rmcjacket23

First of all, Jernigan is going to have a big year this year. If we don't lock him up before the season we will end up regretting it and paying him in the same ballpark as Brandon Williams.

Now if Jacksonville wants him. You tell them Yannick Ngoukwe and a third round pick this year. I think I'd be content with that. But I don't want to see Jernigan traded.

If you're locking him up before the season, you're very likely already paying him what you paid Brandon Williams. Why would he take a deal less than that, when he can just wait a year and be a hot commodity?

  16 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

While I don't think their cap situation in 2018 will be bad, I should also point out that they have $134M under contract currently, but that's only with 36 players.

As is typically the case, its not so much about affording him as WANTING to afford him. Committing something like $20-25M in cap space in a given year to two defensive lineman who aren't particularly great at rushing the passer isn't always the best investment strategy.

I'm not buying the talk of him getting traded or of us not being able to resign him just yet, but again, its difficult to commit that much money to those types of positions.
 

36 players is not a low number at all. Say 8 draft picks (Jernigan, Mosley, Gilmore) that's 47.  Only 4 roster spots to fill.

i absolutely agree I'm also not buying into the trade talk. Just doesn't make sense at the moment. 

if your committing 25 mil on the 2 players then he'll no. That's like saying Jernigan will get a 15 mil per year deal. Let him walk and il gladly take another year of cheap production along with s third round comp. I'm thinking 18 mil between the two is fair if we have a top 5 defense

1. Would depend on the price of those players that are filled. If they are getting $5-7M a year contracts, that's $20-25M spent right there.

2. Well, Williams deal averages at $10.5M. The prevailing thought is that Jernigan would get similar or more, considering he's a pretty good DT who also can get to the QB. So if he got an identical deal, it means you would average $21M spent on those two guys. It wouldn't be $21M in year 1, but if its not, it means by the time you get to years like 2-4, it will be significantly higher than that.

If you're getting them for $18M total on average, that means you're only willing to pay Jernigan $7.5M. If that's the case, then he will definitely be playing elsewhere, because that's probably a very lowball offer.

3. The comp pick is why I don't see him getting traded. Unless he has a disastrous season, he will fetch a price tag that will guarantee us at least a 4th rounder, and likely a 3rd, depending on how next years market shakes out.

I can't see any team giving up more than a 3rd for him, so AT BEST, you'd be trading him a season early to move up in the same round in the draft. To me, that's not worth it.

I'm not dealing him unless I can get a 2nd rounder for sure, and if its a late 2nd rounder, I'm not even sure I do that.

Wow, that Lombardi statement was all over the place!

1- Jernigan is not like guy, he's probably going to demand more than double guy made in free agency!

2- the Ravens can afford to keep Jernigan as they have upwards 35 mil to spend next year and basically only Mosley and Wallace to sign.

3- then he claims the Ravens can't pay him because they payed Williams wich also has nothing to do with Jernigan.

4- finally he suggests moving on with Pierce and Williams when Pierce doesn't even play Jernigans position!

is this guy serious? 

While I don't think their cap situation in 2018 will be bad, I should also point out that they have $134M under contract currently, but that's only with 36 players.

As is typically the case, its not so much about affording him as WANTING to afford him. Committing something like $20-25M in cap space in a given year to two defensive lineman who aren't particularly great at rushing the passer isn't always the best investment strategy.

I'm not buying the talk of him getting traded or of us not being able to resign him just yet, but again, its difficult to commit that much money to those types of positions.

You know it's slow when beat writers copy and paste other writers news articles. LOL! Every player doesn't fit every system. Every team has a different environment and personality, so every free agent doesn't flourish with a new team. Look at when we signed S Michael Huff. He didn't make it through the season if I remember correctly. It was a rare mistake and I think he admitted it was very difficult for him in B-more. Every team makes the same mistakes with FAs.

True, although it seems to happen more frequently with our FAs going to other teams.

The Ravens would be better off getting a QB that doesn't launch under thrown lobs off his back foot

Good luck finding one...

I feel that Juice and Kamar had very legit complaints, and that the problem is the bromance Flacco has with Pitta. Joe locks in on Pitta far too much, and our opponents defenses know that. Good and Great QB's/Offensive teams spread the ball around, are unpredictable. If you have a Superstar such as Julio Jones, Antonio Brown, or Gronk, then sure, you're going to over use them. Pitta is NOT that good. Joe needs to use ALL of his weapons.

