Compared to some of Tuesday's jaw-droppers around the NFL, the Ravens' trade of defensive tackle Haloti Ngata to the Detroit Lions for a pair of mid-round picks was relatively tame. As such, the trade was hailed nationally and locally as a sound move, including by our own Mike Preston.
Here's what some outside media outlets are saying about the trade:
Grantland's Bill Barnwell said Ngata should have been worth more than what amounts to a third-round pick, value-wise, but the Ravens weren't working in a vacuum.
"Ravens fans are furious about this trade because Ngata, in a vacuum, should be worth more than a third-rounder. Your typical third-rounder will not have Ngata's impact. The problem is that the Ravens aren't operating in a vacuum. They were within $2 million or so of the salary cap in the minutes before the 2014 league year ended, left without even the $4.1 million in cap space they'll need to sign their seven assigned picks in this year's draft, a figure that doesn't even include their compensatory picks. …
Even knowing all of that, it's hard to fault Ozzie Newsome for this trade. He was stuck in an untenable cap situation and Ngata was really the only way to clear out space."
MMQB's Peter King wrote that it was easy to understand the deal.
"This one was painful, but simple. The Lions needed to replace Ndamukong Suh. The Ravens couldn't get a deal done with nose man Ngata, who was primed to leave in free agency after the 2015 season. The Lions were willing to give two mid-round picks, and no other team was interested in making a reasonable trade, so Ravens GM Ozzie Newsome pulled the trigger. As we learned two years ago with Anquan Boldin, Newsome doesn't get intimidated by contract disputes; he simply cuts the cord. With Timmy Jernigan playing well down the stretch for Baltimore during Ngata's ill-timed four-game suspension, the Ravens thought they could afford to lose Ngata."
ESPN.com's Jamison Hensley said the Ravens won the deal.
"Would the Ravens have preferred to get an extension done with Ngata to allow him to finish his career with the franchise? Definitely. Are the Ravens a better team with Ngata pushing around blockers up front? No doubt. Did the Ravens want more in return for Ngata in the trade? Absolutely.
But the Ravens faced two options when a deal couldn't get done with Ngata: Release him and get nothing in return or trade him and get a couple of mid-round draft picks.
This is where the Ravens come out winners."
Jeff Seidel of the Detroit Free-Press called it the Lions' Plan C, and still didn't understand how it came to them losing Suh and needing to trade for Ngata.
"Make no mistake: Signing Suh to a long-term deal would have been a whole lot better.
But the Lions failed in Plan A: Lock up Suh over the last year while making a contingency plan if they lost him.
They also failed in Plan B: Outbid Miami for his services. The Dolphins and Suh agreed on a six-year, $114-million deal.
So the Lions were forced into Plan C: Grab a 31-year-old on the last year of his contract, a guy who might have been cut anyway because of salary-cap issues."
Fellow Free-Press columnist Drew Sharp used the Ravens' return — two mid-round draft pick — to show how much more effective they were as an organization than the Lions.
"Good teams recognize the value in fourth- and fifth-round picks.
Good teams consistently develop that value, making it much easier parting with a star whose salary investment isn't consistent with the expected level of production.
The Ngata trade underscores why the Baltimore Ravens are one of the NFL's elite franchises and why the Lions struggle maintaining mediocrity."