Volume WR, Who is it Gonna Be?

[Sledge Hammer]

The ravens have went into season before not knowing who would step up. Really not knowing if anybody could step up with disastrous results for the offense. It's not like Beckham and Cooper whose coaches were fully confident in we're going to step up. Ravens hope soembody will step up to be a #1 WR. And it never turns out like we want it to. Oz said we weren't done adding players. And have to think he means WR. And not a Victor Cruz.
Ideally we trade for a talented WR while one of our own steps up as well. Not much chance any WR cut is what we are looking for. Maclin could be cut but not likely as he has value. Who can become available for a realistic trade? Who on the roster improves the most? Thoughts

If Defense makes us proud we don't want an offense that holds it back because Joe doesn't have weapons.

 

[DeVito52]

I think if Camp stays healthy he could be pretty good in the slot, as well as a good 3rd down target for Flacco. I'm excited to see what Wallace and Perriman can do as a 1-2 deep threat. If we get those TEs going, they could do very well for us in the short to intermediate lanes, and we may not need a true possession receiver at all. When it's all said and done I don't think there will be a standout over the rest, but it'll be more of a committee. Pitta will probably lead the team in receptions, although I don't like the sound of that.

 

[ZonaRaven]

I don't think the Lions would be willing to trade him and I think we'd have trouble getting him under our cap, but my trade target would be Golden Tate. Aside from that, I like the idea of either Marquise Lee or Allen Robinson but definitely not Hurns. Landry is interesting too since they just paid Stills and Parker came on last year but I feel like he and Robinson are going to command contracts outside of our comfort zone.

 

[JoeyFlex5]

I think perriman has a good shot to really surprise folks. Not putting money on it but it wouldn't surprise me to see him get 60ish catches this year.

But realistically, we won't have a volume wr, that will be one of the TEs. I don't think camp is that guy even if he's healthy

 

[Sledge Hammer]

I don't think the Lions would be willing to trade him and I think we'd have trouble getting him under our cap, but my trade target would be Golden Tate. Aside from that, I like the idea of either Marquise Lee or Allen Robinson but definitely not Hurns. Landry is interesting too since they just paid Stills and Parker came on last year but I feel like he and Robinson are going to command contracts outside of our comfort zone.

I don't think Jags part with Robinson. Lee is about to become a free agent. So if the FL State WR and or Westbrook step up Marqise could become available. As could Watkins. However those are talented players. Their teams aren't giving them away that much is sure.

I really liked Hurns even during his draft. However I see him as maybe a Steve Breaston ,Hakeem Nicks type that has a little spurt. One of those that can't afford to lose a half a step and remain as relevant. Not really interested in Tate. He to seems to be slightly in decline closing in on 30. Besides lets take care of this playmaker issue right this time. Part with a round2 pick and see who it can reel in. It's a round2 pick not a whole damn draft. If our defense is gonna dominate again let's the offense be ready this time to contribute to the cookie jar this playoff run.

 

[RavensPunkXVX]

I don't think the Lions would be willing to trade him and I think we'd have trouble getting him under our cap, but my trade target would be Golden Tate. Aside from that, I like the idea of either Marquise Lee or Allen Robinson but definitely not Hurns. Landry is interesting too since they just paid Stills and Parker came on last year but I feel like he and Robinson are going to command contracts outside of our comfort zone.

Prison Mike, you win.

I think they'll just bring in a veteran. Boldin would the the perfect fit. I understand not reaching for a WR in the draft when we got two sophomores who may make strides this year in Moore and Perriman. We need that possession guy.

 

[Sledge Hammer]

Prison Mike, you win.

I think they'll just bring in a veteran. Boldin would the the perfect fit. I understand not reaching for a WR in the draft when we got two sophomores who may make strides this year in Moore and Perriman. We need that possession guy.

No, Boldin is 37 yrs old. He isn't changing the fortune of the offense. He is a year older than last year. He could be totally ineffective.

