BR News

[News] Late For Work 4/18: Who Wants To Make A Deal? Breaking Down Ravens' Trade Scenarios

42 posts in this topic

  9 hours ago, nj_ravens said:
  9 hours ago, law215 said:

The 2012 Superbowl Champion Ravens was in large part a team that was 13-3 in 2006 before Harbs and Flacco, close to winning the Division in 2008, won the division in 2011 and 2012. This is not that team.
This is a team that missed 3 out of the last 4 playoffs and have not won the division in 5 years.

What they need are playmakers : Based on chance of availability
1. OJ Howard –BPA if he’s there at 16. I doubt it though
2. Mike Williams – Miss match, will win ball similar to Boldin, Evans, Benjamin, can make Flacco better
3. Barnett – loss Dummervil, Suggs is older
4. McKinley – speed rusher
5. Corey Davis – route runner, size, RAC
6. Peppers – If the above guys are gone, he’s BPA IMO, will always be around football
7. Cook – home run RB, running and catching out of backfield

Trading back is gambling when you are already behind. Yes, the Ravens can play Steelers, Patriots, and a lot of teams close, but moral victories do not win games.

This is a deep draft so the teams already ahead of the Ravens will get better too. Stay put and select BPA. No need to wheel and deal with a team that has been 3rd in the division for years.

OK, and what if all 7 of those players are on the board, and lets say for sake of example, Detroit (I picked them simply for easy math) wants to give us a 3rd rounder to move back 5 slots, as the draft chart says is approximately even.... you say we don't do it? That doesn't make ANY sense, because you can still get choice of 2 of those 7 AND another player in the top 100.

First, It's highly unlikely that ALL 7 will still be on the board. But I'll play along.

It's still gamble that not needed. What if we move back 2 spots? And Mike Williams turns out to be a beast. He goes to Titans who then would be another AFC team competing for a playoff spot with Ravens.

Also, What if the Broncos trade with Skins. Now there are 2 AFC teams picking a player higher than you.

IMO, trading back works when you already have a good team and need additional picks for depth and future. A team that missed the playoffs and have not won the divison should play the percentages and take the BPA

Well trading back works in a lot more scenarios then just having a good team. Obviously it also works for a team that needs a lot of upgrades at a lot of positions.

The Browns are going to take Garrett, who's clearly the best player in the class at the moment. That team will need a lot of luck to win ONE additional game next season, and that's after they get the best player in the draft. And until they get a viable QB, the same thing will happen year after year.

The REAL way to play the percentages is to stick to the draft philosophy you have and trust your player evaluations. That's playing the percentages. If that means your evaluation says trade up, you trade up. If it says trade back, you trade back. If it says stay put, you stay put.

The absolute worst thing any team can do is deviate from a draft philosophy or strategy to select a player they don't think is worthy of that draft slot... regardless of position.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  8 hours ago, usmccharles said:
  9 hours ago, law215 said:

IMO, trading back works when you already have a good team and need additional picks for depth and future. A team that missed the playoffs and have not won the divison should play the percentages and take the BPA

I completely disagree.  A team with numerous holes is a team that should try to get....numerous picks. 

  9 hours ago, law215 said:

Why in such a deep draft would someone give up picks to us?
Wouldn't they use their picks to obtain many players too?
And if they did, who is this great player they are willing part with picks to secure ?

A team that values a different player than us because they have different needs.  Perfect example Is the Raiders, a team that is a legit contender and some consider the only team that can challenge the Pats.  They need help in the secondary so if a DB is available that they think will put them over the edge, they will want to move up and make that push.  Each team is in a different situation.  Its like you are comparing draft needs from the Browns to the Pats, every team has different needs therefore values players differently. 

 

  8 hours ago, BiggMack91 said:

i don't see us trading back and imo we are going after an offensive playmaker (WR) still would like to see us pick up mack RB from florida in the 2nd or third and if pat eflien is there in the second take him i wouldn't even mind moving up for him and get banner in the 3-4 round to play LG our offense would be almost as good as our D

This forum will explode if we trade back with Mwilliams or Corey Davis on the board, i might be one of those guys.  But adding a RB and a LG (rookies) would in no way make our offense on par with our defense. 

You make valid points. It a matter of do you believe the Ravens have 'holes' or lack 'difference makers'

I believe Ravens had 11 picks last year. There are multiple guys currently on the team at just about every position.But they are 'just guys'. Ravens need difference makers not picks to fill holes.

Bengals beat us cause they have difference makers AJ Green, Benard, Boyd, Eifort

Steelers win cause they have difference makers Brown, Bell

We may split games with them, but they will win more games cause they have players that make the difference. I don't see that on the Ravens.

