• Welcome to PurpleFlock! Sign up here so that you can chat with your fellow Ravens fans.

Signings, Cuts, Trades

rmcjacket23 said:
Seen a lot of sharps taking them at like +350 to miss the playoffs. Basically, they're a Stafford injury away from being irrelevant.
Click to expand...
What contender is not a QB injury away from being irrelevant? At least the Rams have a freshly drafted backup plan which is more than every other contender can say.
 
Adreme said:
What contender is not a QB injury away from being irrelevant? At least the Rams have a freshly drafted backup plan which is more than every other contender can say.
Click to expand...
Sure, but he's a rookie. Him playing this year is a total disaster. The Ravens would take their backup situation, today, over the Rams. By a wide margin. And the Ravens have closer to a league-average backup than they do a good one. There's a reason why the Rams were in on the Cousins market before they drafted.

There's plenty of contenders with better 2026 backup QB situations than the Rams. Rams situation is a lot better long term than it is short term.
Bills, Texans, Bengals, Ravens in the AFC alone wouldn't trade their backup QB for the Rams situation for a one year period. Wouldn't make any sense.
 
rmcjacket23 said:
Sure, but he's a rookie. Him playing this year is a total disaster. The Ravens would take their backup situation, today, over the Rams. By a wide margin. And the Ravens have closer to a league-average backup than they do a good one. There's a reason why the Rams were in on the Cousins market before they drafted.

There's plenty of contenders with better 2026 backup QB situations than the Rams. Rams situation is a lot better long term than it is short term.
Bills, Texans, Bengals, Ravens in the AFC alone wouldn't trade their backup QB for the Rams situation for a one year period. Wouldn't make any sense.
Click to expand...
It doesn’t matter. Every single team you listed is irrelevant and not a playoff team with their backup. It doesn’t change the fact that every contender is irrelevant if their starting QB goes down.

The only interesting conversation is which team is most likely to go 2-2 if their QB has to miss a month. Honestly, depending on the schedule, that probably still is the Rams.
 
Adreme said:
It doesn’t matter. Every single team you listed is irrelevant and not a playoff team with their backup. It doesn’t change the fact that every contender is irrelevant if their starting QB goes down.

The only interesting conversation is which team is most likely to go 2-2 if their QB has to miss a month. Honestly, depending on the schedule, that probably still is the Rams.
Click to expand...

Eagles lol. Hurts ass
 
Adreme said:
It doesn’t matter. Every single team you listed is irrelevant and not a playoff team with their backup. It doesn’t change the fact that every contender is irrelevant if their starting QB goes down.

The only interesting conversation is which team is most likely to go 2-2 if their QB has to miss a month. Honestly, depending on the schedule, that probably still is the Rams.
Click to expand...
I agree. You're missing the entire premise though. The concept was based on the fact that the Rams have, by a wide margin, the best price to miss the playoffs. If I think that every team in the league is irrelevant with their backup in, which I largely do (though there's less than you'd think), then the Rams are pretty much just as likely as any team in the league to have their QB suffer a long term injury. If that's the case, then I'd be targeting them as an option to fade at +400 now based on a wildly inflated preseason expectation.

It also goes without saying but what you think is an interesting conversation is not in the realm of things I find interesting. Unless I'm able to find a junkie bookie willing to take action on which team will lose their QB for a month and still go 2-2, that's a thoroughly uninteresting conversation.

And for what its worth... I think all of the teams I listed would be as or more likely to go 2-2 than the Rams.
 
rmcjacket23 said:
I agree. You're missing the entire premise though. The concept was based on the fact that the Rams have, by a wide margin, the best price to miss the playoffs. If I think that every team in the league is irrelevant with their backup in, which I largely do (though there's less than you'd think), then the Rams are pretty much just as likely as any team in the league to have their QB suffer a long term injury. If that's the case, then I'd be targeting them as an option to fade at +400 now based on a wildly inflated preseason expectation.

It also goes without saying but what you think is an interesting conversation is not in the realm of things I find interesting. Unless I'm able to find a junkie bookie willing to take action on which team will lose their QB for a month and still go 2-2, that's a thoroughly uninteresting conversation.

And for what its worth... I think all of the teams I listed would be as or more likely to go 2-2 than the Rams.
Click to expand...
With mcvay and possibly a great defense, wouldnt surprise me if they could go 2-2.. they have the personnel to make things simple for ty.. jj mccartny won 2 games
 
rmcjacket23 said:
I agree. You're missing the entire premise though. The concept was based on the fact that the Rams have, by a wide margin, the best price to miss the playoffs. If I think that every team in the league is irrelevant with their backup in, which I largely do (though there's less than you'd think), then the Rams are pretty much just as likely as any team in the league to have their QB suffer a long term injury. If that's the case, then I'd be targeting them as an option to fade at +400 now based on a wildly inflated preseason expectation.

It also goes without saying but what you think is an interesting conversation is not in the realm of things I find interesting. Unless I'm able to find a junkie bookie willing to take action on which team will lose their QB for a month and still go 2-2, that's a thoroughly uninteresting conversation.

And for what its worth... I think all of the teams I listed would be as or more likely to go 2-2 than the Rams.
Click to expand...
The entire reason you debate over a backup QB for a contender is that scenario I am listing. The only reason they matter is if your QB misses a month (possible as only about 1/3 of QBs play all 17 games/16 games and rest last) and you need to stay above water. They dont matter in terms of actually contending in January because there isnt a backup QB you want for that because if there was they would not be a backup.

