The Lamar offseason talk thread

[ThatJaxxenGuy]

5 minutes ago, NYRaider said:

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?

That’s not what’s happening though. Teams have said they think the Ravens would match even if it’s a fully guaranteed deal. They just don’t want to but because then they’re wasting time negotiating in favour of a deal the Ravens will match anyway. Furthermore, any offer has to sit on their cap space for 5 days until the Ravens match it, damaging their ability to negotiate free agents if done early in the FA period, and leaving them with their own question marks. So other teams are incentivized to wait or not even act - if they want to pay Lamar it benefits to do it later in the league year - because they will have a draft and free agency and so the compensation they will give Lamar and the burden of an offer on their cap flexibility are both massively decreased

the radio silence doesn’t mean the money isn’t there for Lamar, it means other teams aren’t going to waste time doing what they know the Ravens will match. If the people who are rooting for the team to dig it’s heels in get their way, then the longer the Ravens refuse to pay Lamar they are worsening their own offseason while strengthening the offseason of whatever team lands Lamar. 

Edited March 11, 2023 by ThatJaxxenGuy

[NYRaider]

2 minutes ago, ThatJaxxenGuy said:

That’s not what’s happening though. Teams have said they think the Ravens would match even if it’s a fully guaranteed deal. They just don’t want to but because then they’re wasting time negotiating in favour of a deal the Ravens will match anyway. Furthermore, any offer has to sit on their cap space for 5 days until the Ravens match it, damaging their ability to negotiate free agents if done early in the FA period, and leaving them with their own question marks. So other teams are incentivized to wait or not even act - if they want to pay Lamar it benefits to do them later in the league year - because they will have us a draft and free agency and so the compensation they will give Lamar and the burden of an offer on their cap flexibility are both massively decreased 

the radio silence doesn’t mean the money isn’t there for Lamar, it means other teams aren’t going to waste time doing what they know the Ravens will match. 

Would the Ravens match a fully guaranteed deal? If they're going to move on I think it's more likely that they'll tell Lamar they'll trade him somewhere if he finds another suitor. That way he gets to play where he wants and they get more draft capital in return.

[ThatJaxxenGuy]

1 minute ago, NYRaider said:

Would the Ravens match a fully guaranteed deal? If they're going to move on I think it's more likely that they'll tell Lamar they'll trade him somewhere if he finds another suitor. That way he gets to play where he wants and they get more draft capital in return.

Ian rappaport says yes they would, or at least the general sentiment believed by other teams is that they would.

he knows much more about the inner workings of the NFL than every person in this thread combined so I’m inclined to believe him on that

Edited March 11, 2023 by ThatJaxxenGuy

[NYRaider]

Just now, ThatJaxxenGuy said:

Ian rappaport says yes they would.

he knows much more about the inner workings of the NFL than every person in this thread combined so I’m inclined to believe him on that

If they're willing to match a fully guaranteed deal then why don't they just give him one so they can move forward?

[ThatJaxxenGuy]

Just now, NYRaider said:

If they're willing to match a fully guaranteed deal then why don't they just give him one so they can move forward?

 That’s what I’ve been saying - but the ravens seem to be cool with digging their heels in and just hoping no one offers what they know they’d have to match and are willing to sabotage their own offseason to do so. 
 

[NYRaider]

1 minute ago, ThatJaxxenGuy said:

 That’s what I’ve been saying - but the ravens seem to be cool with digging their heels in and just hoping no one offers what they know they’d have to match and are willing to sabotage their own offseason to do so. 
 

Or they're pretty confident that he's not going to be able to agree to terms elsewhere if he has turned down their best offers.

This is where not having an agent is extremely detrimental for Lamar. Having someone in his corner having conversations with teams at the combine would've given him a much better outlook on his potential market.

Edited March 11, 2023 by NYRaider

[ThatJaxxenGuy]

3 minutes ago, NYRaider said:

Or they're pretty confident that he's not going to be able to agree to terms elsewhere if he has turned down their best offers.

This is where not having an agent is extremely detrimental for Lamar. Having someone in his corner having conversations with teams at the combine would've given him a much better outlook on his potential market.

But Rappaport is speculating that those aren’t their best offers because the Ravens would match any guaranteed deal. In other words the Ravens are willing to pay more but they apparently want to be pushed by another team to do so. 

[Nobellythrower]

lamar going to play for the ravens and they can probably go to the afc chip game with the coaching staff changes

[NYRaider]

Just now, ThatJaxxenGuy said:

But Rappaport is speculating that those aren’t their best offers because the Ravens would match any guaranteed deal. In other words the Ravens are willing to pay more but they apparently want to be pushed by another team to do so. 

It's difficult to really gauge the situation because he hasn't had an agent negotiating on his behalf behind closed doors. It just seems kind of crazy to me that they'd match any contract offer he receives but aren't willing to just meet his demands. The fact that they've been publicly about matching his offer sheet also plays to their advantage because it keeps other teams from even investing into the idea of signing him.

[DreamKid]

Just now, ThatJaxxenGuy said:

Again, you guys are failing to understand the actual issue I am talking about.

