[News] Late For Work 4/28: Watch Tennessee As Potential Trade Partner For Ravens

[ThunderPig317]

Up until a week ago, I had a hard time justifying trading out of the #6, but now, trading back to the #8-12 range doesn't seem like such a bad move. #15 might be too far, though. If we move back 2-6 spots, and are able to grab a Hargreaves or Ronnie Stanley AND have the ammo to trade back into the first and get Noah Spence, I would look at that as a win. We could turn one top 5 talent player into two top 10 talent players..... just my humble opinion.

[bioLarzen]

I would not really love to see a trade with the Titans. I know past drafts have no real bearing on future ones - but history seems to indicate Ozzie isn't really lucky with top-third second round picks: the first one, Jamie Sharper was a good one (although players like Tiki Barber, Mike Vrabel or Derrick Mason were still on the board...), but then... Patrick Johnson, Sergio Kindle and the Courtney Upshaw... And this may be our "prize" foir giving up on a blue chip prospect at #6...

Edited April 28, 2016 by bioLarzen

[hen826957]

  36 minutes ago, EliteRavens said:

Explain...

He's not good enough to give up multiple players to get, especially on a team that needs to fill multiple positions in order to become relevant again.

And no, he's not going to be Ed Reed.

Do you have to give up a second or third rounder or just a third rounder? I thought it was just a third rounder to move to the Chargers spot #3rd overall (according to Sarah Ellison). Third rounder is not that bad to give up and l believe it's worth it to consider getting Ramsey but l also understand if they don't do it and stay put at #6.

[bioLarzen]

5 minutes ago, 757RavensFan said:

But why would he hurt his contract value by intentionally tanking his draft position?? 

To play for a team with legit chances of going all the way.

 

But yes, this is only a wild conspiracy theory, I freely admit it.

[rmcjacket23]

1 minute ago, hen826957 said:

Do you have to give up a second or third rounder or just a third rounder? I thought it was just a third rounder to move to the Chargers spot #3rd overall (according to Sarah Ellison). Third rounder is not that bad to give up and l believe it's worth it to consider getting Ramsey but l also understand if they don't do it and stay put at #6.

Impossible to say. If I were SD, I wouldn't do that deal without getting a 2nd rounder, because they can literally get the best non-QB in the draft at their pick now, regardless of who they rank as such.

If you believe the draft trade value chart, its a 600 point jump from #6 to #3. That's the equivalent of a late 1st, early 2nd round pick. If you follow this to the letter, we would have to give up our 2nd rounder (#36) at least. In theory, we'd have to give up our late 4th rounder as well.

[ibleedpurpleandblack]

Ahhhhh, knew this was going to happen with Jack. For all those saying the Ravens should take him with pick 6 was ridiculous. He'll be lucky if he's taken in the first round now.

[rmcjacket23]

21 minutes ago, EliteRavens said:

I think his game film answers this question.

And the film's answer is no. 

[YankeeRaven]

No thanks to Laremy Tunsil or Ronnie Stanley the Ravens have to go defense, getting sick of these mock drafts with the OT's they won't be worth the 6th pick, hope Ozzie will go defense and give the Ravens defense that identity they been missing for a while.

[budman]

Just don't like Mayock's trade scenario. 15 is going too far back. 8-10 maybe, but I would lie it if we stay put at #6.

[rmcjacket23]

1 minute ago, YankeeRaven said:

No thanks to Laremy Tunsil or Ronnie Stanley the Ravens have to go defense, getting sick of these mock drafts with the OT's they won't be worth the 6th pick, hope Ozzie will go defense and give the Ravens defense that identity they been missing for a while.

You could easily argue that stability at LT is vastly more important than any single defensive player we could get in this draft.

Its actually kind of hard to argue that a Tunsil or Stanley isn't worth a top 6 pick, but a guy like Bosa, Jack, or Buckner is. They all have major strengths, and they all have obvious weaknesses.

Plus, I highly doubt drafting a single defensive player at #6 (especially the one's in this draft) is going to change the "identity" of this team or defense.

