Derek Wolfe

**guymf4** · 03-28-2020, 06:46 PM

Is anyone else wondering if we used the physical as an excuse to pass on Brockers because we knew what we price we could get Wolfe?

Corvus Invictus Eternus

**Desert Raven** · 03-28-2020, 06:59 PM

Originally Posted by NjRavensFan

There aren’t really any WRs left but man... I liked the Brockers deal more than many here, but without that projected money on the books we could’ve topped New Orleans’s offer for Emmanuel Sanders and still signed Wolfe. Sanders would’ve been so perfect here.

Yeah, Sanders would have been the type of receiver who could have really fit in well. He’d be another 30+ year old guy, but he’s not a washed up Crabtree type. He’ll probably have a nice season with Brees opposite Michael Thomas down there.

**BustOfPallas** · 03-28-2020, 07:13 PM

Originally Posted by guymf4

Is anyone else wondering if we used the physical as an excuse to pass on Brockers because we knew what we price we could get Wolfe?

Corvus Invictus Eternus

I thought about this but I think if you deal with people in bad faith like that you can't have success long term in this league. I can't imagine any disciple of Ozzie going all Sith like that.

**sflegend89** · 03-28-2020, 07:39 PM

Originally Posted by guymf4

Is anyone else wondering if we used the physical as an excuse to pass on Brockers because we knew what we price we could get Wolfe?

Corvus Invictus Eternus

I mean they very clearly bounced Ryan Grant's physical out of buyers remorse. The guy had done nothing in his career to warrant that contract and that was when I started to feel like Ozzie lost his fucking marbles.

The pandemic makes this Brockers fiasco harder to figure out, it really is entirely possible that his physical had some red flags and EDC tried to cut some meat off the deal for it and Brockers/Agent were extremely put off by it and said "No thanks, I'll stay in LA if you're going to try to pull money off the table over a damn sore ankle"

**Desert Raven** · 03-28-2020, 07:42 PM

They wouldn’t have traded away Wormley if they didn’t fully intend on dealing with Brockers in good faith I don’t believe. I don’t think this is like Ryan Grant at all. Crabtree getting cut by Oakland after they signed Jordy Nelson is what changed during that whole fiasco.

**21xxxv** · 03-28-2020, 07:42 PM

Originally Posted by chartman

Another thing to note on this deal before we discuss his effectiveness with Von Miller and Chubb taking some heat off Wolfe. Remember how effective Shaq Barrett was in Tampa the year after leaving Denver. Obviously Wolfe and Barrett are different players, but, something to think about.

Chubb didn't play a full (4) games last year for the broncos. He was injured.

**NjRavensFan** · 03-28-2020, 08:24 PM

Originally Posted by guymf4

Is anyone else wondering if we used the physical as an excuse to pass on Brockers because we knew what we price we could get Wolfe?

Corvus Invictus Eternus

No. Stop.

**NjRavensFan** · 03-28-2020, 08:29 PM

Originally Posted by sflegend89

I mean they very clearly bounced Ryan Grant's physical out of buyers remorse. The guy had done nothing in his career to warrant that contract and that was when I started to feel like Ozzie lost his fucking marbles.

Originally Posted by Desert Raven

They wouldn’t have traded away Wormley if they didn’t fully intend on dealing with Brockers in good faith I don’t believe. I don’t think this is like Ryan Grant at all. Crabtree getting cut by Oakland after they signed Jordy Nelson is what changed during that whole fiasco.

Don’t mean to single yall out because obviously this is a commonly held theory here, but the insinuation is that Grant didn’t actually have an ankle injury, and it’s just a coincidence that he didn’t move as well after that year as he had up to that point in his life? He was never the most explosive athlete but he's clearly lost a step from where he was in Washington. And he didn’t have a step to give.

Like I get the appeal of the conspiracy here, but if the Ravens say they didn’t sign a guy because they were worried about potential long term effects of an ankle injury, and that guy has showed the long term effects of an ankle injury, I feel like Occam’s razor can take it from there.

**Desert Raven** · 03-28-2020, 08:44 PM

Originally Posted by NjRavensFan

Don’t mean to single yall out because obviously this is a commonly held theory here, but the insinuation is that Grant didn’t actually have an ankle injury, and it’s just a coincidence that he didn’t move as well after that year as he had up to that point in his life? He was never the most explosive athlete but he's clearly lost a step from where he was in Washington. And he didn’t have a step to give.

Like I get the appeal of the conspiracy here, but if the Ravens say they didn’t sign a guy because they were worried about potential long term effects of an ankle injury, and that guy has showed the long term effects of an ankle injury, I feel like Occam’s razor can take it from there.

That particular year there was a big run on receivers getting big money right out of the gates, and Oz couldn’t sign any of them. I’ll always think that Grant was a panic move because the Ravens had absolutely nothing at receiver except for Mike Wallace, and for some reason they were about to overpay for Ryan Grant. I’m not sure who exactly they were bidding against that they thought he was worth 4 years 20 whatever million when he had shown very little in Washington to inspire some kind of confidence that he was about to take the next step. Then all of a sudden Crabtree gets cut, he’s signed in Baltimore almost immediately, and the Ryan Grant deal was off.

Yes they were right because Grant hasn’t done a thing since, but I just have a hard time believing had his ankle not been an issue that he would have been given that contract unless they couldn’t have gotten Crabtree. I’m not saying that is absolutely right, but the entire thing was very fishy. Then after the deal was off Grant went wherever, the Colts I think, on a one year deal not even close to what the Ravens offered him.

**NjRavensFan** · 03-28-2020, 09:12 PM

We backed off the deal before Crabtree even came for a visit. It was hardly a done deal.

When a deal gets voided because they claim they worry a guy won’t be physically right moving forward, and then that turns out to be the case, it seems pretty reasonable to just accept that the team was telling the truth.

The idea that Ozzie Newsome decided to make a classless, bad-faith move because he got buyers remorse in a matter of two days, and then coincidentally the excuse he made up to justify doing so proved true, just doesn’t seem realistic to me.

**alien bird** · 03-28-2020, 09:36 PM

Originally Posted by chartman

Zrebiec reported the deal is actually 1 yr 3 mil with 3 mil in incentives so only 3 mil cap hit. I will take that since Wormley was almost that before he was traded.

Wormley's cap hit for 2020 was going to be just a touch over $1M, but his Proven Performance Escalator jumped that up to about $2.1M. So, if Wolfe's contract is really $3M + incentives, and the Ravens traded Wormley and a 7th for a 5th, the question is this:

Is (Wolfe + 5th round pick) > (Wormley + 7th round pick + $1M additional cap space)?

That is what the Ravens gained (left side of the equation) and what the Ravens lost (right side of the equation).
Which would you rather have?