• Welcome to PurpleFlock! Be sure to sign up here so that you can chat with your fellow Ravens fans.

The 2020 Offseason Thread

rossihunter2

Staff Member
Moderator
Im surprised Fluker is the front runner, even with the vaunted weightloss he moves like a cargo ship. Maybe hes just so big alongside Zeus that theres no way around him.

i worry about him too - some of the tape from last year is really worrying - but maybe the weightloss has helped

its hard not to view him as the front runner though given that until today he'd taken basically all the reps with the 1s (or so it's been suggested)
i think maybe the other options havent really been viable - it was either 2 rookies one who was converting to guard from tackle (and swapping sides), the other who's got nice feet but very short arms and no real standout athletic traits (but has consistency on tape) or it was ben powers who seems to have vanished - i thought he played really well against the steelers in week 17 but i guess the fact that he was splitting time with a nobody should have been a sign then that he wasnt the future

i think it probably helps fluker that at least in the right-handed running scheme we've had here for a long time (partly because of yanda in the first place) we anchor the run game behind what happens on the right side which makes, at least in the running game, his slow feet less of an issue

but the worry is that the ease with which he could be beaten last year by lateral agility stays with him - and the signs arent great with him getting beaten by calais

the positive is that it sounds like tyre phillips is making strides - he's someone i would have been fascinated to see play a ton of RG in any preseason games we might have had
 

UPennChem

Hall of Famer
Not to be pessimistic, but let's say we lose Elliott for the third year in a row, does Thst mean the end for him? Would safety become a big time need for next year?
 

Simba

Staff Member
Moderator
I've heard this a lot coming out of camp. I think its risky, but not necessarily the worst idea. They're certainly going to need at least probably two TEs on the practice squad.

That's honestly the way I'm leaning right now. TE is important but if Mark Andrews goes down mid-game, are Scarff, Adams, or Wolf really going to see a massive increase in their snaps that game? Probably not. You get through the game and if you have to pull someone up from the PS next week, go for it. How much of risk is it really to not have a middling TE3 on your gameday roster? It also helps to open up the WR passing game (which I think they want to do anyways) since it's possible all 6 could be active on a weekly basis.

If you can upgrade to a Delanie Walker type, sure. No issues keeping 3 there. But are our current TE3 options really that good and will they really play that much of a role? Hurst's snaps are much more likely to be replaced by Andrews and Boyle playing more than your TE3 taking over Hayden's 40% for last year.
 

rmcjacket23

Ravens Ring of Honor
That's honestly the way I'm leaning right now. TE is important but if Mark Andrews goes down mid-game, are Scarff, Adams, or Wolf really going to see a massive increase in their snaps that game? Probably not. You get through the game and if you have to pull someone up from the PS next week, go for it. How much of risk is it really to not have a middling TE3 on your gameday roster? It also helps to open up the WR passing game (which I think they want to do anyways) since it's possible all 6 could be active on a weekly basis.

If you can upgrade to a Delanie Walker type, sure. No issues keeping 3 there. But are our current TE3 options really that good and will they really play that much of a role? Hurst's snaps are much more likely to be replaced by Andrews and Boyle playing more than your TE3 taking over Hayden's 40% for last year.
So, couple things for me:
1. Obviously a third TE will also contribute on ST, but Ricard can and does as well.
2. Boyle was already playing like 70% of snaps, so if there's no 3rd TE (or its Ricard) to help with run blocking, he's essentially an every-down player. I don't know that its necessarily a bad thing, but certainly opens up more risks.
3. I don't know that asking Andrews to block more is the best idea. I don't think he's bad at it, but obviously you'd like him to be more of a pass catcher and be able to run more routes. His snap count would greatly rise also.

I think, ideally, your 3rd TE is a key ST contributor, and also plays a lot in two TE sets on likely obvious running plays, or as potentially a pass protector on 3rd down. We had three TEs active last year, and they all played at least 40% of snaps (Andrews and Hurst played basically right at that, Boyle near 70%). So assuming we want more groupings like that, you'd probably want to maintain a similar distribution, otherwise you just need Andrews and Boyle to fill nearly every-down roles, which amplifies injury risk.

