Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Ravens 2014 Offseason Tracker
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 17, 18, 19  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Baltimore Ravens
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Flaccomania


Joined: 12 Aug 2008
Posts: 23313
Location: Parkville, MD
PostPosted: Thu Dec 12, 2013 9:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SnA ExclusiVe wrote:
In what facet is he playing at a high level right now


He's not playing at a super high level these past 5 games, I agree. The previous 8 he was. That's my point.

Quote:
and where did I say his contract should be judged just off of this 5 game stretch?


In the exact portion I quoted. You're using this 5 game sample to say "he isn't playing at a high level" and "his play has dropped off as of late". You're ignoring his first 8 games in which he had 9 sacks and instead focusing on how he's gone on a cold spell for a whopping 5 games and bringing up the idea that maybe we shouldn't hold onto him.

Unless you're really trying to go with the argument of "well of course I said 'if his production start to go back up'" -- but in that same sense, would it be fair to say it about Torrey as well after his last bad game? Small samples sizes should never, ever, ever be used to entertain whether or not a player's long-term future should be impacted.

Quote:
Suggs is a pretty good run defender, but so is Upshaw. Suggs doesn't command double teams, so why would that have any impact on Dumervil's performance?


Suggs absolutely commands double teams. You truly don't think Suggs being opposite Dumervil is having any impact whatsoever? And that Upshaw could replicate Suggs' production? I don't know if you're truly just a "what have you done for me the past few weeks" type of fan or what, but to say that Suggs isn't playing at an overall pretty high level this season is asinine. I can understand saying "he's fallen off the past few weeks" but to use those weeks to erase the entire first half of the season blows my mind.
_________________


PSA: If your 2015 mock has the Ravens taking a RB in round 1, you're doing it wrong.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sp6488


Joined: 14 Mar 2005
Posts: 9526
Location: MD
PostPosted: Thu Dec 12, 2013 9:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Suggs is one of the best Olbs at playing the run in the league. He sets the edge and holds outside contain better than almost any olb I've ever watched (area of interest for me bc of how much I dealt with it in hs). Plus he's far better as a pass rusher than ups has ever will be.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
SnA ExclusiVe


Joined: 01 Jun 2011
Posts: 28024
Location: Spokane, WA
PostPosted: Thu Dec 12, 2013 10:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Flaccomania wrote:
SnA ExclusiVe wrote:
In what facet is he playing at a high level right now


He's not playing at a super high level these past 5 games, I agree. The previous 8 he was. That's my point.

The previous 8? Are you sure? I would argue he was only playing at a high level for the first 5 or 6 games.

Quote:
and where did I say his contract should be judged just off of this 5 game stretch?


In the exact portion I quoted. You're using this 5 game sample to say "he isn't playing at a high level" and "his play has dropped off as of late". You're ignoring his first 8 games in which he had 9 sacks and instead focusing on how he's gone on a cold spell for a whopping 5 games and bringing up the idea that maybe we shouldn't hold onto him.

Suggs wasn't great last year (injury reasons for most of the season), started out on fire this year and now is back to not being great. Like I said, if his production doesn't start to go back up, I don't see why a team that needs to resign several other key players wouldn't restructure him, especially considering his age.

Unless you're really trying to go with the argument of "well of course I said 'if his production start to go back up'" -- but in that same sense, would it be fair to say it about Torrey as well after his last bad game? Small samples sizes should never, ever, ever be used to entertain whether or not a player's long-term future should be impacted.

A WR isn't involved in every play, that's a bad example.

Quote:
Suggs is a pretty good run defender, but so is Upshaw. Suggs doesn't command double teams, so why would that have any impact on Dumervil's performance?


Suggs absolutely commands double teams. You truly don't think Suggs being opposite Dumervil is having any impact whatsoever? And that Upshaw could replicate Suggs' production? I don't know if you're truly just a "what have you done for me the past few weeks" type of fan or what, but to say that Suggs isn't playing at an overall pretty high level this season is asinine. I can understand saying "he's fallen off the past few weeks" but to use those weeks to erase the entire first half of the season blows my mind.

Theoretically, he should command double teams but he doesn't. Watch the film of him, you'll see. What impact does it have on Dumervil if Suggs is still commanding one guy to block him? We will see where Suggs ends up at the end of the year in terms of sack totals, but Upshaw could replicate Suggs' run stop production.

