Halfway through the season, who are our top Offseason priorities?

[GrimCoconut]

While that's true, you then can't think that NFL coaches and GMs are somehow going to elevate and pay McPhee top-tier pass rushing money (like a Paul Kruger) based on what essentially amounts to less than half a season of quality play.

 

I would guarantee that in the last 2-3 years, no coaches or GMs in this league were anxiously awaiting McPhee to become a FA so they could throw a boatload of cash at him.

 

And while I'm the biggest proponent of NFL executives and coaches having exponentially more knowledge and a much higher level and capability of evaluating talent than basically every fan on the planet does, lets not pretend like these guys don't throw a bunch of money at people on annual basis who turn out to be far, far, far less than what they saw on film.

 

Ellerbe put together about one years worth of quality film, and that was about it. He got a pretty large contract with the Dolphins with significant guaranteed money. He played terribly in his first season, was demoted to outside linebacker and sub-packages in the offseason, then was put on IR this season with a hip injury that really wasn't season-ending. He will be a FA come this offseason after the Dolphins inevitably release him.

 

And that entire scenario played out based on coaches, GMs and scouts watching film and live production from a player for what amounts to basically one season.

 

Needless to say, the evaluation process isn't fool proof. Its possible teams that evaluate him don't really like him that much. They may see him as a situational player who's primarily effective as a 50% snap count guy, in which case paying him significant money to be off the field half the time may not be in their best interest.

 

Again, far too early to make these judgments about how much interest or compensation he will get.

Potential and consistency earn paychecks, and while you haven't admitted it, McPhee was a very good player his first year and led many to say he was better than Arthur Jones at the same point. Arthur Jones got paid, too, and quite well. Arthur Jones really didn't have the big impact he has had until last year, where he really shined. 

 

So, to put it simple, McPhee had a very big rookie year for a 5th round pick, looked pretty nice, had a sophomore slump where he didn't play as well, likely due to injuries and the added weight to be a full time player (an indication we wanted him to become a full-time player, speaking to his potential). 

[GrimCoconut]

Just skimming through the thread, can't believe I didn't notice anyone mention getting Justin Tucker resigned who is in a contract year as well. Where would we be without his leg over the last two and a half years? I know he is "just a kicker" and that Pernell and Torrey's arrows are pointing up but come on guys, this is the best kicker in the league and he has won us several games, including arguably the Super Bowl since we only won that by 3 points. I'm sure it won't be a real issue to get him resigned and I know he wants to stay here but it's just surprising to me that he has been left out of this thread's discussion. we've got Jimmy for another year already so we really need to focus on Tucker, T. Smith, and McPhee and getting them resigned and honestly, Tucker is the most proven commodity of the three so he would be my #1 focus if I were Ozzie/Eric.

Tucker is an RFA, who will likely get extended and not play on a tender, which could pay him around $2M a year, but you never know. It's possible he could play on the 2nd round tender. Nobody will give up a 2nd round pick for a kicker. Lol. Still, he does need to get extended. 

[rmcjacket23]

McPhee can play all over the line and his recent play has been very good in his role, so it's not inconceivable to think he could get paid very well on the open market, which I suspect happens barring an injury. If we make the playoffs, which looks very likely, he will gain even more attention. Granted, a Super Bowl appearance will certainly help increase his value, it won't necessarily increase it that much. There is a slight premium to be paid for signing a Super Bowl player, though, so you are correct there. 

 

Cutting Jacoby and/or Daryl Smith would be more than just cap savings. I think you could see both cut after June 1st and not make the 53 roster. See, their cut would likely be a result of more than a superficial reason of cap space. I think it's so much more multifaceted than that. If we do draft a WR high, which is pretty possible considering the class and free agents available on the open market, that could push Jones out of a job. I think Jones is here for training camp, but I would guarantee that if he doesn't improve we'll cut him before the 53. Daryl Smith could be cut or even traded if we see enough out of Arthur Brown and CJ Mosley to make that decision. I think if Mosley proves it, he can take the MIKE spot next year, which would push Smith back to WILL. If Brown is nipping at his heels, it could cause the FO to let Smith go to allow Brown playing time and to maintain its ST depth to improve the overall 53, rather than keeping a LB around just for depth (a la Brown this year).

 

If cut after June 1st, Jones would save $1.625M in 2015 but cost $1.75M in 2016. Daryl Smith would also save $1.625M in 2015 but cost $1.75M in 2016. That would save us a total of $3.25M in 2015 but cost us $3.5M in 2016, where we won't have to bare the weight Rice's dead money as much and will likely restructure Flacco to some extent. Cuts and trades aren't necessarily always about cap savings, so I can see Smith and Jones cut to 1) help improve cap security for possible future signings as necessary (such as an unforeseen injury a la Morgan Cox this year), 2) to reduce roster spots to help augment other areas of the roster that are not as strong. 

 

As for cutting Gradkowski, it's possible, though he would only save us $660K, and McClellan, while he would save $1M but he's a quality ST player and has rotated as an ILB and OLB in our system, so he provides decent depth. It's certainly plausible, though I'm not sure how likely considering Arthur Brown rides the bench and does not contribute on ST at all. So, he either rides the bench next year, is cut, or becomes a contributor, but then where does that leave Daryl Smith and CJ Mosley? 

Yes, but I don't think you're cutting somebody like Jacoby or Daryl just because we have somebody else younger who might take their role. The only real question at that point is... is Daryl Smith or Jacoby Jones worth $750K a year for one year? In my opinion, even as bench or role players, they are worth that much. Not a big fan of the post-June 1 cuts in general, because it doesn't really solve anything. If there was a year I'd rather take a bigger cap hit, it would be 2015, because Joe's cap number doubles in 2016, and assuming they don't sign an extension for Jimmy until then, his actual contract negotiation might not be until 2016.

 

In 2015, as it stands now, you've really got three guys looking for contracts that "matter" in my opinion... McPhee, Torrey, and Tucker.

 

Assuming that Ngata gets an extension or gets released in 2015, here's a list of the existing 2016 free agents... Yanda, Osemele (that's both of our starting, dominant guards), Jimmy Smith, and even Upshaw. That excludes some significant "role players" like Tyson and Asa Jackson.

 

Also consider that while its easy for the fanbase to assume that Flacco is going to get another extension in 2016, that's certainly not a given. He's got almost all of the leverage in that season for contract negotiations, since the Ravens would save less than $3M in cap space by releasing him, so that's not a threat. HE would have to be the one to want to get an extension, and he's already scheduled to make $18M in salary in that season. I expect something to get done there, but its not the given that a lot of fans make it out to be.

[EricH]

Can we just enjoy the season before we start worrying about off season?

I mean post season even seems a bit premature at this point.

[rmcjacket23]

Potential and consistency earn paychecks, and while you haven't admitted it, McPhee was a very good player his first year and led many to say he was better than Arthur Jones at the same point. Arthur Jones got paid, too, and quite well. Arthur Jones really didn't have the big impact he has had until last year, where he really shined. 

 

So, to put it simple, McPhee had a very big rookie year for a 5th round pick, looked pretty nice, had a sophomore slump where he didn't play as well, likely due to injuries and the added weight to be a full time player (an indication we wanted him to become a full-time player, speaking to his potential). 

That was being said internally, not externally.

 

And Jones also proved to be an outstanding run-stopper and was much more than a 50% snap count guy the last season plus with the Ravens. And he got paid, but he didn't get paid Kruger type money.

 

If I'm an outsider looking at him, I'm concerned about the injuries, particularly when this offseason was literally the first offseason where he wasn't coming off surgery, and I'm also looking at his 2012-2013 seasons, when he missed time due to injury and was largely ineffective as even a situational player.

 

And keep in mind... if he's perceived as the guy who's going to get Kruger or even Jones type money, he's not getting that money from any NFL team who wants him as a situational player. He would be expected to be a 70-80% snap count guy who is supposed to defend the run and the pass. I'd want to see that consistently on game film before I committed that kind of money.

 

Same situation can be said for Kruger, and that's why he's perceived as to not playing up to his contract at the moment. He actually plays more snaps in Cleveland than he did in Baltimore, yet his sack count was cut in half and his tackles were reduced. This season, he's on pace for six sacks so far. Have to realize that one of the major benefits of being a guy who plays 50% of the time is you're generally pretty fresh most of the time from a motor perspective. He may only be trying to get to the QB 15-20 times a game, whereas a guy like Suggs, who doesn't come off the field much, might be trying to do it 40 times a game. There's a big difference there.

[GrimCoconut]

Yes, but I don't think you're cutting somebody like Jacoby or Daryl just because we have somebody else younger who might take their role. The only real question at that point is... is Daryl Smith or Jacoby Jones worth $750K a year for one year? In my opinion, even as bench or role players, they are worth that much. Not a big fan of the post-June 1 cuts in general, because it doesn't really solve anything. If there was a year I'd rather take a bigger cap hit, it would be 2015, because Joe's cap number doubles in 2016, and assuming they don't sign an extension for Jimmy until then, his actual contract negotiation might not be until 2016.

 

In 2015, as it stands now, you've really got three guys looking for contracts that "matter" in my opinion... McPhee, Torrey, and Tucker.

 

Assuming that Ngata gets an extension or gets released in 2015, here's a list of the existing 2016 free agents... Yanda, Osemele (that's both of our starting, dominant guards), Jimmy Smith, and even Upshaw. That excludes some significant "role players" like Tyson and Asa Jackson.

 

Also consider that while its easy for the fanbase to assume that Flacco is going to get another extension in 2016, that's certainly not a given. He's got almost all of the leverage in that season for contract negotiations, since the Ravens would save less than $3M in cap space by releasing him, so that's not a threat. HE would have to be the one to want to get an extension, and he's already scheduled to make $18M in salary in that season. I expect something to get done there, but its not the given that a lot of fans make it out to be.

Why not? Yes, you can get rid of someone if you think you have someone younger to fill their role. It happens. Roster spots are precious, and it's been proven to be precious. I'm not sure we want to keep having guys around just for depth. If Jacoby continues to not impress this year, I think he's as good as gone next if he can't prove in training camp he belongs over others. That's the question that can't be answered until later, as it's contingent based on factors. I can say that Campanaro and others have looked good on PR, so if someone proves they can be a RS, then they could replace him. It could be someone like Asa Jackson. As for Daryl Smith, his job isn't guaranteed. If Brown shows he can be as good as Smith, I think Smith could get traded. It wouldn't be for a lot, since he's older and coming off of somewhat of a down year for him, but it's possible. Just because he signed an extension this year means nothing. IIRC, we cut Mason the year after he extended because we had depth to replace him. 

 

You need money for cap cushion, so while I understand your logic on cutting players after June 1st (I am NOT saying to cut them as post-June 1st designee, BTW!), I think you can cut someone if you want to carry an injury cap cushion on the year, which we DO like to do like every other team. 

 

Jimmy's near-$7M 5th year option is NOT guaranteed until the first day of the regular season after he makes the 53-man. We can extend him and reduce his 2015 base salary to compensate for the extension and the cap space next year. This is what makes Jimmy an important player to extend, especially with the contracts CBs have received of late and with a potentially accelerating cap limit inflating future free agent salaries. I agree on Tucker, McPhee and Torrey, but Jimmy should be included. Tucker is, however, a RFA, so he will be tendered if not extended. 

 

I know who are 2016 free agents are, though I suppose that's less for  me than others. I'm well aware we have both starting guards due the same year. Ideally, it would be great to restructure Yanda (who has done it before and has been a team player even during his original contract negotiations after his rookie deal) and retain both him and KO. If you restructure Yanda, you can decrease some of the 2015 cap space he has, but you would need to be sure he will fulfill his deal, and he will be 31 at the start of next season.

 

I think Flacco would be amiable to restructuring. I understand your point, but I look at character a lot in this and I strongly believe Flacco would want to field a winning team. It's not like he'll lose money. If anything, it would hurt us if we restructure him too much. He's been a very durable player, so restructuring him is a very likely scenario. It's why I feel Yanda and KO should be retained before Torrey Smith. 

[GrimCoconut]

That was being said internally, not externally.

And Jones also proved to be an outstanding run-stopper and was much more than a 50% snap count guy the last season plus with the Ravens. And he got paid, but he didn't get paid Kruger type money.

If I'm an outsider looking at him, I'm concerned about the injuries, particularly when this offseason was literally the first offseason where he wasn't coming off surgery, and I'm also looking at his 2012-2013 seasons, when he missed time due to injury and was largely ineffective as even a situational player.

And keep in mind... if he's perceived as the guy who's going to get Kruger or even Jones type money, he's not getting that money from any NFL team who wants him as a situational player. He would be expected to be a 70-80% snap count guy who is supposed to defend the run and the pass. I'd want to see that consistently on game film before I committed that kind of money.

Same situation can be said for Kruger, and that's why he's perceived as to not playing up to his contract at the moment. He actually plays more snaps in Cleveland than he did in Baltimore, yet his sack count was cut in half and his tackles were reduced. This season, he's on pace for six sacks so far. Have to realize that one of the major benefits of being a guy who plays 50% of the time is you're generally pretty fresh most of the time from a motor perspective. He may only be trying to get to the QB 15-20 times a game, whereas a guy like Suggs, who doesn't come off the field much, might be trying to do it 40 times a game. There's a big difference there.

There's a reason why you and I aren't NFL GMs.

[cobrajet]

I have liked McPhee since he became a Raven. I think he has a high motor and hope we retain him. With that said, if he is commanding Ellerby money maybe we should let him walk. Again, big contracts are for elite QB's, decent LT's, shutdown corners, true #1 WR's and a couple of pro bowlers on your team that are real leaders in your locker room. Torrey plays a big role keeping defenses honest, again I would like to retain him but no way I am giving him #1 WR money. I agree extending Jimmy Smith should be a top priority as good CB's are hard to get and develop. I like Forsett but no way am I giving a running back huge money, I hope we learned that lesson already.

[rmcjacket23]

Why not? Yes, you can get rid of someone if you think you have someone younger to fill their role. It happens. Roster spots are precious, and it's been proven to be precious. I'm not sure we want to keep having guys around just for depth. If Jacoby continues to not impress this year, I think he's as good as gone next if he can't prove in training camp he belongs over others. That's the question that can't be answered until later, as it's contingent based on factors. I can say that Campanaro and others have looked good on PR, so if someone proves they can be a RS, then they could replace him. It could be someone like Asa Jackson. As for Daryl Smith, his job isn't guaranteed. If Brown shows he can be as good as Smith, I think Smith could get traded. It wouldn't be for a lot, since he's older and coming off of somewhat of a down year for him, but it's possible. Just because he signed an extension this year means nothing. IIRC, we cut Mason the year after he extended because we had depth to replace him. 

 

You need money for cap cushion, so while I understand your logic on cutting players after June 1st (I am NOT saying to cut them as post-June 1st designee, BTW!), I think you can cut someone if you want to carry an injury cap cushion on the year, which we DO like to do like every other team. 

 

Jimmy's near-$7M 5th year option is NOT guaranteed until the first day of the regular season after he makes the 53-man. We can extend him and reduce his 2015 base salary to compensate for the extension and the cap space next year. This is what makes Jimmy an important player to extend, especially with the contracts CBs have received of late and with a potentially accelerating cap limit inflating future free agent salaries. I agree on Tucker, McPhee and Torrey, but Jimmy should be included. Tucker is, however, a RFA, so he will be tendered if not extended. 

 

I know who are 2016 free agents are, though I suppose that's less for  me than others. I'm well aware we have both starting guards due the same year. Ideally, it would be great to restructure Yanda (who has done it before and has been a team player even during his original contract negotiations after his rookie deal) and retain both him and KO. If you restructure Yanda, you can decrease some of the 2015 cap space he has, but you would need to be sure he will fulfill his deal, and he will be 31 at the start of next season.

 

I think Flacco would be amiable to restructuring. I understand your point, but I look at character a lot in this and I strongly believe Flacco would want to field a winning team. It's not like he'll lose money. If anything, it would hurt us if we restructure him too much. He's been a very durable player, so restructuring him is a very likely scenario. It's why I feel Yanda and KO should be retained before Torrey Smith. 

1. You typically don't cut guys just because you "think" you have somebody younger. You cut them because they either have a large cap amount that you can't carry and you need that money for somebody else (not the case clearly here) or because the incumbent has lost his starting or even roster spot through competition in training camp/preseason, which is where the majority of the post-June 1 cuts come in. For me, its simple. Daryl Smith, as even a reserve MLB, is worth $750K. And at the moment, there is absolutely no indication that the franchise thinks Arthur Brown is a better option than Daryl at the moment. As it stands, I fully expect Daryl Smith to be a starting MLB on this team in 2015, because there's nothing financially that would suggest otherwise, and there's certainly nothing on the field or off it that would suggest otherwise. That would fall into the "need to see it to believe it" category for me.

 

The argument is sort of ridiculous to me, because we are acting like $750K means something. Its not like we are going to be unable to afford to retain somebody because Jacoby or Daryl is on this team. If we needed $750K or even $1.5M in cap space to sign somebody, there are numerous places that we could look to do that, including Smith and Jacoby. As I already mentioned, I think if the organization had the choice between retaining Daryl Smith in 2015 and Albert McClellan in 2015, they'd retain Smith in a heartbeat, regardless of how great he is on ST (which according to fans on here Arthur Brown is also great at ST, so makes you wonder why McClellan is here at all).

 

And of course we are going to be keeping guys just for depth... in every single season since our existence, we have kept more players on the roster for depth than we have for "starters". There's only really 24-25 guys who are "starters" on a weekly basis, and there's 53 guys on the active roster, and that excludes the PS. That means that there's almost 30 guys on a weekly basis who are either role players (a form of depth) or straight up depth... players that the coaching staff has no intention in an ideal world of playing significant snaps for that team on that day. On gameday alone, 8 of those depth guys don't even dress. That's how every football team creates their roster... with backup and depth in the event that injuries, poor performance, etc. occurs.

 

2. I don't suspect Jimmy is going to be in the top three in priority, primarily because his cap number at $7M approximately is far from prohibitive of a player of his caliber, and he's got another year. Even if we did sign him to an extension, its not like his cap number is going to be much lower than $7M in most seasons, and the FO would be smart to keep it that way.

 

3. Without getting too caught up in terminology, the Ravens, generally speaking, don't restructure contracts. There's a difference between a restructure (like what we did with Webb this season) and an extension, which is what we are talking about. For somebody like Yanda, a restructure is literally impossible, because you can't restructure a contract with only one year remaining, unless he either took a paycut (wont happen) or he signs an extension (likely).

 

Same thing with Flacco. Restructuring his contract accomplishes nothing, because in an actual restructure, you typically take non-guaranteed money, turn it into a signing bonus, guarantee it, and spread it out over the rest of the contract. That does the Ravens no good, because it just increases Flacco's already huge cap hits in future years.

 

If he were to agree to it, the Ravens would likely tack a couple more years onto his deal and convert some of his base salary to a bonus to prorate. That's about the only way the Ravens could reduce his cap number and not screw themselves royally in future years.

[GrimCoconut]

Insert Stephen King novel here.

Part of the issue is you're making your argument without looking at historical data. Regardless of your opinion, which I admit even I'm integrating my own opinion here, the facts remain we HAVE cut veteran starters because we THINK we have a younger option. It happened with Heap, Mason, Gregg. Spin it however you want, but these are facts. If you actually took time to read what I wrote and digest it, you'd comprehend that I'm suggesting both players could be gone if their depth pushes them out. This is something you're ignoring.

I'm not tracking what argument you're referring, because I clearly stated they would be cut if they lost their starting jobs in training camp. That would qualify them as post June 1st cuts, which would save more than $750k each. I actually posted the amount it would save in my post. Lol. I'm not sure if you just don't know how to read or simply stop reading my comments or simply have selective reading.

Of course you have depth, but ideally that depth contributes on ST. That's how we're built. You even said this in one of your old posts, so I know you understand the importance of depth playing a role on ST.

We did it with Webb when he was a RFA. He was on a tender and we gave him an extension on top of the tender. Granted, his tender was around 2m or something but the point remains.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. Convert some base salary to a guaranteed bonus and spread it over the duration of a new deal to extend their respective contacts. Sometimes I wonder of you just like to "hear yourself talk." Some of the stuff you said is exactly what I and others have said at points.

[rmcjacket23]

Part of the issue is you're making your argument without looking at historical data. Regardless of your opinion, which I admit even I'm integrating my own opinion here, the facts remain we HAVE cut veteran starters because we THINK we have a younger option. It happened with Heap, Mason, Gregg. Spin it however you want, but these are facts. If you actually took time to read what I wrote and digest it, you'd comprehend that I'm suggesting both players could be gone if their depth pushes them out. This is something you're ignoring.

I'm not tracking what argument you're referring, because I clearly stated they would be cut if they lost their starting jobs in training camp. That would qualify them as post June 1st cuts, which would save more than $750k each. I actually posted the amount it would save in my post. Lol. I'm not sure if you just don't know how to read or simply stop reading my comments or simply have selective reading.

Of course you have depth, but ideally that depth contributes on ST. That's how we're built. You even said this in one of your old posts, so I know you understand the importance of depth playing a role on ST.

We did it with Webb when he was a RFA. He was on a tender and we gave him an extension on top of the tender. Granted, his tender was around 2m or something but the point remains.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. Convert some base salary to a guaranteed bonus and spread it over the duration of a new deal to extend their respective contacts. Sometimes I wonder of you just like to "hear yourself talk." Some of the stuff you said is exactly what I and others have said at points.

