I think Lamar Jackson's contract is up after this coming season.

[weepaws 2,529]

8 minutes ago, jrokh said:

The correct way, grammatically to say that would be I can easily prove. I'm can easily prove is incorrect. Now if you want to prove the existence of something unprovable, then go for it, but I would recommend first you read the story of Sisyphus, and apply the lesson one can find in that...

Psalm 14:1.  

[weepaws 2,529]

14 minutes ago, jrokh said:

The correct way, grammatically to say that would be I can easily prove. I'm can easily prove is incorrect. Now if you want to prove the existence of something unprovable, then go for it, but I would recommend first you read the story of Sisyphus, and apply the lesson one can find in that...

Fake news. sisyphus needed to read Proverbs 16:18. 

 

[Ray_T 608]

6 hours ago, jrokh said:

I trust the Baltimore brass knows what they are doing. They have proven to be exceptional at roster management. I certainly trust them over some mentally challenged yahoo, who doesn't even watch the game.

Thanks.

honestly I'd trust them over anyone here.

they were competitive before bringing in Jackson.  won a superbowl with Flacco.   They will be competitive after Jackson is long gone. (provided management remains in place)

This is just a very good organization.  I dont much care for the Ravens. I'm not a fan.  but I do appreciate what they have been able to accomplish.

Like it or not, despite what anyone else says, this is a well run organization.

[weepaws 2,529]

And with Dilfer at Qb, it’s a top notch organization. 

[polecatt 405]

16 hours ago, jrokh said:

I don't know, but they have tailored their entire offense around him and his style of play. Having the RB's Gus and Dobbins will help his load, plus if you watch his games he rarely takes direct hits. He is really good at slithering away or going out of bounds. If it was me I would offer a shorter deal with a lot of front loaded guaranteed money, but Ljax and his mommy might have other plans. Anyway, good debate.

I agree, a shorter deal, front loaded. That's not a whole lot different than 2 years on the tag. I know he wants big money for several years to come, I'm just not sure that's realistic.

[polecatt 405]

16 hours ago, weepaws said:

Agreed, and his avg per ff numbers are dropping. 

Oh without his rushing numbers, he's not even worthy as a back up

[Ray_T 608]

54 minutes ago, polecatt said:

I agree, a shorter deal, front loaded. That's not a whole lot different than 2 years on the tag. I know he wants big money for several years to come, I'm just not sure that's realistic.

well, it sounds like Jackson isnt in a hurry to sign a deal.  I'd suggest neither should Baltimore.  if he has another subpar season Baltimore doesnt have to pay big bucks to get rid of him.

but if Baltimore signs him, and he sucks, theyve hurt themselves for a long time.

people of baltimore are upset he doesnt seem to be in a hurry to resign.  I'd suggest thats not a bad thing at this point.   If he wants to wait to sign, I'd be totally ok with that if I was Baltimore management.

worth noting, I generally like betting on players in a contract year.  signing him early takes that contract year away.  why would a team do that?   especially if there are questions about the player.

so unless hes giving a hometown discount to resign, I think Baltimore should just let it ride until he wants to talk contract.

[TBayXXXVII 2,215]

11 hours ago, Ray_T said:

honestly I'd trust them over anyone here.

they were competitive before bringing in Jackson.  won a superbowl with Flacco.   They will be competitive after Jackson is long gone. (provided management remains in place)

This is just a very good organization.  I dont much care for the Ravens. I'm not a fan.  but I do appreciate what they have been able to accomplish.

Like it or not, despite what anyone else says, this is a well run organization.

I don't know that I could completely agree with this.  They did build a winning team and won with Flacoo....while on his rookie contract.  After they have him a new deal, they were a mediocre team, going 40-40 over the next 5 years and made the playoffs only once.

What they've shown is that they can build a winning team, but don't know when to cut bait.  When you pay a QB too much money, you find that other positions suffer.  If your QB isn't good enough to cover those inadequacies, your team can't compete at that level anymore, see Baltimore 2013-2017.

