Photo

EDIT: Steve Smith Signed


  • Please log in to reply
97 replies to this topic

#1 DanBryden

DanBryden
  • Members
  • 440 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 08:44 AM

Ravens have been linked to Smith according to a number of outlets. 


BSL: Is Steve Smith Worth Pursuing?

http://bit.ly/1hc1Zbc


  • BSLChrisStoner, Mackus, BSLMikeRandall and 1 other like this
Follow me on Twitter: @All22Bryden

#2 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 41,313 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 08:46 AM

I'd be in favor of signing Smith to a 1 or 2 year deal and drafting a WR, perhaps in the first round.



#3 bnickle

bnickle

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 38,177 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 08:47 AM

Let Beckham or Cooks learn from him for a year.

Right price though.

For the likely price, I like him much more than Edelman or Sanders.

#4 BSLMikeRandall

BSLMikeRandall

    Sr. Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,318 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 08:52 AM

Once the market dwindles, if he be gotten for a good price. I think he could be an asset for one maybe two more years. $4M-$4.5M per, I probably wouldn't go higher than that even if it is lowball considering Boldin got $6M per.
@BSLMikeRandall

#5 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 41,313 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 08:57 AM

Once the market dwindles, if he be gotten for a good price. I think he could be an asset for one maybe two more years. $4M-$4.5M per, I probably wouldn't go higher than that even if it is lowball considering Boldin got $6M per.

 

I think Boldin's deal is more than Smith will get.  Boldin will be 34 and is coming off of a 1200 yard, 7 TD season.  Smith will be 35 and is coming off of a 750 yard, 4 TD season.  If you look at their last two years, which is more even, Boldin still has 280 more yards and 3 more TDs.

 

2/$6-8M sounds reasonable to me for Smith.  $2-3M signing bonus and guarantee the base in Year 1.



#6 primetime

primetime

    All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 942 posts
  • LocationHampstead, MD

Posted 12 March 2014 - 09:36 AM

Steve Smith's a small-ish wide out and his game has been very dependent on speed. He saw his overall yardage and his YPC drop this year. I do like his toughness but I'm not sure he's a good fit.

 

Also, didn't we try something similar a few years ago when we brought in Lee Evans?


@primetime667083

#7 SammyBirdland

SammyBirdland

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,019 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 09:45 AM


For the likely price, I like him much more than Edelman or Sanders.

 

Not me. I  think Edelman would be a fantastic get.


¡Hasta la vista, pelota!

#8 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 41,313 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 09:46 AM

Also, didn't we try something similar a few years ago when we brought in Lee Evans?

 

I don't see what one has to do with the other.  Or agree that the acquisitions would be particularly similar.



#9 BSLSeanJester

BSLSeanJester

    Restaurant / Travel Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,415 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 09:48 AM

Not me. I  think Edelman would be a fantastic get.

I do too but I worry about him being a system guy, and he's often banged up too.


I never had friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?


#10 bnickle

bnickle

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 38,177 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 09:55 AM

Edelman is fine, but he's gonna get too much money.


Smith is tough and can work the slot. We have to remember that were changing offenses. A catch and run guy in space is more important now.

#11 bnickle

bnickle

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 38,177 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 09:57 AM

I have to mention it again, if they want that short catch, YAC WR type go get Cooks or Beckham.
  • BSLGabeFerguson likes this

#12 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 41,313 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 10:03 AM

I have to mention it again, if they want that short catch, YAC WR type go get Cooks or Beckham.

 

A rookie WR could make a big impact or could be useless until future seasons.  That's not a position where you can reliably count on guys in their first year.  I certainly think that type of WR is a need, but if we get someone like that in the draft, I'd also still like to add a Smith or Sanders or Edelman type for next year (prefer Smith, since I think he'll cost the least).



#13 Pedro Cerrano

Pedro Cerrano

    SportsGuy's Muse

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 29,119 posts
  • LocationEllicott City, MD

Posted 12 March 2014 - 10:07 AM

With Flacco's arm we should be exploring having multiple deep options.  Smith and, uh, Smith would drive opposing defenses crazy.  Combine that with a solid underneath option like Pitta and we have a very potent passing game, IMO.


There is baseball, and occasionally there are other things of note

"Now OPS sucks.  Got it."

"Making his own olive brine is peak Mackus."

"I'm too hungover to watch a loss." - McNulty

@bopper33


#14 jkough1

jkough1

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,426 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 10:16 AM

Smith's smarts is where I trust him the most.

 

With Kubiak a lot of the passing will be built on boots and play action.  This is going to keep guys moving in the secondary and if Joe continues to be the average to slightly above average scrambling threat I think we'll see more zone.  If this is the case, Smith's experience would be a huge asset to this team.

 

I also like Joe's quality rapport with Mason.  It makes me think he can develop something with Smith quickly.



