Who should we take at #6? The new and improved version

[Jaybirds]

22 minutes ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

it's actually one of the best groups in The class but value wise we seem to be in a bad spot. If spriggs falls to our 2nd then he's a great pick and probably a stud pass blocker, Denver Kirkland in the 3rd and Dahl in the 4th could be year 2 or 3 starters with some work, German ifedi is a stud if he can work on the unintentional holding, but as far as the first 2 rounds we are just in an unfortunate spot If we're looking for a tackle lol

I like Ifedi as well; I haven't done too much digging into Kirkland and Dahl.  But I guess I wasn't clear:  I'm looking for Game 1, 2016 tackles because I don't think Osemele is coming back and Monroe will either be cut or injured.  So because of our specific situation, year 2 or year 3 starters are intriguing, but I'm not considering that right now. 

And from there I think we agree: the immediate impact guys aren't going to be there for us at the beginning of the 2nd.  Maybe Spriggs, not a bad thing.  But it's hard to build a strategy off of just one guy like that. 

[ngatainmyhouse]

The real question is if Tunsil were to fall past the Chargers, would it be worth trading with Dallas to secure Tunsil rather than gamble on the Jags not taking him? Also how much would it cost?

[lgcs27288]

23 minutes ago, ngatainmyhouse said:

The real question is if Tunsil were to fall past the Chargers, would it be worth trading with Dallas to secure Tunsil rather than gamble on the Jags not taking him? Also how much would it cost?

I wouldn't. Too many things we need with too many good prospects. Go with the greater good instead of the 1 great.

[January J]

42 minutes ago, ngatainmyhouse said:

The real question is if Tunsil were to fall past the Ch argers, would it be worth trading with Dallas to secure Tunsil rather than gamble on the Jags not taking him? Also how much would it cost?

Nope- bc if the Jags take him then that may mean Ramsey falls right into our lap. Not in his scenario obviously, but 

1)Bosa

2)Goff

3) Buckner

4)Jack/Wentz/Robinson

5)Tunsil/Ramsey

6) Ramsey/Tunsil 

[terps85]

Obviously if Ramsey is there, then the Ravens should have Usain Bolt run the pick in. 

My other two guys are Myles Jack and Treadwell. Jack is the perfect fit for today's NFL. He lined up as an EDGE rusher some plays, linebacker (obviously) some and has the strength to take on and stand up linemen. And he also covered Nelson Agholor and shut him down. 

I know Treadwell may seem like a bit of a reach, but I think he makes a huge difference on this team. 

[52520Andrew]

6 hours ago, jdynamite said:

I agree with you when I saw Wentz, Goff, Lawson I instantly thought why are their names listed at all. The Ravens don't need a QB and Lawson would be a complete reach at 6.  

And other people would choose Lawson in this scenario judging by the votes as he is in 2nd. I said in the main post that not all of these guys are worth taking at #6 but are listed because everyone sees things differently and I wanted to get a full range of who people think may be worth it.

Wentz and Goff probably shouldn't be in here at this point due to the Flacco extension but I would need names to plug in instead(Jack Buckner Bosa Ramsey and Tunsil are all picked in this scenario)

[RayRave2]

On March 1, 2016 at 0:44 PM, trevorsteadman said:

Ravens draft board:

1. Tunsil

2. Ramsey

3. Buckner

4. Jack

5. Bosa

6. Hargreaves

 

I see a quarterback taken top 5 and I see Buckner, Jack, Bosa, or maybe even Ramsey at #6.

You really see Tunsil at the top of our board? No doubt, he'd be a great pick for us but I don't see it as a higher BPA+Need than CB. I believe Monroe will be back and worth taking to chance on his health but add depth behind him later in the draft. Also, I just can't see Buckner ahead of Bosa because he's viewed as a DE-DT and Bosa can play DE-OLB much like Suggs, which is a much larger area of need coming in the next couple couple with Doom and Suggs aging.

