OneWinningDrive |
01-24-2024 06:06 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut
(Post 17361032)
Because it's orders of magnitude easier to build the rest of your roster when you know the QB is locked in for the next 5+ years. Those restructures you so loathe are a LOT easier when you have years at the back of the deal to throw cap space into. Your roster planning is easier. Your cap management is significantly so.
If you can do it that way, you should. Unless you're not sure you WANT to be locked into that QB for another 5+ years.
Last offseason the Ravens weren't sure. He didn't get smarter over the last 12 months. He's the same guy, just at a different point in his development - a curve the Ravens would've had a better handle on than anyone else.
And yet they didn't approach it that way. The 'why' of it seems pretty obvious if you haven't spent several hours (months) trying to convince yourself that Lamar Jackson can read the Matrix now.
|
If you want to make the point that there's a reality where it's advantageous to lock up a QB to a long-term deal because of the increased flexibility it could offer, sure. And if you want to make the point that a QB who relies on rushing ability is less likely to get that deal because of the chance they could decline in that capacity with age, then sure.
So what? What we know is that Jackson signed a contract at market rate and immediately won an MVP and now has years left on the deal. The Ravens have been unambiguous winners thus far in terms of their financial relationship with Lamar Jackson.
But you want to insist on inventing hypotheticals based on massive assumptions to project that in the future--even if not now--that financial relationship might change. Or you want to extrapolate what you think it says about the Ravens' appraisal of Lamar Jackson's long-term trajectory and who is as as an athlete.
Go for it. Enjoy your pie in the sky.
|