Haunted by Missing Ramsey....

[BmoreBird22]

So, the Ravens offered the Cowboys their first fourth round pick for Ramsey, but the Cowboys wanted the Ravens third if they were going to move back because Elliot and Ramsey were at the top of their board. Had the Cowboys traded back, they would have gone with Floyd because the Jags likely would have traded back to a team that would nab Elliot at 5.

[WNC-Raven]

2 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

And if Joe is playing from his back for the next 2-3 years because Monroe and Hurst are protecting his blind side, it doesn't matter how good a corner Jalen Ramsey is.

He can be Darrelle Revis good, and this team won't be significantly better if the former happens.

Lets be honest with ourselves if we're going to go down this path...some of you guys want "sexy". You're deep down not really interested in whether that pick makes this football team significantly better in the long term. You wanted "sexy". Bosa is sexy, Ramsey is sexy, and 100% of all LTs ever taken aren't. 

You as fans have to decide what your true interests are as fans of this team. Some people want a good fantasy roster, some people want guys that are loud and aggressive, and some people want players that help us win Championships.

In many cases, a lot of those guys aren't the same. 

Lets revisit in about 3-5 years, when this topic is actually relevant. Though, of course, it will be all in hindsight at that point, which is the best analysis fans have.

To add to your post, most of the upset fans are also suffering from name recognition disorder.

Most fans only know the names they see on sports center or the team that they watch plus a few others. I dont even watch games and even I knew all of the most popular names by the time the draft came around. So where I have a wait and see approach, others complain because we  coulda, shoulda, woulda. They can't believe we took so and so when Spence was on the board. If Spence was that great we would have taken him. The FO obviously took the more well rounded player that could do more than just pass rush.

[rmcjacket23]

8 minutes ago, WNC-Raven said:

To add to your post, most of the upset fans are also suffering from name recognition disorder.

Most fans only know the names they see on sports center or the team that they watch plus a few others. I dont even watch games and even I knew all of the most popular names by the time the draft came around. So where I have a wait and see approach, others complain because we  coulda, shoulda, woulda. They can't believe we took so and so when Spence was on the board. If Spence was that great we would have taken him. The FO obviously took the more well rounded player that could do more than just pass rush.

And don't get me wrong... I wanted Ramsey too. I thought he was the best defensive player in the draft, and if we had given up a 4th rounder to get him, I'd have been fine with it.

But its just a gross overreaction to pretend like he was the only possible player we should have gotten and the entire draft is a failure because of it. Just completely unreasonable. 

[GrimCoconut]

So Dallas wanted us to give up Bronson Kaufusi for what may be the best defensive player in the Draft? Hmm...that's a tough call, honestly. I really like Bronson a ton so I'm not sure I could've pulled the trigger on that one as well. We need our first three picks to be starters, and that would've made it tough. We could've still potentially had Bronson if we had traded the pick because we could've still traded back from our 2nd round pick to get Correa and pick up the additional picks and used some of those 4th round picks to trade up into the 3rd. That means we wouldn't get Chris Moore, Lewis, or Judon. 

We can't really tell if this was a good move or not. We'll have to learn that in a couple of years. If Moore, Lewis, Judon, Kaufusi don't turn out to be good players and Ramsey is the best defensive player in the NFL, it was a mistake. Hard call to make on the spot on draft night, though. 

[Tank 92]

2 minutes ago, GrimCoconut said:

So Dallas wanted us to give up Bronson Kaufusi for what may be the best defensive player in the Draft? Hmm...that's a tough call, honestly. I really like Bronson a ton so I'm not sure I could've pulled the trigger on that one as well. We need our first three picks to be starters, and that would've made it tough. We could've still potentially had Bronson if we had traded the pick because we could've still traded back from our 2nd round pick to get Correa and pick up the additional picks and used some of those 4th round picks to trade up into the 3rd. That means we wouldn't get Chris Moore, Lewis, or Judon. 

We can't really tell if this was a good move or not. We'll have to learn that in a couple of years. If Moore, Lewis, Judon, Kaufusi don't turn out to be good players and Ramsey is the best defensive player in the NFL, it was a mistake. Hard call to make on the spot on draft night, though. 

You forgot to mention doing without Ronnie Stanley as well. 

[GrimCoconut]

Just now, Tank 92 said:

You forgot to mention doing without Ronnie Stanley as well. 

Yeah, but I thought that was implied. We would obviously need to hope Monroe stays healthy and rely on him more than we will have to do now.

