Tank the 2015 season, revisited.

[allblackraven]

On 23/04/2016 at 5:57 PM, sflegend89 said:

For probably the 100th time, nobody wanted us to actively try to tank, it was more so just hoping that we lost out at a certain point because the playoffs were out the window and we stood to benefit far more from improved draft position than from winning what were essentially garbage time games. Thank goodness the refs screwed up the end the Jags and Raiders games, actually ended up doing us a huge solid. 

This is inaccurate. Lot of people on the board wanted just that. It still pisses me off.

[usmccharles]

1 hour ago, 52520Andrew said:

Maybe a few of us should chip in

Idk.... His sponsors from Hollister might pay more

[Tru11]

tanking or hoping to loose just for better picks tells me you dont have a winner mentality and personally i would hate to have people on my side with anything team related.

i have more respect for a 0-16 team that fought every single game trying to get a win then any other team tanked or lost on purpose regardless of the standing.

wont ever approve or respect anyone with a losers mentality.

[rmcjacket23]

23 hours ago, Winchester said:

Once again just cuz some teams screw their picks to hell is not thesis that every team will. You act as if a couple terrible franchises moves devalues top end draft picks. And want to pretend the ravens 2picks is as good as having a boatload Of picks and it doesn't matter. Because the ravens won for several yrs it means ravens will continue to win and will not need extra draft picks. And you want all"true "  ravens fans to play along with that thought  winning franchises do not need extra draft picks to continue to win. And pretend All those extra draft picks will make no difference.  Only true ravens fans will play along. Last year was an anomaly?? Let's revisit this thread!! Why is it?? Oooh the injuries!! Of course!! The ravens were not losing games already!!

After reading this, I'm willing to up the price of a coherent paragraph to $10.

 

[BmoreBird22]

On 4/23/2016 at 11:04 PM, Winchester said:

Never said he was!! He was fired by the bucs. And the bucs defense did get better under Gruden and won the superbowl.

But look at the teams after Gruden took over and Dungy left, if you really believe the defenses improved. 

Dungy's issue was that his offenses were too "conservative", not that he didn't have great defenses. He's actually credited for building the team and many felt Gruden couldn't keep up with it.

And just so we're clear, the Bucs were top three three times before Gruden and always top 10 after Dungy's first year. In 1995, the Bucs were ranked 27th. After Dungy's first year? 11th. Next year? Three.

Edited April 24, 2016 by BmoreBird22

[52520Andrew]

On 4/23/2016 at 7:37 AM, 757RavensFan said:

This really makes no sense!! Year in and year out the same handful of teams pick in the top 10 of the draft! However, after using all those picks every year to fill their roster they dont even come close to sniffing the Superbowl, let alone the playoffs.

We aren't the Browns when it comes to the draft

[ludy51]

10 minutes ago, 52520Andrew said:

We aren't the Browns when it comes to the draft

That's still no  reason to tank

[52520Andrew]

Just now, ludy51 said:

That's still no  reason to tank

Never said tank intentionally but the talk that a higher pick won't do us any good when every top 5 pick we have made(Ogden, Jamal Lewis, Boulware) is in the ring of honor is just silly. 

[rmcjacket23]

17 minutes ago, 52520Andrew said:

Never said tank intentionally but the talk that a higher pick won't do us any good when every top 5 pick we have made(Ogden, Jamal Lewis, Boulware) is in the ring of honor is just silly. 

True, though there's also not a huge difference in the guys we picked in the top 10 either. McAlister, Starks, Suggs, etc. were top 10 picks but not top 5 picks.

Travis Taylor is about the only guy who wasn't a really good player.

[52520Andrew]

49 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

True, though there's also not a huge difference in the guys we picked in the top 10 either. McAlister, Starks, Suggs, etc. were top 10 picks but not top 5 picks.

Travis Taylor is about the only guy who wasn't a really good player.

Yeah we have been great in the top 10. I think not picking this high in years is a big part in why we struggled last year. But at the same time we have not picked this high in so long because we are so good when we do pick up here. 

People can go on about how the Browns mess it up every year in the first but when we pick this high, there is actual optimism and maybe even expectations that we get things fixed. Comparing us to the Browns when it comes to the draft to me is insulting to our F.O.

[K-Dog]

3 hours ago, 52520Andrew said:

Never said tank intentionally but the talk that a higher pick won't do us any good when every top 5 pick we have made(Ogden, Jamal Lewis, Boulware) is in the ring of honor is just silly. 

ROH is not my benchmark though.

