No tag for Monroe

[Money]

Suggs-One of the best pass rushers in the league at the time.

Ngata-Th ebest DT in the league.

Rice-Top 5 RB.

Monroe is what 12-15 LT. He isn't a top guy so you can't give him that leverage to get that money.

 

This is where you show that you have no idea what you are talking about. There is only one player in 2014 who was tagged and is a top 5 player at his position. That is Graham (and if Graham gets the WR number, you can't count him either).

 

Tagging a player does not give him leverage. Players absolutely hate to play under the tag.

[papasmurfbell]

Yes it does. I realize they hate it. But being tagged starts the real negotiations off at that level. Players don't like it not because they are not well compensated for the yr but because they have no security.

[Money]

Yes it does. I realize they hate it. But being tagged starts the real negotiations off at that level. Players don't like it not because they are not well compensated for the yr but because they have no security.

 

This simply is not true. Negotiations are always based off of other contracts.

[papasmurfbell]

And when you push up the players starting point to being talked about with the best players in his position his agent will look at those deals to get a contract done.

[vmax]

Monroe is not a "franchise player" and he's not worth the money of a tag. So don't give it to him.

And if he was tagged then his agent will go for a higher contract amount than he's worth.

He's good....solid....but not dominant.

[colincac]

Monroe is not a "franchise player" and he's not worth the money of a tag. So don't give it to him.

And if he was tagged then his agent will go for a higher contract amount than he's worth.

He's good....solid....but not dominant.

 

 

 

This simply is not true. Negotiations are always based off of other contracts.

 

Papa is both right and wrong here. He has leverage because he's clearly not worth that Franchise Level, which he could just sign and play for... but yes at the same time, he would rather get a long-term deal. This is all conjecture and every negotiation works out differently, there is no point in arguing about something that we don't know how it would've gone down.

[papasmurfbell]

Of course he wants a long term deal. But having the tag gives you leverage in getting more in that long term deal. That is all I was saying.

[oldno82]

There are definitely options. Besides Veldheer and Albert who I mentioned above, there is also Anthony Collins. Collins was actually very good for Cincy last year and would most likely be cheaper than any of the other guys.

Collins is a viable alternative. He's played well for the Bungles when he's had a chance. I'd go after him.

 

The talk on this board about Castillo working well with young lineman is a good one. And you don't need an elite LT as much in the zone blocking scheme. And, Monroe, while I'm sorry he's gone, was not an elite LT.

 

Veldheer is an option too.

 

If we're going to spend that kind of money, I'd rather spend it on a skill position.

[thesteelhurtin]

Papa while I normally agree with you normally a players tagged number is nowhere near what they eventually sign for.

[papasmurfbell]

Of course it isn't. It is a 1 yr deal. I am saying using bs numbers of course like this. A LT that is worth $5mil is tagged at $11 mil. Now with the tag his agent starts at $13 mil instead of $10. Now he finished with a deal at say 8 mil.

[thesteelhurtin]

Of course it isn't. It is a 1 yr deal. I am saying using bs numbers of course like this. A LT that is worth $5mil is tagged at $11 mil. Now with the tag his agent starts at $13 mil instead of $10. Now he finished with a deal at say 8 mil.

I see your point there and to extent it does give the player some leverage as they can say screw it I'm taking this playing a year and hitting the open market but as has been said players hate one year deals as well. I gotta agree that Monroe wasn't worth tagging.

[papasmurfbell]

Of course. Say they had tagged him. They more than likely would have worked a deal out by the deadline. That long term deal would have been pushed up.

[cravnravn]

Bottom line is we traded 2 picks for him, then let him walk away. Ravens haven't done well in free agency or the draft since 2009, I'm not liking this pattern.

 

And I agree that he should have been tagged then get a long term deal done before June.

[Money]

I see your point there and to extent it does give the player some leverage as they can say screw it I'm taking this playing a year and hitting the open market but as has been said players hate one year deals as well. I gotta agree that Monroe wasn't worth tagging.