[jrokh 574]

46 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

I don't know that I could completely agree with this.  They did build a winning team and won with Flacoo....while on his rookie contract.  After they have him a new deal, they were a mediocre team, going 40-40 over the next 5 years and made the playoffs only once.

 

Baltimore Ravens regular season record 233-183-1 .560

Baltimore Ravens post-season record 16-11—.593

All-time regular and post-season record 249-194-1 .562

This is in their all-time history. That is very competent. How would that compare with say the Tampa Bay Buccaneers in the same time frame?

[Ray_T 608]

1 hour ago, TBayXXXVII said:

I don't know that I could completely agree with this.  They did build a winning team and won with Flacoo....while on his rookie contract.  After they have him a new deal, they were a mediocre team, going 40-40 over the next 5 years and made the playoffs only once.

What they've shown is that they can build a winning team, but don't know when to cut bait.  When you pay a QB too much money, you find that other positions suffer.  If your QB isn't good enough to cover those inadequacies, your team can't compete at that level anymore, see Baltimore 2013-2017.

I respect your thought on this, and you are not entirely wrong, but I'd argue the team had little to no choice.

when your superbowl winning QB comes up for contract negotiations, its a PR nightmare if you let him walk.  The fans would be pissed.  and a team should not piss off the fan base.  thats the lifeblood of the franchise.  so that is a case where I dont think you can 100% blame the team.

to some extent they were a victim of their own success.

 

[RoadLizard 73]

On 4/2/2022 at 10:57 PM, Ray_T said:

honestly I'd trust them over anyone here.

they were competitive before bringing in Jackson.  won a superbowl with Flacco.   They will be competitive after Jackson is long gone. (provided management remains in place)

This is just a very good organization.  I dont much care for the Ravens. I'm not a fan.  but I do appreciate what they have been able to accomplish.

Like it or not, despite what anyone else says, this is a well run organization.

This is true. And, Lamar just doesn’t seem to be on the same level as Allen, Mahomes, Herbert, etc. etc.  he just isn’t. So, tying up an enormous amount of money on him doesn’t make a lot of sense. This is all pretty obvious. 

[TBayXXXVII 2,215]

21 hours ago, jrokh said:

 

Baltimore Ravens regular season record 233-183-1 .560

Baltimore Ravens post-season record 16-11—.593

All-time regular and post-season record 249-194-1 .562

This is in their all-time history. That is very competent. How would that compare with say the Tampa Bay Buccaneers in the same time frame?

Go take a look at Baltimore's history where they win with a bad (Dilfer) to mediocre (Flacco), QB and tell me how they faired when cheap.  Then take a look at how they did when they paid their QB.  Tell me where what I said was wrong.  Then, go back and highlight for me where I said Tampa was the model they should copy.

In their history, they won with a great defense and QB's who don't screw things up.  They won when they were able to keep those defenses together because they were paying their QB's pennies while everyone else was paying with dollars.  What happened when they paid Flacco dollars instead of pennies?  That's right, 5 seasons where they were a .500 team and 1 playoff win.  When he was cheap, 5 playoff appearances, 3 conf champs, and 1 SB.

[jrokh 574]

2 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Go take a look at Baltimore's history where they win with a bad (Dilfer) to mediocre (Flacco), QB and tell me how they faired when cheap.  Then take a look at how they did when they paid their QB.  Tell me where what I said was wrong.  Then, go back and highlight for me where I said Tampa was the model they should copy.

In their history, they won with a great defense and QB's who don't screw things up.  They won when they were able to keep those defenses together because they were paying their QB's pennies while everyone else was paying with dollars.  What happened when they paid Flacco dollars instead of pennies?  That's right, 5 seasons where they were a .500 team and 1 playoff win.  When he was cheap, 5 playoff appearances, 3 conf champs, and 1 SB.

