View Poll Results: Who will you blame if the offense still struggles?

Voters
33. You may not vote on this poll
  • Jim Caldwell

    1 3.03%
  • Joe Flacco

    17 51.52%
  • John Harbaugh

    1 3.03%
  • Ozzie Newsome

    10 30.30%
  • The O-Line

    4 12.12%
Page 10 of 12 FirstFirst ... 6789101112 LastLast
Results 136 to 150 of 173
  1. #136
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Clayton,NC
    Posts
    7,742

    Re: What If It Wasn't Cam?



    Quote Originally Posted by Raveninwoodlawn View Post
    FWIW, Boldin said an extension was never offered to him.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
    I wonder about anything he said/says about this. The reason being, one thing he said while it was going on was that he signed a contract and that's what he attends to play out (and how he'd retire etc. but that's something separate) and he would not go back to the team while still under that contract and ask for more money.

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but is that exactly why he wanted out of Arizona?
    We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid. - Benjamin Franklin




  2. #137

    Re: What If It Wasn't Cam?

    Quote Originally Posted by Raveninwoodlawn View Post
    FWIW, Boldin said an extension was never offered to him.
    HD
    OK, I guess I missed that.

    An extension would have made more sense to me than a straight $2M paycut, but I guess for some reason, they didn't want to extent him or Jacoby.
    “Talk's cheap - let’s go play.” - #19, Johnny Unitas

    Follow me on Twitter @ravenssalarycap




  3. #138

    Re: What If It Wasn't Cam?

    Quote Originally Posted by RavensRule21215 View Post
    It's been shown time and time again (hell...even Ray Rice himself stated it clearly)...the Ravens sign who they want to sign, and don't sign who they don't want to sign (within reason). They didn't want to sign Boldin (at least not for $6M), and they didn't want to replace him with a proven NFL caliber WR. That's the bottom line, and we'll see how it all plays out. I certainly hope that things work out, and in no way am I looking forward to some big "I TOLD YOU SO" if it doesn't. (What seems to be missing here is the fact that the Ravens DID express interest in signing Boldin for $4M. So the debate is NOT over $6M and where would that money have come from, as some would insist, but over the $2M difference.)
    I feel nobody is better at putting personal feelings aside then Ozzie is. The Ravens established that Boldin's value was at $4mil and Ozzie wasn't going to budge from that figure. It was the right call to let him go. The Steelers got themselves into trouble by restructuring contracts to hold onto veterans longer than they should have. The Ravens will not make that mistake. I'm glad they have the front office they do to make those tough calls.




  4. #139
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    2,173
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: What If It Wasn't Cam?

    Quote Originally Posted by B-more Ravor View Post
    OK, I guess I missed that.

    An extension would have made more sense to me than a straight $2M paycut, but I guess for some reason, they didn't want to extent him or Jacoby.
    I think they anticipate a Derrick Mason-like falloff in production very soon for Boldin. Sure, it's nice to pay less for him at ages 33, 34, and 35 than they would have otherwise through an extension but if he can't play, there's no point in paying him anything.

    His style of play is very conducive to that kind of falloff; he can't really create separation through route running anymore so one day his vertical leap and eye-hand coordination is going to drop slightly due to age/wear and tear, and then its all over for him.




  5. #140

    Re: What If It Wasn't Cam?

    Quote Originally Posted by B-more Ravor View Post
    OK, I guess I missed that.

    An extension would have made more sense to me than a straight $2M paycut, but I guess for some reason, they didn't want to extent him or Jacoby.
    The Ravens have always maintained it's better to get rid of a player a year too early than a year too late. I don't think it ever crossed their mind to extend Boldin.




  6. #141
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    The Land of Verdite
    Posts
    13,332
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: What If It Wasn't Cam?

    I think the front office felt that they could get sufficient production from the slot, for a more reasonable price, if they replaced Boldin with a younger player who could do a better job of getting separation. Nobody is going to make a catch in traffic better than Boldin, but far too many of his catches HAD to be made in traffic, because he couldn't separate.
    "When questioned, the Elders explained that they were in search of magical powers. However, they're actually searching for the whereabouts of a certain ring. This ring is a legendary treasure that long ago was known to exist"




  7. #142

    Re: What If It Wasn't Cam?

    Quote Originally Posted by B-more Ravor View Post
    1. Yes, a post-June 1 release would save more than the $1.4M (which was the $1.8M from McClain, less whatever it would have cost to replace him - at least, $405K), but at the time of the Boldin decision, the post-June 1 release wouldn't have helped, only the above amounts would have mattered.

    2. Keeping Boldin at the $6M most certainly would have IMO either prevented them from signing someone or caused them to release someone or caused them to need to restructure a contract.
    1. Gotcha. For some reason I thought only the extra proration was in play until June-1st, not the whole transaction.

