Results 1,849 to 1,860 of 3987
-
Re: New draft/FA/offseason thread
According the Skins site, he is a FA. Pollard and Suggs are good leaders, but Suggs is not a rah, rah guy. I'm just speaking on the defensive side of the ball. You could get Fletcher for slightly over the minimum. Plus, Ellerbe and McClain have been injury prone, like some experience back thier, instead of Bynes/McCllenan we saw what happened when they played.
-
-
Re: New draft/FA/offseason thread
Although Walsh's system of offense can compensate for lack of talent; however, defense is a different story. According to Walsh, talent on defense was essential and could not be compensated for. What did Walsh do in 1981? He acquired physical and talented players on defense.
-
01-31-2013, 02:53 PM #1852
Re: New draft/FA/offseason thread
BINGO.
I also don't think Dickson is better then Jack Squat as a backup, to answer a different post.
And to answer a third different post, I sure would like trading Dickson to Philly and then moving up for a REAL all around TE.
The bottom line, is that I don't think Dickson is ANY BETTER AT ALL then (insert average mid round TE), but costs TRIPLE.
-
01-31-2013, 02:57 PM #1853
-
Re: New draft/FA/offseason thread
No veteran free agent costs $600k. That's what I keep saying here.
Hoomanawanui was drafted in the same class as Dickson, so he isn't even a free agent. What's his value anyways? He offers nothing as a receiver. He's mainly just an extra OT who might catch 5-8 balls per year for you. We can draft a guy who does that. Williams from Alabama is a great example. We can bring in a unwanted veteran-minimum type player like Bajema for around $900k instead of paying Dickson $1.2-$1.3. Why would we do that though? $400k isn't going to make or break our cap. Yet, having no reliable pass-catching option behind Dickson could be highly problematic, particularly if we go with a rookie WR or Doss as our #3wide receiver. Dickson may not have a high value, but at $1.2 million in cap allocation for next year, it's still a moderate steal.
Even if we brought in two rookies to replace Bajema and Dickson, it would have minimal impact on our salary cap. Replacing Dickson on the rule of 51 roster only saves $750-800k.
-
Re: New draft/FA/offseason thread
This makes no sense.
First off, you are forgetting that, if we don't have Dickson on the roster, we still have to replace him with a player who is going to making roughly $500k, so the savings is only really $800k.
Secondly, you admitted that Dickson looked like a Pro Bowler as early as last season. Now you want to trade him or cut him? I'm not sure I get that. Using that logic, we should have cut/traded Ellerbe as well, which wouldn't have worked out so well for us. This guy caught 50 balls last year. He'll be 26 next season. It would be a kneejerk reaction by the Ravens to entertain getting rid of him before his rookie contract is up. History has shown time and again that the Ravens don't make kneejerk reactions.
-
01-31-2013, 03:32 PM #1856Legendary RSR Poster
- Join Date
- Aug 2008
- Location
- Pasadena
- Posts
- 14,123
- Blog Entries
- 4
-
Re: New draft/FA/offseason thread
Again, a rookie and a vet minimum saves us $400k. Would you rather have Dickson/rookie with $400k more on our cap or Bajema/rookie and save $400k. Veteran minimum TEs are guys like Bajema or Tony Stewart....guys that are on their last legs in the NFL usually.
Also, your "young emerging LB" (born 1985) is actually older than your "declining TE" (born 1987). The way you worded it, you would think Ellerbe was 24, 25 and Dickson was 30. Also, as I referenced in my last post, I think it's a bit curious that you are so down on Dickson for underperforming for a year and a half while forgetting about the two seasons where Ellerbe disappointed to the point he rarely saw the field.
-
Re: New draft/FA/offseason thread
Maybe it was Tony Curtis....the guy that was around for a few weeks back in 2010.
-
01-31-2013, 03:54 PM #1859
Re: New draft/FA/offseason thread
If New England were to cut him, his minimum base salary next year would be $745k. This year, after having been cut by St Louis, NE could have paid him as little as $630k.
Hoomanawanui offers far more as a receiver then Dickson does as a blocker. Which is, nto much at all. But, Pitta is a receiving only TE, so what we NEED is an inline blocking TE that isn't a complete liability as a pass catcher, which is precisely what Hoomanawanui is. Is he going to outrun anyone? NO, is he going to make spectacular catches? NO, is he going to drop easily catchable balls, NO.
I'd rather have Williams as well, a bit more of a target,and probably a similar blocker once he has settled in.
$750-800k could easily be the difference between retaining Ellerbe or losing him to the highest bidder. I'd call THAT significant.
Hoomanawanui was basically brought up as a cheap, last minute patch that is "possible". I can easily see him not making the final cut of the Pats roster.
-
Re: New draft/FA/offseason thread
I disagree.
Green Bay, Denver, Seattle, and Atlanta are all picking right around there and all four of them could make a play for Eiffert and/or Ertz.
Secondly, that's not even factoring in teams like Chicago, Arizona, or San Diego who could try and trade back up in front of the Ravens/Niners to target one of those TE's.Disclaimer: The content posted is of my own opinion.
Bookmarks