Cherry-picking small sample sizes is counter productive. The issue is whether Baltimore is a competent franchise. In a larger sample size in their relatively short history (1996), the answer is obviously yes. If your point is they overpaid Joe Flacco, and it would be a similar mistake to overpay LJax, that’s a fair point. I would still trust Baltimore’s assessment over yours. They know what they’re doing…

[TBayXXXVII 2,215]

21 hours ago, Ray_T said:

I respect your thought on this, and you are not entirely wrong, but I'd argue the team had little to no choice.

when your superbowl winning QB comes up for contract negotiations, its a PR nightmare if you let him walk.  The fans would be pissed.  and a team should not piss off the fan base.  thats the lifeblood of the franchise.  so that is a case where I dont think you can 100% blame the team.

to some extent they were a victim of their own success.

 

Agreed, "when your Super Bowl winning QB comes up for contract negotiations", you don't let him walk.  Lamar Jackson in 4 seasons has a 1-3 playoff record.  There's a significant difference.  Fans are stupid and only care about ONE thing... the result.  Remember that PR nightmare in Green Bay about 20 years ago?  How'd that work out?  Over two-thirds of the Packers fanbase was pissed that the Packers let Favre go and start Rodgers... 3 seasons later and a Super Bowl trophy in the building and the entire fanbase was "Favre who?".

The Ravens are in a position that is actually quite beneficial to them.  They have a mid-round #1 pick.  They're at a spot where teams would like to trade up for a QB.  They may be able to trade down and acquire an extra #1 pick next year to give them more ammo to get their new guy next year.  If they win with Jackson (which they won't), then they will re-up him and have more picks to build around him with.

[TBayXXXVII 2,215]

3 minutes ago, jrokh said:

Cherry-picking small sample sizes is counter productive. The issue is whether Baltimore is a competent franchise. In a larger sample size in their relatively short history (1996), the answer is obviously yes. If your point is they overpaid Joe Flacco, and it would be a similar mistake to overpay LJax, that’s a fair point. I would still trust Baltimore’s assessment over yours. They know what they’re doing…

LOL, you bring up the Ravens history to prove a point, when I give analysis of that history... I'm the one cherry picking.  Gotta love it.

"If your point is they overpaid Joe Flacco, and it would be a similar mistake to overpay LJax", that's exactly my point... you quoted my post when I did.

At this point in time, we don't even know what the Ravens' assessment is.  We know they want to re-sign him, but we don't know to what.  I'd be fine with giving him a 3-year $85M deal, because that buys more time to see who and what he is at a reasonable number, but if Jackson wants Watson money (like it sound), then he's going to get franchised next year and be a free agent the following year because right now, the Ravens aren't paying it.

[jrokh 574]

15 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

LOL, you bring up the Ravens history to prove a point, when I give analysis of that history... I'm the one cherry picking.  Gotta love it.

"If your point is they overpaid Joe Flacco, and it would be a similar mistake to overpay LJax", that's exactly my point... you quoted my post when I did.

At this point in time, we don't even know what the Ravens' assessment is.  We know they want to re-sign him, but we don't know to what.  I'd be fine with giving him a 3-year $85M deal, because that buys more time to see who and what he is at a reasonable number, but if Jackson wants Watson money (like it sound), then he's going to get franchised next year and be a free agent the following year because right now, the Ravens aren't paying it.

3 year 85 million? I don’t think you correctly understand the QB market. There may be some wiggle room between that and 230 million fully guaranteed. 3 years 85 million LMFAO….

[TBayXXXVII 2,215]

42 minutes ago, jrokh said:

3 year 85 million? I don’t think you correctly understand the QB market. There may be some wiggle room between that and 230 million fully guaranteed. 3 years 85 million LMFAO….

Sure, but the last thing I read, oh, about a month ago (maybe more), was that he was looking for $40M AAV, the old Watson contract.  After Watson got a new deal, the word on NFL Radio was that he could be looking for that kind of deal.  Now, if you've seen or heard something different, the post it.  I evidently didn't read it.  If he's looking for a Kirk Cousins type deal (like I noted... 3/$85), then I'd think they'd be foolish not to do that.  The only reason they wouldn't, is because they currently don't think he's a franchise QB, because that's a bargain in today's game.

