Resigning AD or Not?

**Raven Nurse** · 01-16-2007, 10:50 PM

Is it me or does it seem that giving AD the "Tag" seems like a bit much for him. I know he is a good player, just as Sharper/ Weaver/ Kemo were, however, why would we take up the cap space for him. Another idea may be a Tag and trade type deal. This way we can assure he does not end up in a Browns or Sqeelers jersey next year. Plus, with him getting national interest now we may be able to milk a #3 pick or something similar.

**PurpleRulz** · 01-16-2007, 11:00 PM

Originally Posted by Raven Nurse

Is it me or does it seem that giving AD the "Tag" seems like a bit much for him. I know he is a good player, just as Sharper/ Weaver/ Kemo were, however, why would we take up the cap space for him. Another idea may be a Tag and trade type deal. This way we can assure he does not end up in a Browns or Sqeelers jersey next year. Plus, with him getting national interest now we may be able to milk a #3 pick or something similar.

If we could get a first round pick for AD, I'd be all for that idea. I wouldn't think twice.

**festivus** · 01-16-2007, 11:03 PM

If we tag him & trade him, somebody still has to pay the salary. It might be a lot to ask of another team to pay him top 5 LB money *and* give us a 1st round draft pick.

Heaven knows it would be nice if we could swing it.

**LBoogy** · 01-16-2007, 11:05 PM

AD should never be put in the same class as Kemo or Weaver, or Sharper for that matter. Weaver never lived up to much, and Kemo was BARELY adequate. Ngata was better than Kemo as a rookie. AD has been an absolute force and could be the best OLB in the game. He's undoubtedly the most versatile defensive player in the NFL.

AD is the best player on the defense and we could use him for atleast another year. Signing him long-term would eat up too much money at this point; he's also going to be 30 years old. Tagging him is a GOOD thing IMO.

He most likely will not be tagged and traded, and I doubt we could get a 1st or 2nd rounder for him even if we DID do that.

I'm all for freeing up cap space, but tagging AD is a good idea for the short term AND the long term. Keeping him around will also allow the Ravens to concentrate on RB/CB/OL in the draft.

**PurpleRulz** · 01-16-2007, 11:13 PM

Originally Posted by LBoogy

AD should never be put in the same class as Kemo or Weaver, or Sharper for that matter. Weaver never lived up to much, and Kemo was BARELY adequate. Ngata was better than Kemo as a rookie. AD has been an absolute force and could be the best OLB in the game. He's undoubtedly the most versatile defensive player in the NFL.

AD is the best player on the defense and we could use him for atleast another year. Signing him long-term would eat up too much money at this point; he's also going to be 30 years old. Tagging him is a GOOD thing IMO.

He most likely will not be tagged and traded, and I doubt we could get a 1st or 2nd rounder for him even if we DID do that.

I'm all for freeing up cap space, but tagging AD is a good idea for the short term AND the long term. Keeping him around will also allow the Ravens to concentrate on RB/CB/OL in the draft.

But you know there will be some teams dumb enough to trade us a first rounder (Dallas? Redskins?) for AD and not worry about the money or cap space. If such a situation presents itself, you wouldn't jump on that? I would and collect the extra 1st rounder, package the 2 first rounders, and move up to get Adrian Peterson.

I know "pipe dream," but you never know especially with organizations like the Redskins, Raiders, and Cowboys that do not value draft picks as we do.

**Ravens0587** · 01-16-2007, 11:18 PM

If we tag him & trade him, somebody still has to pay the salary. It might be a lot to ask of another team to pay him top 5 LB money *and* give us a 1st round draft pick.

You do realize if we tag and trade him that team doesn't have to pay him top 5 lb money right?

They could and most likely would renogotiate a long term contract

**Merlin** · 01-17-2007, 06:42 AM

The tag is a great short-term financial move for the Ravens -- they get another year of production in their immediate window -- and the value of AD goes down significantly as he is 31 next year

It could have bad long-term repercussions for the organization -- they have a good reputation for loyalty and doing the right thing -- and this will really piss off AD which will affect team morale next year.

