Page 13 of 16 FirstFirst ... 3910111213141516 LastLast
Results 145 to 156 of 190
  1. #145

    Re: Flacco Deal Update...



    No way Flacco has earned a Rivers/Eli/BenR type of contract. That said, you won't get him to agree to a deal anywhere near a Kolb or Cassel deal, even if they were egregiously overpaid. Plus QB is the one position where a failure to get an average or slightly above-average player at minimum, guarantees failure (barring a time-machine and an all-time great defense). So you hope to sign him in between these two levels, but would be forced to sign him at the higher level if push came to shove.

    From that point, if Flacco keeps improving, you signed a fair to eventually-cheap deal; if Flacco fails to develop and plateaus at around where he is, you overpaid at the position fairly significantly.

    If Flacco insists on a deal that is bigger than Rivers/Eli/Ben then I think you make him wait until 2013 and take your chances.




  2. #146

    Re: Flacco Deal Update...

    Quote Originally Posted by Haloti92 View Post
    No way Flacco has earned a Rivers/Eli/BenR type of contract. That said, you won't get him to agree to a deal anywhere near a Kolb or Cassel deal, even if they were egregiously overpaid. Plus QB is the one position where a failure to get an average or slightly above-average player at minimum, guarantees failure (barring a time-machine and an all-time great defense). So you hope to sign him in between these two levels, but would be forced to sign him at the higher level if push came to shove.

    From that point, if Flacco keeps improving, you signed a fair to eventually-cheap deal; if Flacco fails to develop and plateaus at around where he is, you overpaid at the position fairly significantly.

    If Flacco insists on a deal that is bigger than Rivers/Eli/Ben then I think you make him wait until 2013 and take your chances.
    Reasonable thoughts.




  3. #147

    Re: Flacco Deal Update...

    Y
    Quote Originally Posted by jonboy79 View Post
    About what?

    U think we are getting flacco for substantially less then 6/100? Good luck with all of that.
    No way he gets 6/100 from the Ravens when Manning got around 5/96. I don't need good luck. I can see if joe carried this offense but the offense is ran thru RR
    WE DON'T NEED YOUR RESPECT BUT WE WILL BEAT UP ON YOU AND TAKE YOUR SOUL!!!!!!!




  4. #148

    Re: Flacco Deal Update...

    Noway hes worth rivers money? I realize eli and ben won SBs but at the same point in their respective careers theyre all arguably similar players even statistically. Wanting more isnt necessarily below market price with inflation and considering his age. I believe, may be wrong, but eli has the latest deal and it was signed in 2008? If he was asking to be paid brady or brees money id agree youre better off waiting him out but those deals those guys signed were young qbs you believe will take the next step and can lead your team which i believe he falls under.
    -JAB




  5. #149
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Cockeysville, MD
    Posts
    3,876

    Re: Flacco Deal Update...

    Quote Originally Posted by The Excellector View Post
    I can understand where RedMike is coming from. What's going here, in my opinion, is that the defense has long been establishing, while the offense is trying to establish itself. So, the coaching staff and front office have chosen the strategy of leaning on the established side of the ball, while they methodically develop the offense. It's not easy to develop any particular side of the ball. It took the Ravens four years to develop the defense into the type of unit that set the foundation for its current reputation.
    I agree. But if you think back to how they developed the defense, they drafted Lewis, Boulware, Sharper, McCallister and Starks. Then they added key veteran free agents. Quality players who still had siomething left in the tank and were itching for a ring (or at least some semblance of success). They haven't quite done that on the offensive side of the ball. They have a solid nucleus, but the ballsy free agent acquisitions have not taken place yet, IMO.




  6. #150

    Re: Flacco Deal Update...

    Quote Originally Posted by Haloti92 View Post
    No way Flacco has earned a Rivers/Eli/BenR type of contract. That said, you won't get him to agree to a deal anywhere near a Kolb or Cassel deal, even if they were egregiously overpaid. Plus QB is the one position where a failure to get an average or slightly above-average player at minimum, guarantees failure (barring a time-machine and an all-time great defense). So you hope to sign him in between these two levels, but would be forced to sign him at the higher level if push came to shove.