[jrokh 574]

12 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Sure, but the last thing I read, oh, about a month ago (maybe more), was that he was looking for $40M AAV, the old Watson contract.  After Watson got a new deal, the word on NFL Radio was that he could be looking for that kind of deal.  Now, if you've seen or heard something different, the post it.  I evidently didn't read it.  If he's looking for a Kirk Cousins type deal (like I noted... 3/$85), then I'd think they'd be foolish not to do that.  The only reason they wouldn't, is because they currently don't think he's a franchise QB, because that's a bargain in today's game.

Obviously, neither of us nor anyone else on here is plugged into Ljax and his mom? line of thinking. I am very confident, however, that the Kirk Cousins model would be instantly dismissed by the Jacksons', as it would be by every agent on the face of the earth... I did just see this from Mike Florio of PFT. “Per a source with knowledge of the situation, Jackson has told the Ravens that he’s currently too focused on having his best possible year and that he doesn’t want to do a deal until the 2022 season is over.” 

If the above is true, then I guess debate about this topic will have to wait till next offseason...

[TBayXXXVII 2,215]

13 minutes ago, jrokh said:

Obviously, neither of us nor anyone else on here is plugged into Ljax and his mom? line of thinking. I am very confident, however, that the Kirk Cousins model would be instantly dismissed by the Jacksons', as it would be by every agent on the face of the earth... I did just see this from Mike Florio of PFT. “Per a source with knowledge of the situation, Jackson has told the Ravens that he’s currently too focused on having his best possible year and that he doesn’t want to do a deal until the 2022 season is over.” 

If the above is true, then I guess debate about this topic will have to wait till next offseason...

Looks like Jackson is taking the Flacco route.  Nothing wrong with betting on yourself.  Personally, I think he's going to lose.  I can certainly see them still making the playoffs, but my guess is that a first round exit is the most likely scenario.

[jrokh 574]

10 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Looks like Jackson is taking the Flacco route.  Nothing wrong with betting on yourself.  Personally, I think he's going to lose.  I can certainly see them still making the playoffs, but my guess is that a first round exit is the most likely scenario.

Well he did win the MVP 2 years ago, so I guess we shall see...

[Ray_T 608]

3 hours ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Agreed, "when your Super Bowl winning QB comes up for contract negotiations", you don't let him walk.  Lamar Jackson in 4 seasons has a 1-3 playoff record.  There's a significant difference.  Fans are stupid and only care about ONE thing... the result.  Remember that PR nightmare in Green Bay about 20 years ago?  How'd that work out?  Over two-thirds of the Packers fanbase was pissed that the Packers let Favre go and start Rodgers... 3 seasons later and a Super Bowl trophy in the building and the entire fanbase was "Favre who?".

The Ravens are in a position that is actually quite beneficial to them.  They have a mid-round #1 pick.  They're at a spot where teams would like to trade up for a QB.  They may be able to trade down and acquire an extra #1 pick next year to give them more ammo to get their new guy next year.  If they win with Jackson (which they won't), then they will re-up him and have more picks to build around him with.

I agree.

if they can trade down and get a first next year, then they are in position to make some noise next year.

though this may not be the best draft to do this as the draft isnt very deep at QB.   another option is to dump Jackson this year to get a high draft pick (or more) and run with Huntley (who actually looked ok in relief of Jackson).  But if you wait and Jackson has another subpar season, then you arent getting anything for the guy.  its a bit of a gamble all around.

That said you need to have a buyer in place to make a deal like that work and it may not be realistic to expect them to pull it off.

for that reason, your plan may be the better one.

and yes Jackson isnt a superbowl winning QB.  thats the reason they can do this where they couldnt with Flacco.   its a different situation.  a few people may be unhappy with the move, but most will be ok with it in the end I think.