Again, this is all based on the predicate of IF Suggs' production doesn't return to what he SHOULD be doing
.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sp6488


Joined: 14 Mar 2005
Posts: 9526
Location: MD
PostPosted: Thu Dec 12, 2013 10:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Case and point re: run game Suggs. How Mathews just got outside of miller, that doesn't happen to sizzle.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
SnA ExclusiVe


Joined: 01 Jun 2011
Posts: 28024
Location: Spokane, WA
PostPosted: Thu Dec 12, 2013 10:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

sp6488 wrote:
Case and point re: run game Suggs. How Mathews just got outside of miller, that doesn't happen to sizzle.


It does. See: Chicago Bears Matt Forte 1st Q run where Suggs crashed and then missed the tackle.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Flaccomania


Joined: 12 Aug 2008
Posts: 23313
Location: Parkville, MD
PostPosted: Fri Dec 13, 2013 6:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

SnA ExclusiVe wrote:
Flaccomania wrote:
SnA ExclusiVe wrote:
In what facet is he playing at a high level right now


He's not playing at a super high level these past 5 games, I agree. The previous 8 he was. That's my point.

The previous 8? Are you sure? I would argue he was only playing at a high level for the first 5 or 6 games.

Quote:
and where did I say his contract should be judged just off of this 5 game stretch?


In the exact portion I quoted. You're using this 5 game sample to say "he isn't playing at a high level" and "his play has dropped off as of late". You're ignoring his first 8 games in which he had 9 sacks and instead focusing on how he's gone on a cold spell for a whopping 5 games and bringing up the idea that maybe we shouldn't hold onto him.

Suggs wasn't great last year (injury reasons for most of the season), started out on fire this year and now is back to not being great. Like I said, if his production doesn't start to go back up, I don't see why a team that needs to resign several other key players wouldn't restructure him, especially considering his age.

Unless you're really trying to go with the argument of "well of course I said 'if his production start to go back up'" -- but in that same sense, would it be fair to say it about Torrey as well after his last bad game? Small samples sizes should never, ever, ever be used to entertain whether or not a player's long-term future should be impacted.

A WR isn't involved in every play, that's a bad example.

Quote:
Suggs is a pretty good run defender, but so is Upshaw. Suggs doesn't command double teams, so why would that have any impact on Dumervil's performance?


Suggs absolutely commands double teams. You truly don't think Suggs being opposite Dumervil is having any impact whatsoever? And that Upshaw could replicate Suggs' production? I don't know if you're truly just a "what have you done for me the past few weeks" type of fan or what, but to say that Suggs isn't playing at an overall pretty high level this season is asinine. I can understand saying "he's fallen off the past few weeks" but to use those weeks to erase the entire first half of the season blows my mind.

Theoretically, he should command double teams but he doesn't. Watch the film of him, you'll see. What impact does it have on Dumervil if Suggs is still commanding one guy to block him? We will see where Suggs ends up at the end of the year in terms of sack totals, but Upshaw could replicate Suggs' run stop production.

Again, this is all based on the predicate of IF Suggs' production doesn't return to what he SHOULD be doing
.


I'm not even going to reply. It's clear you'd rather look at a handful of games to gauge if a player should be kept long-term. We clearly disagree there so we'll move on.
_________________


PSA: If your 2015 mock has the Ravens taking a RB in round 1, you're doing it wrong.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
diamondbull424


Moderator
Joined: 02 Dec 2007
Posts: 12988
Location: Baltimore, MD
PostPosted: Fri Dec 13, 2013 10:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

SnA ExclusiVe wrote:

Suggs is a pretty good run defender, but so is Upshaw. Suggs doesn't command double teams, so why would that have any impact on Dumervil's performance?

He doesn't? News to me. So the multiple occasions in the Steelers game where Suggs would get past their LT only to be hit by Bell... weren't double teams? Or does it only count as a double team when a TE is present on the LOS to assist the LT?

And it's not just the Steelers game. On multiple occasions this season that has happened. RBs tend to attack Suggs side to slow him down than to go towards Dumervil. So that definitely DOES have an impact on Dumervil's performance. It means, he gets more 1on1 opportunities. Also, Suggs being a great pass rusher opposite Dumervil means Doom isn't going to be double teamed himself on many occasions. Unrelated, Suggs presence also helps to draw the RB to his side and sometimes helps to leave a free blitzing ILB to attack the QB unabated.

