totally agreed.

If you've played with Drew Brees and Tom Brady and were traded away from both teams, you might have (or be) a problem.

But salary isn't the issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, fruity pebbles said:

Never heard anything around here about him being a problem with the Pats. Just don’t think the Pats wanted to pay him long term and they saw an opportunity to pick up a 1st

I would tend to agree with this assessment, Cooks is a good player and I never heard anything negative/turd wise. I do think Cooks whole doesn't seem to equal the sum of the parts, but he is still a good player imho (his stupid high jump attempt in sb not withstanding), just not one the Pats were likely to sign for big money long term. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, voiceofunreason said:

Yet he’s been traded twice. If he isn’t a locker room cancer I’ll be shocked. That was confirmed in New Orleans and feels like he didn’t change with the pats.

Not sure where this came from but every thing I heard was that he was the consummate professional and a positive force in the locker room.  Didn’t see one thing otherwise.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont think the Pats planned to re-sign Cooks when they traded for him last year.  Just got a free year out of him, now trade him for an even better pick.  

Not sure who/what/where/when/why/how anyone is looking at this as a bad move for the Pats.  I think they planned this a year ago, and it worked out even better than they planned.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Concept Coop said:

Funny, Watkins truthers were blaming His struggles on Goff missing him deep.

Yeah Cooks is better imo. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.