The Lamar offseason talk thread

[DontTazeMeBro]

What’s the franchise tag? Like over $40 million? You gotta have a lot of balls to leave that on the table. I mean he could fake an injury. But just refuse to even show up. That would be a bold move.

[wackywabbit]

1 hour ago, Ray Reed said:

No but we do have more information than you alluded to in your prior post. You said we can’t assume Lamar is being unreasonable because of the lack of information we have.

Jeff Z saying he’s turning down top 2-3 $ in the league and the most $ in the league up front seems to be pretty solid information.

There's a wide range between the Ravens are being disrespectful and Lamar is being unreasonable and I've seen nothing defeinitive with enough contract details to make either claim.

If Lamar wants to hold out for the Desean Watson deal (hypothetical that he is insisting on that), that wouldn't be unreasonable. Lamar, Burrow, Hurts, Herbert could all be reasonable in their claim that they deserve more than that scumbag.

 

2 hours ago, Ray Reed said:

Good point. Actually not sure on that…was Bell under the new one?

Bell's holdout was 2018. New CBA 2020.

Edited February 17, 2023 by wackywabbit

[Ray Reed]

2 hours ago, diamondbull424 said:

 

This again is not new information. Rumors were they offered Lamar $250m over 5 years, with $133m guaranteed at signing. That’s the same ESPN story from last season.
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/34569529/lamar-jackson-declined-baltimore-ravens-250m-extension-offer-wants-deal-fully-guaranteed-signing-sources-say?platform=amp

 

Jeff Z isn’t saying something new or “plugged in.” He’s regurgitating this same old news from last year.

And this deal is undercutting Lamar. If the team wants a loyalty discount, the team should be willing to pay a loyalty guarantee, otherwise the market is the next guy up that’s a top QB resets the market with the top deal. Murray was a fringe top 10 QB, while Lamar is a top 5 QB when healthy, he’s at the level of resetting the market or at least getting a nice deal fully guaranteed, they have to pick their poison. But teams aren’t loyal and thus a loyalty discount makes sense as long as that loyalty discount is guaranteed. Now if Lamar wants top QB money PLUS fully guaranteed, perhaps that’s something else entirely. However we don’t have that information.

When you’re a ravens fan trying to argue that Jeff Zrebiec is tweeting info without having concrete information, you’ve lost the plot and it isn’t worth expecting an objective conversation with you on the matter.

Sorry. 

And i don’t believe it’s ever been reported before that we’ve offered to pay him to 2-3 money in the league and the most $ in the NFL upfront. That’s different info than the reports from last year.

Edited February 17, 2023 by Ray Reed

[Ray Reed]

2 hours ago, wackywabbit said:

There's a wide range between the Ravens are being disrespectful and Lamar is being unreasonable and I've seen nothing defeinitive with enough contract details to make either claim.

If Lamar wants to hold out for the Desean Watson deal (hypothetical that he is insisting on that), that wouldn't be unreasonable. Lamar, Burrow, Hurts, Herbert could all be reasonable in their claim that they deserve more than that scumbag.

 

Bell's holdout was 2018. New CBA 2020.

Ok, if your issue is with the nomenclature of “unreasonable”, then i’ll amend my phrase.

Watson’s contract was an outlier, and Lamar isn't a good enough quarterback to turn down top 2-3 $ in the league and the most $ in the league up front.

[wackywabbit]

25 minutes ago, Ray Reed said:

Ok, if your issue is with the nomenclature of “unreasonable”, then i’ll amend my phrase.

Watson’s contract was an outlier, and Lamar isn't a good enough quarterback to turn down top 2-3 $ in the league and the most $ in the league up front.

He can turn down whatever deal he wants. The Ravens can refuse to offer whatever deal they want. Consent is everything.

Just wait a month. There isn't any news happening here. You are extrapolating and making up way too many contract details that just aren't given to us.

[diamondbull424]

6 hours ago, Ray Reed said:

1) When you’re a ravens fan trying to argue that Jeff Zrebiec is tweeting info without having concrete information, you’ve lost the plot and it isn’t worth expecting an objective conversation with you on the matter.

Sorry. 

And i don’t believe it’s ever been reported before that we’ve offered to 2) pay him to 2-3 money in the league 3) and the most $ in the NFL upfront. That’s different info than the reports from last year.

