bigcatfrank1

Members
  • Content count

    869
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About bigcatfrank1

  • Rank
    Veteran

Recent Profile Visitors

720 profile views
  1. 1. A quality RT even interior lineman certainly doesn't need to be found exclusively in round 1 or even round 2. Could very easily see somebody taken in round 3 or 4 and come in play right away and play just fine. The guy we just let walk for a boatload of cash did this exact thing. 2. I don't think anybody can honestly say that Camp, Waller, or even Moore at this point have any track record whatsoever of being above average pass catchers in the NFL. They actually have to show that on the field at some point before they can come close to being given that label. 3. We're obviously not taking a first round pick just to fill an immediate need. Almost impossible to build a contending football team that way. You pick a player who you think can be a quality player for you for a decade. If that's a safety, so be it. Eric Weddle ain't going to be here much longer, and if you wait to draft a safety until you absolutely need one, you'll be screwed, because its not really a position you can just walk off the bus and play well in as a rookie. We could use upgrades at every single group of positions on this team, with the exception of QB. We are NOT set at Safety, Corner, ILB, OLB, Dline, WR, TE, or RB. We could use a better player and every single one of those positions, both now and certainly in the future. You take the best guy that's there. Fans need to stop kidding themselves thinking that we're a draft away from being a SB contender. I agree that you don't draft for current needs (at least shouldn't make a habit out of that) but instead you draft for the future! I also agree that we are not drafting a QB this year. I think that there are several positions that we are stocked well at and will not be looking to fill an immediate need or a future need with in this draft. I think QB, TE, NT, DT are some of those positions I believe that looking ahead (not this year) that OLB is our most glaring need but I can make an argument that we are not much better off at WR, OL or CB I think CB and S at least have their fill right now... and as a result we will probably not look to make that draft pick in the first round (unless someone at that positions just blows you away and they fall to you) i.e. if a Jumal Adams or Peppers somehow falls to us... we may feel that they are that special of a player that you go there anyways. The problem with this draft is... this: Do we feel that Peppers is more special at S then say Corey Davis is at WR or more special then Reuben Foster is at ILB or McKinley, Reddick, Ramczyk, Dalvin Cook, Lattimnore, Sid Jones, etc. So then if you feel that one is not more special at their position but several can be super stars then you have to look at your team and say I have a future star either place... which does the team need more. I do think there is enough talent in this draft that we simply may not be very clear on the BPA model and we may need to adapt and go with BPA + need = our next pick (believing that several picks could stars for years to come and someone who we could build around! (Not a bad problem to have BTW) Thursday can get here soon enough! (and just for the record- I still think we trade back) I agree with most of what you said, good comments. You know my 2 additions , it could be a trade up or trade back kind of year. Trade up for Fournette- which I know you absolutely do not agree with Trade down take Robinson- which you seem to leave out of your equations. who do you think the pick would be with a trade back and how far down do you think Oz would go? All that said; Davis is my first guess at 16, I would agree most ratings at 15 and above look to be a player that the Ravens would take except the QB's. I think if next listed order players are Ramczyk, Ross, Humphrey, Bolles, Tim williams, Peppers and Robinson the ones left on the board the Ravens trade down. I'm not sure Foster is in the list. man anything can happen,
  2. I believe it will for 2 fundamental reasons. First Fournette is a beast that can plough through defenses a la Peterson. And second, it'll afford Joe the opportunity to just hand the ball over to him in short yardage situations knowing a first down is a likely outcome and will help Joe realize his potential in the play action game. Joe can be deadly with Fournette in tow imo. Could be the only player the Ravens might trade up for, we have been discussing this on other threads. Many don't agree with the trade at 7- 11. But I cannot see him dropping that ow. So could the Ravens make a play, it would be costly and probably too costly, but at 7 I would make a call and try. I'm with you, but its risky and outside the box. Jacket will tell you
  3. You know if the Ravens could manage one of the O-line guys, Robinson-Ramczyk- Bolles- Lamp in the 2nd without changing #47 and getting another 2 or 3, you might be on to something. Now all 4 of the top OL guys are predicted to go in round 1 in some mocks. They all look to be starting capacity players. Who knows the Ravens actually have many, many options. Its gonna be interesting. This could shape up to be either a trade up or trade down year! 16 just might not have the caliber of player that convinces the Ravens that value of trading might bring. DO the Ravens have 18 top players on the big board? cause 15 of them are bound to go and the bottom 3 could be the ones left to choose from. who is that? Ramczyk, Humphry, Ross? when possibly Robinson, McCaffrey and Bolles sit below and still available. That is 5 players left with room to trade down. Interesting very interesting if it shapes up that way.