Pretty much a myth based on 2016 statistics. Look at the targets/game:

Pitta: 7.4
Wallace: 7.3
Smith: 6.4
Perriman: 4.1
Aiken: 3.1

So Pitta and Wallace were targeted at nearly the same rate, and Steve Smith was only targeted once per game less.

Pretty typical for a team with no clear #1 target. Spread out pretty evenly over the top 2-3 players, and then a drop off to the next group.

I will agree that Pitta's targets numbers are higher than we normally see from him and probably higher than they should be given his skill sets, but he's getting as much attention as Wallace was, and not significantly more than Steve Smith either.

  21 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

  21 hours ago, fusuymada said:

I said for four years while Pitta was out that we had a great talent in Juszczyk and we totally underutilized him. Aiken didn't make it on several teams and in his entire career he had one season where he had almost 1000 yard season and the best he can ever hope for is a 3rd or 4th receiver. Juszxzyk however, was another Danny Woodhead but better. He can run as well, is a better pass receiver, and he can also block when necessary which Woodhead can not do.

I am not a person to call for the coaches head, but the decisions to hire the OC's we have has been horrible except for the one where Ozzie told John he was hiring Kubiak and that was the best coach that Harbaugh ever hired but Harbaugh never hired him. I am seeing this team turn into a dumpster fire and if we don't have a playoff season this year, it is time to move on from Harbaugh as he has lost complete focus, or never had it, on what was important.

Source where Ozzie told John to hire Kubiak?

Pretty sure that didn't actually happen. Most likely a fan-generated myth.

The closest article I found. "The last tweet from Baltimore Sun columnist Mike Preston is telling, considering that Jim Hostler was leading the way for the job it seemed. That would insinuate that Harbaugh wanted Hostler and that Ozzie Newsome and Steve Bisciotti were thinking otherwise."

http://www.baltimorebeatdown.com/2014/1/27/5350924/ravens-to-hire-gary-kubiak-as-offensive-coordinator-official

Preston also makes stuff up all the time too, so needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

  21 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Well we don't really know what the Browns were offering, but my guess is he didn't leave much money behind. We don't even know if the guaranteed money was much different either.

I will almost guarantee that it wasn't a case of the Browns offering like $12M a year and him choosing the Ravens for like $8.5M. We're talking maybe $1M a year difference in most of these cases.

Jefferson himself said he turned down 1.5m per yesr to accept the Ravens offer. 

Yup, so not much. Also don't know what the guaranteed money difference was or if there was one.

  2 hours ago, billiejean said:

  4 hours ago, budman said:

  5 hours ago, The Mom Gene said:

I'm sorry... but Aiken sounds like he's whining. He had opportunities. Quite a few times I saw where he was basically hit right in the numbers with the ball and dropped the pass. Come on man....  He had a ton of chances to prove himself.

I loved Juice. As a fullback, and where the position has taken a back seat to RB's and Receivers, you can basically understand where he's coming from. The play at the end of the Steeler's game is one I will not forget. He laid it out to make that TD.

Good Luck to both of them.

Agree. Aiken really isn't THAT good to be honest. He had his chances to prove himself but couldn't out perform a retiring vet or 2nd year rookie. His route running is also suspect. Lets see just how much he actually plays in Indy. He might just live on special teams. Notice just how much interest teams had in him....Ummmm hardly any. When he signed with them it wasn't a long deal so that should tell him something. I hate whiners! Blame everything and everyone but himself. Geez.

Yea, it is hard to envision Kamar getting much time on offense unless someone gets hurt. I don't think that anyone has ever thought that Kamar was THAT good. I had a hard time last off season trying to justify the FO move to tender him as a second round RFA last year. I still cant come up with any logical explanation for why they made that decision. That said I really don't think what he said is as incendiary as you and others are making it seem. I wish him well.

That's exactly my point, people in this thread are acting like Aiken said "Screw Baltimore, I hate them, they suck, I did amazing things in Baltimore, Indy ftw." People talking about him like he spray painted a swastika on the field before he left. Jeezz

No one is saying Aiken was great, never said he was better than Perriman or Wallace- just that when given playing time, he's more dependable to catch the ball.
Keep in mind, all those stats about his 1st down %(which led our receivers) or 4% drop rate came in the year where he saw his reps decrease cause SSS, Periman, and Wallace were 1, 2, & 3 in the depth chart.

