Front Office Discussion

[rmcjacket23]

16 hours ago, OLD SCHOOL SMASH BALL said:

You nailed it. Pees runs a "TIMID Defense". Pagano, Rex, others did not. In all fairness, we had Thumpers like Ray, Pollard, etc, who would give pause to would be receivers crossing the middle. Who are the 2016 enforcers/Intimidators in all 3 lines of D, and will they be used correctly? SometimesI worry when certain packages come on the field, because they run the same schemes each time, thus cluing in the better qb's how to beat us, as you pointed out, we rarely disguise what we do any more, if we blitz, all the guys get to the line early, and stay there. 

True, though there's some questions at this point as to whether Pagano/Rex style defenses actually work in the NFL. Neither has been running particularly good units in recent years, specifically when they lack the talent to do so.

[OLD SCHOOL SMASH BALL]

6 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

True, though there's some questions at this point as to whether Pagano/Rex style defenses actually work in the NFL. Neither has been running particularly good units in recent years, specifically when they lack the talent to do so.

Lets call it the "Swag" defense, and you are correct, Seattle D, Carolina D, and Denver D all have the Swag factor going. I challenge Pees to figure out how to get Correa to be a contributor on our D, the FO got him here, now can we get this high motor guy involved in shutting down Offenses.....remains to be seen

[ellicottraven]

Pees is and will remain a bend but not break D coordinator. That isn't really bad when you think about it in isolation, but we are the Baltimore Ravens. It is terrible when you take that and apply it to the Harvard of defense - Baltimore Ravens. 

I cannot wait for us to get really aggressive and play with the swag of yester year. Then we went into every game expecting the offense to score 6 points period. Anything more was a bonus in our minds. I would love to get that mojo back, but I don't know if here is a coordinator out there that can recreate the old Baltimore Ravens. 

I suspect that is largely because we don't have that breed of defensive players on our team short of Suggs maybe.

[rmcjacket23]

12 hours ago, OLD SCHOOL SMASH BALL said:

Lets call it the "Swag" defense, and you are correct, Seattle D, Carolina D, and Denver D all have the Swag factor going. I challenge Pees to figure out how to get Correa to be a contributor on our D, the FO got him here, now can we get this high motor guy involved in shutting down Offenses.....remains to be seen

Well and those defenses also have a gigantic amount of talented players, so that doesn't hurt. Certainly more than this team has.

[Ravenslifer]

19 hours ago, OLD SCHOOL SMASH BALL said:

Lets call it the "Swag" defense, and you are correct, Seattle D, Carolina D, and Denver D all have the Swag factor going. I challenge Pees to figure out how to get Correa to be a contributor on our D, the FO got him here, now can we get this high motor guy involved in shutting down Offenses.....remains to be seen

May also have something to do with the fact that they have pro bowl secondary players - in 2014 Carolina was 22nd in points allowed, Denver was 16th in the league - not exactly lighting the world on fire.  All of a sudden in 2015 Josh Norman has an insane year and Carolina moves to 6th in points allowed.  Denver to 4th with Chris Harris and Aquib Talib making Pro Bowl appearances and TJ Ward not sucking.  I'm not saying Pees doesn't shoulder a significant chunk of the blame, but you're comparing the Ravens to teams that got elite play out of their secondary, something we haven't had for a good while.  Us - Webb has not been the same player post-2012 that he was his first 4 years here - maybe the change of position will help.  Jimmy Smith was poor last year coming of Lisfranc surgery - hopefully he bounces back.  Elam is Elam.  Kendrick Lewis was bad.  We had no pass rush after Suggs went down, which certainly doesn't help the secondary.  Pees is responsible for not putting players in the best position to succeed, but certainly he's not responsible for players just whiffing on assignments.  I think the lack of quality play in the secondary is at least as much the players' responsibility as Pees' schemes, and as I've pointed out, since Jimmy in 2011 we haven't drafted an impact secondary player (we whiffed on Elam).

Edited September 7, 2016 by Ravenslifer

[Steve0x]

If Ravens fail make the playoffs fire both Trestman and Pees

[JoeyFlex5]

11 minutes ago, Steve0x said:

If Ravens fail make the playoffs fire both Trestman and Pees

Pretty black and white statement don't ya think?