[Jaybirds]

11 minutes ago, GrimCoconut said:

So Dallas wanted us to give up Bronson Kaufusi for what may be the best defensive player in the Draft? Hmm...that's a tough call, honestly. I really like Bronson a ton so I'm not sure I could've pulled the trigger on that one as well. We need our first three picks to be starters, and that would've made it tough. We could've still potentially had Bronson if we had traded the pick because we could've still traded back from our 2nd round pick to get Correa and pick up the additional picks and used some of those 4th round picks to trade up into the 3rd. That means we wouldn't get Chris Moore, Lewis, or Judon. 

We can't really tell if this was a good move or not. We'll have to learn that in a couple of years. If Moore, Lewis, Judon, Kaufusi don't turn out to be good players and Ramsey is the best defensive player in the NFL, it was a mistake. Hard call to make on the spot on draft night, though. 

I have heard that we did try to trade back into the 2nd round.  When that didn't work we tried the next day to get two picks in the third, again with no success. 

Safe to say we would have missed Kaufusi completely. 

[Tank 92]

1 minute ago, GrimCoconut said:

Yeah, but I thought that was implied. We would obviously need to hope Monroe stays healthy and rely on him more than we will have to do now.

Sure it was implied. But having to depend upon Monroe and not having a potential long term solution at LT has to be part of the conversation when considering the trade up for Ramsey scenario. Probably a much more important loss than not having Kaufusi.

[jazz1988]

10 minutes ago, GrimCoconut said:

So Dallas wanted us to give up Bronson Kaufusi for what may be the best defensive player in the Draft? Hmm...that's a tough call, honestly. I really like Bronson a ton so I'm not sure I could've pulled the trigger on that one as well. We need our first three picks to be starters, and that would've made it tough. We could've still potentially had Bronson if we had traded the pick because we could've still traded back from our 2nd round pick to get Correa and pick up the additional picks and used some of those 4th round picks to trade up into the 3rd. That means we wouldn't get Chris Moore, Lewis, or Judon. 

We can't really tell if this was a good move or not. We'll have to learn that in a couple of years. If Moore, Lewis, Judon, Kaufusi don't turn out to be good players and Ramsey is the best defensive player in the NFL, it was a mistake. Hard call to make on the spot on draft night, though. 

 

It's tough but not even Ozzie knew whom was going to be available by the time their third round pick was up. Ramsey may end up being the best defensive player in this draft but after what happen last year it was quite clear they needed to add solid depth as much as possible.

 

[Jaybirds]

1 minute ago, jazz1988 said:

 

It's tough but not even Ozzie knew whom was going to be available by the time their third round pick was up. Ramsey may end up being the best defensive player in this draft but after what happen last year it was quite clear they needed to add solid depth as much as possible.

 

If we want to think of it that way, then there may have been someone even better than Kaufusi in the third round.  We don't know where he ranked on our board, or if anyone we wanted in the 2nd dropped to the next day. 

[jazz1988]

3 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

And if Joe is playing from his back for the next 2-3 years because Monroe and Hurst are protecting his blind side, it doesn't matter how good a corner Jalen Ramsey is.

He can be Darrelle Revis good, and this team won't be significantly better if the former happens.

Lets be honest with ourselves if we're going to go down this path...some of you guys want "sexy". You're deep down not really interested in whether that pick makes this football team significantly better in the long term. You wanted "sexy". Bosa is sexy, Ramsey is sexy, and 100% of all LTs ever taken aren't. 

You as fans have to decide what your true interests are as fans of this team. Some people want a good fantasy roster, some people want guys that are loud and aggressive, and some people want players that help us win Championships.

In many cases, a lot of those guys aren't the same. 

Lets revisit in about 3-5 years, when this topic is actually relevant. Though, of course, it will be all in hindsight at that point, which is the best analysis fans have.

 

That's quite understandable but Ramsey was more than a sexy pick in my eyes. I think The Ravens team in general is in need of a player that's going to bring energy and leadership to the team. It's one of the reason why I was high on Jalen Ramsey, Jaylon Smith, Mackenzie Alexander, and etc. I know there's next year draft and there may be some young leaders already on the team but Steve Smith and Terrell Suggs won't be around forever .

[Jaybirds]

1 minute ago, jazz1988 said:

 

That's quite understandable but Ramsey was more than a sexy pick in my eyes. I think The Ravens team in general is in need of a player that's going to bring energy and leadership to the team. It's one of the reason why I was high on Jalen Ramsey, Jaylon Smith, Mackenzie Alexander, and etc. I know there's next year draft and there may be some young leaders already on the team but Steve Smith and Terrell Suggs won't be around forever .

