Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast
Results 49 to 60 of 81
  1. #49
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Balt-Wash corridor
    Posts
    24,538

    Re: Savage on scouting and drafting

    Quote Originally Posted by Shas View Post
    I have one from 2011 (for "blatant attempt to hijack thread") and it shows as "expired"
    Jesus Christ, if THAT's a crime then there'd hardly be anyone left on this forum.





  2. #50

    Re: Savage on scouting and drafting

    Quote Originally Posted by JimZipCode View Post
    Jesus Christ, if THAT's a crime then there'd hardly be anyone left on this forum.
    BS. I have never even tried to hijack a thread

    Lets talk about bitcoin





  3. #51

    Re: Savage on scouting and drafting

    Quote Originally Posted by usmccharles View Post
    BS. I have never even tried to hijack a thread
    Who's watching American Idol reboot this season now that Katy Perry is a judge?





  4. #52

    Re: Savage on scouting and drafting

    Quote Originally Posted by NOLARavenFAN View Post
    The Ravens have lost out on scouts since the SB win........Biscuit said as much. Its a very big deal IMO
    It's odd, though - the big name scouts who left were still here for the bad 2013 and 2015 drafts. They left. The new scouts were in place for the great 2016 draft. Maybe Ozzie and Eric just did a great job or the new scouts are not as bad as people think. Our haul of good UDFAs seems to be getting better, too.

    I don't understand Bisciotti on this.
    "Flacco is driving the ball in that wind....."

    (AFCCG, January 2013)





  5. #53

    Re: Savage on scouting and drafting

    Quote Originally Posted by rhapsody View Post
    It's odd, though - the big name scouts who left were still here for the bad 2013 and 2015 drafts. They left. The new scouts were in place for the great 2016 draft. Maybe Ozzie and Eric just did a great job or the new scouts are not as bad as people think. Our haul of good UDFAs seems to be getting better, too.

    I don't understand Bisciotti on this.
    I don't buy it either. The areas where scouts show most of their worth is the later rounds and finding gems in the smaller schools. We've still been fairly successful with that.

    The real bombs have been in the earlier rounds where I think a certain somebody has a little bit more influence than he should on who is being picked. The scouts didn't tell Ozzie/Harbuagh to pass on Myles Jack to pick Correa and convert him to ILB. That was a collective effort from those 2.

    Steve B. blaming the scouts is nothing more than attempting to deflect blame from his boy.





  6. #54

    Re: Savage on scouting and drafting

    Quote Originally Posted by rhapsody View Post
    It's odd, though - the big name scouts who left were still here for the bad 2013 and 2015 drafts. They left. The new scouts were in place for the great 2016 draft. Maybe Ozzie and Eric just did a great job or the new scouts are not as bad as people think. Our haul of good UDFAs seems to be getting better, too.

    I don't understand Bisciotti on this.
    Quote Originally Posted by DeltaRaven View Post
    I don't buy it either. The areas where scouts show most of their worth is the later rounds and finding gems in the smaller schools. We've still been fairly successful with that.

    The real bombs have been in the earlier rounds where I think a certain somebody has a little bit more influence than he should on who is being picked. The scouts didn't tell Ozzie/Harbuagh to pass on Myles Jack to pick Correa and convert him to ILB. That was a collective effort from those 2.

    Steve B. blaming the scouts is nothing more than attempting to deflect blame from his boy.
    For the record, all three were still with the team through the 2016 draft. Douglas and Weidl left after the 2016 draft. Cunningham left after last year's draft.

    But I don't think Ozzie is blaming bad drafts on young, inexperienced scouts. You're right, that conclusion wouldn't make sense, given what I just said above.

    The way I envision it, per my original post, is that Bisciotti was demanding an explanation for the recent misses amongst top 60 picks, as he termed it. I imagined, in my original post here, that Ozzie and Eric candidly suggested to Steve that Harbaugh and likely some of his coordinators had forced picks the scouting department didn't agree with.

    If you try to imagine that conversation further, the coaches in turn--being guys who have been doing this their entire adult lives--probably bristled at the suggestion they aren't qualified to evaluate players. Telling them to back off becomes doubly annoying when they are being told to defer to the opinions of 25 year olds, now.