I still think the most likely scenario is that they franchise him when the contract comes up.   If I was a Ravens fan, I'd probably want them to do what you have proposed because I dont think they can win a superbowl with him at QB.  Better to rip off the band aid rather than peel it off slowly haha.

[weepaws 2,529]

He’s going to make a lot of money as a rb playing in the Qb slot.  

He’ll never be on my team, he gets drafted in ff way early like most qbs.  

[Ray_T 608]

4 hours ago, weepaws said:

He’s going to make a lot of money as a rb playing in the Qb slot.  

He’ll never be on my team, he gets drafted in ff way early like most qbs.  

well, most leagues rules make running QB's more valuable than they actually are in real life football.

lots of your running QB's are great fantasy point producers because running yards are worth more than passing yards, but not great at getting wins for their respective teams.   The biggest risk of a guy like Hurts or Teebow (back in the day) is that they can get benched or injured.   Even Tyrod Taylor in his heyday was a pretty solid fantasy point producer.   but couldnt get the wins and then lost his job.

if that happens midseason, your fantasy gold mine turns into a problem for you.

Jackson (luckily) isnt at a point where I think this is likely to happen, but if he has a slow start, it may start brewing.  Huntley looked really good in relief of Jackson last year when he got hurt.   So its not out of the question that a slow start by Jackson leads to Huntley getting a shot.

I dont think this is highly likely.   but it is certainly possible if Jackson doesnt play well to start the season.

[weepaws 2,529]

When it comes to Mr Jackson, I don’t need to worry about him, I don’t draft qbs before the double digit rounds. 

[Ray_T 608]

2 hours ago, weepaws said:

When it comes to Mr Jackson, I don’t need to worry about him, I don’t draft qbs before the double digit rounds. 

Thats fair.

guys have done well with him in some years in the past, but its looking like defenses have figured out how to play him so in my mind, the guy will likely be drafted earlier than he should be as some still think hes gonna produce like he did a couple years ago.

I'm not sure thats realistic anymore, and those injuries are starting to creep in for the guy like they did with all the other running QB's such as Cam Newton.

He may still have one or two good seasons in him but hes a risky play given the price you need to pay to get him.

like you, I'm not buying at the price you need to pay to get him.

[weepaws 2,529]

I can’t wait to see after the draft ADP for qbs.  

I don’t think one will see a Qb going in the second round like Mahomes.  

[kcBlitzkrieg 18]

On 4/5/2022 at 6:35 PM, weepaws said:

I can’t wait to see after the draft ADP for qbs.  

I don’t think one will see a Qb going in the second round like Mahomes.  

In best ball drafts right now, ADP is 25 for Allen, 33 for Mahomes, 44 Herbert and 48 Lamar.  

[weepaws 2,529]

16 minutes ago, kcBlitzkrieg said:

In best ball drafts right now, ADP is 25 for Allen, 33 for Mahomes, 44 Herbert and 48 Lamar.  

Thanks.  

Third round for a Qb, wow when will they learn.  

[Ray_T 608]

2 hours ago, kcBlitzkrieg said:

In best ball drafts right now, ADP is 25 for Allen, 33 for Mahomes, 44 Herbert and 48 Lamar.  

well, of all the people listed here, I'd suggest Herbert is the best value for your draft capital (if you assume this ADP estimate is accurate)

hard to believe hes going at about the same price as Lamar.   I dont think Lamar is in the same league as this guy.   Herbert in my opinion is superior in nearly every way.

either way, someone has to lose drafts.  drafting Lamar early is a good way to do it.

 

[weepaws 2,529]

Later the better , if Jackson is a fifth round pick he’s the best value. Still way to early.  

[Ray_T 608]

9 minutes ago, weepaws said:

Later the better , if Jackson is a fifth round pick he’s the best value. Still way to early.  

I wouldnt go that far.  not in this case.

Herbert will give you far more than Jackson will.   for me to consider it equal value, Jackson has to go like in the 7th or 8th round.   if its only one round later, I still want the better player unless the talent is close.   I dont think Lamar will be that close to what Herbert will deliver unless Herbert suffers an injury of sorts.

