Whats next on the Ravens "to do" list ?

**psuasskicker** · 03-09-2010, 05:02 PM

Originally Posted by Dont Know

No they wouldn't have because with the highest tender they would be bidding only against themselves.

That's sort of the point, though. If they think they're bidding against themselves by doing that, then they don't tender him for that, which means his market value clearly is nowhere close to a high first round pick. But if they don't think they'd be bidding against themselves because others would bid on him, the only reason they DON'T tender him for a 1st and 3rd is if they want action on him.

Not getting any action is telling in its own right.

- C -

**Brtnder81** · 03-09-2010, 05:12 PM

Originally Posted by jonboy79

Re-sign as many of Ngata, Flacco, Gaither, Rice as possible...

add Yanda and McClain to that list

**Dont Know** · 03-09-2010, 05:18 PM

This is where we disagree.

You seem to think the 1st round tender is an indicament of the Ravens lack of interest in the guy, whereas I think it's done to let the market set a value on his services rather than the agent.

Only time will tell who is right.

**Carey** · 03-09-2010, 05:31 PM

The 1st round tender means i like you but im not committed, i'll listen to offers but i wont give you money i dont feel your worth. I personally think we can get more then a first from a team desperate for a tackle, i wouldnt trade him for just a first if we are just gonna take another tackle but if we are gonna get multiple picks then im with it.

**jonboy79** · 03-09-2010, 05:46 PM

Originally Posted by Dont Know

This is where we disagree.

You seem to think the 1st round tender is an indicament of the Ravens lack of interest in the guy, whereas I think it's done to let the market set a value on his services rather than the agent.

Only time will tell who is right.

I agree. It seems to me that Rosenhous is trying to knock the cover off the ball. Forcing a team to "only" give a first round pick should generate an offer. We still have the advantage of only having to match the money.

Maybe he's not drawing offers because teams know we would match a contract they would offer. Maybe they called his agent and know he's getting a fair offer from Bmore.

Who knows? Oz does, but none of us do.

**psuasskicker** · 03-09-2010, 05:47 PM

Originally Posted by Dont Know

You seem to think the 1st round tender is an indicament of the Ravens lack of interest in the guy, whereas I think it's done to let the market set a value on his services rather than the agent.

No. I think it's more likely the latter. Where we disagree is that I don't think we'll ever know which it really is.

The point I'm making is that the market is setting his value right now. The Ravens likely think the same way I do:
- Don't want to lose Gaither.
- Are okay with losing Gaither if they get fair value for him.

I know what my idea of "fair value" is and while the Ravens' idea might be different, the reality is that if they weren't okay with losing him for some version of a first rounder, they wouldn't have only tendered him with a first rounder. They aren't going to tender a guy with only a 1st round pick if they intend to match any offer given to him...if they intended to do so, they'd have tendered him with a 1st and 3rd to attempt to demotivate teams from making an offer to Gaither, to minimize the money they have to pay him for this season.

More likely they're putting it out there and seeing if there's any interest, and then if there's interest they have an idea of his value, and make a judgment whether or not his value to the team is worth what they're offered in return. If it is, they don't accept a trade or match the offer. If it isn't, they let him walk and take the pick/s in return. That's almost unquestionably what they're doing. The big question is, what's their threshold for where they keep him vs. where they let him walk? We'll never know the answer to that specifically, but eventually we'll know onto which side it fell.

- C -

**jonboy79** · 03-09-2010, 05:50 PM

Originally Posted by Brtnder81

add Yanda and McClain to that list

And see, that is where the road forks. To sign the guys I mentioned, I think we may have to sacrifice the players you list, and perhaps Grubbs too.

I personally, would make my sacrifices along the interior line, places like TE, FB, LBER, S etc....
My rationale lies in that these are positions that mid round picks fill to a sufficient level generally within a year or two. Undrafted players fill the positions from time to time... Bargains abound here and overpaying is not a good idea. Great players emerge yearly from the depths of mediocrity.

Ray Rice wouldn't get another one from me either... at least not a big one. Maybe a hometown discount end the career deal, but then again, I'm for giving him a 5-6 year deal now.