 

[RavensPunkXVX]

No, Boldin is 37 yrs old. He isn't changing the fortune of the offense. He is a year older than last year. He could be totally ineffective.

Fair enough. Who do you think the Ravens could REALISTICALLY get. I'm not looking towards changing our future at WR because that option isn't out there imo. I'm looking to win. Boldin COULD be ineffective, but he is proven at the very least.

 

[Sledge Hammer]

Fair enough. Who do you think the Ravens could REALISTICALLY get. I'm not looking towards changing our future at WR because that option isn't out there imo. I'm looking to win. Boldin COULD be ineffective, but he is proven at the very least.

If we are willing shell out there should be many options with vast potential. Sometimes people act as if trading a Second rounder is trading a whole freaking draft. Like it's the frigging Ditka Williams trade all over again. To be frank. Do we believe this defense could be great? If it is do we want the offense to cost it a chance to go to the Super Bowl? Because it can't contribute anything to the Cookie jar. Going after a WR clearly with his prime behind him isn't making a difference.

 

[ZonaRaven]

Decker is an option and I think it's been rumored the Jets are waiting for him to be healthy before they cut him but who knows. Another big bodied -receiver but I no longer think he's worth it is Green-Beckham.

 

[RavensPunkXVX]

I just don't see the FO making those types of trade moves.

 

[JoeyFlex5]

Trading a second rounder is more than just losing a pick, it's also a salary cap burden. The key to winning is fitting a well rounded talented team under the cap, so if you trade a high end rookie contract for a player on his second deal(the biggest one usually) then you hinder yourself a lot.

 

[Sledge Hammer]

Trading a second rounder is more than just losing a pick, it's also a salary cap burden. The key to winning is fitting a well rounded talented team under the cap, so if you trade a high end rookie contract for a player on his second deal(the biggest one usually) then you hinder yourself a lot.

There's no guarantee your getting a pro bowl player with that damn pick. And really it's ONE second rounder not a whole draft of cheap players. If the player you trade for plays up to his second contract it beats a second round bust. What kills you are draft busts and players not playing up to his big salary. Like the QB shelling out all that money to and get no return on because the weapons suck.

 

[JoeyFlex5]

There's no guarantee your getting a pro bowl player with that damn pick. And really it's ONE second rounder not a whole draft of cheap players. If the player you trade for plays up to his second contract it beats a second round bust. What kills you are draft busts and players not playing up to his big salary. Like the QB shelling out all that money to and get no return on because the weapons suck.

it hinders your cap far more than a rookie 2nd rounder though. It's about a lot more than getting s proven pro bowler. It's about value. You can attempt to get a great talent on a cheap deal for 4 years, or you can guarantee to hinder yourselves with a big contract while losing a second, and you're banking on said player not getting injured or declining. Look at the Monroe trade, imagine if we traded a second instead of a 4th and 5th. That's why you don't make blockbuster trades for big money players with high picks

 

[Sledge Hammer]

it hinders your cap far more than a rookie 2nd rounder though. It's about a lot more than getting s proven pro bowler. It's about value. You can attempt to get a great talent on a cheap deal for 4 years, or you can guarantee to hinder yourselves with a big contract while losing a second, and you're banking on said player not getting injured or declining. Look at the Monroe trade, imagine if we traded a second instead of a 4th and 5th. That's why you don't make blockbuster trades for big money players with high picks

Yes it can hinder your cap if your paying a bunch of players not playing up to their contracts. But if you scout the player you trade for and give out contracts wisely you will be fine. And one up a valuable playmaker. If you have players all over not playing up to their contract then yes it drags down the team. The warning on Monroe shoulda been nobody trades away a good left tackle for late round picks. If your stupid enough to trade a second for Eugene Monroe then yes it hurts you. Thankfully we only got suckered into a couple late rounders.

Trade for a WR that is being held back by a bad QB, bad system, and bad O-Line and he flourishes with our franchise caliber QB then your not hurting the team. Team should be more worried about the big contract it gave a one dimensional NT. Than paying its best playmaker hurting the cap. If we ever do find a real playmaker we have to pay him at some point anyways.