[Tru11]

20 hours ago, OLD SCHOOL SMASH BALL said:

Lets call it the "Swag" defense, and you are correct, Seattle D, Carolina D, and Denver D all have the Swag factor going. I challenge Pees to figure out how to get Correa to be a contributor on our D, the FO got him here, now can we get this high motor guy involved in shutting down Offenses.....remains to be seen

its funny that you mention those teams lol.

pees likes to rush 4 with dropping 7 in coverages with mostly it being zone.

its pretty much what the panthers and the hawks do.

difference is that they have way better players then the ravens.

broncos also pretty much rely on a 4 man rush but they have the lbers and especially CBs to hold up in man cov.

they to have much more talent then the ravens.

 

 

[jazz1988]

17 hours ago, ellicottraven said:

Pees is and will remain a bend but not break D coordinator. That isn't really bad when you think about it in isolation, but we are the Baltimore Ravens. It is terrible when you take that and apply it to the Harvard of defense - Baltimore Ravens. 

I cannot wait for us to get really aggressive and play with the swag of yester year. Then we went into every game expecting the offense to score 6 points period. Anything more was a bonus in our minds. I would love to get that mojo back, but I don't know if here is a coordinator out there that can recreate the old Baltimore Ravens. 

I suspect that is largely because we don't have that breed of defensive players on our team short of Suggs maybe.

 

I think Dean Pees can be aggressive when he has all the piece to do so. The Ravens during the past two years or so haven't had the necessary pieces especially in the secondary to be aggressive  like Ravens fans would like as you suspected. I t would have been nice if he had started using Matt Elam and Levine as linebackers in the passing game sooner than now but I doubt it would have totally solve all The Ravens secondary issue.

[kjbmore]

I think the defense just needs to be - bend don't break for a year.

I think we'll be loading up on defensive guys - undoubtedly throughout the secondary in this next draft.

Again, I'm viewing this as a foundation year - so much new talent coming in, a realisation that we need a different approach in order to keep up in the air it out, faster league.

Feel good about our Offense might need a bit of tweaking on the line but hopefully we don't need to spend picks on - WR, RB, TE, QB

Hopefully we throw some top end picks at secondary talent, to come in and grow behind guys like williams, Jernigan, cj, and some of the young guys we drafted this year.

I just want to see some solid foundations this year, if we're middling im OK with that, look to build upon it next year and then we can't start bringing the swag

[OLD SCHOOL SMASH BALL]

What I want to see, is home grown Ravens on every level of D, and I know its hard with FA, and missing on picks, (I dont think we missed on Brooks, he is almost there).

On the 2nd level, backers and 3rd level DB's, we need a great coverage Safety ball hawk, and a thumper, and a smart thumper LB, and one with speed to match TE's, or rush the qb. If you can find 2 linebackers with thumpability, brains,  and speed, then you are set. Are we there yet? How did the FO do this off season? Does our D scare anybody? Then part 2 would be, do we know how to best utilize what we have. Answer that. 

We got shredded in the passing game last year. 

[Sami84]

If this season turns out to be a bad again, any kind of support i have for this FO is gone. I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt for now but it's clear, looking at this roster at least as of today, we are lacking in talent and that is on the FO. We don't scare teams anymore.

Edited September 8, 2016 by Sami84

[K-Dog]

3 hours ago, Steve0x said:

If Ravens fail make the playoffs fire both Trestman and Pees

There is a zero point zero zero  percent chance that that will happen.

Edited September 8, 2016 by K-Dog

[Sami84]

8 minutes ago, K-Dog said:

There is a zero point zero zero  percent chance that that will happen.

no playoffs in 3 out of the past 4 years is not acceptable and sacks (british english for people getting fired) will occur if that happens/

Edited September 8, 2016 by Sami84

[kjbmore]

Agree with Sami - no playoffs 3 out of 4 - heads will be on the chopping block. Although I temper that statement with a lot of ***

 if we go 9 - 7, there will be leeway - if we go 6-10 people will get fired.

depending on which unit does what will dictate who were pointing fingers at. 

[kjbmore]

I also find it interesting Pees is down on the sideline now - bit more first hand accountability, the man is clearly on thin ice - would anybody argue to the contrary?

