How Rams can exploit a new NFL market inefficiency

SEATTLE, WASHINGTON - JANUARY 25: Terrance Ferguson #18 of the Los Angeles Rams runs during an NFC Championship NFL football game against the Seattle Seahawks at Lumen Field on January 25, 2026 in Seattle, Washington. (Photo by Michael Owens/Getty Images) | Getty Images

The bread and butter of Les Snead and the Los Angeles Rams in terms of roster building has focused on exploiting certain market inefficiencies:

• Understanding that teams used to overvalue early draft picks and trading them for capable veterans (Sammy Watkins, Brandin Cooks, Jalen Ramsey, Von Miller, Marcus Peters, etc.)
• Knowing that interior pressure can be more disruptive to quarterbacks and building their defensive line from the inside out (Aaron Donald, Kobie Turner, Braden Fiske)
• Using void years on contracts to swipe the credit card-paying players now and reducing the salary cap in future years (Matthew Stafford, Donald, Tyler Higbee, etc.)

Which inefficiency will the Rams identify and exploit next? I left a comment on Blaine Grisak's recent post related to the tight end position that gained traction and is worth a deeper dive:

If Rams are going to continue on this trend of 12/13 personnel, you can sign what are considered expensive tight ends at a fraction of the cost of one top shelf receiver. It's a new way to look at things compared to Rams' historic investment in these respective positions.

I think it is a way they can find a competitive edge and exploit market inefficiencies.

I've been hammering home the idea that the Rams are in need of a number two receiver to compliment star Puka Nacua and preserve veteran Davante Adams. It later occurred to me that starting receivers are expensive-whether you acquire them in free agency or through the draft-and that Los Angeles may be better served by embracing their recent usage of heavier personnel.

Rams fans consider Colby Parkinson to be highly paid. That is probably true considering his minimal starting experience prior to his deal in 2024 and production since. But even an annual value of just over $7M is incredibly cheap when you apply this context to the receiver position.

LA signed Tutu Atwell to a one-year, $10M deal last offseason and then barely played him. Number two receivers could command $15-20M annually this offseason and some of them are even looking for their third or later NFL contracts.

If the Rams are committed to 12 (two TE's) or 13 (three TE's) personnel sets moving forward, it might make sense to pay several players towards the top of the tight end market for what could be the cost of one top shelf receiver.

Add in the context that the Rams drafted Terrance Ferguson a year ago. Sean McVay recently stated that Ferguson can play any tight end or receiver position for the team. He's a versatile chess piece that has position flexibility.

Maybe it makes sense to add a similar weapon in Atlanta's Kyle Pitts, who is projected by The Athletic to sign a four year, $70M ($17.5M annual value) contract in free agency.

If the Rams are instead confident in Ferguson's ability as a versatile chess piece, they can sign a blocking specialist with pass catching upside like Charlie Kolar for three years and $21M according to the same projections. This would be a very similar contract to Parkinson's without adjusting for annual inflation. That seems smart to me.

Traditional thinking would suggest that the Rams need another receiver this offseason. If we instead look outside the box, perhaps they can further strengthen the tight end position with more affordable contracts and accomplish the same result.

Can the Rams find their next competitive edge and exploit new market inefficiencies?