If the Los Angeles Rams hope to fill their void of picks at the start of day three by trading down on day one, they will have to get lucky. Most general managers are smart enough to know that trades are not readily available just because “I want one!” and the math of making a deal like that is also complicated and dependent on the perfect formula of prospects available + picks at hand to trade + the draft order, not to mention the relationship of the GMs and the teams that need to come to an agreement that everyone agrees with.
The Rams hold the 13th pick and over the last five years only eight draft day trades have happened in the middle (10-19) of the first round. Only two have happened in the last two years, both by the same general manager, a guy who was fired a couple of months ago.
You want the Rams to trade down from 13 and get your fantasy haul of perfect picks in return because it would be really nice to have and it would help the Rams?
Most other teams in the NFL are not in the business of helping teams that are already favored to win the next Super Bowl …
It’s not just a matter of trading down “because I wanna”, Les Snead also has to find a team that is drafting sometime after the Rams that is also fixated on drafting a certain prospect (which is harder to do in a class like 2026 that is lacking in fascinating prospects, especially at quarterback) and they hold the picks that L.A. wants in return and they’re willing to give up those picks to move up.
There’s a reason that these trade are relatively rare.
These are all the middle-first round trades in the last five years:
2025
No trades between pick 3 and pick 24.
You wouldn’t want to hearken back to last year’s draft as an example of why the Rams should be able to trade back. After the Jaguars traded up for Travis Hunter, phones went dead.
2024
Vikings trade up 11 to 10 with a fourth and fifth and got back a sixth
Vikings trade up 23 to 17 with a fifth and next year’s third and fourth
The only team to trade up around the middle of the first round in 2024 was the Minnesota Vikings, with one of those moves being for a quarterback and the other being for Dallas Turner. In neither case did the team trading down get much help in that year’s draft.
2023
Steelers move up from 17 to 14 with a fourth
Pittsburgh moved up for Broderick Jones in 2023 and that’s about all that happened.
2022
Saints trade up 16 to 11 with a third and a fourth
Lions trade up 32 to 12 with picks 34 and 66 and got back pick 46
Eagles trade up 15 to 13 with a fourth and two fifths
It’s been four years since there has been a “flurry” of moves, if you can call it that, with the Saints trading up for Chris Olave, the Lions for Jameson Williams, and the Eagles for Jordan Davis.
L.A.’s dream scenario might just be the Eagles trade and getting back three day three picks in order to slide down no more than a few spots.
2021
Bears trade up 20 to 11 with next year’s first, fourth, and 2021’s fifth
Jets traded 23 to 14 with two thirds and got back a fourth
At this time, it is unlikely that any team is going to trade a future first round pick to move up for a quarterback like Chicago did for Justin Fields. Not having a good quarterback class this year hurts L.A.’s chances to move down.
The Jets moved up for Alijah Vera-Tucker, a decision that didn’t quite pay off for them.
Who is worth trading up for?
This topic came up in the Turf Show Times Feed section (right hand side of the home page) by our awesome community and TST regular GolfinCanuck, asking the very astute question: “What if the Rams can’t trade back?”
Turf Show Times
What if we can’t trade back?
While browsing a ton of articles around the draft with various teams potential plans, I’m seeing a lot of thoughts towards many of those teams trading back. I’m guessing it’s a reflection of the general feeling of ‘meh’ about the talent available this year. So, in a ‘win today’ year, what do we do if we’re forced to pick at 13?
I realize that’s an easy answer for those that believe in the best player available approach but that’s something I’ve never believed in. I’m thinking it’s the way McSnead works as well, so it’s down to drafting for need.
Going into the draft I happen to think, along with most, that our greatest need is at WR but with such a wide selection of similarly skilled players, what do you do if the guy you like is probably going to be available much later than 13 but will be gone well before our second pick? For example, you like Brazzell as the best fit for the team right now but Player A is available and is more highly touted by the talking heads. Do you trust your gut and take the one you think is the best fit and get accused of ‘reaching’?
Use the Feed post to ask your own questions to the community at any time you want to.
The opportunity to trade down can only arise if there’s another team that wants to trade up.
Are they trading up for Ty Simpson? Probably not. Even if Simpson goes in the top-15, as very few people expect him to, why would the Rams be guaranteed that opportunity instead of teams picking 10th, 11th, or 12th?
It’s not like trading down is Les Snead’s own original idea. In a weak class like this one, trading down is a goal for most general managers.
If a highly-rated prospect has fallen to pick 13, like Jeremiyah Love or Rueben Bain or Carnell Tate, then I have two questions for you:
A) Why did they fall? There’s always a red flag behind the curtain when that happens.
B) If there’s no red flag, why aren’t the Rams running to the podium to draft that player?
It’s a contradiction of ideas. We’re saying that there’s a player who a team is desperate to have because he’s a steal at pick 13, while also arguing that the Rams don’t want that player. That usually only happens when that player is a quarterback and the team already has a quarterback. Well, the Rams would love a quarterback to sit behind Matthew Stafford. If Ty Simpson is worth trading up for at 13, then maybe L.A. should just draft him.
Which team is trading up?
Two of the teams drafting shortly after the Rams, the Jets and Cowboys, already have multiple first round picks.
The Lions are picking at 17. Not only is Brad Holmes an aggressive GM, but he’s got a close relationship with Snead and the Rams. But is there someone that Detroit wants that badly? The Lions have a lot of day three picks, but no pick in round three, so Holmes is probably also interested in trading down more than he is trading up.
Which is the problem.
More teams want to trade down than want to trade up. The Rams might want to trade down and could be willing to take a bad deal if it means getting back a fourth or a fifth round pick, so is that what fans want? Do you want the Rams to take a bad trade, like going down from 13 to 28, just to get a fourth and a fifth? Would that be awesome?
However, the odds are low that the Rams will trade down because the odd are low that literally any team will trade down.
Could this be the year for the Rams to trade down? It’s an answer we probably won’t get for 10 more days.
See More:
