Eugene Monroe Thread (merged) - Released by Ravens

[ALPHA]

2 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Right, so Suggs figures to drop into the 50% range, but that doesn't mean some new player is going to come in and play 80-90%.

We will also probably see more out of Dumervil than usual... probably not as much as last season, but more than in 2014 and before. Probably in the 60-70% range I would think.

All this is moot if we don't get said player, and my overall premise is that if fans are already setting expectations of world beaters for whoever we pick, you're probably going to end up disappointed early. A lot of the great players we've had in this franchises history weren't all-World players right out of the draft.

We should expect to get a great player... just not necessarily a great player right out of the gate.

Bosa could, so could Lawson, those two are refined edge setters who can rush the passer.

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

12 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

If you cut him post June-1, its above $6M in savings... you just take most of the hit in 2017. That cut alone would pay for most of our draft class in 2016.

Not saying its the best option, but its an option.

Yea but at that point do we really need the $18+m in cap space that would create?

Id rather have him on the roster to have options at LT, a more talented best 5 Olineman, and at the very least quality depth at LT if neither plays LG.

And this late in FA where we've got plenty of cap space already I don't see the point in the post June 1 cut that pushes dead money to next year when we can just keep him and have next to no dead money releasing/moving him next year.

Only way it'd make sense to do the post June cut is if they're lining up a trade for a highly paid guy or are interested in signing Norman - and I'm not really interested in doing that.

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

2 hours ago, ALPHA said:

Bosa could, so could Lawson, those two are refined edge setters who can rush the passer.

I just don't see the Lawson love. I don't see him as a quality NFL pass rusher. He's been a DE but projects to more of an OLB in a 3-4 but doesn't have very good athleticism to be dynamic there. 

I agree he can set the edge but I think he's going to be Upshaw 2.0. His sacks in college came mostly on effort and I don't think will translate in the NFL. He's big and stiff, doesn't have the pass rushing moves, bend, or block shedding ability... I think he'll end up being a really good edge run defender with a little more upside than Upshaw in the pass rush department.

if we want that type of player we should've just resigned Upshaw for cheap and used such a high pick on a more valuable skill set. Dodd will be a much better player when all is said and done

[Winchester]

34 minutes ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

I just don't see the Lawson love. I don't see him as a quality NFL pass rusher. He's been a DE but projects to more of an OLB in a 3-4 but doesn't have very good athleticism to be dynamic there. 

I agree he can set the edge but I think he's going to be Upshaw 2.0. His sacks in college came mostly on effort and I don't think will translate in the NFL. He's big and stiff, doesn't have the pass rushing moves, bend, or block shedding ability... I think he'll end up being a really good edge run defender with a little more upside than Upshaw in the pass rush department.

if we want that type of player we should've just resigned Upshaw for cheap and used such a high pick on a more valuable skill set. Dodd will be a much better player when all is said and done

That can't be said enough times. From what I saw he is very refined and got sacks with moves that college tackles are not prepared for. His bag of moves will not be as effective in the nfl. At best I see him as a poor mans Chris Long. Dodd has skills to translate to the nfl.

[Maryland]

13 hours ago, RavensFanMania said:

I wouldn't cut Monroe as it would only be about a 2m dollar savings, which is cheap for a LT.  Next year we will revisit cutting him.

Better to cut him now and get the dead money off the books than hurt our cap in 2017 holding-on to an injury-prone LT who isn't worth his contract. 

 

If we trade-up for Tunsil, I would definitely not play Monroe at LG. I would strongly prefer to play Tunsil at LT, and then either trade or cut Monroe. Considering several other teams drafting late need LTs but are not in position to get one, I think Monroe's contract would be tradable, even if for only a 7th. Detroit and Carolina come to mind. 

If our FO ended up keeping both Tunsil and Monroe, I would play Tunsil at LG, which is what Ogden did his first year, and play Monroe at LT. Best-case scenario: Monroe has a miraculous season, staying healthy and playing well, making his trade value even greater. Worse-case scenario: Monroe gets hurt again, allowing Tunsil to play LT as normal. 

