Jaybirds

There's a weird dynamic between the two positions that creates a chicken-or-the-egg argument. But I think a run-heavy offense doesn't need a franchise quarterback the same way (Trent Dilfer won a Super Bowl). But run-heavy offenses aren't winning games right now, which goes back to what I was saying. I think the QB position got a HUGE boost in value a few years ago, which this draft is reflecting. But that's pretty much just because of the other changes we're not directly naming.

To use a video game term, I think that position defines the NFL's metagame right now, it's forced the values and changes at all the others.

There are a few positions I value more, but two of them are getting cleaned out pretty quickly. I would have said late 20s. Teens wouldn't surprise me though if someone sees an opportunity.

If I was building a team right now, there's only one other guy at the position I'd want before him. And that other guy is definitely going in the first round.

That's what I was thinking. 3 in the first round is going to be high for any team, let alone a not home team that didn't make the playoffs.

Carr and now Mariotta. Interesting to see what we think of the next crop of QBs. Also, two Raiders off the board already. Scary thought.

I'm waiting on the bubble to see who drops. Just like Sam Bradford.

I like the post, I agree with a lot of your points, but I think there's one basic disagreement that spoils it for me. I believe "instant coffee" and "depth' are opposites. Yes, we need both, and I think we got both. But a guy playing a necessary backup role (Kaufusi and Watson, for example) this year is not the same as instant coffee for me. I do consider Wallace, Stanley, Young, and possibly both Correa and Dixon to be instant coffee. I think they'll get the most playing time, and make major contributions right away. It just seems like two different conversations, though: We added instant coffee as one thread, and we added depth as another.

Could just be local homerism; Cincinnati is prone to exaggeration.... http://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/college/university-of-cincinnati/2016/04/19/ucs-chris-moore-catching-eyes-before-nfl-draft/83233648/ "Draft analysts list Moore as a dependable route runner, with long arms and an attack mentality. Scouts also have told him what to work on. “Just at the top of my route, staying lower with my pads and coming out of my speed cuts a lot sharper,” Moore said. “That, and flexibility. I’m not very flexible, I know that. I’m going to start taking yoga and keep working on it." http://nfldraftreport.sportsblog.com/posts/11513382/cincinnati-s-chris-moore-catching-lots-of-attention-at-the-senior-bowl.html "Despite struggles by the North squad’s quarterbacks to air the ball out, Moore has shown crisp route running skills, along with a surprisingly explosive burst. He seems to relish being a primary passing target after having to be the consummate team player and constantly serve in a supporting role at Cincinnati." ....but I think part of it is that he wasn't the go-to receiver until his senior year. Before that he was pretty much just the team's vertical threat. So maybe it's a question of the date on the game? I'm not sure. I'm not trying to say anyone is Absolutely Right or Absolutely Wrong. But it seems like there's enough mixed feedback to say that he could have room for improvement.

I agree it's not a natural fit, it is definitely something he'd have to work on at the next level. But some scouts say he does have the tools, and he does have the experience already. Not saying he's "there" yet, just saying he's farther along than some other guys. Just an example, but I think CBS's evaluation seems to be what I'm trying to say: http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/players/2061725/kamalei-correa "Occasionally asked to drop into coverage, showing enough balance, agility and awareness to warrant development in this role at the next level. Good effort in pursuit, showing vision and speed to get back into the action." Another of the optimists: http://www.charmcitysportsnetwork.com/purple-reign-show/2016/4/30/draft-profile-kamalei-correa-2nd-round-42nd-overall "Coverage Ability: Correa has been able to drop back into coverage and performs well with quick feet and natural instincts. This should translate well in the NFL and it's something the Ravens could use out of an OLB."

It's weird: one of the things I keep hearing out of Cincinnati is that Moore actually runs routes well. Maybe he needs to add a few more to his repertoire? Not sure how the mixed signals are happening.