[cec327]

Miles Jack's statement is would make me pass on him.

[hen826957]

  4 minutes ago, hen826957 said:

Do you have to give up a second or third rounder or just a third rounder? I thought it was just a third rounder to move to the Chargers spot #3rd overall (according to Sarah Ellison). Third rounder is not that bad to give up and l believe it's worth it to consider getting Ramsey but l also understand if they don't do it and stay put at #6.

Impossible to say. If I were SD, I wouldn't do that deal without getting a 2nd rounder, because they can literally get the best non-QB in the draft at their pick now, regardless of who they rank as such.

If you believe the draft trade value chart, its a 600 point jump from #6 to #3. That's the equivalent of a late 1st, early 2nd round pick. If you follow this to the letter, we would have to give up our 2nd rounder (#36) at least. In theory, we'd have to give up our late 4th rounder as well.

Hmm ok. Ozzie could least try to contact the Chargers if they interested in just for a third rounder and maybe a 4th rounder. We got 4 4th rounders so losing one of those isn't big of a deal to me in my opinion. If the Chargers are interested in Buckner or Tunsil this deal could work because l don't believe the Cowboys or Jags are interested in both of those guys and they still get the player they want at number 6. The Ravens have to get ahead of the Cowboys for order to get him. So if they want a second rounder then l won't accept it. ?

[rmcjacket23]

8 minutes ago, budman said:

Just don't like Mayock's trade scenario. 15 is going too far back. 8-10 maybe, but I would lie it if we stay put at #6.

All depends.

If we did that deal with the Titans and moved back to 15, you're pretty much guaranteed to get a high 2nd round pick and maybe another late rounder. So that would put you with 3 top 36 picks.

Lets play it out:

A: Trade back from 6 to 10 with the Giants. Realistic ask would be a 3rd rounder (#71 overall) and a 4th rounder (#109 overall).

B: Trade back from 6 to 15 with the Titans. Realistic ask would be their top 2nd rounder (#33 overall), with us throwing in maybe a very late round pick.

So you move back 5 spots later in scenario B, but you get a pick that's almost 40 spots better, and you'd again now have three top 36 picks in a draft that many analysts suggest is high in depth, particularly at certain positions we are looking to address.

To me, it would all depend on who is left on the board when we pick. 

[rmcjacket23]

7 minutes ago, hen826957 said:

Hmm ok. Ozzie could least try to contact the Chargers if they interested in just for a third rounder and maybe a 4th rounder. We got 4 4th rounders so losing one of those isn't big of a deal to me in my opinion. If the Chargers are interested in Buckner or Tunsil this deal could work because l don't believe the Cowboys or Jags are interested in both of those guys and they still get the player they want at number 6. The Ravens have to get ahead of the Cowboys for order to get him. So if they want a second rounder then l won't accept it. ?

Well, obviously, if I'm SD, I"m not doing that deal, and I'm certainly not doing it if I know the Ravens are moving up to get a player I would like to have at #6 (with Ramsey being one of those guys).

Trades like that really only make sense if the team doesn't see the "value" in that player at that spot (obviously doesn't apply here) or teams are trading with each other because they have different needs. Our needs are largely the same as the Chargers are for the most part.

[rmcjacket23]

13 minutes ago, cec327 said:

Miles Jack's statement is would make me pass on him.

I think we already decided to pass on him at #6 before his comments.

[YankeeRaven]

  15 minutes ago, YankeeRaven said:

No thanks to Laremy Tunsil or Ronnie Stanley the Ravens have to go defense, getting sick of these mock drafts with the OT's they won't be worth the 6th pick, hope Ozzie will go defense and give the Ravens defense that identity they been missing for a while.

You could easily argue that stability at LT is vastly more important than any single defensive player we could get in this draft.

Its actually kind of hard to argue that a Tunsil or Stanley isn't worth a top 6 pick, but a guy like Bosa, Jack, or Buckner is. They all have major strengths, and they all have obvious weaknesses.

Plus, I highly doubt drafting a single defensive player at #6 (especially the one's in this draft) is going to change the "identity" of this team or defense.