Edited April 22, 2016 by Maryland

[rmcjacket23]

9 hours ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

Yea but at that point do we really need the $18+m in cap space that would create?

Id rather have him on the roster to have options at LT, a more talented best 5 Olineman, and at the very least quality depth at LT if neither plays LG.

And this late in FA where we've got plenty of cap space already I don't see the point in the post June 1 cut that pushes dead money to next year when we can just keep him and have next to no dead money releasing/moving him next year.

Only way it'd make sense to do the post June cut is if they're lining up a trade for a highly paid guy or are interested in signing Norman - and I'm not really interested in doing that.

True, but we can roll over cap space as well. Some of that number will come down due to draft picks, but rolling over $10M in cap space into 2017 isn't a bad idea by any stretch, especially when we've got guys like Williams and Wagner due for extensions, and our kicker playing on a one year deal right now.

Chances are we will end up spending some of that money after the draft on a veteran or two, but rolling over $5-10M in cap space makes perfect sense to me, especially if you don't view this team as a slam dunk playoff team or SB contender, which I certainly don't.

That money simply might be better off being spent in future years.

[Crabcakes&Football]

On 4/21/2016 at 11:38 AM, rmcjacket23 said:

If you cut him post June-1, its above $6M in savings... you just take most of the hit in 2017. That cut alone would pay for most of our draft class in 2016.

Not saying its the best option, but its an option.

Definitely keep Monroe. Tunsil does have an injury history and may not even be ready to start week 1. Monroe at the very least would be good depth for both tackle positions.

[ellicottraven]

IF they have the good fortune of drafting Tunsil, then I will guarantee you they're going to draft a nasty guard prospect in the first 4 rounds as well. I believe Monroe will be cut if that happens. But, my personal view is keep Monroe at LT, Tunsil at LG and everything else stays the same. In fact I would love to draft Kelly for the Center position if he falls.

[52520Andrew]

Probably already been said but I don't think Monroe could handle the physicality at LG going against bigger and stronger D-linemen. 

[Halshayeji]

2 hours ago, 52520Andrew said:

Probably already been said but I don't think Monroe could handle the physicality at LG going against bigger and stronger D-linemen. 

Of course not. Wait lemme rephrase that "heeeeeeel no!" He's a finess pass blocker and has nothing to do with the interior. Take whoever you draft and slot him inside till he is ready or Monroe goes down. And please tell these peeps that trading Monroe to start Jensen is a disaster waiting to happen. I think we draft 2 linemen so we'd have Urschel Jensen and whoever we draft backing up 5 starters. And hurst, well let's just hope for Flaccos sake that he stays on the PS

Edited April 26, 2016 by Halshayeji

[Cawtious]

I do so love how the assumptions that a drafted player will always displace a starter.  

[berad]

1 hour ago, Cawtious said:

I do so love how the assumptions that a drafted player will always displace a starter.  

At #6 they'd better be a player worthy of that assumption. Only a handful of players on the team are that good to have their spots nailed down.

[rmcjacket23]

1 hour ago, Cawtious said:

I do so love how the assumptions that a drafted player will always displace a starter.  

Depends on where the player is drafted, since the investment in a player is completely different based on where and when they are drafted.

[Cawtious]

5 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Depends on where the player is drafted, since the investment in a player is completely different based on where and when they are drafted.

So a players cost to the team is a determining factor if they start or not?  I can see that as a part of the equation.  They have a short time to demonstrate themselves as a better player than a player who is a "known quantity".  I think fans often see "new" as "better" too often.  Just my opine.

[omar586]

thank god fans are not running franchises, it would be a crap show. people need to know that after draft people will get cut, so......

[Adreme]

A 6th/7th round pick is basically worthless so why would you give away valuable depth for no real reason for virtually no gain.  The Ravens have all the cap space they will need and they can make plenty next year easily enough but for now they are doing just fine in that regard and giving up depth for useless cap savings sounds like kind of move that a team that is used to drafting in the top 10 would make and not a team that is supposed to be competing for the super bowl every year.