I will acknowledge that this opinion could vary based on rules of your individual league.    but if standard scoring applies, I'd take Herbert over Jackson every time and for me its not even a decision I have to think about.    Herbert can actually throw the ball well and can pick a defense apart without running the ball.  Jackson cannot.

both players run the ball effectively when they want or need to.  I may even give jackson a slight edge there but its not large enough to make up for the throwing deficiencies he has.   not even close.

[weepaws 2,529]

Herbert avg two more points per game , so I don’t see far more.  

Plus like I’ve said manyyyyy times, when you draft a Qb before double digit rounds that’s to early.  

One team last year I had Stafford I drafted him in the tenth, I had Cousins on the other two teams , I drafted him in the 12th, he avg four points less per game then Herbert, now that’s great value.  

[AxeElf 787]

1 hour ago, Ray_T said:

if standard scoring applies, I'd take Herbert over Jackson every time

What about in PPR?

[Ray_T 608]

3 hours ago, AxeElf said:

What about in PPR?

why would ppr make a difference?

if you get a bigger bonus for rush yards and/or TD's you may bump Jackson up a bit, thats the only scenario where Jackson has a chance in this comparison.

but you knew this you were just being a smartass.

[AxeElf 787]

15 hours ago, Ray_T said:

why would ppr make a difference?

Why would standard make a difference?

[kcBlitzkrieg 18]

2 hours ago, AxeElf said:

Why would standard make a difference?

One would think you would value Lamar more in a standard league over Bobby Herbert due to the 6 pt rushing TD v. 4 pt passing.  

I'd rather have Herbert in a non-standard 6pt passing TD league than a standard....This is contrary to what the poster stated though so this is just mho.    

[Ray_T 608]

24 minutes ago, kcBlitzkrieg said:

One would think you would value Lamar more in a standard league over Bobby Herbert due to the 6 pt rushing TD v. 4 pt passing.  

I'd rather have Herbert in a non-standard 6pt passing TD league than a standard....This is contrary to what the poster stated though so this is just mho.    

herbert threw for over 5000 yards last year.   while lamar gets more rush yards/points hes more of a boom bust player.   he can be occasionally great.  

I just dont think you pass over a guy like Herbert to get a guy like Lamar.

Herbert still is young and may have more upside yet.   scary thing to say about a 5000 yard passer (17 game season or not)

 

[kcBlitzkrieg 18]

Number of NFL QBs to throw for over 5000 yards in consecutive seasons??

One.  Drew Brees. 

Drew Brees QB coach?  Joe Lombardi

Bobby Herbert QB coach?  Joe Lombardi 

Perhaps he'll be the second but history is not on his side.  (17 games is BS by the way for these records)  An asterisk should be placed on the year every time there is a macro level change in any league....but anyway... 

All that being said, my response was to the Axeman's question of standard vs. other formats.  I was merely giving my opinion on why that might be a difference in choosing between the players in two different scoring formats.  

Those ADP's were in best ball format so something to note there.  Boom or bust I'm taking Lamar....redraft leagues I'd lean with your opinion on consistency and floor of JH.  

[AxeElf 787]

"Standard scoring" typically denotes non-PPR scoring.  Since most QBs don't catch a lot of passes, it doesn't really matter if you're using standard or PPR scoring.

[weepaws 2,529]

5 hours ago, kcBlitzkrieg said:

One would think you would value Lamar more in a standard league over Bobby Herbert due to the 6 pt rushing TD v. 4 pt passing.  

I'd rather have Herbert in a non-standard 6pt passing TD league than a standard....This is contrary to what the poster stated though so this is just mho.    

Hebert avg 2 points per game more than Jackson also season, and it looks like I can get Jackson in the 5th, and pass on Herbert on the 4th for two points per game, I’ll take another starting wr or rb in the 4th, and loose those 2 points per game.