    From that point, if Flacco keeps improving, you signed a fair to eventually-cheap deal; if Flacco fails to develop and plateaus at around where he is, you overpaid at the position fairly significantly.

    If Flacco insists on a deal that is bigger than Rivers/Eli/Ben then I think you make him wait until 2013 and take your chances.
    Really they're all around the same all 100+M contracts which meanbs jacksquat, GUARNTEE'D money is where it at:
    Rivers 6 years 39Guarntee
    Ben 8 years 36 G
    Vick 6 years 37 G
    Eli 7 35G
    Peyton is under the 100M club but his guarntee'd money is about the ame with 5 years 35G.

    Personally I think Flacco is in the land of 7 years 100M(with all the incentives) and about 32G. Incentive laden more than the others, considering he hasn't had the level of success(even at this point in his career) as the others besides Rivers. But personally I don't think Rivers is very elite either. Give Joe a pair of 6'6' and fast damn receivers(who can also catch), along with Gates and a decent running game and I bet he puts up far better stats. They've handed Joe a washedup short Mason, a possesion guy in Boldin, a beatup end of career Heap(thanks to Boller) and scrubs elsewhere, until T.Smith. And a unimaginative bum of a OC who shouldn't even be coaching HS ball let alone the NFL.




  7. #151

    Re: Flacco Deal Update...

    add 5-10 mil to whatever matt ryan ends up getting...




  8. #152
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Frederick, MD
    Posts
    28,127
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Flacco Deal Update...

    http://blogs.baltimoreravens.com/201...out-to-change/

    PFT stated that no progress has been made, but Aaron Wilson has been informed that the Ravens and Joe Linta have met twice since the combine to discuss Flacco's extension.
    Milk is for babies. When you grow up, you have to drink beer.

    -Arnold Schwarzenegger


    My RSR Blog:
    http://russellstreetreport.com/author/paullukoskie/

    Check out Fatherhood Rules - a blog site dedicated to sports, food, music, movies, and politics.
    http://fatherhoodrules.com




  9. #153

    Re: Flacco Deal Update...

    Quote Originally Posted by ballhawk View Post
    Flacco had a great season last year...what the hell are you guys talking about? And he did it with a cast of rookie and 2nd year receivers (who probably led the league in dropped passes). He is going to get $100 million...and he is worth it.
    I dont know what you watched, but Flacco had a pretty shitty season last year, even to his standards which already arent very high.

    Flacco has always had the benefit of a ridiculously good defense to bail him out.

    And that absolutely should reflect in his contract.




  10. #154

    Re: Flacco Deal Update...

    Quote Originally Posted by landspeed View Post
    I dont know what you watched, but Flacco had a pretty shitty season last year, even to his standards which already arent very high.

    Flacco has always had the benefit of a ridiculously good defense to bail him out.

    And that absolutely should reflect in his contract.
    He didn't have a great year, but he did look good in the playoffs. As far as his off-year is concerned, its hard to tell how much of that is attributed to his terrible offensive coordinator. When the line isn't blocking and everyone is running 9 routes, its hard to be consistent.




  11. #155

    Re: Flacco Deal Update...

    Quote Originally Posted by bmorecareful View Post
    Are you seriously willing to put so much faith in QB rating that you'll decide whether to re-sign Flacco based on 10 points of variance from year to year? I'm sorry, but for as logical and intelligent as you sound, the core of your argument is very dubious.

    Prognosticate over 10 points worth of QB rating as much as you want, but here's a simpler explanation: 1) a given player's performance doesn't exist in a vacuum, 2) because of that fact, a certain degree of variance one way or the other is COMPLETELY unavoidable, 3) you can't be sure that variance is due entirely or mostly to the player himself.

