To Everyone Crying About Top Picks Going To Defense...

[ravefan52]

Current and future need. Also, to those who state that we never draft for the offense, you could strongly argue that we've addressed the offense in the draft by investing our picks into players. Since 2007, we sent a 2007 3rd and 7th and 2008 3rd round pick for RB McGahee, a 2010 3rd and 4th round pick for WR Boldin, a 2013 4th round pick for WR Lee Evans, a 2014 4th and 5th round pick for LT Eugene Monroe, and a 2015 5th round pick for C Jeremy Zuttah. I think we made two defensive trades during that time, both for CB. A 4th for Washington and a 5th for Wilson.

We're better at drafting defense so it doesn't surprise me how much more we trade picks for offensive players.

[redrum52]

you can't just remove two years like that. I could easily say 07 and 08 were used to retool the offense so you should be removing them as well.

Your using information bias to prove a point.

I'd say yes and no.  That's why in my post I said the past two drafts have been defense heavy, but at the same time, when you get past 2012, look at all the players that left on defense.  With the cap situation, there was no realistic other way to fill those holes left in the team other than the draft.  I'd expect that if that many people left on offense, a huge effort would be made to try and fill those voids as well.

[arnie_uk]

I'd say yes and no. That's why in my post I said the past two drafts have been defense heavy, but at the same time, when you get past 2012, look at all the players that left on defense. With the cap situation, there was no realistic other way to fill those holes left in the team other than the draft. I'd expect that if that many people left on offense, a huge effort would be made to try and fill those voids as well.

thats what I said in my last post. In say 8 to 10 yrs time when these 6 picks move on, defense will probably need a big heavy investment at one time again.

[GrimCoconut]

We're better at drafting defense so it doesn't surprise me how much more we trade picks for offensive players.

Are we? Or maybe we're just better at coaching and developing defensive players? I think that is or perhaps rather was the case. We seem to be doing well with a lot of our early round offensive players now.

[GrimCoconut]

thats what I said in my last post. In say 8 to 10 yrs time when these 6 picks move on, defense will probably need a big heavy investment at one time again.

Yeah I get what you're saying. You want us to be even more proactive than we are. In many ways we're very proactive but then we're also very reactive in others.

[ravensdfan]

Sure you can. It's to show that the Ravens seemingly go through cycles where we refocus our draft attention. Cycles of defensive and offensive focus and then a rebalancing then a focus in the other direction. That's all. It's to show that we do focus heavily on offense at times despite popular belief suggesting otherwise.

 

Except that offense and defense did not begin at the same level of need.

 

Our offense was putrid and we spent our top 3 picks on defense - again. On the exact same positions. Again. That is the complaint. it was never really about overall.

 

It wasn't about the level of talent. It wasn't about the last 10 years. It was about getting some long term players in on offense outside of Rice and Flacco to offer some stability.

 

Bottom line at this point is simply that the defense needs to  produce better than mediocre after what's been invested.

[GrimCoconut]

Except that offense and defense did not begin at the same level of need.

Our offense was putrid and we spent our top 3 picks on defense - again. On the exact same positions. Again. That is the complaint. it was never really about overall.

It wasn't about the level of talent. It wasn't about the last 10 years. It was about getting some long term players in on offense outside of Rice and Flacco to offer some stability.

Bottom line at this point is simply that the defense needs to produce better than mediocre after what's been invested.

Yeah our defense needs to produce no question. Too much investment with too little return imo. If we don't yield a top five defense or close to it, I think it'll spell the end of Dean Pees. You have to make better use of the talent and if the players aren't buying into his system then he's gotta go. I don't think he's bad but I'm not sure if the guys buy into what he says consistently.

We did get long term players. Lol. Juszczyk looks like one. Monroe got the contract of one and we traded picks for him, picks we could've used on offense or defense but we spent it to trade for an offensive player who's young. We drafted Pierce likely hoping he'd replace Rice but that doesn't appear to come to fruition. We got Zuttah to be a long-term option on our OL.

