Journey to Ring 3: Club Evaluation & Building Another Champion

[baltimoreRebel]

16 hours ago, diamondbull424 said:

While I certainly would be a fan of platooning Hollywood, Davis, and Bateman (don’t like Moore as a fit), I’ll believe it when I see it. The new offensive coaches could potentially institute something new within our offensive scheme- systematically, but I’ll believe it when I see it as to this point, Roman has never went with 3 WR sets frequently enough to allow me to feel confident we’d be getting our value worth of platooning our resources in both Davis and Bateman... which isn’t to say I wouldn’t want another drafted receiver, but probably not one in the 1st round- considering the high probability that Roman will find some way to waste them as he rolls with a line up of Hollywood, Andrews, Boyle, Tomlinson/Ricard, Dobbins.

If we can obtain Davis for roughly $8-11m then I could have some level of interest there, however if he wants anything beyond that amount, I’d rather overspend for the field impact of the superior talent.

Though I do think in the event that we go with Davis, drafting TEs like Pitts or Freiermuth could potentially provide a safer return on our value while also injecting a difference maker into the lineup that we can trust to be utilized properly by Roman. The prospect of 3 TE sets worries me far less if two of them (Andrews/Freiermuth) can shred defenders.

TE position. I don't think I'd waste early draft picks there. Tyler Eifert was just released. Put him in our offense, he won't play an insane amount of snaps and could potentially stay healthy. He's still a fantastic TE as far as I'm concerned. I think we need to add an early WR pick to grow with Lamar. I'm sick of waiting until mid rounds and watching top talent trickle off the board. 

[diamondbull424]

2 hours ago, baltimoreRebel said:

TE position. I don't think I'd waste early draft picks there. Tyler Eifert was just released. Put him in our offense, he won't play an insane amount of snaps and could potentially stay healthy. He's still a fantastic TE as far as I'm concerned. I think we need to add an early WR pick to grow with Lamar. I'm sick of waiting until mid rounds and watching top talent trickle off the board. 

I agree, but in the event that we go with a Corey Davis, I’d rather go TE because I think they’ll actually see the field vs being buried. Think of how often we used Devin Duvernay out there. Dude clearly has a skillset that could be utilized on bubble screens, on drag routes, etc... yet he was buried for most of the year because Roman wanted to deploy Andrews, Boyle, Ricard on the regular. We only changed for like 4-5 games, when Boyle went down and our TE depth was trash. Then once we discovered that Tomlinson could block pretty darn good, we went back to a higher (though not quite as high) frequency of 22 personnel. It was absolutely shameful.

If I could guarantee that Roman wouldn’t be trash, I’d be all for getting a Rashod Bateman.

Also, I think you might be underestimating the incredible talent gap between Pitts/Freiermuth and Eifert. Tyler has produced about 6 YPT over the last two seasons and will be a year older this season. Pitts I shouldn’t even compare with PF because he’s entered onto his own tier, but Freiermuth is another Mark Andrews level TE and could probably be had atop the 2nd round (trade down scenario with our pick #27 or maybe with the Jags pick if we can complete that deal).

I think the gap between an Andrews level and an Eifert is very wide. If we had two Andrews level TEs, I have no concern with Lamar or our offense wasting them. I think if Hurst had a better catch radius, Lamar would’ve felt more confident in using him and Andrews, Hurst, Boyle could’ve all easily coexisted with another.

But again, I just don’t trust Roman enough to properly develop an offense that can deploy those 3 WRs like we’d need to make those investments worth it. Though I’d be hoping to be proven wrong.

[SalvadorsDeli]

I don't really see a way in which a 3rd TE plays a significant role in the offense unless they start taking Boyle off the field on a fairly consistent basis, which in itself is unlikely considering he is one of the constants on offense when he's healthy and actually outsnaps Andrews. But any shift in strategy there to create a more dynamic 2 TE set in the passing game would be questionable in its own right because it would mean we're spending ~$8 million a year on a bit part rotational TE. 

Even in 2019 when our offense was operating at basically its highest capacity and Hurst was about as good a 3rd TE as you could ask for, when he was coming on the field it was mostly in place of Andrews rather than to form some sort of dynamic TE receiving combo. Any pass-catching TE would be brought in to play a similar role IMO, to spell Andrews rather than to compliment him. 