In fact, they lost Smith Sr and Dummervil. If they can't win more than 8 games with them, you need top talent to replace them

Would also point out that all of the players you listed are offensive players. Its great to have sexy playmakers on offense, and I'd love nothing more than to have them.

But our defense is miles ahead of both of those teams at the moment, both in terms of playmakers and in terms of overall production. So there is a difference there.

Its why a team like Pittsburgh, in my eyes, is dead money in the AFC until they increase their defensive talent and production and do it fast. They can have all the playmakers they want on offense, and they're simply not going to beat New England in the playoffs. Adding another offensive just makes a high powered offense a bit better. It doesn't solve the problems they have.

I frankly have zero concerns about Cincinnati right now. That team has major issues in a lot of areas, and they aren't active enough spenders in FA to account for the people they lose. Doesn't really bother me that they beat us in week 17, and I'm well aware of our struggles against them in recent seasons. But that team isn't close to them that was competing for the division 2-3 years ago.

They're weak on the offensive line, they don't have much of a pass rush anymore, their secondary is average, and they've lost a lot of receivers in recent years. And their RBs are vastly overrated for what they bring to the table.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  10 hours ago, trevorsteadman said:

To be completely honest I know people say Howard is a generational talent at tight end but I have a hard time believing a tight end goes top 10. Maxx Williams was the best tight end in his draft class and everyone talked about him being a 1st round pick. I know looking back Howard is obviously more gifted and athletic, but I still think he will likely be there at #16. 

I really hope he's gone before we draft. If hes there at 16 then a guy we might have taken is probably gone.

thats probably why il make a case for Howard lol

Maax was the best TE in one of the weakest TE classes. He's a tough matchup for many linebackers and could be a good blocker some day. Howard can outrun most NFL safeties and is a matchup nightmare for anyone trying to cover him. He's just too big and too fast it's not even fair. his ceeling is 1000 yards year in year out as a TE. I love Maax but Howard as a prospect is in another stratosphere.

This is a very interesting situation, because I think you both make very valid points. I cant see how the Ravens could pass on Howard at 16 if he drops to that number. Its kind of saying the same thing about Williams.

Of course Williams being the WR he looks to be the "better" position choice but I wonder about the BPA if the two were both to fall to 15 or 16 and would the Ravens actually end up with the one left on the board?

Of course It might be more realistic that Davis or Ross be remaining at 16, I am not sure either can match Howard at BPA if that were the situation.

I suppose the more relevant situation might be will the Ravens pass completely on WR (TE) if any of Barnett, Foster or Humphrey are sitting there too?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless Barnett is there at 16, I see us trading down. There is just too much value between picks 20-100. So much depth and talent in this class, that I think pick 50 or even 60, will be about the same quality of player that is taken at 20 or 30

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Davis isn't available at 16 then we should trade down. There isn't anybody there that we couldn't get him/equal player later. And could really use extra top50/top90 picks

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, bigcatfrank1 said:

This is a very interesting situation, because I think you both make very valid points. I cant see how the Ravens could pass on Howard at 16 if he drops to that number. Its kind of saying the same thing about Williams.

Of course Williams being the WR he looks to be the "better" position choice but I wonder about the BPA if the two were both to fall to 15 or 16 and would the Ravens actually end up with the one left on the board?

Of course It might be more realistic that Davis or Ross be remaining at 16, I am not sure either can match Howard at BPA if that were the situation.

I suppose the more relevant situation might be will the Ravens pass completely on WR (TE) if any of Barnett, Foster or Humphrey are sitting there too?

Just my opinion here but I think Corey Davis is of the same mold as Williams but Ross is a step behind them as a prospect as I highly doubt any team in the top 10 is even considering him.

Foster and Humphrey are also top 10 talents so it wouldn't be hard for Ozzie to pull the trigger as they'd probably to top 10 any other year. Barnett on the other hand is a solid first rounder but I doubt he'd ever go in the top 10.

im not trying to take away from any of the players mentioned but just saying i hope we land a 1A player rather than a 1B player. 

If I had to guess the order of the mentioned players in the Ravens board in order it would probably look something like:- 

1- Williams

2- Davis

3- Humphrey 

4- Foster

5- Barnett

6- Howard (even though I'd hate that pick I couldn't argue against him being BPA)

7- Ross

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Halshayeji said:

Just my opinion here but I think Corey Davis is of the same mold as Williams but Ross is a step behind them as a prospect as I highly doubt any team in the top 10 is even considering him.

