The 2023 Offseason Thread

[rmcjacket23]

I don't think he ever asked for full guarantees but am fairly sure he asked for more money than Watson got.

I don't have a problem with him getting more. He deserves it.

More money than Watson got in terms of what?

Total more money than Watson? Sure, he should get more. Wilson, Murray, Allen and Mahomes have more total $ on their deal than Watson.

AAV? Sure, I guess. Watson's AAV is $46M. Kyler and Wilson got more. Like I'm fine with it, except then it just goes back to the hypocrisy of the argument, because more than Watson also means he deserves more AAV than Mahomes, Allen, and possibly even Rodgers. What's the argument that he should get a higher AAV than those guys?

Guaranteed $? If he's asking for more than Watson, then he's probably a fool. Watson's guaranteed $ at signing is like double the next closest QB, and his practical guarantees are like $40M more than the next closest QB.

To make it simpler... if Lamar wants more than $230M guaranteed, over a 5 year deal, he's not getting it from the Ravens, and I don't think he'll get it from any other team in the league either.
He can get that much, but it won't be for that time period. 6,7,8 years, sure.

 

[rmcjacket23]

In terms of drafting a good player that aligns with team needs, CB looks very sensible.

However, if we're paying Lamar $45M there will be no money to add a FA WR ( not that there are many good ones available). I just don't see how adding a (potentially) slightly better corner helps the team more than adding a (potentially) slightly worse receiver.

This year's FA corner group is much better (and cheaper) than the FA WRs too, which should factor into the decision.

It would also end any chance of getting a long term deal done with Lamar by sending the message that the team still values defense over offense.
All the big recent moves - Marcus W, Hamilton, Roquan have been defensive. Even Linderbaum is a great run blocker who struggles with pass pro. That's not building the team with the QB in mind.

On the other hand, if Lamar's gone, we can draft every position.

Right, but we're not suggesting you don't draft WRs at all. We're suggesting if you go into the draft thinking you have to take a WR in the first round, that dramatically increases the probability that said player just won't be any good.
And the risk isn't that they'll be an average NFL WR. The risk is that they won't even be that. The risk is that they're Breshad Perriman. That's not something we can just discount.

I have no idea what the FA WR market will look like in terms of $, but the reality is that if Lamar is tagged, the WR "upgrades" of any significance are coming through the draft most likely. They'll add bodies via FA, but none of them are going to be dramatically better than the Sammy Watkins types. So your WR is going to look like Bateman, some cheaper veteran FAs, and some draft picks. And the only question is how high or low are those draft picks.

That's not going to be a great group in year 1. And if you do that, and leave yourself with a Corner room looking like it currently does, that groups going to need to score 25-30 a week to have any chance to win. More if Marlon gets injured.

And I even like Stephens and Pepe, and I think they'll get better. But no way am I hanging my hat on that. In this league, you can live with lack of depth on the Dline, the linebacker core, maybe even Safety group. You pretty much can't be terrible at Corner and do well.

 

[Davesta]

I don’t want to get ahead of myself AT ALL, but dare I say that I see a little bit of AB in Zay Flowers’ game? His body control, fluidity, game speed. He looks the part of a potential elite NFL slot guy.

I see it too. Hes like a young AB

 

[Michael M.]

I see it too. Hes like a young AB

What's his injury history?

 

[rossihunter2]

In terms of drafting a good player that aligns with team needs, CB looks very sensible.

However, if we're paying Lamar $45M there will be no money to add a FA WR ( not that there are many good ones available). I just don't see how adding a (potentially) slightly better corner helps the team more than adding a (potentially) slightly worse receiver.

This year's FA corner group is much better (and cheaper) than the FA WRs too, which should factor into the decision.

It would also end any chance of getting a long term deal done with Lamar by sending the message that the team still values defense over offense.
All the big recent moves - Marcus W, Hamilton, Roquan have been defensive. Even Linderbaum is a great run blocker who struggles with pass pro. That's not building the team with the QB in mind.

