Ravens restructure Webb's contract

[757RavensFan]

This news has me checking my phone every 30 seconds for an update like a crackhead.  

[jazz1988]

Can't really think of what cornerback The Ravens would really want to trade for honestly.

[berad]

This would probably be one of the craziest possible moves

His cap hit is just slightly too high, though, so it would require trading a pick and player

 

Would Davis' dead money factor in, he's got ~$4M of that? Not sure, just asking

[BmoreBird22]

Would Davis' dead money factor in, he's got ~$4M of that? Not sure, just asking

You're right, just the base salary

[GrimCoconut]

Let's go outside the box and get crazy. I say we are getting Vernon Davis. He has voiced his displeasure with San Fran already and held out a bit early on. He went to Maryland and is good friends with Torrey Smith. Kubiak always has liked two tightends and Daniels isn't cutting it. Davis has always been a great blocker which means Pitta can be freed up as the "move" tightend. We have obviously made trades with San Fran before look at Boldin. Plus the 49ers have a lot of players needed catches with Sevie Johnson and Crabtree back.

If that's the case then we're trading for Alex Boone lol.

[HomeoftheBRAVENS]

Let us know who the best CBs available are when you do your research.

 

 

Kareem Jackson is the only player I could see us trading for if Ozzie is looking at db's.He is in the last year of his contract,is playing for a team with 0 hope of winning their division,he's a texan which means it's just a matter of time before he becomes a raven anyway lol and his cap number for this year is 4.3 million which would justify us needing to free up that much space.

[izvoodoo]

Why would we trade for any position not CB or DE?

Oline depth?

[rwc94]

Oline depth?

If it was for depth, our 4 mil would be more than enough, so no need for the re-structure

[GrimCoconut]

Anyway, I'll speculate and say it might be James Casey from Philadelphia whose base salary is just barely under $4m. We could cut Daniels and fit him under the cap. It would make sense to me, as you could do a double set with Casey and Juszczyk together and really confuse defenses and get Juszczyk to learn from Casey.

[jazz1988]

Kareem Jackson is the only player I could see us trading for if Ozzie is looking at db's.He is in the last year of his contract,is playing for a team with 0 hope of winning their division,he's a texan which means it's just a matter of time before he becomes a ravens anyway lol and his cap number for this year is 4.3 million which would justify us needing to free up that much space.

 

I could be wrong but I doubt that happens.

[BmoreBird22]

Kareem Jackson is the only player I could see us trading for if Ozzie is looking at db's.He is in the last year of his contract,is playing for a team with 0 hope of winning their division,he's a texan which means it's just a matter of time before he becomes a raven anyway lol and his cap number for this year is 4.3 million which would justify us needing to free up that much space.

What's his base salary

[balfan23]

I could be wrong,but I don't remember hearing about a player signing an extension and having their cap number go up in that year.If anything it usually brings it down.Just look at what we did with Suggs a few months ago.

Depends on the player. For a vet like Suggs, who already has a big contract, yes - that number will go down after an extension is signed. However, when the player is on his rookie contract, then the extension will likely cause the current year's cap number to go up.

 

I'd have to go back and look, but I have a feeling when we gave Webb his current contract, it was an extension in order to keep him from being a restricted free agent. I have a feeling his cap number for that first year went up. 

[HomeoftheBRAVENS]

What's his base salary

 

$3,090,000.

[GrimCoconut]

Depends on the player. For a vet like Suggs, who already has a big contract, yes - that number will go down after an extension is signed. However, when the player is on his rookie contract, then the extension will likely cause the current year's cap number to go up.

I'd have to go back and look, but I have a feeling when we gave Webb his current contract, it was an extension in order to keep him from being a restricted free agent. I have a feeling his cap number for that first year went up.

I don't think it did but that doesn't mean it didn't. I don't recall his cap number increasing from the tender. But with that said, I wouldn't mind if we extended Jimmy or Torrey now rather than waiting. I'd rather get that off the books and bite the bullet on the money this year when we have room to spare.

[acranfor]

Just looking position by position from a logical ('fan logical') standpoint:

 

QB - I think we are fine with Taylor for now at backup

RB - depth is adequate, no need

FB - I think we are ok with Juice, and there would be no need to trade for someone at a non-dynamic position

WR - possibility if the opportunity arises to give us a future. BUT dont see much need for the present.