    2. I still think it could have been done. Dumervil's cap number is only $2.5M ($2M above replacement). Canty was signed before Boldin's physical (while his full salary was still being applied). Huff is an extra 850k above replacement. So we are talking about finding $3M at the time, at least $1M of which we had. Releasing McClain and Leach, no Spears, no Reed gets us there, as far as I can see, or no? Or am I making a mistake due to the timing of Boldin's physical (the week where we had traded Boldin but could not use his cap space)?

    And, btw, what is our current cap situation, including Leach? Approximately, if we do not know the details of the Leach deal.




  8. #143

    Re: What If It Wasn't Cam?

    Quote Originally Posted by The Excellector View Post
    I think the front office felt that they could get sufficient production from the slot, for a more reasonable price, if they replaced Boldin with a younger player who could do a better job of getting separation. Nobody is going to make a catch in traffic better than Boldin, but far too many of his catches HAD to be made in traffic, because he couldn't separate.
    That's been my call since the end of the season, despite the heavy Boldin sentiment. However, I did expect the Ravens to make a serious effort to bring in a proven player, and not rely on David Reed or Tandon Doss.




  9. #144
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Roland Park
    Posts
    2,800

    Re: What If It Wasn't Cam?

    Quote Originally Posted by RavensRule21215 View Post
    It's been shown time and time again (hell...even Ray Rice himself stated it clearly)...the Ravens sign who they want to sign, and don't sign who they don't want to sign (within reason). They didn't want to sign Boldin (at least not for $6M), and they didn't want to replace him with a proven NFL caliber WR.
    We don't know what goes on behind closed doors, but the way it looks from the outside is that they put a number on what each player is worth, and then let the market decide. It's not necessarily "we want this player, we don't want that player."

    Does anyone doubt that they would have kept Anquan for the league minimum? Meanwhile it's also clear they didn't want him at his $7MM price tag. So there is a number somewhere in between those two where their cutoff was.

    In some cases (like Kruger,) everybody and their mother knows that the number the player is going to command on the open market is going to be higher than what the Ravens will offer them, so it seems as though they have no desire to keep that player.

    In other cases, it's a lot closer. Their number for Leach was $2MM. If Miami had offered 3, Vonta would be in teal, and it would have nothing to do with whether the Ravens wanted him or not. It's just about how much they are willing to pay to have him.

    They approach the draft the same way -- they stay true to their board. Only in the draft they are working with a limited resource pool of draft picks instead of dollars. But the philosophy is the same: right player, right price.
    "Leave. Your. Mark."




  10. #145
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Pasadena
    Posts
    10,125
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: What If It Wasn't Cam?

    Quote Originally Posted by HotInHere View Post
    We don't know what goes on behind closed doors, but the way it looks from the outside is that they put a number on what each player is worth, and then let the market decide. It's not necessarily "we want this player, we don't want that player."

    Does anyone doubt that they would have kept Anquan for the league minimum? Meanwhile it's also clear they didn't want him at his $7MM price tag. So there is a number somewhere in between those two where their cutoff was.

    In some cases (like Kruger,) everybody and their mother knows that the number the player is going to command on the open market is going to be higher than what the Ravens will offer them, so it seems as though they have no desire to keep that player.

    In other cases, it's a lot closer. Their number for Leach was $2MM. If Miami had offered 3, Vonta would be in teal, and it would have nothing to do with whether the Ravens wanted him or not. It's just about how much they are willing to pay to have him.

    They approach the draft the same way -- they stay true to their board. Only in the draft they are working with a limited resource pool of draft picks instead of dollars. But the philosophy is the same: right player, right price.
    Ozzie plays the NFL version of Moneyball because he has to with the salary cap. Ideally, yea you'd like to keep every good player that you have, but you can't in a league with a salary cap.




  11. #146

    Re: What If It Wasn't Cam?

    Quote Originally Posted by The Excellector View Post
    I think the front office felt that they could get sufficient production from the slot, for a more reasonable price, if they replaced Boldin with a younger player who could do a better job of getting separation. Nobody is going to make a catch in traffic better than Boldin, but far too many of his catches HAD to be made in traffic, because he couldn't separate.
    I agree with both points made in this post.

    1. The Ravens wanted to replace 80% of Boldin's production for 20% of Boldin's cost. They figured Smith, Pitta and Rice could make up the lost 20% of production. Losing Pitta makes this more difficult, but it doesn't make their original decision wrong.

    2. Giving Boldin too much credit for "making tough catches in traffic" is like giving an outfielder in baseball too much credit for making sliding/difficult catches because they cannot read the ball off of the bat as well as other outfielders and get a horrible jump.




  12. #147

    Re: What If It Wasn't Cam?

    Quote Originally Posted by Money227 View Post
    I agree with both points made in this post.

    1. The Ravens wanted to replace 80% of Boldin's production for 20% of Boldin's cost. They figured Smith, Pitta and Rice could make up the lost 20% of production. Losing Pitta makes this more difficult, but it doesn't make their original decision wrong.

