1.) You re-sign Monroe...  Or let him walk if you don't want to pay him.  Sometimes no compensation is better for future bargaining than accepting less value.  This tells future teams not to budge on their offers (especially for a new GM).

 

2.) I think the majority of teams that would trade for him would do so with a contract extension in mind.  I don't think any team goes into a trade and is like, "Hey, lets rent him and see if we can re-sign him during Free Agency."  The Ravens situation was really strange.  They didn't have the cap money and they were desperate for a tackle for a playoff push.  They decided to gamble that he'd re-sign during Free Agency, and I tend to believe they had some assurances that he would.

 

3.)  This is a hypothetical.  We could play that all day.

1. So you get no compensation, except his services for the remainder of a 4 win season.  As for re-signing him, we can outbid the Ravens and do that right now.  With a couple extra picks in hand, to boot.  As for the rest of your statement about "future bargaining", I think that's a bit of a reach.

 

2. I don't know what was in Eugene or his agent's head, but he wasn't exactly playing like Joe Thomas.

 

3.  Unless the team shut him down, injury is a reality on every play.  In fact, I think it was only 2 games later that Joeckyl went down for the season.

---

1.) Future bargaining is the whole premise.  No team will ever cede their offers at an impasse if they know we'll be the first to cave.  Just like poker... If you know that if you go "all in" that X player will fold every time, then you'll take advantage of that.

 

3.) Yes, hypotheticals are always a possibility - that's why they're hypotheticals.

---

So, if Monroe hits the market on March 11th, what will your reaction be to this trade? Will it have swung "more" in favor for Jacksonville, for Baltimore, or still have no effect? The issue won't be totally reconciled, but it may lend more light on the answer (that does not and will not exist).

---

I'm trying to make myself more informed and less opinionated.

Stop saying whatever stupid thing you're talking about and pay attention to all the interesting things I have to say!

No, it doesn't solidify the deal as "good" for Jacksonville, but it does allow for a little better understanding of the perceived value of the player.

 

Baltimore traded away two "depth selections" for a player at a position of need with the idea that the position was still going to have to be addressed in the future, whether through additional draft selections or contract money. The way that I view the trade -- at least from Baltimore's perspective -- they used their Fourth and Fifth picks to "trade up" in the draft in order to get a quality Left Tackle. Now, if I was Jacksonville would I have taken a Fourth and a Fifth round pick to swap places with Baltimore in the First Round in the '14 draft? No way can I see that happening, but that analogy is incomplete without considering Monroe and the quality of player that he was. Regardless, I would probably do that trade if it was offered in the Third Round or even the Second, because I can see that compensation making more sense, two picks to entice me to slide back eight to 10 spots. The difference is, in a mid season trade scenario, the teams get to keep their original picks.

 

Essentially, the Monroe trade gave us either a chance to nab extra depth/headcase/injury/developmental guys or the ammo to move up in the Second and/or Third Rounds and get starter-caliber players; I don't have a problem with that. Did Jacksonville get major return from this trade? No, they didn't but I still feel like they got good value. Honestly, it's just another trade in my eyes.

 

I like to look at it from this angle. We traded away a player who was most likely playing his last season as a Jag, and it gave us ammo to trade into almost any spot in the draft in order to get a QB we like - without sacrificing most of our picks.

---

So you're going to compare a ridiculous offer to one where MAYBE we could have gotten a LITTLE better. Very 'sensible'.....or not.

 

But that isnt how it works, these draft picks have a value which is separate from the player they end up picking. Was our 3rd rounder that we used on Brian Anger worth less than the one the Seahawks used on Russel Wilson? Of course not, they just used their pick a lot better than we did.

 

The point you made is in a pick for player trade, you don't know who wins and loses until you see how the picks play out. The Colts traded a 1st for Trent Richardson. I don't need to see who Cleveland pick to know they won.

---

Just to be different, Bortles.

But that isnt how it works, these draft picks have a value which is separate from the player they end up picking. Was our 3rd rounder that we used on Brian Anger worth less than the one the Seahawks used on Russel Wilson? Of course not, they just used their pick a lot better than we did.