Either way, it looks like a misallocation of resources to spend either a high draft pick or significant FA money on a TE this offseason, and if the idea is to boost the passing game they're not going to play enough to make a bigger impact than a WR would. We definitely should bring in an option for depth purposes so that there's an alternative if Andrews is injured but it's a move where a cheap vet FA would make the most sense. 

[M.10.E]

Depends on how the FO views Mark Andrews. If they don't think they're going to re-sign him then a high draft pick would be well spent.

[Boodgyman5220]

In the first round I think Pitts is the only TE that makes sense. He seems to be a we/te tweener that would play multiple roles in our offense. I wouldn’t be mad at a second round pick of friermeuth as it would be a much smaller contribution and if he pans out gives the team a succession plan to Andrews allowing us to spend money elsewhere.

[diamondbull424]

18 hours ago, SalvadorsDeli said:

I don't really see a way in which a 3rd TE plays a significant role in the offense unless they start taking Boyle off the field on a fairly consistent basis, which in itself is unlikely considering he is one of the constants on offense when he's healthy and actually outsnaps Andrews. But any shift in strategy there to create a more dynamic 2 TE set in the passing game would be questionable in its own right because it would mean we're spending ~$8 million a year on a bit part rotational TE. 

Even in 2019 when our offense was operating at basically its highest capacity and Hurst was about as good a 3rd TE as you could ask for, when he was coming on the field it was mostly in place of Andrews rather than to form some sort of dynamic TE receiving combo. Any pass-catching TE would be brought in to play a similar role IMO, to spell Andrews rather than to compliment him. 

Either way, it looks like a misallocation of resources to spend either a high draft pick or significant FA money on a TE this offseason, and if the idea is to boost the passing game they're not going to play enough to make a bigger impact than a WR would. We definitely should bring in an option for depth purposes so that there's an alternative if Andrews is injured but it's a move where a cheap vet FA would make the most sense. 

Maybe. But how about the #4 WR? Just last year the Ravens drafted Devin Duvernay in the 3rd and by all accounts they love what they have in him. So if we add both Corey Davis and rookie Rashod Bateman, what are the chances that Bateman completely casts Duvernay aside from the #3 WR role within the offense, keep in mind this on a John Harbaugh team that typically has shown to be rookie adverse? The way I see it at best we’re getting a 3a/3b scenario.

Over the last two seasons our #3 and #4 WRs have earned snap% of 49.6% (Roberts) and 38.5% (Boykin) in 2019 and 52.1% (Snead) and 33.8% (Duvernay) in 2020. While in 2019 Hurst earned 41.4% of the snaps as the #3 TE. In 2018 Williams had 31.5% and Hurst had 23.1%. 

With Davis and Hollywood operating out on the boundary that means Duvernay, Bateman, and Freiermuth are all going to be operating out of the flex/slot role within the offense. So they’re all fulfilling similar alignment placements. With Duvernay likely being the more trusted run blocker, that could see him earning the WR3 looks. If we’re unlucky enough for Bateman to see such snaps than he’s going to potentially see less snaps in that role than what Freiermuth is likely to see as our #3 TE option- based off the trends of the last couple years.
————

Which brings me back to my point, if I had faith that Roman would use our WRs in 3/4 WR sets more often, than drafting Bateman in addition to answering the WR position in FA with Davis could make plenty of sense. However if not, grabbing a potential top 10 TE option, who combines Zack Ertz type athleticism with legitimate ability to consistently get open and display YAC skills.

It would also require a lesser investment (2nd vs 1st), allowing us to address needs in other spots of the draft. Aids the team in negotiations with Andrews and injury assurance for him/Boyle in-season.

As it stands however this offense is a Mark Andrews injury away from Lamar being completely without his safety blanket. Adding Freiermuth would give Lamar two such safety blankets over the middle with great size, hands, and route savvy.

[RavensfanRD]

22 hours ago, SalvadorsDeli said:

I don't really see a way in which a 3rd TE plays a significant role in the offense unless they start taking Boyle off the field on a fairly consistent basis, which in itself is unlikely considering he is one of the constants on offense when he's healthy and actually outsnaps Andrews. But any shift in strategy there to create a more dynamic 2 TE set in the passing game would be questionable in its own right because it would mean we're spending ~$8 million a year on a bit part rotational TE. 