Also I would take that bet if it were offered in a heartbeat that the Rams are by far the most likely to be able to withstand their QB being out a month. Now I think there are basically 2 real backups in the NFL who could call themselves low end starters (Mac Jones and Joe Flacco) and while Flacco does play for the Bengals the Bengals just do not have the defense to withstand a dropoff on offense. I dont think they can go 2-2 scoring 17-20 points.

The Bills have a roster that could but their backup is the definition of "oh right that guy". When we are debating between whether a QB is the 45th best or 65th best I dont think there is a significant difference so at that point I look at the roster and the Rams, by a significant margin, have the best roster in football.
 
Adreme said:
The entire reason you debate over a backup QB for a contender is that scenario I am listing. The only reason they matter is if your QB misses a month (possible as only about 1/3 of QBs play all 17 games/16 games and rest last) and you need to stay above water. They dont matter in terms of actually contending in January because there isnt a backup QB you want for that because if there was they would not be a backup.

Also I would take that bet if it were offered in a heartbeat that the Rams are by far the most likely to be able to withstand their QB being out a month. Now I think there are basically 2 real backups in the NFL who could call themselves low end starters (Mac Jones and Joe Flacco) and while Flacco does play for the Bengals the Bengals just do not have the defense to withstand a dropoff on offense. I dont think they can go 2-2 scoring 17-20 points.

The Bills have a roster that could but their backup is the definition of "oh right that guy". When we are debating between whether a QB is the 45th best or 65th best I dont think there is a significant difference so at that point I look at the roster and the Rams, by a significant margin, have the best roster in football.
Click to expand...
No, I debate over a backup QB because I'm trying to win $ off another teams injury misfortunes. And I'm picking the team that has the best odds of still making the playoffs when not factoring in those injuries. I'm saying the betting line is mis-priced (which happens all the time) and over-emphasizes the quality of the roster and under-emphasizes the importance of that position specifically on that roster.

In addition, I'm not debating over what would happen over a month, because the wager I'm making has nothing to do with a month. It has to do with a much longer period of time than that. There's about 2/3 of the league I wouldn't wager against at all if I thought their QB would only miss a month. Plenty of teams can to go 2-2 or better with their existing backup QBs based on scheduling and just how bad starting QBs are for half the teams in the league.
 
JO_75 said:
Has Drake London really been this good and I haven't noticed? A hefty price here Atlanta is paying. @Simba This is probably making Zay's agent very happy I imagine. We need to lock up Zay quick, can't let these other receivers keep getting paid and the cost of him keeps going up.

Click to expand...


He has. 2024, for example. He was 4th in receiving yards, 8th in TDs, 2nd in contested catches, and 10th in forced missed tackles. He was limited to 12 games this year, but still managed to amass over 900 yards. I did figure the lack of accolades would get a slight discount on the asking price, however.
 
Truth said:
He has. 2024, for example. He was 4th in receiving yards, 8th in TDs, 2nd in contested catches, and 10th in forced missed tackles. He was limited to 12 games this year, but still managed to amass over 900 yards. I did figure the lack of accolades would get a slight discount on the asking price, however.
Click to expand...
I think London slots in ahead of Flowers for sure, but this also just reinforces the fact that Zay's deal will be in excess of $30M AAV, either with the Ravens or someone else, and I imagine his gtd $ will be in the $90-100M range as well.
 
rmcjacket23 said:
No, I debate over a backup QB because I'm trying to win $ off another teams injury misfortunes. And I'm picking the team that has the best odds of still making the playoffs when not factoring in those injuries. I'm saying the betting line is mis-priced (which happens all the time) and over-emphasizes the quality of the roster and under-emphasizes the importance of that position specifically on that roster.

In addition, I'm not debating over what would happen over a month, because the wager I'm making has nothing to do with a month. It has to do with a much longer period of time than that. There's about 2/3 of the league I wouldn't wager against at all if I thought their QB would only miss a month. Plenty of teams can to go 2-2 or better with their existing backup QBs based on scheduling and just how bad starting QBs are for half the teams in the league.
Click to expand...
Its terrible value even with normal injury luck. 2/3 of QBs made 10 starts last season. The ones who tend to miss time played behind far worse OLines than the Rams have (who most likely have a top 5 OLine). If Stafford is in that 2/3 camp you lose and lets pretend that its equally likely that he is or he is not (again he is more likely to be in the 2/3 category given the quality of their OLine). Meanwhile if he goes down after say 5 or 6 games then the backup gets the softest part of the schedule where they simply win by having more talent and its back to the same scenario after week 11.

The Rams are just in a situation where their talent is so overwhelming that they can go .500 with a backup QB so if Stafford has to get hurt in the first 2-3 games for it to realistically play out.
 
Adreme said:
Its terrible value even with normal injury luck. 2/3 of QBs made 10 starts last season. The ones who tend to miss time played behind far worse OLines than the Rams have (who most likely have a top 5 OLine). If Stafford is in that 2/3 camp you lose and lets pretend that its equally likely that he is or he is not (again he is more likely to be in the 2/3 category given the quality of their OLine). Meanwhile if he goes down after say 5 or 6 games then the backup gets the softest part of the schedule where they simply win by having more talent and its back to the same scenario after week 11.

The Rams are just in a situation where their talent is so overwhelming that they can go .500 with a backup QB so if Stafford has to get hurt in the first 2-3 games for it to realistically play out.
Click to expand...
I mean this logically makes no sense. If 1/3 of the QBs missed 7 starts, then I feel great about it. Rams aren't making the playoffs if Stafford misses seven games. Their roster isn't that loaded.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top