**jonboy79** · 03-09-2010, 05:59 PM

Originally Posted by psuasskicker

No. I think it's more likely the latter. Where we disagree is that I don't think we'll ever know which it really is.

The point I'm making is that the market is setting his value right now. The Ravens likely think the same way I do:
- Don't want to lose Gaither.
- Are okay with losing Gaither if they get fair value for him.

I know what my idea of "fair value" is and while the Ravens' idea might be different, the reality is that if they weren't okay with losing him for some version of a first rounder, they wouldn't have only tendered him with a first rounder. They aren't going to tender a guy with only a 1st round pick if they intend to match any offer given to him...if they intended to do so, they'd have tendered him with a 1st and 3rd to attempt to demotivate teams from making an offer to Gaither, to minimize the money they have to pay him for this season.

More likely they're putting it out there and seeing if there's any interest, and then if there's interest they have an idea of his value, and make a judgment whether or not his value to the team is worth what they're offered in return. If it is, they don't accept a trade or match the offer. If it isn't, they let him walk and take the pick/s in return. That's almost unquestionably what they're doing. The big question is, what's their threshold for where they keep him vs. where they let him walk? We'll never know the answer to that specifically, but eventually we'll know onto which side it fell.

- C -

We fundamentally agree here, we just have a minor disagreement of value.

A first and a 3rd tender has proved to be the equal to the Franchise Tag... SD did it to several people... not one of them ever even gets their name mentioned as available or desireable... IMO they wasted $3m or so by tendering too high.
I think the first round tender, on a player of this level, is intended to draw contract offers.
I highly doubt the Ravens would talk TRADE with any teams. I don't think they are interested in anything less then a first round pick as compensation.
I also think they would match basically any reasonable deal.
I also think they would be pretty PO'd if the Colts somehow slipped a poison pill in an otherwise manageable deal. I think that is their biggest concern.

**Rxdoxx** · 03-09-2010, 06:05 PM

And it is a negotiating advantage, forcing another team to show their hand before they know our cards.

On the if we are willing to let him go for the right price (to us), then we already have the fish on the hook, just have to give them a call along the lines of - we are going to match the offer, however we might be willing to trade him to you but we are not letting you have him at that salary for just a first.
And now all kinds of possibilities are opened up for us. Gaither's market value has been set salary wise, we already know if we are comfortable matching it, would rather not match it, or won't match. I doubt if we get a team with a really high #1 because they can get a LT in the draft, it is the bottom of the 1st where we have to squeeze hard if we have any interest in not keeping him.

**jonboy79** · 03-09-2010, 06:19 PM

Bottom line... if we lose Gaither, we need to get another guy that can play LT, and a guy that can start at RT. That may be one more person(1st round pick, or perhaps a trade up from either of ours) or it could be two(A Vet AND a later pick).

**ace2die** · 03-09-2010, 07:20 PM

I am not Ozzie. But if I was GM I would some how force the 49ers to sign Jared Gaither and surrender pick 13. With Pick thirteen take Rolando McClain(A real baby ray from a leadership stand point), then with pick 25 take Kyle Wilson (CB) and use our second and other pick in the 5th we got from Boldin deal to ensure Demaryus Thomas(i can spell that yet(see Ramses Barden) then in the sixth add DL help.

McClain
Wilson
Thomas

Like I said I am not Ozzie but Im sure he would smile at that press conference with his Alabama MLB sitting next to him.

**jonboy79** · 03-09-2010, 07:37 PM

Originally Posted by ace2die

I am not Ozzie. But if I was GM I would some how force the 49ers to sign Jared Gaither and surrender pick 13. With Pick thirteen take Rolando McClain(A real baby ray from a leadership stand point), then with pick 25 take Kyle Wilson (CB) and use our second and other pick in the 5th we got from Boldin deal to ensure Demaryus Thomas(i can spell that yet(see Ramses Barden) then in the sixth add DL help.

McClain
Wilson
Thomas

Like I said I am not Ozzie but Im sure he would smile at that press conference with his Alabama MLB sitting next to him.

And you would have the human Turnstyle Oniel Cousins as both our starting RT and backup LT. ok.. glad you aren't ozzie.