Even in 2019 when our offense was operating at basically its highest capacity and Hurst was about as good a 3rd TE as you could ask for, when he was coming on the field it was mostly in place of Andrews rather than to form some sort of dynamic TE receiving combo. Any pass-catching TE would be brought in to play a similar role IMO, to spell Andrews rather than to compliment him. 

Either way, it looks like a misallocation of resources to spend either a high draft pick or significant FA money on a TE this offseason, and if the idea is to boost the passing game they're not going to play enough to make a bigger impact than a WR would. We definitely should bring in an option for depth purposes so that there's an alternative if Andrews is injured but it's a move where a cheap vet FA would make the most sense. 

This was the greatest travesty of the Ravens offense, in my opinion. I also agree that it would be wasted money to spend on a TE high in the draft or FA (UNLESS its Kyle Pitts). We also need to see what we have in Breeland and see if he's slowed by the injury.

[SalvadorsDeli]

5 hours ago, diamondbull424 said:

Maybe. But how about the #4 WR? Just last year the Ravens drafted Devin Duvernay in the 3rd and by all accounts they love what they have in him. So if we add both Corey Davis and rookie Rashod Bateman, what are the chances that Bateman completely casts Duvernay aside from the #3 WR role within the offense, keep in mind this on a John Harbaugh team that typically has shown to be rookie adverse? The way I see it at best we’re getting a 3a/3b scenario.

Over the last two seasons our #3 and #4 WRs have earned snap% of 49.6% (Roberts) and 38.5% (Boykin) in 2019 and 52.1% (Snead) and 33.8% (Duvernay) in 2020. While in 2019 Hurst earned 41.4% of the snaps as the #3 TE. In 2018 Williams had 31.5% and Hurst had 23.1%. 

With Davis and Hollywood operating out on the boundary that means Duvernay, Bateman, and Freiermuth are all going to be operating out of the flex/slot role within the offense. So they’re all fulfilling similar alignment placements. With Duvernay likely being the more trusted run blocker, that could see him earning the WR3 looks. If we’re unlucky enough for Bateman to see such snaps than he’s going to potentially see less snaps in that role than what Freiermuth is likely to see as our #3 TE option- based off the trends of the last couple years.
————

Which brings me back to my point, if I had faith that Roman would use our WRs in 3/4 WR sets more often, than drafting Bateman in addition to answering the WR position in FA with Davis could make plenty of sense. However if not, grabbing a potential top 10 TE option, who combines Zack Ertz type athleticism with legitimate ability to consistently get open and display YAC skills.

It would also require a lesser investment (2nd vs 1st), allowing us to address needs in other spots of the draft. Aids the team in negotiations with Andrews and injury assurance for him/Boyle in-season.

As it stands however this offense is a Mark Andrews injury away from Lamar being completely without his safety blanket. Adding Freiermuth would give Lamar two such safety blankets over the middle with great size, hands, and route savvy.

If we sign a starting wideout in FA then I agree the TE vs. WR question in the draft becomes a lot more of a toss-up. Absent a FA signing though it's no contest in terms of where the bigger need/clearer path to instant impact is. 

I'm less bullish on Duvernay than some of you though I think. I know the org was super excited about him but it seems like that was mostly in a classic Harbaugh kind of way where they love his special teams/gadget player ability rather than him really being a natural receiver (which also lines up with his pre-draft strengths and weaknesses). So like, even if we signed a Corey Davis type, I'd still see a much more viable path for a Rashod Bateman to be an instant difference maker compared to any TE in the draft who isn't Kyle Pitts.  Some of the stuff about Harbaugh being rookie-averse is outdated at this point. He was willing to start Tyre Phillips over DJ Fluker this season, Queen played through all sorts of growing pains, and Hollywood was an instant starter last year. Even Boykin played a decent amount as a rookie before Roberts took over his role. I don't think a player of Bateman's caliber would be gradually bedded in even if Hollywood and a Marvin Jones/Corey Davis type were solidified as our WR1 and WR2, he'd probably immediately supplant Duvernay in 3 wideout sets and offer us length/mismatches across the board out of that formation that we have not had before. 

If the org is planning to let Andrews walk, then I think the calculus becomes a lot clearer and going FA signing at WR and then drafting TE Round 1 or 2 makes a lot more sense. 

