jravens13

Members
 View profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    1,667

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by jravens13

  1. Posted · Report post

      2 hours ago, The Greek said:

    the way i see the draft playing out is we will either trade back with a team that will allow hargreaves to still fall to us while acquiring more draftpicks or we will draft bosa, jack or buckner. ronnie stanley if we lose osemele

    I agree with the potential trade back.
    However, I strongly thing that a.) Buckner will be gone at #6, and b.) Ozzie won't pick Bosa even if he's still on the board at #6 (which more and more mocks project will be the case).

    Why? Ozzie and the Ravens scouting team has a great track record identifying capable pass rushers that are still available on day#2. Three names: JJ, McPhee, Za'Darius Smith. All three were day#2 picks. And there will be promising pass rusher talent on day#2. Therefore, I think Ozzie won't go for a pass rusher with his top picks.

    And, since retaining Shareece Wright means we have our starting CB tandem, the most logical and safest bet for #6 seems to be Ronnie Stanley - as I'm positive KO will be gone the first day of free agency - meaning that although we have Urschel and probably Jensen, a top talent at G would be a logical pick. Or a trade down. And, as a trademark Ozzie-move, drafting our next great pass rusher in the 4th round, with one of the picks acquired in the trade :)

    I wouldn't bank on Wright being the locked in starter. He played mediocre at best last year. We played some really bad QB's when he started getting playing time and he wasn't overwhelming. He is an upgrade to Arrington who can't cover anyone anymore. BTW Wright's resume is not great, but he did play better in 2015 than he had previously.

    https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2014/05/13/best-fantasy-cb-matchups/

    https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2015/02/13/sig-stats-ypcs-cornerbacks/

    His contract: 3YR $16M.

    0

  3. Posted · Report post

      35 minutes ago, TorryGundy said:

    This is already proving to be an interesting off season. I am not sure if we can depend on Suggs coming back as a big impact player. His mind seems to be on a great deal of other things. I see and hear about how everyone else is attacking their rehab and he is still playing childish games. Why was he over another woman's house, didn't he just get engaged last year? The next day he was on IG liking several girls pics. He is a head case. We really need to draft a few pass rushers. Right now on the outside we have a player who is Sizzled out and left us Doomed LOL

    I believe Suggs wife filed for divorce last year over allegations of infidelity. I am less concerned about his personal life and more concerned about if he will come into camp in shape to play. Suggs has a history of playing his way into football shape during camp. With his injury and age I worry those days are behind him and he needs to be working out now or we will be spending the season talking about if this is his last year.

    Suggs is in his 14th Season. He knows exactly what he needs to do to get ready for the season. He has been arguably our best player for the last 10 years and I still don't see anyone on this roster that makes more of an impact than Suggs on Sundays.

    1

  5. Posted · Report post

    Pitta, Rice, and now Suggs- look at all this dead money/ bad contracts we have in place that it cripples us for years- other teams do a much better job at managing the cap / drafting/ picking up free agents.. how many more safeties do we have to draft/ pick up in FA before we get this right?

    Suggs is the leader of this defense. His 7.5M cap hit is a bargain compared to what he brings to the table. Pitta was a mistake. No one would have ever thought Rice would do what he did and that the media storm would force him out of the league.

    Ozzie, DeCosta, Hortiz are as good as it gets. They have recently made some mistakes, but I would be willing to bet that they are learning from them as the league evolves. Think about how many years we have been drafting in the 20s-30s. We get to pick at the top of each round and this class is incredibly talented at positions we need. CB, ILB, DE, OT, OLB. I expect 3 Pro Bowlers to come out of this class.

    0

  6. Posted · Report post

    22 hours ago, riseNConquer81 said:

    Joe's cap hits for the first three years of his post super bowl deal were $6.8M, $14.8M, $14.5M.

    Why on earth would you want to strap us more in years with a smaller cap than the current one by making his capnumbers north of $20M all three of those years instead? How would that have helped us back then?

    There's no question that when the time came Joe would be ready to negotiate a new extension, so why would you NOT give him a backloaded contracted to maximize your cap space and go after more trophies?

    We did do things right the first time.

    And how about those trophies? 2013: 8-8, 2014: 10-6 Divisional Round Exit, 2015: 5-11 It all comes down to taking more risk and banking on 2013-2015 vs. spreading things out evenly and having more flexibility. Notice how I said "Inflation Adjusted". We would be in an even better situation now had they done things right the first time. 