I wasn't even referring to whatever discussion you were involved in previously in the thread. Was more so making a separate point about what a fan's mentality should be- towards any player's contract.

2 hours ago, DreamKid said:

You want a deal Lamar is willing to sign so you retain his services,

^^^^This has been my stance on Lamar's deal from the beginning. 

9 minutes ago, ThatJaxxenGuy said:

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! 

They just wouldn't trade him in that situation. Also, after July 17 no team(including the Ravens) can sign him to a long term deal anyway. Which means no one will put in an offer sheet for a player they can't extend and he'll have to choose to either show up and play for us on the tag or hold out and hurt himself further in the eyes of the league and his teammates(where many, fairly or unfairly, think he already avoided playing and quit on his team in the playoffs last season to preserve his contract hopes)- it wouldn't be a good look for him, and he'd just be starting this process over again next year. This isn't a Leveon Bell situation where the club will eventually relent, QBs are too valuable. If Lamar chooses to hold out off consecutive tags he won't be playing football for 2 years, he'd earn a fat 0 dollars, and would become a UFA at 28 Y/O having not played the sport for 2 years. No one wants that to happen. Not the Ravens, his mother, the NFLPA, or Lamar. Which is why it won't.

Lamar has no doubt been informed about all of this by the Ravens and the NFLPA. That we'd be using the non exclusive tag letting him test the market- before he was tagged, the July 17th deadline where he wouldn't be able to sign the long term deal with the guarantees he's apparently after anyway, the money he's leaving(and already left) on the table by not signing an extension and potentially playing on the smaller tag, and the ramifications of holding out short or long term. It's a professional process, he isn't in the dark with any of this.

I think the situation will resolve itself quicker than fans think now that he's been tagged and FA is starting. Everyone should take a deep breath and let the people paid to worry about it, deal with it. 

[diamondbull424]

8 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. 

This perspective is true but also IMO misses some important context behind it to a degree.

TLWR?
1) good NFL players want to play with stars, 2) liking the team you’re a fan of matters as a fan, and 3) I agree that players signing for less is good… hence why I prefer Lamar getting fully guaranteed because $232.5m over 5 years signs him through his prime years, retains our star player, and would do it at probably the cheapest APY we could hope for, I could care less about gtd dollars as I doubt we cut him anyway.

First-
This does not consider the actual interpersonal dynamics of team building. It’s a “numbers only” focus that fails to fully conceptualize the “why” behind teams being built the way they do.

If you’re truly a fan of the team you have to realize that certain players are star players and that those star players are the lifeblood that allows for the remaining components of the team to be signed to such “criminally underrated” deals.

Other guys sign such deals based on a few things a) their ability to produce/start/achieve/thrive personally, b) true star players they could see getting them to the dance to hopefully win a SB and improve their legacy, and c) the stability and reputation of the organization.

Do we think players in the early years came to Baltimore in droves to play under Art Modell and then Steve Bisciotti? Or did they realistically come to Baltimore because of Ray Lewis and Ed Reed? Ozzie was also a star that legitimately some saw what he was doing and respected what he was being allowed to thrive within and that intrigued some of them to join.

Flacco, Ngata, and even Suggs were terrific players none were truly ever at that “star” level as Ray and Ed were and that showed in the years following Ray’s retirement. EDC is a great general manager, but he’s not putting on for the culture like Ozzie was.

You don’t consistently recruit guys like Calais Campbell, Morgan Moses, Kevin Zeitler, Justin Houston, etc without a star like Lamar Jackson… as some of them would simply choose another organization that has that “star” player but with perhaps a worse organizational reputation.

Second-
The other context is that stories also matter. Being a fan of a team is cool, but inevitably you’re a fan of something; the culture of the organization, the style of play, and the stories of its players/coaches. Otherwise what are you TRULY a fan of, what does your fandom TRULY represent?

SBs are cool and all, but if the squad was chock full of mass murderers, child, women, and/or dog abusers, etc... and all across the squad, I would not be cheering them on as heavily (or perhaps at all) as I would be the Louisville QB that was told to play RB that went on to be the organizations first TRUE offensive star player that said “they’re going to get a Super Bowl outta me, belie dat!” Or seeing a guy like Calais Campbell that was a veteran who played the right way his entire career and lacks only one thing, or Mark Andrews refusing to let diabetes define who he could be as an athlete, Justin Tucker solidifying his status to go down as the GOAT kicker with multiple SB rings, etc.

 

Last-
So I don’t disagree with the point that getting a player retained on the most salary cap friendly deal makes the most sense, but similarly keeping legitimate star players with great stories is also important.

So when people bulk at paying Lamar Watson’ money, I call THAT cuck’ish because it is being one sided to the perspective of the owners. As @wackywabbit has broken down about guaranteed money in the past about Joe Flacco’s deal, the same is true with Lamar.

I’d much rather sign Lamar to a 5 year, $232.5m deal with $46.5m guaranteed fully, than to pay him $52m-54m/year with far less guaranteed. One gives the team an additional $6-8m to work with annually, while the other is just paranoia forcing a more expensive result… because let’s face it are we REALLY going to sign Lamar, pay him $130-180m in guarantees and then cut him 3-4 years from now? I’m not buying that in the slightest.