SnA ExclusiVe wrote:
Theoretically, he should command double teams but he doesn't. Watch the film of him, you'll see. What impact does it have on Dumervil if Suggs is still commanding one guy to block him? We will see where Suggs ends up at the end of the year in terms of sack totals, but Upshaw could replicate Suggs' run stop production.

Perhaps Upshaw could replicate Suggs' run stop production (he still hasn't gotten to Suggs level though... who has had over 5 STFs in every year of his career outside of his rookie year (where he was the 3rd down pass rush specialist) and injured 2012 season (and this season, to this point.) Upshaw had 7 STFs last season, but only has one this season. And 5 is only the benchmark. Suggs has proven he can 8 on five occasions while still rushing the passer at a high level.

Even if Upshaw replaced Suggs run stopping and Dumervil maintains his production, where are we getting the additional pass rushing outside of Suggs... any FA addition that could add 10 sacks on a season would cost just as much or more than it would take to extend a veteran Suggs. And as a perennial playoff team attaining a high level pass rusher isn't likely where we're drafting. We're much more likely to get a Whitley Mercillus, Paul Kruger, or Brooks Reed type of pass rusher... not an elite edge threat. Though... I suppose if we let Suggs walk, our defense just might struggle enough to get us in range for somebody talented... but I'd much rather not risk that.

Especially considering Suggs has been a franchise player, a DPOY, and a Raven through and through. There's absolutely no reason to look at the grass being greener elsewhere in his case. He's still got it. And that's something any franchise worth it's respect should be doing within their power to keep.

SnA ExclusiVe wrote:
The previous 8? Are you sure? I would argue he was only playing at a high level for the first 5 or 6 games.

5 or 6? So you're not sure if you'll count that Green Bay game where Suggs had 10 tackles and a stuff? And since you're so strongly team Dumervil... wasn't that the game where he had something like 3 detrimental penalties to the team in that game to aid in the loss? So I guess Suggs being all over the field << 3 boneheaded penalties + 2 sacks/FF, makes no sense to me. Doom would've had an awesome game if not for having multiple costly penalties give the Packers more chances to march on and make plays. Suggs didn't have the better game there, but Suggs also doesn't produce so many stupid penalties to continue to give the opposing team opportunities. A sack is usually only going to result in a 3-7 yard loss. Whereas those three unsportsmanlike penalties probably nullified the loss yardage... plus provided them with 1st downs. So essentially, it basically cancels out everything except maybe one of the FFs when looking at it all. Then we've got Pittsburgh and Cleveland. Our pass rush never really shows up against them... usually because the refs allow much more physicality in those matchups and our (mostly) leverage pass rushers are at a disadvantage when opposing teams are allowed to hold them. That said, Suggs still ended up with 6 solo tackles and a sack.. to Dumervil's 1 solo and 0.5 sack. So if Suggs had a bad game... what did Dumervil do? Cleveland Suggs dealt with Joe Thomas most of the night... and ended up with a 7 tackles and 1 sack... Doom was held stat-less (talk about no impact).

In terms of bad games, this past one wasn't a bad game. Suggs produced 5 solo tackles and a TFL... and that doesn't include his should-be-sack, where Cassel was tackled in the backfield but fell forward to the LOS and thus resulted in no sack.. But since Dumervil can be trusted to produce, I'm sure he dominated right? 3 tackles and no sacks? Hmm... maybe your implication that Dumervil successfully supplants Suggs isn't as accurate as you assumed?

SnA ExclusiVe wrote:
Suggs wasn't great last year (injury reasons for most of the season), started out on fire this year and now is back to not being great. Like I said, if his production doesn't start to go back up, I don't see why a team that needs to resign several other key players wouldn't restructure him, especially considering his age.

Suggs wasn't great last year, but he still proved that he was the best defender on this team last season. We started the year off healthy across the board with a healthy Ngata, Webb, Lewis, Reed, etc... yet the defense played like hot garbage- giving up a bevy of 100 yd rushers. Our pass defense also struggled and neither Kruger nor Upshaw could prove to be an effective pass rusher. Yet once Suggs returned.. our run defense drastically improved and Paul Kruger started to emerge as a pass rushing threat. So either Dean Pees finally figured out how to stop the run better and call better defensive plays... or Suggs is just that darn important to our defensive unit that his return could spark such improvement.

