kjbmore

Free Agency 2017 (Players from Other Teams We Should Consider)

2,555 posts in this topic

2 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Obtaining 7 new assumable "starters" is a 2-3 year plan, at best. No chance in the world it could be achieved in a single offseason, regardless of cap space or draft picks.

So this year we have a new LT, LG, WR, RB on offense - could of been a TE too if Watson didn't go down 

on D - new SS, 2 corners - young, powers, plus Orr, pierce

not sure think that's about 6 or 7

no chance in the world we can get that done in one offseason hahaha

Edited by kjbmore
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/24/2016 at 6:41 PM, Maryland said:

The Packers have Corey Linsley though, and he was their starter the last couple seasons. Maybe they just roll with him next season?

I'm not sure if Tretter is good or not. I no longer buy PFF, and I don't exactly notice guys play Center unless they're terrible or truly spectacular lol.

Tretter's played very well from what I've seen, and if he hits FA he'd be the top player I'd want us to sign (it would likely be an overpay, but C is such an important position these days that it'd be worth it imo). It's more that him hitting the market is one of those "I'll believe it when I see it" things. Which I also said about a Pacquiao/Mayweather fight, so go figure. :P 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, kjbmore said:

So this year we have a new LT, LG, WR, RB on offense - could of been a TE too if Watson didn't go down 

on D - new SS, 2 corners - young, powers, plus Orr, pierce

not sure think that's about 6 or 7

no chance in the world we can get that done in one offseason hahaha

And according to many of the fans out there, a lot of those guys aren't any good.

Got a lot of positions out there, but certainly no guarantee a lot of them are here for more than a year or two, and certainly no guarantee the young guys stick there.

Among the positions he listed:

OLB (we just drafted two this year)

CB (we just drafted one this year and gave an extension to another)

Safety (just signed one and converted another to the position)

WR (spent a 1st round pick on one last year AND signed a veteran in FA)

RT/LG (we just spent a draft pick on this spot and Lewis will play one of those positions)

So he listed five positions that we need to add a player at, yet all five of those positions have had at least one player added to the position via FA or the draft in the last 12 months.

So if we already addressed these positions...why are we addressing them again?

Hint: The answer, in a lot of cases, is we didn't address the position adequately enough.

Hence, 2-3 year process. If it only took one year to address the WR position, why are we addressing it again next offseason (according to his theory)? If we signed a FA corner and gave him an extension in the last two years AND drafted another one... why are we looking for another CB?

Again, I already know the answer to these questions... just hoping to enlighten some that don't. Everytime you need to address a position in the offseason that you've already recently addressed (in some cases multiple times), that's the definition of a long-term process.

Edited by rmcjacket23
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, rmcjacket23 said:

And according to many of the fans out there, a lot of those guys aren't any good.

Got a lot of positions out there, but certainly no guarantee a lot of them are here for more than a year or two, and certainly no guarantee the young guys stick there.

Among the positions he listed:

OLB (we just drafted two this year)

CB (we just drafted one this year and gave an extension to another)

Safety (just signed one and converted another to the position)

WR (spent a 1st round pick on one last year AND signed a veteran in FA)

RT/LG (we just spent a draft pick on this spot and Lewis will play one of those positions)

So he listed five positions that we need to add a player at, yet all five of those positions have had at least one player added to the position via FA or the draft in the last 12 months.

So if we already addressed these positions...why are we addressing them again?

Hint: The answer, in a lot of cases, is we didn't address the position enough. 

Hence, 2-3 year process. If it only took one year to address the WR position, why are we addressing it again next offseason (according to his theory). If we signed a FA corner and gave him an extension in the last two years AND drafted another one... why are we looking for another CB?

Again, I already know the answer to these questions... just hoping to enlighten some that don't. Everytime you need to address a position in the offseason that you've already recently addressed (in some cases multiple times), that's the definition of a long-term process.

I think most fans on offense are happy with Stanley - when he plays, Wallace, Lewis, West

definitely happy with weddle & young, most people like pierce and Orr is doing a good job

i don't see any of these guys leaving

thats 8 guys we added this last offseason, nobody's calling for their heads or saying they need to be upgraded

we're realistically looking to add less players this year than we did last offseason 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, kjbmore said:

I think most fans on offense are happy with Stanley - when he plays, Wallace, Lewis, West

definitely happy with weddle & young, most people like pierce and Orr is doing a good job

i don't see any of these guys leaving

thats 8 guys we added this last offseason, nobody's calling for their heads or saying they need to be upgraded

we're realistically looking to add less players this year than we did last offseason 

Depends on how you define "needs". Not every player we add is a "need". Ben Watson really wasn't a "need". He was mostly a hedge against Pitta not recovering and Gillmore being injured for much of the offseason.