 

My view of our board:

1.Ramsey

2.Bosa

3.Tunsil

4.Buckner

5.Jack

6 Hargreaves (If those 5 are gone I see Ozzie trading back)

[JoeyFlex5]

2 minutes ago, RayRave2 said:

You really see Tunsil at the top of our board? No doubt, he'd be a great pick for us but I don't see it as a higher BPA+Need than CB. I believe Monroe will be back and worth taking to chance on his health but add depth behind him later in the draft. Also, I just can't see Buckner ahead of Bosa because he's viewed as a DE-DT and Bosa can play DE-OLB much like Suggs, which is a much larger area of need coming in the next couple couple with Doom and Suggs aging.

 

My view of our board:

1.Ramsey

2.Bosa

3.Tunsil

4.Buckner

5.Jack

6 Hargreaves (If those 5 are gone I see Ozzie trading back)

Monroe is not a well liked man in that FO, he is regarded as a quitter and soft. He is not figured into our plans for the future. Tunsil is a far superior prospect to Ramsey and LT really could be the biggest need on the team if KO leaves

[RayRave2]

1 minute ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

Monroe is not a well liked man in that FO, he is regarded as a quitter and soft. He is not figured into our plans for the future. Tunsil is a far superior prospect to Ramsey and LT really could be the biggest need on the team if KO leaves

But cutting Monroe gains us very little in cap. Considering we invested so much in him it's hard for me to see us just cutting him. And the injuries have been painful for us but the chance of him performing at the level that he did in Jacksonville is worth more, IMO, than a couple mil and a lot more dead money. I know comparison are made every year and most fall short but Ramsey's resemblance to Patrick Peterson makes him the most exciting prospect for me. That said, exciting doesn't equal BPA. 

[Raven504]

Since we released Daryl Smith are we 

definitely eyeing Myles Jack? 

[January J]

30 minutes ago, Raven504 said:

Since we released Daryl Smith are we 

definitely eyeing Myles Jack? 

Id Have To say its A Darn  good possibility.

[Raven504]

2 minutes ago, January J said:

Id Have To say its A Darn  good possibility.

I really hope so man, I think he is an extremely special talent that we can't pass up on if he is there 

[January J]

Not picking up cantys option narrows it down to 2 players...conveniently exactly what decosta said. Buckner and Jack have to be the two on their radar.

[L.A.Ravens]

6 minutes ago, January J said:

Not picking up cantys option narrows it down to 2 players...conveniently exactly what decosta said. Buckner and Jack have to be the two on their radar.

..along with Bosa. Ok so that makes 3 but I feel like Bosa will be there at 6.

Edited March 3, 2016 by L.A.Ravens

[rmw10]

16 minutes ago, January J said:

Not picking up cantys option narrows it down to 2 players...conveniently exactly what decosta said. Buckner and Jack have to be the two on their radar.

No it doesn't. Let's not overreact to expected cuts. It very well could be fhat Jack and Buckner are the options, but these 2 cuts likely don't have much to do with that. 

[JoeyFlex5]

1 hour ago, RayRave2 said:

But cutting Monroe gains us very little in cap. Considering we invested so much in him it's hard for me to see us just cutting him. And the injuries have been painful for us but the chance of him performing at the level that he did in Jacksonville is worth more, IMO, than a couple mil and a lot more dead money. I know comparison are made every year and most fall short but Ramsey's resemblance to Patrick Peterson makes him the most exciting prospect for me. That said, exciting doesn't equal BPA. 

Keeping around for financial reasons isn't the same as depending on him, and if we were to pull a monumental blunder like passing on tunsil for any reason, then not only are we saying we can count on Monroe, but we're also saying screw you to flacco lol. 

 

Its a moot point anyway because tunsil is not making it to us

[JoeyFlex5]

15 minutes ago, rmw10 said:

No it doesn't. Let's not overreact to expected cuts. It very well could be fhat Jack and Buckner are the options, but these 2 cuts likely don't have much to do with that. 

