16 out of 20

**The Excellector** · 01-15-2019, 05:06 PM

When looking at the first four picks the Ravens have made in every draft from 2013-2017 (5 Drafts, 20 total picks), 16 of them have been defensive picks. A few of us have generally looked at the first three picks in each draft when discussing this and that was 12 out of 15. Even if you go a pick deeper each year, it still comes out that they've spent 80% of those picks on defense. That was interesting to read. I don't think there is a single team who drafted fewer, under that criteria. I definitely checked the Patriots and Falcons, because there was something I looked up a while back (I think it was the first three picks in each of those drafts) and they were the only two who drafted fewer. No one, from what I'm seeing thus far, has drafted fewer when you go first four.

**ravens1991** · 01-15-2019, 10:08 PM

I know a lot of posters here have said that our philosophy is out dated. Do you think the philosophy was "we gave Joe his $$$ now its time for him to turn chicken **** to chicken salad" Or do you guys think it is a draft board that is just sub par.

**The Excellector** · 01-16-2019, 05:15 AM

I don’t think that the Ravens organization ever had a true desire to change their approach to how they wanted to try to win. I could be wrong, but in my opinion they simply felt pressured to pay Flacco.

**Ravenswintitle** · 01-16-2019, 08:34 AM

Then take a look at free agency signs for the same years - you'll see where they filled out the offense

**HbgPARavenfan** · 01-16-2019, 08:53 AM

Originally Posted by Ravenswintitle

Then take a look at free agency signs for the same years - you'll see where they filled out the offense

so then you could argue they are bad at evaluate college and pro talent... or at least contracts

**carrollcountyraven** · 01-16-2019, 09:07 AM

Originally Posted by HbgPARavenfan

so then you could argue they are bad at evaluate college and pro talent... or at least contracts

both

**Cleo&Dilly** · 01-16-2019, 09:10 AM

Originally Posted by The Excellector

When looking at the first four picks the Ravens have made in every draft from 2013-2017 (5 Drafts, 20 total picks), 16 of them have been defensive picks. A few of us have generally looked at the first three picks in each draft when discussing this and that was 12 out of 15. Even if you go a pick deeper each year, it still comes out that they've spent 80% of those picks on defense. That was interesting to read. I don't think there is a single team who drafted fewer, under that criteria. I definitely checked the Patriots and Falcons, because there was something I looked up a while back (I think it was the first three picks in each of those drafts) and they were the only two who drafted fewer. No one, from what I'm seeing thus far, has drafted fewer when you go first four.

PROOF - if any is needed - that the Ravens failed to build a team around Joe Flacco. We all know that they did this for all of Joe's 11 years in Baltimore. Imagine what they could have achieved if they had coaches who understood that offense is more than 20% of the game. Does anyone expect them to do anything different with Lamar under DeCosta.

Maybe the Raven's plan for developing Lamar as a passer is for him to throw it to himself. That would let them play with nine offensive linemen and it should significantly improve the running game.

**Ravenswintitle** · 01-16-2019, 09:30 AM

Originally Posted by HbgPARavenfan

so then you could argue they are bad at evaluate college and pro talent... or at least contracts

Or that they worked the board and then filled in the pieces through FA like most every other team

**HbgPARavenfan** · 01-16-2019, 09:37 AM

Originally Posted by Ravenswintitle

Or that they worked the board and then filled in the pieces through FA like most every other team

but they clearly have been poor at evaluating both pro and offensive talent. At the very least they have no idea how to construct contracts for aging injured players

**ERey** · 01-16-2019, 10:20 AM

Originally Posted by The Excellector

When looking at the first four picks the Ravens have made in every draft from 2013-2017 (5 Drafts, 20 total picks), 16 of them have been defensive picks. A few of us have generally looked at the first three picks in each draft when discussing this and that was 12 out of 15. Even if you go a pick deeper each year, it still comes out that they've spent 80% of those picks on defense. That was interesting to read. I don't think there is a single team who drafted fewer, under that criteria. I definitely checked the Patriots and Falcons, because there was something I looked up a while back (I think it was the first three picks in each of those drafts) and they were the only two who drafted fewer. No one, from what I'm seeing thus far, has drafted fewer when you go first four.

I posted this exact thing about a week ago.

They signed Joe to a market value deal after the Super Bowl, then they trade away his favorite target for a 6th round pick. Then they ignore his side of the ball and invest heavily in defense for the next 5 years. When they finally address the offense one of those picks his replacement. Fans then say Joe is just an average QB - after he took the team to the Championship Game 3 times and was Super Bowl MVP. Joe was expected to goto another Super Bowl with receivers on the wrong side of 30 (with all due respect to Steve Smjith Sr.) and guys like Marlon Brown, Kyle Juszczyk, Breshard Perriman and Crockett Gilmore. The irony of the whole thing? Joe gets the lead in final games 2014, 2016 and 2017 only to see Dean Pees and the defense piss it all away.

**srobert96** · 01-16-2019, 10:33 AM

They are going to do the same thing with Lamar. They love Lamar because he gives the added weapon from the QB position. They wont have to worry about having great WRs. They will talk about weapons but it is all lip services. They will do the same thing at WR position. They will be happy with Andrews and Hurst as primary weapons. They are doubling down on running the ball and using the passing game to keep teams honest. The issue in the past 7 years or so is that we have sucked evaluating talent. Every time they missed on the defensive side they would use more picks or sign players to fill the holes. They went with scrap heap at WR and Oline when they missed on players at those positions. That will continue.

**Cleo&Dilly** · 01-16-2019, 11:23 AM

Originally Posted by srobert96

They are going to do the same thing with Lamar. They love Lamar because he gives the added weapon from the QB position. They wont have to worry about having great WRs. They will talk about weapons but it is all lip services. They will do the same thing at WR position. They will be happy with Andrews and Hurst as primary weapons. They are doubling down on running the ball and using the passing game to keep teams honest. The issue in the past 7 years or so is that we have sucked evaluating talent. Every time they missed on the defensive side they would use more picks or sign players to fill the holes. They went with scrap heap at WR and Oline when they missed on players at those positions. That will continue.

Like I said in a previous post - they're going to have Lamar throw to himself, play nine lineman, and run the ball - hoping for more 4th and 29 conversions!