B-more Ravor

IDK, this is a weak FA class and there are teams with just incredible amounts of Cap dollars to burn. Those two factors, IMO, make it harder to get players to accept paycuts. Not to mention, we aren't the playoffs every year Ravens of 2008-2012 that players might want to stick around for. Plus, as Jacket said, paycuts alone aren't going to create that much Cap space. They most certainly are going to need to release some of those players. Lastly, dead money is what it is. It's not as scary or terrible as it's made out to be and is a natural part of most team's salary cap. Yes, the year with Ray Rice's ~$10M in dead money was bad, but that was an extreme circumstance. The dead money from most of the guys mentioned is a sunk cost - it's going to either be part of their Cap number or will be dead money if they are released. Again, it's going to be there one way or another (just different columns, so to speak). So, the real question with most of these decisions isn't about the dead money, it's the Cap savings. If the Cap savings is enough, the team isn't concerned about the resulting dead money.

Not sure what you're talking about, but plenty of teams have separate QB coaches that aren't the OC. In fact, other than NE, it looks like most teams have a separate QB coach. Luck has one. Rodgers has one. Ben has one. Brees has one. Eli has one. Ryan has one. Rivers has one. Wilson has one. Newton has one. And Peyton pretty much had one his entire career.

If the new Denver HC does not retain Dennison, then I'm certain he'll be very much in the Ravens plans. Don't know what kinds of other opportunities he may have, but hopefully, the Ravens will be in his plans too!

Yes, correct. Incentives are paid if earned and count (in this case, since they were NLTBE) against the following year's Cap as a negative adjustment on the Cap, but don't affect the player's Cap number (and, hence, the dead money involved). Sometimes players have escalators that do affect the following year(s)' base salaries if earned. In this case, Pitta's were incentives, not escalators.

Orr is a RFA, not a UFA, so they will tender him (likely the 2nd round tender, IMO) to maintain control over him for 2017.

Zorn hasn't coached in the NFL since 2012 (or, anywhere, it seems), so I doubt they'd ever consider him. He's also a bit of an odd ball and didn't mess well with a lot of people (other than Joe, it would seem).

Savings for Pitta is $3.3M if released before June 1 or $5.5M if released after June 1.

Also leaving Johnson out, there are 8 RTs making at least $6M/year, 5 of whom are making more than $6M/year. The two most recent signings were Schwartz ($6.6M/yr) and Cannon ($6.5M/yr). Most importantly, Wagner is also a FA now, prices always go up when the market opens and there are teams with incredible amounts of Cap to spend. I don't think it's much of stretch to expect Wagner to make at least $6M/year (whether he deserves to be in that stratosphere or not).

As I said, I don't really disagree. It's just a matter of how agreeable to a reasonable - very reasonable - extension (which is going to have to include a "paycyut" IMO) he's going to be.

Not saying I disagree - he may very well be amenable and he did seem to improve as the season went on - but I'd be careful in extending a player who appears to be on the downside of his career. That's only going to push possible dead money into the future, whereas there is none under his column at this point. Or, said another way, I'm ready to see them start cleaning up their Cap, not find ways to push today's problems down the road.

I agree. He definitely has his sources, but there's no way to be sure if anything (or everything) in that article is just opinion or "informed" opinion based on sources. As you said, he did say he believed that MM was going to fired, so that was clearly opinion, so there's no way to really know which one it is in this case.

Well, at this point Weddle, Webb and Lewis are under contract; Huff is a RFA and Levine and Elam are FAs. IMO, it's very possible that Webb and Lewis are released and Huff is non-tendered (can't see him being tendered at $1.8M). So, that could leave Weddle as the only Safety under contract or under team control as of March. That doesn't mean they will draft one in the 1st round (although if Hooker from OSU somehow gets that far, he'd be hard to pass up), but they definitely may very well need to restock the position.

Yes, if they lose Wagner, I would expect them to sign a veteran RT and draft another OT/G like Lewis (and, to a much lesser extent, the soon to depart Hurst). Then the 3 of them would fight it out for RT.

Oh, absolutely. Liking him is all well and good, but expecting him to make the jump from the PS to the starting C is a bit much, I would agree. Would be great, but really can't expect it.

I have thought all along that the plan was for Lewis to take the RT spot, but based on Harbaugh's comments at the presser - which, granted, may well have been the first shot of pre-draft misinformation - it looks like they see Lewis as the LG. That, or they are still hoping to re-sign Wagner, in which case Lewis would play LG, and if that plan fails, then they will consider Lewis at RT (the back-up plan).