It's worth trying I believe to take a chance with a defensive player, Ramsey, Bosa and Buckner are my top 3, let's take some inspiration from the Denver Broncos who had a bad passing game, an ok run game and then elite defense. The reason why I don't want the OT's is because Tunsil has injury concerns and missed games in all his college years and it sounds like if the Ravens grab him that they will replace Eugene Monroe with a new Eugene Monroe + he has off the field issues, yeah no thanks and Ronnie Stanley is not worth taking at 6th, if we trade down then yes.

[fusuymada]

Let's not forget that Ozzie in the past has moved back in a draft and then moved back up when the person he wanted becomes valued by another team. It's no secret I have been saying move back and grab Hargreaves then move back up into the first and grab either Spence (who is showing he is clean) or Nkemdiche (who is so good he is worth the risk). IF Ramsey is not there at 6 then I can see them moving back to 15, then moving back up to 10 or 12, just in time to grab Hargreaves. Then, as I said, move back up into the first and grab a great pass rusher. I listened to Sara and her best case scenario and it is alot like what I just said except she is hoping for Ramsey at 6 and that would be best case, but I think it is highly unlikely.

[budman]

2 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

All depends.

If we did that deal with the Titans and moved back to 15, you're pretty much guaranteed to get a high 2nd round pick and maybe another late rounder. So that would put you with 3 top 36 picks.

Lets play it out:

A: Trade back from 6 to 10 with the Giants. Realistic ask would be a 3rd rounder (#71 overall) and a 4th rounder (#109 overall).

B: Trade back from 6 to 15 with the Titans. Realistic ask would be their top 2nd rounder (#33 overall), with us throwing in maybe a very late round pick.

So you move back 5 spots later in scenario B, but you get a pick that's almost 40 spots better, and you'd again now have three top 36 picks in a draft that many analysts suggest is high in depth, particularly at certain positions we are looking to address.

To me, it would all depend on who is left on the board when we pick.

I get it and agree. However in the back of my mind I keep thinking that if we move back too far, more picks might not yield a player that is as good as the one we passed on. Just don't feel good about it (not that that means a thing). I guess imo we should just stick at #6 and see.

[rmcjacket23]

Just now, YankeeRaven said:

It's worth trying I believe to take a chance with a defensive player, Ramsey, Bosa and Buckner are my top 3, let's take some inspiration from the Denver Broncos who had a bad passing game, an ok run game and then elite defense. The reason why I don't want the OT's is because Tunsil has injury concerns and missed games in all his college years and it sounds like if the Ravens grab him that they will replace Eugene Monroe with a new Eugene Monroe + he has off the field issues, yeah no thanks and Ronnie Stanley is not worth taking at 6th, if we trade down then yes.

I think its obviously an overreaction to start trying to build teams based on what you saw the prior SB champ do. It changes annually. If we want anything resembling that Broncos defense, we're going to need a LOT more than just signing a single player. We need multiple big time FA acquisitions and multiple really good draft picks, which is how they got to be where they are. And obviously, they've lost a good amount of that so far as well. That's like a 3-4 year project, and I don't even think we are interested in doing it that way nor do we need to. 

I have no issues with Tunsil "off-field" because I simply don't see what concerns people have there, and if I had issues with him, then I'd have to have issues with Bosa as well. Its tough to make the case that college injuries are predictive of Pro injuries, and there's a lot of NFL people who say they prefer Stanley over Tunsil anyway AND think Stanley gets picked before we do. 

To me, the whole "he's not worthy of that pick" argument sort of doesn't make sense if we agree that Stanley is worthy of a top 8-10 pick, which he clearly is. So he's a reach at #6 but he's great value at #10? Really tough sell.

[hen826957]

  12 minutes ago, hen826957 said:

Hmm ok. Ozzie could least try to contact the Chargers if they interested in just for a third rounder and maybe a 4th rounder. We got 4 4th rounders so losing one of those isn't big of a deal to me in my opinion. If the Chargers are interested in Buckner or Tunsil this deal could work because l don't believe the Cowboys or Jags are interested in both of those guys and they still get the player they want at number 6. The Ravens have to get ahead of the Cowboys for order to get him. So if they want a second rounder then l won't accept it. ?

