The “It’s Over”, the Offense, and the Turnovers

[rossihunter2]

Pressures are only good if they lead to:

1. Turnover
2. TFL
3. Sack
4. Incompletions

That’s the truth and that pressure may not result in any of those for the guy generating the pressure. But if it results in anyone benefitting then I think it’s good. With that said, not getting many sacks with pressure is also very disappointing. The question is then how much respect does the offense show that pressure? If the guy is double or triple teamed then that’s respect

i mean pressure forcing a quick checkdown or short completion (e.g. a stop) vs a bigger gain is also a win

 

[Simba]

i get the first bit - obviously it's tough with two poor guards next to you
is he playing like a top 5 C in the league though? because if he is then it's a no-brainer that you re-sign him

I think he is, but that might also be reflective of the fact the lack of talent across the league. Every time I watch another team play, the OL rarely feels better than ours. I know we're complaining this year but the state of OL play for nearly all teams is not great right now.

 

[rmcjacket23]

For me, it's more so that they've invested a premium contract into Madubuike already at DT (assuming he's back, as Simba thinks he will be), so spending another premium contract on a defensive tackle feels like a tough pill to swallow. Not to mention, they have premium contracts for Humphrey, Smith, Hamilton, and have first round picks in Wiggins and Starks.

I'd be really upset if they let an offensive lineman walk with Faalele being a free agent as well because that'd be likely turnover at the three interior spots.

I want to see the offense get a little bit of love here, too.

The counterpoint would be... do you want to see turnover at three Oline spots or three Dline spots? Technically if you include Edge players, you're set to lose both Jones', Van Noy, and Jenkins.

Realistically, I'd expect Emery Jones to return as a starting Guard next year (or at least be pretty much given every possible opportunity to win that job). So even if Linderbaum leaves, I think you're only replacing two Olineman, not three, regardless. They're going to have Jones and Vorhees under contract, and one of those guys is winning a starting job.

The positions I expect them to need to add offensively are TE and RB, with some depth at WR. TE and RB are pretty much exclusively day 2 or day 3 draft pick types.

I do not mind keeping Linderbaum, and I actually think there's at least some leverage to possibly get him for a bit less than what he would have made last year. But I'm not sure he's critical anymore. And I'll be super pissed if they franchise tag him.

 

[29BmoreBird22]

marlo's probably gone
and they're not paying any EDGE guys

you'd be looking at hamilton, roquan and madubuike as your only other big contracts on defence with everyone else on rookie deals or short-term vet deals

i don't think having 2 big deals on the DL is a bad thing tbh

im not saying don't invest in the offence, i'm just saying that i think travis jones is really valuable

I don't think having two highly paid defensive lineman is an issue, in a vacuum. Where it becomes an issue to me is when the offense, especially the offensive line, is being shafted to put all this investment into the defense.

 

[29BmoreBird22]

The counterpoint would be... do you want to see turnover at three Oline spots or three Dline spots? Technically if you include Edge players, you're set to lose both Jones', Van Noy, and Jenkins.

If I had a choice, I'm returning the offensive line over the defensive line every time (not saying this offensive line; just in general.)

I think the offensive line is a more chemistry driven positional group where continuity pays dividends and I think that the Ravens have made a very sizable investment into Lamar, so keeping him upright and healthy should be a priority.

To a later point- no, I would not want the Ravens to tag Linderbaum, either. The tag not taking into account positional groupings for offensive lineman makes the tag astronomically high.

 

[rmcjacket23]

If I had a choice, I'm returning the offensive line over the defensive line every time (not saying this offensive line; just in general.)

I think the offensive line is a more chemistry driven positional group where continuity pays dividends and I think that the Ravens have made a very sizable investment into Lamar, so keeping him upright and healthy should be a priority.

To a later point- no, I would not want the Ravens to tag Linderbaum, either. The tag not taking into account positional groupings for offensive lineman makes the tag astronomically high.

If I thought the Oline was good enough to keep intact, I would. I'm not sacrificing quality for continuity, and I personally am of the mindset that depth is as important as the starters, because most years, you're going to go extended periods of time in-season where your starting five Olineman aren't playing together due to injuries. One of the main reasons why fans undervalued somebody like Hurst, and Mekari, who were effectively average players at four positions. And to the surprise of nobody who has followed the NFL, they end up having like 10+ year careers, even though the fanbase thinks they suck. This has actually been one of the healthiest teams in terms of Oline play in the entire league, and they're still nothing more than hovering around the league average. That's not great.
IF we were talking about Tackles, I'd be on board. I think finding an upgrade on Stanley or even RR is a very difficult task in the current OLine shit show that is the draft. But what's clear is you have two Guards who are replacement level starting right now.