Everything Aiken said is valid.
Are there better options, OBVIOUSLY.
But to Aikens point, there is a difference between not playing cause you suck, and not playing cause the front office wanna see what the rookie can do.

Aiken is not that great BUT, when put in his shoes, if in 2015 you led the team with 75 receptions for 944 yards and five touchdowns, then see your self on the bottom of the depth chart for what is in your mind no other reason than some bigger names came in.... tell me you wouldn't feel the same way???

Ideally he would have realized that Steve Smith missing a big chunk of the season had a lot to do with that, as well as the fact that the team spent most of the season trailing and had to throw constantly.

If I were him heading into last offseason, I would have said to myself "well, Steve is coming back (even though he said he was going to retire, Perriman is getting healthy, AND they signed Mike Wallace... I'm not sure they really think much of me at this point".

Yes, please cut out the commercial switches after every single change of possession.

They are actually going to be doing this. Not fully, but significantly.

Too bad they are not taking this seriously enough to make real changes. They are considering reducing overtime from 15 minutes to 10 minutes. Yea Roger, thats the problem. The couple of games per year that go into overtime, lets reduce it my 5 minutes. It couldn't possibly be that they are too greedy to even pause for a second before going to commercial. Or that they refuse to cut the commercials short like they used to and now bring back the game after the snap. Until they make changes that hurt their own self interests, revenue, they will continue to lose viewers. How are people at the top always so disconnected to reality?

But the reality is it has very little to do with that. People think this is an NFL problem... its not really. Its a television problem. Its a TV network issue, its a TV subscriber issue.

People aren't paying for Cable/Satellite TV anymore. There's a rapid change in consumer preference when it comes to this. They don't want commercials PERIOD. Has nothing to do with length of them or quality of them.

The steps that they're talking about taking in regards to commercials I actually think will work. You'll get less commercial breaks, but you'll get a slightly lengthier commercial break when you get one. Doubt fans actually take notice.

  15 minutes ago, ByTheBay said:

Is it me or does the tone of Aiken and Juice feel like night and day? Juice sounds more appreciative while Aiken sounds bitter and whiney. 

They're complaining of 2 different situations...Juice's position was underutilized, Aiken's position was crowded and he could catch better than 2 of the 3 people ahead of him on the depth chart. Juice would sound bitter too if there were other FB's getting more playing time with Juice feeling as if he could contribute more than them.

Granted, Wallace and Perriman have other qualities that might have made them rank above Aiken such as better route running, more separation, more YAC, etc., but when your JOB is to CATCH THE BALL, it seems as if the Ravens valued the wrong attributes and maybe Aiken realized that.
You can't blame him for feeling the way he does.

Or they looked at his 4% drop rate (which isn't terrible, but not great either) and determined that maybe he wasn't all that great at doing that either...

  27 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

  47 minutes ago, david thomas said:

E David Thomas
agree with Aiken, he deserved more reps or at the very least constructive feedback on what needed improvement to get more play time. my sense is, my beloved Ravens just don['t have a good Reciever Game strategy/route trees/creative plays to take advantage of skills of WR's - they are to predictable and limited to keying on 1 or 2 WR's for any play (lacks flexibility) and simple progression reads that either go to #1 or #2 or very quickly to the dump-off outlet - come on guys, let's get it together for 2017.

I'm pretty sure he identified already that the Ravens were identifying things that he didn't do well or needed to work on. Seemed he just simply disagreed.

The problem with Aiken is that I don't see a particular set of skills that he brings to the table that differentiates himself from his peers, and I think the league knows that.

Aiken's skill set was being sure handed on 3rd down and moving the chains, which he did when he played.
His peers: Perriman- deep threat with no hands
Wallace- deep threat who occasionally had no hands
Ironically, his best shot for playing time would've come with this years Ravens since, with the departure of SSS, he would have had the surest hands on the team aside from getting one of the top 3 WR in the draft.

Another myth though. Aiken had a higher drop rate (4%) in 2016 than Steve Smith (3%), Mike Wallace (1.7%), and Pitta (1.7%), two of which will be on the 2017 team.

In terms of being a "chain mover", his 1st down % isn't much different than most of his peers in 2016.

