Jump to content



Recent headlines from The Baltimore Sun

Photo
- - - - -

T Sizzle to Sign Long Term Contract Tomorrow?


  • Please log in to reply
24 replies to this topic

#1 douger

douger

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 28,168 posts

Posted 16 February 2014 - 08:50 PM

Some cap room?

 

Terrell Suggs wants to be a Raven for life, and General Manager Ozzie Newsome has reportedly worked out a deal to make that happen.
 
Suggs and the Ravens have agreed to a long-term contract extension, according to Jason La Canfora of CBS Sports. The terms of the deal were not immediately released.
 
The deal is expected to be announced during a press conference with Newsome at 12 p.m. Monday at the Under Armour Performance Center. 

 

 



#2 Ravens2006

Ravens2006

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 14,378 posts

Posted 16 February 2014 - 09:33 PM

Hmmm... one would have thought a guy like Preston or Cerrato would have "broken" this story... you know, with all their key, reliable, high-ranking sources...


"Matt Wieters is sunshine, unicorns, puppy dogs and the baby Jesus all rolled into one"

#3 Slidemaster

Slidemaster

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 18,336 posts

Posted 16 February 2014 - 09:49 PM

Good to hear. Suggs is a Raven.
The kids are alright.

#4 OriginalColtsFan

OriginalColtsFan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 18,384 posts

Posted 16 February 2014 - 11:31 PM

Not so sure the whole "Raven for life" thing is worth it in the long run. I think Suggs best days are way behind him, and that it's the wrong move to lock him into a long term contract. But time will tell.



#5 Steveg85321

Steveg85321

    Sage of wisdom, reason and truth

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,839 posts

Posted 17 February 2014 - 10:46 AM

Not so sure the whole "Raven for life" thing is worth it in the long run. I think Suggs best days are way behind him, and that it's the wrong move to lock him into a long term contract. But time will tell.

I'm with this. Are the Ravens getting the Suggs from the first half of 2013 or the last half of 2013. The latter to me was a key reason the Ravens went in the tank at the end of the season. Was he hurt? Was he overweight? Was he just not hungry? He just had no sizzle, not to mention sacks.



#6 OriginalColtsFan

OriginalColtsFan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 18,384 posts

Posted 17 February 2014 - 11:11 AM

I'm with this. Are the Ravens getting the Suggs from the first half of 2013 or the last half of 2013. The latter to me was a key reason the Ravens went in the tank at the end of the season. Was he hurt? Was he overweight? Was he just not hungry? He just had no sizzle, not to mention sacks.

And it's the past two years, not just the past year. He's been plagued by injuries, he's on the wrong side of 30, and a long term contract for this type of player is exactly what keeps hurting the Ravens cap-wise (long term) AND performance-wise. This sentimental, "retire as a Raven" just has no place if the team is serious about improving. This is treading water, at best.



#7 douger

douger

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 28,168 posts

Posted 17 February 2014 - 12:01 PM

And it's the past two years, not just the past year. He's been plagued by injuries, he's on the wrong side of 30, and a long term contract for this type of player is exactly what keeps hurting the Ravens cap-wise (long term) AND performance-wise. This sentimental, "retire as a Raven" just has no place if the team is serious about improving. This is treading water, at best.

 

I'd like to reserve judgement on the effect of his new contract on the cap until we get to see the details of it. 



#8 Struds

Struds

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,626 posts

Posted 17 February 2014 - 12:14 PM

And it's the past two years, not just the past year. He's been plagued by injuries, he's on the wrong side of 30, and a long term contract for this type of player is exactly what keeps hurting the Ravens cap-wise (long term) AND performance-wise. This sentimental, "retire as a Raven" just has no place if the team is serious about improving. This is treading water, at best.

Although his injury plagued 2012 and who the hell knows what happened in the 2d half of 2013 are troubling, I think there are several things to keep in mind.  Despite the issues, he showed flashes of the complete LB he became after his early days as pretty much just a pass rusher. Additionally, the team cannot possibly fix every weakness in one off-season; there are at least 3-4 postions that are more critically in need of an upgrade (OL, FS) or at least maintaining the current players (Pitta, Monroe). This new contract probably goves the FO a better opportunity to do so.



#9 douger

douger

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 28,168 posts

Posted 17 February 2014 - 12:25 PM

I am not a fan of keeping a player for the sole reason that he was a great player and that it'd be a sentimental value that he retired a home team player. There are very few players special enough to even consider it.

 

It worked for Cal Ripken and Ray Lewis because, although they were shells of their glory days by the time they retired, neither were hard liabilities to their team in their end days. Both gave what could be considered adequate or a bit below adequate performances their last seasons.

 

I don't know what caused Suggs' sacks to drop off so precipitously the second half of the season. Had teams discovered a weakness in his game? Was he hurt? Maybe he'll address those questions in his presser today.

 

Struds raised an excellent point. He did play a more complete linebacker in 2013 than he had previously. If the Ravens can get another couple of years of that, this extension might be a good deal.



