I'm very familiar with the articles describing the Ravens' system, but what you conveniently have left out, is that the pre-draft rankings already take into consideration personalities, character concerns, possible off-field issues and other non-football related factors. It has not been revealed how much these factors weigh in compared to football skills and attributes, but considering how often we have skipped players "with concerns" who are much higher on many of the pundits' big boards, I'd say our organisation takes any personality concerns way more seriously than many others.
You know, you can try to spin this any way you want, the fact of the matter is that it doesn't matter who puts together our draft board and whose opinion counts more, the fact is that way too often for my personal liking have we skipped on a very talented players in the draft. Not taking risks with talented players who might have, but also might not have once they reach NFL, those "character concerns" has, in my personal opinion, led us to this shortage of game changing play makers we are facing today.
The FO has admitted that one of the reason for our troubles is the lack of play makers. But unfortunately they have not opened up about what they think the reason is for that, why haven't our draft picks turned out to be the studs they were hoped to be. Is our scouting, evaluation of prospects and pre-draft ranking process flawed? Or is it that we have been unwilling to take some risks in the draft (like I believe the reason to be)? Or maybe our staff is incapable of coaching these players up? Or we have just been unlucky and drafted a whole bunch of players with very limited talent?
Just out of curiosity, what do you think ConquerorWorm, what's the reason we have failed to draft any kind of significant playmakers for many many years now? Because you can't deny that we have not drafted many serious impact players. But please don't get me started with the "we've drafted KO and B.Williams and Juice", they are top of their respective positions but these positions aren't the ones that can carry the entire team and put the game on their backs. I'm sure you know what I mean.
Back pedal, back pedal. So now you're saying it's not Harbaugh's fault and he doesn't control what players we draft? Of course players are going to get bumped down due to off-field concerns, medical concerns, etc but it's not because of the HC as you claimed. It's a solid, proven philosophy of the Ravens organization (and millions of successful businesses) - The best predictor of future performance is past performance. Sure, there are exceptions to the rule like Honey Badger. But for every one of those, I can name the Johnny Manziel, Josh Gordon, Justin Blackmon, Aldon Smith, Greg Hardy's of the NFL. Are you going to invest the future of your franchise on that risk? And after the Ray Rice, Bernard Pierce, Terrence Cody off-season, Stevie B & Co. are going to take those concerns more seriously than others. Stanley is a play-maker - franchise LT are not easy to find. CJ Mosley is a stud LB and a play-maker (i guess you didn't see those INT). Both are serious impact players. Again, you say we've passed on all these play-makers but you don't name them. Now, if you're talking about RB & WR - that's another issue. The bust rates on those players are about the highest (especially WR). For every OBJ you name, I can name the Kevin Whites, DGB, etc. To mitigate the bust factor, you need to draft in the Top 15. The Ravens have only once in many, many years drafted that high (and nailed it with Stanley.). It's also an organizational philosophy - the game is won in the trenches on both sides of the ball and the Ravens draft accordingly (as do the Pats, the Packers, the Seahawks, the Broncos, etc). Zeke & Dak are good but it's the o-line that makes them work. What have play-makers Dez, AP, Mike Evans, Darrell Revis, Patrick Peterson, OBJ, Todd Gurley, David Johnson, AJ Green, LeVeon Bell, Antonio Brown, etc won? Nothing. Only 15% of all players drafted become perennial starters. So, given the average draft of 240 players, that's 36 players in the entire draft become starters between all 32 teams. That's an average bust rate of 85%. It's not a flawed system of evaluation, scouting, etc - the draft is a low percentage chance. Part of the problem is perception. You think if a guy is drafted in the 1st Round, he should be an impact starter, however, the odds & history say that's the complete opposite. When the odds say the Ravens should only get 1 starter from the draft and Oz gets 4 (Stanley, Lewis, Dixon & Young) that's a damn good draft.