  4. I remember last year when 3 regular members of the posts community argued and argued with me about the Ravens taking Stanley with their first pick in round 1. And a host of anti- mid level receiver moves, the Ravens wouldn't pick up another mid aged FA -WR yet Oz pulled the trigger on Wallace quick. yep, remember it well.
  5. We don't need a RB who can take the team to the next level... its not a position that is required to have a player like that in order to win games. We can have 3 backs getting 10 carries each a game for all I care... as long as collectively the running game is doing better than what we saw last season, where it didn't matter who we put it out there because we couldn't get anything going. The first four games will have West as the lead runner with Woodhead as the passing down back. When Dixon gets back and gets in game shape, I'd expect to see him overtake West to the point where West likely won't play very much. Plus once Dixon is back, he's more capable of handling 3 down work, assuming he gets better in pass protection. He's much more versatile than West is. poor decision if they go the way you explain it.
  6. Its not a contradiction. What I am saying is that you are getting a lesser player that most likely would have gone in the mid second round if this was the 2016 NFL draft. When there is a weak class teams that need a certain position are going to use a high pick on a player that would usually be drafted much later in a more robust class. The best way to get value in the first is to draft a position that is deep. And with so many needs that the Ravens have I would highly doubt that Robinson would be atop their board at 16. There are plenty of examples of needy teams over drafting OTs in a week class and it is not pretty. Erik Flowers, Andrus Peat, Justin Pugh, DJ Fluker, Reily Reif, Derrick Sherrod, Gabe Carimi. Saying that the Ravens board is going to fall like dominios and that the first 1-10 are no brainers is just not an accurate claim. QBs will throw a wrench into your dominoes and frankly this is one of the least certain (not that any of them are certain) drafts in a while. There will be a few Pass Rushers, WRs and possibly even a DB LB or RB that will most likely be at 16 that will be higher on our board than Cam. And I will try to explain this again. We have a lot of needs. The OT class is weak. Those two factors allow the Ravens to draft a player that deserves to get drafted at 16 or even higher than 16. Reaching for a guy in these circumstances would be a mistake. I wouldn't be totally bummed out if we picked Cam because I think if the FO picked him that he was the highest rated player on their board because I don't think they would reach for him. I just think there will be others there that will be higher on board than him. But clearly I have not done as much research as they have and could very well be underestimating the FOs opinion of the guy. If we were to take him it would solidify the tackle spots for 4 years btw. Assuming Stanely performs well the next few years we have the option to keep first round picks for a fifth year. You didnt mention a single player in the draft. what a swing and miss
  7. FRANK why do you continue to argue about things that you clearly have very little background knowledge of. ALLLLLLLL of the teams from 11 to 15 will want less than the Chargers because we are moving less spots. Assuming that the Chargers will move back for less than the teams at 11 to 15 is just not how things work. Even assuming that the Chargers would be willing to move back for less because of their circumstances (as I mentioned before) is not logical either. No team is going to be willing to give up the 7th pick for less because of the fact that they are building for the future. That just doesn't make sense. I mentioned Gates, but before I mentioned Gates I said they drafted a young TE in the very beginning of the second round last year and he put up close to 500 yards in his rookie season. They don't need any of our TEs. We would very likely have to give up 3 early round draft picks to move up there. Now clearly not all early round draft picks become starters but they have the best chance to become starters. What you are saying is that you would rather have one starter at a position that isn't a huge need rather than 3 starters. Getting a solid running back but not being able to pick up a solid OT or C would negate the RBs supposed value. It just isn't a logical move for a team with so many needs. Not to mention that RBs get hurt quite frequently in the NFL and without quality starters in other positions on the offense an injured RB could mean the end of the season because of the need to rely so heavily on the guy. I have a point of view, you obviously argue because you know everything and know all the background of what is going to happen before it happens. I never said any of what you said, especially anything about 3 starters instead of 1 starter which is an absolutely ridiculous observation. What I said was exactly what I wanted to. I am not assuming anything what I said was if Foursette was there at 7, I would make a call and I think Oz should too! He doesn't have to listen to me. Im sure he will listen to you. bwahahhahha
  8. I'm not sure the Ravens thought Wagner was worth that kind of money. Robinson might be when he is 3 years in the league. We ware going to find out, however besides the 14 players that everyone lists ( maybe the Ravens big board) who do you say the Ravens go with at 16? Ok you want the 14 - we know the top 4 Garrett- Thomas- Fournette- Lattimore, then the next 10 who could move up and down the board a little- Hooker/ Adams / Barnett /Williams / Howard / Davis /Foster / Allen / Reddick / Humphrey ( some may put Ross above Humphrey) So if the Dominos fall and all these players are picked, Why not take Cam Robinson? over Ross- Cook - Tim Williams because if he left on the board Denver will take him at 20 in my opinion.