    2. Giving Boldin too much credit for "making tough catches in traffic" is like giving an outfielder in baseball too much credit for making sliding/difficult catches because they cannot read the ball off of the bat as well as other outfielders and get a horrible jump.
    I don't disagree with your view of the Ravens thinking...nobody at all disputesthe fact that the team didnt want Q at his cap number and that the team expected Pitta and others to do a good job of replacing him...I still dont agree with it and for like the 100th time, i, nor anybody else suddenly felt that way when Oitta got hurt.

    Lol at the second point. Every Legit WR is going to have to make tough catches. And who knows how open he'd be with a OC who actually has a clue on how to use him. Contested catches or not, the guy was absolutely dominating in the highest pressure games of the year.

    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
    Last edited by Raveninwoodlawn; 08-01-2013 at 05:10 PM.
    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.




  13. #148

    Re: What If It Wasn't Cam?

    Quote Originally Posted by Raveninwoodlawn View Post
    I don't disagree with your view of the Ravens thinking...nobody at all disputesthe fact that the team didnt want Q at his cap number and that the team expected Pitta and others to do a good job of replacing him...I still dont agree with it and for like the 100th time, i, nor anybody else suddenly felt that way when Oitta got hurt.

    Lol at the second point. Every Legit WR is going to have to make tough catches. And who knows how open he'd be with a OC who actually has a clue on how to use him. Contested catches or not, the guy was absolutely dominating in the highest pressure games of the year.

    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
    I certainly don't mean to minimize Boldin's contribution to the Ravens. He's a fan favorite and had a fantastic playoff run. I just feel like a lot of people are approaching it like we lost a top 10 receiver. Those days are long gone for him.




  14. #149

    Re: What If It Wasn't Cam?

    Quote Originally Posted by Haloti92 View Post
    1. Gotcha. For some reason I thought only the extra proration was in play until June-1st, not the whole transaction.

    2. I still think it could have been done. Dumervil's cap number is only $2.5M ($2M above replacement). Canty was signed before Boldin's physical (while his full salary was still being applied). Huff is an extra 850k above replacement. So we are talking about finding $3M at the time, at least $1M of which we had. Releasing McClain and Leach, no Spears, no Reed gets us there, as far as I can see, or no? Or am I making a mistake due to the timing of Boldin's physical (the week where we had traded Boldin but could not use his cap space)?

    And, btw, what is our current cap situation, including Leach? Approximately, if we do not know the details of the Leach deal.
    Still haven't seen any final numbers on Leach. Without him factored in, I've got them presently at a little under $5.4M under the Cap. But, that's the Rule of 51 number.

    When projecting a roster of 53 and who we can presently expect to be on IR/PUP (Pitta, Jensen, Kapron-Lewis) - and before factoring Leach in - I've got them with only around $2.5M under. Obviously, the make up of the final 53 can be argued and there are always surprises, but barring a major surprise, it's likely to be somewhere between $2-3M. Again, that's without Leach and without any more injuries.

    That's not a lot, especially when considering that McClain very well may end up staying on PUP, meaning that another player would be added to the roster at at least $405K. And, unfortunately, there will likely be other injuries.

    In fact, now looking at it closer, I would expect that they will have to restructure Yanda, Suggs or Ngata at some point, in order to create some additional cushion (or release McClain with a failed physical designation).

    So, we can pick and choose who we might have liked to see released instead of Boldin or who shouldn't have been signed, but again, he was still the best way to get $6M (or a restructure and a release of Leach, as I said above). Otherwise, any combination of players not signed or released has to be replaced by several bodies and that offsets any of the Cap savings.

    Heck, at this point, even releasing Boldin and getting $6M in savings might very well not be enough.
    “Talk's cheap - let’s go play.” - #19, Johnny Unitas

    Follow me on Twitter @ravenssalarycap




  15. #150

    Re: What If It Wasn't Cam?

    Quote Originally Posted by B-more Ravor View Post
    Still haven't seen any final numbers on Leach. Without him factored in, I've got them presently at a little under $5.4M under the Cap. But, that's the Rule of 51 number.

    When projecting a roster of 53 and who we can presently expect to be on IR/PUP (Pitta, Jensen, Kapron-Lewis) - and before factoring Leach in - I've got them with only around $2.5M under. Obviously, the make up of the final 53 can be argued and there are always surprises, but barring a major surprise, it's likely to be somewhere between $2-3M. Again, that's without Leach and without any more injuries.

    That's not a lot, especially when considering that McClain very well may end up staying on PUP, meaning that another player would be added to the roster at at least $405K. And, unfortunately, there will likely be other injuries.

    Good info. Thanks, as always.


    Quote Originally Posted by B-more Ravor View Post
    So, we can pick and choose who we might have liked to see released instead of Boldin or who shouldn't have been signed, but again, he was still the best way to get $6M (or a restructure and a release of Leach, as I said above). Otherwise, any combination of players not signed or released has to be replaced by several bodies and that offsets any of the Cap savings.
    That is all I was doing, was picking and choosing differently. But I also was trying to recall what would have been needed in terms of timing as well. As you pointed out, some of the issue was timing (not getting post-June 1st help for cuts in March, and needing the space in March, not just by now, in order to sign coveted FAs).




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