1) Way to try and create a strawman narrative around what I said as “arguing with Jeff Z” vs arguing with your analyses that there’s somehow new info in this tweet when there really isn’t.

[“They’ve been more than willing to make him second or third highest paid player in nfl and give him most upfront. He’s entitled to say no but we’re going to have to agree to disagree about that being disrespectful.”]

Where is the new material?

2) It was reported last year that the Ravens offered Lamar top 2-3 money via the ESPN report I already linked to a couple posts ago. $50m APY is top 2-3 money. 

3) Also you’re interpreting his “most upfront” as “THE most upfront [money]”. Those are two VASTLY different statements and meanings.

The former means most of his contract money to be paid upfront, which would simply mean more than half to qualify the statement as accurate. The ESPN report of $250m with $130m fully guaranteed was 52% of the deal upfront, ie qualifying as “most [of it] upfront” and thus not anything newly reported.

Whereas contrary to that, the latter would mean that the Ravens are offering Lamar “[the] most upfront [money]” which would be the same thing as saying they’re offering “the most fully guaranteed money” which would mean “more than $230m fully guaranteed.” If this was the report, why would Jeff Z not simply say “most full gtd” instead?

Occam’s Razor is true here, the most simple translation is thus the former and not the latter. Especially equipped with the rumors that Lamar was seeking Watson level fully guaranteed dollars.
_________________

If Jeff Z was truly reporting something new, he would be saying something more concrete like “my sources tell me that the most recent rounds of negotiations had the Ravens offer Lamar $50m per year and just over $230m of that fully guaranteed. And he turned it down.”

And if he were stating that information 1) yeah then Lamar is being unreasonable in his contract demands to expect both the record for guaranteed as well as such a high APY and 2) then that means this organization has a serious issue with leaks from their top brass, which has never been an issue before.

The only members of the Ravens brass with knowledge of the Lamar negotiations should presumably be Steve Bisciotti, EDC, Sashi Brown, and perhaps Ozzie Newsome… and I HIGHLY doubt that they are leaking this info to Jeff Z for him to casually get into Twitter debates about. That would be both flagrantly unprofessional and reckless of him to do if that were TRULY the case.

Edited February 17, 2023 by diamondbull424

[diamondbull424]

6 hours ago, wackywabbit said:

He can turn down whatever deal he wants. The Ravens can refuse to offer whatever deal they want. Consent is everything.

Just wait a month. There isn't any news happening here. You are extrapolating and making up way too many contract details that just aren't given to us.

Yeah it’s weird to me that fans think the Ravens and Lamar are going to rush this process that will define years for the franchise and the player… to placate fan tensions.

Let’s just analyze the scenario. They JUST hired their OC presumably with input from top offensive core players (presumably Lamar, Andrews, Stanley), top executives, and key coaches on the staff. That process took an 3-4 weeks and was very thorough and not rushed, yet we would rush something even more important?

Deadlines
2/21-3/7 = Tag Window

We have another three weeks before the tag window closes, this is the first negotiation hurdle.

Getting a deal done before for the organization means potentially not having to cut/restructure key players to create necessary cap space for the tag. Means they could possibly be active in free agency as well if they desired. Thus a deal done within this deadline would greatly benefit the team building, if at all possible. However considering the squad is pretty tightly constructed as it stands, this isn’t really a huge deal. We’ve historically been just as/more active post 6/1 when teams are making player cuts/trades and the same would be true in a scenario where this deadline is not meant and likely true regardless of that fact.

7/15 = Franchise tag negotiation deadline.

Whether the team chooses to give Lamar the exclusive tag or the non-exclusive tag, they and/or other teams will still have another 4 1/2 months to negotiate a long term deal with Lamar that is suitable for both sides.

If the team feels as though Lamar won’t be worth much on the trade market (as some Browns fans have felt) and/or that Lamar’s contract demands are truly outrageous, then Ravens brass would strategically benefit from using the non-exclusive tag.

That way if they truly feel Lamar’s demands are extreme, they can allow the market to humble him until he signs the deal we offered.

Conversely, if we go with the exclusive option, then we can reasonably assume that the team isn’t willing to risk the threat of other teams paying what some fans feel are “unreasonable demands” from Lamar… unless they’re also willing to supply the franchise with an unreasonably valuable haul in attempting to replace Lamar’s value to the team.