I can't give any insider knowledge, but I can tell you that they up Skura's weekly practice squad salary from the minimum PS salary of $6,900 up to the rookie minimum ($450K/17 = $26,471). So, even though he was still on the PS, his base salary for those weeks was the same as a rookie who was on the 53-man roster. I've never seen them give a PS player that much in weekly salary. So, that tells me that (1) they do like him, (2) some other team was trying to sign him to their 53 and the Ravens offered the same money to keep him (even though on the PS) and (3) he chose to stay and then re-sign for 2017 because he must see this as a good opportunity for himself.

Here's the article: http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/ravens/ravens-insider/bal-ravens-news-notes-and-opinions-20170105-story.html Here's what Jeff said: "It also means that if Wagner departs, and the bet here is he will, the Ravens will be in the market for a right tackle......" Now, that could be just an opinion or it could be a informed opinion, who knows?

Rick graded out pretty well, but both Schwartz and Cannon just earned 2nd team All-Pro status today. That said, Wagner is about to be a FA and prices go up year to year, so I think we can expect to see Wagner get paid in at least the $7M/year range.

All you need is right here - a full breakdown of the present Cap status and a projection of where they will be after ERFAs, RFAs, incentives and other Cap adjustments: http://russellstreetreport.com/2016/12/27/baltimore-ravens-salary-cap/ravens-2017-offseason-preview/

Mitchell Schwartz (KC) just got $33M/5 yrs last Spring. Marcus Cannon (NE) got $32.5M/5 yrs in November. Prices will go up as FA approaches, so I'd think Wagner is going to end up around $7M/year.

From a Cap perspective, nothing is likely to change. Forsett stays on the Cap at $3M and is entitled to termination pay, meaning he can request payment of the balance of that $3M salary. He has until the end of the season to elect to take it (players can only do so once in their careers). If he for some reason doesn’t, then the Ravens would get credit of 13/17ths of the $3M in 2017. Assuming there isn’t some agreement not to do so (the working of “parting by mutual agreement” is a bit interesting), he will likely make that election. Since the balance of the $3M continued to count this year, there is no carryover for 2017.

Keep in mind that with contract dynamics, it's always easy to paint the number how you'd like. For instance a 5 year deal at $4M per year is a $20M deal. Not saying they did - but if the Ravens then offered an alternative deal of 4 years at $4.5M (a higher yearly rate), the total is only $18M. So, the total value is LESS than the prior offer, but at a higher yearly rate and the shorter deal gets Tucker back on the FA market sooner (to cash in again at a young age). Shorter deals also means less bonuses and less guarantees. So, "less" also applies there. But, whether it is or not, remains to be seen though, without the details. Also, remember Ozzie urged Reed to take a shorter deal, but when he didn't, Reed complained about the deal in the later years. I think Ozzie would always like shorter deals, but most agents and players don't want to take the risk.

The CBA allows teams to roll over Cap space every year of the deal (thur 2020). There is no prohibition for doing it after 2017 (or any other year after that).

Monroe got an $11M bonus, which is prorated over the 5 years of the deal and initially counts $2.2M against the Cap each year. Since he was released after June 1, only this year's $2.2M remains on the Cap and the team get the $6.5M in Cap savings (the amount of his base salary). They do, though, still have to account for 2017 and 2018's prorations of $2.2M each. So, both of those accelerate and count $4.4M in 2017. As I said, they were going to have to account for those either way, you can't escape Cap charges for bonus prorations because they are Cap charges for money already paid. So, again, assuming he wasn't going to be on the team next year - one way or another - then that $4.4M was going to count in 2017 either way.

Can't really look at it that way, though, because the $4.4M was going to count one way or another at some point. So, unless you expect that he would have played out the contract to completion (2018), they were going to have to deal with the $4.4M next year anyway. That's basically a sunk cost due to the bonus prorations that can't be avoided. So, it still comes down to whether they were going to pay him $6.5M to "compete" for a starting spot (and it appears that he's not interested in playing RT or G). Teams do care about cash too and that's too much for them to pay Monroe (highest base salary on team). Given his history and given that they had already paid him $17.5M for 2 subpar years, there was no way IMO that they would dream of risking another $6.5M on the possibility that he may stay healthy this time around.