And you extend Suggs' contract because despite his age (31), Suggs has never relied upon elite athletic measurables to get by defenders. He's a leverage pass rusher. So his game will age much better than someone that relies on elite physical ability. Suggs is a lot like Anquan Boldin in that respect. Ages well because he uses the nuances of his position to be successful at a high level. Suggs will slow down, sure, but at worst he probably ends up as a great 2 down run stuffing OLB with a 3rd down pass rush specialist subbing in for him on 3rd downs... though even then, that's probably worst case scenario (assuming nothing out of the ordinary happens to him). Lastly you extend Suggs because it means saving money against the cap next season. It lowers his cap hit to a much more manageable level.

I think you're drastically underrating Suggs. Dumervil is only a half sack better than him on the season, yet you imply the Ravens are better of with him then Suggs... makes no sense.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SnA ExclusiVe


Joined: 01 Jun 2011
Posts: 28024
Location: Spokane, WA
PostPosted: Fri Dec 13, 2013 10:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dumervil is a half-sack better and is making drastically less.

I watched the highlights of the Steelers game again and literally didn't see one play where a RB went over to chip Suggs so you'll have to help me out on this one. I have, however, seen many occasions where Suggs will spy a RB or chip a RB coming out of the backfield and then continue on his pass rush, if that's what you're saying?

But I don't think you guys are understanding what my point is, still. My point isn't that right now Suggs shouldn't be resigned - my point is that if we finish the year and Suggs ends up with 9 sacks and stays at the level he's been playing at for the past few games, meaning he will have gone more than half the season being near invisible, I wouldn't be surprised to see the FO try to restructure him given his age and salary.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Go_Ravens2


Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Posts: 1995
PostPosted: Fri Dec 13, 2013 11:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm at work right now, so I don't have time to find specific examples, but even though Suggs has been held sackless recently, he's still been getting pretty good pressure on a number of occasions. Quarterbacks are just getting rid of the ball quicker. Over the last 2 games our entire team has been held sackless though, so why is it fair to say Suggs has been underperforming but others have been playing well? I'd still take Suggs over Doom every day of the week and twice on Sundays. Not to mention, we just lost Ed and Ray last year and Suggs has stepped into that leadership role. I don't know if this defense can afford to lose another leader. I'd be all for an extension for Suggs (lowers cap hit + keeps him in bmore longer), but if that doesn't happen, I'm completely against cutting/trading him.
_________________

GO RAVENS!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SnA ExclusiVe


Joined: 01 Jun 2011
Posts: 28024
Location: Spokane, WA
PostPosted: Fri Dec 13, 2013 11:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Question: If we extend Suggs, would that lower or raise his cap hit right now? Isn't his cap hit something like $22 million?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
diamondbull424


Moderator
Joined: 02 Dec 2007
Posts: 12988
Location: Baltimore, MD
PostPosted: Fri Dec 13, 2013 11:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

SnA ExclusiVe wrote:
Dumervil is a half-sack better and is making drastically less.

Of course he is... because he's also drastically worse at defending the run and was signed as an "aging pass rusher" vs a "young pass rusher", Suggs extension also wouldn't see him getting paid elite pass rusher money anymore, but rather maybe $7-8m/year... and that $2-3m extra over Dumervil would account for his run stuffing ability.

SnA ExclusiVe wrote:
I watched the highlights of the Steelers game again and literally didn't see one play where a RB went over to chip Suggs so you'll have to help me out on this one. I have, however, seen many occasions where Suggs will spy a RB or chip a RB coming out of the backfield and then continue on his pass rush, if that's what you're saying?

The first game or the second Steelers game? I'm referring to the second. Also, by "highlights" are you simply referring to highlights or are you talking about watching the game (gamerewind/tivo) because I definitely remember a couple occasions where he got by the LT only to be redirected back to the tackle due to a RB. That... and Big Ben going hoodini in the pocket. But if by highlights, you just mean, actual highlights... why would any highlight tape EVER show a play where a player ALMOST made a play. Would be like the worst highlight reel of all time... unless it was a lowlight tape... in which case the lulzy play would be appropriate.

SnA ExclusiVe wrote:
But I don't think you guys are understanding what my point is, still. My point isn't that right now Suggs shouldn't be resigned - my point is that if we finish the year and Suggs ends up with 9 sacks and stays at the level he's been playing at for the past few games, meaning he will have gone more than half the season being near invisible, I wouldn't be surprised to see the FO try to restructure him given his age and salary.