 

The point you made is in a pick for player trade, you don't know who wins and loses until you see how the picks play out. The Colts traded a 1st for Trent Richardson. I don't need to see who Cleveland pick to know they won.

 

+1

---

I've always felt with this trade that Monroe must of made it pretty clear to Caldwell that he was unwilling to sign a contract..hence the trade

---

I've always felt with this trade that Monroe must of made it pretty clear to Caldwell that he was unwilling to sign a contract..hence the trade

Or maybe Caldwell and company decided to go the cheap route instead and ultimately decided to sit on Khan's wallet.


Joeckel may have been drafted as a cheap replacement for Monroe.

---

"Before you criticize a man, walk a mile in his shoes. That way, if he gets angry, he's a mile away and barefoot."

Or maybe Caldwell and company decided to go the cheap route instead and ultimately decided to sit on Khan's wallet.


Joeckel may have been drafted as a cheap replacement for Monroe.

 

There are 4 reasons I can fathom that made Caldwell make the trade and only one of them makes any sense to me, but even that one is full of holes.

 

First and the only reason with any redeeming features. Monroe, flat out refused to negotiate, said he was going to leave and wouldn't even consider resigning so Caldwell got what he could knowing that because the Jags are going to spend big in FA we wouldn't get any comp picks and didn't want to use the tag for fear of hurting the cap. The problem with this however is that it doesn't add up. Monroe has been a model pro all his career, the coaches were always praising his work ethic and he doesn't seem like the diva kind. Also when guy like Jason freaking Babin is saying he will take a pay cut to stay, that tells me there are some serious positive feelings about the team in the locker room.

 

The second is that Caldwell has fallen in love with a QB and was stocking up on ammo, but then that doesn't make sense because if you are prepared to bet the farm, you will find a way to get it done.

 

Third, Caldwell thinks Monroe sucks, which I disagree with totally. He was a very good, not great OT. IMHO thats worth more than a 4th and 5th.

 

Fourth, the organization was being cheap.

---

Just to be different, Bortles.

Monroe was on the clock the moment Joeckel was drafted.  His draft position, which is based on his talent, dictated that he'd play LT sooner or later.

 

Baltimore and Joeckel's good play gave them the opportunity.

 

The writing was on the wall from the beginning.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

My cousin is a fry cook at Dave and Buster's and he heard from one of the bus boys that the Jaguars are already talking about re-signing Eugene Monroe to play RT next year and moving Pazstor back to OG.

 

OK, I made that up but it illustrates another possible avenue in trades- deal the guy with 10 to go in a lost season and then re-sign him in FA while pocketing, essentially for free, what you got in the deal.

 

I think Anonymous made a good point- while TMD rants about trading EM 4 weeks prior to the deadline, waiting even another week drops his value as there are only 9 games left at that point. Good point.

Of course, the injury risk is also very important.

---

Season Ticket holder since 2004.

 

        

But that isnt how it works, these draft picks have a value which is separate from the player they end up picking. Was our 3rd rounder that we used on Brian Anger worth less than the one the Seahawks used on Russel Wilson? Of course not, they just used their pick a lot better than we did.

 

The point you made is in a pick for player trade, you don't know who wins and loses until you see how the picks play out. The Colts traded a 1st for Trent Richardson. I don't need to see who Cleveland pick to know they won.

 

Oh, so you're 100% positive the pick won't be a bust?

---

Back when the trade happened, the butt-smoochers were labeling this trade a "rental" (to make Caldwell look better for making the trade) . It was argued by a few that the only way the trade would be considered a rental was if Monroe wound up signing somewhere else in the offseason as a FA. 

 

So, since trading for Monroe, have the Ravens agreed to any new deal with him yet?

Are you one of the butt-smoochers? I recall you starting a thread about liking the move after giving it some time. I called you out on it then.

 

Now I'm calling you out on this. How many times are you going to flop on your stance?

---

What lies behind us, and what lies before us are tiny matters compared to what lies within us.







 

1.) Future bargaining is the whole premise.  No team will ever cede their offers at an impasse if they know we'll be the first to cave.  Just like poker... If you know that if you go "all in" that X player will fold every time, then you'll take advantage of that.