    Case in point: as I said earlier, 5 (or possibly 6, depending on how you want to define it) of Ray Rice's rushing TDs in 2011 came as a result of a long pass play downed within the 10 yard line or a DPI in the end zone. If those 5 TDs are passing TDs, Flacco's QB rating goes up almost 5 points.

    Does that "really" mean he was 5 points better? I think we can all agree that is not necessarily the case.

    You can play with the numbers however you want, but to pin all your hopes on QB rating is, in a word, hopeless. I don't care what Flacco's QB rating is in 2012 if he's helping his team win, particularly when the chips are down and no one else seems to be stepping up. He did exactly that often enough to convince me last year.

    And I'm not an anti-stats guy. I'm actually pretty big on stats in a lot of respects. But you'll never see a Cam Cameron passer post gaudy stats under ANY circumstances. Drew Brees has been the most consistently excellent passer of the last 5 years, and even he only broke a 90 QB rating once under Cam, in 2004. His average QB rating in San Diego was an 84.9, slightly lower than Joe's career average, and he was a worse passer on the whole in San Diego. Do you think that's a coincidence? I don't, and I think it further illustrates why pinning all your hopes on 1 stat is a mistake.
    First, QB rating isn't '1 stat,' it's four stats rolled into one number, intended to be a measure of overall efficiency of a QB's play. You can debate its validity if you like, but it exists and is constantly referenced because it is one of the better indicators of how well a team is doing offensively. Not just the QB, I grant you--it also says something for how well the receivers are getting the ball, how far they're making it when they catch a pass, etc. About the only thing it measures that is mostly on the QB is interceptions.

    Second, it's like this. Here's two sets of data for you--first, the ratings for all the QBs of the teams that won 12 or more games last year, and then the records of the teams that had QBs which finished the year +/- 5 points of Flacco on the QB rating scale, and who played all 16 games (if you want, throw out Jackson--he only played 15). I posted this earlier, but not in this format, so maybe it'll be clearer this way:

    Rodgers-122.5
    Brees- 110.6
    Brady- 105.6
    Smith- 90.7
    Roethlisberger- 90.1
    Flacco- 80.9

    Newton- 84.9/6 wins
    Hasselbeck- 82.4/9 wins
    Flacco- 80.9/12 wins
    Dalton- 80.4/9 wins
    Jackson- 79.2/7 wins
    Fitzpatrick- 79.1/6 wins
    Sanchez- 78.2/8 wins


    So what does it tell you? Obviously, it's not a large enough sample size to say anything definitively, but it does show two things--that Flacco's QB rating was by far the worst of the teams that were the 'elite' of the league last year, and that QBs who got ratings similar to Flacco tended to win far fewer games.

    So... upon seeing this, it raises a few questions for me, and makes one thing seem likely. The latter first--getting high quality (statistically) play out of whoever is at the QB position is less important to the Ravens than it is to other teams (or, at least it was to the 2011 Ravens--maybe 2012 will be different). If you get 12 wins with an 80.9 rating, you're apparently making up for that deficiency in other areas (defense, running... probably not special teams!). The questions it raises are these--how many wins would that have been at a 90 rating? How many at a 70 rating? If that's the spread you're working with, what's that actually worth paying for?

    Is this in any way definitive? Am I saying I'm right? Not at all. But I think it's a logical, cogent viewpoint, and I think that I want to see another year of this offense before I spend any big money on any part of it, if I'm the Ravens FO. You may be right--Cam may be the whole problem. The Ravens should have gotten rid of him just to see what would happen, IMO. But until you've got a better idea as to exactly where the problem is... I wouldn't throw a lot of cash around.
    Last edited by redmike34; 04-09-2012 at 08:23 PM. Reason: format of stats was effed




  12. #156

    Re: Flacco Deal Update...

    If you go to the playoffs with a quarterback for all four years of his career, you keep him.

    Redmike, you can draw other conclusions from your same stats. How about this one: Joe Flacco's QB rating was aberrantly low in the 2011 season despite his success as an NFL quarterback.
    Festivus

    His definitions and arguments were so clear in his own mind that he was unable to understand how any reasonable person could honestly differ with him.




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