Foster and Humphrey are also top 10 talents so it wouldn't be hard for Ozzie to pull the trigger as they'd probably to top 10 any other year. Barnett on the other hand is a solid first rounder but I doubt he'd ever go in the top 10.

im not trying to take away from any of the players mentioned but just saying i hope we land a 1A player rather than a 1B player. 

If I had to guess the order of the mentioned players in the Ravens board in order it would probably look something like:- 

1- Williams

2- Davis

3- Humphrey 

4- Foster

5- Barnett

6- Howard (even though I'd hate that pick I couldn't argue against him being BPA)

7- Ross

I honestly think that Barnett would be listed as the first defensive guy, of said players.  Even though Jsmith has an injury history, but he is still under 30.  We also brought in Carr, Young looks promising as well.  Pass rush to me would be higher on our list considering we let Doom go (still could bring him back) and Suggs is pretty close to done, maybe 2 more years-ish.  Also, with the amount of good DBs in this draft, i think we go pass rusher first and grab a DB later. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, usmccharles said:

I honestly think that Barnett would be listed as the first defensive guy, of said players.  Even though Jsmith has an injury history, but he is still under 30.  We also brought in Carr, Young looks promising as well.  Pass rush to me would be higher on our list considering we let Doom go (still could bring him back) and Suggs is pretty close to done, maybe 2 more years-ish.  Also, with the amount of good DBs in this draft, i think we go pass rusher first and grab a DB later. 

I agree that pass rush is a greater need than CB and WR for that matter. I'd even bet good money that we draft a pass rusher in the second round if for whatever reason we don't take one in the first. 

I like Barrett's strength and his elite run stopping abilities. I don't love his burst or little use of finess moves. I honestly don't see much of a dropoff from him the the next 4 best pass rushers. When you compare that to WR and ILB There's a huge dropoff from Williams, Davis, Foster to the next best.

i agree that this CB class is loaded all the way till the 3rd and it's no longer an urgent need at all. Il definitely take Humphrey back

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Halshayeji said:

I agree that pass rush is a greater need than CB and WR for that matter. I'd even bet good money that we draft a pass rusher in the second round if for whatever reason we don't take one in the first. 

I like Barrett's strength and his elite run stopping abilities. I don't love his burst or little use of finess moves. I honestly don't see much of a dropoff from him the the next 4 best pass rushers. When you compare that to WR and ILB There's a huge dropoff from Williams, Davis, Foster to the next best.

i agree that this CB class is loaded all the way till the 3rd and it's no longer an urgent need at all. Il definitely take Humphrey back

Don't get me wrong, Mike Williams is who I want.  I also don't think he will be available

What next 4 pass rushers in your opinion after Barnett?

Edited by usmccharles
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, usmccharles said:

Don't get me wrong, Mike Williams is who I want.  I also don't think he will be available

What next 4 pass rushers in your opinion after Barnett?

Tim williams, takksrish Mackinzy, Ryan Anderson, and Charles Harris. Please excuse my spelling lol

yeah I think your right. Williams is probably long gone by the time we draft. And take Foster off the list. News came out he failed a drug test at the combine.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Halshayeji said:

Tim williams, takksrish Mackinzy, Ryan Anderson, and Charles Harris. Please excuse my spelling lol

yeah I think your right. Williams is probably long gone by the time we draft. And take Foster off the list. News came out he failed a drug test at the combine.

I like everyone on that list other than Anderson, just not a fan, maybe some here can convince me

I see a lot of people on here aren't a fan of Takk.  Very intriguing options

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At pick 16 I truly don't see Williams, Davis or Ross being available WRs at that point in the draft. I don't see OLB Foster or OT Robinson to be there at pick 16 either. I believe that Denver and/or NYG may leap frog over Us to get that OT. if not I expect a trade back to pick 20 or 23 plus an additional third pick giving us eight total picks. But I think that changes that first round pick to a Pass rusher DE or ISLB with Mosley. That !st round pick has to be a starter. It doesn't matter whether it's on the Offense or Defense. Anything less than you're paying first round money on a player who is expected to be a support player. Therefore if we don't use pick 16 ourselves or trade up to get a starter we might as well build up our 2nd, 3rd, and/or 4th round picks. This could be a far reach but the possibility exists for us to trade back two or three times in the first round picking up at least three more picks in that top 78 picks while still having a pick in the first round. Just imagine having two seconds, two thirds and three fourth round picks. The more I think about the possibilities of gaining more picks in this draft and still getting the people we are looking at is mind blowing. But the senarieos have tp fall just right.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now