| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Who do you think will be the 2012 kicker? |
| Billy Cundiff |
|
12% |
[ 3 ] |
| Justin Tucker |
|
88% |
[ 22 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 25 |
|
| Author |
Message |
RavensTillIDie
Joined: 14 Jan 2007
Posts: 10841
Location: ----------------- Props to Jamison. on the dope signature!!!!!!!!!!
|
 Posted: Wed Aug 15, 2012 12:30 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
|
| dcarey20 wrote: | | Quote: | | First off let me say welcome to the forums StevenV32! Secondly, I keep thinking you're DCarey20.. you both have the same avatar... |
You are not alone my friend, I have started to read a post that I thought was mine just because I saw that avatar, only to get to the end and realize that it wasn't me, lol. |
For a sec, I thought you and I could no longer be friends when I saw the Miami Heat sig.  
_________________
 | EliteTexan80 wrote: | | If this site represents "average" then yes. There are times where I forgo saying things because I'm afraid some of you will make me dumber. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
SnA ExclusiVe
Joined: 01 Jun 2011
Posts: 10584
Location: Spokane, WA
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 15, 2012 9:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I read on Twitter either today or yesterday (can't remember if it was Aaron Wilson or the Official Ravens) that said Dean Peas has "no apprehension of using a rookie kicker".
What exactly does that mean? Does that mean he's already set in his mind that Cundiff is going to be the kicker?
Also, from today's practice:
“@Ravens: Justin Tucker hits from 52 and 56 yards while Billy Cundiff missed both, wide right. One clanked off the post.”
Tucker is straight up beating out Cundiff for the job so if Peas says he has no apprehension of going with a rookie kicker, that just blows my mind.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
coordinator0
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Posts: 5873
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 15, 2012 10:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| You mean Rosburg, not Pees. Either way it's starting to look like Cundiff is falling behind in practices. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Boodgyman5220
Joined: 16 Dec 2005
Posts: 802
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 15, 2012 11:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| SnA ExclusiVe wrote: | I read on Twitter either today or yesterday (can't remember if it was Aaron Wilson or the Official Ravens) that said Dean Peas has "no apprehension of using a rookie kicker".
What exactly does that mean? Does that mean he's already set in his mind that Cundiff is going to be the kicker?
Also, from today's practice:
“@Ravens: Justin Tucker hits from 52 and 56 yards while Billy Cundiff missed both, wide right. One clanked off the post.”
Tucker is straight up beating out Cundiff for the job so if Peas says he has no apprehension of going with a rookie kicker, that just blows my mind. |
by saying he has no apprehension means that he would have no problem using a rookie kicker or isn't afraid to have a rookie kicker.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SnA ExclusiVe
Joined: 01 Jun 2011
Posts: 10584
Location: Spokane, WA
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2012 12:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| coordinator0 wrote: | | You mean Rosburg, not Pees. Either way it's starting to look like Cundiff is falling behind in practices. |
Oops, my mistake, yes Rosburg.
And thanks for the clarification Boodgyman.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RavensfanRD
Joined: 07 Mar 2007
Posts: 1436
Location: Baltimore, MD (Land of the Greatness)
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2012 1:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Boy...
What a difference a year(And one tremendously untimely fraud) makes!
I think somehow Cundiff wins it. Not majorly concerned because at the point of the game, I want touchdowns dammit. Keep your 3 points. I want sevens on the board!
_________________
| Ray Lewis wrote: | | This it! This it, man! This is it! We goin' for a ring man! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jpeter15
Joined: 17 Dec 2007
Posts: 170
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2012 8:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| I think we end up keeping Cundiff and see how he does during the season, then if he struggles we can easily bring in Tucker without really missing a step. I think it is very unlikely we flat out cut Cundiff before the season even if Tucker beats him out in preseason. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Flaccomania
Joined: 12 Aug 2008
Posts: 16537
Location: Parkville, MD
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2012 8:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| jpeter15 wrote: | | I think we end up keeping Cundiff and see how he does during the season, then if he struggles we can easily bring in Tucker without really missing a step. I think it is very unlikely we flat out cut Cundiff before the season even if Tucker beats him out in preseason. |
It honestly wouldn't surprise me if we did. If Tucker shows he's the better man for the job, we'd save money under the cap by cutting Cundiff and could use it elsewhere. Then, if Tucker screws the pooch, I'm sure Cundiff will still be floating around to bring him in. If we let Tucker go, I wouldn't be surprised to see another team potentially scoop him up kinda like what happened with Hauschka.
I also read that in camp, Tucker is currently 82/97 (84.5%) whereas Cundiff is 74/89 (83%).
_________________
Why not Michael Jordan? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BaltimoreTerp
Joined: 13 Feb 2005
Posts: 24817
Location: Brooklyn, New York
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2012 11:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Somehow, no matter what decision we end up making, I just know I'm not going to feel very confident about it.
Either we go into this season with a rookie kicker or Billy Cundiff. Hell of a world we live in.
