Mock Drafts from the Media

[raven94]

56 minutes ago, BmoreBird22 said:

Again, 38 is way too much and just isn't realistic, but hey, you all do you.

Finding a starter late in the draft does not equal first round talent. I think there must be some huge misconception about what a first round talent means.

Matt Miller is the lead draft analyst and actually communicates with scouts, unlike any of the other writers. He's the most invested and the most actively involved. The others are giving an opinion.

I heavily maintain that there aren't going to be 32 first round talents in any given year, but then again, I don't have an arbitrary grading system, either. I just like a prospect or I don't and I'm not going to sit here and make up my own system and give out my own flawed grades.

 

51 minutes ago, BmoreBird22 said:

http://www.powerhousegm.com/blog/nfl-draft-prospect-grading-systems

Here's just an example article with two grading tables with round designations beside it. A grade of 7.5 is required in this table to be a first round talent. There's zero chance you would find 38 players in this draft with the ability to become a day one feature player on his team and create physical mismatches for the opposing team. It just isn't going to happen.

Ok, I see your point. I'm on board with your perspective. However that doesn't change anything for me. My idea of a guy worth a first round pick is someone who has shown steady development over their college career, someone with traits, skills, or physical abilities that project well to the next level, someone with scheme versatility, someone with good intangibles, someone who can start day 1 and be an upgrade over the current player on the roster, and someone who needs very little time to develop. There are a lot of guys in this draft who check out just about every single box for me. So I've handed out a lot of first round grades. Am I an easy grader? Possibly. In the end it doesn't matter because I'm not submitting names for the Ravens to draft on draft night. This is why we have the tier system though

[raven94]

Not to mention the positional criteria I have for each position. I thought that would be a given, but I don't want to get chastised for not mentioning it in my post above

[rossihunter2]

6 hours ago, BmoreBird22 said:

I don't value the combine nearly at all. The combine should never be the determining factor in deciding a players athletic ability. The combine should serve to confirm what you see or make you go back and watch again, but never to be the deciding factor.

Anyway, I don't view Barnett as a guy who will be the "next Suggs" or an elite edge rusher. I think he's going to get his dues with his super refined hand usage and motor that never quits, but when you can't change direction well and don't have great burst or quickness, you're just not going to do a ton of damage in the league as a pass rusher. 

With Charlton, he's an athletic freak for someone his size. He's inconsistent as all hell and will require some serious coaching to really reach that ceiling, but he's got All-Pro potential written all over him. Will he ever reach that? I don't know. However, is he going to be a good starter anyway? I think so. 

If I'm picking between the two, I'd take the upside if I know I'm getting a strong starter either way.

I don't see that Barnett has a lack of lateral agility - especially with the way he sets up his outside moves often with essentially a double move type deal or a fake to the inside - I really don't see the athletic limitations as limitations because he's still pretty athletic - he just uses his tools to aid his athleticism

[trevorsteadman]

Has anyone seen Casserly's latest mock? Has the Ravens taking Corey Davis and the Browns end up with Myles Garrett, OJ Howard, and Mitchell Trubitsky. All three of those players the Browns get are the best at each respective position. I would love to see that type of draft haul for the Browns. Also I am a big Corey Davis fan so I would like to see him here.

[Darhk_Raven]

It may be time to stop looking at mock drafts when you start seeing Dorian Johnson as a first round pick. There was also two OL that went in the top 10.

[rmw10]

30 minutes ago, Darhk_Raven said:

It may be time to stop looking at mock drafts when you start seeing Dorian Johnson as a first round pick. There was also two OL that went in the top 10.

Don't get caught up in current rankings.  There are always prospects you don't think will be 1st rounders that end up in the first round.  Karl Joseph was lauded as a 2nd round guy up until a couple weeks before the draft last year.  Ryan Kelly got the 1st round buzz a bit earlier but at this point last year, he was also in a similar boat where he wasn't considered a 1st rounder.  A couple of years back Ja'Wuan James was a consensus 2nd/3rd rounder until about a week beforehand.

