Perception of Team Need vs. Reality

[usmccharles]

gimme Josh Uche after the first

[bacchys]

What I'm saying is the Ravens aren't banking on major contributions from players who have yet to be identified, which is the case with the coming draft picks.

At this time last year Brown wasn't expected to make any contribution to the '19 season, and the Ravens picked up Seth Roberts as a way of ensuring they wouldn't overvalue a WR pick because they need one to make an immediate contribution.

Right now, the only real holes on this team are interior O-line and ILB. I don't expect them to reach in order to fill those holes. If they draft players they think can, great, but I won't be surprised if the top picks are a LT, a WR, and a DB. It'll cause consternation with talking heads and some fans, but while LT isn't a area of need this year Stanley might walk in a year or two. No WR coming onto this team should expect to set rookie receiving records, but LJ is going to need outside targets in the years down the road. It would be better of those WR's have some NFL experience.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[Shas]

From their inception in 1996 until 2018 they were always filling in around either Ray Lewis or CJ Mosley...every year except 2013.

They attempted to fill that one gap year with a second round pick in Arthur Brown, who wasn't up to to the task, and one of those fill-in players in Daryl Smith.

Filmstudy ...sees it as a value calculation--It's a better value to use no more than a third on a rotational LB mixed in with cheaper free agents, etc, and you get the same value with two cheap players that you'd get from one very expensive one. Leaving your first round pick to be used on a premium position--a real difference maker at WR or DE, for instance.

I think it's good logic.

There are two caveats, however.

One, it assumes the WR or OLB actually has premium talent. If scouts believe Murray is a premium player, and there is no premium WR or rush end on the board, I want them taking Murray.

Two, in doing the value calculation, there is a variable that I believe you need to include, and that is the value of versatility. If you are resigned to rotating specialists in and out of the middle of the field--players who are better on first and second down stopping the run, and players on third down who are better at blitzing and in coverage--you are limiting Wink's creativity and you are exposing your weaknesses to the opponent. .

Filmstudy sent me a note reminding me thats Arthur Brown may have simply been a case of overvaluing a player.

Can't argue with that.

For years I have claimed that they make their worst draft day decisions when they become enamored with with the size or speed of an athlete, without the college production to back it up. It's often a player in the late first, second or third round with athletic traits that convince them he is a first round talent who just needs to be coached up.

Arthur Brown and his sideline-to-sideline speed.
Timmy Jernigan's burst
Terrance Cody's bulk
Breshard Perriman's size and speed
Yamon Figur's speed
Kyle Boller's arm

Clearly Brown turned out to be a second round reach.

However I wasn't evaluating their success at assembling a linebacking corps. I was trying to diagnose their philosophy.

When they used a second round pick on Brown in '13, I felt it reflected a consistent philosophy to invest a large chunk of draft capital in one blue-chip inside linebacker -- with the intention to fill in around him with undrafted, developmental talent and/or street free agents.

The fact that Brown, it turned out, wasn't a blue chip player isn't as relevant to my point: they thought they were building around a star quality player coming out of that 2013 draft.

The time period is notable not just because Ray Lewis had just retired, but also because the league was transitioning, putting more value on smaller, turn and run linebackers. And they thought they had found someone in Brown who could do that in spades--worth a big investment, they thought.

So from that perspective, 2019 was a big departure from their philosophy. With Mosley gone they did not invest draft capital in an attempt to fill his spot in a blue chip solution. They rolled the dice with moving Peanut to a new position and allowing Kenny Young to become next man up. The corps was a fourth rounder and three UDFAs. That struck me as a departure.

Fast forward to 2020 and the question is, while the 2019 plan failed, initially, did the fact they quickly redeemed the plan by shuffling in more "found talent" give them confidence to stay on that path in 2020.

I look at it as a 23 year history of investing in one expensive solution, and a 1 year history of using a patchwork of players with more narrow skills.

Granted, it may reflect a different philosophy under a new man in EDC. He has already shown a propensity to use premium picks on players at premium offensive positions, which may correspond with devaluing the ILB position.