Either way, the deadline is 5 months away. So fans jumping at every little tweet of recycled info is… absolutely precious.

[Ray Reed]

8 hours ago, wackywabbit said:

He can turn down whatever deal he wants. The Ravens can refuse to offer whatever deal they want. Consent is everything.

Just wait a month. There isn't any news happening here. You are extrapolating and making up way too many contract details that just aren't given to us.

Obviously he can turn down whatever he wants. lol. What a weird thing to say to try and shut down discussion that you may not like. That’s like responding to some draft rumors with “the Ravens can draft whoever they want. There isn’t any news here. Just wait till after the draft to comment on players”. 

I’m not making up contract details. I’m posting tweets from far and away the most reputable Ravens reporter out there, and commenting on them.

Bizarre you can’t see the difference there. It’s not like i’m writing up a totally imagined contract with all the details (which some people in here do btw…but that’s totally valuable and cool. Posting tweets about Lamar Jackson, in the "Lamar offseason talk thread", the day they were tweeted by our best beat reporter though? Out of bounds.  No place for it. You're right).

Edited February 17, 2023 by Ray Reed

[diamondbull424]

12 hours ago, Ray Reed said:

Obviously he can turn down whatever he wants. lol. What a weird thing to say to try and shut down discussion that you may not like. That’s like responding to some draft rumors with “the Ravens can draft whoever they want. There isn’t any news here. Just wait till after the draft to comment on players”. 

I’m not making up contract details. I’m posting tweets from far and away the most reputable Ravens reporter out there, and commenting on them.

Bizarre you can’t see the difference there. It’s not like i’m writing up a totally imagined contract with all the details (which some people in here do btw…but that’s totally valuable and cool. Posting tweets the day they were posted by our best reporter though? Out of bounds)

No you’re just totally imagining your own interpretation of a tweet that people in the Ravens community have discussed ad nauseam and yet none have come up with quite the same “unique” interpretation as you that means the Ravens have given Lamar “the most upfront money.” 

21 hours ago, Ray Reed said:

And i don’t believe it’s ever been reported before that we’ve offered to pay him to 2-3 money in the league

Again, not to your knowledge… not that it was posted within the very post that you were quoting or anything, but do carry on. 😂 

Edited February 17, 2023 by diamondbull424
Feeling less salty

[wackywabbit]

2 hours ago, Ray Reed said:

Obviously he can turn down whatever he wants. lol. What a weird thing to say to try and shut down discussion that you may not like. That’s like responding to some draft rumors with “the Ravens can draft whoever they want. There isn’t any news here. Just wait till after the draft to comment on players”. 

I’m not making up contract details. I’m posting tweets from far and away the most reputable Ravens reporter out there, and commenting on them.

Bizarre you can’t see the difference there. It’s not like i’m writing up a totally imagined contract with all the details (which some people in here do btw…but that’s totally valuable and cool. Posting tweets about Lamar Jackson, in the "Lamar offseason talk thread", the day they were tweeted by our best beat reporter though? Out of bounds.  No place for it. You're right).

Restating myself so I won't do it another time but:

1. Without talking about actual details (when and what was offered) I don't understand how you can fault Jackson for not taking something. As DB said, from what Jeff recently said, it could be be the contract offer (allegedly) leaked by NFLPA in the fall. I don't even think Jeff would hear new numbers at this time. From the wording Jeff used it definitely sound like it was this he was referring to: https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/34569529/lamar-jackson-declined-baltimore-ravens-250m-extension-offer-wants-deal-fully-guaranteed-signing-sources-say. Hence my statement that you are not reacting to actual news (this info is 5 months old).

I forget, did you actually say whether you think Zrebiec is speaking about some new numbers that aren't the above? Because you can definitely report that as top 2-3 money.

2. Jeff said the hold up is % guaranteed. I've already stated why I think that is overblown as a concern for anyone not writing the check (and putting all that money in escrow), and reasonable to ask for as a player. It would be welcome for me if he takes lesser AAV with more guaranteed.

Edited February 17, 2023 by wackywabbit

[Ray Reed]

2 hours ago, diamondbull424 said:

No you’re just totally imagining your own interpretation of a tweet that people in the Ravens community have discussed ad nauseam and yet none have come up with quite the same “unique” interpretation as you that means the Ravens have given Lamar “the most upfront money.” 

