Kyle Pitts shouldn’t be only tight end on the trade block

If Rams find a taker for Colby Parkinson, they should trade him

The Atlanta Falcons are open to trading tight end Kyle Pitts according to ESPN’s Jeremy Fowler, but if there are teams out there willing to take a chance on an underwhelming player at the position than the L.A. Rams must try to take advantage of it right now by offering up Colby Parkinson as a consolation prize.

Les Snead’s biggest free agent whiff of 2024, Parkinson is now buried even deeper on the depth chart after the Rams drafted Terrence Ferguson with their first pick. The former Stanford Cardinal and Seattle Seahawk is on an inevitable path towards an exit out of L.A., so maybe this is as good of a chance as any to trade Colby Parkinson.

Financial implications

The Rams have already paid Parkinson a $2.5 million roster bonus this year, so at most the cost to his new team would be a $5.25 million base salary. As bad as that sounds, it is less than half the amount that a team would have to pay Kyle Pitts: $10.9 million base salary.

Plus, Pitts is in a contract year and will be a free agent in 2026. If Parkinson has a mid-size rebound with his new team, he’s signed through 2026 at a relatively affordable sum of $7 million.

The Rams could even agree to help with the financials in any trade and accept a bad contract in return. Perhaps a slightly overpaid cornerback?

The numbers

In his first season with L.A., Parkinson had 30 catches for 294 yards and one touchdown. In comparison, Pitts had 47 catches for 602 yards and four touchdowns. But Parkinson might be a better blocker and a more versatile player than Pitts, who has yet to be much more than a big wide receiver.

Would a team rather trade for Pitts and hope that he’s a scheme fit for them despite not being a scheme fit for multiple different offensive coordinators in Atlanta and also pay him $11 million before hitting free agency in 2026…

OR

Trade less draft capital for Parkinson (probably at most a day three pick swap), pay him $10 million for two years of service instead of one, and know that he’s probably more likely to fit into an offense than Pitts even if he is not as “freakish” of an athlete and won’t have as many yards or touchdowns?

That’s a question that GMs should be asking themselves — especially Snead — as they mull over the possibility of acquiring Kyle Pitts.

If there’s a buyer for Pitts, then there must be a secondary market for Parkinson. And the Rams have to take advantage of it while they can.