#10 Navypost

Navypost

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,173 posts

Posted 17 February 2014 - 12:37 PM

The Ravens maybe one if the most loyal pro teams in sports.

#11 OriginalColtsFan

OriginalColtsFan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 18,384 posts

Posted 17 February 2014 - 12:44 PM

I'd like to reserve judgement on the effect of his new contract on the cap until we get to see the details of it. 

He's signed through 2018 and his cap hit for this year is $7.8M. Sound good to you? It does not sound good to me.



#12 douger

douger

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 28,168 posts

Posted 17 February 2014 - 01:34 PM

There's still no details on the deal, other than it's good for four years.

 

If that drop off in performance last year is permanent, he won't be here in four years.



#13 bmore_ken

bmore_ken

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 53,724 posts

Posted 17 February 2014 - 01:36 PM

I'd like to reserve judgement on the effect of his new contract on the cap until we get to see the details of it. 

Same here


Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. It has a nice sound to it

Suggs has signed. I've never been so happy to be wrong

Don't blame me, I voted Bob Barr:cool:

#14 Ravens2006

Ravens2006

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 14,378 posts

Posted 17 February 2014 - 01:45 PM

As is often the case... a guy like La Canfora manages to get some of the details before the local, well-connected, reliable folks...

 

http://www.cbssports...dlier-extension


"Matt Wieters is sunshine, unicorns, puppy dogs and the baby Jesus all rolled into one"

#15 Ravens2006

Ravens2006

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 14,378 posts

Posted 17 February 2014 - 01:51 PM

As for drop off in performance... how many other DEs (or OLBs playing the role) notched both 80 tackles and 10 sacks last year?  J.J. Watt had 80 tackles and 10.5 sacks in 16 games last year.  Granted, Suggs might not be playing at his former player-of-the-year levels... but he was WAY down the list of concerns in 2013.  Nobody knows how much time at "plus" performance level he has left, but the guy's in solid condition and there's no reason to think he can't go another 2 or 3 years.  Ngata's probably one more knee injury away from being a non-factor, he's a far bigger concern to me in terms of value vs. health / performance. Suggs isn't there yet, physically.  And the 2017 and 2018 years are very likely just part of the numbers game that teams play with these deals.


Edited by Ravens2006, 17 February 2014 - 01:56 PM.

"Matt Wieters is sunshine, unicorns, puppy dogs and the baby Jesus all rolled into one"

#16 Ravens2006

Ravens2006

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 14,378 posts

Posted 17 February 2014 - 02:05 PM

Rosenthal with NFL.com is reporting (via Rapaport and Breer) there's 16M guaranteed in the first two years...

 

http://www.nfl.com/n...ion-with-ravens

 

La Canfora reported that there was 16M guaranteed in the deal.

 

Might be a little while before we find out the absolute numbers, but if the two reports are fairly accurate... it's looking a lot like a 2 or 3 year deal with virtually no big impact on the back end (years 4 and/or 5) if they part ways.  The Ravens get cap relief in 2014, and take a gamble that he'll still be a plus player for 2 or 3 more years. 

 

Seems like a reasonable risk of doing business...


Edited by Ravens2006, 17 February 2014 - 02:06 PM.

"Matt Wieters is sunshine, unicorns, puppy dogs and the baby Jesus all rolled into one"

#17 codefool

codefool

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 107 posts

Posted 17 February 2014 - 02:18 PM

And just think we almost could have had Byron Leftwedge instead.  If the Jaguars we just a few seconds later getting thier pick in...



#18 douger

douger

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 28,168 posts

Posted 17 February 2014 - 02:18 PM



As for drop off in performance... how many other DEs (or OLBs playing the role) notched both 80 tackles and 10 sacks last year?  J.J. Watt had 80 tackles and 10.5 sacks in 16 games last year.  Granted, Suggs might not be playing at his former player-of-the-year levels... but he was WAY down the list of concerns in 2013.  Nobody knows how much time at "plus" performance level he has left, but the guy's in solid condition and there's no reason to think he can't go another 2 or 3 years.  Ngata's probably one more knee injury away from being a non-factor, he's a far bigger concern to me in terms of value vs. health / performance. Suggs isn't there yet, physically.  And the 2017 and 2018 years are very likely just part of the numbers game that teams play with these deals.

 

Most of those numbers came in the first half of the season. Was the first half an aberration or was the second half?

 

I've recognized that he played a much better overall linebacker in 2013 and improved on setting the edge. I'm not prepared to toss Suggs into the trash heap, but if he's not going to be getting to the quarterback won't we need to find someone who can?



#19 OriginalColtsFan

OriginalColtsFan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 18,384 posts

Posted 17 February 2014 - 02:27 PM

There were plenty of instances when he didn't even set the edge. This is a bad signing, IMO.



#20 Steveg85321

Steveg85321

    Sage of wisdom, reason and truth

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,839 posts

Posted 17 February 2014 - 03:11 PM

What is the team's liability if they cut him after one or two years? I don't know how that works.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users