Indianapolis traded safety Rich Coady to St. Louis at the end…
Indianapolis traded safety Rich Coady to St. Louis at the end of the 2003 preseason for a 2004 seventh-round pick, which became kicker David Kimball at No. 229. The Rams received immediate depth and the Colts received a late selection, but neither return developed into meaningful long-term value. With limited football impact on both sides, matching C-plus grades and an Even Trade verdict fit the result.
Indianapolis Colts Received
- pick 2004 7th round pick (229th overall, David Kimball)
Los Angeles Rams Received
- player Rich Coady
Trade Analysis
Why the Rams Wanted Coady
Late-August trades are often about final roster needs rather than long-range franchise planning. St. Louis entered 2003 as a contender and used a future seventh-round pick to add Rich Coady, an experienced safety who could provide depth and familiarity with NFL responsibilities. The price was minimal, which made the move easy to justify even without expecting a major role.
What Indianapolis Received
The Colts accepted a 2004 seventh-round choice rather than keep Coady through the final roster squeeze. That pick became No. 229 overall and was used on kicker David Kimball. A seventh-round selection gives a team another low-cost opportunity, but the return did not develop into a lasting contributor who materially changed Indianapolis' roster.
How the Results Balanced Out
Neither side can point to a strong long-term payoff. St. Louis received the immediate player and Indianapolis received the future selection, but the transaction remained at the margins of both teams' larger plans. That matters when grading a small move: a club does not need to uncover a star for the decision to be rational, yet hindsight still asks whether one side ultimately captured more useful value.
Final Verdict
Even Trade. Indianapolis and St. Louis each receive a C-plus because the exchange did what low-cost late-preseason deals often do: it shifted a reserve player to the team that wanted him and returned a late pick to the team that did not. With no meaningful downstream advantage on either side, there is not enough separation to award a clear winner.