[trevorsteadman]

28 minutes ago, rmw10 said:

Don't get caught up in current rankings.  There are always prospects you don't think will be 1st rounders that end up in the first round.  Karl Joseph was lauded as a 2nd round guy up until a couple weeks before the draft last year.  Ryan Kelly got the 1st round buzz a bit earlier but at this point last year, he was also in a similar boat where he wasn't considered a 1st rounder.  A couple of years back Ja'Wuan James was a consensus 2nd/3rd rounder until about a week beforehand.

It reminds me of Billings last year being talked about being an early 2nd round pick and he fell to the 4th round to Cincy at 122. There always seems to be a few surprise risers and fallers draft day.

[Darhk_Raven]

1 hour ago, rmw10 said:

Don't get caught up in current rankings.  There are always prospects you don't think will be 1st rounders that end up in the first round.  Karl Joseph was lauded as a 2nd round guy up until a couple weeks before the draft last year.  Ryan Kelly got the 1st round buzz a bit earlier but at this point last year, he was also in a similar boat where he wasn't considered a 1st rounder.  A couple of years back Ja'Wuan James was a consensus 2nd/3rd rounder until about a week beforehand.

Trust me I don't get caught up in them. Like you said Joseph was lauded as a 2nd rounder until a couple of weeks before the draft. Could you see someone like Johnson who has been listed as a person that lacks athleticism and sources from teams having him as a 4th or 5th rounder making that kind of jump?

[rmw10]

1 minute ago, Darhk_Raven said:

Trust me I don't get caught up in them. Like you said Joseph was lauded as a 2nd rounder until a couple of weeks before the draft. Could you see someone like Johnson who has been listed as a person that lacks athleticism and sources from teams having him as a 4th or 5th rounder making that kind of jump?

I can because Johnson has long had a 2nd round grade from me. Good, dependable player who should be able to start from day 1. Not many flaws to his game. Not overly athletic but has enough to function in practically every scheme. 

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

13 hours ago, BmoreBird22 said:

Every draft has to have 32 players go in the first, right? I think that's where the 36 players could go in the first comes into play. It's not like we end the first round after all the players you had a high grade on are gone.

As for what does it mean to have a first round grade, I'm not entirely sure what a scout set the bar at grade wise, but they might say a first round player has a grade of 7.0 or higher on our board. That's a really high grade that not many players will reach, so maybe they only get 10 players with that grade. Then you naturally fill in the next 22 to get your top 32.

I get the point... but arbitrarily saying a "1st round grade" is 7.0 or higher, and that in any year theres at most 10-15 players that would grade in that range is meaningless, and almost stupid.

Why would that be your criteria for someone having a 1st round grade if theres never been a draft that has 32 players with said grade. Grading someone as a 1st rounder is literally a dumb label if less than half of the players in the 1st round are capable of earning that grade in 90% of drafts. Not directed at you, just the semantics of the system/idea.

 

If a team is constructing their board, and theyre identifying players with "1st round grades" it should mean the players they'd be comfortable taking in the 1st round. If its only relative to their pick (using us as an example) then sure, maybe that only consists of 10-15 players since we're picking 16th. Someone we'd feel comfortable picking at 25 wouldnt have our "1st round grade" in that situation.

 

I guess what im saying is that a system that says a player must have a 7.0 or higher, of which there will only ever be 10-15 in a draft, is no more or less arbitrary than one that says there are 38 players with 1st round grades, meaning 38 players that could/should go in the 1st.

If a grade scale is tied to the rounds of the draft, it should be a moving scale based on the available pool of players in any given draft... not something thats drawn across all players in all drafts.

[lgcs27288]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000793067/article/2017-nfl-draft-rumors-connecting-players-afc-north-teams?akmobile=android&akcarrier=other

 

Heres a list of players the Ravens have reportedly met or will meet.

[JoeyFlex5]

2 hours ago, trevorsteadman said:

It reminds me of Billings last year being talked about being an early 2nd round pick and he fell to the 4th round to Cincy at 122. There always seems to be a few surprise risers and fallers draft day.

