Signings, Cuts, Trades

[rmcjacket23]

I don’t care enough about this discussion to give you examples. We’ve never really had sufficient space but that’s kind of the point. It’s because we’ve tried to squeeze the pennies from the dollars by bringing on budget talent that just isn’t up to par at times. That’s also a part of managing your cap and resources. Yeah, I like the budget guys but sometimes it’s like “dude, what are you thinking bringing in Michael Huff will solve your problems?”

At some point we need to stop settling for budget players and realize we can’t fill every hole. Sometimes having a body for the sake of it is worse than just accepting the weakness. If we didn’t make some of those budget moves we’d have more cap space too.

Right, but I don't know that a lack of cap space means they're bad at managing the cap. In most cases, it means they're not good enough at talent evaluation, i.e. they give contracts to players that don't pan out. Some of that is predictable or their fault, some of it isn't. I think they're two different things. There's really no such thing as cap maneuvering your way out of a bad contract. If it's a bad deal, it's a bad deal. It's just a question of how long you delay paying the bill.

I don't agree that not making budget moves means we'd have more cap space. Most of the budget moves we do aren't even multi-year impacts, or if they are, they're like two year windows. They're not crushing your cap space. What's crushing your cap space is when you have large valued players in dead money, or large valued players who are injured/not playing, or playing like shit.

As far as "accepting the weakness" goes, I do generally agree with you in that regard. However, in my opinion, I think the fanbase talks the talk but doesn't walk the walk in that regards. I think when pushes comes to shove, if there's a position of weakness that is greatly diminishing this team (like Tackle last year), I don't think any Ravens fan, including yourself, will file it under "accepting the weakness". I think everybody would say that's purely unacceptable, and would want it addressed. And if that means a budget upgrade, so be it.

End of day, the overwhelming majority of the fanbase doesn't care how the sausage is made. They just want it to taste good.

 

[JAAM]

Well, this hurts.

This is what happens when we're continually in the bottom half of the league in terms of cap space availability and value picks like no other. I hate to be a downer but it seems like we're falling behind a bit in terms of AFC prominence. We still have quite a few holes to fill and teams like Denver, LA, and Buffalo keep getting better

 

[rossihunter2]

Interesting... this combined with the interest in Za'Darius seems like we're not afraid to spend for an edge. Makes you wonder who else we're in on. That market hasn't moved a ton yet.

yeah it's definitely interesting that not only are we in on that group but we're looking at the top guys (or so it seems)

we've seemingly been interested in both Ogbah and ZDS... just looking at the rest of the edge group
von miller
chandler jones
jadeveon clowney (we know he's gonna take his time again... or at least that's what he's said)


then after that you're looking at the jerry hughes, melvin ingram, derek barnett, arden key or even justin houston types of the world

ogbah and zds definitely belong in that first group - it makes me wonder whether we might be in on chandler jones

 

[RavensMania]

This is what happens when we're continually in the bottom half of the league in terms of cap space availability and value picks like no other. I hate to be a downer but it seems like we're falling behind a bit in terms of AFC prominence. We still have quite a few holes to fill and teams like Denver, LA, and Buffalo keep getting better

Will be interesting to see how quickly the 93m in available cap space in 2023 evaporates, especially since that is with 27 active contracts and doesn't include Lamar Jackson or Marcus Peters and obviously none of this years signings.

 

[rossihunter2]

obviously idk how his old contract was structured because i havent looked - but why would lawrence take a nearly 50% pay-cut to stay in dallas even if it is fully guaranteed??

 

[rossihunter2]

Will be interesting to see how quickly the 93m in available cap space in 2023 evaporates, especially since that is with 27 active contracts and doesn't include Lamar Jackson or Marcus Peters and obviously none of this years signings.

27 contracts but you can add at least 8-10 from this upcoming rookie class to that number - if lamar plays on the tag then that cap space gets instantly cut in half (will be significantly less if we can get him to sign long-term)

 

[Grim]

Right, but I don't know that a lack of cap space means they're bad at managing the cap. In most cases, it means they're not good enough at talent evaluation, i.e. they give contracts to players that don't pan out. Some of that is predictable or their fault, some of it isn't. I think they're two different things. There's really no such thing as cap maneuvering your way out of a bad contract. If it's a bad deal, it's a bad deal. It's just a question of how long you delay paying the bill.

I don't agree that not making budget moves means we'd have more cap space. Most of the budget moves we do aren't even multi-year impacts, or if they are, they're like two year windows. They're not crushing your cap space. What's crushing your cap space is when you have large valued players in dead money, or large valued players who are injured/not playing, or playing like shit.

