Let's talk about Pernell McPhee

[gabefergy]

I think it's possible we can retain them both, sure. We can extend Jimmy Smith to reduce his $6M cap figure to a more friendly number and we can extend Justin Tucker much like Webb, possibly reduce his cap figure as well. He's a RFA next off-season and I assume he'll get at the very least a second round tender. That's around $2M. That's before cuts.

I guess my issue is beyond 2015 and more specifically 2016, when we'll have some significant free agents and that's when Joe's cap balloons. Yanda and KO are both free agents that year. Definitely a huge year for our free agents.

We also won't have nearly as much committed to the cap in 2016, so extending guys won't be a huge issue. Flacco will probably be restructured as well after this season.

[Valid1]

Two words... he gone.

 

Yup. Thanks to Rice we don't have the money to do anything this offseason. 

[Valid1]

We also won't have nearly as much committed to the cap in 2016, so extending guys won't be a huge issue. Flacco will probably be restructured as well after this season.

 

He'll play next season, he needs to be restructured for the final three years of his contract. 

[gabefergy]

He'll play next season, he needs to be restructured for the final three years of his contract. 

You're right. His contract will be restructured after next season, before 2016.

[Bullrush]

I'm not sure what some of you see in McPhee. "Retaining" him, him trying to "test the market"...some of you make it sound like he's hot commodity or something, like he's playing so well it'll be hard to keep him in Baltimore, like he's gonna have 31 other options once the season ends.

 

He's a role player with a bum knee who doesn't have a true position, who hasn't done anything to be honest this season. He's not a pass rushing OLB and he's not a D-Lineman. He lacks explosiveness/moves to rush the passer as a LB (not that he ever was a sack artist) and he lacks size/strength (and a healthy knee) to be an every down DE, especially in the 3-4.

 

I'm actually hoping we move on from him after the season in order to grab a true pass rusher or a true D-Lineman to add some depth. McPhee is a guy we don't know what to do with.

[codizzle]

I'm not sure what some of you see in McPhee. "Retaining" him, him trying to "test the market"...some of you make it sound like he's hot commodity or something, like he's playing so well it'll be hard to keep him in Baltimore, like he's gonna have 31 other options once the season ends.

He's a role player with a bum knee who doesn't have a true position, who hasn't done anything to be honest this season. He's not a pass rushing OLB and he's not a D-Lineman. He lacks explosiveness/moves to rush the passer as a LB (not that he ever was a sack artist) and he lacks size/strength (and a healthy knee) to be an every down DE, especially in the 3-4.

I'm actually hoping we move on from him after the season in order to grab a true pass rusher or a true D-Lineman to add some depth. McPhee is a guy we don't know what to do with.

Pretty much wrong on every level imo

[Moderator 3]

Play nicely, people.

[arnie_uk]

Pretty much wrong on every level imo

summed up my thoughts nicely

[rmcjacket23]

You're right. His contract will be restructured after next season, before 2016.

Maybe, but that also implies that Flacco has an incentive to do so.

 

If I were him, I'd seriously consider just forcing the Ravens to pay me in 2016. He knows the Ravens wouldn't cut him, and since his annual salaries (excluding the signing bonus) have been relatively low from 2013-2015, I'm sure he'd be more than happy to get paid $18M in 2016, which is what currently will happen.

 

I'm sure both sides will broach the subject then, but Joe has 100% of the leverage until 2017. The decision to extend his contract (it won't be a restructure) is 100% up to him and his agent until then.

[1/28/01]

Maybe, but that also implies that Flacco has an incentive to do so.

If I were him, I'd seriously consider just forcing the Ravens to pay me in 2016. He knows the Ravens wouldn't cut him, and since his annual salaries (excluding the signing bonus) have been relatively low from 2013-2015, I'm sure he'd be more than happy to get paid $18M in 2016, which is what currently will happen.

I'm sure both sides will broach the subject then, but Joe has 100% of the leverage until 2017. The decision to extend his contract (it won't be a restructure) is 100% up to him and his agent until then.

They will 100% restructure Flacco's contract before the start of the 2016 season. It will be crippling and near impossible to carry a $28.55 million cap figure. It will be done in a fashion that is favorable to both Flacco and the Ravens...pretty much how all restructures are done.

[rmcjacket23]

They will 100% restructure Flacco's contract before the start of the 2016 season. It will be crippling and near impossible to carry a $28.55 million cap figure. It will be done in a fashion that is favorable to both Flacco and the Ravens...pretty much how all restructures are done.

I 100% guarantee there will NOT be a restructuring of Joe's contract without adding additional years and/or money to it, which is called an extension, not a restructuring.

 

The reason... a restructuring doesn't benefit the Ravens. All you would be doing is lowering the cap in 2016 at the expense of a higher cap hit (which is already higher) in 2017 and 2018, and guaranteeing more money.

 

Ozzie is already on record, numerous times publicly, for saying that restructuring contracts is a bad idea, something that almost never benefits the franchise in any way, and is something that we very, very, very, very rarely do. Its something teams like the Steelers and Cowboys, who are notoriously poor at managing the cap do, and its why they have salary cap issues for years and years.