 

Edited February 24, 2021 by SalvadorsDeli

[diamondbull424]

1 hour ago, SalvadorsDeli said:

If we sign a starting wideout in FA then I agree the TE vs. WR question in the draft becomes a lot more of a toss-up. Absent a FA signing though it's no contest in terms of where the bigger need/clearer path to instant impact is. 

I'm less bullish on Duvernay than some of you though I think. I know the org was super excited about him but it seems like that was mostly in a classic Harbaugh kind of way where they love his special teams/gadget player ability rather than him really being a natural receiver (which also lines up with his pre-draft strengths and weaknesses). So like, even if we signed a Corey Davis type, I'd still see a much more viable path for a Rashod Bateman to be an instant difference maker compared to any TE in the draft who isn't Kyle Pitts.  Some of the stuff about Harbaugh being rookie-averse is outdated at this point. He was willing to start Tyre Phillips over DJ Fluker this season, Queen played through all sorts of growing pains, and Hollywood was an instant starter last year. Even Boykin played a decent amount as a rookie before Roberts took over his role. I don't think a player of Bateman's caliber would be gradually bedded in even if Hollywood and a Marvin Jones/Corey Davis type were solidified as our WR1 and WR2, he'd probably immediately supplant Duvernay in 3 wideout sets and offer us length/mismatches across the board out of that formation that we have not had before. 

If the org is planning to let Andrews walk, then I think the calculus becomes a lot clearer and going FA signing at WR and then drafting TE Round 1 or 2 makes a lot more sense. 

Yeah. I suppose that’s the disconnect. I agree that it’s no contest with #2/#3 WR over #3 TE. But in a situation between #3/#4 WR and #3 TE, I don’t think it’s nearly as clear an advantage. What’s more don’t get it twisted, I’d still want another receiver added, just not as a 1st round investment.

For example:
Scen1
WR- Hollywood, Davis, Bateman, Duvernay
TE- Andrews, Boyle, Tomlinson

Scen2
WR- Hollywood, Davis, Duvernay, Dyami
TE- Andrews, Boyle, Freiermuth/Jordan

I’m not a huge Duvernay fan, but I do think Hollywood being utilized within the slot also present him with some unique advantages. Could still use Dyami Brown as a boundary deep threat option while Hollywood diversifies his route tree from inside. Duvernay would do well within Snead’s vacated role as the sure handed slot receiver to get you something short over the middle, only he’s more of a YAC threat.

Whats more while scenario 1 presents potential output advantages if health holds up with our main contributors, in the event that Andrews goes down for half a season (knock on wood) and/or Hollywood goes down (knock on wood), scenario 2 still is one where I’m comfortable rolling out the offense with no great flaws within the lineup.
————

I suppose my biggest thing is building redundancies into the offense that could also thrive with one another. If Bateman was guaranteed to receive 55% of snaps, I would find his 1st round investment quite easily worth its admission.

However, like I said in my first response to @Ray Reed above, it’s not that I don’t like the idea, I just don’t trust Roman to properly execute the requisite snap distribution to make it viable. I think what we’d see would be something like:
Duvernay: 42%
Bateman: 42%

Hollywood was a needed deep threat, Queen was entering a position group that was wide open, and Tyre is indeed a perplexing case... honestly can’t explain why he got the start over either Fluker OR Powers, like the field results weren’t even close.
————

So in the event where such expectations are meant with Snap counts, I could see a scenario where in my proposed scenario where the breakdowns are something like:

Dyami Brown: 36%
Duvernay: 44%
Freiermuth: 40%

Freiermuth’s snap count would justify his selection in the 2nd, I think he’s the perfect redundancy to Andrews. Make no mistake, I think we should resign Andrews, but I also believe having a legitimate TE3 within our offense would be a great idea. Even better would be the TE value likely presented with Brevin Jordan at the top of the 3rd, considering he likely receives a similar snap breakdown. But again, I want a redundancy for Andrews with guys that are legitimate impact talents.

Though I also feel it’ll be difficult weighing that with addressing the other needs such as edge, safety, IOL, RT. All of those are position groups where top 100 selections would really assist the unit in a big way.

[Ray Reed]

Wink Martindale is so damn impressive man.

One of the best coaches to walk through 1 Winning Drive.