1) It hasn't just been Suggs that has been "invisible". It's the pass rush. And there are factors that support that as being a good reason. In these past 5 games, two of those games has seen us deal with inclement weather. And thus opposing teams have been less willing to have long developing pass plays/passes in general. Only taking shots when opportunities arise. The Bears barely passed that whole game until maybe midway through the 4th quarter when the winds died down. [And then McCown made plays and everyone thus assumes he had some amazing game. When in fact, had the game not been delayed as long as it was... he doesn't have the arm to lead the Bears to the win in inclement weather] So there were limited opportunities to sack a QB in that game due to less passing and when they were passing it was usually the dink and dunk, quick release passes.

The Jets game was a shutout defensive effort. Everyone played well as a unit (and the Jets offense played bad as a unit). Suggs not standing out isn't a big deal. No defender truly "stood out" in that game outside of maybe McPhee and Daryl Smith. Suggs did have a FR, so that's more than plenty of other guys put forth "statistically"... outside of the greatest stat they accomplished, "3", as in points.

Pittsburgh always features Roethlisberger going houdini and avoiding sacks to make his OL look better than it is. That game was no different. Suggs had a few opportunities in that game where he was left sackless due to a RB or Roethlisberger navigating the pocket.

Then you've got this past game with the weather. Meaning short passes all game long. Cassell had what, 8-10 bubble screen passes of their 37 attempts? You can't get sacks there. And then they had a boat load of other short passes. They maybe had only 7-8 attempts all game where they had Cassell dropping back and looking for long developing routes (that I can remember anyway).

Suggs has already shown to have a quality game against the Vikings IMO. I didn't see how you can simply equate "sacks" only with having a good game. If he brings down Cassell for a half a yard back and gets that sack, is his performance somehow markedly improved? Absolutely not. Suggs shut down the run, got a stuff, and a near sack.

2) Suggs may make more money than Dumervil, but Doom also isn't a full time player. He's nothing more than what Paul Kruger was. A pass rushing specialist, who when fresh can be half decent against the run. He's not a full player. Suggs is... and that means it's majestically harder to scheme against shutting down a Suggs led defense than a Dumervil led defense.

It also means you're going to have to find another great pass rusher to replace Suggs' pass rush and someone to replace his run stopping ability... for less than what Suggs would command. Dumervil isn't a full time player, so you'll need to find a run stopper to supplement in to hide his run weakness. And with Upshaw he can be a great run stuffer, but he's got weight issues and also hasn't shown he can be a pass rusher at the NFL level. So now you need to find a 3rd down pass rushing specialist to back him up... seems like it would simply be easier to keep Suggs... while reducing his 2014 cap number.

3) The Ravens can't restructure Suggs contract. Next season is the final year of his deal. There's no further years on his deal to dump the money into. They can only do four things: a) Cut him b) renegotiate (meaning Suggs would have to ACCEPT a paycut, same situation as Boldin going into this season)... these first two options are HIGHLY unlikely to happen. The last two options at our disposal are to c) extend Suggs or d) let him play out his deal. Restructuring his contract is not an option.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
diamondbull424


Moderator
Joined: 02 Dec 2007
Posts: 12988
Location: Baltimore, MD
PostPosted: Fri Dec 13, 2013 12:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SnA ExclusiVe wrote:
Question: If we extend Suggs, would that lower or raise his cap hit right now? Isn't his cap hit something like $22 million?

1. Extending his deal would lower his cap hit. They could convert some of his 2014 salary into a signing bonus and spread it out into the rest of the years of his deal. I don't think his option bonus can be spread out any further however, since that can only be prorated a maximum of 5 years in any given deal... and that was a 2nd year option bonus on a 6 year deal, meaning that's the fifth year of the proration.

So yeah, a Suggs extension would lower his cap hit by however much they decide to roll into a signing bonus... along with the additional signing bonus for the deal itself.

2. In terms of Suggs cap hit... It's no where close to $22m.. WTDH? That's elite QB territory. Laughing

It's listed at $12.4m, the third highest cap hit behind Ngata ($16m- disgusting) and Joe Flacco ($14.8m). You can find the rest of the cap hits in the link.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SnA ExclusiVe


Joined: 01 Jun 2011
Posts: 28024
Location: Spokane, WA
PostPosted: Fri Dec 13, 2013 12:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The whole "Dumervil can't play the run" thing hasn't been the case this year. IIRC, PFF actually mentioned several times throughout the year that Dumervil's run defense has been much better.

