Random Ravens Thoughts: New Forum Edition

[DreamKid]

1 hour ago, BaltimoreTerp said:

EDC is only 49 and just getting started, assuming he keeps up his performance I would guess he's looking at keeping this job for another 10-15 years. 

And this is a role he's wanted to occupy since childhood, his dream job. Young and talented working a job he loves. He's not going anywhere for a long time.

[Ray Reed]

 

[DontTazeMeBro]

19 minutes ago, Ray Reed said:

 

That’s really interesting. My mind went straight to Fluker or Phillips. Never considered the possibility of both starting. I like it.

[SalvadorsDeli]

Interesting also that Harbaugh said that about Bozeman in the context of saying he was the only guaranteed starter on the interior line. You'd have to think Fluker is pretty close to being a lock but clearly not set in stone. 

[drd23]

2 hours ago, DontTazeMeBro said:

That’s really interesting. My mind went straight to Fluker or Phillips. Never considered the possibility of both starting. I like it.

He's been talking up the possibility of Bozeman starting at C a fair bit (for him at least) this off-season.

I guess its going to come down to how Phillips does in pre-season compared to Mekari (and/or Skura if he makes it back in time). Like BTerp I think it's basically a lock that Fluker starts at RG

[sp6488]

6 hours ago, BaltimoreTerp said:

Think we're a ways off of that. DeCosta I think became de-facto GM-in-waiting in 2012 when he turned down the Bears job, so it was a while in the making, but at that point Ozzie had already been in the job for 15+ years and was 56 years old so it made sense to think about a succession plan when there was someone as highly regarded as EDC waiting in the wings. EDC is only 49 and just getting started, assuming he keeps up his performance I would guess he's looking at keeping this job for another 10-15 years. 

Yep. Also several other guys left to take GM/FO roles elsewhere over the years (Kokinos, Savage, etc.)

[Danand]

How do you guys feel about giving Stanley a contract that exceeds the one Tunsil got?

And how many "top contracts" are we actually able to dish out. In my opinion, Stanley, Orland Brown, Lamar and Andrews are key components on offense and should get extended while Humphrey is the sole "top tier" player on our defense who are in for a big contract.

But can we actually pay those 5 top money, or do we have to let 1 or 2 of them go? In that case, is it worth paying Stanley 23-24 mill. a year compared to maybe extending Orlando Brown for less and let Stanley walk after we franchise tagget him? Or is Andrews/Brown someone we try to extend after next season to a little less dollars in hope they accept it while getting an early payday?

Both Stanley and Brown and Humphrey are players I see as potential 3rd contract options. Stanley has had issues with minor injuries, while Brown and Humphrey as had availability as a strong suit for them.

Brown won't decline due to lack of athleticism as he doesn't rely on that anyway, and Humphrey might transition into a great safety if he at some point get slower due to age. I still believe he might be our best free safety option already. I think he has Charles Woodson type of career potential with us.

[M.10.E]

21 minutes ago, Danand said:

How do you guys feel about giving Stanley a contract that exceeds the one Tunsil got?

May be against the grain here, but I'd rather tag Stanley after this year than give him a 23M/yr contract. I think he's really good, however I think the help he (our OL) gets from our offensive system cannot be understated. Idk how the cap voodoos is going to work, but I imagine at least 1 of those 5 will be gone (obvi Lamar isn't even an option).

Edited June 1, 2020 by M.10.E

[sp6488]

31 minutes ago, Danand said:

How do you guys feel about giving Stanley a contract that exceeds the one Tunsil got?

And how many "top contracts" are we actually able to dish out. In my opinion, Stanley, Orland Brown, Lamar and Andrews are key components on offense and should get extended while Humphrey is the sole "top tier" player on our defense who are in for a big contract.