The third option, of course, is to go with less 2-3 TE sets and put 3-4 WR sets on the field. May help spread the defense out more, especially on play action or passing downs, but also may hurt you in the run game.

As for mid-game injuries, it is what it is. If Andrews gets hurt, our passing game will suffer, and if Boyle gets hurt, our run game will suffer. There's no in-game fix that I see. Its more about the long term, which obviously promoting from the PS becomes an option. For me, its more about snap management and making sure you're not overloading our two TEs with workload that makes them less productive late in games.
 

RL52TheGreatest

Ravens Ring of Honor
Not to be pessimistic, but let's say we lose Elliott for the third year in a row, does Thst mean the end for him? Would safety become a big time need for next year?

I think we would still hold onto him for the final year of his rookie contract and see if he can stay healthy for once. That being said, I think we'll look to draft and/or sign another safety regardless of what happens. Elliott will always have the injury concerns, fair or not since they were kinda fluke injuries IMO, and it's way too early to tell if Stone will amount to anything. I think we've learned our lesson ever since 2014 and we're always going to be trying to restock our secondary players via draft and FA.
 

Simba

Staff Member
Moderator
So, couple things for me:
1. Obviously a third TE will also contribute on ST, but Ricard can and does as well.
2. Boyle was already playing like 70% of snaps, so if there's no 3rd TE (or its Ricard) to help with run blocking, he's essentially an every-down player. I don't know that its necessarily a bad thing, but certainly opens up more risks.
3. I don't know that asking Andrews to block more is the best idea. I don't think he's bad at it, but obviously you'd like him to be more of a pass catcher and be able to run more routes. His snap count would greatly rise also.

I think, ideally, your 3rd TE is a key ST contributor, and also plays a lot in two TE sets on likely obvious running plays, or as potentially a pass protector on 3rd down. We had three TEs active last year, and they all played at least 40% of snaps (Andrews and Hurst played basically right at that, Boyle near 70%). So assuming we want more groupings like that, you'd probably want to maintain a similar distribution, otherwise you just need Andrews and Boyle to fill nearly every-down roles, which amplifies injury risk.

The third option, of course, is to go with less 2-3 TE sets and put 3-4 WR sets on the field. May help spread the defense out more, especially on play action or passing downs, but also may hurt you in the run game.

As for mid-game injuries, it is what it is. If Andrews gets hurt, our passing game will suffer, and if Boyle gets hurt, our run game will suffer. There's no in-game fix that I see. Its more about the long term, which obviously promoting from the PS becomes an option. For me, its more about snap management and making sure you're not overloading our two TEs with workload that makes them less productive late in games.

Yeah I probably should retract and say that Boyle's snaps probably aren't going up, but Andrews' snaps certainly are this year. Would be shocked if he comes in around 40% again unless there's an injury of course. And we know Ricard's snaps are probably going up as well, especially as an inline blocker at TE.

We averaged 76 snaps a game last year. Replacing Hurst's 40% is about 30 snaps a game. I don't think it's inconceivable that those 30 will be taken over in some way between Andrews, Ricard, and the probability that we'll try to feature our WRs more.

Even if you don't, are you really that concerned with a TE3 taking maybe 10 snaps a game on offense? I'm not super worried about it and would be willing to take the risk of injury and keeping multiple guys on the PS if you need to make a move. I guess I just don't see a scenario where Andrews gets hurt and the answer is one of these TE3 candidates coming in and filling the same role for the rest of the game.

Just to be clear... no problems at all if we do keep a TE3 and I'd prefer it, but I also think there's justification for taking that risk as well.
 

rmcjacket23

Ravens Ring of Honor
Yeah I probably should retract and say that Boyle's snaps probably aren't going up, but Andrews' snaps certainly are this year. Would be shocked if he comes in around 40% again unless there's an injury of course. And we know Ricard's snaps are probably going up as well, especially as an inline blocker at TE.