TE - This could be a possibility. Pitta is the number 1, but there is uncertainty with Daniels. Is 2 TEs that important to Kub?

OL - depth is the only issue, and not sure we need 6-7M in space for depth?? Still some potential I guess.

 

CB - The obvious choice for everyone, although do we need 6-7M for a 3rd CB? Makes the Cox pickup a little confusing too?

S - We have an immediate need at FS since Stewart is a SS, Brooks is a rookie and Hill is out? Low probability though.

LB - Not much need here, unless we land a young OLB behind Suggs and move McPhee back to DE full time

DT - No Need. Good rotation of Ngata, Tyson, Jernigan, Williams

DE - Only have Canty and McPhee w/ some help from the DTs. This is a possibility.

[BmoreBird22]

Depends on the player. For a vet like Suggs, who already has a big contract, yes - that number will go down after an extension is signed. However, when the player is on his rookie contract, then the extension will likely cause the current year's cap number to go up.

 

I'd have to go back and look, but I have a feeling when we gave Webb his current contract, it was an extension in order to keep him from being a restricted free agent. I have a feeling his cap number for that first year went up.

If what I read is correct, it increased based on his signing bonus

[BmoreBird22]

$3,090,000.

What's Jonathan Joseph's

[HomeoftheBRAVENS]

What's Jonathan Joseph's

 

He has a $11,250,000 cap number and a $7.5 million base salary.

[bMore Heathen]

This confuses me a little. We obviously have a plan for somebody, but there really isn't any area where we need a player that would command the kind of money we freed up.

Could it be a TE like Vernon Davis ? It's possible, but unlikely considering we gave Pitta a substantial contract. It doesn't make sense to spend that much cap on 1 position.

Could it be a CB? Possibly, but why would we want to add a player that will need 6 m, to be our 3rd CB when our starters are healthy? Could we be trying to move Webb? That's possible. Lower his salary so a potential new team could fit him on their roster. But then we are out a starting CB at an already thin position.

FS is the one spot where we could be looking to upgrade. Stewart hasn't been perfect, Books made a couple plays last week, but we may want to work him in more at nickel.

I don't really see a spot on the oline where we would need to make a big splash for a starter. A back up isn't going to command 6M.

It's hard to guess what we're planning, but it's defiantly something.

[shaneomatic]

I think I would prefer to get Jimmy done now rather than Torrey just because of how many good wide receivers there are going to be next year in free agency.  With the market next year full of WR's that will garnish more money than Torrey, I think we can get him for a good deal for both parties.

[BmoreBird22]

He has a $11,250,000 cap number and a $7.5 million base salary.

Base salary is what we'd take on. I can dream

[acranfor]

This confuses me a little. We obviously have a plan for somebody, but there really isn't any area where we need a player that would command the kind of money we freed up.

Could it be a TE like Vernon Davis ? It's possible, but unlikely considering we gave Pitta a substantial contract. It doesn't make sense to spend that much cap on 1 position.

Could it be a CB? Possibly, but why would we want to add a player that will need 6 m, to be our 3rd CB when our starters are healthy? Could we be trying to move Webb? That's possible. Lower his salary so a potential new team could fit him on their roster. But then we are out a starting CB at an already thin position.

FS is the one spot where we could be looking to upgrade. Stewart hasn't been perfect, Books made a couple plays last week, but we may want to work him in more at nickel.

I don't really see a spot on the oline where we would need to make a big splash for a starter. A back up isn't going to command 6M.

It's hard to guess what we're planning, but it's defiantly something.

Yeah, I am having the same problem.

 

I think I would prefer to get Jimmy done now rather than Torrey just because of how many good wide receivers there are going to be next year in free agency.  With the market next year full of WR's that will garnish more money than Torrey, I think we can get him for a good deal for both parties.

I believe Jimmy is under contract next year since we exercised the 5th year option. There is no rush there unless we want to beat him from warranting a larger contract from his potential play this year.

[shaneomatic]

Acronfor that is what I was going for.  I think he is just going to get better, and I would rather give him his money now and avoid Haden/Peterson type numbers.  Just looked again and there arent as many free agent WR's as I thought, but Dez, Randall Cobb if he repeats past performances, Demaryus Thomas should all command more than Torrey hopefully driving down his price.