Aiken: 62%
Wallace: 60%
Steve Smith: 56%
Perriman: 58%

Pitta was the only one with a pretty low number.

E David Thomas
agree with Aiken, he deserved more reps or at the very least constructive feedback on what needed improvement to get more play time. my sense is, my beloved Ravens just don['t have a good Reciever Game strategy/route trees/creative plays to take advantage of skills of WR's - they are to predictable and limited to keying on 1 or 2 WR's for any play (lacks flexibility) and simple progression reads that either go to #1 or #2 or very quickly to the dump-off outlet - come on guys, let's get it together for 2017.

I'm pretty sure he identified already that the Ravens were identifying things that he didn't do well or needed to work on. Seemed he just simply disagreed.

The problem with Aiken is that I don't see a particular set of skills that he brings to the table that differentiates himself from his peers, and I think the league knows that.

  13 minutes ago, whobilly said:

Life in the NFL today. Whatever team pays me the most I'm leaving. Simple formula. Juice was way over paid but good for him. When he is released by the Niners as a cap casualty two years from now and 7 total wins later at least he was able to grab some extra cash.

Good thing Tony Jefferson had a completely different mindset..

Well we don't really know what the Browns were offering, but my guess is he didn't leave much money behind. We don't even know if the guaranteed money was much different either.

I will almost guarantee that it wasn't a case of the Browns offering like $12M a year and him choosing the Ravens for like $8.5M. We're talking maybe $1M a year difference in most of these cases.

  1 hour ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Well, sort of.

1. He can take less because he's made a little under $200M in his career from the Patriots. That's why he can take less, which he somewhat does.

2. Fans seems to forget that there have been multiple contracts in Brady's career where he was taking top of the market deals. The reason fans forget this is because QBs weren't making $20M+ a year when he was doing that.

In 2005, he signed a deal that paid him nearly $10M AAV, which was one of the biggest deals in league history at the time. Note that the salary cap that season was just over $85M.

In 2010, he signed a 4 year extension worth $72M, so an AAV on that extension of $18M/year. On AAV, that made him the highest paid player in the league.

3. Also need to understand that Brady's compensation and cap numbers are often two very different things. Much of Brady's compensation through his career has come in the form of bonuses instead of base salaries, so that they can be allocated over a longer period of a contract.

Tom Brady made over $28M to play football last season. That's how much cash the Patriots paid him. He wasn't playing for $5M, or $10M, or $15M.

Now, in 2017, he's only owed $1M, but we will see if that actually comes to fruition or not.
 

Welp, here's to hoping that Flacco has filled his pockets with enough moolah at one point so he, too, would be willing to take a bit less or maybe shuffle some of that dough around into bonuses of different sort. 

1. He's already done the bonus thing. It's why his cap number is so high right now and why he had to do a complete extension after just 3 years of a 6 year deal.

2. Unlikely to see anything of the sort, given that Joe almost certainly won't be playing until he is 40 like Tom will. He would be 37 when his current contract expires, and that's probably around the time he'll start considering retirement, assuming he even makes it that long.

I'm curious to see what the price tag for this 1 year deal is. If he's going there on a bargain I'll be kind of upset that we didn't at least give him a competitive offer. I know the people who comment here aren't high on Aiken, but dude could play some ball. He would've definitely been useful this year as we transition away from SSS. Don't really understand why he's so undervalued, also don't understand why he signed with Indy over Seattle. Seahawks seemed like a better team and a better chance at consistently seeing the field.

And for even added context, look at the output from the Colts the last few years in that role:

In 2016, the 3rd WR on the roster was actually 4th on the team in targets, with 56. By comparison, he had 50 targets in Baltimore last year, and felt "underutilized". Note that the Colts ran a lot of two TE sets, and had two TEs with over 50 targets. Not that much difference than Baltimore, who had Pitta as a target hog and Juice having nearly identical targets to Aiken.

In 2015, the 3rd WR on the roster was again 4th on the team in targets, though did see a bump to 77 targets. This was also the year that Luck missed significant time and the Colts threw a lot more due to falling behind in games a lot.

So realistically, based on how our offense runs compared to the Colts, I don't really see the options for Aiken to get more usage. Like 2015, he's probably going to need an injury to Moncrief or Hilton in order to get significant time. AND that's assuming that he gets more targets than somebody like Dorsett, which I doubt.

