35 replies to this topic

[dhstandard]

Safety- 7 mil
Linebacker- 9.6 mil


I know it was reported that they wouldn't use the tag if Flacco was signed early but how could we not use the non-exclusive one if the price is right. It gives us some sort of leverage in keeping a player like Kruger around, and maybe a team would sign him in exchange for the picks.

It seems like we would miss out if we didn't use it.

[GrimCoconut]

It would cost more than 7M for Reed, and we already said we won't be tagging any other player. Besides, we wouldn't want to do it. What if we could get Reed for 4.5?

[Ravensfan23]

Safety- 7 mil
Linebacker- 9.6 mil


I know it was reported that they wouldn't use the tag if Flacco was signed early but how could we not use the non-exclusive one if the price is right. It gives us some sort of leverage in keeping a player like Kruger around, and maybe a team would sign him in exchange for the picks.

It seems like we would miss out if we didn't use it.

Problem is nobody is gonna give up 2 1st rounders for Kurger. So the Ravens would be stuck with Kruger for 1yr 9.6M. Flacco probably won't even count for 9.6M against the cap in 2013, it's definitely to high for Kruger.


The Ravens are not gonna give Kruger the type of money he can get on the open market, so his agent would just suggest Kruger play out the one year at 9.6M and cash in next year.

Don't see the Ravens doing it. As I said earlier, the Tag doesn't help the Ravens at all this year because it's too much against a tight cap

[Bltravens]

Problem is nobody is gonna give up 2 1st rounders for Kurger. So the Ravens would be stuck with Kruger for 1yr 9.6M. Flacco probably won't even count for 9.6M against the cap in 2013, it's definitely to high for Kruger.


The Ravens are not gonna give Kruger the type of money he can get on the open market, so his agent would just suggest Kruger play out the one year at 9.6M and cash in next year.

Don't see the Ravens doing it. As I said earlier, the Tag doesn't help the Ravens at all this year because it's too much against a tight cap

You dont necessarily have to trade a player on the tag for 2 first rounders. I believe the Pats franchised Cassel then dealt him to KC for a 2nd round pick. As long as the compensation is agreed upon it can be anything.

Edited by Bltravens, 01 March 2013 - 11:51 PM.

[GrimCoconut]

You dont necessarily have to trade a player on the tag for 2 first rounders. I believe the Pats franchised Cassel then dealt him to KC for a 2nd round pick. As long as the compensation is agreed upon it can be anything.

We don't normally operate like that, though. It also carries some risk if a team doesn't want to make the trade.

[Bltravens]

We don't normally operate like that, though. It also carries some risk if a team doesn't want to make the trade.

Oh I know, I was just saying the compensation can be anything.

[Raven Hammer]

Doe's anyone think that signing Kruger to a back loaded contract to see if upshaw is for real is a good idea?

[arnie_uk]

Doe's anyone think that signing Kruger to a back loaded contract to see if upshaw is for real is a good idea?

no. Kruger is a situational pass rusher. Never has been a three down player and that was evident when he was starting. He needs to go and play end in a 43 front where he can on his ears back and get after the QB every down like Allen, freeney and matis have made a living out of. That's where he will excel and be a solid 10 sack a year guy. But in our system he isn't worth as much as he'd get on the open market from a 43 team.

If we changed to a 43 front I'd consider it. Suggs ngata McPhee Kruger.

Will would be a rookie, ellerbe mike, and upshaw at the same, stopping the run and covering the flats.

In fact that would probably suit who we have on the roster better, instead of needing to draft two starters, ie a nose tackle and ilb, we'd only need to draft one starter, a will linebacker. You could then draft a big nt in the later rounds for when it do want to convert back to the 34 front. Ngata rookie jones.

Then Suggs rookie ellerbe and upshaw. Difference being the big nose tackle wouldn't see too many snas so he doesn't need to be a high pick.

[arnie_uk]

If you tagged Kruger though there's no way in hell you get back reed

[1/28/01]

We dont have the cap space to really tag anyone. Using the FT is not really a positive in just about any situation, unless you have hopes to sign said player. Flacco was the person to fit this bill this year and that was to just simply buy us time. Reed at almost $7M on the tag? No thanks! Kruger at $9M? No thanks! No one will be tagged and rightfully so.

[Raven Hammer]

no. Kruger is a situational pass rusher. Never has been a three down player and that was evident when he was starting. He needs to go and play end in a 43 front where he can on his ears back and get after the QB every down like Allen, freeney and matis have made a living out of. That's where he will excel and be a solid 10 sack a year guy. But in our system he isn't worth as much as he'd get on the open market from a 43 team.

If we changed to a 43 front I'd consider it. Suggs ngata McPhee Kruger.

Will would be a rookie, ellerbe mike, and upshaw at the same, stopping the run and covering the flats.

In fact that would probably suit who we have on the roster better, instead of needing to draft two starters, ie a nose tackle and ilb, we'd only need to draft one starter, a will linebacker. You could then draft a big nt in the later rounds for when it do want to convert back to the 34 front. Ngata rookie jones.

Then Suggs rookie ellerbe and upshaw. Difference being the big nose tackle wouldn't see too many snas so he doesn't need to be a high pick.

It looks like that you believe that Kruger has reached his ceiling. That could be true, i don't know. For me, it was with more playing time he got better. Either way if we sign him to a backload, it would keep us from loading all our eggs in the upshaw basket. Then if either upshaw is for real or a new draft pick shows up we could trade him for a pick next year. Makes since to me.

