905 replies to this topic

[Slidemaster]

Because he's being asked to do too much whne the playoffs start. You win 13 games and the #1 seed with the top rushing attack in the league and get to the AFCCG and forget what got you there. Why is that so hard for you to understand? Why are you still giving the coaches a pass for a horrible game plan??

I'm not giving them a pass, but I always believe player execution is paramount. Great players are great players because they play great, not because they had a great coach who turned them from benchwarmer to all-pro.

Coaches help. Schemes help. But players need to play well too. Lamar hasn't just been ineffective because the playcalling was bad. He's been ineffective because he makes bad decisions and bad throws at crucial times. It's like Romo syndrome but in purple.

[Biggsy]

The only thing I heard all year on Bateman was his win rate or seperation yardage was really good. But Lamar doesnt look his way much and he has had some drops too. So who knows.

To me, win rate and seperation gained are great indicators for probable success. If you're consistently beating your man, and gaining seperation, you're doing your job. You can't throw it to yourself, all you can do as a WR is get open. If Bateman is doing that, but not getting targets, that's not on him.


As far as Oweh, he actually had the highest pass rush win rate on the team. Had 54 total pressures. So once again, he's doing his job. Sack totals can be fickle. Clowney has made a career of winning, and getting to the QB consistently, but not getting sacks. To me, I'm good with low sack totals, as long as the player is consistently winning his assignment, and pressuring the QB. Without looking, I'd like to know how many of Oweh's pressures from the outside, led to sacks for the interior lineman because the QB had to step up, or move away from him.

I'm picking up both options. Both play premium positions, and both do what they're supposed to do, consistently well. Have to trust that will eventually lead to production on the "attractive" stat lines.

[hallas]

To me, win rate and seperation gained are great indicators for probable success. If you're consistently beating your man, and gaining seperation, you're doing your job. You can't throw it to yourself, all you can do as a WR is get open. If Bateman is doing that, but not getting targets, that's not on him.


As far as Oweh, he actually had the highest pass rush win rate on the team. Had 54 total pressures. So once again, he's doing his job. Sack totals can be fickle. Clowney has made a career of winning, and getting to the QB consistently, but not getting sacks. To me, I'm good with low sack totals, as long as the player is consistently winning his assignment, and pressuring the QB. Without looking, I'd like to know how many of Oweh's pressures from the outside, led to sacks for the interior lineman because the QB had to step up, or move away from him.

I'm picking up both options. Both play premium positions, and both do what they're supposed to do, consistently well. Have to trust that will eventually lead to production on the "attractive" stat lines.

I can see an argument where Bateman being so awful at the catch point to the point that it negates his separation. For me it's mostly the absurd going rate for WRs making me want to exercise it.

[bmore_ken]

I'm not giving them a pass, but I always believe player execution is paramount

So a coach who works against the team's strength is the player's fault? Yeah I'm done here, 2035 gets his wish. I'm done bro. 

[Mashed Potatoes]

Pick up both pleez

[Slidemaster]

So a coach who works against the team's strength is the player's fault? Yeah I'm done here, 2035 gets his wish. I'm done bro.

I literally didn't say that.

[cprenegade]

I'm wondering if the Raven's didn't act too quickly to name a defensive coordinator.  I like Zach Orr but the fact is that he has never written up a game plan or made halftime adjustments the way MacDonald had.  It seems unlikely that the change is seamless.  I think he will be good in the long run, but there will be growing pains and the Ravens are built for winning it all now.  The window may start closing after next year.  It may be closing already.

 

Had they waited, Steve Wilks would have been available.  He was made the scapegoat by Kyle Shanahan for the SB loss.  In reality, his team held KC to 19 points in regulation.  SF's defense was good most of the year.  I could see him stepping in as DC here after losing MacDonald.  

 

Maybe the Ravens should have waited before instantly handing the job to Orr.  

[TwentyThirtyFive]

I'm wondering if the Raven's didn't act too quickly to name a defensive coordinator. I like Zach Orr but the fact is that he has never written up a game plan or made halftime adjustments the way MacDonald had. It seems unlikely that the change is seamless. I think he will be good in the long run, but there will be growing pains and the Ravens are built for winning it all now. The window may start closing after next year. It may be closing already.