When you get a chance, check out videos on Correa and Young.  We drafted energy.  I think Kaufusi might count as well. 

[Tank 92]

1 minute ago, jazz1988 said:

 

That's quite understandable but Ramsey was more than a sexy pick in my eyes. I think The Ravens team in general is in need of a player that's going to bring energy and leadership to the team. It's one of the reason why I was high on Jalen Ramsey, Jaylon Smith, Mackenzie Alexander, and etc. I know there's next year draft and there may be some young leaders already on the team but Steve Smith and Terrell Suggs won't be around forever .

Just my opinion, but given what we know right now I'd take Stanley and Kaufusi in trade for Ramsey without hesitation.

[GrimCoconut]

24 minutes ago, Jaybirds said:

I have heard that we did try to trade back into the 2nd round.  When that didn't work we tried the next day to get two picks in the third, again with no success. 

Safe to say we would have missed Kaufusi completely. 

 

22 minutes ago, Tank 92 said:

Sure it was implied. But having to depend upon Monroe and not having a potential long term solution at LT has to be part of the conversation when considering the trade up for Ramsey scenario. Probably a much more important loss than not having Kaufusi.

I don't disagree. Just saying it's obvious with Monroe and all. I'm not at all upset. I would've loved Ramsey here but I am glad to not have to depend on Monroe, because he sadly hasn't been dependable since signing his extension. 

20 minutes ago, jazz1988 said:

 

It's tough but not even Ozzie knew whom was going to be available by the time their third round pick was up. Ramsey may end up being the best defensive player in this draft but after what happen last year it was quite clear they needed to add solid depth as much as possible.

 

Depth is where we suffered the most and I think it's the key component of any Super Bowl team because injuries are the name of the game. When we won the Super Bowl we had enough depth at every position and that seems to be the common denominator for every Super Bowl representative from what I've seen.

7 minutes ago, Jaybirds said:

When you get a chance, check out videos on Correa and Young.  We drafted energy.  I think Kaufusi might count as well. 

I like them all, especially Kaufusi, but they're not the same talent as Ramsey. He's a different kind of beast. That said, I'm not mad at not getting Jalen. I would've loved to have him here because I think he would've been a difference maker, but it's over now and he's not here so no use crying over it for me at least. Not saying you are. 

4 minutes ago, Tank 92 said:

Just my opinion, but given what we know right now I'd take Stanley and Kaufusi in trade for Ramsey without hesitation.

It's hard for me to say, but I may be inclined to agree. It's a tough call. Not sure I can say yes one way or another. Give me five minutes and I may feel differently, especially when we're playing Jacksonville this year. You can be sure this thread and other criticisms will return regarding our decision. We will learn the impact of that decision in that game, I suspect.

[rmcjacket23]

17 minutes ago, jazz1988 said:

 

That's quite understandable but Ramsey was more than a sexy pick in my eyes. I think The Ravens team in general is in need of a player that's going to bring energy and leadership to the team. It's one of the reason why I was high on Jalen Ramsey, Jaylon Smith, Mackenzie Alexander, and etc. I know there's next year draft and there may be some young leaders already on the team but Steve Smith and Terrell Suggs won't be around forever .

Not suggesting that Ramsey is purely a "sexy" pick. I'm suggesting that there are many fans who are basing their beliefs on who we drafted by either what the media/mock drafts tell us to think, or based on some combination of highlight videos they found on YouTube.

I'm not nearly as big as others in terms of having the desire for "leaders" in some regards, because I don't think you can just go out and draft players and assume they will leaders because they appeared to be so in college. Pretty much 100% of the players that fans would say are "leaders" are also at least good if not great players, and the latter is a prerequisite to be considered a good leader in this league. 

Players on teams don't want to follow leaders who aren't good players on the field. Maybe Ramsey will be, but maybe he won't. But to me, it just seems like our fans every year just want to reincarnate Ray Lewis or Ed Reed in their prime for the leadership, when that's borderline impossible. I don't see leadership being something that you have to draft five years in advance.

[Jaybirds]

6 minutes ago, GrimCoconut said:

 

I like them all, especially Kaufusi, but they're not the same talent as Ramsey. He's a different kind of beast. That said, I'm not mad at not getting Jalen. I would've loved to have him here because I think he would've been a difference maker, but it's over now and he's not here so no use crying over it for me at least. Not saying you are. 