1. YOU thinking that we cut those players because we thought we had better, cheaper talent doesn't make something fact. It makes something opinion. For what its worth, here's an article I pulled through 30 seconds of research identifying the main reasons why guys like Mason, Heap, and Gregg were released. Notice the phrases "cap-strapped" and the $18.6M in cap space (which was a lot more than it is now when this happened) saved from those releases seem to be the main driver. I referenced this in my earlier post, when I identified monetary/cap space reasons as being one of the main drivers of releases of veteran players like this.

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/thehuddle/post/2011/07/ravens-derrick-mason-todd-heap/1

Needless to say, I would think that if the salary cap relief of releasing said players weren't so high, things might have gone quite differently.

2. Post June-1 cuts save money in the current year, and cost more money in the following season. That's not really a long-term benefit for the Ravens, as they don't actually gain any benefit from doing that. They'd likely be just as beneficial to keep somebody like Smith who list his starting spot as a reserve, and cut him the following year. By the time training camp/preseason winds around, they've already signed their draft picks, and the pickings from the FA market are generally pretty bare for the most part, so its not like they would need to clear that roster spot for a better player in most cases. That's why the guys that we typically have as Post-June 1 cuts are guys that most people have never heard of or very small salaried players, generally speaking.

3. Obviously, the depth would ideally contribute on ST. Doesn't mean it works that way though. We've still got starters who play ST, so its not only for reserves. In any given gameday, there's probably 10-15 players who either don't play at all, or play very, very, very rarely... and its by design. That's 20-25 percent of the entire roster alone.

4. What you are describing isn't a restructuring, which is what I pointed out. You are describing an extension. The two things are not the same.

[GrimCoconut]

1. YOU thinking that we cut those players because we thought we had better, cheaper talent doesn't make something fact. It makes something opinion. For what its worth, here's an article I pulled through 30 seconds of research identifying the main reasons why guys like Mason, Heap, and Gregg were released. Notice the phrases "cap-strapped" and the $18.6M in cap space (which was a lot more than it is now when this happened) saved from those releases seem to be the main driver. I referenced this in my earlier post, when I identified monetary/cap space reasons as being one of the main drivers of releases of veteran players like this.

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/thehuddle/post/2011/07/ravens-derrick-mason-todd-heap/1

Needless to say, I would think that if the salary cap relief of releasing said players weren't so high, things might have gone quite differently.

2. Post June-1 cuts save money in the current year, and cost more money in the following season. That's not really a long-term benefit for the Ravens, as they don't actually gain any benefit from doing that. They'd likely be just as beneficial to keep somebody like Smith who list his starting spot as a reserve, and cut him the following year. By the time training camp/preseason winds around, they've already signed their draft picks, and the pickings from the FA market are generally pretty bare for the most part, so its not like they would need to clear that roster spot for a better player in most cases. That's why the guys that we typically have as Post-June 1 cuts are guys that most people have never heard of or very small salaried players, generally speaking.

3. Obviously, the depth would ideally contribute on ST. Doesn't mean it works that way though. We've still got starters who play ST, so its not only for reserves. In any given gameday, there's probably 10-15 players who either don't play at all, or play very, very, very rarely... and its by design. That's 20-25 percent of the entire roster alone.

4. What you are describing isn't a restructuring, which is what I pointed out. You are describing an extension. The two things are not the same.

Those players weren't cut just because of cap. You and I both know you need players behind them you feel comfortable starting in their place when you cut a starter.

I said Jones and Smith could be cut if their depth pushes them. We're discussing possibilities here. In Jones' case especially, there's little reason to keep them around just because you want insurance. There are instances where we keep players strictly as reserves. Taylor, Arthur Brown, Hurst, and others are examples of this. With that said, the positions and situations are unique. We're talking a 30+ ILB being depth and likely not contributing on ST. That's not very common. In Brown's situation it's different. Arthur Brown is clearly developing and he's on a rookie deal and must not be as good as others ST and not as good as Smith or Mosley on defense.

I'm not disagreeing with your point about McClellan. I think it's possible he could be cut, you're right. I'd rather have Smith as defensive depth than McClellan. If Daryl can play ST then I say keep him. That's if the scenario I presented even happens. It's all conjecture at this point.

My issue is you have linear thinking that doesn't permit different views. You immediately cast off ideas without consideration.

If they were cut as June cuts then they would count as a cap cushion in event of injuries. Any unused amount would carry over into 2015.

Ozzie has a hand in the roster but John surely does as well and he's a ST coach and it's no coincidence our ST has improved under him. Part of that is utilizing the entire roster, as you said, on game day. As you said, it's better to have a guy active for ST than a guy active for depth. That's your argument and it's one where I agree with you.

I used the wrong word, however, I explained what I meant. When I write my posts I'm often distracted by running or at the gym. My mistake. I explained what I meant, so I figured you'd understand regardless. I think you knew what I meant, though you seem to enjoy lecturing others rather than interpreting or clarifying.

[JoeyFlex5]

Its a tough call with McPhee. I'm not convinced that he's getting much public exposure at this point. I think a major factor in the explosion from Paul Kruger was the fact that our team made the playoffs, we were front and center for so long in the playoffs, and he played well during that period. I think coaches and players know about him, but not at that level yet. Its hard to really gauge McPhee's contract possibilities at this point, since the season isn't even halfway over, but we are also probably going to be in a somewhat better cap situation than we were when Kruger's deal came up.

 

I don't see us cutting Daryl or Jacoby, because there really isn't much cost-savings in doing so. We would only save $750K each in 2015 by letting them go. To put that in perspective, you could save nearly as much if not more by cutting somebody like Gino Gradkowski or Albert McClellan, who I think are less valuable and more easily replaceable than losing Daryl or Jacoby.