A lot of people were hyping kaufusi as a late first early second guy. I never bought that hype though

[JoeyFlex5]

7 minutes ago, lgcs27288 said:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000793067/article/2017-nfl-draft-rumors-connecting-players-afc-north-teams?akmobile=android&akcarrier=other

 

Heres a list of players the Ravens have reportedly met or will meet.

Strange list. I could see us snagging kazee in the 3rd for sure though. But Brantley and taco? A bit surprising. Taco doesn't strike me as an Ozzie type of pick

[RaineV1]

6 minutes ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

Strange list. I could see us snagging kazee in the 3rd for sure though. But Brantley and taco? A bit surprising. Taco doesn't strike me as an Ozzie type of pick

I think Taco is one of those covering all of our bases type of things. Just checking in with him just for the sake of making sure we didn't miss anything.

I really like that the Ravens looked at Jamari Staples. He could be a really good value pick.

[JoeyFlex5]

2 minutes ago, RaineV1 said:

I think Taco is one of those covering all of our bases type of things. Just checking in with him just for the sake of making sure we didn't miss anything.

I really like that the Ravens looked at Jamari Staples. He could be a really good value pick.

True, our list of visits always appears pretty strange. TBH I know nothing about staples

[Edgar]

3 hours ago, trevorsteadman said:

Has anyone seen Casserly's latest mock? Has the Ravens taking Corey Davis and the Browns end up with Myles Garrett, OJ Howard, and Mitchell Trubitsky. All three of those players the Browns get are the best at each respective position. I would love to see that type of draft haul for the Browns. Also I am a big Corey Davis fan so I would like to see him here.

Huh? Why would you love that for the Browns? 

[RaineV1]

9 minutes ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

True, our list of visits always appears pretty strange. TBH I know nothing about staples

Basically he's tall (6'3") with a great wingspin and is capable of snaring in off target passes pretty well, which he had to do a lot. He's also got good speed, and isn't afraid of contact. And the Louisville coaches rave about his work ethic and leadership. Though he needs to work on his functional strength and route running, which is why he's considered a third rounder. He has the upside to be a good number 2 receiver.

Edited March 29 by RaineV1

[Edgar]

http://walterfootball.com/ProspectMeetings/ByTeam

A list a little more extensive 

Keion Adams is interesting.....never heard of Dayon Pratt

Edited March 29 by Edgar

[JoeyFlex5]

14 minutes ago, RaineV1 said:

Basically he's tall (6'3") with a great wingspin and is capable of snaring in off target passes pretty well, which he had to do a lot. He's also got good speed, and isn't afraid of contact. And the Louisville coaches rave about his work ethic and leadership. Though he needs to work on his functional strength and route running, which is why he's considered a third rounder. He has the upside to be a good number 2 receiver.

I'll check him out thanks

[mc_red23]

It's the first time I've taken notice of mock drafts, what a load of garbage they all are. All they're doing it for is to cover their backsides with "I told you so" moments and pretend that they're some sort of experts. 

[rossihunter2]

2 hours ago, rmw10 said:

I can because Johnson has long had a 2nd round grade from me. Good, dependable player who should be able to start from day 1. Not many flaws to his game. Not overly athletic but has enough to function in practically every scheme. 

I really hate Dorian Johnson as a prospect - he looked slow on tape, not particulalry powerful and doesn't recover well for a start

[ravensnation5220]

Charles Harris improved his vertical to 37.5 at his pro day. Had 32 inch at combine. Talk about explosion. Good kid and looks fluid in space. His stock is weird though. He's ranked 11th on Todd mcshays big board but goes late first early second in the mocks. I think we will have a high grade on him however. He's got all the tools to be an elite pass rusher. Great character kid too, hard working, non stop motor. Depending how the board falls I would be happy with him at 16

[Jacquouille]

Yeah, trade down is definitely the best case scenario. There's about 20 guys that I want on day 2.

[Jonah DeVito]

6 hours ago, trevorsteadman said:

Has anyone seen Casserly's latest mock? Has the Ravens taking Corey Davis and the Browns end up with Myles Garrett, OJ Howard, and Mitchell Trubitsky. All three of those players the Browns get are the best at each respective position. I would love to see that type of draft haul for the Browns. Also I am a big Corey Davis fan so I would like to see him here.