We averaged 76 snaps a game last year. Replacing Hurst's 40% is about 30 snaps a game. I don't think it's inconceivable that those 30 will be taken over in some way between Andrews, Ricard, and the probability that we'll try to feature our WRs more.

Even if you don't, are you really that concerned with a TE3 taking maybe 10 snaps a game on offense? I'm not super worried about it and would be willing to take the risk of injury and keeping multiple guys on the PS if you need to make a move. I guess I just don't see a scenario where Andrews gets hurt and the answer is one of these TE3 candidates coming in and filling the same role for the rest of the game.

Just to be clear... no problems at all if we do keep a TE3 and I'd prefer it, but I also think there's justification for taking that risk as well.
I think the only concern is that if Andrews is forced to take over most of Hurst's snaps as well, you're dramatically increasing injury risk to a position that already comes with higher risk than most. And a long-term injury to Andrews, especially with no Hurst on the roster, would probably be one of the top 2-3 injuries on the offense that are most detrimental to the team's success. Lamar obviously being hurt is #1, and I think Stanley would be a huge blow, but other than that, I think the loss of Andrews would have the biggest impact on the offense.

Also, an injury to Ricard means you now lost your starting FB, your 3rd TE, and potentially a deep rotational Dlineman all at the same time.
 

Simba

Staff Member
Moderator
I think the only concern is that if Andrews is forced to take over most of Hurst's snaps as well, you're dramatically increasing injury risk to a position that already comes with higher risk than most. And a long-term injury to Andrews, especially with no Hurst on the roster, would probably be one of the top 2-3 injuries on the offense that are most detrimental to the team's success. Lamar obviously being hurt is #1, and I think Stanley would be a huge blow, but other than that, I think the loss of Andrews would have the biggest impact on the offense.

Also, an injury to Ricard means you now lost your starting FB, your 3rd TE, and potentially a deep rotational Dlineman all at the same time.

And that's where the risk comes in. The main question then becomes if one of Scarff, Adams, or Wolf are good enough to mitigate that risk?

And do you care to take on that risk for 1 partial game if a guy was to go down, knowing that you could likely keep all 3 on the PS if you really wanted?

Just food for thought and I wouldn't be surprised to see them go in either direction.
 

rmcjacket23

Ravens Ring of Honor
And that's where the risk comes in. The main question then becomes if one of Scarff, Adams, or Wolf are good enough to mitigate that risk?

And do you care to take on that risk for 1 partial game if a guy was to go down, knowing that you could likely keep all 3 on the PS if you really wanted?

Just food for thought and I wouldn't be surprised to see them go in either direction.
I guess the real questions are a) are any of these third TEs showing enough in camp to earn a spot (sounds like to Zrebiec the answer is no) and b) what other player are they keeping over them and what kind of impact are they going to have on the roster.
 

Simba

Staff Member
Moderator
I guess the real questions are a) are any of these third TEs showing enough in camp to earn a spot (sounds like to Zrebiec the answer is no) and b) what other player are they keeping over them and what kind of impact are they going to have on the roster.

Just to bring back an old conversation, that could be a guy like Broderick Washington that they want to keep around but don't necessarily trust to get through waivers as a 5th round draft pick and DL with the lack of depth across the league.

Side note related to this conversation as well... how crazy is it that Mark Andrews put up the numbers he did with only about 40% of the snaps? That's actually insane.
 

JoeyFlex5

Hall of Famer
Yesterday’s training camp live was not showing Patrick queen at his best, thats for damn sure. In 2v2 rub route drills, Queen was multiple yards away from his man twice in a row, with the separation coming within 2 steps by the receiver. It was like snap-step-separate-burned.