 

I would say though that most likely 2015 would be the last seasons as a Raven for both Jacoby and Daryl, and you're then talking almost $4M in cap savings between the two.

mcphee has played much better this year(his first healthy year since being a rookie) than kruger and ellerbe combined ever have, and while ellerbe was pretty limited to coverage and kruger was limited to pass rushing, mcphee brings much more to the table, OLB, DE, edge rusher, DT, NT, inside and outside penetration, beats double teams, length to disrupt plays you dont expect him to, strength to beat most lineman he faces 1 on 1, and he is so insanely athletic that he can slide right past most lineman without them knowing what happened. kruger and ellerbe were nowhere near as good as mcphee, teams would be reasonable to throw kruger-esque contracts at mcphee. 

 

the only way we keep mcphee, is after jimmy and torrey are extended, and ozzie sees mcphee as a must keep type of player, and im not so sure he does, although i think there are a few guys combined that make this front 7 work, and mcphee is near the top of that list with the chaos he can cause all over the defensive front, but sadly i dont see him staying, and i think out of the krugers and ellerbe's and bart scotts etc. this is the one that we really regret.

[rmcjacket23]

Those players weren't cut just because of cap. You and I both know you need players behind them you feel comfortable starting in their place when you cut a starter.

If this theory were true, explain to me the logic behind the Boldin situation then? Certainly no notable or even vague resemblance of a player on the roster capable of filling his role, and the FO already had that knowledge. By almost every account possible... it was 100% a salary cap move. Asked him to take a paycut of allegedly $2-3M, he declined, and they moved him out of town.

 

There are plenty of instances where quality football players have been cut from ANY football team, not just the Ravens, in what is essentially 100% a salary cap move.

 

Did the Ravens have players capable of filling the spots of guys like Mason and Heap? Yes. If either one of those guys (Mason in particular) had minimal salary cap hits in those years, would they have been cut from the team? In my opinion, no.

 

That's the analysis I have no doubt every franchise makes, and the Ravens are particularly good at it. You look at the salary cap situation, you look at the numbers that stand out the most and the one's that you have the most maneuverability with, and then you look at the production and replacement level talent on the roster for that player. If the player is reasonably easy to replace, and there is a significant financial benefit to getting rid of that guy, then yes, he's a prime candidate for release. Its why guys like Canty stick out like a sore thumb in the upcoming season.

 

For 2015, the players that stand out the most to me in regards to potential cap savings are Ngata, Yanda, Canty and Koch. If the Ravens needed to clear significant cap space for some reason, these are likely the guys that they would be looking at doing something with. I think Canty and Koch are obvious release candidates, and Ngata and Yanda are obvious extension candidates, which hopefully frees up room. There are other guys with big numbers (Webb), but the maneuverability of changing his cap number is much more difficult.

[rmcjacket23]

mcphee has played much better this year(his first healthy year since being a rookie) than kruger and ellerbe combined ever have, and while ellerbe was pretty limited to coverage and kruger was limited to pass rushing, mcphee brings much more to the table, OLB, DE, edge rusher, DT, NT, inside and outside penetration, beats double teams, length to disrupt plays you dont expect him to, strength to beat most lineman he faces 1 on 1, and he is so insanely athletic that he can slide right past most lineman without them knowing what happened. kruger and ellerbe were nowhere near as good as mcphee, teams would be reasonable to throw kruger-esque contracts at mcphee. 

 

the only way we keep mcphee, is after jimmy and torrey are extended, and ozzie sees mcphee as a must keep type of player, and im not so sure he does, although i think there are a few guys combined that make this front 7 work, and mcphee is near the top of that list with the chaos he can cause all over the defensive front, but sadly i dont see him staying, and i think out of the krugers and ellerbe's and bart scotts etc. this is the one that we really regret.

Ellerbe averaged 50 defensive snaps a game as a starter for the Ravens in 2012. That's not "limited to coverage".

 

That's basically a 3 down linebacker.

[1/28/01]

If this theory were true, explain to me the logic behind the Boldin situation then? Certainly no notable or even vague resemblance of a player on the roster capable of filling his role, and the FO already had that knowledge. By almost every account possible... it was 100% a salary cap move. Asked him to take a paycut of allegedly $2-3M, he declined, and they moved him out of town.

Pitta

[stampedehero]

Now that the season is almost halfway done, the players have shown enough at this point to begin the discussion of what will happen in the offseason.  McPhee and Torrey are clearly the top priorities, but a lot will need to happen in order to retain both.

 

That being said, I think that numerous things could happen in the offseason.

 

First of all, McPhee needs to be our clear cut #1 priority.  Losing him in the offseason will set us back for a few years on defense.  Suggs and Doom (while they are still good now) are not getting any younger, and could possibly drop off soon.  That would leave Upshaw as our only young OLB, and he is a terrible pass rusher.  In my opinion, McPhee needs to be in the long term plans for our defense if we are serious about regaining our defensive prowess that we lost a few years ago.  

 

Torrey, who was originally the #1 priority, has become the #2 (in my opinion).  I think we should try to retain him, but only at the right price.  He has proven to be not worth the big money, and I don't think that giving him a huge contract would be a smart idea.  I would rather pay McPhee more money to stay than Torrey.

 

In order to clear some space, I would like to see Canty and Jacoby get cut, and I hope that we can restructure Ngata's contract.  Also, if Mosley shows enough this season to be the green dot guy, I think Daryl Smith's future may be changing on this team.  Possibly a restructure to make sure he stays here at least 1 more year.  I think that we could also cut Webb, depending on how the rest of his season looks.  As of right now, he has become the biggest part of our coverage resurgence that has allowed us to get 10 sacks in the past 2 games.  However, he has proven to be very injury prone and has dropped off since his breakout season in 2011.  