Well, obviously, if I'm SD, I"m not doing that deal, and I'm certainly not doing it if I know the Ravens are moving up to get a player I would like to have at #6 (with Ramsey being one of those guys).

Trades like that really only make sense if the team doesn't see the "value" in that player at that spot (obviously doesn't apply here) or teams are trading with each other because they have different needs. Our needs are largely the same as the Chargers are for the most part.

If they're interested in Ramsey, then the trade wouldn't make since. But if they interested in Buckner or Tunsil why would the Chargers worried about the Ravens drafting Ramsey? They chose them not Ramsey.

[The Mom Gene]

I still don't believe we move back.  How often do we get this chance?

[rmcjacket23]

4 minutes ago, budman said:

I get it and agree. However in the back of my mind I keep thinking that if we move back too far, more picks might not yield a player that is as good as the one we passed on. Just don't feel good about it (not that that means a thing). I guess imo we should just stick at #6 and see.

In my opinion, if Ramsey or Tunsil is there, they aren't moving back no matter what. I'd be borderline tempted to add Bosa to that list as well.

Only if those 2 or 3 guys are gone to I think they look to move back.

In general, when fans talk about his trading as frequently as we have, we usually stay put.

Edited April 28, 2016 by rmcjacket23

[The Mom Gene]

If Tennessee wanted "their pick", then they shouldn't have traded that far back to begin with. They got picks for doing so... I'd tell them they have to give up what they got for trading back.

[budman]

Just now, rmcjacket23 said:

In my opinion, if Ramsey or Tunsil is there, they aren't moving back no matter what. I'd be borderline tempted to add Bosa to that list as well.

Only if those 2 or 3 guys are gone to I think they look to move back.

I would agree with that 100%. Just hope that if they are there, we are not tempted by a "great" deal and trade out. 2 of those 3 will probably be there. imo

[rmcjacket23]

2 hours ago, The Mom Gene said:

If Tennessee wanted "their pick", then they shouldn't have traded that far back to begin with. They got picks for doing so... I'd tell them they have to give up what they got for trading back.

 

For starters, there's really no value added in doing that, and you obviously risk another team ahead of us agreeing to do that deal for less compensation. And then, of course, the Titans take a player we want, since they have similar needs as well.

That's the kicker here. A lot of the teams wanting to come up to our spot are going to be interested in the exact same players we are.

[hen826957]

I still don't believe we move back.  How often do we get this chance?

I don't believe it either. It would be idiotic joke if they trade back all the way to #15. No way Ozzie should do this.

[rmcjacket23]

1 minute ago, budman said:

I would agree with that 100%. Just hope that if they are there, we are not tempted by a "great" deal and trade out. 2 of those 3 will probably be there. imo

All relative to how great the deal is. If we are in love with Tunsil, and Tennessee wants him, maybe we ask for more than just a 2nd rounder. What if its the first rounder they acquired next year? Do that deal then?

Maybe its both 2nd rounders this year? Maybe its a 2nd this year and a 2nd next year?

We can be as greedy as we want in that spot, but there's a lot of combination of deals that long term would likely yield us a great quantity of better players.

[sami]

I think Myles Jack would still be a great choice at #6. We wouldn't be able to afford him after 4 yrs anyway.

[budman]

Just now, rmcjacket23 said:

All relative to how great the deal is. If we are in love with Tunsil, and Tennessee wants him, maybe we ask for more than just a 2nd rounder. What if its the first rounder they acquired next year? Do that deal then?

Maybe its both 2nd rounders this year? Maybe its a 2nd this year and a 2nd next year?

We can be as greedy as we want in that spot, but there's a lot of combination of deals that long term would likely yield us a great quantity of better players.

I get it. I would just hate to trade out and miss out on maybe the next Ogden or Watt or Woodson. It's all a risk though, I get it.

[budman]

13 minutes ago, The Mom Gene said:

I still don't believe we move back.  How often do we get this chance?

Exactly