Why the Rams were never going to get very much for Cam Akers
After a few days of fielding calls and shopping Cam Akers on the trade market, the Los Angeles Rams found a team to take the fourth-year running back. The Minnesota Vikings agreed to acquire Akers from the Rams, paying very little to get a deal done.
The Rams gave up Akers and a conditional seventh-rounder in 2026 in exchange for a conditional sixth-round pick in 2026. It’s about as low as the compensation gets for a trade considering draft picks can’t be dealt more than three years out.
So why did the Rams settle for such little return for a former second round pick? Because they had no choice. In the lead up to this deal, the Rams essentially backed themselves into a corner with Akers. Not only did they make him a healthy scratch in Week 2, but Sean McVay’s comments this week made it clear that Akers was done in Los Angeles.
“That won’t be an opportunity,” McVay said Monday of whether Akers could potentially remain with the Rams. “It’ll be an opportunity to be able to move – I feel good about the opportunity to be able to move him, but we won’t go back and forth on it.”
So if every team in the NFL knew Akers wasn’t going to be back with the Rams, why would they pay a lot to acquire him in a trade? If the Rams didn’t get what they were looking for, they would’ve simply released him. After all, the cap savings would’ve been $1.29 million regardless of whether they traded him or cut him, so it’s not as if they couldn’t release him for financial reasons.
On Monday night, McVay then said on the “Coach McVay Show” that it was fair to say Akers played his last down in Los Angeles. Whether that was a sign of his confidence that a trade would get done or McVay simply saying Akers was done with the Rams no matter what, he once again made it clear that Los Angeles had no plans of keeping No. 3 on the roster.
And then there was the dispute with the team last year that led to Akers being away for a couple of weeks. Those locker room rumblings came up again on Sunday when it was reported that Akers didn’t adhere to the Rams’ culture.
Beyond those issues, Akers’ play on the field was, well, not great. He was fantastic to end last season, rushing for 100-plus yards in each of his last three games, but he was inefficient and ineffective in Week 1 this year. He rushed for 29 yards on 22 carries in the opener and he didn’t see a single target in the passing game.
Akers has never been much of a threat as a receiver despite the Rams often talking about his ability in that area, and his career average is just 4.0 yards per carry. He simply hasn’t been very explosive since tearing his Achilles in 2021, which isn’t necessarily his fault.
Plus, he’s in the final year of his contract and the team that traded for him would be forced to take on $1.29 million – not a ton of money but also not a tiny amount. And for a one-year rental, with Akers becoming a free agent after this season.
Between his performance, McVay’s comments, his contract and apparent culture issues, the Rams were simply never going to get much for him. And in the end, they got the bare minimum.