As far as "accepting the weakness" goes, I do generally agree with you in that regard. However, in my opinion, I think the fanbase talks the talk but doesn't walk the walk in that regards. I think when pushes comes to shove, if there's a position of weakness that is greatly diminishing this team (like Tackle last year), I don't think any Ravens fan, including yourself, will file it under "accepting the weakness". I think everybody would say that's purely unacceptable, and would want it addressed.

End of day, the overwhelming majority of the fanbase doesn't care how the sausage is made. They just want it to taste good.

You're definitely right on talent evaluation. That is absolutely a problem. I can't fault the team for Ronnie Stanley getting hurt, Dennis Pitta blowing out a hip (unless you restructure the guy after he did, not an ideal restructure dude IMHO), Ray Rice punching his wife/fiancee/girlfriend/whatever, etc. I do think you have to wonder about missed draft picks for a few years, over-valuing your own guys because you failed to prepare for actual replacements, or other moves of those. I think DeCosta has done better in that area, extending guys earlier to get them cheaper.
The budget moves part is kind of like this. I know where you're going with your point, but if you have $20 and you decide to spend $15 on some budget stuff that will get you through the year but you know in a year you will need to replace it because it's a bandaid, and you COULD get something quality maybe at $25 but it would stretch you some but it is more quality, what do you do? I go for the quality. I don't like spending my money on junk that will break in a year because my ROI will be worse. I will end up buying higher because of inflation, etc. So give me the better quality stuff that lasts longer than cheap Walmart moves. Those cheap budget deals add up.
I don't care about the fanbase. I mean, they are important but the Ravens have a business to run and nothing gets fans to buy in to things they question like success.
Some weaknesses can be accepted, these are known as accepted risks. Some weaknesses must be addressed. For example, if I have a house with no windows, that is a weakness and a risk. Someone may go steal my shit. If I don't put windows on my house, that is a likely risk. Now, I may also have a roof that has a leak. Is that a risk? Yep, sure is, but maybe I live in some dry ass area and the likelihood of rain is low. Maybe I can make due with a bucket.
Bottom-line is there's not infinite money and there is a cap limit. Sometimes, you have to say you accept the risk and just build around it to mitigate it.

 

[Michael M.]

OLine should be a priority, at least 2 position upgrades, i.e. swing tackle and center/guard, and not the typical Raven bargain basement selections. I can't believe the absence of Stanley was the only problem. IF they re-sign Bozeman, I hope its to play left guard, which he was good at. Get a center and a swing tackle, plug and play guys not projects

 

[Grim]

obviously idk how his old contract was structured because i havent looked - but why would lawrence take a nearly 50% pay-cut to stay in dallas even if it is fully guaranteed??

My guess is it's a win for him, he gets guaranteed $30M cash w/o worrying. If the Cowboys cut him, he can go to another team and they are still on the hook for the deal.

 

[SepticeyePoe]

You're definitely right on talent evaluation. That is absolutely a problem. I can't fault the team for Ronnie Stanley getting hurt, Dennis Pitta blowing out a hip (unless you restructure the guy after he did, not an ideal restructure dude IMHO), Ray Rice punching his wife/fiancee/girlfriend/whatever, etc. I do think you have to wonder about missed draft picks for a few years, over-valuing your own guys because you failed to prepare for actual replacements, or other moves of those. I think DeCosta has done better in that area, extending guys earlier to get them cheaper.
The budget moves part is kind of like this. I know where you're going with your point, but if you have $20 and you decide to spend $15 on some budget stuff that will get you through the year but you know in a year you will need to replace it because it's a bandaid, and you COULD get something quality maybe at $25 but it would stretch you some but it is more quality, what do you do? I go for the quality. I don't like spending my money on junk that will break in a year because my ROI will be worse. I will end up buying higher because of inflation, etc. So give me the better quality stuff that lasts longer than cheap Walmart moves. Those cheap budget deals add up.
I don't care about the fanbase. I mean, they are important but the Ravens have a business to run and nothing gets fans to buy in to things they question like success.
Some weaknesses can be accepted, these are known as accepted risks. Some weaknesses must be addressed. For example, if I have a house with no windows, that is a weakness and a risk. Someone may go steal my shit. If I don't put windows on my house, that is a likely risk. Now, I may also have a roof that has a leak. Is that a risk? Yep, sure is, but maybe I live in some dry ass area and the likelihood of rain is low. Maybe I can make due with a bucket.
Bottom-line is there's not infinite money and there is a cap limit. Sometimes, you have to say you accept the risk and just build around it to mitigate it.