_________________
"The really important kind of freedom involves attention, and awareness, and discipline, and effort, and being able truly to care about other people and to sacrifice for them, over and over, in myriad petty little unsexy ways, every day.” |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RavensfanRD
Joined: 07 Mar 2007
Posts: 1436
Location: Baltimore, MD (Land of the Greatness)
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2012 12:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
EDIT: Already posted
_________________
| Ray Lewis wrote: | | This it! This it, man! This is it! We goin' for a ring man! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jpeter15
Joined: 17 Dec 2007
Posts: 170
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2012 1:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Right now I think our best case scenario may be going MLB style and trading for a kicker from a non-contending team mid way through the season.
What would people give up for a competent kicker via trade? 4th round pick? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
coordinator0
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Posts: 5873
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2012 1:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| You rarely see teams trade kickers, especially competent ones. A 4th round pick does seem about right but this isn't the MLB and next season those non-contending teams could make a quick turnaround and be in the playoffs. I don't think that's a realistic option at all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Flaccomania
Joined: 12 Aug 2008
Posts: 16537
Location: Parkville, MD
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2012 2:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| coordinator0 wrote: | | You rarely see teams trade kickers, especially competent ones. A 4th round pick does seem about right but this isn't the MLB and next season those non-contending teams could make a quick turnaround and be in the playoffs. I don't think that's a realistic option at all. |
Exactly. While kickers aren't "valuable" in terms of trade value, they are very much valuable in terms of each team needing one. No matter how good/bad a team is, if they have a good kicker they aren't going to trade them.
_________________
Why not Michael Jordan? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bmorecareful
Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 432
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2012 5:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Flaccomania wrote: | | jpeter15 wrote: | | I think we end up keeping Cundiff and see how he does during the season, then if he struggles we can easily bring in Tucker without really missing a step. I think it is very unlikely we flat out cut Cundiff before the season even if Tucker beats him out in preseason. |
It honestly wouldn't surprise me if we did. If Tucker shows he's the better man for the job, we'd save money under the cap by cutting Cundiff and could use it elsewhere. Then, if Tucker screws the pooch, I'm sure Cundiff will still be floating around to bring him in. If we let Tucker go, I wouldn't be surprised to see another team potentially scoop him up kinda like what happened with Hauschka.
I also read that in camp, Tucker is currently 82/97 (84.5%) whereas Cundiff is 74/89 (83%). |
That was actually a typo Tucker is 82/87 (94%) and has been perfect most days in camp
http://www.csnwashington.com/08/15/12/Justin-Tucker-has-made-82-of-87-FGs-in-c/mobile_landing.html?blockID=757173&feedID=6703 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
coordinator0
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Posts: 5873
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2012 5:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
http://www.ravens24x7.com/columns/The-Money-Clip-Baltimore-Ravens-Salary-Cap-Analysis/Will-Cundiffs-contract-save-or-cost-him-his-job
| Quote: | If Tucker does beat out Cundiff (and remember that in 2010, the Ravens ended up keeping Cundiff after he outperformed the presumed favorite, Shayne Graham, even though Graham was signed to be the PK), the Ravens will be able to create $1.81M in Salary Cap space for this year. That amount represents the savings from Cundiff’s $2.2M base salary versus the $390K that Tucker would make. The team would still have to carry $600K of dead money against the Cap in 2012 and $1.8M in 2013.
But, while teams don’t usually like to carry dead money from one year to the next, there are three factors that would/should lessen that concern. First, the team is presently carrying very little dead money over into 2013. In fact, right now, the only dead money that will be carried over into 2013 is the roughly $40K of prorated bonus money from the undrafted rookies that will not make the team. In contrast, due to the releases of Willis McGahee, Kelly Gregg and others, the Ravens carried over more than $4.5M in dead money from 2011 into 2012.
The second factor that lessens the impact of releasing Cundiff is that the Ravens can carry over any unused 2012 Cap space into 2013. So, if $1.81M that is saved this year isn’t used this year, it can be carried over as to increase the team’s 2013 Cap space and would essentially be a wash with the $1.8M in dead money that was also carried over.
Of course, if the team needs that additional Cap space at some point in 2012, there would still be up to $1.8M in dead money to account for in 2013.
The last factor in favor of keeping Tucker over Cundiff, and this is a big one, is that, despite some possible Cap pain in 2013 from the dead money carry-over, Tucker will be far cheaper over the next 4 years than Cundiff. Cundiff is due $10.2M in base salary over the next 4 years and will count $12.6M against the Cap over those years. On the other hand, Tucker, as an undrafted free agent, will play those 4 years under minimum salaries ($390K, $480K, $570K, RFA in 4th year). As such, Tucker will likely cost no more than $3-4M (depending on the RFA tender in year 4) or so over the same period. |
That was one of the things I was concerned about before camp started. It looks like the negative effects of possibly cutting Cundiff won't help him in the kicking competition. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