#15 primetime

primetime

    All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 942 posts
  • LocationHampstead, MD

Posted 12 March 2014 - 10:39 AM

Also, didn't we try something similar a few years ago when we brought in Lee Evans?

 
I don't see what one has to do with the other.  Or agree that the acquisitions would be particularly similar.

They're both smaller WRs that rely on speed. They both are/we're in the November of their careers, which means their best asset, speed, is likely greatly diminished.

I don't see how you don't see the similarity. And what one has to with the other is the Lee Evans thing failed miserably, so learn from history and buyer beware.
@primetime667083

#16 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 41,313 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 11:02 AM

They're both smaller WRs that rely on speed. They both are/we're in the November of their careers, which means their best asset, speed, is likely greatly diminished.

I don't see how you don't see the similarity. And what one has to with the other is the Lee Evans thing failed miserably, so learn from history and buyer beware.

 

They are similar in size I suppose, but not remotely similar in ability.  Evans only had two seasons in his career over 850 yards.  Smith has had 6 seasons over 1100, including 2 in the last 3 years despite being older than Evans was when he retired.

 

There is little similarity, and even if there was, the fact that Evans didn't work out would have absolutely zero bearing on whether Smith will or won't work out.

 

Not wanting to sign Smith because you think he's lost too many steps and doesn't have enough good football left is perfectly fine.  Not wanting Smith because Lee Evans was bad is disconnected logic.  It's identical logic to not want to draft a WR at #17 because Travis Taylor was a bust.


  • Greg Pappas likes this

#17 Pedro Cerrano

Pedro Cerrano

    SportsGuy's Muse

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 29,119 posts
  • LocationEllicott City, MD

Posted 12 March 2014 - 11:04 AM

Yea, not really seeing the Lee Evans/Steve Smith comparison.  One was a decent to pretty good WR for a few years, the other is a borderline HOF WR.


There is baseball, and occasionally there are other things of note

"Now OPS sucks.  Got it."

"Making his own olive brine is peak Mackus."

"I'm too hungover to watch a loss." - McNulty

@bopper33


#18 BSLRobShields

BSLRobShields

    BSL Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 83,818 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 12 March 2014 - 11:10 AM

I think we draft a WR early either way...T Smith is no guarantee to be here beyond next year and the Ravens will plan for that IMO.
@BSLRobShields

#19 BSLGabeFerguson

BSLGabeFerguson

    Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,169 posts
  • LocationCity of Angels

Posted 12 March 2014 - 12:19 PM

I wouldn't be opposed to signing Smith for an inexpensive one year deal, because I think he can still contribute as a #2/3 WR. 

 

My main concern, as Dan pointed out, would signing a vet WR dissuade the FO from taking a WR early? 

 

I think Odell Beckham can come in and do all the things Steve Smith can do, but also provide a better vertical threat and be a contributor in the return game. Beckham reminds me a lot of a young Steve Smith which I would much rather have than a 35 year old Steve Smith.


@gabefergy

#20 primetime

primetime

    All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 942 posts
  • LocationHampstead, MD

Posted 12 March 2014 - 12:22 PM

They are similar in size I suppose, but not remotely similar in ability.  Evans only had two seasons in his career over 850 yards.  Smith has had 6 seasons over 1100, including 2 in the last 3 years despite being older than Evans was when he retired.

 

There is little similarity, and even if there was, the fact that Evans didn't work out would have absolutely zero bearing on whether Smith will or won't work out.

 

Not wanting to sign Smith because you think he's lost too many steps and doesn't have enough good football left is perfectly fine.  Not wanting Smith because Lee Evans was bad is disconnected logic.  It's identical logic to not want to draft a WR at #17 because Travis Taylor was a bust.

 

 

I think you're putting words in my mouth. I said they're similar players in that they're both small-ish WRs and that they're both guys that use speed as a major part of their game. I also said we tried to bring in a past his prime speed guy a few years ago and it didn't work. Both of those things are true.

 

Smith is obviously more accomplished/consistent then Evans was; I never said don't look into Smith because the Lee Evans experiment didn't work. What I said was to be cautious about acquiring a guy who's game relies on speed when he's clearly at the tail end of his career. I don't see how that's faulty logic.

 

Smith isn't going to out-phyiscal anyone, he doesn't have a size advantage on anyone. He's a guy who made a living on getting behind defenders with his speed and he also had a knack for making guys miss after the catch. But again, a WR that's going to be 35 this spring isn't going to have the same ability to get away from defenders because he's losing (or has lost) that "suddeness".

 

If he comes on the cheap on a short term deal AND we add a legit WR through the draft, taking a flier on Smith is decent idea. However, I don't think he should be a guy we acquire and pencil in as 60 snap a game contributor on offense.


@primetime667083




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Partners