I’m just gonna choose to not read into that very much, for my own sake.
 

rossihunter2

Staff Member
Moderator


very interesting on both counts

1) the idea that we might not even keep a TE3
2) the fact that adams of all people is the leader for that position

if anything though number 2 makes number 1 more likely

hard to believe though that given harbs answer to the TE 3 question a month ago that it was neck and neck between scarff and wolf that someone outside of those 2 would win it
 

rossihunter2

Staff Member
Moderator
That's honestly the way I'm leaning right now. TE is important but if Mark Andrews goes down mid-game, are Scarff, Adams, or Wolf really going to see a massive increase in their snaps that game? Probably not. You get through the game and if you have to pull someone up from the PS next week, go for it. How much of risk is it really to not have a middling TE3 on your gameday roster? It also helps to open up the WR passing game (which I think they want to do anyways) since it's possible all 6 could be active on a weekly basis.

If you can upgrade to a Delanie Walker type, sure. No issues keeping 3 there. But are our current TE3 options really that good and will they really play that much of a role? Hurst's snaps are much more likely to be replaced by Andrews and Boyle playing more than your TE3 taking over Hayden's 40% for last year.

to me its more about how often we want to use the 3 TE offence and if one guy goes down whether we can still run our 2 TE sets

we ran so much 22 personnel last year its hard to imagine being able to run the offence without 2 TEs and Ricard on the offence at the same time and its only 1 injury away from us being unable to do that

that being said if we dont keep a TE3 then it opens up maybe a spot for us to keep washington on the 53 or maybe even one of the OLBs like John Daka (who's had rave reviews about his special teams during camp and who has some upside as a pass rusher)
 

rossihunter2

Staff Member
Moderator
I think we would still hold onto him for the final year of his rookie contract and see if he can stay healthy for once. That being said, I think we'll look to draft and/or sign another safety regardless of what happens. Elliott will always have the injury concerns, fair or not since they were kinda fluke injuries IMO, and it's way too early to tell if Stone will amount to anything. I think we've learned our lesson ever since 2014 and we're always going to be trying to restock our secondary players via draft and FA.

every year we're drafting at least 1 OL and at least 1 DB knowing that even if we miss 3 in every 4 that means we've got at least 1 contributor from those picks in the space of a rookie contract length at those 2 positions

and tbh the hit rate at those positions has been pretty good in recent times for the ravens

the other element to that is we're always looking at special teams at the backend of the draft and that normally means we're looking at DBs or WRs in those spots
 

rossihunter2

Staff Member
Moderator
Yesterday’s training camp live was not showing Patrick queen at his best, thats for damn sure. In 2v2 rub route drills, Queen was multiple yards away from his man twice in a row, with the separation coming within 2 steps by the receiver. It was like snap-step-separate-burned.

I’m just gonna choose to not read into that very much, for my own sake.

i saw the same thing and then had to remind myself that those drills are set up for the offence to win handily
still it was a bit worrying
then again there was one where he didnt get out of a jog so it might have been a kind of install type drill for the offence (was the RBs + TEs running combos)

until i see something concrete im going to ignore that stuff but ngl what ive seen in the individual stuff has been not that impressive from queen but you have to remind yourself that LBs are never going to look good in individual drills because of how multiple their role is on defence and by all accounts queen and harrison have both been impressive in team drills (which we conveniently dont get to see)

but i definitely noticed the same that you saw
 

JoeyFlex5

Hall of Famer
i saw the same thing and then had to remind myself that those drills are set up for the offence to win handily
still it was a bit worrying
then again there was one where he didnt get out of a jog so it might have been a kind of install type drill for the offence (was the RBs + TEs running combos)

until i see something concrete im going to ignore that stuff but ngl what ive seen in the individual stuff has been not that impressive from queen but you have to remind yourself that LBs are never going to look good in individual drills because of how multiple their role is on defence and by all accounts queen and harrison have both been impressive in team drills (which we conveniently dont get to see)

but i definitely noticed the same that you saw
Yeah I’m looking at it the same as you, I’m chalking it up to just being a motions drill where it’s just not designed for the defensive half to be competitive outside of a good jump on a route or something, because the second one where Adams just dusted his boots queen was clearly just walking through, and I’m not gonna doubt queens work ethic or passion for practice for even a second, so yeah I’m kinda chalking it up for now, still not a good look lol
 
Top