 

In the end, I think that Ozzie will recognize McPhee's importance to the future of our defense, and he will do anything he can to retain McPhee.

 

What do you guys think?

Upshaw made Roethisberger feel pain for weeks. I do not think he is terrible.   

[rmcjacket23]

Pitta

Who was already a part of the team even when Boldin was here... he's not the replacement for Boldin nor was he intended to . He would just be the TE who would benefit most from his targets.

 

If Pitta was supposed to do what Boldin did, then why was Steve Smith signed?

 

Reasonably, Smith was signed because they realized that one TE plus one WR isn't going to be sufficient enough to have a stable offense, just like it wasn't sufficient enough to win a SB either.

[The Raven]

Upshaw made Roethisberger feel pain for weeks. I do not think he is terrible.   

 

Hitting a QB hard does not make him not a terrible pass rusher. He's pretty mediocre rushing the passer regardless of how hard he hits people.

[GrimCoconut]

If this theory were true, explain to me the logic behind the Boldin situation then? By almost every account possible... it was 100% a salary cap move. Asked him to take a paycut of allegedly $2-3M, he declined, and they moved him out of town.

 

For 2015, the players that stand out the most to me in regards to potential cap savings are Ngata, Yanda, Canty and Koch. If the Ravens needed to clear significant cap space for some reason, these are likely the guys that they would be looking at doing something with. I think Canty and Koch are obvious release candidates, and Ngata and Yanda are obvious extension candidates, which hopefully frees up room. There are other guys with big numbers (Webb), but the maneuverability of changing his cap number is much more difficult.

At the time of Boldin's trade, we had Torrey Smith (an emerging WR who I'm sure we hoped would become the #1 WR for the team and help mask the loss of Boldin), Dennis Pitta (an excellent go-to guy for Flacco who provides a lot of what Boldin provided), Jacoby Jones (a big-play threat who can take the top off of defenses), Tandon Doss (a player we hoped would emerge into a bigger role and replace Boldin but never did) and Deonte Thompson (a player who looked really good in camp and the off-season). There was talk for some time about Doss eventually replacing Boldin. It never came to fruition. Obviously, hindsight tells us it was not good enough, but losing Pitta and Boldin and Doss not living up to the hope, with Jacoby Jones going down due to injury really exposed the flaws. Then, you had a bad OL and it was just a mess. 

 

I'm not saying that we traded Boldin because of young guys. I'm saying we traded Boldin because we wanted cap space and we made the move because of the depth we had at WR that made us feel like we could survive without him. I'm not saying we will trade or release Daryl Smith (as an example) because of Arthur Brown. That is ridiculous. I'm saying that (like Boldin) we could move on from Daryl Smith if we feel like Arthur Brown really looks good in camp and feel like he is ready to take the next step. If Mosley continues to look solid, then yes, I feel like Daryl could be moved to some capacity. It would benefit us on the cap by providing us extra cap cushion should we need it. 

 

I think we will want to retain Ngata, though I hope we don't give him some long extension. I'm also not nearly as confident as you he will be extended. I agree with you that Koch and Canty are likely gone. I think Yanda is a player primed for an extension with a converted base salary into a guaranteed bonus. I'm hopeful we do that. I'd rather have Yanda over Ngata--all day, every day. We don't look great on the cap for next year, so it will take some wiggling to maneuver next year's cap. I'm confident we will do it. We're one of the best in the business. 

[GrimCoconut]

Who was already a part of the team even when Boldin was here... he's not the replacement for Boldin nor was he intended to . He would just be the TE who would benefit most from his targets.

 

If Pitta was supposed to do what Boldin did, then why was Steve Smith signed?

 

Reasonably, Smith was signed because they realized that one TE plus one WR isn't going to be sufficient enough to have a stable offense, just like it wasn't sufficient enough to win a SB either.

Steve Smith was signed because he's a great player and Torrey Smith did not look like a #1 WR last year and we needed another guy because Jacoby Jones isn't it but is (or was) a good return specialist. 

[stampedehero]

Hitting a QB hard does not make him not a terrible pass rusher. He's pretty mediocre rushing the passer regardless of how hard he hits people.

Everyone has their own opinion.  I look at results and that result pleased me. thnx 

[stampedehero]

Steve Smith was signed because he's a great player and Torrey Smith did not look like a #1 WR last year and we needed another guy because Jacoby Jones isn't it but is (or was) a good return specialist. 

In my opinion, we signed him for his work ethic, Hands Reliability, ability to create open space, $ affordability under the cap and last but not least ATTITUDE. Would you all agree he is better here than on another AFC North team??   

[rmcjacket23]

At the time of Boldin's trade, we had Torrey Smith (an emerging WR who I'm sure we hoped would become the #1 WR for the team and help mask the loss of Boldin), Dennis Pitta (an excellent go-to guy for Flacco who provides a lot of what Boldin provided), Jacoby Jones (a big-play threat who can take the top off of defenses), Tandon Doss (a player we hoped would emerge into a bigger role and replace Boldin but never did) and Deonte Thompson (a player who looked really good in camp and the off-season). There was talk for some time about Doss eventually replacing Boldin. It never came to fruition. Obviously, hindsight tells us it was not good enough, but losing Pitta and Boldin and Doss not living up to the hope, with Jacoby Jones going down due to injury really exposed the flaws. Then, you had a bad OL and it was just a mess. 