Terrence West certainly wasn't a "need". He was tendered as a RFA and was competing with like 4 other RBs for playing time. He just happened to outperform most of them, to most peoples surprise.

This is also Orr's 3rd year on the team, not 2nd, so he's not in that group of last year offseason acquisitions.

Truth is we have no idea what our "needs" will be, nor do we know how many players we will need to add.

Finish the season poorly and you'll probably see more cuts than you think, meaning there's more holes to fill.

Edited by rmcjacket23
-2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bla bla bla we added 6 or 7 starters this last offseason need or no need 

as it stands, I'd like to think we can find a cb2, a centre, pass rusher and a wide receiver, might even find a new safety and a couple new lineman - don't think it's going to take 3 years 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a guess, but I'm betting one of the 2 BWill or Wagner stays. Not sure which but I doubt it's both, just a guess based off how we retain players.

I also think we'll look for a Center, didn't we make a play for Mack a couple years ago and just got outbid? We've been looking so if someone grades out but doesn't break the bank I bet they're here. 

FS were def going to need. I'm not sure where Webb grades out but I bet it's pretty low. We kicked Stewart to the curb because he sucked, and now is doing great in Denver(go figure) due to money and lack of production, I think them playing with Webb is over. There's crap for the market, unless as a couple people ,mentioned earlier, we get a SS and move Weddle to FS. Prob a 90% chance of this. This will prob be the main acquisition. 

WR, I can see a Garçon coming here. He's obviously gonna hit the market, and I doubt will be that expensive. WR wise anyway for expensive. Lol. 

All that prob means BWill gets his payday elsewhere. The more I think about it the more it makes sense. Use that money to make sure you get Wagner done and add a Center, solidifying you're OL for the next 2-3 years without having to touch a thing. Add a SS and pick up Garçon to take Sr snaps when he retires. Draft another WR and CB in the top rounds and use the middle rounds to keep building depth along both lines.

Now of course most of that will be wasted if we keep Pees and Castillo. But that's besides the point. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:
11 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Obtaining 7 new assumable "starters" is a 2-3 year plan, at best. No chance in the world it could be achieved in a single offseason, regardless of cap space or draft picks.

 

How did we do this offseason? Stanley, Lewis, West/Dixon, Young, Weddle, Wallace. That is 6 and pretty darn good. 

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

And according to many of the fans out there, a lot of those guys aren't any good.

Got a lot of positions out there, but certainly no guarantee a lot of them are here for more than a year or two, and certainly no guarantee the young guys stick there.

Among the positions he listed:

OLB (we just drafted two this year)

CB (we just drafted one this year and gave an extension to another)

Safety (just signed one and converted another to the position)

WR (spent a 1st round pick on one last year AND signed a veteran in FA)

RT/LG (we just spent a draft pick on this spot and Lewis will play one of those positions)

So he listed five positions that we need to add a player at, yet all five of those positions have had at least one player added to the position via FA or the draft in the last 12 months.

So if we already addressed these positions...why are we addressing them again?

Hint: The answer, in a lot of cases, is we didn't address the position adequately enough.

Hence, 2-3 year process. If it only took one year to address the WR position, why are we addressing it again next offseason (according to his theory)? If we signed a FA corner and gave him an extension in the last two years AND drafted another one... why are we looking for another CB?

Again, I already know the answer to these questions... just hoping to enlighten some that don't. Everytime you need to address a position in the offseason that you've already recently addressed (in some cases multiple times), that's the definition of a long-term process.

Very good points and you are correct because of the natural turnover from year to year. 

OLB we can assume Doom is done and Suggs is playing well but not getting younger. Really like Judon but probably could use another good pass rusher. 

CB Wright has underperformed I believe we can all agree on that. It's a shame we didn't get to see what Canady can do I think he can be a solid CB although before he went to IR I heard he was playing some FS. So CB and FS we my have an answer but it is till an unknown, which is the problem. So Canady could be an answer to 1 of the 2 positions unless Webb takes a paycut. 

WR Wallace was a nice signing, but SSS may retire and Aiken is a FA but again we have 2 unknowns in BP and Moore oth have potential but I would like to see some more usage to get an idea of what we have and if and when to address WR.

C/RG/RT yes at least one probably two need addressing Lewis is locked in at RG/RT but we need a C and fill the void if Wagner leaves 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Terrelle Pryor 130 yards today, get that man in the building.