Had they waited, Steve Wilks would have been available. He was made the scapegoat by Kyle Shanahan for the SB loss. In reality, his team held KC to 19 points in regulation. SF's defense was good most of the year. I could see him stepping in as DC here after losing MacDonald.

Maybe the Ravens should have waited before instantly handing the job to Orr.

It def wont be seamless. The defense is gonna take a step back but we just have to hope its not a huge step back. It could easily be a huge step back with all the turnover we are going to have. Both coaching staff turnover and roster turnover.

[Biggsy]

Harbaugh has apparently mentioned that the O-line rebuild will be a priority this offseason. Linderbaum may be the only started really safe at all.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

I think Stanley will be back

[makoman]

I think Stanley will be back

I said before I’d draft his replacement but keep him this year, assuming/hoping the pick is ready in 2025.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

I said before I’d draft his replacement but keep him this year, assuming/hoping the pick is ready in 2025.

Agreed. I dont think he is here for long but def '24.

[hallas]

His cap hit kind of forces the issue. But next year is probably his last year.

[makoman]

His cap hit kind of forces the issue. But next year is probably his last year.

He’s sorta cuttable (though painful) if you have a cheap replacement, but that’s not easy at LT. The problem is even if he’s here you have to pretty much plan on him missing like 4 games.

Moses is very cuttable but he’s still adequately cheap if you think he’s a decent starter. He seemed fine to me, but I don’t really know enough to tell.

[BaltBird 24]

I'd stick with Linderbaum and Moses. Don't really care about Stanley - the sooner we get rid of him the better. Simpson can go. Time to see what Cleveland can do.

[Biggsy]

I think Stanley will be back

I think so too. But hearing that they're "rebuilding" doesn't bode well. If I'm EDC, I'm keeping Moses and Stanley. You have Vorhees, Cleveland and Mekari on the roster still, so I wouldn't say they need a "rebuild". Unless EDC is looking for longer term answers around Linderbaum.

[Ravens2006]

Harbaugh has apparently mentioned that the O-line rebuild will be a priority this offseason. Linderbaum may be the only started really safe at all.

 

An O line that is solid to strong from one side to the other should be their primary focus in my mind.  The edges especially were just a little too vulnerable to edge rush.  Lamar manages to save them from a sack or three a game in my view. Stanley is / was very good when fully healthy, but hasn't been fully healthy in many years now.  Gotta do whatever they can to improve that group as much as they can.

[Mackus]

I thought Stanley played well two years ago but not this year. Whether the poor play this year was due to injuries he played through or due to general decline in ability would drive my decision to cut him or not. Also need to know what the replacement options would be, in-house choices are not acceptable so gotta weigh the cost of next year's LT in the math.

[makoman]

I thought Stanley played well two years ago but not this year. Whether the poor play this year was due to injuries he played through or due to general decline in ability would drive my decision to cut him or not. Also need to know what the replacement options would be, in-house choices are not acceptable so gotta weigh the cost of next year's LT in the math.

I think he was bad due to the knee injury, but I am not sure that we can expect him to be healthy either with all the leg problems he's had.

 

He costs $26.1M to keep, and costs $17.8M to cut, so if you are going to cut him you probably want to find a replacement to stay under that $26.1 total, otherwise I feel you just go with him and hope for the best. That's why I think they keep him, I don't know what $8M gets you in FA at LT. Or maybe you do post June 1. 

 

He has a roster bonus due 3/18, so I guess we'll know by then.

[Ravens2006]

I'm sure injuries have impacted his performance.  But there's been so much injury the last 4 years with him, it's hard to think a guy of that size will magically become MORE healthy and durable as he hits age 30.  He's started less than half their games over 4 seasons, and clearly struggles at times with edge rush even when he's on the field.  Might have been Humphrey's podcast (which is a GREAT watch / listen by the way) where someone talked sort of openly about Ronnie's difficulty playing through the issues he's had / having.

 

Do something with his contract to spread out the annual, maybe give him a HAIR more money for ego / thank you purposes, but otherwise they HAVE to find a replacement that you can at least go in to camp having decent confidence the guy SHOULD be healthy.  Basically someone without an established track record of physical ailments.  If it goes south later on, chit happens... but Stanley is pretty much a guarantee to be limited availability / dependability at best at this point.  They were even rotating him a lot this season when "healthy".  That's not a good idea long term.