On the other hand, if Lamar's gone, we can draft every position.

that is a dramatic oversimplification

even in a year with not many picks and not a ton of money, you have more than just your 1st round pick to add players

and also not particularly true to say Linderbaum struggled in pass pro - he struggled against 6 of the biggest tests in the league for a C on some reps and needs to clean up some of his stunt/twist reads - but he was mostly a pretty steady pass protector and was largely put in pretty difficult blocking situations because the ravens would often leave Powers as the free man vs a 4 man rush and not Linderbaum

i think it's also fairly likely that the CB/EDGE vs WR grade difference at 22 may be too enormous to reasonably justify a reach...

 

[rossihunter2]

im assuming this is the offseason surgery harbs was referring to
but also maybe not given he's a free agent

 

[rmcjacket23]

In terms of drafting a good player that aligns with team needs, CB looks very sensible.

However, if we're paying Lamar $45M there will be no money to add a FA WR ( not that there are many good ones available). I just don't see how adding a (potentially) slightly better corner helps the team more than adding a (potentially) slightly worse receiver.

This year's FA corner group is much better (and cheaper) than the FA WRs too, which should factor into the decision.

It would also end any chance of getting a long term deal done with Lamar by sending the message that the team still values defense over offense.
All the big recent moves - Marcus W, Hamilton, Roquan have been defensive. Even Linderbaum is a great run blocker who struggles with pass pro. That's not building the team with the QB in mind.

On the other hand, if Lamar's gone, we can draft every position.

Would also point out that most of the recent "big moves" have been on defense because they should have been on defense. Until this past season, the offense was far and away the better of the two units. The defense from 2018-2021 was aging poorly and lacking of high end players.

In 2018 and 2019, we drafted seven players on day 1 or 2 of the draft. Six of them were offensive players.
In 2020 and 2021, the offense got 50% of them. So that's 11/17 day 1 or 2 draft picks on offense in a four year period.
I posted about this like two years ago, but it was clear as day that the shift towards more defense and less offense was coming. The offense got most of the draft picks and many of the long term extensions over the last several years (Stanley, Andrews), got two first round WRs, a 2nd round RB, a first round Center, and also had solid veteran Oline signings (Zeitler, Moses). Like everybody realizes there's only one aspect of the offense that's really "lacking", and its one position group (WR).

Meanwhile, you go back 2-3 years ago, and you had a badly aging Dline, pretty much no quality, younger pass rushers, and we were literally recycling older Safeties like Weddle, Earl Thomas, etc.

I suspect here in the next year or two it will balance itself out a bit in terms of investments, but I think everybody saw this coming.

 

[QtR Nevermore]

that is a dramatic oversimplification

even in a year with not many picks and not a ton of money, you have more than just your 1st round pick to add players

and also not particularly true to say Linderbaum struggled in pass pro - he struggled against 6 of the biggest tests in the league for a C on some reps and needs to clean up some of his stunt/twist reads - but he was mostly a pretty steady pass protector and was largely put in pretty difficult blocking situations because the ravens would often leave Powers as the free man vs a 4 man rush and not Linderbaum

i think it's also fairly likely that the CB/EDGE vs WR grade difference at 22 may be too enormous to reasonably justify a reach...

"Dramatic oversimplification" is a dramatic overstatement.

Of course they have other avenues to add players, but the 1st rounder is by far the highest card they have to play. Their stated objective was to upgrade the WR room. If we go by track record, DeCosta will look to accomplish that - within reason.

I expect WRs to be given a pretty big 'position of need' bump on the Ravens draft board, but, of course, if that still doesn't lift a prospect above the next CB or Edge, they won't draft him.

I wasn't saying Linderbaum was a bad pick or is a terrible pass protector, just that he was drafted in the 1st for his run game ability. His pass pro vs Mekari or even Colon isn't enough to justify the pick. Nothing wrong with that, of course, but I was talking in terms of Lamar wanting to lean more into the passing game - not taking a global view of the Ravens.

 

[QtR Nevermore]

Would also point out that most of the recent "big moves" have been on defense because they should have been on defense. Until this past season, the offense was far and away the better of the two units. The defense from 2018-2021 was aging poorly and lacking of high end players.

