Jerry Jeudy

[Mmcclend]

Lamb is so good that, if I were given the choice, I would take him alone, over the combination of Boykin and Brown.

This is certainly debatable but I’d say I wouldn’t do it.

[BcRaven]

We won’t be taking a WR for a couple years. Problem with taking 2 in the first 3 rounds is that we will probably let these guys have a couple years even if they aren’t what’s needed.

I don't see any problem with drafting Hollywood (1st) and Boykin (3rd). Aren't they exactly what the Ravens needed? I think so and furthermore it will allow DeCosta to concentrate on other positions of need. IOL and pass rush come to mind. So R4R, what's the problem?
... Bc

[jonboy79]

I don't see any problem with drafting Hollywood (1st) and Boykin (3rd). Aren't they exactly what the Ravens needed? I think so and furthermore it will allow DeCosta to concentrate on other positions of need. IOL and pass rush come to mind. So R4R, what's the problem?
... Bc

I’m not B4R, but the only “problem” is if they BOTH bust, as we will have enough tied up in them and enough needs elsewhere that the poor WR cycle would necessarily continue. That said, if even one hits it’s our best chance to break that cycle in our teams history so... well worthy of the risk...

[tnsmith90]

I’m not B4R, but the only “problem” is if they BOTH bust, as we will have enough tied up in them and enough needs elsewhere that the poor WR cycle would necessarily continue. That said, if even one hits it’s our best chance to break that cycle in our teams history so... well worthy of the risk...

That's why it wouldn't be smart to draft as if we already maxed out in terms of investment at the position. Right now we have 2 or 3 nice prospects, and 0 sure things. Each of them are all still, at this point, a roll of the dice. More of a portfolio of risky investments than any surefire brick of gold. So, if another WR prospect comes along, that is the best talent available when we draft, we are still in the position that we HAVE to draft him. IF it turns out that we suddenly have 3 or 4 beastly WRs where we struggle to get them all the ball, then that's a champagne problem that I'm prepared to deal with.

[guymf4]

That's why it wouldn't be smart to draft as if we already maxed out in terms of investment at the position. Right now we have 2 or 3 nice prospects, and 0 sure things. Each of them are all still, at this point, a roll of the dice. More of a portfolio of risky investments than any surefire brick of gold. So, if another WR prospect comes along, that is the best talent available when we draft, we are still in the position that we HAVE to draft him. IF it turns out that we suddenly have 3 or 4 beastly WRs where we struggle to get them all the ball, then that's a champagne problem that I'm prepared to deal with.

By the end if the season, ie before the draft, we should have a much better idea if these guys are going to be busts or Role players or legit 1s. We should at least have a sense if upper ceiling.

I wanted to split top 2 picks with EDGE and WR, to leave some space to fill in next year. It's supposed to be a great WR draft And we don't need one. This year was supposed to be a great pass rusher draft, and we missed out. Hopefully Ferguson was discounted and a steal because so many teams already picked up their guy, but haven't heard nearly as much hype about him as Boykin.

The point is you'd always rather have a orderly balanced roster because then you can draft BPA. When you've got depth in one area and 0 in another, it makes less dense to draft a BPA if it's already a stacked area. Line DB in this draft when we're needed iOL, or WR next year when we have guys on rookie contracts. Or TE. Much easier to draft behind a veteran that night leave or you could cap cut. This is also why Bowser, Wormly and Williams were such failures in the BPA approach, not just because none had developed, but because we already had Judon, Suggs, Smith and a deep D line. Had we drafted a TE or WR then, maybe we wouldn't have needed 2 consecutive years to fix the roster.

However, I do think this roster is close to fixed and EDC did it very quickly. Helps when ozzie hands you a team with a QB, 2 tackles, and secondary depth to die for.

And man, we are so critical of our line. We nitpick over 2 spots as if most teams out there have 5 all pros. But I digress...



Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[tnsmith90]

By the end if the season, ie before the draft, we should have a much better idea if these guys are going to be busts or Role players or legit 1s. We should at least have a sense if upper ceiling.

I wanted to split top 2 picks with EDGE and WR, to leave some space to fill in next year. It's supposed to be a great WR draft And we don't need one. This year was supposed to be a great pass rusher draft, and we missed out. Hopefully Ferguson was discounted and a steal because so many teams already picked up their guy, but haven't heard nearly as much hype about him as Boykin.

The point is you'd always rather have a orderly balanced roster because then you can draft BPA. When you've got depth in one area and 0 in another, it makes less dense to draft a BPA if it's already a stacked area. Line DB in this draft when we're needed iOL, or WR next year when we have guys on rookie contracts. Or TE. Much easier to draft behind a veteran that night leave or you could cap cut. This is also why Bowser, Wormly and Williams were such failures in the BPA approach, not just because none had developed, but because we already had Judon, Suggs, Smith and a deep D line. Had we drafted a TE or WR then, maybe we wouldn't have needed 2 consecutive years to fix the roster.

However, I do think this roster is close to fixed and EDC did it very quickly. Helps when ozzie hands you a team with a QB, 2 tackles, and secondary depth to die for.

And man, we are so critical of our line. We nitpick over 2 spots as if most teams out there have 5 all pros. But I digress...



Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Yeah, we'll definitely have a much better idea, but unless one completely breaks out in their rookie year, we will still be looking at 2 or 3 rolls of the dice & 0 sure things. I get your point about trying to build a well rounded roster, and I'm all for it. I just think based on the combined expected value of the position given our current investment, we could stand to add 1 more roll of the dice in order to make sure we hit. So, I wouldn't be in the trade down camp if there is a stud WR sitting at BPA when we pick. I'd say take him, and hope we wind up fortunate enough to be in a position where we have to wonder how we can get enough targets to all of them.

EDC is definitely putting in work though so far, as you said. So, I have confidence in his ability to make the right call when it comes down to it.

[BcRaven]

I’m not B4R, but the only “problem” is if they BOTH bust, as we will have enough tied up in them and enough needs elsewhere that the poor WR cycle would necessarily continue. That said, if even one hits it’s our best chance to break that cycle in our teams history so... well worthy of the risk...

So are you suggesting that an IOL and/or pass rusher draftee can't bust? The NFL draft is (as many have stated) pretty much a crap-shoot. Since any player at any position can fail, then why not draft two WRs high since it's such an area of importance. Especially on this team. I'd add that in Ozzie's last draft he picked a QB, two TEs, and two Olinemen. EDC complemented them with two WRs, an RB, and an OG. There seems to be an offensive plan in place. You can't be timid if you want to win it all... Bc

[guymf4]

Yeah, we'll definitely have a much better idea, but unless one completely breaks out in their rookie year, we will still be looking at 2 or 3 rolls of the dice & 0 sure things. I get your point about trying to build a well rounded roster, and I'm all for it. I just think based on the combined expected value of the position given our current investment, we could stand to add 1 more roll of the dice in order to make sure we hit. So, I wouldn't be in the trade down camp if there is a stud WR sitting at BPA when we pick. I'd say take him, and hope we wind up fortunate enough to be in a position where we have to wonder how we can get enough targets to all of them.

EDC is definitely putting in work though so far, as you said. So, I have confidence in his ability to make the right call when it comes down to it.

Bro, have some koolaid and relax. Boykin and Brown are going all pro this year.

But seriously, I can't remember the guys on this board that are really good at evaluating talent be as happy with Boykin (at least, and yes, talking about you EX), and I think we saw some nice flashes by brown last game. More than we ever saw from Perriman.

Moore is on a contract year and Snead had 1 now only I think, so I'm not against grabbing a wideout, but I do think we have greater needs. I don't want us to become the Steelers and go from defensive juggernaut to offensive juggernaut. I'd like us to always be a top 5 D, even at the expense of a top 5 offense.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[tnsmith90]

Bro, have some koolaid and relax. Boykin and Brown are going all pro this year.

But seriously, I can't remember the guys on this board that are really good at evaluating talent be as happy with Boykin (at least, and yes, talking about you EX), and I think we saw some nice flashes by brown last game. More than we ever saw from Perriman.

Moore is on a contract year and Snead had 1 now only I think, so I'm not against grabbing a wideout, but I do think we have greater needs. I don't want us to become the Steelers and go from defensive juggernaut to offensive juggernaut. I'd like us to always be a top 5 D, even at the expense of a top 5 offense.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Haha I'm very excited about their prospects as well. Hopefully they do go all pro!

[jonboy79]

That's why it wouldn't be smart to draft as if we already maxed out in terms of investment at the position. Right now we have 2 or 3 nice prospects, and 0 sure things. Each of them are all still, at this point, a roll of the dice. More of a portfolio of risky investments than any surefire brick of gold. So, if another WR prospect comes along, that is the best talent available when we draft, we are still in the position that we HAVE to draft him. IF it turns out that we suddenly have 3 or 4 beastly WRs where we struggle to get them all the ball, then that's a champagne problem that I'm prepared to deal with.

Short term thinking you are correct, but you might be skipping the forest for the trees.
Yes, of value is smacking you in the face, you draft a WR. But how predictable are the posts if we don’t have the best offense and WR corps in fort all, because we have “ignored the defense for years”... it is a slippery slope. Going back to the same well you just went is risky.. that is a lot of resources doled our Ina. Small area.

[tnsmith90]

Short term thinking you are correct, but you might be skipping the forest for the trees.
Yes, of value is smacking you in the face, you draft a WR. But how predictable are the posts if we don’t have the best offense and WR corps in fort all, because we have “ignored the defense for years”... it is a slippery slope. Going back to the same well you just went is risky.. that is a lot of resources doled our Ina. Small area.

I see your point, and for the most part I agree. We just see how small an area it is differently. The way I see it, we just spent a 1 & a 3 on a position group with 3 players getting starters minutes in today's NFL. If we're lucky, and they both pan out, we still have a position open for another young talent. If, in the likely scenario where one of them doesn't pan out, we have 2 positions to fill. If we are incredibly unlucky, and they both bust, then we aren't quite as doomed as the scenario you laid out earlier would have us. In any case, we would still have room for another good WR on our roster.

I just don't think it makes sense to view the position as currently being at max investment the same way I would suggest QB, or TE seem to be right now. If a stud is there, I prefer we take him, rather than trading back.

I do get why you feel differently though. If there is a stud Edge rusher, AND a stud WR, I'd probably lean towards edge rusher too. However, if we just have a stud WR, and then everyone else a rung or two below them, I prefer we make the pick vs trading back. All good though. Either way, in Decosta I trust! Lol

[bandc]

Well 3rd times a charm I guess. People keep saying this and people keep being proven wrong. But go on!

Fromm is Matt Barkley, but worse. He might have a decent college career, but he's not an NFL QB.