 

And as I stated earlier... until 2017, Joe has all the leverage. There are no realistic viable options that the Ravens can use to force him to do anything, and his agent is undoubtedly smart enough to realize that. He will be in the exact same position that Haloti Ngata is in this season... a big fat cap number that the franchise has virtually no choice but to pay unless HE agrees to do something about it.

 

I'm not saying nothing will happen, because I do suspect Flacco will agree to an extension before the 2016 season. But its far from given, and without an extension, a restructuring accomplishes literally nothing for the franchise.

[1/28/01]

I 100% guarantee there will NOT be a restructuring of Joe's contract without adding additional years and/or money to it, which is called an extension, not a restructuring.

The reason... a restructuring doesn't benefit the Ravens. All you would be doing is lowering the cap in 2016 at the expense of a higher cap hit (which is already higher) in 2017 and 2018, and guaranteeing more money.

Ozzie is already on record, numerous times publicly, for saying that restructuring contracts is a bad idea, something that almost never benefits the franchise in any way, and is something that we very, very, very, very rarely do. Its something teams like the Steelers and Cowboys, who are notoriously poor at managing the cap do, and its why they have salary cap issues for years and years.

And as I stated earlier... until 2017, Joe has all the leverage. There are no realistic viable options that the Ravens can use to force him to do anything, and his agent is undoubtedly smart enough to realize that. He will be in the exact same position that Haloti Ngata is in this season... a big fat cap number that the franchise has virtually no choice but to pay unless HE agrees to do something about it.

I'm not saying nothing will happen, because I do suspect Flacco will agree to an extension before the 2016 season. But its far from given, and without an extension, a restructuring accomplishes literally nothing for the franchise.

Ha, okay. An extension is a form of a restructure. And also, since the guarantees will have been paid in full at the conclusion of next year, ANY form of a restructure is possible.

[1/28/01]

FYI, Webb was recently restructured. So, with your stance, that didn't benefit the Ravens at all. Just Webb, right?

[arnie_uk]

Ha, okay. An extension is a form of a restructure. And also, since the guarantees will have been paid in full at the conclusion of next year, ANY form of a restructure is possible.

his/her post was complete nitpicking

[1/28/01]

his/her post was complete nitpicking

Generally is.

[rmcjacket23]

FYI, Webb was recently restructured. So, with your stance, that didn't benefit the Ravens at all. Just Webb, right?

Basically, yes.

 

His cap number decreased in 2014, and it increased in future years. That's how restructurings work. Webb didn't lose any money, and the Ravens didn't long-term save any money. All the Ravens did was take non-guaranteed money, guarantee it, and pro-rate it for the rest of the contract length. They added no money to his deal, nor did they add any years to his deal.

 

The net effect for the Ravens, therefore, is nothing. A short term decrease in cap space at the expense of a now more-guaranteed long-term increase in cap space is NOT, by definition, a benefit. Its simply kicking the can down the street.

[1/28/01]

Basically, yes.

His cap number decreased in 2014, and it increased in future years. That's how restructurings work. Webb didn't lose any money, and the Ravens didn't long-term save any money. All the Ravens did was take non-guaranteed money, guarantee it, and pro-rate it for the rest of the contract length. They added no money to his deal, nor did they add any years to his deal.

The net effect for the Ravens, therefore, is nothing. A short term decrease in cap space at the expense of a now more-guaranteed long-term increase in cap space is NOT, by definition, a benefit. Its simply kicking the can down the street.

Or or or or its allowing $3M in rollover to help with Rices dead money of $9.5M next year = benefit.

[rmcjacket23]

Ha, okay. An extension is a form of a restructure. And also, since the guarantees will have been paid in full at the conclusion of next year, ANY form of a restructure is possible.

Which again, is completely untrue. An extension is not necessarily a form of a restructure, since you can extend someone's contract without restructuring anything.

 

And while, technically speaking, restructuring a then 3 year contract without adding years/money to it is "possible" (much like everybody on this planet dying in the next 20 minutes is "possible"), its also incredibly unrealistic.

 

Lets play the math game with the kind of scenario you think would happen...

 

Lets say they want to "restructure" his deal. No years added, no money added. All they want to do is reduce his salary cap in 2016. OK, well, how would you do that? The most obvious way is to convert some of his salary into a signing bonus, so that you can that pro-rate that over the rest of the contract. So lets do that...

 

He's schedule for a $28.5M cap hit, with $18M in salary and $10.5M in pro-rated bonus (can't touch that). So lets say we want to drop his cap number down to, around $18M for 2016. Well, they would take about $15M of his 2016 salary, convert it into a signing bonus, and pro-rate it over the last 3 years. So that means that he would now have a $3M salary cap hit + $15.5M in pro0rated bonus = $18.5M cap hit in 2016. Sounds great right?

 

Now lets go to 2017. His current cap number, before that restructuring is $31.1M. So now, we've added another $5M to that due to the previous restructure, meaning his cap number is now $36.1M, of which over $20M is a dead money cap hit, regardless of whether he's on the team or not.