[Ravenslifer]

I think it's more that a lot of the guys we pick up in the early rounds that are highly talked about end up being defensive players - for instance getting CJ this year, when he was a consensus top 10 prospect.  He was talked about that way for a couple of seasons before coming out, as well.  So there's an excitement factor.  Compare that to most of the receivers we've drafted, outside of Torrey nobody on here was someone people were super excited about e.g. a Dez Bryant or Robert Woods type.  Marlon was coming off injury, we've signed some free agents from other teams, and guys like Camp are 7th rounds and undrafted.  We really, aside from Torrey, haven't spent a high draft pick on a pass catcher since Clayton in 2005.  We've done well with the players we've taken, but just haven't drafted that superprospect WR or TE like other teams have.  However next year there are several options that could be available, and then I think this conversation is over.

[ravefan52]

Are we? Or maybe we're just better at coaching and developing defensive players? I think that is or perhaps rather was the case. We seem to be doing well with a lot of our early round offensive players now.

Yeah that's part of what I was saying too. It's hard to tell which it has been though. Still we've had better overall success drafting defense.

[ravensdfan]

Yeah our defense needs to produce no question. Too much investment with too little return imo. If we don't yield a top five defense or close to it, I think it'll spell the end of Dean Pees. You have to make better use of the talent and if the players aren't buying into his system then he's gotta go. I don't think he's bad but I'm not sure if the guys buy into what he says consistently.

We did get long term players. Lol. Juszczyk looks like one. Monroe got the contract of one and we traded picks for him, picks we could've used on offense or defense but we spent it to trade for an offensive player who's young. We drafted Pierce likely hoping he'd replace Rice but that doesn't appear to come to fruition. We got Zuttah to be a long-term option on our OL.

 

Unlike some, I don't mind when we spend draft picks on OL. It all starts there and we got a good taste of what happens when the OL breaks down last season. I get that Oher was supposed to be the answer at LT, and Gino was supposed to be Birk II and they didn't pan out. That happens.

 

The problem is, and don't get me wrong here cuz I love Torrey, Flacco is going into year 7 and we haven't given him that guy. Outside of maybe 4 or 5 teams, Torrey would not be a #1 WR anywhere else. Pitta was a late round and we got lucky because Dickson was supposed to be that go-to TE. Brown was undrafted, very lucky there. Can't imagine how much worse last season could have been if not for that stroke of luck. It is why we are always, always, always, bringing in that vet FA. Outside of Jacoby, they haven't really worked out well. I'm hopeful Smith Sr will break that trend. We shouldn't have to be doing that though when we've had our franchise guy here for 7 years. That is too long to wait.

 

 However next year there are several options that could be available, and then I think this conversation is over.

 

That's what we expected this draft as it was WR talent heavy. Didn't happen though.

[GrimCoconut]

Unlike some, I don't mind when we spend draft picks on OL. It all starts there and we got a good taste of what happens when the OL breaks down last season. I get that Oher was supposed to be the answer at LT, and Gino was supposed to be Birk II and they didn't pan out. That happens.

The problem is, and don't get me wrong here cuz I love Torrey, Flacco is going into year 7 and we haven't given him that guy. Outside of maybe 4 or 5 teams, Torrey would not be a #1 WR anywhere else. Pitta was a late round and we got lucky because Dickson was supposed to be that go-to TE. Brown was undrafted, very lucky there. Can't imagine how much worse last season could have been if not for that stroke of luck. It is why we are always, always, always, bringing in that vet FA. Outside of Jacoby, they haven't really worked out well. I'm hopeful Smith Sr will break that trend. We shouldn't have to be doing that though when we've had our franchise guy here for 7 years. That is too long to wait.

That's what we expected this draft as it was WR talent heavy. Didn't happen though.

I think it's possible we will spend picks on the offense next year. Not sure if they'll all be high picks but I do believe we'll invest again. The entire OL is essentially set outside of potentially Yanda, who will be a free agent after next season. He has two years left, so I could see us maybe draft a guard to replace him but that's if we want to replace him. We'll probably re-sign him.

Jones and Smith Sr could both be gone in two years. Marlon may not improve or be better than what he is. Torrey might not even improve either. We have Campanaro but I still think we could take a WR high despite signs pointing otherwise. That's just me. I only see safety, CB, RB, OL, QB, DT, OLB as needs next year and some of them are for depth not starters.