 

 

You base "every time" off of a single occurrence? Statistically speaking, that's really stupid.

---

What lies behind us, and what lies before us are tiny matters compared to what lies within us.







 

Are you one of the butt-smoochers? I recall you starting a thread about liking the move after giving it some time. I called you out on it then.

 

Now I'm calling you out on this. How many times are you going to flop on your stance?

 

I remember that thread. The meat of that thread is not what you remember. I stated in that thread that I still thought the trade should have netted more that the 4th and 5th rounders - that never changed - ---, what WAS being discussed in the thread was that the trade was trending to be favorable in respect to where the 4th and 5th rounders were looking to wind up at that time in respect to each round. The Ravens had a losing record at that point and the picks seemed to be landing in the top end of each's round. 

 

So, once again, you are calling out a flop and you are dead wrong. 

---

You base "every time" off of a single occurrence? Statistically speaking, that's really stupid.

 

Just saying its not a good precedent to be setting, especially in your first year.  I'd have preferred, in this instance in particular, a hard line stance be taken.  As a GM with leverage, I either get what I want or nobody wins... And make no mistake, DC had significant leverage.  The Ravens were desperate for a tackle for a playoff push, they had limited cap space and the Caldwell had a free year, cap space, a #2 overall tackle, and the full support of owner/team in whichever choice he decided.

 

Make no mistake, this isn't a bash the GM post either.  I rated him an A+ in the other thread.  I just thought this was A.) A missed opportunity to further improve the team and B.) A missed opportunity to set a tone.

---

Oh, so you're 100% positive the pick won't be a bust?

 

I'm not, but it's statistically very unlikely they will be long term contributors as you well know, anyway 4th and 5th round picks cannot be busts because that would require us to have expectations of them which we don't. Heck 5th rounders aren't even guaranteed to make the final roster.

 

This just goes back to the the idea that a player for pick trade can't be judged until the pick is used. Which is stupid.

---

Just to be different, Bortles.

So, if Monroe hits the market on March 11th, what will your reaction be to this trade? Will it have swung "more" in favor for Jacksonville, for Baltimore, or still have no effect? The issue won't be totally reconciled, but it may lend more light on the answer (that does not and will not exist).

unless he gets a large enough deal that could've sent us a 3rd round comp pick, I don't think when he signs or who would be relevant

 

the more I think about this trade, there's ultimately 1 thing that will make it successful, and that is Joeckel becoming an elite LT, if that happens, IMO, there's no reason to question the trade

---

unless he gets a large enough deal that could've sent us a 3rd round comp pick, I don't think when he signs or who would be relevant

 

the more I think about this trade, there's ultimately 1 thing that will make it successful, and that is Joeckel becoming an elite LT, if that happens, IMO, there's no reason to question the trade

 

I still feel like it is tied -- somewhat tied mind you, not completely dependent on -- what Caldwell ultimately does with those selections.

 

A Fourth round pick in the middle of the round is a nice chip to help you move up a few spaces in the draft; or it could be used on a 'fringe' guy. If Caldwell did this trade just to trade and has no specific plan for those selections, that's worrisome. But if he uses them to his great advantage, and Joeckel turns out to be the player he was drafted to be, now we're talking good GM moves.

---

I'm trying to make myself more informed and less opinionated.

Stop saying whatever stupid thing you're talking about and pay attention to all the interesting things I have to say!

The Eugene Monroe trade left many of us fans puzzled when it occured and even iriate after Luke suffered a season ending injury after being forced to switch positions back to LT.  The thing is we dont know what occurs behind the scenes, maybe it was soley based on saving funds or maybe Dave didnt feel that Eugene was worth the money he would require at resigning & figured it was better to get something from him than nothing.  I am not Dave, nor am I in his position so in this matter it wouldnt be fair to judge him soley on that.

I know when Gene Smith was hired everyone screamed that it was way too early to judge him as a GM after only one year, and I would expect the same holds true for Dave.  Lets see how his rookies play next year, and who he drafts & how they play this season coming up before passing judgements on him as a GM.

---