Jump to content

Ravens Trade for Roquan Smith


baltimoreRebel

Recommended Posts

On 10/31/2022 at 5:43 PM, Ray Reed said:

Thank God. It was nauseating watching the defense be completely soft across the middle and our LBs getting drug 2-3 yards after every run the last 3 years.

That sort of thing trickles down energy-wise to the rest of the defense. Having a dog in the middle again will surprise a lot of you with how much of a difference it will make.

Only took 1 game to see that shift in energy I was talking about

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Bigbear72 said:

Twitter does not represent us.

There are idiots from every fanbase on twitter. Come to the Bears forum. We were not thrilled by the compensation but we weren't overly upset about it either. We new he was leaving but were hopeful in a sense that a deal could get done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bigbear72 said:

There are idiots from every fanbase on twitter. Come to the Bears forum. We were not thrilled by the compensation but we weren't overly upset about it either. We new he was leaving but were hopeful in a sense that a deal could get done.

Agree about twitter, but I was specifically motivated to post that after seeing so many in Bears' media(where twitter does represent dominant opinion) celebrating that deal combination. 

I see the Bears as one of the few teams where paying an ILB(like Roquan) top money actually would've made sense. 1. You have the money(cap space) and can afford the luxury, 2. You need foundational players and leaders as you try to build a winning squad around Fields' rookie deal, and 3. Smith was clearly loved by the fandom/community. Now the team is a short a leader, impact player, and inevitably Poles will try to chase high end play at the position(off ball LB) through valuable draft capital- after you already had the spot locked up with a 25 Y/O All-Pro talent who you used a Top 10 pick on. 

All that said, if Smith didn't want to be there then there's no reason to keep him. So it comes down to questioning how it got to that point between him and the Bears' FO.

The real issue is that Claypool deal, which from every angle looks horrific. Not only is he an overrated player with a non ideal personality, but the Steelers clearly juiced the price and took advantage of an inexperienced GM. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, DreamKid said:

Agree about twitter, but I was specifically motivated to post that after seeing so many in Bears' media(where twitter does represent dominant opinion) celebrating that deal combination. 

I see the Bears as one of the few teams where paying an ILB(like Roquan) top money actually would've made sense. 1. You have the money(cap space) and can afford the luxury, 2. You need foundational players and leaders as you try to build a winning squad around Fields' rookie deal, and 3. Smith was clearly loved by the fandom/community. Now the team is a short a leader, impact player, and inevitably Poles will try to chase high end play at the position(off ball LB) through valuable draft capital- after you already had the spot locked up with a 25 Y/O All-Pro talent who you used a Top 10 pick on. 

All that said, if Smith didn't want to be there then there's no reason to keep him. So it comes down to questioning how it got to that point between him and the Bears' FO.

The real issue is that Claypool deal, which from every angle looks horrific. Not only is he an overrated player with a non ideal personality, but the Steelers clearly juiced the price and took advantage of an inexperienced GM. 

Putting that amount of resources in an off the ball LB in our defensive scheme didn't make sense to us when we need an entire defensive line, offensive line help, wideouts, and may need to pay our qb if he continues to develop. Every position that I named will cost us $15m+ on the open market. I like Roquan a lot but not enough to pay the $20m a year that he was asking for. As far as Claypool goes, we would have rather not have spent a second rounder but we had to outbid Green Bay and we are desperate for receivers.

Edited by Bigbear72
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bigbear72 said:

Putting that amount of resources in an off the ball LB in our defensive scheme didn't make sense to us when we need an entire defensive line, offensive line help, wideouts, and may need to pay our qb if he continues to develop. Every position that I named will cost us $15m+ on the open market.

You don't build a team through FA, you build it through the draft and supplement with FA. 

You also aren't going to find worthy options at all of those spots in FA, and there's no guarantee you convince the big fish that do swim in unrestricted waters to sign- even if you're offering the most money. 

1 hour ago, Bigbear72 said:

As far as Claypool goes, we would have rather not have spent a second rounder but we had to outbid Green Bay and we are desperate for receivers.

Why did you have to outbid GB? The Bears aren't close to contention and Claypool isn't an impact WR....

You're out a Top 40 pick and still have a major need at WR. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DreamKid said:

You don't build a team through FA, you build it through the draft and supplement with FA. 

You also aren't going to find worthy options at all of those spots in FA, and there's no guarantee you convince the big fish that do swim in unrestricted waters to sign- even if you're offering the most money. 

Why did you have to outbid GB? The Bears aren't close to contention and Claypool isn't an impact WR....

You're out a Top 40 pick and still have a major need at WR. 

I know you don’t build a team through FA. You still need to allocate those funds to premium positions. Period. Even if you draft them you will have to pay them. As far as Claypool goes have you seen the FA market for WR next year? This isn’t a particular strong draft for WRs either and as a Raven fan you of all people should know how hit or miss drafting one is and Fields needs a pass catcher yesterday. Outside of Mooney there is no one else. We don’t need Claypool to be a star. We just need him to be competent. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Bigbear72 said:

I know you don’t build a team through FA. You still need to allocate those funds to premium positions. Period. Even if you draft them you will have to pay them. As far as Claypool goes have you seen the FA market for WR next year? This isn’t a particular strong draft for WRs either and as a Raven fan you of all people should know how hit or miss drafting one is and Fields needs a pass catcher yesterday. Outside of Mooney there is no one else. We don’t need Claypool to be a star. We just need him to be competent. 

You're acting like there's star players at premium positions(QB, OL, WR, CB, EDGE) you're going to have immediate access to and thus need to pay, there isn't.... 

Drafting WRs is risky, so you should boot a Top 40 pick for 1.5 years control of a mediocre receiver you hope is competent- all while you're 3-5 years away from serious contention. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, DreamKid said:

You're acting like there's star players at premium positions(QB, OL, WR, CB, EDGE) you're going to have immediate access to and thus need to pay, there isn't.... 

Drafting WRs is risky, so you should boot a Top 40 pick for 1.5 years control of a mediocre receiver you hope is competent- all while you're 3-5 years away from serious contention. 

Nope just lending a different perspective. What exactly was the point of your take? Every team overpays for someone. Every team misses in FA and the draft including your own. What’s your point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Bigbear72 said:

Nope just lending a different perspective. What exactly was the point of your take? Every team overpays for someone. Every team misses in FA and the draft including your own. What’s your point?

And btw there are multiple highly drafted WR that are useless every year. How many Raven WRs out performed Claypool over the last 2 years?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Bigbear72 said:

Nope just lending a different perspective. What exactly was the point of your take? Every team overpays for someone. Every team misses in FA and the draft including your own. What’s your point?

You said the Bears couldn't/shouldn't pay Roquan Smith(even in a theoretical world where he wanted to stay) because they have to assign all that money to premium positions. My point was you don't actually have premium positions to pay and are applying a principle of cap allotment that isn't relevant to the Bears current or near future situation. 

16 minutes ago, Bigbear72 said:

And btw there are multiple highly drafted WR that are useless every year. How many Raven WRs out performed Claypool over the last 2 years?

Again, great point. There are WR picks who bust so it's smart to severely overpay for overrated/mediocre options.... 

Forget 2 years, Isaiah Likely the Ravens 4th Round pick at TE has as many TDs as Claypool's entire season in just the last two weeks when filling in for Mark Andrews. Enjoy your 'weapon'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...