View Poll Results: If you could be sure ONE of these was possible, which would you prefer?

Voters
70. You may not vote on this poll
  • Extend Anquan Boldin's contract out to three years at a slightly reduced cap hit this year.

    48 68.57%
  • Cut Boldin and sign Wes Welker to a three year deal at a slightly higher cap hit per year.

    0 0%
  • Cut Boldin and draft Tavon Austin to play in the slot.

    8 11.43%
  • Cut Boldin, elevate Tandon Doss, use the $ to re-sign Ellerbe or Reed or Williams

    6 8.57%
  • I don't like any of those options.

    8 11.43%
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 43 of 43
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    2,173
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Boldin | Which would you rather?



    Quote Originally Posted by jonboy79 View Post
    if he was a more normal size he would be going #1 overall in this poor draft.
    That's definitely true. If he was 6'' 190 he'd top 5 top 10 easily.




  2. #32

    Re: Boldin | Which would you rather?

    Quote Originally Posted by s.r.genovese View Post
    That's definitely true. If he was 6'' 190 he'd top 5 top 10 easily.
    If he were 6' 190 I don't think there would be any question who would go #1 overall... I think the question would be if KC would get enough value to trade out of the pick...




  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,405
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Boldin | Which would you rather?

    I won't argue the point that his size is the primary factor in limiting his draft stock. But I think it would be wrong to think he is everything you want in a receiver who just happens to be smallish. It's not like a team is going to get a guy who will produce like a #1 overall receiver who will be a steal in the later half of the first round.

    His size and skill in the open field shaped how he was used at WVU and it will narrow how he will be used in the NFL. He wasn't asked to do what a Calvin Johnson does, and he won't do what a Calvin Johnson can do in the NFL. He'll give a team a few explosive plays that will be the difference in winning some games, and he will be a nightmare to cover, which will make the other receiving options on the field that much better. But he won't be the kind of workhorse receiver who will rack up a ton of catches, or the sort of player a team will lean on in the red zone when they have to score or the kind of go-to guy on third down who you throw it up and expect he'll make a play. That's the kind of player who you do think about making the number one overall pick. Not many guys not named Calvin Johnson have that kind of total value.

    What I'm trying to say is that this isn't like an undersized linebacker who still can do everything you expect a linebacker to do. His size does limit what kind of role he has had, and will have. Which is not to say he isn't a tremendous talent. I'd be very happy to have him as a complimentary piece to go with Rice and Torrey Smith in a very dynamic scheme. Like Rice and Smith, who both were second round picks, he needs to be a piece of the puzzle.




  4. #34

    Re: Boldin | Which would you rather?

    For me extend Boldin. I chuckle when I read Raven fans talking about Boldins lack of speed. Because of his strong body and hands he's one of the few guys in the NFL that is open when he is covered if the ball is placed in the right area. Take a look at the Browns game from Thursday Night football. That was just incredible work by Boldin and Joe.




  5. #35
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    2,173
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Boldin | Which would you rather?

    Quote Originally Posted by Shas View Post
    I won't argue the point that his size is the primary factor in limiting his draft stock. But I think it would be wrong to think he is everything you want in a receiver who just happens to be smallish. It's not like a team is going to get a guy who will produce like a #1 overall receiver who will be a steal in the later half of the first round.

    His size and skill in the open field shaped how he was used at WVU and it will narrow how he will be used in the NFL. He wasn't asked to do what a Calvin Johnson does, and he won't do what a Calvin Johnson can do in the NFL. He'll give a team a few explosive plays that will be the difference in winning some games, and he will be a nightmare to cover, which will make the other receiving options on the field that much better. But he won't be the kind of workhorse receiver who will rack up a ton of catches, or the sort of player a team will lean on in the red zone when they have to score or the kind of go-to guy on third down who you throw it up and expect he'll make a play. That's the kind of player who you do think about making the number one overall pick. Not many guys not named Calvin Johnson have that kind of total value.

    What I'm trying to say is that this isn't like an undersized linebacker who still can do everything you expect a linebacker to do. His size does limit what kind of role he has had, and will have. Which is not to say he isn't a tremendous talent. I'd be very happy to have him as a complimentary piece to go with Rice and Torrey Smith in a very dynamic scheme. Like Rice and Smith, who both were second round picks, he needs to be a piece of the puzzle.
    While you make some good points, you can essentially say the same of DeSean Jackson at Cal; they made him the focal point of their offense in terms of screens, reverses, and of course kick returns.