So we’re better off getting him for as low as we can get the APY, the rest of the owners colluding to keep players from guaranteed deals. Why should I care? If the league really wanted to nip this, then establish a max contract amount and/or make only ONE player on the team eligible to get paid guaranteed money at a time.

Edited March 11, 2023 by diamondbull424

[diamondbull424]

5 hours ago, NYRaider said:

Would the Ravens match a fully guaranteed deal? If they're going to move on I think it's more likely that they'll tell Lamar they'll trade him somewhere if he finds another suitor. That way he gets to play where he wants and they get more draft capital in return.

They can’t trade him. They can either match the offer sheet and retain him or give the other team Lamar for two first round picks.

This looks more like Bisciotti not wanting to be the owner that truly establishes the fully guaranteed to QBs culture and this maneuver is about saving face to the other owners. Forcing one of THEM to force the culture and thus blame can be attributed to them alone.

What @ThatJaxxenGuy is talking about however is the reality that teams aren’t dumb. They’re not going to negotiate with Lamar until all other options have presented itself and been exhausted.

It makes sense for the Panthers to trade up for CJ Stroud (who I personally think they’re going to pick) vs going for Lamar because the Ravens will just match and it’s better to strike with the option you know you can obtain.

So strategically this is going to draw out, they’re all going to say “they’re not interested” because as of this moment, they’re going to actively pursue the routes with a higher success rate.

Only until after the draft has come and gone and select teams haven’t been able to solve their QB situations via trade, free agency, or the draft with ideal options… will they then say “screw it, I’ll spin the bottle to see what the Ravens ACTUALLY do.” Before settling on a Baker Mayfield or Jacoby Brissett if those are the best options that present themselves, they will put in an offer sheet to Lamar, but that wouldn’t be until likely May. They likely would IMO do it before second free agency happens in June so as to know what strategies to implore come 6/1.

But all in all, it would make no logical sense for any team to pursue Lamar until after the draft and it would equally make no sense for Lamar to panic and sign an extension deal he doesn’t like from the Ravens until after that time period.

Because all of this is simply a game of RISK.

Fans claiming “the market has decided” when it hasn’t even opened up yet for negotiations are short sighted at best and presumably don’t understand long term strategy.
 

@ThatJaxxenGuy is simply looking far down the road into the path where we ultimately match a gtd deal from a truly desperate team anyway. And in such a scenario perhaps they go fully gtd AND high APY, the worst possible result.

I don’t sit equally on either side. I think there’s a chance that all the QB needy teams solve their QB situations just enough that the Ravens could get “lucky” with a non fully guaranteed deal and that’s probably also what they hope as well.

But on the other side, why be cowards in the first place? Just give him the fully guaranteed deal at a lower APY and tell the other NFL owners “f’ what you heard” and let your nuts hang on the table for all the other owners to see… but I’m also not a billionaire, so I could see how that method wouldn’t be the most ideal for Bisciotti.

[DreamKid]

9 minutes ago, diamondbull424 said:

I think there’s a chance that all the QB needy teams solve their QB situations just enough that the Ravens could get “lucky” with a non fully guaranteed deal and that’s probably also what they hope as well.

Who knows what Lamar actually wants with reports that "other teams would be shocked at what he's turned down" from some sources and then reports that "he isn't seeking a fully guaranteed deal" from other sources.

The common thread from all of our biggest negotiations is Biscotti stepping in and wanting to get the best deal until he can't.

Flacco asked for the world, and Biscotti refused until he couldn't any longer...... Joe won the SB, was SB MVP, and wagged his junk at Biscotti's bank vault.

Apparently now Lamar is asking for the world, and it looks like Biscotti is probably going to refuse until he can't once again. Which in this negotiation probably means until he sees proof that someone will give Lamar the deal he wants. Until then he seemingly isn't going to give him the deal.

Biggest question now is what Lamar does if that deal he's after just isn't out there? Does he just come back and accept our best offer with no issue? Very interesting.

Biscotti should do something like promise to match or double any charitable donation by Lamar, and leak to the media that Lamar demanded that in the contract(If that's even legal in a football contract IDK). Would make both parties look good in the media, and put Lamar in position to get more lucrative brand deals by appearing super altruistic. They need to get creative. 

[ThatJaxxenGuy]

The Browns effed us with the guaranteed deal for Watson. Let’s pass the favour on to the Bengals and pay Lamar, lol 

[SalvadorsDeli]

13 hours ago, wackywabbit said:

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.

Panthers coming off the board as an option feels a little more significant to me in that they always struck me as most likely to give Lamar a Watsonesque offer we wouldn't match given that Tepper is one of the richest and newest owners in the league - I know they bowed out of the Watson sweepstakes rather than paying that but seemed possible that they had regret over not pulling the trigger.

The fact that they'd rather give up more draft capital and a WR1 instead of paying Lamar strikes me as significant. Doesn't mean there isn't a team waiting in the wings to pull the trigger but the Panthers being out of the running is more significant IMO than say, if the Raiders had traded up to 1 instead.