In 2018 and 2019, we drafted seven players on day 1 or 2 of the draft. Six of them were offensive players.
In 2020 and 2021, the offense got 50% of them. So that's 11/17 day 1 or 2 draft picks on offense in a four year period.
I posted about this like two years ago, but it was clear as day that the shift towards more defense and less offense was coming. The offense got most of the draft picks and many of the long term extensions over the last several years (Stanley, Andrews), got two first round WRs, a 2nd round RB, a first round Center, and also had solid veteran Oline signings (Zeitler, Moses). Like everybody realizes there's only one aspect of the offense that's really "lacking", and its one position group (WR).

Meanwhile, you go back 2-3 years ago, and you had a badly aging Dline, pretty much no quality, younger pass rushers, and we were literally recycling older Safeties like Weddle, Earl Thomas, etc.

I suspect here in the next year or two it will balance itself out a bit in terms of investments, but I think everybody saw this coming.

Agreed. I don't think it was the wrong thing to do. I was talking about the message it would send to Lamar if the next big move was also on defense.

 

[Tank]

A good QB hitting a competitive market will get a fully guaranteed deal. Not just Watson but Cousins also got one. Lamar's better than both, if he rode out 2 tags and hit the market he'd definitely get it.

A trade makes it a little less likely, but if Lamar made 100% guarantees his criteria when choosing between suitors, then I think he'd get it.

From a practical position, giving Lamar a fully guaranteed deal wouldn't be much of a competitive disadvantage. Good QBs almost always earn their full salaries. Except in the case of catastrophic injury (which didn't hurt Dak) or when a bad QB gets a huge contract (Wentz, Goff etc) teams don't usually look to get out from their QB contracts. Not with QBs of Lamar's quality anyway.

What's hurting the Ravens is that Bisciotti has chosen to carry the owner's water in standing against guarantees.

Kirk Cousins? His is a 1 year extension. lol Not sure why that enters the conversation.

Also not sure why Biscotti is being portrayed as a villain. A Watson type deal would just be an outright dumb decision, whether all the owners agree or not.

 

[BoredMarine13]

The fanaticism/apocalyptic approach some fans have to Lamar is getting old. I honestly feel really good about the direction of the team if we sign him long term or trade for a boat load of picks.

 

[rmcjacket23]

Agreed. I don't think it was the wrong thing to do. I was talking about the message it would send to Lamar if the next big move was also on defense.

I wouldn't be concerned about that either. He can wait and see the totality of the offseason. If Lamar feels like he's being slighted because the team is investing in defense instead of offense, let him. I'd just point him to the things I laid out in my last post. He's got a top 10 Oline, a All-World TE, and at least had a running game that worked on just about anybody. He's missing WRs. If that's the apocalyptic approach he wants to take, so be it.

If he wants to see what pressure looks like, have the team give him 2 stud receivers and spend nothing on defense, while paying him $50M a year. And then lose early in the playoffs. He wants no part of that.

 

[QtR Nevermore]

Kirk Cousins? His is a 1 year extension. lol Not sure why that enters the conversation.

Also not sure why Biscotti is being portrayed as a villain. A Watson type deal would just be an outright dumb decision, whether all the owners agree or not.

Cousins got a fully guaranteed deal with Minnesota when he hit the open market.

I don't think it's such a dumb decision because almost all good QBs earn their whole contract anyway, so it doesn't really hurt the Ravens unless he has a career ending injury. I think Bisciotti is making a stand because he doesn't want to set a precedent - not due to competitive reasons.

 

[rmcjacket23]

The fanaticism/apocalyptic approach some fans have to Lamar is getting old. I honestly feel really good about the direction of the team if we sign him long term or trade for a boat load of picks.

I generally agree. No guarantees the next QB will be anywhere as good as Lamar obviously, but like everybody is like "well you've gotta have a QB good enough to beat Burrow and Mahomes and Allen and Herbert and Tua and all these guys". And then I'm like "OK, but where did those guys come from"? They came from the draft. All of them.

The difference is people think you have to replace Lamar within 1-2 years. If Lamar leaves, his replacement may be in High School right now and is somebody nobody has heard of. And he may end up being a better player anyway.

All comes down to executing your draft picks and your talent evaluation. And that's critical with or without Lamar.

 

[rmcjacket23]

Cousins got a fully guaranteed deal with Minnesota when he hit the open market.

