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

Signings, Cuts, Trades

Simba said:
The Metcalf situation is interesting, and I've heard some whispers that it could be something we're seriously involved in. On one hand, it's not often that you have an opportunity to acquire a high end WR before they hit that 2nd contract. On the other hand, we've invested a ton into the position and this would be a clear indication that they don't believe in Hollywood for the long term. Can't see this being something that actually happens but still have to remember that this is a high end player available because of a rebuild so there's a little less leverage on the Seahawks side as there would be normally.
Click to expand...
Where has it been reported we could be interested?
 
JAAM said:
Where has it been reported we could be interested?
Click to expand...
I think Incarcerated Bob is the only one to have reported it so far but his info is iffy.

But I know someone who is in one of the inner circles to some extent and I've heard the rumor, although it's more of a hey they've called rather than a omg they're super serious about it.
 
Simba said:
I think Incarcerated Bob is the only one to have reported it so far but his info is iffy.

But I know someone who is in one of the inner circles to some extent and I've heard the rumor, although it's more of a hey they've called rather than a omg they're super serious about it.
Click to expand...
Interesting. I will say this - I’d rather have Metcalf over Hollywood, and I’d rather give a big contract to Metcalf as well
 
If this is true, I wonder what we offered

 
I"d prefer Hollywood over Metcalf. I was a big fan of both coming out of college and feel Metcalf has been in a great situation with Russell Wilson the last few seasons. Hollywood has improved every season and just had his first 1k yard season and that was playing with Lamar for only 11 or 12 games. Hollywood is a must sign going forward and no way this happens if we trade for Metcalf.
 
JAAM said:
Interesting. I will say this - I’d rather have Metcalf over Hollywood, and I’d rather give a big contract to Metcalf as well
Click to expand...
JAAM said:
Yea, never been a fan of his soft ass
Click to expand...
tactics-1.jpg
 
Simba said:
It's definitely an interesting thought. It'd basically be only 1 year but a WR group with Metcalf and Hollywood challenging on the outside while Bateman and Andrews work the inside and middle sounds scary. But making that investment makes it harder to fix the myriad of other issues. It's interesting to think about and I'd be calling and making somewhat of a serious run too. You'd be dumb not to unless you're Cinci basically.
Click to expand...

the question isn't really about whether he's worth it... it's about your team-building philosophy *this* year

i doubt EDC gives up 14 for Metcalf but let's say he gives up 45 - you've probably got to find a few more mediocre or average veterans than you were expecting to at some positions on defence to fill out the roster there - you're losing your 2nd best chance to find a young defensive starter to add talent to the defence

and you're also basically committing to getting a long-term deal done with metcalf too or else you're going to lose him after the year - and a 2nd rounder is a big price for a 1 year rental

if EDC could swing it somehow for a 3rd rounder then i'd be all in on it tbh - but would be hard to imagine a team like the jets wouldnt offer more...
 
Simba said:
I think Incarcerated Bob is the only one to have reported it so far but his info is iffy.

But I know someone who is in one of the inner circles to some extent and I've heard the rumor, although it's more of a hey they've called rather than a omg they're super serious about it.
Click to expand...

would be irresponsible not to at least check in and see what it would cost...
 
  • Like
Reactions: cdp
rossihunter2 said:
would be irresponsible not to at least check in and see what it would cost...
Click to expand...
I guess I should clarify that the info that I heard was that they called again after missing out on Wagner. So not necessarily straight passive interest as it sounds like they've called at least twice and are seemingly still open to a big swing before diverting attention elsewhere.
 
Simba said:
I guess I should clarify that the info that I heard was that they called again after missing out on Wagner. So not necessarily straight passive interest as it sounds like they've called at least twice and are seemingly still open to a big swing before diverting attention elsewhere.
Click to expand...

that is interesting - his 2022 cap hit is likely similar to what wagner's would have been on a multi-year deal

i, and others, have wondered about a potential slight philosophical change regarding the types of players we target and finding stars and filling out the roster with mid-late round draft picks and backing your coaches to develop vs filling every hole in free agency pre-draft and then drafting completely freely

a rams-like approach and this type of move would definitely fit that new approach...

we've seen that, outside of michael pierce and eddie goldman - every player we've apparently been in on has been either young or a bona fide stud or both

only guys we've seemingly offered small deals to are vet minimum deals to some of our own guys (none of whom have re-signed yet lol) and whatever we've offered calais
 
This was in response to a Bengals fan telling Lamar that Metcalf doesn’t know him lol

Side note - Lamar is taking no prisoners on Twitter this off-season. My god

 
rossihunter2 said:
that is interesting - his 2022 cap hit is likely similar to what wagner's would have been on a multi-year deal

i, and others, have wondered about a potential slight philosophical change regarding the types of players we target and finding stars and filling out the roster with mid-late round draft picks and backing your coaches to develop vs filling every hole in free agency pre-draft and then drafting completely freely

a rams-like approach and this type of move would definitely fit that new approach...

we've seen that, outside of michael pierce and eddie goldman - every player we've apparently been in on has been either young or a bona fide stud or both

only guys we've seemingly offered small deals to are vet minimum deals to some of our own guys (none of whom have re-signed yet lol) and whatever we've offered calais
Click to expand...
Premium players and/or premium positions essentially. Williams obviously fit both while Wagner only fit one, but it's still a philosophy change to some extent.
 