    0

  7. Posted · Report post

    Myles Jack gives you so much versatility. He is an absolute freak athlete who can play everywhere on the field. He puts Jalen Ramsey to shame, and has much better tape. He is probably the best defensive player in the draft, but we all know pass rushers come at a premium. Right now it seems like BPA will work out because we have needs at OLB, CB, ILB, and OT: (Bosa, Hargreaves, Jack, and Stanley)

    0

  8. Posted · Report post

    KO is a goner, unfortunately. Monroe is staying which is also unfortunate. I think the CB position will surely be addressed through both free agency and the draft.

    How do you know that? He is shopping his deal and we cleared cap space to potentially bump our offer to keep him in Baltimore. Team's will not pay him as a top Tackle only playing 4 games at the position.

    1

  9. Posted · Report post

    If we can't keep K.O after this it will be darn shame. Especially after effectively insulting the only other viable option in Monroe by the statements made, we are nearing a really terrible predicament with no LT or starting LG on our team. In times like these we end up overpaying for services that we tend to regret down the road. My sense is we shouldn't offer top tackle money to K.O simply because he is unproven at tackle and was serviceable at tackle for a total of 4 games. Is he worth paying top tackle money for? No, I don't think so. Top guard money or average tackle money is all they have to pay for K.O. If not, we need to get somebody else.

    I think 9M/Year is the magic number. I think teams are less likely to pay him as a Tackle, but consider his versatility as a bonus. He will get top guard money offers on the open market.

    0

  15. Posted · Report post

    4 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

    1. Saying "Tucker has the bigger leg so we attempt longer kicks" isn't even remotely accurate. We wouldn't attempt like four times as many longer kicks as a guy who has a very strong leg like Gostkowski. We attempt those longer kicks because our offense stalls between the 30-40 a lot more frequently than the Patriots do. This team doesn't enjoy sending Tucker out for 55 yard kicks on a weekly basis. If he never attempted a kick outside of 50 yards for a whole season, I bet it'd be one of the better offensive seasons for this team ever. That's sort of the goal. 

    2. Saying Tucker is more accurate wouldn't seem to be wise given the statistics I just showed you. You're literally just making that up. Since Tucker has been in the league, he has NOT been more accurate than Gostkowski. That's not debatable.

    He may have never let us down in crunch time, but there's also been a few seasons where "crunch times" were very few and far between, bordering on now very many to begin with.

    Kind of like putting all your eggs in the "but he's a really great postseason player" basket. That's great and wonderful, but if you're average in the regular season and great in the postseason, and your team doesn't make the postseason, guess what that makes you for that season? It makes you average.

    Remember, in order to be "clutch", you have to be put into a situation to be clutch. When those opportunities aren't present, you still have to make the kicks.

    Please never reply to another one of my comments and I will do the same. 

    0

  16. Posted · Report post

      46 minutes ago, jravens13 said:

    Tucker has a higher career FG percentage, Tucker has more FG's of 50+ and has played 6 less seasons. Tucker is 87% from 40-49yds to Goskowski's 79%. He has had a higher touchback percentage in 3 of his 4 years and has a stronger leg. Tucker is 6 years younger than Gostkowski. I can't even remember Tucker missing a kick where the game is on the line. Obviously Goskowski has had his share of clutch kicks, but Tucker is clearly better and is at a much earlier stage in his career. 

    Yeah, but the problem is... nobody cares about career numbers for kickers. The only thing that matters for kickers is how good have you recently been, since great kickers go from being great to being unemployed in a 1-2 year period. They're swapped out like children's toys anytime they become stale, and if you have a bad season, you immediately face competition from your job and are replaced.

    Age is entirely irrelevant with kickers, because frankly, older kickers are preferred to younger kickers. Unlike most positions, there's really no risk of injury and there's very little concern over aging standards, since the great kickers kick well into their 40s, which is largely unheard of at any other position.

    With a kicker... is it more relevant how good they were 8-10 years ago, or is it more important how good they've recently been? Obviously, the latter.

    So in that case, in the last four years (since Tucker has been in the league):

    Gostkowski: 91% FG pct, 86% 50+ yards

    Tucker: 88% FG pct, 60% 50+ yards

    For me, I don't really care what Gostkowski did back in 2006, because, well, it was 2006. If he sucked that bad, he wouldn't have been tenured for a decade in a league that throws away kickers annually.

    At the end of the day, I can make statistics say whatever I want them to say. By the way... may want to consider using percentages for your 50+ metrics, because saying "o he's made more 50 yarders" doesn't really mean anything. I would have expected him to make significantly more, considering he's attempted significantly more (a product of how more efficient one offense is over another). Gostkowski's only attempt 22 regular season 50+ yard FGs in 10 years, an average of about 2-3 a year. That's a GOOD thing, not a bad thing. Tucker had 10 attempts last season alone... NOT a good thing. The reason you use percentages? Because while Tucker's made more 50+ yarders than Gostkowski has in six less years, he's also MISSED more 50+ yard FGs than Gostkowski has in six less years. In fact, Justin missed more 50+ yarders in 2015 alone than Gostkowski has in TEN YEARS.