Think it would really help Joe, if we add some size to that group.

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So with Marcus Cannon signing a:

Quote

The team and tackle Marcus Cannon agreed to a five-year deal worth $32.5 million, including $14.5 million in guarantees, a source told NFL Network Insider Ian Rapoport.

 

What do you think Rick Wagner's going rate is and any new thoughts if we re-sign him?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dubs said:

So with Marcus Cannon signing a:

 

What do you think Rick Wagner's going rate is and any new thoughts if we re-sign him?

I think it'll be a touch under that.  Most of the top guys are in Cannon's range.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎11‎/‎28‎/‎2016 at 4:31 AM, kjbmore said:

Terrelle Pryor 130 yards today, get that man in the building.

Think it would really help Joe, if we add some size to that group.

 

No way Cleveland lets him go.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, DomMcRaven said:

$$$$$$$$

Pryor will get paid no matter where he goes. Playing for a team with a chance of winning should be attractive to him.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Somerset Ravens said:

Pryor will get paid no matter where he goes. Playing for a team with a chance of winning should be attractive to him.

Key word: should. I think it all depends on the suitors (plenty I'm sure) and the $$$ they offer compared to the Browns offer. Don't get me wrong, I would love him here, but I seriously doubt we'd outbid other teams for his services. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Somerset Ravens said:

Why in the world would he want to stay in Cleveland? 

Hoping he's on this thought train - he's not super young but young enough for us - don't waste your peak in Cleveland 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

Pryors loyal to hue I think. I could definitely see him sticking around

I was about to say the same... They have followed each other everywhere. Plus I'm afraid to see what Pryor would look like in a different offense. That was the main reason I was concerned about the hype of the team trying to sign Edelman a few years back. Those type of guys grow into systems on teams but I'm not sure the growing pains they would have elsewhere. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/23/2016 at 10:20 PM, kjbmore said:

Exactly - they threw some cash at a pass rusher and a corner - oh hang on that sounds like a team I know.... 

whatever bud, it's all hypotheticals

No, the point is, and in the examples you came up with yourself - the bulk of the team is draft picks and bargain FA's playing above their pay grade.

When you have that majority of the team set, then yes, it's cool to spend somewhat big for veteran, proven additions at a key spot or two to put the team "over the top" so to speak. Like adding Revis, or Ware and Talib (but keep in mind, the Pats HAD Talib and let him walk to get Revis.... so they subtracted a big time FA to add one)... but anyways.

Thats when its ok to do, and historically we havent been opposed to doing that either. Adding Shannon Sharpe and Harrison when that team looked ready to win. Adding Boldin (though it was a trade)... while we also tried to acquire TO. 

 

But, you dont build the team that way. You build through draft, resigning your own guys (because youve had years of seeing they not only perform, but perform here.... other teams guys may have a history of performing, but not performing as a Raven in the Ravens system). Once youve got the team in place thats a proven competitor, and you feel you're just a piece or two away from perhaps winning it all - then yea you splash a little to add that veteran piece. 

 

The examples you gave werent teams coming off 8-8, 9-7 seasons where the squeaked into the playoffs. They were dominant division winners, and legit SB contenders that came up a little short.

While I dont think we're all that far off from being there, we just arent yet. And deciding to splurge your money too early, before youre at that level, can negatively effect your chances of ever getting back there, and shortening the window if/when you do.

Adding high priced FA's before youre a true contender will block younger players from getting reps at that position. So, you could have a cheap, unearthed gem sitting there that could have allowed you to spend that money elsewhere on another hole. Plus, youre prob not going to resign that guy and some other team gets his prime for far cheaper. 

 

 

I'm not for spending just for the sake of spending. Thats dangerous thinking. BUT, sure... if a guy becomes available that you think is a sure fire play maker and will be a key cog for your team the next 5 years, ok. I think you should be evaluating that stuff all the time regardless of where your teams at. But, just saying ok we have $20m so lets spend $20m is where you get in trouble and overpay guys.

Edited by BOLDnPurPnBlacK
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, rmw10 said:

I think it'll be a touch under that.  Most of the top guys are in Cannon's range.

