How did we do?

[Cj34]

Fact is that every team doesn't employ BPA every round. Not drafting a player is not sole indication of how they were thought of.

Fact is the Gradkowski competed against lesser talent.

Gradkowski transferred to Delaware from Pittsburgh just like Joe did. He might have competed against lesser talent after he transferred but he was a D1 talent. He transferred due to lack of playing time when he first got there and the reason he transferred to Delaware was the same reason all athletes that transfer from D1 to 1AA do....you don't have to sit out a year.

Edit - my mistake he transferred from West Virginia not Pittsburgh. He's from Pittsburgh.

[Cj34]

They already did. This was NOT a typical Raven BPA draft. This one was all about needs.

Are you serious? So that's why they took a RB in the 3rd and waited for a receiver until the 6th. Get real.

[TtlPkg17]

You're confused because you want to be confused. THEY said this draft went like no other. THEY said they never seen things go the way it was going. THEY said they started getting "antsy" because their players/board was getting wiped out.

So this whole debate is becoming more about the messenger. Because I'm just repeating the message THEY HAVE BEEN GIVING YOU SINCE SATURDAY. So when THEY say things were totally different, and those that worship say things were the same and handled the same....it's clear whose dealing with reality and not some folklore of perfection.

What is with you and saying that people "worship " our FO? We all hear what they said. We can read just like you. The difference is the way that most people interperit it. Where I feel they saw what was happening and made sound adjustments you feel they panicked and reached. So for me having confidence in their abilities I worship them? AGAIN I will say, I am PERFECTLY CONFIDENT They handled the draft the way they ALWAYS handle the draft. SOUND JUDGEMENTS AND DECISIONS. So in that context They did handle it the SAME. I don't recall anyone saying that this draft was the same. Sounds a bit like your reaching to make your blind worshiper argument.

Yes Ozzie has made mistakes in the past. But he seems to get it right more than any other teams FO. That is the reason why most people do TRUST the man. It is called "track record".

I am dealing with folklore and you with all your wisdom is dealing with reality? Of course it is clear. Clearly Ozzie has done nothing to warrant any trust from such a profound expert as yourself. And anyone that does trust him based on his folklore is just a blind fool.

Wow you really can stretch it can't ya? Just like you stretch their words and everyone elses. Getting creative = panicking , Having to bring their "A" game = we had to reach , trackrecord = folklore
Atleast if you are gonna be a "messenger" try and get the message right. As far as I am concerned your interpretation is a reach.

But then again, I am just a blind worshiper that cant see his own had in front of his face unless Ozzie told me it was there.

[Raveninwoodlawn]

How is this quote...

Ozzie didn't even want Upshaw on the first round and could have had. Then
he trades out and said there were several players we liked but we wanted more
picks. We will get 1 of those players we passed on in the first, so Upshaw might
not have been one of them.

Being attributed to me? I didn't make those comments.

[Raveninwoodlawn]

What is with you and saying that people "worship " our FO? We all hear what they said. We can read just like you. The difference is the way that most people interperit it. Where I feel they saw what was happening and made sound adjustments you feel they panicked and reached. So for me having confidence in their abilities I worship them? AGAIN I will say, I am PERFECTLY CONFIDENT They handled the draft the way they ALWAYS handle the draft. SOUND JUDGEMENTS AND DECISIONS. So in that context They did handle it the SAME. I don't recall anyone saying that this draft was the same. Sounds a bit like your reaching to make your blind worshiper argument.

Yes Ozzie has made mistakes in the past. But he seems to get it right more than any other teams FO. That is the reason why most people do TRUST the man. It is called "track record".

I am dealing with folklore and you with all your wisdom is dealing with reality? Of course it is clear. Clearly Ozzie has done nothing to warrant any trust from such a profound expert as yourself. And anyone that does trust him based on his folklore is just a blind fool.

Wow you really can stretch it can't ya? Just like you stretch their words and everyone elses. Getting creative = panicking , Having to bring their "A" game = we had to reach , trackrecord = folklore
Atleast if you are gonna be a "messenger" try and get the message right. As far as I am concerned your interpretation is a reach.

But then again, I am just a blind worshiper that cant see his own had in front of his face unless Ozzie told me it was there.

Dude...talking to him is like trying to reason with a 5 year old.

[darb72]

So let me see if I understand this.

Gino was a reach because the draft "experts" didn't have him rated very high.

Upshaw was a reach/bad choice because we got him in the second round even though all of the draft "experts" had him going in the middle of round 1.

I consider myself a man capable of following logic, no matter what twist and turns it may take. In fact, one could argue my entire career is based on making absurdly huge leaps in logic and convincing others that I'm not bat-shit crazy. Only once, prior to this thread, in my entire life have I failed to understand the point someone was trying to reach. A particularly fervent femi-nazi told me that Robinson Crusoe (the guy on the island for those reading this who were born in Pissburg) was rife with anti-feminism.