[arnie_uk]

It looks like that you believe that Kruger has reached his ceiling. That could be true, i don't know. For me, it was with more playing time he got better. Either way if we sign him to a backload, it would keep us from loading all our eggs in the upshaw basket. Then if either upshaw is for real or a new draft pick shows up we could trade him for a pick next year. Makes since to me.

no he didn't get better. When suggs came back Kruger got pulled from early downs and suggs and Upshaw played against the run. Kruger only then played a role of pin your ears back and get after the qb 99 percent of that time. His role was changed to suit his strength. He didn't get better. Go look at his stats before and after suggs came back. It's as night and day as flacco before and after cam.

Kruger isn't a 3 down 34 olb where he needs to set the edge, defend the run and drop into coverage.

Hes a quessential 43 end that can get after the qb down in down out.

[Andrew Glass]

We can't afford kruger. Honestly I would tag him and trade him for something.. Atleast worse you get a 2nd or 3rd and nothing counts against the cap.

[Ravenslifer]

It looks like that you believe that Kruger has reached his ceiling. That could be true, i don't know. For me, it was with more playing time he got better. Either way if we sign him to a backload, it would keep us from loading all our eggs in the upshaw basket. Then if either upshaw is for real or a new draft pick shows up we could trade him for a pick next year. Makes since to me.

I don't think he got better, he was just allowed to be a pass rusher instead of being forced to be an every down player. He's poor against the run. That, to me, is the issue with Kruger - Flacco deal or no, Kruger is a situational pass rusher, not an every down player. How much should you be willing to pay for a guy who isn't a starter, regardless of his play-making abilities when on the field? And how much will some other team with boatloads of cap money overpay for him, trying to make him a starter?

Edited by Ravenslifer, 02 March 2013 - 10:16 AM.

[Raven Hammer]

no he didn't get better. When suggs came back Kruger got pulled from early downs and suggs and Upshaw played against the run. Kruger only then played a role of pin your ears back and get after the qb 99 percent of that time. His role was changed to suit his strength. He didn't get better. Go look at his stats before and after suggs came back. It's as night and day as flacco before and after cam.

Kruger isn't a 3 down 34 olb where he needs to set the edge, defend the run and drop into coverage.

Hes a quessential 43 end that can get after the qb down in down out.

Maybe i'm wrong but it looked to me that suggs did not draw the doubleteams like everyone thinks. If i'm wrong then he may have reached his ceiling. But even if i am wrong why rely on upshaw if you can sign kruger to a backload just to be sure

[bMore Heathen]

Kruger is out of the question, but what's the number for Ellerbe? Is that an option if we can't work out a deal with him?

[Raven Hammer]

I don't think he got better, he was just allowed to be a pass rusher instead of being forced to be an every down player. He's poor against the run. That, to me, is the issue with Kruger - Flacco deal or no, Kruger is a situational pass rusher, not an every down player. How much should you be willing to pay for a guy who isn't a starter, regardless of his play-making abilities when on the field? And how much will some other team with boatloads of cap money overpay for him, trying to make him a starter?

This all depends on his ceiling. He is a late blumer no question. If other teams are will to over spend for a pass rusher this year why not next. It's the Ravens who assume some of the backload. To me the questain is Assuming the backload vs the insurance for upshaw.

[arnie_uk]

Maybe i'm wrong but it looked to me that suggs did not draw the doubleteams like everyone thinks. If i'm wrong then he may have reached his ceiling. But even if i am wrong why rely on upshaw if you can sign kruger to a backload just to be sure

where did I mention double teams? I didnt, maybe I need to dumb this down. Suggs was injured, Upshaw and Kruger started. Kruger had to play three down, set the edge, run defend, cover and rush. He was pretty horrible, couldn't handle all that. Suggs comes back, Kruger benched, Upshaw starts and does the dirty work, defending the run etc. Kruger then only comes in in passing situations and rushes the passer. He lights it up. Hence he's a situational pass rusher in our scheme or else a prototypical 43 end. Nothing to do with double teams but all to do with the roles he was asked to do before and after suggs was out.

[GrimCoconut]

where did I mention double teams? I didnt, maybe I need to dumb this down. Suggs was injured, Upshaw and Kruger started. Kruger had to play three down, set the edge, run defend, cover and rush. He was pretty horrible, couldn't handle all that. Suggs comes back, Kruger benched, Upshaw starts and does the dirty work, defending the run etc. Kruger then only comes in in passing situations and rushes the passer. He lights it up. Hence he's a situational pass rusher in our scheme or else a prototypical 43 end. Nothing to do with double teams but all to do with the roles he was asked to do before and after suggs was out.

I agree that Kruger is best as a 4-3 DE. Where do you think he goes, BTW? Any ideas? I think he would be perfect in a 4-3 defense. I could see the Colts get him, but I still don't see him as a starter, just as you said.

You think the Cowboys? They are tight against the cap, but may not be able to re-sign Spencer with what he wants and could possibly have Kruger cheaper. I'm really not sure on Kruger's destination. Been trying to figure that out for a bit.

Edited by GrimCoconut, 02 March 2013 - 10:39 AM.

[arnie_uk]

Also you cn draft good in fact very good situational pass rushers in rounds 3 or after. Michael buchannon, Brandon Jenkins etc for a cap hit of probably under 1 mil and could easily hit .6 to 8 sacks a year. Why pay Kruger the guts of 10 mil for the same thing.

If he could play all three downs like suggs he'd be tagged, but he cant in a 34 system. He could be devastating as a 43 end like Allen or freeney.