[OLD SCHOOL SMASH BALL]

At this point the roster is just about set. We have not seen all the pieces together yet. With Doom out, we will see a Suggs/ZDS tandem, with Judon hopefully seeing time, which I am looking forward to seeing. Orr has speed and thump ability, CJ looking to see if steps up after the sophmore year. 3rd level safeties are old, both injury prone, which means Levine will get time, will Poers help at Nickel, who thumps? Jimmy is set, but Wright looked sketchy on the eyeball test, which opens doors for rooks. Will everybody be on the same page? Has tackling and coverage improved? Questions, questions, questions

[Willbacker]

6 minutes ago, kjbmore said:

I also find it interesting Pees is down on the sideline now - bit more first hand accountability, the man is clearly on thin ice - would anybody argue to the contrary?

Harbs wants him down there so he can yell at him. Lookee here Dean none of that dumb stuff. Awright.

[PurpleCity5]

46 minutes ago, kjbmore said:

I also find it interesting Pees is down on the sideline now - bit more first hand accountability, the man is clearly on thin ice - would anybody argue to the contrary?

Nope, he has to be more than anyone else.

[PurpleCity5]

Oz did stress the importance of Depth. I know this isn't a star studded team but when I look at the skill positions on offense, he surely did do his job. We're very deep at WR, I can feel good about that position if someone(hope not) goes down. I mean look at TE, Ben Watson goes down and we're still good there. Even at RB there's tons of depth. It's a crowded backfield. 

I think he's done a good job. 

[kjbmore]

what the hell was he doing last season then?

we had one deep threat - and he was a rookie, we had gotten away with it ever since jacoby left because some how torrey managed to stay healthy - probably cos hes soft as and avoids contact at any and all opportunities

think last season was a real wake up call for the Front Office - getting a little complacent - we started being a trendy superbowl pick - 2 players went down, not having perriman start really hurt us and then Sizzle - just unraveled from there

looks like he learnt (the hard way) can never have enough options

given that we went 4-0 through the preseason - this clearly speaks to the depth we have assembled

[Rav'n Maniac]

8 hours ago, kjbmore said:

what the hell was he doing last season then?

we had one deep threat - and he was a rookie, we had gotten away with it ever since jacoby left because some how torrey managed to stay healthy - probably cos hes soft as and avoids contact at any and all opportunities

think last season was a real wake up call for the Front Office - getting a little complacent - we started being a trendy superbowl pick - 2 players went down, not having perriman start really hurt us and then Sizzle - just unraveled from there

looks like he learnt (the hard way) can never have enough options

given that we went 4-0 through the preseason - this clearly speaks to the depth we have assembled

I think the fact that Perriman went down really helped to open their eyes to the limitations forced by not being able to stretch the field. Had Perriman played, they may not have brought in Wallace or possibly not drafted Moore. 

[JoeyFlex5]

11 minutes ago, Rav'n Maniac said:

I think the fact that Perriman went down really helped to open their eyes to the limitations forced by not being able to stretch the field. Had Perriman played, they may not have brought in Wallace or possibly not drafted Moore. 

Last season in general was a wake up call. The whole philosophy seems to have taken a complete 180. We seem to be more focused on fielding a winning team now and for the future, when before it seemed like it was always a long term plan taking center stage. Were done with depending on old and slow guys and were beginning to adapt by adding speed everywhere, we're done making FA bargains as our primary means of building. I really like what our FO has done this off-season and if it doesn't pay immediate dividends, I think we will see a huge return soon. Like I see a contender in this team stronger than we ever had 2-3 years from now.

[rmcjacket23]

11 minutes ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

Last season in general was a wake up call. The whole philosophy seems to have taken a complete 180. We seem to be more focused on fielding a winning team now and for the future, when before it seemed like it was always a long term plan taking center stage. Were done with depending on old and slow guys and were beginning to adapt by adding speed everywhere, we're done making FA bargains as our primary means of building. I really like what our FO has done this off-season and if it doesn't pay immediate dividends, I think we will see a huge return soon. Like I see a contender in this team stronger than we ever had 2-3 years from now.

Sort of.