    That didn't stop him from becoming a pretty complete receiver in his own right when he came to the NFL.

    Now you're right Austin will never be a Calvin Johnson but it doesn't mean he'll forever be relegated to a gadget receiver. Hell, one of the most productive receivers in the league (Welker) is about the same size as Austin. I wouldn't say his role is all that "narrrow." He can do almost everything a normal receiver can do save maybe go deep (though he went pretty deep on that dropped AFC Championship pass). But that isn't any different than a guy like say Boldin, who's skillset also precludes him from running 9 routes effectively.




  6. #36

    Re: Boldin | Which would you rather?

    There once was a little guy named Steve Smith down in Carolina that was a "pretty good" receiver. Albeit he was a 3rd rounder when taken, he came out of a junior college program and then went to a smaller division one school (Utah). Could Tavon Austin be as good a player as Smith or will he be more of a complimentary player like Harvin or McCluster?




  7. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by HKusp View Post
    There once was a little guy named Steve Smith down in Carolina that was a "pretty good" receiver. Albeit he was a 3rd rounder when taken, he came out of a junior college program and then went to a smaller division one school (Utah). Could Tavon Austin be as good a player as Smith or will he be more of a complimentary player like Harvin or McCluster?
    If appropriately schemed, Austin will be a better playmaker than Smith, but he won't be a better receiver.

    Inch-for-inch, Smith may be the best receiver since the merger. Austin is so damn gifted, I don't know that he'll ever feel like he needs to be the technician that Smith has become. Crappy statement to make, but if Austin does indeed become a technician like Smith... Good Lord.
    Last edited by BigPlayReceiver; 03-11-2013 at 07:38 AM.
    "On their way to the podium, the Ravens FO is going to collectively step over my dead body and select...Breshad Perriman." -- Me, the day before the Draft

    Settle down. John Harbaugh and Joe Flacco's Baltimore Ravens can beat any team, anywhere.

    Having fun talking football and tech stuff on Twitter @BigPlayReceiver




  8. #38
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Cockeysville, MD
    Posts
    2,660

    Re: Boldin | Which would you rather?

    What I've been hearing is the extension piece is in relation to how tight the cap maybe next year and they aren't looking at Boldin as a mainstay beyond 2013. I was listening to WNST this morning and they layed out the other players that will be getting a jump in pay that should still be here with most notably Flacco, Suggs, Webb, Ngata, Rice, and I think Yanda (not a cap expert at all so someone clarify these).

    At this point the Ravens are just looking at the big picture and not just being greedy or hateful. I want Boldin here and I thought that they would be able to adjust pay of other players that will be here for the long haul, but I guess that they are playing hardball at this time.

    I'm wondering if the Ravens just have some bigger plans in FA than we anticipated. Possibly a LT along with Ellerbe?




  9. #39
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Wilton, CT
    Posts
    16,024
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: Boldin | Which would you rather?

    Quote Originally Posted by Stealthbirds80 View Post
    What I've been hearing is the extension piece is in relation to how tight the cap maybe next year and they aren't looking at Boldin as a mainstay beyond 2013. I was listening to WNST this morning and they layed out the other players that will be getting a jump in pay that should still be here with most notably Flacco, Suggs, Webb, Ngata, Rice, and I think Yanda (not a cap expert at all so someone clarify these).

    At this point the Ravens are just looking at the big picture and not just being greedy or hateful. I want Boldin here and I thought that they would be able to adjust pay of other players that will be here for the long haul, but I guess that they are playing hardball at this time.

    I'm wondering if the Ravens just have some bigger plans in FA than we anticipated. Possibly a LT along with Ellerbe?
    Why weren't they looking big picture last season when they gave Birk a multi-year deal? If you extend Boldin for 3 years you would then re-evaluate after next season. Just like this deal he's probably not going to see the last year as it's set up. Now that only works if you feel that Boldin can still be productive for 2013 and 2014. Based on what we saw him do without Cam I'm convinced.
    He Who Dares.....Wins




  10. #40
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    "Merry old England"
    Posts
    9,307
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Boldin | Which would you rather?

    If the Ravens choose to keep Boldin and not cut anyone else, they are going to have to restructure someones contract unless they want to be completely out of FA. Can't do much with 4M, and they are only going to be able to keep one of their main FAs with that much.




  11. #41

    Re: Boldin | Which would you rather?

