The premise of the Los Angeles Rams trading quarterback Matthew Stafford can no longer be classified as a baseless rumor or speculation because this year the franchise is putting up signals that the team is ready to make some sweeping changes. Though there is a significant difference between trying to trade Cooper Kupp (not going to be easy) and trading Stafford, the latter doing a lot more damage to the continuity of the offense than the former, fans can’t ignore the possibility that the Rams are going to be looking beyond 2025 with this offseason.
Before I’m accused of simply “being a hater”, my offseason plan included keeping Stafford and actually restructuring his contract to save money.
But just because it’s what I might do, that’s a much different question than what the L.A. Rams might do. Especially if Stafford, who requested a trade from the Lions only four years ago, tells Les Snead and Sean McVay that he wants to finish his career somewhere else.
While a rumored team like the Giants hasn’t won a playoff game since 2011, New York does have a quarterback friendly setup with head coach Brian Daboll, offensive coordinator Mike Kafka, receiver Malik Nabers, and new assistant quarterbacks coach Chad Hall, who also happens to be Stafford’s brother-in-law.
Could the Rams get the Giants’ number 3 overall pick for Stafford?
No chance.
So what could the Rams get from New York in a Stafford trade? And what would L.A.’s best offer for Stafford be?
Let’s talk over some possibilities.
The closest comparison trade: Aaron Rodgers
We can’t compare trading Stafford at 37 to what the Texans got for Deshaun Watson, the Seahawks got for Russell Wilson, or the Lions got for Stafford when he was 33.
Teams won’t be racing to out-bid each other for a 37-year-old who has been really good — not really great — in the last three years, and also most likely wants a new contract agreement with his next franchise.
In fact, no team has traded a first round pick for a player since 2022 when Watson and Wilson were traded for multiple 1s. Only Sean Payton has commanded a first round pick return over the past three years.
Instead, we turn to Rodgers, who was traded to the Jets on April 24, 2023 with a first round pick and a fifth round pick, as the Packers sent back a first round pick (2 picks higher than New York’s original selection), a second round pick, a sixth round pick, and a conditional first round pick that ended up being a second rounder because Rodgers missed virtually the entire 2023 season.
In other words:
- Jets get Aaron Rodgers and a 5th
- Packers get 2 second round picks, move up 2 spots in the first round, and a 6th
Rodgers was 40 when he was traded. But he had also won back-to-back MVPs just a year before he was traded.
Stafford hasn’t been bad, but both his situation and Rodgers’ situation recently are reminders that these old, immobile guys need really good offensive lines, really good weapons, and a great coaching staff.
A team trading for Stafford isn’t going to make their offense weaker in order to do so and that includes the Giants not giving up the third overall pick, which they could then use to pick an offensive lineman like Will Campbell or (if they trade down) a tight end like Tyler Warren or receiver like Tetairoa McMillan.
That would be a different story if the Rams had a ton of leverage and they were holding onto this definite Heart of the Ocean diamond that everybody wanted and was guaranteed to be the starter for 10 years. Instead, Stafford is a year-to-year retirement question and if he goes to a bad team, he’s going to be bad right along with them.
So the ideal trade offer for the Rams might include a late first round pick or a decent improvement on their own first round pick at 26th overall, as well as some day two and day three picks, but they won’t be prying a top-10 pick for Stafford straight up. And the Giants are not going to move down from 3 to 26 to get a quarterback who they can’t protect.
Where does this leave the Rams?
Some potential best trade offers...
Giants
Rams get 34th overall pick, 65th overall pick, conditional 2nd round pick in 2026
Giants get Matthew Stafford, 90th overall pick
The Rams do not have a second round pick this year because of the Braden Fiske deal in 2024, so this trade would give them the second overall pick on day two (a borderline first rounder) and improve the higher of their two third round picks into the first pick of round three.
In addition, the Rams would get a third round pick in 2026 that becomes a second round pick if the Giants make the playoffs.
This is almost like getting three second round picks for a 37-year-old quarterback, which would be one of the best returns that any team has gotten for any player in the last three years.
Vikings
Rams get 24th overall pick, conditional 1st round pick in 2026, LB Ivan Pace
Vikings get Stafford, 26th overall pick
This is a tough pill to swallow because the Rams would only move up two spots in the 2025 draft, but the upside is most likely getting a first round pick in 2026, which is going to be a much better QB class than 2025.
The condition could be playing time, and as long as Stafford plays in over 60% of the Vikings season then a second rounder becomes a first.
Pace is an undersized linebacker, to say the least, but he’s also considered the heart of Minnesota’s defense and would be a huge upgrade to free agents Christian Rozeboom and Troy Reeder.
Reuniting Stafford with Kevin O’Connell and pairing him with Justin Jefferson and Jordan Addison is probably very appealing to the Vikings. There will be questions of “Why not include J.J. McCarthy?” and I think that’s as simple as the probabilities that Minnesota will want to hold onto him and L.A. might not want him.
Why so many people are in a rush to start quarterbacks before they’re ready, when there’s so much evidence of that ruining their careers, is beyond me. And McCarthy hasn’t practiced since last fall due to his torn ACL, so he’s going to need time to get back into football shape, which is why Stafford would be a valuable bridge quarterback. Even if it’s for 2 years.
Colts
Rams get 14th overall pick, Anthony Richardson
Colts get 26th overall pick, Matthew Stafford
It’s been 26 years since the Rams traded a second and a fifth to the Colts for Marshall Faulk. Indy is one of the most unpredictable franchises in the NFL because you truly never know what owner Jim Irsay will approve or disapprove, including giving up on a former top-5 pick after only two seasons.
And really, why shouldn’t the Colts seriously consider turning Richardson into the best offer they can get for him at this point?
He hasn’t been good, completing only 50.6% of his passes for 11 touchdowns and 13 interceptions, and he’s only played in 15 games over two years.
On the other hand, if the Rams end up deciding to part with Stafford, getting back a freak of nature athlete for Sean McVay to work with is intriguing, as long as the Rams also improve their draft capital. They do both here.
The Colts haven’t shied away from old quarterbacks in the past — Philip Rivers, Matthew Hasselbeck, Matt Ryan — and they most likely feel they can win the AFC South next year with a decent quarterback throwing to Alec Pierce, Michael Pittman, and Josh Downs.
Even if Richardson doesn’t pan out, the Rams will have still moved up from 26 (where they’ll get a player they have a second round grade on, most likely) to 14 (where they could get a prospect who could potentially become a star or trade up or trade down) in the draft.
What should the Rams do?
There are definitely other teams to consider, but out of these three offers which sounds the best?
The Giants offer has more opportunity because it is more picks, but doesn’t include a first rounder. The Vikings offer is a better package of picks than Indy, because it doesn’t include a quarterback. The Colts offer is only moving up in the first round, but it’s a good move up and it does include a quarterback who was recently drafted fourth overall.
I think the Colts offer would be the most intriguing.
If you think the Rams could get a first round pick for Stafford straight up, maybe you’re right. Given the circumstances of his age, contract, and possible retirement in 2026, I don’t.