 

All indications were that he was agreeable to getting a fair long-term deal done. Using the tag on a player you are close to negotiating a deal with is good business because it keeps a team like the Dolphins from coming in and offering a deal well above market value. The Steelers (another very well run organization) used the tag on a player who was backup LB last year. Worilds is young and has a ton of potential and the Steelers don't want to lose him. They are confident that they will get a deal done with him. Obviously none of us have any idea how negotiations have gone, but I have to believe the Ravens were not confident a deal could get done. I believe the Ravens are using the deal Jake Long signed last year as a barometer. 4 yrs, $34mil, $12mil guaranteed. I'm guessing Monroe is coming in well above that.

[oldno82]

 

All indications were that he was agreeable to getting a fair long-term deal done. Using the tag on a player you are close to negotiating a deal with is good business because it keeps a team like the Dolphins from coming in and offering a deal well above market value. The Steelers (another very well run organization) used the tag on a player who was backup LB last year. Worilds is young and has a ton of potential and the Steelers don't want to lose him. They are confident that they will get a deal done with him. Obviously none of us have any idea how negotiations have gone, but I have to believe the Ravens were not confident a deal could get done. I believe the Ravens are using the deal Jake Long signed last year as a barometer. 4 yrs, $34mil, $12mil guaranteed. I'm guessing Monroe is coming in well above that.

The Long contract would have been fair. Not more than that.

[RavenousBG]

 

All indications were that he was agreeable to getting a fair long-term deal done. Using the tag on a player you are close to negotiating a deal with is good business because it keeps a team like the Dolphins from coming in and offering a deal well above market value. The Steelers (another very well run organization) used the tag on a player who was backup LB last year. Worilds is young and has a ton of potential and the Steelers don't want to lose him. They are confident that they will get a deal done with him. Obviously none of us have any idea how negotiations have gone, but I have to believe the Ravens were not confident a deal could get done. I believe the Ravens are using the deal Jake Long signed last year as a barometer. 4 yrs, $34mil, $12mil guaranteed. I'm guessing Monroe is coming in well above that.

.

 

Totally agree here.

[RavenousBG]

Collins is a viable alternative. He's played well for the Bungles when he's had a chance. I'd go after him.

 

The talk on this board about Castillo working well with young lineman is a good one. And you don't need an elite LT as much in the zone blocking scheme. And, Monroe, while I'm sorry he's gone, was not an elite LT.

 

Veldheer is an option too.

 

If we're going to spend that kind of money, I'd rather spend it on a skill position.

The Castillo angle really could be something if he proves it. I read that last year and also while he was in Philly. And I agree that if we are going to drop big money, I would rather it be for a skill position. If Monroe was looking to break the bank with a deal of more tha 9 mil a year average then he needs to go find it elsewhere. We would pay for doing something that irrational later. I think he's a 7.5 mil a yr LT. Very good, not great. So 5 yrs 38 mil and figure a 16 mil SB. If the a team goes more than that then good for them and Monroe. Hate losing the 4th and 5th rounders but we can't be more shortsighted and overpay because of it.

[RavenousBG]

Collins is a viable alternative. He's played well for the Bungles when he's had a chance. I'd go after him.

 

The talk on this board about Castillo working well with young lineman is a good one. And you don't need an elite LT as much in the zone blocking scheme. And, Monroe, while I'm sorry he's gone, was not an elite LT.

 

Veldheer is an option too.

 

If we're going to spend that kind of money, I'd rather spend it on a skill position.

The Castillo angle really could be something if he proves it. I read that last year and also while he was in Philly. And I agree that if we are going to drop big money, I would rather it be for a skill position. If Monroe was looking to break the bank with a deal of more tha 9 mil a year average then he needs to go find it elsewhere. We would pay for doing something that irrational later. I think he's a 7.5 mil a yr LT. Very good, not great. So 5 yrs 38 mil and figure a 16 mil SB. If the a team goes more than that then good for them and Monroe. Hate losing the 4th and 5th rounders but we can't be more shortsighted and overpay because of it.