As I trudged (yes, trudged, because I feel world-weary and battered after slogging towards the end of what has become nothing more than the insipid ramblings of a... person?... so wholly convinced of his own genius that his mind has unfettered itself of that abominable yoke we call reality) through this particularly pointless missive, one shining beacon, a clarion call in the stygian darkness, called to me and I understood.

For others, who like myself are over-encumbered by intelligence, please allow me to succiently convey what it is he is trying to say.



Derp-de-derp.

[alien bird]

You're confused because you want to be confused. THEY said this draft went like no other. THEY said they never seen things go the way it was going. THEY said they started getting "antsy" because their players/board was getting wiped out.

So this whole debate is becoming more about the messenger. Because I'm just repeating the message THEY HAVE BEEN GIVING YOU SINCE SATURDAY. So when THEY say things were totally different, and those that worship say things were the same and handled the same....it's clear whose dealing with reality and not some folklore of perfection.

Wrong. I'm simply amazed that you choose to put a particular spin on what they are saying just to suit your needs and justify your frustration with the draft. You aren't repeating the message, you are interpreting it poorly. For them to say the draft went differently than other ones, that they were getting antsy as players they liked went off the board, and that they had to make adjustments on the fly does not equate to panicking and having a bad draft - although you seem to think it does.

So, they watched players they liked go off the board, so they got antsy? Big whoop. All that means is that they decided they needed to make a move to be sure to get the guys they wanted (like Pierce in the 3rd and Gradkowski in the 4th). That doesn't mean they panicked. It means the draft wasn't going as they expected and they realized those guys wouldn't be there in later rounds. They made adjustments - adjustments for which they said they were prepared. You like leaving that part out of the message.

You interpret their message as "we panicked and had a bad draft". I don't think that's what they are saying at all, but go ahead and continue to think whatever you want. I think they are saying, "Things went differently in this draft and we had to make adjustments we normally wouldn't have to make, based on what other teams were doing and where we were drafting, but we were prepared to do that and get players we had highly ranked on our board."

It may not have been the most sexy draft ever, and it may be they didn't get all the players they wanted (who ever does), but it doesn't mean they failed. They had 8 picks, and over 200 players were chosen. They aren't going to get everyone they want. Ever. I'm not a blind faithful. I realize they make errors and bad choices (David Pittman, Yamon Figurs, etc.). They also pick guys I wouldn't pick. But guess what? They spend way more time preparing and analyzing players than any one on this board, so I'm more likely to trust their judgement over someone pissed off because they traded up to grab a running back they liked in the 3rd round and it cost them the 164th pick of the draft.

[RavingMad]

Unfortunately, that's what you get with some on this board. Critical thinking is viewed the same way as criticizing, which is serious enough to get your "fandom"revoked.

Another points out it's all about interpretation. That's true. I gave my interpretation days ago. It was attacked/challenged. That's what real boards do. Debate. Not have homers sit around pat each other on the backs, form clicks, and tell each other how real fans don't questioned Ozzie. Tear down opposing to boost up our players. The Hightower back and forth is laughable. Pure homer-ism.

Next guy boast his intelligence. He's so intelligent he seen things that don't exist. Like I claimed Upshaw was a reach pick. Never happened. In fact I was specific of which picks I was speaking of. But that tactic is common. No surprises here. Then I'm absurd for having the opinion/interpretation of Gino being a reach pick. When it was Eric Decosta who revealed the plan was to get him later but he started to get "antsy" because their players were flying off the board. That's how Decosta described the pick.

So overall I think we didn't address a critical need. A wide receiver that has good to great route running skills and can get separation. A compliment to our vertical threat (Smith). In defense of Flacco holding the ball too long folks said the receivers (mainly Boldin) struggled getting separation. Many local and national pundits said the same. One called Boldin a small tight end. I saw evidence of that myself this past season. Pre-draft the brass said that receiver was a need. Post draft they are propping up Reed and Doss. Lol. IMO it's because they didn't get their man. From the presser, IMO they underestimate the other teams scouting ability. That's my INTERPRETATION of "every team in the league knows what it takes NOW". And it made them "antsy".

So emotions run high here. I get that. On the Spot board I was called a black bigot for suggesting Culpepper be considered a vet back up to Boller before he got hurt in 2008. I was then called a white bigot for pointing out what Ozzie said about D-WILL being our answer to the receiving problems back in 2009. Hell, one dude on this board who disagreed with me, thanked me for my service to our country. Once the "group" attacked/challenged my opinion, he went back and edit his post taking out the thank you. lol. Like I said no surprises here.