His cover skills still have room for improvement. We still could have used Cravens, for example. But he played cornerback on some snaps. He has experience lining up against receivers, and I think his size will match up well against TEs. So I'm taking a risk with that statement, but overall I think he is a notch or two above what we had last year.

But we wanted a playmaker, a pass-rusher, and a LB who could cover TEs. OF COURSE we were going to be angry when all that was the same guy.

CBS had him ranked as the 4th best OLB in this class all winter behind Jack, Darron Lee, and Leonard Floyd. He came up in the Edge Rushers thread in this forum as an alternative after the first round. Heck, I mentioned him on the first page of the Draft Day 2 thread, but he didn't seem relevant to anyone with Spence still on the board. Correa got talked about a lot more once we drafted him. But he didn't exactly come out of nowhere, either.

Woah. So maybe he's not a backup in case Perriman is injured? Maybe we groom him to replace Smith?

Things that have changed for the Ravens in the past 4 years, give or take: 3 offensive coordinators rules changes that made passing easier and opened up the dink and dunk offense Torrey and Boldin both left. the WR market changed at least once (the Big Guy fad into the demand for Fast Guys) It's not that our front office can't make up its mind. It's that circumstances at WR have changed at least once every single year for about 4 years now.

I think we do keep Monroe for depth. I like the idea of Stanley and Jensen on the left, but then Wagner's only backup is Hurst/Lewis. That seems thin to me. But I don't think Monroe would take kindly to being moved inside. It might be better for him to have less space to cover. But I think he'd take it as a demotion. If we sign another vet, even if it's just a guard or right tackle, then maybe it's worth the dead money.

Oh right! I'm on my civvy computer for all this.

I happen to love this page: http://overthecap.com/salary-cap/baltimore-ravens/ Eugene Monroe: Before June: $6.6M dead money, $2.1M cap savings After June 1: $2.2M dead money, $6.5M cap savings So it's an interesting conversation in a few weeks.

My just-a-theory theory about the hacks: IMO, it would have been easier to do all of that if you had access to a device, like a mobile phone or a computer, that was left on. The videos/messages would have been on the hard drive already, and a lot of people don't log out of their accounts like IG. So instead of stealing all the material, and then cracking into the sites, it's all in one place. So then I'm wondering who would have access to those devices, but still have it out for him.

Could you elaborate more on the new blitz packages? I'm curious about that, and it does seem more plausible than completely switching to a 4-3. I like to pretend Canady can fill in while Smith heals. But I agree a vet makes more sense.

Yeah, I actually bumped my score UP on him when I found out the details. But it still doesn't make up for the other antics, and the injury history. It's unfortunate though: clearly there's a good guy in there. But I don't think Miami is the franchise to bring that out of him.

He roughed up his step father, who pressed charges. Tunsil explained that he was protecting his mother. So pretty much the exact opposite of Ray Rice, but still filed under DV. Now ask me who I think leaked that video.....

I agree Smith is needed, and he isn't that old. I included him because of the bad combination of injured and expensive. But I think we're saying the same thing. We're keeping some older guys around because we cut a lot of the intermediate guys. So we've got people approaching or past 30 that we're not going to build around, and we've got rookie contracts. The guys in between are gone.

I don't think Willie Henry is a two-gap kinda guy. Williams and Davis are higher on the depth chart anyway, but that's not a great pick in a 3-4. I think Kaufusi will definitely have trouble against guards instead of tackles and open space on one side. He'll be better outside. I agree Correa is an OLB either way. And we haven't really replaced Smith in ILB. That's less of a problem if there's only Mosley. Young is almost certainly a nickelback. So maybe we brought Kaufusi in with that formation in mind? But it seems like we'll get more out of him if we just keep four guys on the line. I know next to nothing about 4-3 linebackers. So I'm sure I'm wrong there. I'm mostly going off of our new linemen with this prediction, but we seem to disagree there. Plus the fact we don't have two starting ILB makes a little more sense if we don't play two.