That's an interesting idea. So like filling holes with guys on the minimum and only spending on impact guys? Who would you not have signed in recent years?

 

[Grim]

This is what happens when we're continually in the bottom half of the league in terms of cap space availability and value picks like no other. I hate to be a downer but it seems like we're falling behind a bit in terms of AFC prominence. We still have quite a few holes to fill and teams like Denver, LA, and Buffalo keep getting better

I mean TBF there's still a lot of FA left. Good free agents are still out there, including all of our own, too. I'm not super worried about Denver, we will see how they mesh. That's a lot of new pieces coming together, I don't care how it's sliced or who is there. LAC we will see, they historically have issues, I'm not sold on them. Buffalo is the real threat to us along with the Chiefs and some other teams.

 

[UPennChem]

OLine should be a priority, at least 2 position upgrades, i.e. swing tackle and center/guard, and not the typical Raven bargain basement selections. I can't believe the absence of Stanley was the only problem. IF they re-sign Bozeman, I hope its to play left guard, which he was good at. Get a center and a swing tackle, plug and play guys not projects

This seems a bit extreme to me. Would I obviously love to have the luxury of playing BB at guard and somehow finding a quality starting right guard, starting center, and quality swing T sure, but that's not going to happen.

Under no circumstances if BB is resigned, will he be playing anything other C.

 

[Grim]

That's an interesting idea. So like filling holes with guys on the minimum and only spending on impact guys? Who would you not have signed in recent years?

I would not have signed Watkins after we missed out on Juju. Should've just taken that one on the chin when everyone told us no from Juju to that dude from Colts, I forget his name atm. I'd have to go over the entire FA list and tell you. I would've still signed Wolfe. I liked Wolfe, sucks what happened to him but he was a good signing that had some issues.

 

[Grim]

This seems a bit extreme to me. Would I obviously love to have the luxury of playing BB at guard and somehow finding a quality starting right guard, starting center, and quality swing T sure, but that's not going to happen.

Under no circumstances if BB is resigned, will he be playing anything other C.

The main problem we have is that next year I think Zeitler is a FA and getting older. We really need to get ahead of some of these expiring deals and have some talent there to replace guys. You can't just replace a Marshal Yanda, but you can plan to replace a Zeitler. It's why I am not opposed to a G, but it's also not ideal. Phillips is not a T. We've had a lot of G picks just not pan out lately in Bredesen, Phillips (hurt and switched a lot of spots), Cleveland, Powers. Then again, you need tackles too and Stanley is a huge question mark for us.

 

[Michael M.]

The main problem we have is that next year I think Zeitler is a FA and getting older. We really need to get ahead of some of these expiring deals and have some talent there to replace guys. You can't just replace a Marshal Yanda, but you can plan to replace a Zeitler. It's why I am not opposed to a G, but it's also not ideal. Phillips is not a T. We've had a lot of G picks just not pan out lately in Bredesen, Phillips (hurt and switched a lot of spots), Cleveland, Powers. Then again, you need tackles too and Stanley is a huge question mark for us.

Amen to this!

 

[Edgar]

I know a couple of folks on here really liked him...

wow! Thats a big signing and of course Buffalo moves on him. Curious about the money. ...we'll probably re - sign Campbell and one of the journey man RB's from last year...

 

[Davesta]

 

[Michael M.]

This seems a bit extreme to me. Would I obviously love to have the luxury of playing BB at guard and somehow finding a quality starting right guard, starting center, and quality swing T sure, but that's not going to happen.

Under no circumstances if BB is resigned, will he be playing anything other C.

Sometimes teams have players that are just a noche above mediocre. Too good to let go until you're in close games and they are not good enough to put you over.
That's the dilemma of the Ravens with the current O-line. Can't remember who said on here they thought Bozeman was better at guard, but I agree with him. Also remembet someone saying the diff in the SB winner was who could keep the QB upright. Once again, I still maintain Raven's need a swing tackle and a center if you want Jackson to remain upright. Philips not the answer at LG. To blame the Oline collapse solely on the absence of Stanley is wishful thinking...but this is where the Ravens seem to run into trouble. They love to load up on defense, yet wonder why their offensive line is sketchy and subpar.

 

[allblackraven]

Interesting... this combined with the interest in Za'Darius seems like we're not afraid to spend for an edge. Makes you wonder who else we're in on. That market hasn't moved a ton yet.

As long as it's not Clowney, we're golden.

 

[redrum52]

Completely forgot that bum was still the GM there. That Kirk contract makes so much more sense now.