    So, the way I see it, is that Bisciotti realized that if he is going to ask his coaches to step away from player evaluation, he better be able to promise them he's handing the job over to the very best evaluators he can find. If you are going to tell Harbaugh that his very job security will no longer be entirely in his own hands, you better be able to sell him on the hands that are replacing his.

    Another way to say it is, if you are going to stop overanalyzing players, with so may opinions in the room, and narrow it down to just a very few opinions, then you want the best-informed opinions his money can buy.





  7. #55
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Balt-Wash corridor
    Posts
    24,538

    Re: Savage on scouting and drafting

    Quote Originally Posted by JimZipCode View Post
    Got my second-ever warning for it!

    My last one was in 2012. I think it expired? Anyway: watch out in 5-1/2 years.
    Quote Originally Posted by Shas View Post
    I have one from 2011 (for "blatant attempt to hijack thread") and it shows as "expired"

    I did my time.
    My warning for "Insulted Other Member(s)" expired already!

    Man, that's a short probation. Not even 90 days.

    Anyway: I'm free to insult people again. Line up, motherfuckers!





  8. #56
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    355
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Savage on scouting and drafting

    Quote Originally Posted by Shas View Post
    I've noticed that Phil Savage's reputation around here isn't exactly as lofty as it once was--and there have been rumors he didn't leave the Ravens in good standing either.

    Still, I find him interesting to listen to. And you can't deny that he's well connected with college football as a radio analyst for Alabama football, and as director of the Senior Bowl.

    With that in mind, you may want to listen in on his appearance on the b-mo-opinioniated podcast, with Jason LaCanfora and Jerry Coleman. Phil's segment starts 38-minutes into the show, although they touch on some other Ravens issues prior to that, if you care to hear it all (and their usual, incessant criticism of everything happening in Baltimore sports).

    A couple things stood out to me in the interview. Being close to Alabama, Phil was asked if he was surprised the Ravens didn't get more production out of Tim Williams. Phil's answer is no, Williams was slow to figure things out at Alabama too, and once it clicked, he was dominant. Phil expressed that he expects Williams to show a lot more this year (players typically do in their second year, particularly along the d line)...and if he doesn't, then yeah, they're in trouble with this pick. Judon is mentioned as a guy who was a productive pass rusher--and we all know he didn't dominate from day one.

    A related question was about the zero sacks, not only from Williams, but Kafusi, Wormley, Correa, and Bowser too. Savage didn't say it, but to me, you could apply the same comment about rookie learning curve here, and there is an injury issue to throw in, too.

    Savage, while not answering it directly, did transition to a discussion about how draft decisions are made. He related it back to when he took the job in Cleveland and tried to duplicate the democratic process he learned under Ozzie, where many opinions are shared before the GM makes the final call.

    Phil admitted he allowed too many different voices in the room and regretted how he ran things in Cleveland. He stated his belief that teams now have too many people involved in player evaluation and all the opinions put forth are impossible to break down into a coherent decision.

    While he admitted he no longer knows how things work in Baltimore, he definitely implied too many voices in the draft room may be an issue for the Ravens. He talked about how in his days with the team Brian Billick was interested in the draft, but not at all focused on it--not nearly as much as he was motivating people and gameplanning. Phil said that in his experience a lot of coaches are really, really bad at player evaluation, but they won't admit it, and they can really screw up a draft. He cited former D-line coach Mike Smith at being a rare exception--Smith apparently was very good at evaluating players on film. Almost the exception that proves the rule.

    This all brings us back to a topic that was hinted at here a month or so ago. And that's the question of whether the Ravens decline in quality drafts can be attributed to John Harbaugh and perhaps some of his coaches asserting themselves too vociferously in the process of setting up the draft board--a situation that Savage, having lived it, described as being very emotionally charged and difficult to navigate. One suggestion proffered on this board is that Ozzie was worn down by all this and didn't put his foot down hard enough in recent years, giving in to John's wishes.

    Steve Bisciotti seemed to be hinting at some of this when laid-out the theory that some of the Ravens draft misses, particularly in the early rounds of recent drafts, have been due to having too many voices involved in making the decisions--too much over-analysis.