[SalvadorsDeli]

58 minutes ago, diamondbull424 said:

 

For example:
Scen1
WR- Hollywood, Davis, Bateman, Duvernay
TE- Andrews, Boyle, Tomlinson

Scen2
WR- Hollywood, Davis, Duvernay, Dyami
TE- Andrews, Boyle, Freiermuth/Jordan

I’m not a huge Duvernay fan, but I do think Hollywood being utilized within the slot also present him with some unique advantages. Could still use Dyami Brown as a boundary deep threat option while Hollywood diversifies his route tree from inside. Duvernay would do well within Snead’s vacated role as the sure handed slot receiver to get you something short over the middle, only he’s more of a YAC threat.

Whats more while scenario 1 presents potential output advantages if health holds up with our main contributors, in the event that Andrews goes down for half a season (knock on wood) and/or Hollywood goes down (knock on wood), scenario 2 still is one where I’m comfortable rolling out the offense with no great flaws within the lineup.

I think w're mostly in agreement. The one thing I'll say is that I don't view scenario 1 as the alternative to scenario 2, and moreso that scenario is basically untenable. Maybe I'm wrong on this but I view Tomlinson moreso as insurance against Boyle not being ready for the season rather than a guy likely to have his own distinct role in the team, and that between the two of them they essentially occupy one roster spot. One way or another I think we are going to add an actual 3rd TE with more of a pass-catching skillset who can compliment Andrews and/or replace him if he gets hurt. So if not a draft pick I fully expect us to be on the FA market for veterans we can sign for close to the minimum who can 'do a job' if called upon in that role - guys like Tyler Eifert, Trey Burton, or Richard Rodgers, depending on who gets priced at what level, and my comfort level with going that route is pretty high. 

[SalvadorsDeli]

Just trying to drum up some conversation - assuming we can only bring one of our 3 best EDGE players back, what's your order of preference if these are the options:

- Ngakoue for 4 years, $17-18 million per year

- Judon for 2-3 years, $12-13 million per year

- Bowser for 4 years, $7-8 million per year

Just assume any of these contracts are structured in a way that reduces the year 1 cap hit as much as possible given the cap crunch.

Maybe another way of asking this is, what's the highest AAV you'd be willing to go for each of these players? 

[Ray Reed]

33 minutes ago, SalvadorsDeli said:

Just trying to drum up some conversation - assuming we can only bring one of our 3 best EDGE players back, what's your order of preference if these are the options:

- Ngakoue for 4 years, $17-18 million per year

- Judon for 2-3 years, $12-13 million per year

- Bowser for 4 years, $7-8 million per year

Just assume any of these contracts are structured in a way that reduces the year 1 cap hit as much as possible given the cap crunch.

Maybe another way of asking this is, what's the highest AAV you'd be willing to go for each of these players? 

With those #s, my preference would be:

Judon
Bowser
Ngakoue (hurts - I'm a Terp)

 

Highest AAV for each player I'd probably say:

Ngakoue: 14.5
Judon: 14
Bowser: 8.5

[diamondbull424]

On 2/24/2021 at 1:49 PM, Ray Reed said:

Wink Martindale is so damn impressive man.

One of the best coaches to walk through 1 Winning Drive.

Nothing is populating here for me (something must be wrong with my phone or something), What did he do?

[diamondbull424]

8 hours ago, SalvadorsDeli said:

Just trying to drum up some conversation - assuming we can only bring one of our 3 best EDGE players back, what's your order of preference if these are the options:

- Ngakoue for 4 years, $17-18 million per year

- Judon for 2-3 years, $12-13 million per year

- Bowser for 4 years, $7-8 million per year

Just assume any of these contracts are structured in a way that reduces the year 1 cap hit as much as possible given the cap crunch.

Maybe another way of asking this is, what's the highest AAV you'd be willing to go for each of these players? 

1. Bowser

2. Judon
3. Ngakoue

I think MAYBE there could be some extra mining of pass rush we could obtain from Bowser. What’s more I don’t see a great difference between he and Judon. While Judon is a better finisher, Bowser seems to generate more legit wins IMO. I have no stats to justify this, just based on what I feel I’ve seen.

Only Bowser also doubles as a high level cover LB. Plus he doesn’t appear to be as much of a distraction. So I’ll take all of that and at a cheaper contract over 4 years than these other guys.

We can also more easily draft that slower good run stuffing, disciplined pass rusher edge guy. The front office has seemingly found that guy for years, yet Bowser is sort of unique in the skillset he provides.