That and we can’t forget this golden analysis. The Ravens were, not to your knowledge anyway, . 

Again, not to your knowledge… not that it was posted within the very post that you were quoting or anything, but do carry on. 😂 

[Ray Reed]

1 hour ago, wackywabbit said:

Restating myself so I won't do it another time but:

1. Without talking about actual details (when and what was offered) I don't understand how you can fault Jackson for not taking something. As DB said, from what Jeff recently said, it could be be the contract offer (allegedly) leaked by NFLPA in the fall. I don't even think Jeff would hear new numbers at this time. From the wording Jeff used it definitely sound like it was this he was referring to: https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/34569529/lamar-jackson-declined-baltimore-ravens-250m-extension-offer-wants-deal-fully-guaranteed-signing-sources-say. Hence my statement that you are not reacting to actual news (this info is 5 months old).

I forget, did you actually say whether you think Zrebiec is speaking about some new numbers that aren't the above? Because you can definitely report that as top 2-3 money.

2. Jeff said the hold up is % guaranteed. I've already stated why I think that is overblown as a concern for anyone not writing the check (and putting all that money in escrow), and reasonable to ask for as a player. It would be welcome for me if he takes lesser AAV with more guaranteed.

Does a fully guaranteed structure not come with unavoidable cap hits later on (say years 4/5/6 of a contract) years down the line?

If the Ravens give Lamar a fully guaranteed contract I would assume that means his salary in those later years is guaranteed, meaning the cap hits later on aren't going to be very navigable without an extension/restructure. So what happens if we fully guarantee Lamar a $50 mil base salary in 2029, but he's significantly declined by then, or injuries have taken their toll, etc? We'll just have a $50mil sunk cost cap hit on the books with no chance to remedy that situation outside of a trade. No thanks. It's just not smart business. Let the Browns be the Browns. We're the Ravens. Not the Lamar's. As Ravens fans the long terms prospects of the football team are more important than the long term prospects of cash flow to Lamar's account.

If he's willing to take a sh!t ton of money up front in exchange for non-guaranteed years later on, I'm all for the deal. I don't really care if Lamar has a big cap hit the next 2-3 years because I expect him to still be a top 5-10 QB in that period. But that remains to be seen if he's willing to do that, and that's not the current conversation around the deal from our beat reporters. If there are tweets or reports or speculation that come out in the next few weeks about that being a possibility, great, I'll be discussing that in here as well. It's the Lamar offseason talk thread. 

Edited February 17, 2023 by Ray Reed

[wackywabbit]

2 hours ago, Ray Reed said:

Does a fully guaranteed structure not come with unavoidable cap hits later on (say years 4/5/6 of a contract) years down the line?

If the Ravens give Lamar a fully guaranteed contract I would assume that means his salary in those later years is guaranteed, meaning the cap hits later on aren't going to be very navigable without an extension/restructure. So what happens if we fully guarantee Lamar a $50 mil base salary in 2029, but he's significantly declined by then, or injuries have taken their toll, etc? We'll just have a $50mil sunk cost cap hit on the books with no chance to remedy that situation outside of a trade. No thanks. It's just not smart business. Let the Browns be the Browns. We're the Ravens. Not the Lamar's. As Ravens fans the long terms prospects of the football team are more important than the long term prospects of cash flow to Lamar's account.

Yes, the risk that we should care about is that Lamar is bad enough that no one wants to take on that cap hit and he will have to be cut and we eat that cap space. My opinion is the percentage chance of that happening and the Ravens still being close enough to contention to take advantage of that cap space with another QB pretty small. Like in the 10-15% range at most. I'm willing to risk that to keep Lamar on this team.

Edited February 17, 2023 by wackywabbit

[Ray Reed]

35 minutes ago, wackywabbit said:

Yes, the risk that we should care about is that Lamar is bad enough that no one wants to take on that cap hit and he will have to be cut and we eat that cap space. My opinion is the percentage chance of that happening and the Ravens still being close enough to contention to take advantage of that cap space with another QB pretty small. Like in the 10-15% range at most. I'm willing to risk that to keep Lamar on this team.

Fair enough, I can see that

[RavensfanRD]

20 hours ago, Ray Reed said:

Lamar isn't a good enough quarterback to turn down top 2-3 $ in the league and the most $ in the league up front.

 

Cap