I don't think it's such a dumb decision because almost all good QBs earn their whole contract anyway, so it doesn't really hurt the Ravens unless he has a career ending injury. I think Bisciotti is making a stand because he doesn't want to set a precedent - not due to competitive reasons.

Well it doesn't necessarily have a to a career ender either. The type of injury that severely reduces his ability as a runner would be hurtful also. If Lamar couldn't run, would anybody pay him $50M as a pure passer? I wouldn't. Or... the Tua problem. Concussions aren't predictable. He starts getting 1-2 a year, and now you've got yourself a problem.

The other aspect for me is that, no matter what, nobody knows when the "cliff" for a QB is going to come. The presumption is that all great QBs are going to play well until they're at least like 35. That ain't real.

One other thing I'd suggest, though I don't think it would happen... people around the league are going to start head scratching if Deshaun Watson isn't really good in 2023 or 2024. I think he'll obviously be better than last year, but if he's not like at least a top 7-8 QB in the league, every single Owner is going to say to themselves "why am I locking myself into a guy like this for 5 years no matter what"? Like its fine to give these guys 5,6,7 year extensions, but once the guaranteed $ is gone, if the production isn't there, they ain't afraid to cut bait. Nor should they be.

Precedent is important, but practicality is also. No Owner wants to be the guy paying out like $100M on the back end of a massive contract to a declining or injured player. And nobody knows when either of those things are going to happen.

No two QBs are identical, but look at Cam Newton. Broke the rookie passing yardage record, put up monster numbers for like 7-8 years. Won MVP in 2015, was basically a fringe-starter in the league by 2019, out of the league entirely by like 31-32.

 

[Thezone27]

Well it doesn't necessarily have a to a career ender either. The type of injury that severely reduces his ability as a runner would be hurtful also. If Lamar couldn't run, would anybody pay him $50M as a pure passer? I wouldn't. Or... the Tua problem. Concussions aren't predictable. He starts getting 1-2 a year, and now you've got yourself a problem.

The other aspect for me is that, no matter what, nobody knows when the "cliff" for a QB is going to come. The presumption is that all great QBs are going to play well until they're at least like 35. That ain't real.

One other thing I'd suggest, though I don't think it would happen... people around the league are going to start head scratching if Deshaun Watson isn't really good in 2023 or 2024. I think he'll obviously be better than last year, but if he's not like at least a top 7-8 QB in the league, every single Owner is going to say to themselves "why am I locking myself into a guy like this for 5 years no matter what"? Like its fine to give these guys 5,6,7 year extensions, but once the guaranteed $ is gone, if the production isn't there, they ain't afraid to cut bait. Nor should they be.

Precedent is important, but practicality is also. No Owner wants to be the guy paying out like $100M on the back end of a massive contract to a declining or injured player. And nobody knows when either of those things are going to happen.

No two QBs are identical, but look at Cam Newton. Broke the rookie passing yardage record, put up monster numbers for like 7-8 years. Won MVP in 2015, was basically a fringe-starter in the league by 2019, out of the league entirely by like 31-32.

You say the expectation is that good qbs play well till their 35. Most of them actually do, but with the new generation of "mobile" QBs, no more. I really want Lamar back, but i would say that I only want him for like 4 more years. If he's still playing well then, maybe give him a 2yr deal. I'm extremely wary of signing Lamar for longer than that.

 

[Deebo813]

The fanaticism/apocalyptic approach some fans have to Lamar is getting old. I honestly feel really good about the direction of the team if we sign him long term or trade for a boat load of picks.

Any new qb we get will likely be a bum.. derek carr is in fact trash and thats likely the best qb we could possibly get… then theres arod……

 

[QtR Nevermore]

Well it doesn't necessarily have a to a career ender either. The type of injury that severely reduces his ability as a runner would be hurtful also. If Lamar couldn't run, would anybody pay him $50M as a pure passer? I wouldn't. Or... the Tua problem. Concussions aren't predictable. He starts getting 1-2 a year, and now you've got yourself a problem.

The other aspect for me is that, no matter what, nobody knows when the "cliff" for a QB is going to come. The presumption is that all great QBs are going to play well until they're at least like 35. That ain't real.

