Browns extend CB Denzel Ward (5 years, $100.5M, $71.25M gtd)

[Soko]

1 hour ago, AFlaccoSeagulls said:

Yeah he was pretty bad last year before getting hurt.

But prior…

https://mobile.twitter.com/PFF/status/1362892473085870087/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed|twterm^1362892473085870087|twgr^|twcon^s1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fd-4208404656399089074.ampproject.net%2F2203281422000%2Fframe.html

Edited April 20, 2022 by Yin-Yang

[AFlaccoSeagulls]

24 minutes ago, Yin-Yang said:

But prior…

https://mobile.twitter.com/PFF/status/1362892473085870087/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed|twterm^1362892473085870087|twgr^|twcon^s1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fd-4208404656399089074.ampproject.net%2F2203281422000%2Fframe.html

Yeah I think last year was just a down year in general for our whole team. Injuries took a toll on everyone and I think because of how decimated our secondary was it trickled.

[JAF-N72EX]

On 4/19/2022 at 12:42 PM, MWil23 said:

And what I'm SAYING is, Denzel Ward is MUCH BETTER as a true coverage lockdown corner, which is what Cleveland runs. Humphrey is at his best in zone, as Baltimore doesn't run as many man coverage principles.

19 hours ago, AFlaccoSeagulls said:

DO you actually have these numbers because I can't find them for 2021.

This is a just my opinion supported by stats from FO and SIS.  Take it for whatever it's worth.

Last year, Baltimore's defense was in man coverage 36% of the time on pass plays, which was 4th most in the league, and only 52% in zone coverage (27th). Cleveland was only in man coverage 25%, which was 22nd in the league, and 58% zone coverage (15th).

Baltimore played less nickel than most teams last year and opted to play more base, dime, and quarters defense (54%/44%). Which is further illustrated by the fact that 16 different DBs/LBs played atleast 20% snaps (along with injuries). Whereas the Browns played more base and nickel and less dime and quarters (61%/36%). This is important to note for a few different reasons -- for and against both teams and players. For one, we have to remember that the Ravens run a 3-4 and the Browns runs a 4-3 and both teams ran their base defense nearly the same amount of snaps (BAL 24%, CLE 25%) and I don't think I need to explain the distinct differences here. In most cases formation wouldn't matter since we all know the traditional base isn't used so often anymore and every defense rushes with 4 most of the time anyways. In this case though, the differences in formation and schemes changes the dynamics a little bit.

In the Ravens case, usually running alot of man in dime/quarter defense would help out the secondary more since your essentially sacrificing less body's to get to the QB in exchange for more help in coverage, and in some cases this was true for the Ravens since they only rushed with three 10% of the time (5th most in the league). However, they didn't use the dime/quarter in the traditional way either.  Instead, they used it to disguise their blitz packages from the safety/corner/slot-- which they did alot of-- by blitzing with five or more 27% of the time and only rushing with four 61% (28th lowest in the league).  Under normal circumstances this would help the scheme argument since a heavy blitz scheme would typically help the secondary by forcing the QB to throw the ball sooner than he wants to. But in this case it doesn't since that only works if your blitzing effectively and the Ravens failed in this regard by finishing 23rd in pressure %, despite blitzing alot, which actually puts MORE pressure on the secondary by putting them at a big disadvantage. Especially in man coverage.

All of this points more towards Harbaugh and Wink than the players IMO. We all know how good Humphrey's can be.

The point is, the scheme argument could typically be used to discredit Humphrey's and the Ravens secondary in the traditional sense, but not in this case it can't. Not fairly anyhow. Instead it should be seen as an example of just how many hurdles that he and the secondary were facing, and one of the reasons as to why the Ravens pass defense finished 30th in DVOA last year in general.

I also don't think Humphery's rotating field assignments should ever be used as a knock against him either. Or any player for that matter. Versatility is never a bad thing.

Anyhow, here are pass rush percentages for both teams and where they ranked (or how they were used vs the rest of the NFL anyways).

Ravens
3 Rushers:  10% (5th most)
4 Rushers:  61% (28th)
5 Rushers:  21% (10th)
6+ Rushers: 6%  (8th)

Browns
3 Rushers:   3% (28th)
4 Rushers:  76% (7th)
5 Rushers:  17% (21st)
6+ Rushers: 3% (23rd)

 

 

[hornbybrown]

A lot of people commenting won’t have watched award much because Browns.

 

The Warden of the North is elite. Ranks top three for Passer rating vs him. He has had some injuries but not a lot. Only thing I would like to see more of as a Browns fan is a couple more picks a year

[MWil23]

16 hours ago, JAF-N72EX said:

he point is, the scheme argument could typically be used to discredit Humphrey's and the Ravens secondary in the traditional sense, but not in this case it can't. Not fairly anyhow. Instead it should be seen as an example of just how many hurdles that he and the secondary were facing, and one of the reasons as to why the Ravens pass defense finished 30th in DVOA last year in general.

I also don't think Humphery's rotating field assignments should ever be used as a knock against him either. Or any player for that matter. Versatility is never a bad thing

Not knocking him for that, just stating I’d prefer a true lockdown outside guy and believe that is more valuable in today’s league. Just my opinion.

[Vee-Rex]

On 4/18/2022 at 3:47 PM, Jakuvious said:

I'm aware the big pieces are signed, but that's not what makes me curious, what I wonder how they'll manage is just basic roster fill. Right now, based on the most common cap projections for 2023, they're on pace to have either $5M in space or literally nothing in cap space for that offseason. That's prior to the Ward deal, so it'll presumably be down to nothing either way after this. And that'll be with 30 players under contract. The drafts and filling to 53 alone would put them over. And while the stars are signed, there are some notable role players between this offseason and next that are parting and need replaced. Tretter, Conklin, Harrison, McDowell, Jackson, Walker, Njoku, Williams, Clowney, Landry, etc. And not even talking about the value of any of those players, more just pointing out that they will need literal replacements, with no money available. The only cuts next offseason that would save more than like $2M in space are Chubb and Cooper, which would obviously not be desirable. There's no one they can even really trade that makes more space that dead money. John Johnson and Jedrick Wills would be the possible early extensions, by neither saves enough money alone or combined. So I assume they're going to restructure someone (maybe multiple guys), there just aren't many choices that wouldn't snowball quickly. Like, they can restructure Watson, lower his 2023 cap hit by $33M, but then you're ballooning his last 3 years up to $66M with how they structured it.

I'm not saying they won't figure it out, or that these deals aren't worth it at the moment. But it will be one of the tougher cap situations to deal with next offseason, and there are no blatant outs, so I'm intrigued to see what they'll choose to do.

Restructure, restructure, restructure.

As long as the owner is willing to pay in escrow (and all indications are that he is), then the situation isn't quite as problematic as you might think. It'll be important to get some value out of the draft and hit on some of those 2-4th round picks.

Snowballing would only be problematic for a couple years - generally when players start underperforming their contracts or getting older. That's when you trade them for draft capital (mid rounders, etc...), become a middle-of-the-pack team (still have your cornerstone pieces), and recover from the salary cap. Then it's wash, rinse, repeat. Open up a new window for 3-4'ish years, push down more cap, etc.... and have another 2 year'ish window where you're not a real contender but you're recovering from the salary cap.

I don't think people truly understand how salary cap management works and assume any collection of big contracts are just gonna ruin a team for decades to come.

Edited April 22, 2022 by Vee-Rex