[Maryland]

22 minutes ago, Adreme said:

A 6th/7th round pick is basically worthless so why would you give away valuable depth for no real reason for virtually no gain.  The Ravens have all the cap space they will need and they can make plenty next year easily enough but for now they are doing just fine in that regard and giving up depth for useless cap savings sounds like kind of move that a team that is used to drafting in the top 10 would make and not a team that is supposed to be competing for the super bowl every year.

Not sure how you came to this conclusion. 6th and 7th round picks often serve as assets during the regular season for making trades with other teams; they are useful for moving up a bit in the draft; the players drafted here often help on special teams; and the players can sometimes turn out to be late-round gems. 

Also not sure how you came to the conclusion that the Ravens have tons of cap space. OTC has us projected bottom-4 in the league in terms of cap space each of the next two seasons. It would be cap-smart to get Monroe's bad contract off the books asap so that we can alleviate our cap problems for 2017 and onward. 

[Adreme]

6 hours ago, Maryland said:

Not sure how you came to this conclusion. 6th and 7th round picks often serve as assets during the regular season for making trades with other teams; they are useful for moving up a bit in the draft; the players drafted here often help on special teams; and the players can sometimes turn out to be late-round gems. 

Also not sure how you came to the conclusion that the Ravens have tons of cap space. OTC has us projected bottom-4 in the league in terms of cap space each of the next two seasons. It would be cap-smart to get Monroe's bad contract off the books asap so that we can alleviate our cap problems for 2017 and onward. 

Every few years you might get someone who is useful on the field but in general the players who get picked by each team in the 6th and 7th fizzle out fairly quickly or are at best special teams specialists.

As for the cap number this year the Ravens have enough room to sign there draft picks and still have some left over if they want a small free agent  pickup or 2 which means they have enough room for this year and gaining more is not really useful. Designating him a post June 1 pushing most of the hit onto next year then seems rather counterproductive as far as building next years team goes since this years is pretty much built.  

As for next year while the Ravens are at only 12 million in cap space already (though a lot of there players are already signed) there are a ton of cuts that could free up a lot of cap space if need be.  Just looking at it cutting Monroe next year is a 4.5M savings as oppposed to a 2, Wallace is almost 6M if he doesnt work out, Pitta is 3M if his comeback fails, Watson 3M if he ends up not working out with only a 1M hit,  Webb is 5.5M and there are several more in the 2m range with no cap hit so I am not worried about next years cap number is the long and short of it.

[rmcjacket23]

13 hours ago, Cawtious said:

So a players cost to the team is a determining factor if they start or not?  I can see that as a part of the equation.  They have a short time to demonstrate themselves as a better player than a player who is a "known quantity".  I think fans often see "new" as "better" too often.  Just my opine.

In some ways, yes. The investment you make in something is a reflection of the output you expect to get from it.

They're paying Joe Flacco a lot more money than they are paying Ryan Mallett, hence, they are making a larger investment in him.. Do you really think both players have an equal opportunity to win the starting job?

Draft status is largely no different, partially because of the increase in compensation that comes from being drafter higher, and the fact that expectations are higher. We don't expect the same output from a 1st round pick as we do a 7th round pick, for obvious reasons.

There's nothing guaranteed in terms of a starting job (see Matt Elam), but if you're investing a pick that high in a player, the long term expectation is that they will be better than the incumbent at that position. If you didn't think that, then you shouldn't make the investment in that guy.

[Gordo52]

How much would we save cutting Monroe? Think it would be enticing to add some vets who get cut/sign draft class? 

Didn't address guard so I guess we're cool with Urshel/Jenson. I'm content with it. 

Stanley-LG-Zuttah-Yanda-Wagner

Looks solid for our scheme. Hopefully we get 14 Wagner and Stanley contributes faster than we think. 

Edited May 1, 2016 by Gordo52

[Tru11]

zuttah has experience playing LG if they want to keep Urshel at C.

they could also start stanley at LG if Monroe comes in healthy and stays injury free.

either urschel/jensen could win the starting LG job as well.

Monroe is most likely the last option to try there though

[ravensnick]

18 minutes ago, Gordo52 said:

How much would we save cutting Monroe? Think it would be enticing to add some vets who get cut/sign draft class? 