Exactly. If 2 qbs go and we have ramsey, bosa, and Jack or buckner there, then it's pretty safe to assume that Jack or buckner won't be the pick. 

 

I think this 2 guys thing is more about realism rather than all possibilities. Were probably expecting tunsil, bosa, and ramsey to go before us and I think that buckner and Jack are being viewed as the 2 realistic options at this point, doesn't mean we are dead set on either

[jboy19]

I don't think it's a top priority to replace Canty or Smith. There's committees at both those spots (DE- Urban, Guy, KLM) (ILB- Orr, Brown, McClellan) that have shown some good stuff on tape. 

[Cillmatic]

I think Myles Jack needs to be the pick. A fast coverage excelling MLB who can play Slot is pretty appealing.

[glen ferguson]

You know what mr. ellicottraven, i think youre on to something. Ezekiel Elliot would be a great pick, an instant star. The other guy i think is Bucknor. I dont see Bosa or Ramsey getting pass SD, DAL, or  JAC.

[jboy19]

Just now, Cillmatic said:

I think Myles Jack needs to be the pick. A fast coverage excelling MLB who can play Slot is pretty appealing.

But would we really draft a player that would either put Mosley on the bench for passing downs or replace the existing slot players (Webb, Elam, Brooks) on the field in those situation. 

[MightyRaven]

2 minutes ago, jboy19 said:

But would we really draft a player that would either put Mosley on the bench for passing downs or replace the existing slot players (Webb, Elam, Brooks) on the field in those situation. 

MLB's have to play slot as well as DB

[FGSB]

We should take Hargreaves and watch the turnovers pile up

Instead our two young ILBs will watch the secondary get torched 

Hope Daryl Smith getting cut only means they have faith in Orr

Edited March 3, 2016 by FGSB

[jboy19]

Have to think the Chargers releasing Donald Butler makes Jack an option for them. 

[Sizzlebshu]

7 minutes ago, jboy19 said:

Have to think the Chargers releasing Donald Butler makes Jack an option for them. 

Eh I think that has more to do with money than anything else. Butler's cap hit saves them almost 10 mil. Besides there are way too many other players of similar caliber to Jack available to them at positions of need - Bosa, Ramsey, Tunsil possibly. 

Daryl Smith on the other hand really didn't save us anything cap wise (2 million about) and is a better indicator imo. 

[RayRave2]

3 hours ago, January J said:

Not picking up cantys option narrows it down to 2 players...conveniently exactly what decosta said. Buckner and Jack have to be the two on their radar.

I think it's just as likely that it's Bosa/Jack

[RaineV1]

4 hours ago, jboy19 said:

But would we really draft a player that would either put Mosley on the bench for passing downs or replace the existing slot players (Webb, Elam, Brooks) on the field in those situation. 

It wouldn't put Mosley on the bench. Nickle formations still have two linebackers, which could be Mosley and Jack.

[gooftroop]

On 3/1/2016 at 1:42 PM, JoeyFlex5 said:

I'm going with shaq Lawson. It was between him and vh3 and I ultimately went with the more shallow position group. I figure we can absolutely find a starting cb in round 2 like wj3 or fuller which would likely be our goal. 

 

I doubt we see value at Lawson in the first but i personally think that he has low risk and the most potential and also is the prototype for a ravens OLB

I like Lawson a lot, too, but I'm not sure he's worth a #6, and I don't see us trading down this time- unless Ozzie's board get wiped out by the 1-5 picks.

[Boddiebroadus]

Is anyone worried that Ozzie might target Ragland? Since we cut smith ?

[RaineV1]

No Ragland isn't near the top ten. He's not as good as Mosley who was picked at 15. Ozzie might like him, but I seriously doubt he's one of the top options for our pick.