     

    How many of those Tucker misses came from 55+ before the half? Goskowski has only made one FG in his entire career of 55+. Tucker has the bigger leg so we attempt more reach kicks. Tucker is more accurate and has a stronger leg. He has never let us down in crunch time. End discussion.

    1

  17. Posted · Edited by jravens13 · Report post

    2 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

    Well, Gostkowski is better by just about any possible metric imaginable.

    Tucker has a higher career FG percentage, Tucker has more FG's of 50+ and has played 6 less seasons. Tucker is 87% from 40-49yds to Goskowski's 79%. He has had a higher touchback percentage in 3 of his 4 years and has a stronger leg. Tucker is 6 years younger than Gostkowski. I can't even remember Tucker missing a kick where the game is on the line. Obviously Goskowski has had his share of clutch kicks, but Tucker is clearly better and is at a much earlier stage in his career. 

    2

  19. Posted · Report post

    Our tax dollars at work on something as important as whether or not Flacco is elite. Syria, Iran, ISIS, Al Qaeda, Mid east peace, budget crunch, economy, etc... and they are spending time on Flacco's elitism. I don't understand with Webb's production and health, Will Hill is in danger of being cut and Webb isn't? He must have pictures of somebody up top in a compromising position. SMH

    Webb took a pay cut last year and I think the FO thought it would be bad taste to ask him to take even less money this year. He will be a much better safety than corner if he can bulk up and hold up. Webb has good ball skills, but couldn't keep up with quick WR's after his knee surgeries. I think Kendrick Lewis is the odd man out if they get rid of anyone. We used a lot of 3 Safety looks last year and the league is moving towards that. They don't wan't to cut Webb because the 6M in dead money and only 4M in cap savings. Lewis carry 1M in dead money, but would also save us 1M in cap space.

    1

  21. Posted · Report post

      3 hours ago, HomeoftheBRAVENS said:

    Assuming the titans take Bosa,the browns take a QB and the chargers take Tunsil,we need to attempt to trade our first and third round pick to the cowboys for Ramsey.I had given up on the idea of him after we landed just out of the top 5,but after his combine performance yesterday,he's worth the 1 or 2 extra picks it would take to get him.There's no way he won't hit the ground running as a rookie and become a pro bowler.He's the second biggest sure thing in this draft.I'd even be ok with us having to go as high as our 1st,3rd and a future 5th if the cowboys really wanted to be stubborn about it.

    At last someone with an understanding of the trade value chart :D

    I don't think Ozzie would give up his third round pick for Ramsey in such a situation - but at least it would be a fair trade offer - we should even get DAL's one current low-round pick (6th round) and we would still be generous :)

    Ramsey is a project at corner, but has the athleticism to be good. However he is an impact player at Safety. His lateral movements and hips are not ideal for a shut down CB or a guy worth taking in the top 10. His straight line down hill speed is elite. I think he is a much better player playing safety, but he still never made that many plays. I just don't see him being any better than a guy like Antonio Cromartie, but with less ball skills at CB. At safety he can be a playmaker who flies to the ball. I just don't think a top safety is worth trading up for and taking No. 3 overall. I would much rather draft Karl Joseph in the 2nd Round.

    0

  23. Posted · Report post

    4 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

    OK, but you're not making any valid points. Who, specifically, were expendable that we retained? Pitta's deal looks bad because of an injury, Webb's deal was signed long before Flacco's was, and Monroe's deal is bad because he's hurt and not very good. But none of those contracts were affected by Joe's either, and we let countless "expendable" players walk out the door, precisely as you wanted them to do.

    No idea where you got your numbers from in terms of backloading salaries, but your numbers are wrong. This is what Joe's actual SALARY numbers look like:

    $1M, $6M, $4M, $18M, $20.6M, $20M. The problem with your explanation, however, is that if you add up those six numbers, you'll find that only adds up to $69.6M, which means you're missing $51M as part of the deal. Where is that $51M? Well, that would be in the form of three different bonuses ($29M in 2013, $15M in 2014, $7M in 2015). Those are what largely are driving up the latter part of his cap hits, since they get prorated over the remaining life of the deal.

    The biggest elephant in the room that you are not addressing is... under what scenario are the Baltimore Ravens a better football team in 2013, 2014, 2015, or 2016 if Joe's cap structure was "flatter"? Or better yet, ask yourself this...