  9. I'm all for them expending draft capital on the O line... but I don't know about them spending the 1st rounder - not this year. If they do, it needs to be a part of a trade back, but even then, I'd find it disappointing, because it will appear that there were true playmakers that they wanted did not fall to them. Let's just put it this way ... if Davis and/or Williams are available and we pick Robinson ... I'll certainly have to give the nod to our FO and hope they made the right move, but I'll not be able to help feeling like we shied away from getting a difference making offensive weapon and went with the safer play in an area of need. second point first- I agree that The Ravens have players listed above Robinson. The thing is they all have a high probability of getting picked before 16 including Davis and Williams. the first point- it kind of hard to name some players below 16 that look to fit the Ravens and their needs better than Robinson. I really think this is the key here, I think the Ravens will risk losing out on Robinson at pick 20. I would be happy, the draft is deep with CB, Edge, WR and LB. Especially if Cam proves to be the starting lock down deal at RT in the Pros.
  10. We don't need another RB. We signed a passing down specialist back, and we have two guys who are more than capable of being quality RBs, though I don't find either particularly special. I wouldn't take Fournette for a plethora of reasons. For starters, he's your prototype two down RB. He's not a viable asset in the passing game, meaning you will perpetually need to employ another RB with a different skill set, thus using a second roster spot on a back to produce the value that one well-rounded RB could achieve on their own. And if that passing down back is a pure specialist (much in the way Woodhead is), you're basically committing to carrying 3 RBs at all times, which is not exactly ideal if you're in a tough spot with injured players later in the year. Most importantly, I don't really like bruising backs that actively seek contact. Everybody likes to pretend like "Beast mode" is the way to go, but those guys wear down and wear down fast, and seeking contact in the NFL is much different than seeking it in College. To me, Fournette is a one contract back. I can't give a guy like that $10M a year on a second deal when he's going to be 26-30 years old. I have no issue using a day 3 pick on a RB and seeing if they end up being a value play and outplay West, because I don't think West is anything special either. Its just brutally hard to get a quality ROI on a first round RB in this league anymore, especially when the Pro production dropoff from first round backs to like day 2 or even day 3 backs is so small. A lot makes sense, my only comments would be dont you think we are in the very situation that you describe? I appreciate the added insight about Fournette, I am only looking at tape and general bio information. He looked very strong and impressive at combine. I dont know if his receiving skills are a huge issue that he couldn't move to another level. I guess three big things I am concerned with with the RB squad of Dixon, West and Woodhead are 1. games 1-4 2. I think that West proved he is only a 2 down back. 3. Who is the "one" that take the squad to the next level in the next few years. I don't see West and obviously Woodhead lasting long. The Ravens have proved both in successful years and over the past 3 years that they must have a good running game. The QB and team is really built that way. Lastly, I cannot say that the Ravens chances of a Playoff run change with Fournette, 3rd round prospect or a late added FA. However I do think that the RB position is weak especially games 1-4 and barring an injury they are putting a lot of stock in a 5'8 200lb 32 year old multi-functional non-every down Flex back in Woodhead.
  11. I'd prefer taking Christian McCaffrey and retaining our draft picks. We could use everything Mac brings to the table: RB, WR, PR/KR. Its an option, I wonder how much different each player will be for their prospective teams coming. There is always a risk, I just dont know if using the Ravens BPA rating that McCaffery would top Robinson or some of the other close choices. I wouldn't be discouraged with McCaffery, he could learn from one of the best who is similar to his style, Woodhead. I do think RB and RT are the 2 most important starting positions that the Ravens can focus on for the immediate situation looking at game 1. Things will change after the draft and as the 90 man fills, Just my opinion.
