Marty wanted Lamar to switch to WR

**alien bird** · 11-18-2019, 09:49 PM

Originally Posted by MarkS

But Lombardi isn't just bashing Marty, he seems to be claiming that NO ONE - not DeCosta, Harbaugh, nor anyone else in the entire Ravens organization - wanted Lamar, and that Bisciotti forced this decision on all of them, which seems highly dubious.

Total baloney, according to this article that came out today in Business Insider:

"The Ravens didn't interview Lamar Jackson before the draft because they didn't want rumors to spread about how badly they wanted him"

https://www.businessinsider.com/rave...rumors-2019-11

This is a really good read.

**Davesta** · 11-18-2019, 10:04 PM

Originally Posted by alien bird

Total baloney, according to this article that came out today in Business Insider:

"The Ravens didn't interview Lamar Jackson before the draft because they didn't want rumors to spread about how badly they wanted him"

https://www.businessinsider.com/rave...rumors-2019-11

This is a really good read.

Man, I take that with a grain of salt. I doubt it. If we BADLY wanted him, we wouldn’t have pass on him twice and spent our first round pick on a TE and then having to trade back into the first round to go get him.

**The Excellector** · 11-18-2019, 10:11 PM

A few things.

1. The WR comment sounds like Marty was disappointed that they didn't get a WR. At least, that is plausible.

2. Tony Lombardi has intimated, and we've been through this numerous times, that the guy who wanted Lamar the most was indeed Bisciotti. It's not that NO ONE else wanted him. It was that they weren't as determined and passionate about getting him. Remember that it was Bisciotti who pushed for them to take a QB in 2008, originally wanting Ryan, until they talked him into Flacco. Then, Ozzie and Co. kept wanting to trade down and get every little pick they could, until Bisciotti began urging them (Not ordering them) to just get their guy. He even told DeCosta to stop being a "pick whore".

So, there is some plausibility in all of this. That said, however, it won't show up in the way that Lombardi is trying to make it seem.

**Finisher** · 11-18-2019, 10:19 PM

Marty was incompetent. Harbaugh is 50-50 in hiring coordinators but when he stumbles on the right ones on both side of the ball we are cookin'.

**The Excellector** · 11-18-2019, 10:21 PM

Originally Posted by Finisher

Marty was incompetent. Harbaugh is 50-50 in hiring coordinators but when he stumbles on the right ones on both side of the ball we are cookin'.

The last time he picked the right OC, we beat Pittsburgh in the playoffs, for the first time in team history, and nearly took out New England AGAIN.

**xiao_ke** · 11-18-2019, 11:05 PM

Originally Posted by Davesta

Man, I take that with a grain of salt. I doubt it. If we BADLY wanted him, we wouldn’t have pass on him twice and spent our first round pick on a TE and then having to trade back into the first round to go get him.

Agreed there is no way you gamble that Lamar is available at the end of the first and that you can trade up for him. I'm thrilled with Lamar, but let's not pretend this was all part of some master plan the Ravens had. I remember on draft night there was heavy speculation that the Saints were going to draft Lamar and groom him for a couple years to take over for Brees.

**boller4president** · 11-18-2019, 11:23 PM

Originally Posted by Finisher

Marty was incompetent. Harbaugh is 50-50 in hiring coordinators but when he stumbles on the right ones on both side of the ball we are cookin'.

The disrespect people have for Marty to me is disgusting. Was he perfect? No. But he was a damn fine co-ordinator who has 30+ years of OC experience going all the way back to Steve Young. I don't for a moment believe Michael Lombardi knows anything about what Marty said or when he said it.

He does regular appearances on 105 and I suspect he'll be asked and dismiss the reports.

https://1057thefan.radio.com/media/audio-channel/marty-mornhinweg-vinny-and-haynie-11-15-19mp3

**JimZipCode** · 11-19-2019, 12:05 AM

Originally Posted by xiao_ke

Agreed there is no way you gamble that Lamar is available at the end of the first and that you can trade up for him.

Yeah, it's hard to parse.

The one thing that keeps making me think maybe it's true, is that DeCosta is always SO confident he knows where other teams have players slotted.

**alien bird** · 11-19-2019, 12:06 AM

Originally Posted by Davesta

Man, I take that with a grain of salt. I doubt it. If we BADLY wanted him, we wouldn’t have pass on him twice and spent our first round pick on a TE and then having to trade back into the first round to go get him.

Well, "Badly" is the headline writer. DeCosta didn't use that term. Here is what DeCosta said, and I have no reason to think it didn't happen like he says.

"We felt like there was a pretty good chance that Lamar might be there later in the first round, early part of the second round," DeCosta said. "We were willing, if we could, to trade back, trade back, accumulate capital, and then possibly either try to trade back again or in a second round, make a play and get Lamar at that point. But, you know, it was a risk."

I think they wanted him, but had a value that put him late first/early second.

**xiao_ke** · 11-19-2019, 12:08 AM

Originally Posted by JimZipCode

Yeah, it's hard to parse.

The one thing that keeps making me think maybe it's true, is that DeCosta is always SO confident he knows where other teams have players slotted.

It was a hell of a gamble if that’s how it really played out. DeCosta has had the golden touch so far has GM, so maybe it’s true.

**xiao_ke** · 11-19-2019, 12:09 AM

Originally Posted by alien bird

Well, "Badly" is the headline writer. DeCosta didn't use that term. Here is what DeCosta said, and I have no reason to think it didn't happen like he says.

"We felt like there was a pretty good chance that Lamar might be there later in the first round, early part of the second round," DeCosta said. "We were willing, if we could, to trade back, trade back, accumulate capital, and then possibly either try to trade back again or in a second round, make a play and get Lamar at that point. But, you know, it was a risk."

I think they wanted him, but had a value that put him late first/early second.

This explanation makes the most sense and is inline with how the Ravens run their drafts.

**JimZipCode** · 11-19-2019, 12:12 AM

Originally Posted by The Excellector

Then, Ozzie and Co. kept wanting to trade down and get every little pick they could, until Bisciotti began urging them (Not ordering them) to just get their guy. He even told DeCosta to stop being a "pick whore".

So, there is some plausibility in all of this.

That's the way I see it too. Ozzie and esp DeCosta's willingness to risk losing "their guy" by trading back to nab an extra, late pick – what an options trader might call "pick up pennies in front of steamrollers – is amply documented by now.

The behavior seems insane to me. But! That by itself is not conclusive that they didn't want Lamar. Because they've done that shit before. Crazy.