 

Sorry, I didn't bring them up to compare talent.  We were looking for guys who could bring some extra energy to the team, on the field and in the clubhouse.  I think those two definitely have an extroverted personality.   I think their attitude could be contagious.  

The active duty Navy officer could also have leadership skills.  Just a hunch. 

[K-Dog]

1 hour ago, WNC-Raven said:

To add to your post, most of the upset fans are also suffering from name recognition disorder.

 

N.R.D.

I  like that. I am gonna startusing it.

 

BTW, whats with us calling players " sexy" all of a sudden?

I find it a bit odd really. 

[rmcjacket23]

1 minute ago, K-Dog said:

N.R.D.

I  like that. I am gonna startusing it.

 

BTW, whats with us calling players " sexy" all of a sudden?

I find it a bit odd really. 

I probably started that, but its pretty much true.

Or you can call it a "splash" if you will. That's what fans asked for... a "splash". LTs are pretty much never a "splash". He never touches the football, and if he does his job well, we won't even be talking about him much.

[gtalk12]

As much as I'd love to have Ramsey, we have no idea how good our draft is...correct me if I'm wrong but when we had Ed Reed he wasn't exactly the guy we really wanted.....and by we I mean the Ravens. He was actually low on our list......draft picks miss more often then not, we get one every year.....relax and watch, what if Jalen ends up being ok and Stanley keeps Flacco's bombs falling with all the extra time he gives Joe? You wouldn't like that? Or the return of a dominating run game? Keeping the defense off the field and therefore making them more effective and fresh? Seriously, there are 2 ways to skin a cat.

[RavensDieHard21]

On ‎5‎/‎1‎/‎2016 at 9:07 PM, PuRock said:

It takes two people to tango.  I don't know if the actually details have been leaked.  But it's very possible Dallas feared that if they went back, we took Ramsey, JAX might trade with someone that wanted Zeke.  

It's not as simple as "get er done".

I agree here. Jones wanted Elliot bad and the fear of losing him from a trade ultimately in my mind made him too scared to move back, but don't get me wrong, offering a 4th rounder to move up that high in the draft is cheap at best, Ozzie should have countered.

[rmcjacket23]

1 minute ago, RavensDieHard21 said:

I agree here. Jones wanted Elliot bad and the fear of losing him from a trade ultimately in my mind made him too scared to move back, but don't get me wrong, offering a 4th rounder to move up that high in the draft is cheap at best, Ozzie should have countered.

Really not much to counter with though. Any counter results in giving up a pick a full round earlier. I doubt just saying "hey we will give you a 6th on top" would have been good enough to get that done.

I wouldn't have given up a top 70 pick to move up for him, which is pretty much the only other outcome.

[Tank 92]

33 minutes ago, GrimCoconut said:

 

It's hard for me to say, but I may be inclined to agree. It's a tough call. Not sure I can say yes one way or another. Give me five minutes and I may feel differently, especially when we're playing Jacksonville this year. You can be sure this thread and other criticisms will return regarding our decision. We will learn the impact of that decision in that game, I suspect.

lol.  That game will provide fodder for some interesting convo on these boards, no doubt. But one game really won't provide much evidence of the impact of the decision. Give it a couple, three years and then I think you could get an honest read.

Edited May 2, 2016 by Tank 92

[MissRay27]

Disappointed generally in the draft. The opportunity to get an impact player was squandered. We had a good draft, not an A++, one that puts Cincy and the Squeelers on high alert. Saying that, I think when the final 53 are counted we should have a good team.

[RavensDieHard21]

8 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Really not much to counter with though. Any counter results in giving up a pick a full round earlier. I doubt just saying "hey we will give you a 6th on top" would have been good enough to get that done.

I wouldn't have given up a top 70 pick to move up for him, which is pretty much the only other outcome.

I mean realistically we could have offered two 4ths or simply our 70th pick, which would at least given us a better chance. When making any deal there are risks and if you are dallas you want your risks to be covered by a potential bail out, which is the picks they would receive from us.

This isn't stating that it would have gotten it done, but frugal trade offers are not likely to work. In actuality I believe Dallas still would have gotten Elliot, but who knows.

[rmcjacket23]

6 minutes ago, RavensDieHard21 said:

I mean realistically we could have offered two 4ths or simply our 70th pick, which would at least given us a better chance. When making any deal there are risks and if you are dallas you want your risks to be covered by a potential bail out, which is the picks they would receive from us.