    Is Elvis Dumervil here if Joe has a $15-20M cap hit in 2013? How could we have afforded him? Is Steve Smith here if Joe has a $20M cap hit in 2014? How could we have afforded him?

    I'm also a bit confused by the stance of "you win through the draft and keeping core leaders together" (which I agree with), but then later on you want us to spend significant cap space on impact free agents, which hasn't worked historically for winning franchises. So which one are you advocating?

    Again, this just circles back to more hindsight analysis from fans that don't have the foresight to see these things until they happen. The Ravens basically have, for the last three years, adopted the strategy you claim to advocate... resign our own "core" players, let non-essentially players walk in FA, and focus on the draft. The problem is that you are now also bashing that strategy because you see it hasn't been working.

     

     

    My point is that we would have more room NOW. To make impact moves in Free Agency, and for the next 6 years. To retain the must keep guys. McPhee is the only guy we should have resigned at the right price, but it seems that didn't work out. We should not have paid Webb what we spent on him. We should not have paid Pitta even close to what we paid. Monroe was a bargain in terms of what you commit to a LT, but clearly Jacksonville knew he wasn't that great. 

     

    If we didn't have Dumervil don't you think we would have drafted another pass rusher? Dumervil isn't even a 3 down player. SSR was a bargain at 3M a year and he would have made it on this team regardless. 

     

    I like how you tell me my numbers were wrong. You are forgetting to include the option bonus which Flacco collects every year he comes back on the deal. Check spotrac again. You clearly don't get it. Internet arguments are so stupid. 

    0

  24. Posted · Edited by jravens13 · Report post

    1 hour ago, rmcjacket23 said:
    2 hours ago, jravens13 said:

    It is called gambling on the present and sacrificing the future. We could have paid Flacco more upfront and let other guys walk. We chose to keep a team together that wasn't good enough to get it done. Flacco is now going to be overpaid for the next 6 years because of this mistake. 

    Well, in reality, it has nothing to do with how much Joe got paid, because Joe got paid very handsomely in the last three years ($62M of $120.6M in the last three years). Joe himself made $30M in year 1 (2013) of his deal and another $21M in year 2 (2014), so from an actual cash received standpoint, that deal is more front loaded than back loaded from Joe's perspective.

    It is from a salary cap perspective only that the deal was backloaded, which I agree was a mistake, but not for the reason you think it was.

    As it were, I definitely don't buy this notion of "pay him more and let other guys walk", because I really can't think of any player we kept and should have let walk because of Joe's deal. You do realize that the biggest knock on the FO has been letting TOO MANY players walk in the last three years as opposed to trying to keep the band together right?

    How quick you are to forget the "purge" of 2013, that started practically days after our SB victory. We pretty much took the entire defense from our SB run and took a butchers knife to it in a single offseason, and that was with Joe only carrying a roughly $7M cap number that season.

    Please provide me a list of the players that we kept that you think we should have cut by increasing Joe's cap number in the last three years. Not saying there aren't any, but I can't think of any significant one's off the top of my head.

    Flacco won't be overpaid for the next six years... his cap number and the amount he will get is going to be an accurate reflection of what is NOW the market value for said QBs.

     

    Take the hits as they come. If we can't retain guys that is just part of the business. You win through the draft and keeping core leaders together. Yanda, Flacco and Suggs were the only guys we had to retain since 2013. McPhee could be in that equation as well. The rest of were expendable. KO would be another, but it seems like the Flacco deal could get in the way.

    Don't handicap your future for what you can have today from a roster standpoint. It is the base salary that they backloaded for Flacco.
    What if they did: 1M, 9M, 9M, 23M, 25M, 25M
    What they should have done: 9M, 14M, 16M, 17M, 18M, 18M

    We reached for guys that screwed up our salary cap. When you miss on guys and backload the contract it only amplifies your mistakes: Pitta, Webb, Monroe, and (Flacco Backload) are all reasons why we are tight on the cap now. Rice falls off the books next year but that contract was much more appropriate.

    We have lost more talent than we gained through free agency yet we have less cap space because of some of these hindering contracts. We could be bringing in impact Free Agents if we were more disciplined fiscally.

    0

  25. Posted · Report post

    1 hour ago, rmcjacket23 said:

    Well, you don't get to decide whether to backload the contract (from a cap perspective) after you see what the future holds.

    If we had won a SB in the last three years, nobody would be complaining about the backloaded contract. Its only after hindsight analysis to fans complain, which doesn't really accomplish anything.

    It is called gambling on the present and sacrificing the future. We could have paid Flacco more upfront and let other guys walk. We chose to keep a team together that wasn't good enough to get it done. Flacco is now going to be overpaid for the next 6 years because of this mistake. 

    1