But can we actually pay those 5 top money, or do we have to let 1 or 2 of them go? In that case, is it worth paying Stanley 23-24 mill. a year compared to maybe extending Orlando Brown for less and let Stanley walk after we franchise tagget him? Or is Andrews/Brown someone we try to extend after next season to a little less dollars in hope they accept it while getting an early payday?

Both Stanley and Brown and Humphrey are players I see as potential 3rd contract options. Stanley has had issues with minor injuries, while Brown and Humphrey as had availability as a strong suit for them.

Brown won't decline due to lack of athleticism as he doesn't rely on that anyway, and Humphrey might transition into a great safety if he at some point get slower due to age. I still believe he might be our best free safety option already. I think he has Charles Woodson type of career potential with us.

I'm hopeful that we don't have to "top" Stanley's in terms of AAV. Can still make him the "highest-paid" LT by having it be longer, thus bigger total value, and significantly more guaranteed (SB for 6-years vs. 3).

[coordinator0]

8 hours ago, M.10.E said:

May be against the grain here, but I'd rather tag Stanley after this year than give him a 23M/yr contract. I think he's really good, however I think the help he (our OL) gets from our offensive system cannot be understated. Idk how the cap voodoos is going to work, but I imagine at least 1 of those 5 will be gone (obvi Lamar isn't even an option).

Stanley has been good for the Ravens regardless of system though. Last year wasn't a revelation. The dude has been a stud since he's stepped onto the field. His drawback is the few times he's been dinged up and missed games. That would be my only reservation about a big deal.

Between new deals for Stanley and Brown I think the easy decision is Stanley. Right tackles aren't that hard to find. For the draft whether you get the pure right tackle types of those that have to switch from college left to pro right there's always options. It's much, much harder to find that stud left tackle. Especially if Baltimore will be picking from the back end the next few years. Both sides get paid in free agency now so that's not a huge deciding factor. 

Jackson is getting his money. I think Humphrey is too. Those are practically set in stone from my perspective. Andrews is an interesting one. His durability is going to be a big factor. That one is going to have to play itself out until the actual time comes for a new deal, I don't think we can get a good feel until then.

[berlin calling]

QB > LT > CB > RT > TE

i love all of the aforementioned already for where they are at in their individual career with the Ravens but you've got to bring in positional value at some point.
i'd say its very obvious the current 60% salary cap split on defense is going to be turned around on offense within the next 2, max. 3 years.

[sp6488]

RT may have higher positional value than TE, but you pay for that in the contract via dollars. I think for our team/offense scheme in particular, Andrews may be the more important signing long-term, dollar-for-dollar. If the team can lock up Marlon before his walk year, then I wouldn't be shocked to see the tag used on Andrews as a point of leverage, though, as it's not too onerous for TEs.

Ultimately, though, I'm not sure the team can't sign all five players, if they feel that that's their core for the future.

Edited June 2, 2020 by sp6488

[M.10.E]

10 hours ago, coordinator0 said:

Stanley has been good for the Ravens regardless of system though. Last year wasn't a revelation. The dude has been a stud since he's stepped onto the field. His drawback is the few times he's been dinged up and missed games. That would be my only reservation about a big deal.

Before this year he wasn't close to record setting deal though. I don't mind paying him 17M a year or whatever, but if we have to beat Tunsil, that's where I get worried.

Edited June 2, 2020 by M.10.E

[sp6488]

44 minutes ago, M.10.E said:

Before this year he wasn't close to record setting deal though. I don't mind paying him 17M a year or whatever, but if we have to beat Tunsil, that's where I get worried.

Part of that is  normal development timelines, though. He performed at an all-pro level in his age-25 season. And was still quite good before that. It's not like he was a career JAG who all of a sudden had an amazing season.

[M.10.E]

2 hours ago, sp6488 said:

Part of that is  normal development timelines, though. He performed at an all-pro level in his age-25 season. And was still quite good before that. It's not like he was a career JAG who all of a sudden had an amazing season.

Or his job got a whole lot easier this last year.