This isn't stating that it would have gotten it done, but frugal trade offers are not likely to work. In actuality I believe Dallas still would have gotten Elliot, but who knows.

Its really kind of hard to claim it as frugal though, particularly when the value to us to move up clearly wasn't that high. Really, the only people thinking that our offer was unrealistic are the people who likely would have given up just about anything to move up to get Ramsey. 

I wouldn't have given up our third rounder for him, and we have no idea if Dallas would have been content with another 4th rounder or not.

[RavensDieHard21]

Don't get me wrong, I wanted Ramsey and thought he had the highest ceiling in the draft on defense, but I also understand that there was a lot at stake for Dallas and to make the two sides agree was apparently undoable. I do believe though that we need an impact defensive player, but Stanley is as solid as it gets for our offensive line and he has tremendous upside still to go as he could become the real deal once he gains more strength and coaching.

I would have loved the Ramsey, Spriggs combo, but I am by no means upset that we got Stanley.

[flynismo]

12 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Its really kind of hard to claim it as frugal though, particularly when the value to us to move up clearly wasn't that high. Really, the only people thinking that our offer was unrealistic are the people who likely would have given up just about anything to move up to get Ramsey. 

I wouldn't have given up our third rounder for him, and we have no idea if Dallas would have been content with another 4th rounder or not.

Yeah, I mean it comes down to would we rather have Ramsey, or Stanley and Bronson. I'm as big a Ramsey fan as the next guy, but I think the choice there is clear. I even said as much in another thread that given a choice between Ramsey and Tunsil, the smart money would be on Tunsil.

To clarify, given the choice between a stud LT or a stud DB, all else being equal, the LT is almost always the way to go

Edited May 2, 2016 by flynismo

[RavensDieHard21]

9 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Its really kind of hard to claim it as frugal though, particularly when the value to us to move up clearly wasn't that high. Really, the only people thinking that our offer was unrealistic are the people who likely would have given up just about anything to move up to get Ramsey. 

I wouldn't have given up our third rounder for him, and we have no idea if Dallas would have been content with another 4th rounder or not.

I am not in that camp lol there simply was no player worth a king's ransom, maybe besides Tunsil if he didn't have so much baggage. I just feel we are at times too frugal with moving around on draft day and the approach of "they'll fall right to us" doesn't always work. I am a fan of Stanley do not get me wrong though. There could have been a more aggressive push in the second though I felt.

[rmcjacket23]

6 minutes ago, RavensDieHard21 said:

I am not in that camp lol there simply was no player worth a king's ransom, maybe besides Tunsil if he didn't have so much baggage. I just feel we are at times too frugal with moving around on draft day and the approach of "they'll fall right to us" doesn't always work. I am a fan of Stanley do not get me wrong though. There could have been a more aggressive push in the second though I felt.

Most likely there could have been.

The one thing I will say, and I'm glad people like McShay are pointing this out on TV now, is that there is a ton of analytics out there that support the notion that the draft almost quite literally is about quantity, not quality in the long run. It sounds odd to say that, because conventional wisdom says you should always try to get the best possible players you can. 

But long-run analysis basically shows that the teams who historically have yielded the best value from the draft picks are the one's who have the largest quantity of draft picks, regardless of round or position. Simply put... its a dart throw, and teams with the most darts to throw have a better chance at landing on something good. 

And I think the Ravens know this (we all know they love comp picks) and that's why they are hesitant to go out there and give up two or three draft picks for a single player, and especially top 4 round picks, where historically we get great value. Its why you always see teams like NE, Seattle, Baltimore, GB, etc. trading back so often. Part of it is because they pick so late often that the value gets better, but also because they know that quantity is important.

And actually, historically, some of our "weaker" draft classes have been in years where we had less picks. 2004 and 2005 were pretty weak drafts... only 7 picks each year. 2009 was marginal and 2010 was probably one of our worst ever... only 13 picks in those two years.

Sweet spot for us seems to be to try to get at least 8 picks in each draft.

[GrimCoconut]

1 hour ago, Jaybirds said:

Sorry, I didn't bring them up to compare talent.  We were looking for guys who could bring some extra energy to the team, on the field and in the clubhouse.  I think those two definitely have an extroverted personality.   I think their attitude could be contagious.  

The active duty Navy officer could also have leadership skills.  Just a hunch. 

I'm talking defense but yeah. We need some fire on defense! I'm not talking about getting burned either lol. Saw plenty of that last year