 

Now lets go to 2018. Current cap number is $24.75M, which you've now raised to $29.75M because of the $5M pro-rated restructure in 2016.

 

Flacco lost no money, and the Ravens gained no money. All they did was push it (and guarantee more of it).

[rmcjacket23]

Or or or or its allowing $3M in rollover to help with Rices dead money of $9.5M next year = benefit.

And adding $3M in cap space in future years (a now guaranteed $3M that wasn't guaranteed before) = not benefit.

 

Still just kicking the can down the street

[1/28/01]

Which again, is completely untrue. An extension is not necessarily a form of a restructure, since you can extend someone's contract without restructuring anything.

And while, technically speaking, restructuring a then 3 year contract without adding years/money to it is "possible" (much like everybody on this planet dying in the next 20 minutes is "possible"), its also incredibly unrealistic.

Lets play the math game with the kind of scenario you think would happen...

Lets say they want to "restructure" his deal. No years added, no money added. All they want to do is reduce his salary cap in 2016. OK, well, how would you do that? The most obvious way is to convert some of his salary into a signing bonus, so that you can that pro-rate that over the rest of the contract. So lets do that...

He's schedule for a $28.5M cap hit, with $18M in salary and $10.5M in pro-rated bonus (can't touch that). So lets say we want to drop his cap number down to, around $18M for 2016. Well, they would take about $15M of his 2016 salary, convert it into a signing bonus, and pro-rate it over the last 3 years. So that means that he would now have a $3M salary cap hit + $15.5M in pro0rated bonus = $18.5M cap hit in 2016. Sounds great right?

Now lets go to 2017. His current cap number, before that restructuring is $31.1M. So now, we've added another $5M to that due to the previous restructure, meaning his cap number is now $36.1M, of which over $20M is a dead money cap hit, regardless of whether he's on the team or not.

Now lets go to 2018. Current cap number is $24.75M, which you've now raised to $29.75M because of the $5M pro-rated restructure in 2016.

Flacco lost no money, and the Ravens gained no money. All they did was push it (and guarantee more of it).

Didn't read all of that. I don't need a novel to tell me how this all works.. An extension is a form of a restructure.

[beasy2487]

So that Pernell McPhee's a helluva player. Amiright?

[gabefergy]

So that Pernell McPhee's a helluva player. Amiright?

He sure is. Rewatching the Carolina game reinforces what he does for us.

[beasy2487]

He sure is. Rewatching the Carolina game reinforces what he does for us.

 

Yea man. I think a big distinction fans need to understand is that the job is to rush the passer, not sack him. Sacks are gravy, but if you're consistently pushing the pocket and disrupting plays then you're golden. McPhee is that guy. Not top tier because of the sack numbers, but definitely the level just below.

[GrimCoconut]

I never knew there was a winning or losing on here. Typically, it's just the sharing of opinions with disagreements and agreements. Nobody is really right or wrong except in hindsight. It's all projections and hyperbole. Some of you need to relax.

[1/28/01]

Be right back. Gonna go build a killer Hotwheels track for my kids! Yay, smiles!

Edit - Oh yeah, GO MCPHEE!

[gabefergy]

You must be delightful at parties.

 

 

I get it man. There's a core group here that operates from a place of mutual respect and the rest is just noise imho. On topic, I don't know if we can realistically keep McPhee just because I don't see him as a long term replacement for Suggs, Upshaw is the answer on the other side, and he's going to want to start. I'd rather get the 3rd or 4th rd comp pick for him.

I'd much rather have McPhee than Upshaw in the long term. I know Upshaw does a lot of the dirty work, but it's a lot harder to find a versatile pass-rusher like McPhee than an Upshaw imo. 

[GrimCoconut]

I'd much rather have McPhee than Upshaw in the long term. I know Upshaw does a lot of the dirty work, but it's a lot harder to find a versatile pass-rusher like McPhee than an Upshaw imo.

They do call those interior DT who can rush the passer unicorns in the NFL because they're so rare. So hard to find someone who can apply pressure through the middle.

[arnie_uk]

I'd much rather have McPhee than Upshaw in the long term. I know Upshaw does a lot of the dirty work, but it's a lot harder to find a versatile pass-rusher like McPhee than an Upshaw imo.

totally agree. Interior pass rushers are hard to find

[codizzle]

He sure is. Rewatching the Carolina game reinforces what he does for us.

I do believe a few missed the carolina game because from some internet search some people here must have done I've been told he's terrible because he only has one QB pressure all year and doesn't have a position

[rmcjacket23]

I'd much rather have McPhee than Upshaw in the long term. I know Upshaw does a lot of the dirty work, but it's a lot harder to find a versatile pass-rusher like McPhee than an Upshaw imo. 

Without question. I think part-time run stoppers are not really all that difficult to find, and that's pretty much what Upshaw is.

 

But like I said before, its going to come down to priority for the Ravens. There's no shortage of situational players like McPhee who have been allowed to at least test FA or leave completely in recent years who will probably be in the same "salary area" as he will be.

 

Time will tell.