[RavenMad]

You are not getting Monroe for $7.5m per year. Jake Long signed with the Rams for $8.5m per year last offseason and Monroe graded out 1 spot higher in the tackle rankings. He might get $10+m from a stupid team but a fair contract is going to be in the $8.5m-$9.5m range especially with the almost 10% increase in the cap. $8.5m + 10% = $9.35m. A good agent will try and start the bidding at $10+m per season with the floor being around $9m.

 

My guess is we started around $8m and the sides are far apart at this point. I also believe we will have a shot to match whatever Monroe can get on the open market. If that is $10m+ my guess is he is gone. If it's more around that $9m mark then we might see him return.

 

Ozzie has to continue to stick to his philosophy of right player at the right price. Monroe could be the right player but at $10m+ he would be the wrong price and we have to move on to other options.

[tsylvester]

 

All indications were that he was agreeable to getting a fair long-term deal done. Using the tag on a player you are close to negotiating a deal with is good business because it keeps a team like the Dolphins from coming in and offering a deal well above market value. The Steelers (another very well run organization) used the tag on a player who was backup LB last year. Worilds is young and has a ton of potential and the Steelers don't want to lose him. They are confident that they will get a deal done with him. Obviously none of us have any idea how negotiations have gone, but I have to believe the Ravens were not confident a deal could get done. I believe the Ravens are using the deal Jake Long signed last year as a barometer. 4 yrs, $34mil, $12mil guaranteed. I'm guessing Monroe is coming in well above that.

 

 

 

Well run, yes, for the most part of the Steelers. However, all they are currently doing is pushing the money further down the road. In a few years, it will catch up with them to where they have no cap room and have to rely on cheap players exclusively.

 

Using the tag as protection is not always a good idea, especially on an average player such as Monroe. If a deal was close, something happened to change some one's mind, and Monroe is no Jake Long. He does have the leverage since the Ravens traded two picks for him and the organization has said since the trade, they plan to keep him, that he would be their future starter. So he has all the leverage and that, is not good for the Ravens.

 

They came across this before with Bobo, over paid for him and the quarterbacks paid dearly. I hope the team learns from thier past mistakes and takes the line seriously, even if that means, going a season developing a good line through young players.

[RavenousBG]

7.5 mil is MY number and it would be around my starting point. It's how I would negotiate to keep from going too high. I think his true value is 7.5 but if a guy hits the market you have to pay a little more. If Ozzie could get him for 8 or 8.5 then it would be overpaying to me but I wouldn't be upset. 9 and up would really bother me because he's just not on that level to me. But 7.5 is my assessment. At this point he's probably going to test the market and you're right , we won't get him for 7.5 per. But 8.5 is reasonable overpay to me.

[cravnravn]

This is no time to be budget consience, with the signing of Pitta we are still 25 mil under the cap. I te the nature of the beast to overpay for players, this is nothing new. If Monroe is the best of a weak lot, then you ha e to sweeten the pot

[RavenousBG]

This is no time to be budget consience, with the signing of Pitta we are still 25 mil under the cap. I te the nature of the beast to overpay for players, this is nothing new. If Monroe is the best of a weak lot, then you ha e to sweeten the pot

I disagree I this case Cravn. In a yr or two there's going to be a guy that's worth it and if we are stuck with a guy we massively overpaid it won't feel good. It's the agents job to take us for what they can. It's the FO's job to limit that. So we can get better players in other positions. Monroe is the best of a weak group is what's said. But let's not pay him like he's great.

[papasmurfbell]

YEp. You have to think into the future.

[cravnravn]

You kind of have to bg, this is not new. This stems back to when the skids over paid for Wilkerson, it's the sign of today. There are 31 and 1/2 nfl teams fans that think we overpaid Joe. It is what it is. Bottom figure would be 10% higher then what Long got from the Rams. Then negotiate from there.