What If It Wasn't Cam?

**Raveninwoodlawn** · 08-01-2013, 11:03 AM

Originally Posted by B-more Ravor

With all due respect, IMO, they could not have done what they have done - even had they not re-signed Leach and had cut McClain - without reducing Boldin's Cap number or making some other move (ie not signing someone they did, releasing someone else or restructuring a deal of some other player).

Prior to re-signing Leach, but factoring in injuries to Pitta and Jensen, I would have expected them to have around $2.5-3M in space going into the season. If they had released McClain, that would only make roughly a $1.4M net difference, so that would have them at $3.9-4.4M under, pending further injuries.

That still wouldn't cover Boldin at $6M, without other moves or changes to what they did do.

Also, FWIW, I do believe that if Boldin had accepted their restructure request, that they would have released Leach at that time. Since he didn't, they felt they could hold onto Leach for longer to see how their other additions played out in terms of Cap space.

I understood that and that's why I also suggested Jacoby's cap number.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

**Haloti92** · 08-01-2013, 11:07 AM

Originally Posted by B-more Ravor

Yes, correct. When the season starts, all players on the 53, PUP, IR, PS will count against the Cap. Injuries will hurt the Cap space and they'll need to carry excess into the season to protect against that (or restructure someone down the road if it gets too tight).

How much does a post-June 1st release of McClain free up? $2.5M? I am not seeing how you are getting to $1.4M.

And I think he was focusing on Doom and Huff (and Canty), not necessarily lesser moves like Marcus Spears or Daryl Smith (or re-signing David Reed)

I don't see how Boldin agreeing to a $2M paycut or being kept at full salary would have prevented/precluded us from signing Dumervil, Canty or Huff. Not sure if you are disagreeing.

**RavensRule21215** · 08-01-2013, 11:21 AM

Originally Posted by shana

I just don't think guys like that are the answer (really Moss?). The reason the the younger WRs are such unknown is because every year some veteran WR is brought in to take reps from them. I just really think you should be making this argument in a year. I would much rather the younger guys go out and completely suck than not knowing what they are capable of and because we brought in yet another veteran. If they fail they fail and we know that Ozzie cannot draft WRs. Just let the year play out before we pine over Boldin.

Again...for the final time...I'm not pining over Boldin. I'm stating that choosing to seek to replace him with unknown players already on the roster is a mistake. You want to wait/waste a year finding out what's behind door number 2? Fine. I'd rather bolster up that hole with proven NFL players, rather than just roll the dice and hope for the best.

**Haloti92** · 08-01-2013, 11:27 AM

Right now we have the following LBs on the team:

Suggs
McClain
Dumervil
Upshaw
Smith
Brown
Simon
Adkins
McClellan
Bynes
Carr
Hamilton

(Ignoring longshots Copeland, Bryant and Williams)

We also are supposedly moving McPhee to OLB as well as Bryan Hall to ILB

I don't see, with this massive depth, how a Daryl Smith signing or a Jameel McClain retention (especially at his cap number) is as crucial as trying to keep the offense as close to the playoff level performance we had last year.

**B-more Ravor** · 08-01-2013, 11:28 AM

Originally Posted by Haloti92

How much does a post-June 1st release of McClain free up? $2.5M? I am not seeing how you are getting to $1.4M.

And I think he was focusing on Doom and Huff (and Canty), not necessarily lesser moves like Marcus Spears or Daryl Smith (or re-signing David Reed)

I don't see how Boldin agreeing to a $2M paycut or being kept at full salary would have prevented/precluded us from signing Dumervil, Canty or Huff. Not sure if you are disagreeing.

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.

**Raveninwoodlawn** · 08-01-2013, 11:30 AM

Originally Posted by B-more Ravor

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.

Jacoby is the obvious candidate.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

**B-more Ravor** · 08-01-2013, 11:31 AM

Originally Posted by Raveninwoodlawn

I understood that and that's why I also suggested Jacoby's cap number.