 

[JoeyFlex5]

Yes it can hinder your cap if your paying a bunch of players not playing up to their contracts. But if you scout the player you trade for and give out contracts wisely you will be fine. And one up a valuable playmaker. If you have players all over not playing up to their contract then yes it drags down the team. The warning on Monroe shoulda been nobody trades away a good left tackle for late round picks. If your stupid enough to trade a second for Eugene Monroe then yes it hurts you. Thankfully we only got suckered into a couple late rounders.

Trade for a WR that is being held back by a bad QB, bad system, and bad O-Line and he flourishes with our franchise caliber QB then your not hurting the team. Team should be more worried about the big contract it gave a one dimensional NT. Than paying its best playmaker hurting the cap. If we ever do find a real playmaker we have to pay him at some point anyways.

Teams trade quality players on the last year of their deal for peanuts all the time, they don't wanna re-up a big contract. More indicative of the cap situation than the player. All the scouting in the world can't prevent injuries. Big contracts are risky period, and losing a second round pick makes that risk way too high. Big contracts on the trainers table will crush any team, trading your high picks for players on big deals is incredibly reckless.

If it's such a great idea then why doesn't every team do it? Because it isn't.

 

[Sledge Hammer]

Teams trade quality players on the last year of their deal for peanuts all the time, they don't wanna re-up a big contract. More indicative of the cap situation than the player. All the scouting in the world can't prevent injuries. Big contracts are risky period, and losing a second round pick makes that risk way too high. Big contracts on the trainers table will crush any team, trading your high picks for players on big deals is incredibly reckless.

If it's such a great idea then why doesn't every team do it? Because it isn't.

Teams do it all the time. Patriots recently did it. It isn't reckless it's fixing a considerable weakness. Wreckless is giving out contracts to players already on ir.

Everybody says a move is a bad when he don't think the team is going to do it. Because you want to believe we are better off. But be honest if we traded a second for Watkins you would be doing cartwheels across screen on this board. But you are pretending missing out on the next Correa, Brown, Max, Jernigan is wreckless. It will destroy the team. Gimme a break. What will hurt the team is the offense struggling wildly. Besides nobody said trade for a $100million player. But get a playmaker so the offense isn't one of the bottom 5.

 

[JoeyFlex5]

Teams do it all the time. Patriots recently did it. It isn't reckless it's fixing a considerable weakness. Wreckless is giving out contracts to players already on ir.

Everybody says a move is a bad when he don't think the team is going to do it. Because you want to believe we are better off. But be honest if we traded a second for Watkins you would be doing cartwheels across screen on this board. But you are pretending missing out on the next Correa, Brown, Max, Jernigan is wreckless. It will destroy the team. Gimme a break. What will hurt the team is the offense struggling wildly. Besides nobody said trade for a $100million player. But get a playmaker so the offense isn't one of the bottom 5.

using the patriots as the example is never a good idea, considering they are literally the only team out of 32 that has managed to avoid the parity that the NFL is built on, not a single team can do what they do.

and if we traded watkins, sure id be excited, but id also have a whole lot of questions: 1) where is that cap space coming from? 2) he has been injured every season of his career, why would we allocate so many resources to a player who is always injured.

you literally just said giving a contract to a player on IR is reckless and then suggest we trade a second for a guy whos never played a healthy season and is coming up on a big pay day. its not about missing on the next correa or brown or jernigan, its about not blowing your wad on one player and allocating very limited resources wisely. the NFL is seriously not a cut and dry "sign all the best players at all costs" league, it is literally designed to prevent the one thing you are suggesting, that is why teams dont do it often. what dont you get about the fact that if you allocate all these resources to one player(aside from a franchise qb) then you run the risk of really screwing the franchise if the player gets an injury bug? look at all the resources we had tied up in pitta, rice, ngata, monroe, dumervil, suggs, and jimmy, and look at how often we have shelled out massive money to these guys as they sit on the trainers table, it has CRUSHED this franchise for years now and we are just now beginning to get these contracts off the books and moving on, and you suggest that we crush ourselves again, but even worse, by making the same mistake and losing early draft picks in the process.

you hate our recent second rounders, i get it, but you are suggesting ridiculous things that simply dont work in the NFL.