Having Wink there to dial up creative schemes may help support a philosophical shift. So too might the now-extensive use of dime and nickel packages that reduce the utility of a traditional ILB, and therefore dictate a lowering of their value.

It's a little too early for me to know what they are thinking. If they go through three rounds of the draft without taking an ILB, then I will be ready to say their philosophy has indeed changed.

BTW, in addition to overvaluing players based on their athletic skill, I believe they have also been guilty of overvaluing players for their positional versatility--Matt Elam, Kam Correa, Paul Kruger, Bronson Kaufusi, Chris Wormley maybe even Hayden Hurst come to mind.

When they draft this type of player the coaching staff inherits a player who doesn't do one particular thing really, really well, and so it's hard for the coach to develop a role for that player where they can build on early success. Or they ask a player to learn and do "too much." These types of players take longer to develop.

Interestingly, Calais Campbell was once this type of player when he came into the league.

I say this about the dangers of drafting a versatile player knowing that I am contradicting an earlier statement about the team valuing versatility--in this case, a three-down ILB who can stay on the field without being exposed.

Perhaps it is right to refer to that player as a "unicorn" because the scouts may become enamored with a guy's versatility only to get him here and find out he's just a pony.

[QtR Nevermore]

I agree that players get over valued due to size/speed and versatility, but the Ravens are far from the worst offenders on that front. Every other team and the draft experts do it all the time too.

One other thing that annoys me is scouting by size. I looked at Daniel Jeremiah's top 50 this morning and almost every write up started with the player's size. I'm not sure whether he's just old fashioned or if scouts really do look at prospects with a head full of size protypes for every position but how many good players have to drop because they don't fit an ideal template before they realise it doesn't matter as much as production? Ray Lewis, Russell Wilson, Aaron Donald, Drew Brees and hundreds more good players were 'undersized' and most dropped further than they should have.

I'd be much more wary of prospects like Terrell Lewis who are elevated just because they fit the template.

[Jesse Stovall]

I do agree that we will get a very good idea of how the front office values ILBs after day 2 of the draft. I'm starting with the presumption that Queen and Murray are not unicorns. They are fast and played at big time programs with good coaching. But do they have the production, leadership, smarts, and anticipation to thrive as a 3 down Mike linebacker? I'm saying they will not give us value at pick 28. Let another team take them. Get more value from the pick. Get me an edge player who can give me 5 years of sacks and pressures on a rookie deal. Or get me a WR who can provide a few 60+ catch season with over 800 receiving yards. Or a FS or DT/DE who can replace an aging vet in the near future with equal production. I'm not spending pick #28 to replace Josh Bynes. Nope.

[Shas]

I'm not spending pick #28 to replace Josh Bynes. Nope.

Well, not to sound flippant, but of course not. I don't want to spend a first round pick on a player who gives them what Bynes gave them. But the comparison is a bit unfair.

If you put it that way, it begs another question: were we happy with Josh Bynes to begin with? Are we satisfied with just another Josh Bynes, who they could have just re-signed?

When I try to picture being in the offseason meeting at Steve Bisciotti's house, I like to imagine the conversation. I think it centered on three goals:

1. Help Lamar continue to gain the maturity/confidence needed to play just as calmly in playoff games as regular season game
2. Make the offense indefensible by continuing to add talent around Lamar
3. Defensively, get better in the front seven

On this last point, while they finished fifth in team defense versus rushing, I bet much was made on their inability to stop the Titans running game in playoff time.

Put this way, I would have asked your question thusly: is it worth a first round pick to replace Mosley?

[edromeo]

...Put this way, I would have asked your question thusly: is it worth a first round pick to replace Mosley?

I view all the draft choices the same way. Is that player the best player available on your board and would they be the best player on your team at that position/role?

Rinse, wash, repeat.

[Blovius_Maximus]

The Ravens were great front-runners last year. Adding Campbell helps assure that opponents playing in come-from-behind mode will have a difficult time.