In reality, we're talking about Linderbaum and Linderbaum only. I think its impossible to argue that Faalele or Vorhees are good enough that you can't easily replace them. That's a foregone conclusion.
I brought up the tag because, since we declined his 5th year option, and haven't extended him, you can't really control if he returns or not. In order to keep him, you either have to pay what every other team in the league will pay for him (which could be a lot), or you have to tag him, which is at above market value. Other than that, whether he stays or not may not be up to you.

 

[29BmoreBird22]

If I thought the Oline was good enough to keep intact, I would. I'm not sacrificing quality for continuity, and I personally am of the mindset that depth is as important as the starters, because most years, you're going to go extended periods of time in-season where your starting five Olineman aren't playing together due to injuries. One of the main reasons why fans undervalued somebody like Hurst, and Mekari, who were effectively average players at four positions. And to the surprise of nobody who has followed the NFL, they end up having like 10+ year careers, even though the fanbase thinks they suck. This has actually been one of the healthiest teams in terms of Oline play in the entire league, and they're still nothing more than hovering around the league average. That's not great.
IF we were talking about Tackles, I'd be on board. I think finding an upgrade on Stanley or even RR is a very difficult task in the current OLine shit show that is the draft. But what's clear is you have two Guards who are replacement level starting right now.

In reality, we're talking about Linderbaum and Linderbaum only. I think its impossible to argue that Faalele or Vorhees are good enough that you can't easily replace them. That's a foregone conclusion.
I brought up the tag because, since we declined his 5th year option, and haven't extended him, you can't really control if he returns or not. In order to keep him, you either have to pay what every other team in the league will pay for him (which could be a lot), or you have to tag him, which is at above market value. Other than that, whether he stays or not may not be up to you.

I would not keep the Ravens current offensive line together for the sake of continuity, but I would not be jumping up and down to let Linderbaum go and be faced with keeping Vorhees (or praying Jones works out) and trying to replace RG and C, too. I do think if Jones develops well (which is a huge IF) and the Ravens keep Linderbaum and get a decent RG in free agency or the draft that the offensive line could be pretty decent. IF Jones developed, Linderbaum is kept, and a young RG is found, you're looking at having four of those players together for two years (I imagine they'll look to get a new LT at some point) and potentially longer if they could manage to re-sign RR. A lot of ifs there, obviously.

With the tag, I don't think it's an option for the same reason the fifth year option wasn't- not having a T, G, and C tag, but having an OL tag just means a center will likely never get tagged, unless they're Creed Humphrey levels of good.

 

[rmcjacket23]

I would not keep the Ravens current offensive line together for the sake of continuity, but I would not be jumping up and down to let Linderbaum go and be faced with keeping Vorhees (or praying Jones works out) and trying to replace RG and C, too. I do think if Jones develops well (which is a huge IF) and the Ravens keep Linderbaum and get a decent RG in free agency or the draft that the offensive line could be pretty decent. IF Jones developed, Linderbaum is kept, and a young RG is found, you're looking at having four of those players together for two years (I imagine they'll look to get a new LT at some point) and potentially longer if they could manage to re-sign RR. A lot of ifs there, obviously.

With the tag, I don't think it's an option for the same reason the fifth year option wasn't- not having a T, G, and C tag, but having an OL tag just means a center will likely never get tagged, unless they're Creed Humphrey levels of good.

Not sure its really so much of "praying" that Jones works out as it is him getting a full offseason to start. He's pretty much a plug and play starter at Guard next year barring something odd happening with one of the Tackles. I wouldn't anticipate them making a much higher investment in a Guard than a third rounder, so anybody they would add wouldn't be in a better spot than he is to start.

If anything, I think they'd just add a veteran C for cheaper rather than a Guard. Regardless, I don't think "continuity" or the fear of having to replace 3 Olineman is going to be a factor in deciding whether they want to give Linderbaum $18M/yr over three years or not. It'll come down to whether they think he's good enough to get that $.

 

[29BmoreBird22]

Not sure its really so much of "praying" that Jones works out as it is him getting a full offseason to start. He's pretty much a plug and play starter at Guard next year barring something odd happening with one of the Tackles. I wouldn't anticipate them making a much higher investment in a Guard than a third rounder, so anybody they would add wouldn't be in a better spot than he is to start.

If anything, I think they'd just add a veteran C for cheaper rather than a Guard. Regardless, I don't think "continuity" or the fear of having to replace 3 Olineman is going to be a factor in deciding whether they want to give Linderbaum $18M/yr over three years or not. It'll come down to whether they think he's good enough to get that $.

I don't expect a massive investment at guard, either, but I just hope the Ravens have a contingency at guard in case Jones doesn't work out. A Simpson type, if you will. Low investment price and generally just... as average as can be, but someone they can plug in if disaster strikes.

I will be curious to see the numbers on Linderbaum, but I do think, to a degree, that it'll factor in turnover on the offensive line after having a year where the offensive line has been so... uneven and played a large hand in offensive struggles.