[RavingMad]

Wrong. I'm simply amazed that you choose to put a particular spin on what they are saying just to suit your needs and justify your frustration with the draft. You aren't repeating the message, you are interpreting it poorly. For them to say the draft went differently than other ones, that they were getting antsy as players they liked went off the board, and that they had to make adjustments on the fly does not equate to panicking and having a bad draft - although you seem to think it does.

So, they watched players they liked go off the board, so they got antsy? Big whoop. All that means is that they decided they needed to make a move to be sure to get the guys they wanted (like Pierce in the 3rd and Gradkowski in the 4th). That doesn't mean they panicked. It means the draft wasn't going as they expected and they realized those guys wouldn't be there in later rounds. They made adjustments - adjustments for which they said they were prepared. You like leaving that part out of the message.

You interpret their message as "we panicked and had a bad draft". I don't think that's what they are saying at all, but go ahead and continue to think whatever you want. I think they are saying, "Things went differently in this draft and we had to make adjustments we normally wouldn't have to make, based on what other teams were doing and where we were drafting, but we were prepared to do that and get players we had highly ranked on our board."

It may not have been the most sexy draft ever, and it may be they didn't get all the players they wanted (who ever does), but it doesn't mean they failed. They had 8 picks, and over 200 players were chosen. They aren't going to get everyone they want. Ever. I'm not a blind faithful. I realize they make errors and bad choices (David Pittman, Yamon Figurs, etc.). They also pick guys I wouldn't pick. But guess what? They spend way more time preparing and analyzing players than any one on this board, so I'm more likely to trust their judgement over someone pissed off because they traded up to grab a running back they liked in the 3rd round and it cost them the 164th pick of the draft.

1. I wasn't pissed off. Regardless I take emotion out of my post. Too much emotion is the problem here because it clouds the debate...but moving on....

2. I acknowledge you are a decent/ rational guy. So let's find some common ground. Folks are upset about the word panic. Can we agree that they were ANTSY and not as "happy" as they normally are post draft?

[srobert96]

Another points out it's all about interpretation. That's true. I gave my interpretation days ago. It was attacked/challenged. That's what real boards do. Debate. Not have homers sit around pat each other on the backs, form clicks, and tell each other how real fans don't questioned Ozzie. Tear down opposing to boost up our players. The Hightower back and forth is laughable. Pure homer-ism.

Next guy boast his intelligence. He's so intelligent he seen things that don't exist. Like I claimed Upshaw was a reach pick. Never happened. In fact I was specific of which picks I was speaking of. But that tactic is common. No surprises here. Then I'm absurd for having the opinion/interpretation of Gino being a reach pick. When it was Eric Decosta who revealed the plan was to get him later but he started to get "antsy" because their players were flying off the board. That's how Decosta described the pick.

So overall I think we didn't address a critical need. A wide receiver that has good to great route running skills and can get separation. A compliment to our vertical threat (Smith). In defense of Flacco holding the ball too long folks said the receivers (mainly Boldin) struggled getting separation. Many local and national pundits said the same. One called Boldin a small tight end. I saw evidence of that myself this past season. Pre-draft the brass said that receiver was a need. Post draft they are propping up Reed and Doss. Lol. IMO it's because they didn't get their man. From the presser, IMO they underestimate the other teams scouting ability. That's my INTERPRETATION of "every team in the league knows what it takes NOW". And it made them "antsy".

So emotions run high here. I get that. On the Spot board I was called a black bigot for suggesting Culpepper be considered a vet back up to Boller before he got hurt in 2008. I was then called a white bigot for pointing out what Ozzie said about D-WILL being our answer to the receiving problems back in 2009. Hell, one dude on this board who disagreed with me, thanked me for my service to our country. Once the "group" attacked/challenged my opinion, he went back and edit his post taking out the thank you. lol. Like I said no surprises here.

We really will not know if this draft was good or not for a few years. By definition a reach pick is taking guy higher than you could have potentially gotten him. By that definition for what we know as the public the Gradkowski pick appears to be a reach. That logic could be flawed. The media's rating of players is usually the measure by which a reach is determined. The media will not have small school guys ranked as high because they are not going to have a lot of film. We really do not know how high he was on team boards or not.

I would have liked to see the Ravens get a wr as well but the staff has to way what is available versus what they have in house. Fans look at players in the draft like shiny new toys that are going to be better than what they got the previous years. Receiver is a position that rarely contributes as a rookie. This was a tough off season for the Ravens. Lost a few good starters and had little cap to fill with veterans. The draft was needed for potential starters at G, C and JJ's spot. Receiver was less important. Next year Receiver will be the biggest priority.

[Ravenalytics]

I think it was fine overall - but not like last year where we hit jackpot having both Smiths fall to us.

Kind of wish they traded up to get Cordy Glenn. But that might have meant sacrificing Pierce.

Like they say, time will tell.

[RavingMad]

Good article here. Pretty much sums up my issues with the draft.

http://www.baltimoreravens.com/News/...sing_Game.aspx