[52520Andrew]

5 minutes ago, K-Dog said:

ROH is not my benchmark though.

You're right, we totally couldn't use either of Ogden, Jamal Lewis, or Boulware. All 3 of them also have multiple pro bowls and at least one all pro selection each.

[K-Dog]

Okay cause that is exactly what I meant.

[52520Andrew]

5 minutes ago, K-Dog said:

Okay cause that is exactly what I meant.

Then what is your benchmark because whatever it is, those players have hit it

[allblackraven]

@K-Dog, @52520Andrew - lol, someone is in disagreement with both of you

[52520Andrew]

12 minutes ago, allblackraven said:

@K-Dog, @52520Andrew - lol, someone is in disagreement with both of you

Don't know what people are thinking. To say those guys have not lived up to the pick and the ring of honor is ridiculous. They all deserve their spots there. If you don't appreciate what those guys brought to the table, it is hard for me to consider you a true fan. I'd love to get one of them at this pick. 

[52520Andrew]

It is either that or we are insulting the Ring of Honor itself which I mean, come on. Like if the ring of honor isn't good enough to be your benchmark, what is? Ozzie isn't getting HOFers with every pick here. 

[757RavensFan]

6 hours ago, 52520Andrew said:

We aren't the Browns when it comes to the draft

I get that, but the Browns are not us when it comes to contended for the playoffs since 1996. All the more reasons why drafting multiple players doesn't always mean you'll succeed.  

[52520Andrew]

32 minutes ago, 757RavensFan said:

I get that, but the Browns are not us when it comes to contended for the playoffs since 1996. All the more reasons why drafting multiple players doesn't always mean you'll succeed.  

But we aren't the Browns when it comes to the draft so saying that because they can't draft in the top 10 means we can't either just is a bad line of thinking to me. Give us the picks that they have had the past few years and tell me we wouldn't be contending.

[allblackraven]

3 minutes ago, 52520Andrew said:

But we aren't the Browns when it comes to the draft so saying that because they can't draft in the top 10 means we can't either just is a bad line of thinking to me. Give us the picks that they have had the past few years and tell me we wouldn't be contending.

Lol, we'd probably be exempt from regular season games.

[757RavensFan]

Just now, 52520Andrew said:

But we aren't the Browns when it comes to the draft so saying that because they can't draft in the top 10 means we can't either just is a bad line of thinking to me. Give us the picks that they have had the past few years and tell me we wouldn't be contending.

Obviously, we would be contenders.  Even when we DIDN'T pick in the top 10 like the Browns have in the past few years, we're STILL contenders. 

[52520Andrew]

6 minutes ago, 757RavensFan said:

Obviously, we would be contenders.  Even when we DIDN'T pick in the top 10 like the Browns have in the past few years, we're STILL contenders. 

We weren't contenders last year and even if we were, we have plenty of room for improvement with our older core aging or retired. We would certainly be a better team than we are now if we had their picks every year to phrase things differently. 

9 minutes ago, allblackraven said:

Lol, we'd probably be exempt from regular season games.

I mean we would have been in position to take Khalil Mack in 2014 without moving up(like we were looking at doing), that pick right there would have fixed so much that was wrong for us last year. 

[K-Dog]

4 hours ago, 52520Andrew said:

Then what is your benchmark because whatever it is, those players have hit it

Playoff wins and ultimately Super Bowl wins are my benchmark.   Having fifty players in ROH means nothing without the wins.  Now obviously I fully understand that it is the players in the ROH that made all our playoff wins and Super Bowl wins possible.   Obviously.
But football being a fully team sport team such as it is, there really are not a lot of players who did not contribute in one way or another who were on our Super Bowl winning teams.   Todd Heap as an example,  first round pick, won some playoff games, but never a Super Bowl.  Todd is one of the, if not the best ever tight end to play for the Ravens.

Point being, great picks doesn't necessarily  equate wins.   Wins equate wins.  Great players are needed for wins yes, but just getting a low pick doesn't mean you get a great player.  ( I can't say for sure, but I recon the list of first round disappointments is greater than the list of first round home runs. )  I am pretty sure you can build a great team with late first round picks and plenty of second and third picks.

[usmccharles]

14 minutes ago, K-Dog said:

Playoff wins and ultimately Super Bowl wins are my benchmark.   Having fifty players in ROH means nothing without the wins.  Now obviously I fully understand that it is the players in the ROH that made all our playoff wins and Super Bowl wins possible.   Obviously.
But football being a fully team sport team such as it is, there really are not a lot of players who did not contribute in one way or another who were on our Super Bowl winning teams.   Todd Heap as an example,  first round pick, won some playoff games, but never a Super Bowl.  Todd is one of the, if not the best ever tight end to play for the Ravens.