So...you want to see a team in our division have a great draft. Am I missing something?

Edited March 29 by Jonah DeVito

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

5 hours ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

Strange list. I could see us snagging kazee in the 3rd for sure though. But Brantley and taco? A bit surprising. Taco doesn't strike me as an Ozzie type of pick

Maybe its just John doing one of his brothers players a favor.

Or it could be collecting intel... seeing if anyone behind us is in love with him, bc if a cpl pass rushers go off the board ahead of us a team later could get antsy and want to jump up to snag Taco so we dont. We agree to trade back with them, they get Taco, we get an extra pick(s) and still end up with Cam, Tim Williams, Charles Harris, or someone else we covet.

 

[JoeyFlex5]

4 hours ago, Jonah DeVito said:

So...you want to see a team in our division have a great draft. Am I missing something?

I personally love to see perennial cellar dwellers make a turnaround. Obviously it sucks they're in our division but it's just good for football. The titans, bucs, raiders and cowboys all made a big splash this year and I'm really excited to see the titans and bucs especially in the future. I personally would like to see the browns getting competitive, I would just hate to see them beat us lol. 

Now the bengals... they can go back to the damn cellar the came from and stay there. 

[Jonah DeVito]

4 minutes ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

I personally love to see perennial cellar dwellers make a turnaround. Obviously it sucks they're in our division but it's just good for football. The titans, bucs, raiders and cowboys all made a big splash this year and I'm really excited to see the titans and bucs especially in the future. I personally would like to see the browns getting competitive, I would just hate to see them beat us lol. 

Now the bengals... they can go back to the damn cellar the came from and stay there. 

As long as the Bengals take a trip to the cellar I suppose it's alright if the Browns have a turnaround. But four competitive teams in the same division doesn't sound like fun.

[balfan23]

The mocks I'm seeing are all over the place. A number of them have us going OL in the 1st round and in almost every case, it is the first OL player off the board. That indicates to me that consensus is there isn't any OL player worth #16 and mockers have us reaching for need. Do other think there really is an OL player that will be actually be the BPA at #16? 

[Darhk_Raven]

51 minutes ago, balfan23 said:

The mocks I'm seeing are all over the place. A number of them have us going OL in the 1st round and in almost every case, it is the first OL player off the board. That indicates to me that consensus is there isn't any OL player worth #16 and mockers have us reaching for need. Do other think there really is an OL player that will be actually be the BPA at #16? 

No I don't think so. If no team reaches for need, then no OL player should go top 20. 

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

1 hour ago, balfan23 said:

The mocks I'm seeing are all over the place. A number of them have us going OL in the 1st round and in almost every case, it is the first OL player off the board. That indicates to me that consensus is there isn't any OL player worth #16 and mockers have us reaching for need. Do other think there really is an OL player that will be actually be the BPA at #16? 

It depends. Conventional wisdom says franchise tackles go that high and you can wait on other OL positions...

but we've seen an emphasis on interior OL lately. I mean many thought Frederick was a reach for need by the Cowboys at the time.... but now they've got a perennial all pro C. 

If the FO thinks Cam Robinson, Bolles, or Lamp is an all pro at G/RT/C then it's not really a reach. Plus mocks don't usually project trades and that's always a possibility - they're hearing we love Cam but we only love him if we can trade down in the 18-22 range. 

Ultimately we can all say what value is... but if say Myles Garret is a huge bust and Cam Robinson becomes a HOF LG... then Garret would've been a waste even at 16 and Robinson would've been a great pick (assuming no other HOF players at more important positions were on the board for us there).

 

Id be happy if we traded back and went OL while picking up another pick on day 2 or multiple picks. 

But if we stay put id much prefer the top pass rusher available, MW/CD, OJ, a top CB... Foster if he falls somehow, I might even prefer Fournette if he fell to us. 

Ultimately I trust our FO evaluations over media guys and myself - so while the media and I may not think there's an OL worthy at 16.... if the FO does im not one to judge, especially with their track record of drafting them.