[Corvus]

I'm thinking a new contract for Torrey or Tucker, possibly both since Tucker is in the "kicker price range" regardless of how great he has been (meaning kickers comparitively don't make as much, not a dig at J.Tuck, he is one of my favorite players). Ozzie already bought some time with Jimmy when he exercised the 5th year option on his rookie deal so I doubt Jimmy is on their mind at the moment. I don't see a trade and sign coming with the Cox signing (unless there is some d-linemen who fits our scheme and is in the last year of a deal out there) but you never know I guess. My money is on Torrey though as he is about to have a career year and the team and Mr. Smith would like to continue this partnership over bringing in a FA next year to replace him.

[rmw10]

Didn't realize we would have been that close to the cap once the rule of 51 is no longer in effect.  Could be some additional cushion, as Brian said...

 

Brian McFarland ‏@RavensSalaryCap  5m

(1/3) Remember, only top 51 count against Cap now. As of next week, everyone - 53roster+IR+PUP+PS+Suspended (less games susp) - will count.

 

Brian McFarland ‏@RavensSalaryCap  5m

(2/3) Present projected FULL Roster - pre-Webb restructure - would have been really close to Cap (pending a few likely injury settlements)

 

Brian McFarland ‏@RavensSalaryCap  4m

(3/3) So, Webb restructure may have been as much about creating additional needed cushion, as it was about creating room for something else

[dhstandard]

If we want to go waaay outisde the box...maybe we are trading Jacoby and a pick for another receiver?  We had trouble with guys getting open our last preseason game.  

[rmw10]

But then you have this quote from Ozzie...

 

"The only time we consider restructuring guys’ deals is [if] there is a player that comes available that we think has great value and is worth us restructuring a deal to get it done. But it has to be a player that we think has a pretty good chance of playing out his contract, because that’s when you get in trouble. If you restructure a deal, then all the sudden that player’s abilities fall off the cliff and you have to let him go, then you have to eat all that acceleration right away."

[acranfor]

Can it be confirmed that this restructure does not inflate Webb's future years? Hensley just wrote an article explaining that the restructure adds 1M to 2015 & 2016 for Webb, making his cap hit 12M for these years. The article also states the following:

 

http://espn.go.com/blog/baltimore-ravens/post/_/id/12581/restructuring-webbs-deal-raises-red-flag

 

"The only time we consider restructuring guys’ deals is [if] there is a player that comes available that we think has great value and is worth us restructuring a deal to get it done. But it has to be a player that we think has a pretty good chance of playing out his contract, because that’s when you get in trouble. If you restructure a deal, then all the sudden that player’s abilities fall off the cliff and you have to let him go, then you have to eat all that acceleration right away." Ozzie

 

This could lead one to assume that if the restructure inflates the future, that 1) The Ravens are in fact after someone since Ozzie only wants to restructure to pursue an immediate opportunity 2) an extension would not be the case because inflating the future with a restructure would cause less cap room for an extension and 3) The Ravens have faith in Webb's future.

[dhstandard]

Didn't realize we would have been that close to the cap once the rule of 51 is no longer in effect.  Could be some additional cushion, as Brian said...

 

Brian McFarland ‏@RavensSalaryCap  5m

(1/3) Remember, only top 51 count against Cap now. As of next week, everyone - 53roster+IR+PUP+PS+Suspended (less games susp) - will count.

 

Brian McFarland ‏@RavensSalaryCap  5m

(2/3) Present projected FULL Roster - pre-Webb restructure - would have been really close to Cap (pending a few likely injury settlements)

 

Brian McFarland ‏@RavensSalaryCap  4m

(3/3) So, Webb restructure may have been as much about creating additional needed cushion, as it was about creating room for something else

This makes me sad

[JO_75]

But then you have this quote from Ozzie...

 

"The only time we consider restructuring guys’ deals is [if] there is a player that comes available that we think has great value and is worth us restructuring a deal to get it done. But it has to be a player that we think has a pretty good chance of playing out his contract, because that’s when you get in trouble. If you restructure a deal, then all the sudden that player’s abilities fall off the cliff and you have to let him go, then you have to eat all that acceleration right away."

 

So who would be available then? We freed up enough for a starter, not just a depth player. I'm thinking FS would be the position since we have Elam at his natural SS position. But who would it be?