Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567
Results 73 to 76 of 76
  1. #73

    Re: If we lose Dennis Pitta it is going to hurt, and it looks like that could be coming



    Quote Originally Posted by BcRaven View Post
    I don't know that much about Chandler, but stats don't always tell the whole story. Pitta is like Joe's security blanket, and is looked for when we need that 3rd down pass to move the chains. He, along with Boldin, were Flacco's go-to guys. Ed Dickson was drafted one round before Pitta, but can the Ravens count on his hands when they need an important 1st down? I'm not advocating over-paying Pitta, but comparing numbers do not give a complete picture of our specific situation... Bc
    It isn't just that stats don't tell the whole story in terms of Chandler, it is that Chandler is going to get paid. I still have no clue why he entered the discussion as a price-point comparison since he is a FA as well and is going to get paid as well.

    This is another issue where I am hearing some totally hypocritical, Jekyll and Hyde arguments.... "Boldin is too expensive, anyone will do" to "Joe has no weapons, we need Pitta healthy" to "give Pitta multiple millions like he has earned? No way, let's settle for an unproven rookie or cheaper gamble like Fred Davis."

    As for paying extra for "chemistry," I agree it logically makes some sense, but only if we are talking about a very small amount. And it also works both ways, where Pitta should want to take a bit less to keep the chemistry and not have to uproot his life and make new friends, etc. So maybe the "chemistry" factor ends up being a wash, where we just refrain from expecting a hometown discount.

    We'll see what Pitta gets paid and where, but I don't think it will be a very low 1-year "prove it" deal. Someone will offer him a multi-year deal for at least $3.5M-4M per, imo. Probably $4M per. Of course, depending on the structure and guarantee, (small guarantee, back-loaded final years), that may not mean much.




  2. #74

    Re: If we lose Dennis Pitta it is going to hurt, and it looks like that could be coming

    Next man up is the saying. Been like that for several seasons now, since there are no guarantees in football.




  3. #75
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,745
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: If we lose Dennis Pitta it is going to hurt, and it looks like that could be coming

    Quote Originally Posted by Haloti92 View Post
    This is another issue where I am hearing some totally hypocritical, Jekyll and Hyde arguments.... "Boldin is too expensive, anyone will do" to "Joe has no weapons, we need Pitta healthy" to "give Pitta multiple millions like he has earned? No way, let's settle for an unproven rookie or cheaper gamble like Fred Davis."

    As for paying extra for "chemistry," I agree it logically makes some sense, but only if we are talking about a very small amount. And it also works both ways, where Pitta should want to take a bit less to keep the chemistry and not have to uproot his life and make new friends, etc. So maybe the "chemistry" factor ends up being a wash, where we just refrain from expecting a hometown discount.

    We'll see what Pitta gets paid and where, but I don't think it will be a very low 1-year "prove it" deal. Someone will offer him a multi-year deal for at least $3.5M-4M per, imo. Probably $4M per. Of course, depending on the structure and guarantee, (small guarantee, back-loaded final years), that may not mean much.
    Excellent points, H92. (1) After Boldin's outstanding run through the playoffs, I don't blame him for being angry that Ozzie tried to cut his salary by 1/3. "anyone will do" is ridiculous.
    (2) The "chemistry" factor does work not only for Flacco, but for Pitta as well. Pitta will be 29, so he has to think about creating that kind of relationship with another QB, and it can take a few years.
    (3) Going against Pitta is the ill-timed injury and age. However, he does have leverage as the Ravens saw in 2013, when they had to rely on an unproductive Ed Dickson, an old Dallas Clark, and (add your own adjective here) Billy Bajema. So, I don't see him accepting a 1 year deal, but do not see him being offered a long term contract either. If it's somewhere in-between, I hope it's with the Ravens... Bc




  4. #76

    Re: If we lose Dennis Pitta it is going to hurt, and it looks like that could be coming

    Quote Originally Posted by Haloti92 View Post
    It isn't just that stats don't tell the whole story in terms of Chandler, it is that Chandler is going to get paid. I still have no clue why he entered the discussion as a price-point comparison since he is a FA as well and is going to get paid as well.

    This is another issue where I am hearing some totally hypocritical, Jekyll and Hyde arguments.... "Boldin is too expensive, anyone will do" to "Joe has no weapons, we need Pitta healthy" to "give Pitta multiple millions like he has earned? No way, let's settle for an unproven rookie or cheaper gamble like Fred Davis."

    As for paying extra for "chemistry," I agree it logically makes some sense, but only if we are talking about a very small amount. And it also works both ways, where Pitta should want to take a bit less to keep the chemistry and not have to uproot his life and make new friends, etc. So maybe the "chemistry" factor ends up being a wash, where we just refrain from expecting a hometown discount.

    We'll see what Pitta gets paid and where, but I don't think it will be a very low 1-year "prove it" deal. Someone will offer him a multi-year deal for at least $3.5M-4M per, imo. Probably $4M per. Of course, depending on the structure and guarantee, (small guarantee, back-loaded final years), that may not mean much.
    It is possible that some peoples minds have been changed since watching how they were unable to replace Boldin.

    Boldin and Flacco showed great chemistry in the playoffs but they hadn't shown a consistent connection similar to Pitta before then. Many assumed that the Ravens would probably draft/sign one receiver to try to replace Q. Which they didn't.

    Also these become stacked losses. When you just let Q go then it's easier to say that we can replace him. Well we didn't replace him. Now were gonna replace Pitta? It's time to start adding pieces not replacing them.




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