For the Steelers game, I'm referring to the second one, the game highlights, and I don't have have Rewind/All-22 so that's why I asked for you to help me out with that Very Happy

Lastly, yes, our pass rush has been invisible, but here's the thing. We have a leader in Suggs who, when the pass rush goes invisible, should be able to be relied on to create sacks and create a presence, and he simply hasn't done that consistently. There's a reason why these guys get paid more than others, and that's a huge part of it. When others aren't consistent, your top players should be. All I'm saying is that Suggs shouldn't be getting beat by single blockers as much as he has been when we consider the level of dominance he's capable of.

Lastly, saying Dumervil is nothing more than Paul Kruger is vastly underrating Dumervil. I understand their roles are much in the same, but Dumervil as a player is better in every aspect of football than Kruger was. And if you want to replicate Suggs' pass rush, we have Dumervil. Want to replicate his run stopping abilities, we have Upshaw. Quite simple.

However, an extension for Suggs is the most likely scenario, and if that takes his cap hit down, then I'm all for it. Like I originally said, the premise for this was Suggs' play continues to not match his paycheck (which means he continues to not match this for SEVERAL more games).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SnA ExclusiVe


Joined: 01 Jun 2011
Posts: 28024
Location: Spokane, WA
PostPosted: Fri Dec 13, 2013 12:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

diamondbull424 wrote:
SnA ExclusiVe wrote:
Question: If we extend Suggs, would that lower or raise his cap hit right now? Isn't his cap hit something like $22 million?

1. Extending his deal would lower his cap hit. They could convert some of his 2014 salary into a signing bonus and spread it out into the rest of the years of his deal. I don't think his option bonus can be spread out any further however, since that can only be prorated a maximum of 5 years in any given deal... and that was a 2nd year option bonus on a 6 year deal, meaning that's the fifth year of the proration.

So yeah, a Suggs extension would lower his cap hit by however much they decide to roll into a signing bonus... along with the additional signing bonus for the deal itself.

2. In terms of Suggs cap hit... It's no where close to $22m.. WTDH? That's elite QB territory. Laughing

It's listed at $12.4m, the third highest cap hit behind Ngata ($16m- disgusting) and Joe Flacco ($14.8m). You can find the rest of the cap hits in the link.


You'll have to excuse my memory, for the past few days I've been doing a lot of research on baseball contracts and the $22M was Alex Rodriguez's salary in 2006, and I just remember seeing a 2 in Suggs' salary cap so I made a connection that wasn't there Wink

But in terms of that, I think Suggs will get an extension and Ngata will DEFINITELY get restructured.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Flaccomania


Joined: 12 Aug 2008
Posts: 23313
Location: Parkville, MD
PostPosted: Fri Dec 13, 2013 12:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SnA ExclusiVe wrote:
The whole "Dumervil can't play the run" thing hasn't been the case this year. IIRC, PFF actually mentioned several times throughout the year that Dumervil's run defense has been much better.

For the Steelers game, I'm referring to the second one, the game highlights, and I don't have have Rewind/All-22 so that's why I asked for you to help me out with that Very Happy

Lastly, yes, our pass rush has been invisible, but here's the thing. We have a leader in Suggs who, when the pass rush goes invisible, should be able to be relied on to create sacks and create a presence, and he simply hasn't done that consistently. There's a reason why these guys get paid more than others, and that's a huge part of it. When others aren't consistent, your top players should be. All I'm saying is that Suggs shouldn't be getting beat by single blockers as much as he has been when we consider the level of dominance he's capable of.

Lastly, saying Dumervil is nothing more than Paul Kruger is vastly underrating Dumervil. I understand their roles are much in the same, but Dumervil as a player is better in every aspect of football than Kruger was. And if you want to replicate Suggs' pass rush, we have Dumervil. Want to replicate his run stopping abilities, we have Upshaw. Quite simple.

However, an extension for Suggs is the most likely scenario, and if that takes his cap hit down, then I'm all for it. Like I originally said, the premise for this was Suggs' play continues to not match his paycheck (which means he continues to not match this for SEVERAL more games).


So wait, when the pass rush is lacking, it's up to Suggs to step up and find a way to get pressure.

But yet, it's not up to the guy across from him, who's making a little less (who you think isn't dependent on Suggs at all) to do anything? The guy who basically has solely a role of generating that pressure and is much more rested?
_________________


PSA: If your 2015 mock has the Ravens taking a RB in round 1, you're doing it wrong.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Baltimore Ravens All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 17, 18, 19  Next
Page 3 of 19

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group