I'm curious to see what the price tag for this 1 year deal is. If he's going there on a bargain I'll be kind of upset that we didn't at least give him a competitive offer. I know the people who comment here aren't high on Aiken, but dude could play some ball. He would've definitely been useful this year as we transition away from SSS. Don't really understand why he's so undervalued, also don't understand why he signed with Indy over Seattle. Seahawks seemed like a better team and a better chance at consistently seeing the field.

Have not seen any updates on his contract size either, but hopefully soon we will.

I find the whole thing amusing. He complains about his role in an offense that had limited abilities at the WR position, then signs with a team to COMPETE for the #3 WR in an offense that is extremely multi-dimensional.

Basically he complains about the Ravens not "showing him love", and then signs a one year deal in a bad WR market with a team just so he can COMPETE for #3 duties.

Sounds like the Colts don't think he's that good either.

  10 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Yup... for multiple seasons, not just a one year stop gap on a team that's not likely to compete for a SB title.

Would also point out that the last time he was in Baltimore, where he had less competition for snaps and playing time, he wasn't that much of a red zone threat in the regular season either. Especially in his last two seasons.

People remember him being one in the playoffs, but he didn't display nearly as much of that from September-December.

Be that as it may, settling for FG was one of our Achilles heels last season. Since nothing had changed receiver wise it may be a problem this year as well. Sure signing a long term solution would be great if you can find one. If not I for one would welcome Boldin back as a one year stop gap. Beggers cant be choosers. 

Or its something we address in the draft. Or we start using our TEs more, which I think is the goal. Or we start running the ball better, especially in the red zone, which is certainly the goal.

That's why I don't think we are a "begger" in that regard. I don't think anybody realistically thinks adding Boldin will mean we start scoring a bunch of TDs instead of FGs.

  23 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

It would be if it were a sustainable number, but you already know that it isn't.

That's an indication of a redzone specialist, not an efficient receiver.

We could definitely use a red zone specialist 

Yup... for multiple seasons, not just a one year stop gap on a team that's not likely to compete for a SB title.

Would also point out that the last time he was in Baltimore, where he had less competition for snaps and playing time, he wasn't that much of a red zone threat in the regular season either. Especially in his last two seasons.

People remember him being one in the playoffs, but he didn't display nearly as much of that from September-December.

Dunno if anyone else has realized - but with Aiken saying interesting things about the Ravens offensive situation - but I cannot help noticing that in 2 years this was the second time a free agent says negative things about the Ravens offensive management. Last year KO said that he never felt that the O-line is appreciated - and now Aiken... You never hear anything bad like that about the D...

Yep, it may be nothing more than a bitter player... but still.

I'd go with the bitter player. KO I'm not even really sure he knew what he was talking about or anybody really even understands what he said. It seemed to me that he was just upset that the Ravens didn't put up a better contract offer.

With Aiken, pretty clear he wasn't a valued member of the offense, and we all knew that already.

  13 hours ago, whobilly said:

If Joe's wife made 40 mill a year like Gizele was maybe he would look at restructuring like Brady.

You can not in all seriousness believe that Gizele's income is the main reason for Brady low cap number?!

I mean, if that was the case and Brady really was living out of Gizele's pocket, why even take 15mil per year. Why not take 10mil, or 5??

Brady takes less money cause he wants to be with a winning organization and wants that organization to be in the best possible position to win as many titles as possible. 

Well, sort of.

1. He can take less because he's made a little under $200M in his career from the Patriots. That's why he can take less, which he somewhat does.

2. Fans seems to forget that there have been multiple contracts in Brady's career where he was taking top of the market deals. The reason fans forget this is because QBs weren't making $20M+ a year when he was doing that.

In 2005, he signed a deal that paid him nearly $10M AAV, which was one of the biggest deals in league history at the time. Note that the salary cap that season was just over $85M.

In 2010, he signed a 4 year extension worth $72M, so an AAV on that extension of $18M/year. On AAV, that made him the highest paid player in the league.

3. Also need to understand that Brady's compensation and cap numbers are often two very different things. Much of Brady's compensation through his career has come in the form of bonuses instead of base salaries, so that they can be allocated over a longer period of a contract.