Simba said:
Premium players and/or premium positions essentially. Williams obviously fit both while Wagner only fit one, but it's still a philosophy change to some extent.
Click to expand...

the other guys we didnt get too: ZDS, Ogbah - and while Key isnt a star he is still just 25

im guessing it's partly because he sees the prices of the middle class free agents going up so the value in bargain shopping is less than it was unless you get lucky with a vet or a deal with a guy like Moses

find a few difference makers rather than lots of contributors

and if that really is the tactic this offseason then it's a really interesting major departure from how they've done things historically but would be very much in line with how the bucs and rams assembled their SB winning teams - lots of home-grown draft picks, supporting some well-known superstars and a few star mercenaries from outside the building too
 
rossihunter2 said:
he's also potentially only a 1 year rental while lamar remains unsigned long-term - you'd almost have to make his trade contingent on a long-term deal signed at the outset otherwise any capital you give up is tough to let go outside of a day 3 or late day 2 pick

for a 1st or 2nd round pick you've got be getting long-term value out of the player

can absolutely see the ravens sniffing around to see what it would take to bring him here - high quality player who adds a ton of value to any corps he's a part of - that physicality, power, athleticism and YAC is enticing and it would be irresponsible not to do our due diligence

that being said... if we part with the 1st or 2nd round pick to get him, then you're giving up significant capital that could/should be going to the defence just to add another weapon on offence and are somewhat committing to potentially winning shootouts (which i guess could make sense given that we're clearly looking to add playmakers on defence and not worrying necessarily about where they play - easiest way for a defence to help you in a shootout is to get turnovers)
Click to expand...

RavensMania said:
I"d prefer Hollywood over Metcalf. I was a big fan of both coming out of college and feel Metcalf has been in a great situation with Russell Wilson the last few seasons. Hollywood has improved every season and just had his first 1k yard season and that was playing with Lamar for only 11 or 12 games. Hollywood is a must sign going forward and no way this happens if we trade for Metcalf.
Click to expand...

rossihunter2 said:
the question isn't really about whether he's worth it... it's about your team-building philosophy *this* year

i doubt EDC gives up 14 for Metcalf but let's say he gives up 45 - you've probably got to find a few more mediocre or average veterans than you were expecting to at some positions on defence to fill out the roster there - you're losing your 2nd best chance to find a young defensive starter to add talent to the defence

and you're also basically committing to getting a long-term deal done with metcalf too or else you're going to lose him after the year - and a 2nd rounder is a big price for a 1 year rental

if EDC could swing it somehow for a 3rd rounder then i'd be all in on it tbh - but would be hard to imagine a team like the jets wouldnt offer more...
Click to expand...
...what no one is saying is if this agreement with DKM would be cheaper now for a future deal than waiting for Hollywood to make up his mind. Sure, Hollywood is cheaper now in his draft contract, but locking up DKM for 5 years and not having to worry about Hollywood retiring, etc...

I still think there's money better spent, but DKM and Rashod Bateman for the next 3 years locked, that ain't a bad idear.
 
drjohnnyfever said:
...what no one is saying is if this agreement with DKM would be cheaper now for a future deal than waiting for Hollywood to make up his mind. Sure, Hollywood is cheaper now in his draft contract, but locking up DKM for 5 years and not having to worry about Hollywood retiring, etc...

I still think there's money better spent, but DKM and Rashod Bateman for the next 3 years locked, that ain't a bad idear.
Click to expand...
Rather keep hollywood
 
Whether we actually trade for DK or not, I just have questions. EDC has looked at the C position and said pass. EDC clearly wanted to upgrade multiple positions on Defense and was successful in some cases and unsuccessful in others.

The other day I asked after missing out on some key defensive guys, is it time to just reevaluate and see what other options are on the table? When I asked it, it was with respect to cycling back on Tretter.

Now we hear that we've made 2 calls about DK. One that fundamentally means EDC thinks the WR position can be meaningful upgraded and that it would potentially be worth a somewhat sizable investment.

Does this mean that EDC wants to change the offensive identity to something closer to Cincinnati and that requires 3 really good receivers?

Does it mean we prefer DK over Hollywood?

Does it mean depending on the board on draft night that London or Olave are potentially in play?

Something else altogether?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top