    That's pretty much in line with what Savage is talking about in this podcast interview. You could argue that "over analysis" refers to relying on character evaluation rather than different people weighing in on player evaluation. But when he specifically refers to "too many voices" it's hard not to conclude it has been coaching staff voices that need to be toned down (and in a way, maybe this is really the same issue if you can imagine Harbaugh's voice chiming in, lobbying for "mighty men" who have certain character traits...faith, perhaps. All just speculation on my part here).

    I'm picturing now how the meeting in Jupiter went as Bisciotti pressed his guys on this issue of missing on high draft picks. I can guess that it could have been a fairly candid, heated bit of finger pointing...front office personnel pointing at members of the coaching staff that might have "stood on the table" for some of the guys the scouts didn't particularly like and who ended up being less than stellar.

    If you can picture that, you can easily imagine how Bisciotti came away from that retreat convinced that he has to restore the decision making back to his GM and limit the amount of influence his coaches have over the draft. Which is essentially what he said at the State Of presser.

    A related question some of us may have is whether Ozzie's retirement at the end of this season was truly planned-for five years ago...or whether Bisciotti determined that Ozzie is no longer willing to fight for what the scouts are telling him, so maybe now is the time to hand things over to Eric, with a renewed commitment (edict?) to restore the old process that Phil Savage learned under.

    Maybe I'm being overly suspicious. Let's just say that all the statements about Dean Pee's retirement, and his reasons for quickly "un-retiring" don't exactly line up. If the team pushed Pees out "honorably" in this way, could they have similarly protected Ozzie's reputation by suggesting he'd make a much better scout, and telling the public the move has nothing to do with recent draft misses?

    Savage was asked whether we should expect a different, more modern approach under Eric.

    He didn't exactly answer that.

    But it did lead to an interesting observation as to whether Bisciotti's re-commitment to old-school Ravens-style football can work in today's NFL. Savage's view is if you are going to rely on a dominate defense, you need to have a dominate player at all eleven positions...plus a dominant special teams to carry a mediocre offense. Whereas with today's rules franchise quarterback with a couple playmakers can carry an entire team. I'm not sure it's as dramatic as all that, but certainly it's interesting to think about it as we try to understand in what direction the team may be headed, and whether the move to a more youthful GM signals an attempt to better align the team with modern realities while hoping to hold on some of the culture the built their reputation on.
    Unfortunately, I think there were too many voices in this draft as well. Also, Ozzie and Eric relies on their scouts and coaches too much. I’m not saying you shouldn’t rely on your talent department, but when they continue to have draft misses, you might want to second guess or reevaluate their work.

    I believe, going forward Eric may need to add experienced scouts to help identify talent and limit the number of opinions on draft day. If that means certain coaches or scouts canÂ’t enter the draft room on draft day so be it.

    If an influential scout or coach misses on a talent because of inexperience, and Ozzie and Eric trusts that scout or coach opinion, then that’s how we get a Perriman or a Elam. And that’s how we get the statements “Ozzie lost his mind.” Well Ozzie never lost it in regards to evaluating talent, his mistakes was given the talent department (the scouts) too much trust on draft day. It’s worked before, like with Phil and Eric, but it’s not really working now. Like our coaches of the past, our scouts usually get promoted elsewhere. That leaves a whole that sometimes doesn’t get filled properly or efficiently. If you go young, you run the risk of inexperience.

    In addition, it appears the system the Ravens use has some flaws that resulted in some pretty bad drafts. Too many strong voices and differing opinions on talent, plus the owners renowned pleasure to bring in choir boys to please ticket holders is why we draft safe now (see Ray Rice).
    Last edited by BMORERavens; 05-11-2018 at 05:05 PM. Reason: Correcting Errors





  9. Re: Savage on scouting and drafting

    Quote Originally Posted by Jfoh View Post
    You don't need 11 great players but you do need one or more great players at each of the three levels. Suggs on the line, Ray Lewis at lb and Ed Reed at safety is a classic example. You had a top level player, a on field coach at each level who could direct everyone at that level to be in exactly the right place at the right time. Plus they could adjust on the fly.
    I think you just said it best. Totally agree.





