Handicapping the DL trade chips

[Shas]

If I were to set the value on Pierce as 100, I'd say Urban is 45 and Davis is 35.

So the question is, what does that currency buy you on the offensive side of the ball.

Does 100 realistically get you a player who turns into what they had in K.O. early in his career? Does 45 get you what they found in Alex Lewis last year?

What does 35 buy you on the offensive trade market in terms of players?

The problem is that none of us scouts other teams and can speak intelligently about an offensive lineman, for god's sakes, sitting out there as a 35, buried on someone's depth chart--but I' very confident that Vincent Newsome and his staff do. I am positive they know of six of those guys. It's more a question of whether they can get a deal to line up.

I'm pretty confident that that they can parlay a player like Davis into more than a scrapheap offensive lineman like we've seen in a Vlad Duccasse...even if that player isn't currently a starter in the league.

[Filmstudy]

DL depth is regularly at a premium league wide. The Ravens just finished an amazing year where they used just 5 DL all year, but teams develop an in-season need every year. As Shas indicates, the team we want to trade DL to has 5 DL for a 3-4 and maybe isn't happy with the 5th man in their rotation.

Similarly, the team we want to acquire an OL from has 7 OL, including a player they can't find a spot for, probably in his 4th season. Chris Chester was that guy in 2009 with the Ravens. As Shas suggests, they don't need to be the same team.

[Filmstudy]

So the question is, what does that currency buy you on the offensive side of the ball.

Does 100 realistically get you a player who turns into what they had in K.O. early in his career? Does 45 get you what they found in Alex Lewis last year?

What does 35 buy you on the offensive trade market in terms of players?

The problem is that none of us scouts other teams and can speak intelligently about an offensive lineman, for god's sakes, sitting out there as a 35, buried on someone's depth chart--but I' very confident that Vincent Newsome and his staff do. I am positive they know of six of those guys. It's more a question of whether they can get a deal to line up.

35-45 should get you a 4th year player who may be of starting quality, but the team has not spot and is abut to lose him. If the Ravens had signed Mangold and avoided injuries this camp, Ryan Jensen could be that guy. I hope we'd be talking about a guy with some demonstrated ability to play, but obviously not a Pro Bowl talent.

[QuothDaRaven]

Geeze. A lot of glass half empty attitudes...dismissing the idea that the Ravens managed to assemble good talent on the D line, and skeptical that anyone else in the league may have valuable talent stockpiled on their O line depth charts. Par for the course lately here I guess.



I'm looking for the exact equivalent player on the opposite side of the line of scrimmage. In other words, I'm looking to take one of my non-starting but promising-looking young defensive linemen who I just don't have a spot for, and turn him into someone else's non-starting promising-looking offensive lineman who they didn't have a spot for.

Don't care how you get there. Straight-up swap. Or trade for a pick and then use a pick to go get an offensive lineman. If a player like Davis who has looked very good on film can't get you anything more than a sixth round pick, okay (although I was thinking conditional 5th actually), fine, then I'd argue that same pick ought to be enough to good enough and acquire the same guy on the offensive side of the ball.



I know that's the prevailing attitude, but I don't know that it's accurate. If you look at the defensive lineman on this list of eight, not one of them was taken higher than the third round, with two UDFA on the list. The offensive line is much weaker, but their approach is no different, if not more emphasis there. Stanley is a first rounder. Yanda and Lewis third rounders.

The difference is they seem to be snake bitten on losing OLmen...Urshel, Lewis, Siragusa...Yanda's been hurt, and now what's up with Stanley?

As for too much emphasis on drafting defense, the issue there isn't emphasis, it's quality. Too many DBs and LBs have busted, forcing them to draft replacements, in addition to natural attrition on that side of the ball. There are only so many picks to go around.



Davis is entering the third year of a four year deal, making $787,021 this year. I'd be looking for a similar player. A player who has a couple years in the league to give him some experience, cheap, and stuck down the depth chart in a numbers game.



Based on what? I would say teams want their depth to be cheap on any side of the ball so they can save money to retain their best starters.

If anything, you'd value cheap depth more on the defensive side of the ball because those guys play all the time as part of a rotation. You'd be willing to pay a guy a bit more to get snaps there as opposed to offensive lineman who never play unless there's an injury.

In other words, on defense if you have good starting linemen, but holes in the depth chart behind them, you're extremely worried. You really need to rely on those backups. Whereas on offense if you have good starters on the o line, but you aren't sure about the back ups, you aren't as panicked. You're just thinking maybe you can survive the year. And if your a team with just two good backups, and maybe a third or fourth good looking OL prospect behind him, thrilled to flip that guy for a third or fourth back up on the D line...a guy who will play a whole lot more.



Maybe the problem here is that everyone is thinking the trade would be for a pro-bowl caliber starter. That's not what I'm suggesting. My post was about handicapping who is the most likely DL trade bait. I didn't mention getting a sure starter off someone else's roster. That's not realistic. But a quality back up would be extremely valuable, even if he doesn't start.

The Colts are hurting on the DL and have a surplus of OL. They drafted Zach Banner who looks like a promising backup at OT as a rookie.

