The Lamar offseason talk thread

[ThatJaxxenGuy]

22 minutes ago, Ray Reed said:

And that is unequivocally Lamar's choice, not the Ravens.

If Lamar continues to balk at our extension offer, he's playing 2023 on the tag. That means he's contracted to play for this team next season once he signs the tag.

From there, he can choose to have a full offseason and learn the new offense, or not. He'd probably choose not, but that's his prerogative, not the Ravens. It all cycles back to this weird cognitive dissonance you have that refuses to acknowledge anything but "if Ravens don't pay Lamar everything he's asking, Ravens FO bad. Ravens FO villain. Lamar good. Lamar savior".

That's not the reality of the situation. He's holding the team hostage. And the notion that he was the "savior" of a team that was 5th, 12th, and 7th in DVOA ( @AngusMcFife DVOA reference for ya) in the league in the three seasons before he got here (excluding the 2015 season where literally every player got hurt) is laughable. We're not falling into purgatory without Lamar Jackson. We were starting 2 UDFAs in his absence last year and went 3-3, and were one freak goalline fumble away from matching our playoff wins with Lamar in one start under Tyler Huntley.

it’s not Lamar holding the team hostage, it’s called leveraging your position, something every person on earth with a job should do when the opportunity arises. 

I don’t understand how it’s Lamar’s responsibility to take less money because the franchise locked itself into a position without leverage and paralyzed its future outlook? Biscotti being cheap put the team in this position.

 

the Ravens are in this position by their own doing. It’s simple. Pay Lamar now and have a proper offseason with a vision for the team, or don’t and try to win next year with no free agency and drafting without knowing who your QB is. This team will not improve without a free agency period and a clear vision of the roster for the draft. That’s impossible to do so without solving the Lamar problem asap and the fastest way to do that is to pay him his money.

If this drags on it’s going to cause the team to hemorrhage opportunities. They can stop the bleeding by bucking up instead of this cowardly collusion game By the Billionaires.

Edited March 10, 2023 by ThatJaxxenGuy

[Ray Reed]

2 hours ago, ThatJaxxenGuy said:

it’s not Lamar holding the team hostage, it’s called leveraging your position, something every person on earth with a job should do when the opportunity arises. 

I don’t understand how it’s Lamar’s responsibility to take less money because the franchise locked itself into a position without leverage and paralyzed its future outlook? Biscotti being cheap put the team in this position.

 

the Ravens are in this position by their own doing. It’s simple. Pay Lamar now and have a proper offseason with a vision for the team, or don’t and try to win next year with no free agency and drafting without knowing who your QB is. This team will not improve without a free agency period and a clear vision of the roster for the draft. That’s impossible to do so without solving the Lamar problem asap and the fastest way to do that is to pay him his money.

If this drags on it’s going to cause the team to hemorrhage opportunities. They can stop the bleeding by bucking up instead of this cowardly collusion game By the Billionaires.

Again - we are trying to pay him his money. That’s what you seem to be ignoring. Every report coming out the last week is that the Ravens have made him an offer that other teams aren’t willing to go above, and if they somehow do, we’ll match it.

We’re in this position because Lamar overestimated his value around the league, and is going to draw this out out of spite/pressure from the NFLPA. Not because our FO is being cheap.

 

Edited March 10, 2023 by Ray Reed

[AFlaccoSeagulls]

2 hours ago, ThatJaxxenGuy said:

it’s not Lamar holding the team hostage, it’s called leveraging your position, something every person on earth with a job should do when the opportunity arises. 

The problem with this analogy is that Lamar has clearly vastly overestimated his own position. He thought another team would jump at the opportunity to give him a fully GTD contract and...it's not happening. The most likely teams that had the draft picks and cap space and QB availability to do so have all said they are out.

So, if no team is willing to give him a fully GTD contract, the only other possibility remains a non-fully guaranteed contract and by all accounts the Ravens' offer is as good as Lamar's going to get, otherwise they'll match anything else.

So yeah, Lamar leveraged his position - poorly - and it's now hurting everyone.

2 hours ago, ThatJaxxenGuy said:

I don’t understand how it’s Lamar’s responsibility to take less money because the franchise locked itself into a position without leverage and paralyzed its future outlook? Biscotti being cheap put the team in this position.

It's not his responsibility to take less money, but the market is clearly telling him he's not worth the value he thinks he is. I don't understand how this relates to Bisciotti being cheap when the Ravens have had literally no issue paying people big money. Our issue is always being right up against the cap because of who we choose to pay.

2 hours ago, ThatJaxxenGuy said:

the Ravens are in this position by their own doing. It’s simple. Pay Lamar now and have a proper offseason with a vision for the team, or don’t and try to win next year with no free agency and drafting without knowing who your QB is.

They are trying to pay Lamar now, and have been for a year. They simply are not going to give him a fully guaranteed contract, and I cannot blame them one bit. Would you give him that deal? Consider that if you're the Ravens you just watched him regress for 2 straight years. You just watched him fail to finish 2 straight seasons because of injury. You just watched Tyler Huntley almost win you a playoff game, which would match Lamar's career total in playoff wins.