Given how much of a turnstile our line has become at times I hope we do sign him to something around Cannon's deal--I would be okay with 6 Mill-ish a year knowing that Ronnie Stanley is on a rookie deal for a couple years, Alex Lewis is too, Yanda is locked up and whoever our C of the future will be will likely be a rookie or aging vet contract

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

Pryors loyal to hue I think. I could definitely see him sticking around

If Hue is fired though and comes to Baltimore to be the OC, we need to throw money at Pryor. Perfect weapon for Flacco. We need bonafide game-changers, not over the hill bargain bin veterans especially if Smith Sr. retires. Flacco surrounded by Pryor, Perriman, Wallace, Dixon and Maxx with Hue calling the shots would be a dream come true. 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably not a popular scenario to discuss, but what happens with Zach Orr's RFA Tender? I know he's under the radar, but I could definitely see a team giving up a Round 2 pick to sign him, maybe even a Round 1 from a more successful, LB-lacking team (NYG comes to mind). Is it worth a Round 1 tender? Seems like a tough scenario to me. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jboy19 said:

Probably not a popular scenario to discuss, but what happens with Zach Orr's RFA Tender? I know he's under the radar, but I could definitely see a team giving up a Round 2 pick to sign him, maybe even a Round 1 from a more successful, LB-lacking team (NYG comes to mind). Is it worth a Round 1 tender? Seems like a tough scenario to me. 

I'd keep Orr anyway I could, to put it simply lol. There's no one else on the market that could replace him and I'd rather not spend a high pick on a LB unless he plays on the outside. Ozzie is good though at retaining his LB's however. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, jboy19 said:

Probably not a popular scenario to discuss, but what happens with Zach Orr's RFA Tender? I know he's under the radar, but I could definitely see a team giving up a Round 2 pick to sign him, maybe even a Round 1 from a more successful, LB-lacking team (NYG comes to mind). Is it worth a Round 1 tender? Seems like a tough scenario to me. 

Throw a round 2 on him.  Don't think there's too much to worry about there.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

No, the point is, and in the examples you came up with yourself - the bulk of the team is draft picks and bargain FA's playing above their pay grade.

When you have that majority of the team set, then yes, it's cool to spend somewhat big for veteran, proven additions at a key spot or two to put the team "over the top" so to speak. Like adding Revis, or Ware and Talib (but keep in mind, the Pats HAD Talib and let him walk to get Revis.... so they subtracted a big time FA to add one)... but anyways.

Thats when its ok to do, and historically we havent been opposed to doing that either. Adding Shannon Sharpe and Harrison when that team looked ready to win. Adding Boldin (though it was a trade)... while we also tried to acquire TO. 

 

But, you dont build the team that way. You build through draft, resigning your own guys (because youve had years of seeing they not only perform, but perform here.... other teams guys may have a history of performing, but not performing as a Raven in the Ravens system). Once youve got the team in place thats a proven competitor, and you feel you're just a piece or two away from perhaps winning it all - then yea you splash a little to add that veteran piece. 

 

The examples you gave werent teams coming off 8-8, 9-7 seasons where the squeaked into the playoffs. They were dominant division winners, and legit SB contenders that came up a little short.

While I dont think we're all that far off from being there, we just arent yet. And deciding to splurge your money too early, before youre at that level, can negatively effect your chances of ever getting back there, and shortening the window if/when you do.

Adding high priced FA's before youre a true contender will block younger players from getting reps at that position. So, you could have a cheap, unearthed gem sitting there that could have allowed you to spend that money elsewhere on another hole. Plus, youre prob not going to resign that guy and some other team gets his prime for far cheaper. 

 

 

I'm not for spending just for the sake of spending. Thats dangerous thinking. BUT, sure... if a guy becomes available that you think is a sure fire play maker and will be a key cog for your team the next 5 years, ok. I think you should be evaluating that stuff all the time regardless of where your teams at. But, just saying ok we have $20m so lets spend $20m is where you get in trouble and overpay guys.

thank you for that awesomely long post - good thing i dont run the front office - id be splashing cash all over the show and we'd be 0 - 16

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.crainscleveland.com/article/20161122/BLOGS06/161129939/terrelle-pryor-will-cash-in-soon-but-will-it-be-with-browns

Spotrac estimates Pryor's market value at $10.76 million per year. The Tom Brady of sports salary websites says Pryor should receive a contract in the range of four years and $43 million, which would put his average annual salary at No. 75 overall and 11th among wide receivers.

im down for this if we can lure him away from the browns - I would like to see us give joe weapons he can just grow with and basically play with for the next 4 or 5 years, the man needs some consistency in his life - it looks like his 2 favourite targets are done - ssr retire, pittas not far off

Pryor & Perriman, Maxx hopefully as your dangerous pass catching TE other interchangeable parts but let that hopefully be the core for the next 4 or 5 years

 

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now