One other thing I'd suggest, though I don't think it would happen... people around the league are going to start head scratching if Deshaun Watson isn't really good in 2023 or 2024. I think he'll obviously be better than last year, but if he's not like at least a top 7-8 QB in the league, every single Owner is going to say to themselves "why am I locking myself into a guy like this for 5 years no matter what"? Like its fine to give these guys 5,6,7 year extensions, but once the guaranteed $ is gone, if the production isn't there, they ain't afraid to cut bait. Nor should they be.

Precedent is important, but practicality is also. No Owner wants to be the guy paying out like $100M on the back end of a massive contract to a declining or injured player. And nobody knows when either of those things are going to happen.

No two QBs are identical, but look at Cam Newton. Broke the rookie passing yardage record, put up monster numbers for like 7-8 years. Won MVP in 2015, was basically a fringe-starter in the league by 2019, out of the league entirely by like 31-32.

I don't think Lamar is going to sign a Mahomes/Allen style super long term contract, so the risks of that type of attrition/decline are reduced.

Fully guaranteed or not, most QB contracts have more guarantees that get triggered with every year they stay on the roster, so the risk of being worse off than any other team without a fully guaranteed QB reduces with every year that passes.

Even if Lamar lost his speed as a runner, I believe his ability to make people miss in the pocket and in space as a scrambler is mostly in his head, rather than his legs, so a Cam style decline isn't that likely. A Lamar who lost his designed run ability would still have a Mahomes-like ability to buy time and pick up scramble yards - if not the same passing ability.

I just don't think the football case against giving Lamar a fully guaranteed deal is that strong.

 

[rmcjacket23]

You say the expectation is that good qbs play well till their 35. Most of them actually do, but with the new generation of "mobile" QBs, no more. I really want Lamar back, but i would say that I only want him for like 4 more years. If he's still playing well then, maybe give him a 2yr deal. I'm extremely wary of signing Lamar for longer than that.

Well, from a cap perspective, it pretty much needs to be at least a 4 year deal. A two year deal is basically the same as franchise tagging him, because you get basically no cap flexibility without signing him to another extension.

Even on a 3 year deal, if they sign him to that today, we'll be talking extension again in either 2024 or 2025, because you won't want him to be able to hit FA in 2026 unless he's terrible.

Like people mock the Kirk Cousins deal, but its actually fairly decent for both sides. Kirk keeps getting to get market adjustments every 2-3 years basically, as long as he doesn't suck balls, which he hasn't. And he's actually signing for a somewhat "reasonable" amount of $. Like if Kirk came to them asking for 3 years, $150M, fully guaranteed, Vikings and everybody else would tell him to fuck off.

But he did 3/84 back in 2018, then he did 2/66 in 2020, and he did another year for $35M last year. And I'll bet they'll be talking another 1-2 year extension here this offseason as well.

And funny thing is... if Lamar went to EDC and said "I won't do longer than a 3 year deal, fully gtd", I think Ravens would hate it, but they'd do it. I think they'd do 3/150, fully gtd. It's just shitty for the franchise, because the cap flexibility doesn't really exist, and its just perpetually doing extensions basically every year or two until one side says no more.

 

[Tank]

Cousins got a fully guaranteed deal with Minnesota when he hit the open market.

I don't think it's such a dumb decision because almost all good QBs earn their whole contract anyway, so it doesn't really hurt the Ravens unless he has a career ending injury. I think Bisciotti is making a stand because he doesn't want to set a precedent - not due to competitive reasons.

Kirk's contract is 1 year, $35 mil. fully guaranteed. Again, how is that relevant?

Nobody is going to structure a contract like Watson's. Again, it would be dumber than dumb. lol

YEAR		AGE	BASE SALARY	SIGNING	CAP HIT	DEAD CAP	YEARLY CASH
2022		27	$402,500	$8,993,000	$9,395,500	$229,367,500	$45,367,500($45,367,500)
2023		28	$46,000,000	$8,993,000	$54,993,000	$219,972,000	$46,000,000($91,367,500)
2024		29	$46,000,000	$8,993,000	$54,993,000	$164,979,000	$46,000,000($137,367,500)
2025		30	$46,000,000	$8,993,000	$54,993,000	$109,986,000	$46,000,000($183,367,500)
2026		31	$46,000,000	$8,993,000	$54,993,000	$54,993,000	$46,000,000($229,367,