Lamar was worth this contract after the 2019 season, not after the 2022 season.

2 hours ago, ThatJaxxenGuy said:

This team will not improve without a free agency period and a clear vision of the roster for the draft. That’s impossible to do so without solving the Lamar problem asap and the fastest way to do that is to pay him his money.

 

2 hours ago, ThatJaxxenGuy said:

If this drags on it’s going to cause the team to hemorrhage opportunities. They can stop the bleeding by bucking up instead of this cowardly collusion game By the Billionaires.

The only question I want to reiterate in these two quotes is: Is there a limit on what you would pay Lamar? Would you just give him a 5-year $230M fully GTD deal?

[wackywabbit]

18 minutes ago, AFlaccoSeagulls said:

The problem with this analogy is that Lamar has clearly vastly overestimated his own position. He thought another team would jump at the opportunity to give him a fully GTD contract and...it's not happening. The most likely teams that had the draft picks and cap space and QB availability to do so have all said they are out.

You are making up specific details none of us have. Unless you have quotes from Lamar, this is just assumptions or your own storytelling. You don't know that Lamar's camp is panicking right now to the degree you want to believe they are. Anchor yourself in known reality, please.

If Lamar had an agent and took the traditional route he would have signed an extension after year 3 that probably looks a lot like the Josh Allen deal (same class, arguably similar or close value at the time). That's a reasonable benchmark. Let's compare that to what he ends up getting, then you can make the case for what he did or didn't mess up with his process.

If he resigns here for whatever the Ravens best offer is after this tag business, and it's still more money than he would have got resigning early (when Allen did) is it a loss for him?

Again for the record, I don't really care who WINS between Biscotti and Lamar. It's not my money and I don't have to put any of it in escrow. The boolean fact of whether Lamar is on this team is the only part of this story I care about, whether it means +/-$5-10M of cap space a year for the next 5 years is going to not matter.

Edited March 10, 2023 by wackywabbit

[AFlaccoSeagulls]

5 minutes ago, wackywabbit said:

You are making up specific details none of us have. Unless you have quotes from Lamar, this is just assumptions or your own storytelling. You don't know that Lamar's camp is panicking right now to the degree you want to believe they are. Anchor yourself in known reality, please.

If Lamar had an agent and took the traditional route he would have signed an extension after year 3 that probably looks a lot like the Josh Allen deal (same class, arguably similar or close value at the time). That's a reasonable benchmark. Let's compare that to what he ends up getting, then you can make the case for what he did or didn't mess up with his process.

If he resigns here for whatever the Ravens best offer is after this tag business, and it's still more money than he would have got resigning early (when Allen did) is it a loss for him?

I'm not even saying he should've signed earlier, I'm saying he should've taken what the Ravens offered because no other team is going to beat that, and if Lamar comes back the Ravens have every incentive to lower their deal as a result.

Lamar, or whoever is advising him, very clearly told him to dig in on the fully GTD hill and die there, and it seems like that was a giant miscalculation on their part.

[wackywabbit]

Just now, AFlaccoSeagulls said:

I'm not even saying he should've signed earlier, I'm saying he should've taken what the Ravens offered because no other team is going to beat that, and if Lamar comes back the Ravens have every incentive to lower their deal as a result.

If Lamar comes back next week and asks the Ravens for the same deal they offered last week do you IN REALITY think they say no you have to take less now?

[AFlaccoSeagulls]

5 minutes ago, wackywabbit said:

If Lamar comes back next week and asks the Ravens for the same deal they offered last week do you IN REALITY think they say no you have to take less now?

I honestly don't know. I could definitely see it both ways. I could see them adjusting their deal because the market spoke, and I could also see them just leaving that offer on the table for him if he wants to come back.

[wackywabbit]

1 minute ago, AFlaccoSeagulls said:

I honestly don't know. I could definitely see it both ways. I could see them adjusting their deal because the market spoke, and I could also see them just leaving that offer on the table for him if he wants to come back.

Yea, I don't know 100% either, but I consider the latter FAR more likely. If they are giving him 9 figures to lead the team it's not worth it to make him take less than your best offer. They wouldn't have made any offer to him with the expectation that he ends up accepting less either.

[paraven]

7 hours ago, ThatJaxxenGuy said:

This is a moronic take. Good luck ever signing a free agent when we’re the team who said “nah” to the only player who kept their head coach employed and their franchise relevant.

The Browns are bad because of 30+ years of ineptitude, not one contract. If you think one highly paid player is the difference between the Ravens and the Browns then you don’t know what you’re talking about

yall penny pinching fans are just sad. Why not lick the billionaires boots a little harder? It’s not like it’s your money. If you think the team would be hamstrung by a big Lamar contract wait until you see how bad the offence will be with nothing but a late 2024 first, a late 2025 first, and an offence led by Matt Ryan to show for it. This team will have to punt on free agency and the draft by playing tough guy with Lamar, when the key to making this all go away is the simplest answer: pay him. 

5 years of being relevant with a fat Lamar contract is better than what the Indianapolis Colts have gone through the last 5 years.

You said "sign lamar to whatever he wants"... Thats not how negotiations work.