Didn't address guard so I guess we're cool with Urshel/Jenson. I'm content with it. 

Stanley-LG-Zuttah-Yanda-Wagner

Looks solid for our scheme. Hopefully we get 14 Wagner and Stanley contributes faster than we think. 

His cap hit is $8,700,000 and we'd only save $2,100,000 if we cut him. I think we keep him and cut him next year. Start him at LT and Stanley at LG until Monroe gets hurt. 

[rmw10]

I don't think money is much of a factor when it comes to Monroe.  If they're cutting him, it's because the bridges are burned.

[jimmypowder]

Monroe : cut him .Its not just the injuries. He doesn't seem 

4 hours ago, ravensnick said:

His cap hit is $8,700,000 and we'd only save $2,100,000 if we cut him. I think we keep him and cut him next year. Start him at LT and Stanley at LG until Monroe gets hurt. 

Which will be pretty quickly 

 

 

[Adreme]

Someone give me a real reason they should cut Monroe because I do not see it.  Give me something they could DO with that cap space he saves or explain to me why you would think the Ravens are better without him on the 53 man roster.   Yes he has an injury history and he could very easily get banged up but even if he does its not like there is someone out there who is a safer bet you can invest in with the money you save so why not keep the guy you got and revisit the issue again next year.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Adreme said:

Someone give me a real reason they should cut Monroe because I do not see it.  Give me something they could DO with that cap space he saves or explain to me why you would think the Ravens are better without him on the 53 man roster.   Yes he has an injury history and he could very easily get banged up but even if he does its not like there is someone out there who is a safer bet you can invest in with the money you save so why not keep the guy you got and revisit the issue again next year.

Monroe will remain on the team. We have to shore up our Offensive Line and protect Flacco.

Which is no ringing endorsement for Monroe, he's obviously been both injury prone and less than a stalwart. We drafted Stanley to take his place. But what about the acquisition of Monroe?  What did Oz see to sign him?  I truly believe Oz thought he was getting our Left Tackle of the future, which was quizzical based upon his performance at Jacksonville.  Performance that influenced the Jaguars to use a Top Pick to draft another Left Tackle (Luke Joeckel) as soon as Monroe's rookie deal lapsed. Performance that also was not substantially better than the Left Tackle that Monroe replaced.

So what makes anyone think Stanley is going to be "Instant Coffee"?......A phrase that makes me cringe.

I gotta tell this board, I am not high on Notre Dam players because it is my firm belief they play a patty cake schedule but for a couple rivalry contests. Granting they did play good Clemson and Ohio State teams last year.  I just  don't believe Notre Dam NCAA talent translates well to the NFL...Certainly not like Southeast Conference NCAA talent.

So, in the end, we have to hope Stanley pans out. Do I expect him to pan out and be even a 2012 McKinnie?...No I do not.

[Passepartout]

Really it is about protecting Flacco. And it is about not letting him get injured like he did last year. It is about trying to beef up the O.L.

[billick]

tunsil may not play lg for the ravens, ever

[edthehead]

do anybody feel like monroe do not want to be here

 he didn't get the money he wanted and nobody was knocking at his door

delusions of grandeur at it's best 

he stays injured, he is speaking on topics that goes against the nfl, and the organization

players was at OTA's and he chose to be in vegas at a convention

medical marijuana is a good thing for player/people in general

seems like monroe is doing everything he can to get ran out of town,

I do hope he gets traded. 

[757RavensFan]

1 hour ago, edthehead said:

do anybody feel like monroe do not want to be here

 he didn't get the money he wanted and nobody was knocking at his door

delusions of grandeur at it's best 

he stays injured, he is speaking on topics that goes against the nfl, and the organization

players was at OTA's and he chose to be in vegas at a convention

medical marijuana is a good thing for player/people in general

seems like monroe is doing everything he can to get ran out of town,

I do hope he gets traded. 

Vets NOT attending OTAs is not an issue. 

That aside, he's wasn't medically cleared to participate in OTAs this year.  And when he was physically fit last year he still didn't attend the OTAs. 

Edited June 3, 2016 by 757RavensFan