| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Suffering_Bills
Joined: 10 Apr 2006
Posts: 3331
Location: Rochester, N.Y.
|
 Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 10:15 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
|
| Estonianzulu wrote: | | Suffering_Bills wrote: |
Fantastic, mod. Now, please get on that guy's case for STARTING it. Thanks. |
My intent was not to get on anyone's case merely to give a friendly and somewhat comical reminder to stay on topic.
~~
This is a reminder to everyone, if someone posts something you feel is insulting or a personal attack, do not respond in kind and do not provoke it. Either A. Ignore it, it will go away or B. Tell a mod via pm. Getting into a flame war helps no one. |
Duly noted, and thank you.
_________________
Why have a signature? I don't need to be famous................................................. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
49ersfan
Joined: 21 Apr 2007
Posts: 4657
|
| Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 11:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| adam9 wrote: | | Also as it has been pointed out before San Francisco's draft was definitely not that bad. Those 2nd-3rd round receivers had many different rankings depending on the team you talked to. Also they had 2 late-round steals with Cam Johnson and Trent Robinson. Looney will start for them and Lamichael will get good playing time year one as well. 2 starters year 1, 2-3 with potential/contributors off the bench out of 7 picks, with the other 2 being unsure at this point. How is that in the worst 5 in the league? |
I expect Jenkins and James to contribute day 1. I won't be surprised if Jenkins moves his way up the depth chart and starts the year goes on. James will also see about 8-10 carries but i could see him getting snaps at Slot WR and returner too.
As for grading it...well, everyone has different opinions on the players selected. To me, the strategy is sound. With the first 2 picks, the desired result is more 3rd down and redzone conversions, and an increased amount of chunk yardage plays. With the turnover ratio expected to fall back to earth, the margin of error goes down, and you need more big plays to offset that. Joe Looney is competition at our only position without a clear starter. Everyone else provides depth at positions of need and some have the upside to compete for starting jobs in the future (although i don't expect any players selected in round 5-7 to be a long-term starter for us in the future).
Keeping in mind the strategy and the players selected,I personally gave it a B.
_________________
-Not taking this off until the 49ers win #6 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Suffering_Bills
Joined: 10 Apr 2006
Posts: 3331
Location: Rochester, N.Y.
|
| Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 11:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| 49ersfan wrote: | | adam9 wrote: | | Also as it has been pointed out before San Francisco's draft was definitely not that bad. Those 2nd-3rd round receivers had many different rankings depending on the team you talked to. Also they had 2 late-round steals with Cam Johnson and Trent Robinson. Looney will start for them and Lamichael will get good playing time year one as well. 2 starters year 1, 2-3 with potential/contributors off the bench out of 7 picks, with the other 2 being unsure at this point. How is that in the worst 5 in the league? |
I expect Jenkins and James to contribute day 1. I won't be surprised if Jenkins moves his way up the depth chart and starts the year goes on. James will also see about 8-10 carries but i could see him getting snaps at Slot WR and returner too.
As for grading it...well, everyone has different opinions on the players selected. To me, the strategy is sound. With the first 2 picks, the desired result is more 3rd down and redzone conversions, and an increased amount of chunk yardage plays. With the turnover ratio expected to fall back to earth, the margin of error goes down, and you need more big plays to offset that. Joe Looney is competition at our only position without a clear starter. Everyone else provides depth at positions of need and some have the upside to compete for starting jobs in the future (although i don't expect any players selected in round 5-7 to be a long-term starter for us in the future).
Keeping in mind the strategy and the players selected,I personally gave it a B. |
Somewhere between a C and a D for me; probably closer to a "D."
_________________
Why have a signature? I don't need to be famous................................................. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mudderfudder77
Joined: 14 Jan 2005
Posts: 1306
|
| Posted: Thu May 10, 2012 11:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Suffering_Bills wrote: | | I could review/critique EVERY single pick, easily. NOT a problem. Oh, and not to sound redundant, but EVERY player DRAFTED could flop or be great, and we haven't seen ANY of them play yet, of COURSE. Some just have a pretty blatant chance of being flops more than others. I thought you guys got a decent potential late-round steal in Criner, even though WR wasn't your biggest need. Does this help some? |
Do you work/subscribe to a service - or do you have a friend who gets the tapes for you?
_________________
2013 Draft - Go TE or go home. Yes, TE, even after signing Bennett. Vance McDonald is your huckleberry. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Suffering_Bills
Joined: 10 Apr 2006
Posts: 3331
Location: Rochester, N.Y.
|
| Posted: Thu May 10, 2012 11:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Mudderfudder77 wrote: | | Suffering_Bills wrote: | | I could review/critique EVERY single pick, easily. NOT a problem. Oh, and not to sound redundant, but EVERY player DRAFTED could flop or be great, and we haven't seen ANY of them play yet, of COURSE. Some just have a pretty blatant chance of being flops more than others. I thought you guys got a decent potential late-round steal in Criner, even though WR wasn't your biggest need. Does this help some? |
Do you work/subscribe to a service - or do you have a friend who gets the tapes for you? |
Neither. I slap around Kiper until he spills the beans. 