 

[Sledge Hammer]

using the patriots as the example is never a good idea, considering they are literally the only team out of 32 that has managed to avoid the parity that the NFL is built on, not a single team can do what they do.

and if we traded watkins, sure id be excited, but id also have a whole lot of questions: 1) where is that cap space coming from? 2) he has been injured every season of his career, why would we allocate so many resources to a player who is always injured.

you literally just said giving a contract to a player on IR is reckless and then suggest we trade a second for a guy whos never played a healthy season and is coming up on a big pay day. its not about missing on the next correa or brown or jernigan, its about not blowing your wad on one player and allocating very limited resources wisely. the NFL is seriously not a cut and dry "sign all the best players at all costs" league, it is literally designed to prevent the one thing you are suggesting, that is why teams dont do it often. what dont you get about the fact that if you allocate all these resources to one player(aside from a franchise qb) then you run the risk of really screwing the franchise if the player gets an injury bug? look at all the resources we had tied up in pitta, rice, ngata, monroe, dumervil, suggs, and jimmy, and look at how often we have shelled out massive money to these guys as they sit on the trainers table, it has CRUSHED this franchise for years now and we are just now beginning to get these contracts off the books and moving on, and you suggest that we crush ourselves again, but even worse, by making the same mistake and losing early draft picks in the process.

you hate our recent second rounders, i get it, but you are suggesting ridiculous things that simply dont work in the NFL.

Doesn't have to be Watkins. But any WR borderline 1 caliber. Of course injured players hurt the cap. All I'm saying is if we manage cap with some common sense it won't hurt to trade a round2 pick for a badly needed player that will make a splash throughout our offense. And help pay dividends on our biggest investment. As long as we don't keep paying nosetackles $60mil. A team can easily absorb trading a 2 rounder for a badly needed player. And turn a big weakness into a strength for once

 

[JoeyFlex5]

Doesn't have to be Watkins. But any WR borderline 1 caliber. Of course injured players hurt the cap. All I'm saying is if we manage cap with some common sense it won't hurt to trade a round2 pick for a badly needed player that will make a splash throughout our offense. And help pay dividends on our biggest investment. As long as we don't keep paying nosetackles $60mil. A team can easily absorb trading a 2 rounder for a badly needed player. And turn a big weakness into a strength for once

paying NTs 60mil isn't a league standard thing because a lot of teams fail to realize that you can't win without stopping the run, but for us, it's really not a bad move, wasn't my first choice but the reasoning is obvious. Stopping the run is and always will be priority one on any successful defense. But as long as we have a franchise qb under contract, we would have a very hard time getting a star wr under any contract but a rookie deal, look at what average WRs got on the market this year. We absolutely can't afford to make a splash FA/trade move for a wr who is already under a big deal or is coming up on a big deal.

Not to mention, one thing has been proven time and time again, all-universe superstar wide receivers are not that damn important. Look at every SB winning team in the modern era. I don't think there has been a massive star WR on a super bowl winning team since the colts with Harrison, and before that is was the rams with Isaac Bruce and Torrey holt. But defenses win, good OLs win, qbs win, WRs just don't. We are wise not to stray from our formula. There was no point in the draft where a wr was of value(oj Howard was value but a TE technically) and there is no wr that we could logically justify trading a second for right now given that we are always cap strapped.

If we want a stud wr, we either have to draft one, or find another veteran who still has a year or 2 left in the tank who will play for cheap. Because totally mediocre WRs got paid absurd amount of money this offseason. There is just not feasible way to work it out. We would be better off building a run game and making die with our current group and hope we luck out somewhere, because or cap situation isn't gonna allow it until flacco is gone unless we decide to abandon our excellent defense and ignore our OL in order to throw the whole
Bank account at an average wr