Tom Brady made over $28M to play football last season. That's how much cash the Patriots paid him. He wasn't playing for $5M, or $10M, or $15M.

Now, in 2017, he's only owed $1M, but we will see if that actually comes to fruition or not.

On ‎3‎/‎23‎/‎2017 at 1:48 AM, sizzlingdoom said:

On ‎3‎/‎22‎/‎2017 at 9:45 AM, rmcjacket23 said:

  23 hours ago, sizzlingdoom said:

On ‎3‎/‎22‎/‎2017 at 9:13 AM, rmcjacket23 said:

  23 hours ago, sizzlingdoom said:

  On 3/21/2017 at 3:41 PM, rmcjacket23 said:

  On 3/21/2017 at 3:29 PM, hen826957 said:

  On 3/21/2017 at 3:16 PM, rmcjacket23 said:

LOL, well at 3 years, $20M you already know why we aren't going after him... because we don't have that kind of money to spend.

With that kind of price tag for a #2 MLB, we wouldn't be able to extend Mosley in a year or two.

He'd have to be in the $3-4M/year range or even less for us to entertain it.

You do realize that spending $6-7M/year on a second ILB is a ton right?

LOL her we go again. Ready to pounce huh. No, it's not. He probably would be even accept 5M a year. 

LOL, do you honestly believe what you are saying or are you just trolling?

Just FYI, $7M a year is top 10 inside linebacker money in the NFL... also known as a ton. Its especially a ton for a team that probably only has about half that much in cap space to actually spend.
 

Still money to free up Genuis.
But of course you knew that? You know it all sounds like

Maybe, maybe not. Doesn't sound like a great way to build a quality football team though.

Sounds like you didn't really think this one through all the way before you fired off the troll post.

LOL. By suggesting a couple obvious cuts that will be made...? O OK LOL Continue to impress with your ways

1. You mean the obvious cuts that every fan was so sure was going to happen like a month ago? Those obvious cuts? LOL.

Funny thing is... its basically one person... Ben Watson. Arrington isn't getting cut until he can pass a physical, otherwise we have to pay him something in a settlement, which could eliminate most of the cap savings, thus making it pointless.

2. Also implies that we would actually want to cut one of those guys simply to spend $7M on a MLB when we have another MLB who will get at least that much probably next offseason.

Again, if you just think these things through, its not really that hard.

interesting you know how much we would pay him. I knew you were on the inside with all your knowledge.
Plus, it doesn't imply that at all. It might imply that we have 5 other tight ends. And a second rounder that needs to hit the field, in addition to Boyle, Gilmore, and Pitta. Who knows if they'll keep trying with Waller. Watson is coming off an Achilles and will be 37 before the season's over. Think it through, it's not that hard.

1. If you invested the extra few seconds to read some of the other posts on this thread, you'd recognize where that figure came from. (Hint: it didn't come from me).

2. Yup, and we had close to that many TEs last season, and nothing changed. Some will get injured, some may get cut. Watson is the only one we could cut and get any relevant cap relief from.

So unless you plan on magically signing Brown for $500K a year, cutting any one or combination of those guys outside of Watson is meaningless.

 

The basic point you miss is that if more of boldin's catches result in first downs or tds he's more efficient.  

 

Simply using ypc benefits the guy who IS NOT targeted on goal to go situations.  That's not being more efficient it's being unreliable 

And equally, if YPC benefits the guy who is not targeted in goal line situations, then TD receptions or even TD ratio WOULD benefit the guy who is targeted in goal line situations... and unfairly so.

The basic point you miss is that if more of boldin's catches result in first downs or tds he's more efficient.  

 

Simply using ypc benefits the guy who IS NOT targeted on goal to go situations.  That's not being more efficient it's being unreliable 

A word of advice... if you're going to propose a theory, you might want to at least substantiate it or test it out first. Now I had to do your work for you...

Aiken had 18 first downs on 29 receptions, a 62% rate. Boldin had 41 first downs on 67 receptions, a 61% rate. So at best, they were comparable in terms of efficiency from a first down standpoint.

TDs are obviously in Boldin's favor, though I'm not really sure why you think that's a quality measurement for efficiency. YAC is a pretty good measurement of efficiency, and that favors Aiken pretty comfortably.

The only thing a TD ratio is going to display is usage differences between the two players. Aiken was obviously not a red zone option, while Boldin was.