Possibly lost in the shuffle is Denzelle Good, a 7th round OT draft pick in 2015 from Mars Hill University. Despite being relatively young he already started 14 games for the Colts at tackle and guard. This year it looks like he's going to be dropped down to third string behind Banner and Brian Schwenke.

He's big and powerful, 6'5" 345lbs. He's versatile, and he's at a position of excess for them. He's a player I would target. He isn't a pro-bowler by any means but he's young, experienced, and has a decent ceiling possibility.

The Colts have invested a lot in their DL to try and fortify the glaring weakness, but a Michael Pierce or Carl Davis would be a huge upgrade for them.

Just my 2 cents. Great post Shas.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Shas]

35-45 should get you a 4th year player who may be of starting quality, but the team has not spot and is abut to lose him. If the Ravens had signed Mangold and avoided injuries this camp, Ryan Jensen could be that guy. I hope we'd be talking about a guy with some demonstrated ability to play, but obviously not a Pro Bowl talent.

Funny you'd say that now that Zuttah is rumored to return. If so, Jensen indeed may become that guy.

Maybe they don't trade a DLl and instead go the IR route

[Jazz1988]

I'm not entirely sure If Carl Davis is some one The Ravens want to trade. Since it seems like Brandon Williams and Micheal Pierce are both starting that would mean a 320 pounds Carl Davis would be the ideal depth at NT and at the 3 technique .

[Shas]

I'm not entirely sure If Carl Davis is some one The Ravens want to trade. Since it seems like Brandon Williams and Micheal Pierce are both starting that would mean a 320 pounds Carl Davis would be the ideal depth at NT and at the 3 technique .

That makes complete sense. I think that Davis is a guy you'd ideally want to keep.

Of course that's why he has value.

And if you do keep him what does that leave you?

For sure it seems like you'd be cutting Ricard (or IR'ing him), which may need to happen anyway, even if you trade one, to get to six DL's...one more than you carried last year.

That would leave Henry as the fourth inside DLman on the roster and the guy you'd be looking to trade. That would hurt less, but net less too.

On Ken's scale, I'd call Henry a 15 or 20 in terms of what he's showed other teams.

[Filmstudy]

Funny you'd say that now that Zuttah is rumored to return. If so, Jensen indeed may become that guy.

Maybe they don't trade a DLl and instead go the IR route

Based on what I've seen at camp and the first game, Jensen will certainly start somewhere for this team.

[Filmstudy]

That makes complete sense. I think that Davis is a guy you'd ideally want to keep.

Of course that's why he has value.

And if you do keep him what does that leave you?

For sure it seems like you'd be cutting Ricard (or IR'ing him), which may need to happen anyway, even if you trade one, to get to six DL's...one more than you carried last year.

That would leave Henry as the fourth inside DLman on the roster and the guy you'd be looking to trade. That would hurt less, but net less too.

On Ken's scale, I'd call Henry a 15 or 20 in terms of what he's showed other teams.

I disagree on Henry. He's show a little less on the field, but his trade value is similar to Davis, because he has an extra year of team control. In fact, given a choice to trade either for the same return, I'd trade Davis.

[Minion]

Davis is the ideal trade candidate here, but I'm not even convinced I'd want to trade him yet. I need to see more from Ricard, but both times I've watched him, he looks like your run of the mill back end of the roster DLineman. Looking forward to seeing if he can start to show what he's apparently shown in camp during the games. Then, I might be alright with dealing Davis if possible.

[Shas]

Based on what I've seen at camp and the first game, Jensen will certainly start somewhere for this team.

Definitely agree. If not at center, he steps in for Lewis at LG, and Skura is the back up at G/C, barring any new bodies, hence the gist of this thread.

I disagree on Henry. He's show a little less on the field, but his trade value is similar to Davis, because he has an extra year of team control. In fact, given a choice to trade either for the same return, I'd trade Davis.

Good to know. I wouldn't have seen him as being able to establish value based on control, but I believe you. He's a fourth rounder, Davis a third, and Davis has more on film.

Regardless, wanted to ask what you thought of Eluemanor. As a run blocker I was pleasantly surprised. Moved the pile a bunch of pancakes...and footwork when pulling. A couple misses in passpro, bit also some nice communication picking up rushers, I though.

[Filmstudy]

Definitely agree. If not at center, he steps in for Lewis at LG, and Skura is the back up at G/C, barring any new bodies, hence the gist of this thread.



Good to know. I wouldn't have seen him as being able to establish value based on control, but I believe you. He's a fourth rounder, Davis a third, and Davis has more on film.

Regardless, wanted to ask what you thought of Eluemanor. As a run blocker I was pleasantly surprised. Moved the pile a bunch of pancakes...and footwork when pulling. A couple misses in passpro, bit also some nice communication picking up rushers, I though.

I did a short piece with scoring for JE and Skura:

http://russellstreetreport.com/2017/...emunor-grades/

Eluemunor had a variety of issues, pass and run. Looked lost at times, pulled a little deep, but made 7 of 10 pulls. He gave up an unshared sack, 1 preesure, and part of a QH.

Skura scored well, but he had some issues anchoring I want to keep an eye on.

I originally gave both players a "0" for the game, but after play-by-play scoring, I make it -1 for JE and +1 for Skura.