budlitebrad Posted April 20, 2010 Share Posted April 20, 2010 Adam Schefter reported the trade on ESPN. Schefter didn't have the terms of the trade, but he did report that the trade does not involve Albert Haynesworth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawks21 Posted April 20, 2010 Share Posted April 20, 2010 Wow. Not amazed that the Skins threw more money at their problems. I am amazed that the Rams would trade one of their only bright young players, especially if they aren't planning on taking Suh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
budlitebrad Posted April 20, 2010 Author Share Posted April 20, 2010 Only a swap of 5th round picks for Carriker. Pretty cheap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kpholmes Posted April 20, 2010 Share Posted April 20, 2010 Carriker is their anchor on that line. Â They HAVE to be making a move for Suh or McCoy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted April 20, 2010 Share Posted April 20, 2010 Carriker is their anchor on that line. They HAVE to be making a move for Suh or McCoy.  Maybe they'll somehow trade for Big Ben to handle their QB needs freeing them up to take Suh or McCoy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackass Posted April 20, 2010 Share Posted April 20, 2010 looks like things could get interesting.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted April 20, 2010 Share Posted April 20, 2010 Wow. Not amazed that the Skins threw more money at their problems. I am amazed that the Rams would trade one of their only bright young players, especially if they aren't planning on taking Suh. pretty well documented that I have had a hard time buying the Rams passing on Suh...this makes me even more leary of them taking Bradford over Suh now.  Carriker is their anchor on that line. They HAVE to be making a move for Suh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted April 20, 2010 Share Posted April 20, 2010 I dunno, if they're letting him go for next to nothing, they obviously don't value him much. in which case, I can't see how getting rid of him signals anything at all about their intentions regarding suh/bradford. if anything, if they were taking suh, maybe they'd want to keep the other nebrasky boy around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whiskey Pimp Posted April 20, 2010 Share Posted April 20, 2010 Is there a reason why Haynesworth is included in the subject line if he has not been traded nor has anything to do with this trade? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted April 20, 2010 Share Posted April 20, 2010 Wish they'd trade Andre Carter to a 4-3(if there are any left). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted April 20, 2010 Share Posted April 20, 2010 Is there a reason why Haynesworth is included in the subject line if he has not been traded nor has anything to do with this trade? I modified it to make the meaning more clear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
budlitebrad Posted April 20, 2010 Author Share Posted April 20, 2010 I modified it to make the meaning more clear. Â Â Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooby's Hubby Posted April 21, 2010 Share Posted April 21, 2010 I dunno, if they're letting him go for next to nothing, they obviously don't value him much. in which case, I can't see how getting rid of him signals anything at all about their intentions regarding suh/bradford. if anything, if they were taking suh, maybe they'd want to keep the other nebrasky boy around. +1 Maybe it is money? How much was Carriker gonna make this year? If the Rams are gonna give Bradofrd a big contract, maybe they wanted to clear up some money and rebuild for 2012. Maybe they are just slimming down their payroll at various positions or ridding themsleves of players who won't be around 2-3 years from now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Square Posted April 21, 2010 Share Posted April 21, 2010 I don't get it. Carriker has some talent, but I haven't watched many St. Louis games so I don't know how well he played lately. I agree that if they only traded him for a late round pick, it probably doesn't signal too much with what they are going to do with the #1 overall. That being said, it still gives me the heebie geebies that the stupid rams are going to screw up my hope of Suh going to the Lions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted April 21, 2010 Share Posted April 21, 2010 Wow. Not amazed that the Skins threw more money at their problems. I am amazed that the Rams would trade one of their only bright young players, especially if they aren't planning on taking Suh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.