[SalvadorsDeli]

Panthers giving up 2 1st rounders, 2 2nd rounders, AND DJ Moore to go for Bryce Young or CJ Stroud rather than taking a run at Lamar is probably the strongest indicator yet that the market just isn't there for him. 

[wackywabbit]

1 hour ago, SalvadorsDeli said:

Panthers giving up 2 1st rounders, 2 2nd rounders, AND DJ Moore to go for Bryce Young or CJ Stroud rather than taking a run at Lamar is probably the strongest indicator yet that the market just isn't there for him. 

There are still less viable QB options than open spots. Stroud (I'm assuming) was always going to go somewhere and now every other team knows it won't be to them. I think Ravens fans as a group are counting our chickens a little soon, when teams aren't even allowed to talk to Lamar yet. Let's see what the talk is next week.

[DreamKid]

7 hours ago, wackywabbit said:

Again for the record, I don't really care who WINS between Biscotti and Lamar. It's not my money and I don't have to put any of it in escrow. The boolean fact of whether Lamar is on this team is the only part of this story I care about, whether it means +/-$5-10M of cap space a year for the next 5 years is going to not matter.

This is basically the correct answer, no fan should care about Biscotti or Lamar's money.

I'd only add that fans, in the end, should be pulling for the team to retain Lamar on the smallest and most cap favorable deal possible. You want a deal Lamar is willing to sign so you retain his services, but no one should hope he gets anything extra detrimental to our cap just because you like him- that would be cuckish.

Ultimately the goal is to kind of hope the team f*cks the players, so that we have the cap space to sign additional talented players.

Marcus Williams, Morgan Moses, Kevin Zeitler, Broderick Washington, Michael Pierce, Tyus Bowser, Geno Stone, etc- All of these guys are on deals ranging from team favorable to near criminal in terms of what they "deserve". Fans should be happy about that, because it helps the team's ability to sign other players.

The only goal for any fan of the Ravens should be to see the team win the Super Bowl. You're just a fan of Lamar or any other player, and not the team, if your only goal/wish is to see them win the biggest contract possible.- leave that sh*t to their family and friends. 

[NYRaider]

5 hours ago, SalvadorsDeli said:

Panthers giving up 2 1st rounders, 2 2nd rounders, AND DJ Moore to go for Bryce Young or CJ Stroud rather than taking a run at Lamar is probably the strongest indicator yet that the market just isn't there for him. 

Owners don't want to put $250M into escrow to get a deal done. The lack of interest in Lamar is purely financial, IMO.

[ThatJaxxenGuy]

2 hours ago, DreamKid said:

This is basically the correct answer, no fan should care about Biscotti or Lamar's money.

I'd only add that fans, in the end, should be pulling for the team to retain Lamar on the smallest and most cap favorable deal possible. You want a deal Lamar is willing to sign so you retain his services, but no one should hope he gets anything extra detrimental to our cap just because you like him- that would be cuckish.

Ultimately the goal is to kind of hope the team f*cks the players, so that we have the cap space to sign additional talented players.

Marcus Williams, Morgan Moses, Kevin Zeitler, Broderick Washington, Michael Pierce, Tyus Bowser, Geno Stone, etc- All of these guys are on deals ranging from team favorable to near criminal in terms of what they "deserve". Fans should be happy about that, because it helps the team's ability to sign other players.

The only goal for any fan of the Ravens should be to see the team win the Super Bowl. You're just a fan of Lamar or any other player, and not the team, if your only goal/wish is to see them win the biggest contract possible.- leave that sh*t to their family and friends. 

Again, you guys are failing to understand the actual issue. It’s not at all about “cheering for the biggest contract” it’s about bucking up what we are eventually going to have to pay anyway so that we get an actual offseason and focused draft to build the team, otherwise the Ravens have no choice but to tread water for the entire offseason while teams like the Bengals, Bills, and Chiefs have an offseason to get better.

 

if you are in favour of the team digging in it’s heels then you are not understanding that by doing so we are eliminating ourself from being able to participate in the offseason and it’s benefits and thus actually damaging the teams chance to win the Super Bowl. 
 

Teams have already stated they aren’t going to make offers because the Ravens will just match. Essentially the team is in a bidding war with itself and refusing to offer a better deal it is likely eventually going to pay, the league knows this, and the ravens are going to make their position and team worse with each passing day until they either cave to Lamar or make a trade after the draft and free agency have already passed, by which time- good luck finding a Super Bowl quarterback! 
 

if you actually think this is about me “cheering for one guy to get all the most money” then you don’t see the issue 

 

 

Edited March 11, 2023 by ThatJaxxenGuy

[NYRaider]

4 minutes ago, ThatJaxxenGuy said:

Teams have already stated they aren’t going to make offers because the Ravens will just match. Essentially the team is in a bidding war with itself that is going to make its position worse with each passing day until they either cave to Lamar or make a trade after the draft and free agency have already passed, in which case - good luck finding a Super Bowl quarterback!

To me it seems like Lamar will eventually have to cave and come off of some of his demands. If no other team in the league is willing to give him the contract he's asking for, what can he really do about it other than take less?