But the Ravens are vulnerable when the score is even. We all know that a strategy to handicap an explosive offense is to play keep away. Run. Run. Run.

Derrick Henry can have great games. Not every team has a Derrick Henry. But the Ravens need to be prepared nevertheless.

If a six-ten year starter at ILB is staring them in the face at 28 then address the need, set it, and forget it for five years.

[edromeo]

...3. Defensively, get better in the front seven

On this last point, while they finished fifth in team defense versus rushing, I bet much was made on their inability to stop the Titans running game in playoff time...

A measure that a lot of people value in terms of front seven/rush defense is YPC.
Historically the Ravens have a low YPC. I heard somewhere that last year was the 1st team in a while that the Raven's defense gave up over 4.0 YPC they were at 4.4 YPC which was 20th.

[Jesse Stovall]

Well, not to sound flippant, but of course not. I don't want to spend a first round pick on a player who gives them what Bynes gave them. But the comparison is a bit unfair.

If you put it that way, it begs another question: were we happy with Josh Bynes to begin with? Are we satisfied with just another Josh Bynes, who they could have just re-signed?

When I try to picture being in the offseason meeting at Steve Bisciotti's house, I like to imagine the conversation. I think it centered on three goals:

1. Help Lamar continue to gain the maturity/confidence needed to play just as calmly in playoff games as regular season game
2. Make the offense indefensible by continuing to add talent around Lamar
3. Defensively, get better in the front seven

On this last point, while they finished fifth in team defense versus rushing, I bet much was made on their inability to stop the Titans running game in playoff time.

Put this way, I would have asked your question thusly: is it worth a first round pick to replace Mosley?

I hear you. And I don't disagree. What I'm trying to say is that we dont need to spend 1st round draft capital to improve upon Bynes. The league is starting to get away from using run stuffing linebackers on 3rd and 5 or more. We don't need a CJ Mosely type player for 3 downs anymore. We need him for 2 downs and we need a coverage/blitzing hybrid backer/safety on 3rd downs who can stick to TEs and RBs and race through the line to pressure the QB. We can find both those players later in the draft and we have those players on our team. And both of those players can play roles on special teams.

At the same time, if Queen or Murray is the top player on the Ravens board when we arrive at pick 28, I'm fine with them choosing that player. I'm simply basing my prediction that this will not happen on the fact that neither of those players fits the mold of a complete 3 down Mike linebacker and future leader of the defense. I predict instead EDC will draft a higher rated player such as an athletic Edge rusher, speedy WR, pass rushing Dlineman, or rangy FS.

[Shas]

We don't need a CJ Mosely type player for 3 downs anymore. We need him for 2 downs and we need a coverage/blitzing hybrid backer/safety on 3rd downs who can stick to TEs and RBs and race through the line to pressure the QB. We can find both those players later in the draft and we have those players on our team. And both of those players can play roles on special teams.

At the same time, if Queen or Murray is the top player on the Ravens board when we arrive at pick 28, I'm fine with them choosing that player.

Fair enough.

My only caveat--I'm pretty sure I detailed it earlier in the thread--is that there is real value to versatility in that you aren't exposing a weakness--'look, the Ravens have their run stuffer on the field, here comes a throw to the tight end'--and you don't get caught with the wrong linebacker on the field when an opponent goes no huddle.

But I also acknowledged that you don't value versatility so much that you end up with a player who is just average at all aspects. It was a mistake they made with Kam Correa, and hopefully not with Tyus Bowser, fairly pricey second round picks.

If they go the route you suggest, at least Wink can focus on a strength and put that player in a position to succeed.

[Jesse Stovall]

That is a risk getting "stuck" with a run stuffer in the game as the opponent goes no huddle and throws 5 straight passes. But that opponent would be in a base offense with 2 wrs, 1 rb, 1 TE, 1 FB/HB. So I would hope Wink can scheme in order to minimize the damage. And finally we wont play every 1st and 2nd down with 2 NTs who are practically useless in the pass rush and screen defense. So that will certainly help when offenses throw on 1st downs.