  12. Just curious: do you know what pick package Ozzie should give up to trade up to, let's say #7? Well lets look at it from a different perspective, At #7 The Chargers are most probably looking for Safety or WR help. If they think that they can move down and still get a player that is on their board, then they may be motivated by additional picks this year and next. Sure the question is would Fournette be worth the sacrifice of lets say one of the extra #3's this year and a #2 next year /or even a throw in a player on the roster maybe a TE ( we have plenty) This is not out of the question. Its all about the deal. The Ravens, inside camp, if potentially make the play-offs especially deep, will not have very favorable picks next year. This could be the move of the next 2 years. Is Fournette the real deal? I say The Las Vegas Chargers for a reason, this team is in a very trepidatious time. The LV Chargers could be looking at 3 years from now, they know they are most probably not facing a potential "win it all" situation this year. This then could have major impact on a trade deal for a team such as the Ravens at 16, who would be very motivated if Fournette were to fall past #6. This is the primary reason, I say at #7, that OZ and the FO to look at certain scenarios. This happens all the time, sure a deal is not made when a team has to give up more than they are willing duh, what I am saying is would the Ravens look at this? I think I would, even make a call if I were them. Frank the Chargers are moving to Los Angelos. And I dont think any of your arguments used to legitimize your thought that the Ravens will consider trading spots with the Chargers are valid. I think it would be a good move for the Chargers to trade back. They could stack up more picks while potentially still being able to take the best OT in the draft. The fact that they are in a building year isn't going to make them lower the price for that pick. They will be asking for at least 2 early rounders (most likely more). If the Ravens were a RB away from winning the superbowl the trade up might make sense but giving up early round picks with all of the holes that we have just isn't logical at this point and I can assure you that Ozzy isn't going to give them a ring because he knows the price is too steep. Throwing in a TE wouldn't sweeten the deal much. They drafted a TE last year at 35 (he almost hit the 500 yrd mark) and already have Antonio Gates. If Fournette falls out of the top 10 the FO would certainly consider moving up but with the position we are in any early draft pick that we would have to give up is akin to selling the farm. Agh, my bad. I stand corrected LA Chargers. Its the Raiders moving to LV. 1.Thanks for agreeing with me, without validating my arguments, that the Chargers may be motivated to move back which means they would trade with a team to move up. ( ie the Ravens) 2 early rounders- I guess you just couldn't bring yourself to saying they wont trade without a #1. So IF ( yes big IF) the Ravens were to go deep in the playoffs this year #1 next year isn't a very good position and maybe the best time to make a deal is now. 3 The Ravens just like all NFL teams will start with 52, they wont have holes they just will have weaknesses, sounds like you have decided which ones you are willing to live with. 4. I dont know what Oz will do, I wont assure you of anything other than what I might do and i would call them at #7 for Fournette. 5. Gates, my point exactly, Ravens have 4 young TE's. 6. So you say 11-15, tell me which team would want less than the LA chargers? 7. I said a couple of chickens for a rooster dude, not the farm, never said that
  13. Well you can get #1 RBs without using a first round pick. There's plenty of them in the league right now. So we have the ability to get a #1 RB any year that we want to. so if that is true where is the #1 RB? BTW Jacket we have had this discussion before. I know you have good knowledge and some ( even I ) can appreciate it. But I try not to make points without using specific Ravens players and potential players as examples or topics. While prognosticating might not be your favorite thing, you tend to dance around actual examples of players when you contradict or comment. My point is specifically about the #1 RB in the draft Fournette. You can plain disagree that he is worth it and that is fine, or you can give some decent points about the player and why. You could point out a couple of running backs later in the draft that, you think, may be better "starting" running backs. You could say the Ravens dont need a running back so they will not go up and get the #1. But to generalize is quite snipey.
  14. Its way to early to take him at 16. Maybe if we traded back but this is an extremely week class which means that OL needy teams are going to draft those top 2 guys earlier than they probably should. you contradicted yourself, I agree that a trade back is probably an option and still get Robinson. However if your point is true that because of a week class teams will draft earlier, then why wouldn't the Ravens take Robinson at 16. I just don't get it , all this talk about the bottom 20 are very, very close and then people want to argue that its too early to take one of them. Some do not think he sits above Ramczyk but I think he fits the Ravens better. Maybe the Ravens do too. Simple facts, the Ravens can really use a top, starting caliber RT. A young counter side to Stanley could solidify this line for 3 years. Yanda and Lewis on the inside leaving the Center position TBD in house or maybe even later in the draft. I will not be surprised if the Ravens take Cam at 16, again as I said if the Ravens board falls like dominos and it probably will. 1-10 are practically no brainers, we all have talked for months about them.
  15. Well you can get #1 RBs without using a first round pick. There's plenty of them in the league right now. So we have the ability to get a #1 RB any year that we want to. so if that is true where is the #1 RB?