    Quote Originally Posted by The Excellector View Post
    On top of his quickness, Austin provides vertical speed from the slot position. If safeties cheat up on Torrey, Austin is capable of winning over the top.
    Tavon Austin rocked Dunbar football.
    Tavon Austin rocked fairly big time NCAA football @ WVU.
    Tavon Austin in the NFL ... ????? (Who knows)

    I don't think anyone can guarantee that Tavon makes even one of the many crucial jump ball catches Boldin delivered in the post season.

    If one is seriously thinking of cutting Boldin and acquiring his replacement before the 2013, let's at least make it a replacement w/ a demonstrated NFL ability to replace.

    Which of course also rules out Tandon Doss




  12. #42
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,405
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Boldin | Which would you rather?

    Quote Originally Posted by s.r.genovese View Post
    While you make some good points, you can essentially say the same of DeSean Jackson at Cal; they made him the focal point of their offense in terms of screens, reverses, and of course kick returns.
    But that wouldn't be saying the same thing that I was saying. You're making a different point. You're saying it's possible to find a way to use a talent like DeSean Jackson so that he can be a valuable part of an offense. And that's totally true of Jackson, and I think could be true of Austin, too.

    But the point I was making is that you have to find the right offense for a guy like Jackson or Austin. They really aren't a fit for the traditional big receiver passing offense. And so if you build your offense around that type of player, you have to be willing to sacrifice in the areas where that kind of player doesn't excel.

    The Eagles were at the bottom of the league in red zone scoring. They were in the bottom half on third down conversions. If you look at the top third-down conversion teams, you can see my point about traditional passing offenses with traditional downfield, go-to receiving threats...

    1 New England
    2 Atlanta
    3 Denver
    4 New Orleans
    5 Dallas
    6 Carolina
    7 Indianapolis
    8 Detroit
    9 Green Bay
    10 Pittsburgh
    11 NY Giants

    I don't think those teams, other than New England, and we'll get back to them, rely on a player like Jackson to run their offense through. The Ravens, by the way, aren't on this list, but the way they played in the playoffs once Cam was gone makes me think they are now that type of offense.


    Quote Originally Posted by s.r.genovese View Post
    That didn't stop him [Jackson] from becoming a pretty complete receiver in his own right when he came to the NFL.
    I wouldn't call Jackson a complete receiver. I'd call him one of the best of the niche receivers.

    Quote Originally Posted by s.r.genovese View Post
    Now you're right Austin will never be a Calvin Johnson but it doesn't mean he'll forever be relegated to a gadget receiver. Hell, one of the most productive receivers in the league (Welker) is about the same size as Austin. I wouldn't say his role is all that "narrrow." He can do almost everything a normal receiver can do save maybe go deep (though he went pretty deep on that dropped AFC Championship pass). But that isn't any different than a guy like say Boldin, who's skillset also precludes him from running 9 routes effectively.
    I don't like the word gadget, because it suggests that Jackson isn't all that talented, but rather he relies on trickery. That would not be my point. But I do think that Welker and Jackson both rely on fitting into a certain scheme to get the most out of them. The Eagles and Pats both run an offensive scheme that suits that type of player as the go-to guy, but I think there are limits to the number of teams that could take a player like this, like Austin, like Percy Harvin, and make him the featured receiver. Which brings me back to thinking that his draft stock is influenced by the number of teams who can value him as much as Calvin Johnson, or who have to view him as more of a complimentary luxury in their offense.

    Also, I disagree a bit that going deep is the only thing that separates Johnson and Jackson. I think Johnson is the type of receiver you can ask to go up and make a play on the ball regardless of how well he's covered. Johnson can beat you with his feet, but also beat you with his size and strength a and hands, which is what players like Jackson and Austin can't do.




  13. #43
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,405
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Boldin | Which would you rather?

    Quote Originally Posted by GOTA View Post
    Percy Harvin is exactly what teams a seeing with Austin. There are certain teams that look at a player like that and the wheels just start turning. The Seahawks for example have been trying to find offensive playmakers since Pete Carroll arrived. That's why they spent all that money on Sydney Rice. That's why they traded for Leon Washington and Marshawn Lynch. Now that Carroll has a playmaking QB he's going to try even harder to put that kind of guy on the offense.

    I see the Bucs, Panthers, Saints and Packers as other teams who are going to really think about this kid. If the 49ers and Titans didn't just draft 1st round WRs last year I'd throw them in there too. Austin definitely doesn't fit in everyones offense but as complimentary piece he's very intriguing.
    Your point sounds even smarter today now that Harvin has been traded to the Seahawks. They'll get much more out of him in Carroll's scheme.




Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Russell Street Report Website Design by D3Corp Ocean City Maryland