Point being, great picks doesn't necessarily  equate wins.   Wins equate wins.  Great players are needed for wins yes, but just getting a low pick doesn't mean you get a great player.  ( I can't say for sure, but I recon the list of first round disappointments is greater than the list of first round home runs. )  I am pretty sure you can build a great team with late first round picks and plenty of second and third picks.

I honestly don't know what point your trying to make 

[52520Andrew]

4 minutes ago, K-Dog said:

Playoff wins and ultimately Super Bowl wins are my benchmark.   Having fifty players in ROH means nothing without the wins.  Now obviously I fully understand that it is the players in the ROH that made all our playoff wins and Super Bowl wins possible.   Obviously.
But football being a fully team sport team such as it is, there really are not a lot of players who did not contribute in one way or another who were on our Super Bowl winning teams.   Todd Heap as an example,  first round pick, won some playoff games, but never a Super Bowl.  Todd is one of the, if not the best ever tight end to play for the Ravens.

Point being, great picks doesn't necessarily  equate wins.   Wins equate wins.  Great players are needed for wins yes, but just getting a low pick doesn't mean you get a great player.  ( I can't say for sure, but I recon the list of first round disappointments is greater than the list of first round home runs. )  I am pretty sure you can build a great team with late first round picks and plenty of second and third picks.

This is just off.

You need players to be good. We have not drafted well recently in the back end of the first which is at least partly why we were so bad last year. We have no real young impact players. That at least to me was our biggest hole last year. We have not met our usual standards of first round players recently.

Also I am not saying we need to trade all our picks for a top 5 pick, we would have a higher pick in every round. We aren't sacrificing players for an impact player if we pick higher in the order. That is why bad teams are given the highest picks every year. To improve. And you need to hit on picks at some point to win, especially if like us you don't have much cap to spend on free agents.

Also to recap our most recent picks in the top 20, Mosley, Flacco, Ngata, Suggs. We definitely do better when drafting higher up the order. All this talk that us drafting higher doesn't matter to me is hilarious as us not drafting high is why we have not drafted as well as usual recently with the exception being 2014 where you guessed it, we drafted in the top 20. 

[K-Dog]

39 minutes ago, usmccharles said:

I honestly don't know what point your trying to make 

See where I said "point being... " that is where my point be.

 

[K-Dog]

38 minutes ago, 52520Andrew said:

This is just off.

You need players to be good. We have not drafted well recently in the back end of the first which is at least partly why we were so bad last year. We have no real young impact players. That at least to me was our biggest hole last year. We have not met our usual standards of first round players recently.

Also I am not saying we need to trade all our picks for a top 5 pick, we would have a higher pick in every round. We aren't sacrificing players for an impact player if we pick higher in the order. That is why bad teams are given the highest picks every year. To improve. And you need to hit on picks at some point to win, especially if like us you don't have much cap to spend on free agents.

Also to recap our most recent picks in the top 20, Mosley, Flacco, Ngata, Suggs. We definitely do better when drafting higher up the order. All this talk that us drafting higher doesn't matter to me is hilarious as us not drafting high is why we have not drafted as well as usual recently with the exception being 2014 where you guessed it, we drafted in the top 20. 

I am not arguing with anything you are saying.  I am simply saying, having a top ten pick is not the be all end all of a successful draft. Or a successful team. 
Case in point.  As much as WE ALL HATE the Patriots, they are one of the winningest teams in the past ten to fifteen years.  Their record can not be argued.  They have picked top ten TWICE since 2000.    I am trying to find out what team has had the MOST top ten picks in the past ten years.  I have a hunch they are an occasional  contender at best.  ( although I could be wrong, I just don't think I am )
 

[usmccharles]

9 minutes ago, K-Dog said:

See where I said "point being... " that is where my point be.

 

Wins equate wins doesn't really explain the daft process. Are you just saying,  we aren't guaranteed a star just because we pic low? 

[harfordravenfan]

This thread is giving me a headache

[RavensFanMania]

On 4/23/2016 at 11:33 PM, K-Dog said:

You technically have yet to answer the question "are you a Ravens fan "

We should all lay off of Winchester.  He's absolutely right.  He's always right and we know it.  Winchester believes 1 + 1 equals 11 and there is no way around it.