Not sure its worth it the downside risk. I'm concerned that the team is overvaluing certain players -- i would rather take a chance with continuing to bring in young talent -- e.g. continue injecting o-line with youth, new running back, -- take a few hits this year and not overpay older talent and compensate for it by really opening up the offense play calling next year (I know its a pipe dream)

We really have a chance to avoid cap hell with all the good rookies we are drafting . .

**skaybaltimore** · 01-17-2007, 07:27 AM

Originally Posted by Merlin

and compensate for it by really opening up the offense play calling next year (I know its a pipe dream)

It's really worse than a pipe dream -- because Billick is simply not capable of running any other kind of offense besides Billickball, especially in big game situations, and the sooner we as fans understand and accept that, the better for our aspirations and expectations. Billick has become the heir-apparent to Marty Schottenheimer, and any other belief is just setting ourselves up for another disappointment.

The only way I see us succeeding under Billick next year is to supercharge our running game, because that's the only thing he seems to be comfortable with and focused on. (not to mention that fact that McNair's arm is not what it once was; he's going to be our starting QB; and we need to face facts in that regard as well.) McNair should be able to "Dilfer" us -- along with Rex Ryan's super strong D -- into another post season -- hopefully, further than we were able to get this year.

Given all of the above, morale buster or not, I think tagging -- and keeping -- AD is the way to go. Players understand that the "loyalty" question has to be balanced with the business end of pro football, and along with that goes the additionally valid reality that just going anywhere else for the money is NOT necessarily going to translate to success for AD. Unless he can get into a wide open D like Rex runs, he will NOT be as effective. So HE'S got some choosing to do as well, along lines that have to factor in non-fiscal considerations.

GO RAVENS!!!

**Gabrosin** · 01-17-2007, 07:44 AM

While I hate the thought of tagging AD, because it would be a terrible way to treat him as he gets his big chance for a huge contract. But I love the thought of a tag and trade. If we could get a second-round pick out of a bad team, or a first out of a good team, then it would be worth seeing him go. And that would be one pick more than we'll have if we just let him walk.

If we can make the pre-draft cap space to tag him with the intent to trade, and we're certain we can't get our own deal in place with him, then we should do it. He may not make as much money as he otherwise would in a totally open market, but he could get close with any team willing to offer compensation for him.

I want him back, but it would be a shame to let him walk for nothing.

**festivus** · 01-17-2007, 08:12 AM

Tagging AD is not a terrible way to treat him. It's giving him a huge raise with the opportunity to have a huge payday at the end of this coming year.

It's not what he wants but it's not a bad thing, either.

Sometimes the franchise tag does seem cruel. But in this case, when you are talking about a huge raise, I really don't think it's a bad thing for AD or the Ravens.

**PurpleRulz** · 01-17-2007, 08:35 AM

Well, Bruce just said on Fox morning news that we will tag AD "with the chance at exclusive rights at negotiating a long term deal with AD." Bruce also said we would be "aggressive at getting a long term deal."

We would not be thinking of tagging AD if we did not think we were able to afford AD with a long term deal. That would not give us a bad rep. What would be bad is to just tag him and let him play with that tag year, and then let him go when his value is lesser.

Of course, expect AD to holdout if a deal is not in place by training camp, but this is a good sign that either AD will be signed here to a long term deal or tagged and traded (to a team outside of the division). This is a smart move.

**RavensNTerps** · 01-17-2007, 09:38 AM

why would anyone want to trade AD?

Do they watch our games?

Honestly, our defense is only as good as it is because of him. It would be a terrible, terrible idea to get rid of him.

The guy that is still good, but falling and we can afford to dump his huge salary isn't AD...it is Ray Lewis. Like it or not.

Times are changing.

Think about it. In 2000 would you have traded Ray Lewis to keep, say, Jamie Sharper? No. Because at teh time Ray was the single most important piece to our defense.

Now it's the same thing. AD is much much more important than anyone else. The D runs around him.