The FA strategy really hasn't changed much at all, save for maybe the possibility that we care less about comp picks, but that seems to be more in line with this particular season being one where we knew we weren't going to get much in return. All the FAs we added were basically still "bargain" guys... they are signed to short-term contracts with limited guaranteed money.

Mike Wallace signs a two year deal with only $4.75M guaranteed. Can move on from him after one season with only $2.2M in dead money and $5.75M in cap savings. Very low risk signing.

Ben Watson signs a two year deal with only $3M guaranteed. Can move on from his after one season with only $1M in dead money and $3M in cap savings.

Even Weddle's deal is basically just a two year, $13M deal.

So we sign three relatively "name" veterans which would appear to be outside our "norm", yet we commit to none of them for more than two years, and its possible some of them are only here for one season.

To me, that's bargain shopping. A deviation in FA strategy, for me, would be us doing a Malik Jackson-level deal with a UFA, giving them 3-4 guaranteed years and like $60M. 

[JoeyFlex5]

1 hour ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Sort of.

The FA strategy really hasn't changed much at all, save for maybe the possibility that we care less about comp picks, but that seems to be more in line with this particular season being one where we knew we weren't going to get much in return. All the FAs we added were basically still "bargain" guys... they are signed to short-term contracts with limited guaranteed money.

Mike Wallace signs a two year deal with only $4.75M guaranteed. Can move on from him after one season with only $2.2M in dead money and $5.75M in cap savings. Very low risk signing.

Ben Watson signs a two year deal with only $3M guaranteed. Can move on from his after one season with only $1M in dead money and $3M in cap savings.

Even Weddle's deal is basically just a two year, $13M deal.

So we sign three relatively "name" veterans which would appear to be outside our "norm", yet we commit to none of them for more than two years, and its possible some of them are only here for one season.

To me, that's bargain shopping. A deviation in FA strategy, for me, would be us doing a Malik Jackson-level deal with a UFA, giving them 3-4 guaranteed years and like $60M. 

We didn't abandon the philosophy, but it seems like we added a more short term emphasis to it and we seem a lot more interested in adapting to the modern NFL, which we've been unwilling to do recently.

[January J]

I don't think anybody Is in panic mode like some suggest. The tune of biscotti during the season ending presser let me know he truly believed this was an abberation. That being said they didn't have a lot of contingency plans in place incase  things went sideways and into disarray. I.E 1)no one to stretch the feild when perriman never came back( givens was a late attempt to fix the problem but he failed miserably and was obviously a band aid)

2)not many pass rushers behind suggs and this put way too much pressure on doom.

3) relying on schaub as the backup and thinking his troubles were behind him when obviously his confidence cannot be restored. They had to shuffle through him and Clausen before they found a viable solution in mallet which turned out to be a good fit. -

4)relying on injury prone Monroe at left tackle and Hurst ( which coincidentally ended up being the one who took out Joe, though at no fault of his own) 

5)the struggles of the secondary and lack of turnovers and the questionable moves and play calling by dean pees.

This year its obvious we have prepared for such things and not only have a plan B but C and D.

1) perriman is back and looking good but just incase we brought in wallace and Moore  to be vertical threats.

2) we have a slew of pass rushers behind suggs and doom with a lot of potential.my guess is this is why we went in that direction in round 2 AND 3 BC bisciotti did not want a repeat and was pounding on the table for them. KC, ( unfortunately kafusi is done) but also judon will work out well. Also zadarius can now play more of a mcphee type role like we originally intended.

3) Ozzie brilliantly signed mallet not only for the remainder of last season - but this one as well. Now god forbid something happen to joe- but we have somebody with similar attributes, a cannon, and the playbook can stay virtually the same. He showed he can carry us to victory beating Pittsburgh and win some games if needed.

4) We invest our highest first round pick In over a decade in a franchise LT in Stanley ( who looks to be the real deal and has outperformed Tunsil) and found a late round gem in Alex Lewis who is likely starting week 1. This shows we are invested in protecting our franchise QB.

5) We bring in Leslie Frazier to coach the secondary and commit to forcing more turnovers- move Webb to safety who has arguably the best hands on the team- and brilliantly bring in an all pro safety in Weddle who looks like he should have been born a raven. Now if pees continues to struggle we have his successor in house ready to take the reigns if things go sideways once again.