Jacoby at $3M might do it, but it might not.

Whether we like it or not, Boldin was the best place to find the most money ($6M) in one single move.

IMO, had he agreed to reduce by $2M, they would have released Leach (saving $3M) and that would have been close enough. At that time, I believe it was one or the other.

**Haloti92** · 08-01-2013, 11:39 AM

Originally Posted by B-more Ravor

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. I obviously do not know the details of the post-June 1st release rules. We could not have let McClain go in March with a post-June 1st designation like we did with Pollard?

2. Yes, everyone agrees it would have caused us to release someone else or even signed one or two less people. The issue is who those people are. If not Dumervil, Canty or Huff, I would consider it a clear win (to keep Boldin). And if it meant no McClain, Leach, Spears, Smith, and even D. Reed, then so be it, imo. Obviously others disagree.

**RavensRule21215** · 08-01-2013, 11:42 AM

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.)

**B-more Ravor** · 08-01-2013, 12:17 PM

Originally Posted by Haloti92

1. I obviously do not know the details of the post-June 1st release rules. We could not have let McClain go in March with a post-June 1st designation like we did with Pollard?

Yes, they could have - they are allowed 2 such moves - but they don't get the actual cap relief until after June 1. Until then, the player still counts fully, as if he's still on the team. Pollard, for example, was taking up $3.25M against the roster from the time he was released until June 2nd. At that point, the Cap savings was realized and his Cap charge was reduced to $750K (with $1.4M counting next year).

For McClain, he would have still counted $4.2M against the Cap til 6/2, when it would have dropped to $1.2M (with $1.2M counting next year).

So, releasing him back in March would have not provided enough immediate Cap space to cover for retaining Boldin and using the post-June 1 designation would not have helped at all at that time. It could have been piece of the puzzle, perhaps, but at that time only $1.4M worth ($1.8M savings less $405K in replacement costs).

2. Yes, everyone agrees it would have caused us to release someone else or even signed one or two less people. The issue is who those people are. If not Dumervil, Canty or Huff, I would consider it a clear win (to keep Boldin). And if it meant no McClain, Leach, Spears, Smith, and even D. Reed, then so be it, imo. Obviously others disagree.

Spears and DReed aren't counting enough to make a difference, when you consider the difference between their low costs and the cost to replace them.

Smith is also relatively cheap and likely wouldn't have been signed if McClain had recovered as expected.

So, yes, IMO - barring some other release or a structure - it likely would have caused them to not sign someone else more important.

It may have caused them to not pursue Dumervil - who they could not have anticipated falling into their laps as he did - or, in the alternative, caused them to reassess their plan and make another move they weren't expecting to make when that opportunity presented itself and was too good to pass up.

**Raveninwoodlawn** · 08-01-2013, 12:35 PM

Originally Posted by B-more Ravor

Jacoby at $3M might do it, but it might not.

Whether we like it or not, Boldin was the best place to find the most money ($6M) in one single move.

IMO, had he agreed to reduce by $2M, they would have released Leach (saving $3M) and that would have been close enough. At that time, I believe it was one or the other.

Why wouldn't it?

Jacoby and Leach clear $6 million. I'd let go of both, no questions asked.

If not, there is always the prospect of extending Jones and even Boldin for a year or 2 to lower at a small cost to lower their cap numbers.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

**HotInHere** · 08-01-2013, 01:14 PM

Originally Posted by Raveninwoodlawn

Jacoby and Leach clear $6 million. I'd let go of both, no questions asked.

Seems like a lot of people who wanted to keep Anquan were willing to do it at the expense of Jacoby, with their argument being what a monster Anquan was in the post-season. But Jacoby made three ENORMOUS plays in the post-season. If he doesn't make any one of those three, we most likely do not hoist the Lombardi. He was 1a with Joe Flacco for Super Bowl MVP.

So my serious question to people who feel that way is: why the difference?