 

I'm not saying that we traded Boldin because of young guys. I'm saying we traded Boldin because we wanted cap space and we made the move because of the depth we had at WR that made us feel like we could survive without him. I'm not saying we will trade or release Daryl Smith (as an example) because of Arthur Brown. That is ridiculous. I'm saying that (like Boldin) we could move on from Daryl Smith if we feel like Arthur Brown really looks good in camp and feel like he is ready to take the next step. If Mosley continues to look solid, then yes, I feel like Daryl could be moved to some capacity. It would benefit us on the cap by providing us extra cap cushion should we need it. 

 

I think we will want to retain Ngata, though I hope we don't give him some long extension. I'm also not nearly as confident as you he will be extended. I agree with you that Koch and Canty are likely gone. I think Yanda is a player primed for an extension with a converted base salary into a guaranteed bonus. I'm hopeful we do that. I'd rather have Yanda over Ngata--all day, every day. We don't look great on the cap for next year, so it will take some wiggling to maneuver next year's cap. I'm confident we will do it. We're one of the best in the business. 

1. I never once thought that the FO actually considered Doss as anything more than a role player on offense. If there was any talk about Doss even remotely replacing the production or doing even 1/10th of the things that Boldin did, it was probably 100% generated on Ravens fan boards. Even if we assume that your analysis of the skill sets of those players was correct, Torrey and Jacoby at the time of that trade had virtually identical skill sets. They were both deep threats, but neither was a pure route runner or was known for making physical, tough catches. It appeared (after the trade) that Torrey was improving in that area, but that doesn't appear to be the case now.

 

My opinion of the Boldin situation is far simpler... the franchise knew they were blowing the defense up, knew that we had salary cap issues, and deep down didn't see the 2013 team as a legitimate "contender". Maybe a playoff team, but not the kind of team that threatens to win a SB. I think if the FO was being honest with people, they 100% viewed 2013 as a mild "rebuilding" year. They never had any intention of replacing Boldin in that season. If a young guy emerged, so be it, but I doubt they were banking on it or expecting it. If he didn't, they'd go to the draft or FA and look elsewhere, which is what they did. They looked at the 2013 roster, determined that we weren't likely to be legit contenders even with Boldin, and decided there was no point in keeping him here when he was never going to be with the team beyond that season anyway.

 

2. I actually think its possible (although I think they both get extended, or maybe Yanda doesn't and just plays out his last year) that the FO could look to release Yanda and extend Ngata instead. If there's one thing we know about the Ravens, we can generally find great interior offensive lineman just about anywhere. I think Yanda is a great player, and I think he will be a very good player for the next couple years, but if he's going to be wanting a deal similar to what he's playing on now, the FO may design to move on from him. We let a guy like Grubbs walk in FA, and in the long-run it may have been a great decision for us. At the time, they were considered probably the best tandom of guards in the league. Maybe they like Urschel, bottom even so, they could probably take an interior lineman in the early rounds of the draft, insert them right away, and still be a very good offensive line. With the exception of LT and maybe center, the OL is a unit. You can be weak at one or possibly even two spots on the line and still hold up very well over the long run. I don't think removing Yanda from the lineup would all of the sudden make our offensive line crumble, even with how good he is.

 

Ultimately, I think Ngata takes an extension, and Yanda just plays out the final year of his deal. We will then decide whether to retain Yanda in 2016 or just let him walk in FA and give Osemele good money instead.

[codizzle]

Tucker is an RFA, who will likely get extended and not play on a tender, which could pay him around $2M a year, but you never know. It's possible he could play on the 2nd round tender. Nobody will give up a 2nd round pick for a kicker. Lol. Still, he does need to get extended.

He has been mentioned because first he's a rfa as you mentioned but also because come on lol

There is no way on this earth he is going anywhere for a loooong loooong time

[rmcjacket23]

He has been mentioned because first he's a rfa as you mentioned but also because come on lol

There is no way on this earth he is going anywhere for a loooong loooong time

Will Tucker get an extension at some point? Of course.

 

But remember, they are kickers. Even the best kickers get very little leeway if they start missing kicks. We've seen kickers go from being amongst the best in the league and consistently nailing long kicks to being cut within about 1-2 years.

 

Not saying it will happen with Tucker, but if he were to start missing makeable FGs for whatever reason over a decent period of time, he's going to face competition for his job.

[GrimCoconut]

He has been mentioned because first he's a rfa as you mentioned but also because come on lol

There is no way on this earth he is going anywhere for a loooong loooong time

Huh? I agree. He's not going anywhere. Did I say otherwise? Now you have me wondering if I didn't communicate right lol.

[4everraven]

Good topic. Has to be McPhee priority one. Then Jimmy, although I think he is restricted free agent this year. Then, I'd probably ensure we keep Tucker. Hill and Forsett would be next. This all is seemingly pushing Torrey further down the pecking order, yicks! But, I look at replace-ability. On my list Torrey and Forsett are more readily replaced and their loss less of an impact.

[Gtown Purple]

Right player, right price. If mcphee keeps up his current level of play he priced himself out of baltimore. If that is the case our first or second round pick is a olb next draft. JJ is almost surely gone with the depth we have coming at WR. Torrey stays because he accepts reasonable money. Canty is also on the block with KLM and Urban coming back next year. We probably also draft another lineman or 2.

[codizzle]

Huh? I agree. He's not going anywhere. Did I say otherwise? Now you have me wondering if I didn't communicate right lol.

Na was just using your post to springboard my thought