  10. #58

    Re: Savage on scouting and drafting

    Quote Originally Posted by BMORERavens View Post
    Unfortunately, I think there were too many voices in this draft as well. Also, Ozzie and Eric relies on their scouts and coaches too much. I’m not saying you shouldn’t rely on your talent department, but when they continue to have draft misses, you might want to second guess or reevaluate their work.

    I believe, going forward Eric may need to add experienced scouts to help identify talent and limit the number of opinions on draft day. If that means certain coaches or scouts canÂ’t enter the draft room on draft day so be it.

    If an influential scout or coach misses on a talent because of inexperience, and Ozzie and Eric trusts that scout or coach opinion, then that’s how we get a Perriman or a Elam. And that’s how we get the statements “Ozzie lost his mind.” Well Ozzie never lost it in regards to evaluating talent, his mistakes was given the talent department (the scouts) too much trust on draft day. It’s worked before, like with Phil and Eric, but it’s not really working now. Like our coaches of the past, our scouts usually get promoted elsewhere. That leaves a whole that sometimes doesn’t get filled properly or efficiently. If you go young, you run the risk of inexperience.

    In addition, it appears the system the Ravens use has some flaws that resulted in some pretty bad drafts. Too many strong voices and differing opinions on talent, plus the owners renowned pleasure to bring in choir boys to please ticket holders is why we draft safe now (see Ray Rice).
    When Derwin James and Tremaine Edmunds are on the board (both acknowledged as top 12 non-QB talent) and the Ravens pass on both -- that tells us that this isn't the 2003 Ozzie/Phil war room.

    When the Ravens, Titans, and Steelers all need an ILB, and the Steelers and Titans were playoff teams, and the Ravens decide to trade with...the Titans and give them the chance to select the ILB -- that tells us that the "Defense Wins Championships" mindset may be under reevaluation.

    When, years ago, the owner chides DeCosta to not be a "pick whore" but this year the team trades down at least three times -- that tells us that maybe the red lantern was in the window.

    When the Ravens sign three veteran WRs and draft an older tight end in the first round, all in a win-now mode but then trade away a second round pick for a QB who can't help you win now -- that tells us there is some conflict, some hedging.

    When the Ravens have a head coach who is notorious for bleeding cloying coach speak, but the team selects a WR who was suspended and an OL who had a head-scratching, red-flag raising Combine performance -- that tells us a change in power or outlook may have happened.

    The Ravens did a lot in this draft.
    Did the new guy get to pull more strings?
    Are they competing, rebuilding, reloading?
    Will the focus change from being a defense-oriented team with a run/pass balance to a QB-centric team?

    I don't know much, but I know this: I don't recognize the 2018 Ravens War Room.





  11. #59
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Balt-Wash corridor
    Posts
    24,538

    Re: Savage on scouting and drafting

    Quote Originally Posted by Coram_Nobis View Post
    I don't recognize the 2018 Ravens War Room.
    Overstated.

    The draft seems "incoherent" because you're trying to reconcile the 2 top picks with each other. But the top 2 picks were driven by different "processes". The Hurst pick was the output of Ozzie's "need" process, which was really well showcased in the 2008 draft with the Flacco pick. The Lamar pick was the usual Ozzie process, grab a falling potential diamond.
    (I mean philosophically. I reallize that the "mechanics' of the LJ draft choice were like Flacco, in terms of trading away a future pick to get back into the late first. But the decision to use that mechanic was usual Ozzie.)

    More on my view of it here:





  12. #60
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Westminster OG, now behind enemy lines in NE
    Posts
    23,073
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Savage on scouting and drafting

    Quote Originally Posted by BcRaven View Post
    Ya know Jimmy, I can't prove it, but my gut feeling is that Billick was the driving force behind drafting Kyle Boller. I think Ozzie wanted Leftwich, but there was some sort of draft glitch (which I don't remember) so he "settled" for Suggs @ #10. Later, that same draft, came the infamous Boller trade... Bc
    Wish they "settled" for Derwin James...

    Really great thread Shas! And all the OP's!





Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Link To Mobile Site
var infolinks_pid = 3297965; var infolinks_wsid = 0; //—->