All of the issues that plagued us last year have been addressed with not only one backup plan but several. This is a team that is prepared, loaded with weapons and has solid depth across the board. It blows my mind when people say that nothing was done to address the issues. We didnt go buckwild and start firing people- but as ive shown we made signifigant improvements..and a little continuity goes a long way. ( this is the First time in joes ENTIRE career he will enter the season with the same O.C.)  Ofcourse there are still areas of concern as there is with every team, but the  ravens are known to bounce back. Don't expect a repeat. 

Edited September 8, 2016 by January J

[berad]

17 hours ago, Tru11 said:

its funny that you mention those teams lol.

pees likes to rush 4 with dropping 7 in coverages with mostly it being zone.

its pretty much what the panthers and the hawks do.

difference is that they have way better players then the ravens.

broncos also pretty much rely on a 4 man rush but they have the lbers and especially CBs to hold up in man cov.

they to have much more talent then the ravens.

So Dean is misusing the players? He can be the best pastry chef in the world but that doesn't matter much if he can't cook the burger you want.

[rmcjacket23]

22 minutes ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

We didn't abandon the philosophy, but it seems like we added a more short term emphasis to it and we seem a lot more interested in adapting to the modern NFL, which we've been unwilling to do recently.

And that's probably an acknowledgment of "not so good" recent draft classes. Less money being desired to spend on your own talent means there's more money to spend (and have to spend) in FA. 

I guarantee if we go back to having some more successful draft classes, we will go back to spending even less in FA.

[JoeyFlex5]

1 hour ago, rmcjacket23 said:

And that's probably an acknowledgment of "not so good" recent draft classes. Less money being desired to spend on your own talent means there's more money to spend (and have to spend) in FA. 

I guarantee if we go back to having some more successful draft classes, we will go back to spending even less in FA.

I agree, and theres nothing wrong with that if it's real talent. I think the biggest thing was overpaying players for the sake of chemistry. We should have never gave ngata, Ray rice, and pitta those contracts, and it's easy to say in hindsight but there was real reason to feel this way at the time of the signing as well. Monroe was an unfortunate disaster that seemed brilliant at first. 

I personally think that giving Brandon Williams enough money to keep him from testing waters would be a horrible idea, how we handle his contract next off-season is a real test of our "changing" philosophy.

[rmcjacket23]

On ‎9‎/‎8‎/‎2016 at 0:23 PM, JoeyFlex5 said:

I agree, and theres nothing wrong with that if it's real talent. I think the biggest thing was overpaying players for the sake of chemistry. We should have never gave ngata, Ray rice, and pitta those contracts, and it's easy to say in hindsight but there was real reason to feel this way at the time of the signing as well. Monroe was an unfortunate disaster that seemed brilliant at first. 

I personally think that giving Brandon Williams enough money to keep him from testing waters would be a horrible idea, how we handle his contract next off-season is a real test of our "changing" philosophy.

Its basically on a contract by contract basis.

The Ngata contract I still have no issue with, and I honestly don't see what the problems with it were. The only thing I can think of is that it was realized he had a large dead money cap hit towards the end of the deal, but that's more of the fact that not all understand how contracts work, since it was and still is pretty standard.

Ray Rice's contract is a bit more complex. He signs a five year deal in 2012, which was realistically basically a four year deal. Ideally, he would have been here through 2015 and then been released, but obviously things changed.

Pitta's contract was certainly suspect given the most recent injury he suffered, but we had also let Boldin go the prior season, so not sure letting him walk was wise.

The main issue I have when it comes with this is there's really no scenario where the Ravens come out of this looking "good" in their eyes. If they overpay somebody and they don't perform, they're accused of overpaying and doing "bad contracts". If they don't pay market value for a player, and that player leaves, they are accused of being cheap, not signing the right players, and not evaluating talent well enough (and that's regardless of whether that player turns out to be good or not). There are people who still think letting Ellerbe and Kruger go was a mistake even to this day, despite the immense information we have about them now.

The ONLY way the Ravens don't get criticized in these situations is if the guy they sign to a big contracts plays at a JJ Watt-like level for the entirety of the deal. Anything else happens and the contract gets criticized.