_________________
Why have a signature? I don't need to be famous................................................. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dcarey20
Joined: 15 Feb 2006
Posts: 7188
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2012 6:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Whether you agree with the values or not, I don't know how anyone can rank the Ravens at 18 given Ozzie Newsome's track record. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Suffering_Bills
Joined: 10 Apr 2006
Posts: 3331
Location: Rochester, N.Y.
|
| Posted: Sat May 12, 2012 8:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| dcarey20 wrote: | | Whether you agree with the values or not, I don't know how anyone can rank the Ravens at 18 given Ozzie Newsome's track record. |
Because he's due for one, in this inexact science known as drafting. Seriously, though... NOT the best effort I've seen by the Ravens.
_________________
Why have a signature? I don't need to be famous................................................. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Its A Sabotage
Joined: 14 May 2010
Posts: 28465
Location: Do. Your. Job.
|
| Posted: Sat May 12, 2012 9:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Suffering_Bills wrote: | | dcarey20 wrote: | | Whether you agree with the values or not, I don't know how anyone can rank the Ravens at 18 given Ozzie Newsome's track record. |
Because he's due for one, in this inexact science known as drafting. Seriously, though... NOT the best effort I've seen by the Ravens. |
Whaaa?
_________________
| green24 wrote: | | Sabo is the best poster on FF |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Suffering_Bills
Joined: 10 Apr 2006
Posts: 3331
Location: Rochester, N.Y.
|
| Posted: Sat May 12, 2012 9:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Its A Sabotage wrote: | | Suffering_Bills wrote: | | dcarey20 wrote: | | Whether you agree with the values or not, I don't know how anyone can rank the Ravens at 18 given Ozzie Newsome's track record. |
Because he's due for one, in this inexact science known as drafting. Seriously, though... NOT the best effort I've seen by the Ravens. |
Whaaa? |
In my opinion, this is the way I see it.  Bring any selection up; I'll elaborate individually.
_________________
Why have a signature? I don't need to be famous................................................. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dcarey20
Joined: 15 Feb 2006
Posts: 7188
|
| Posted: Sun May 13, 2012 1:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Suffering_Bills wrote: | | dcarey20 wrote: | | Whether you agree with the values or not, I don't know how anyone can rank the Ravens at 18 given Ozzie Newsome's track record. |
Because he's due for one, in this inexact science known as drafting. Seriously, though... NOT the best effort I've seen by the Ravens. |
Except he's not "due for one", because he simply does not have bad drafts.
If you can tell me why it's a bad draft, I'd love to hear it. Here's my argument, hopefully you read all of this because it's all tied together, and will show why 18th is really never a spot that a Baltimore Ravens draft should be ranked.
There has only been one draft since 1996 that you can cite where the Ravens have not obtained at least 1 impact player, and that's 2004 where we were without a first round pick.
Following is a list of the impact players that have been acquired in each of Newsome's drafts since 1996. The players listed have either gone to the pro bowl, became a starter on our team, or greatly exceeded the expectations that came with where they were drafted.
Notice the enormous success rate he has with high picks as well as late picks who blossomed into key contributors for the Baltimore Ravens.
1996 - OT Jonathan Ogden (1st), LB Ray Lewis (1st), WR/RS Jermaine Lewis (5th)
1997 - LB Peter Boulware (1st), LB Jamie Sharper (2nd), S Kim Herring (2nd), C Jeff Mitchell (5th)
1998 - CB Duane Starks (1st)
1999 - CB Chris McAlister (1st), WR Brandon Stokley (4th), OG Edwin Mulitalo (4th)
2000 - RB Jamal Lewis (1st), LB Adalius Thomas (6th)
2001 - TE Todd Heap (1st), CB Gary Baxter (2nd), C Casey Rabach (3rd), LB Ed Hartwell (4th)
2002 - S Ed Reed (1st), P Dave Zastudil (4th), RB Chester Taylor (6th)
2003 - LB Terrell Suggs (1st), LB Jarret Johnson (4th), FB Ovie Mughelli (4th), DT Aubrayo Franklin (5th), OT Tony Pashos (5th)
2004 - As mentioned this is the one and only draft that I conceded was not a success in some way.
2005 - C Jason Brown (4th)
2006 - DT Haloti Ngata (1st), OG Chris Chester (2nd), S Dawan Landry (5th), P Sam Koch (6th)
2007 - OG Ben Grubbs (1st), OG Marshal Yanda (3rd), FB Le'Ron McClain (4th), OT Jared Gaither (Supp.)
2008 - QB Joe Flacco (1st), RB Ray Rice (2nd), S Tom Zbikowski (3rd), S Haruki Nakamura (6th)
2009 - OT Michael Oher (1st), CB Lardarius Webb (3rd)
2010 - DT Terrence Cody (2nd), TE Ed Dickson (3rd), TE Dennis Pitta (4th), DT Arthur Jones (5th)
2011 - CB Jimmy Smith (1st), WR Torrey Smith (2nd), DE Pernell McPhee (5th)
His success in choosing players is close to unmatched league-wide.
And as far as this draft goes, it's probably not a sexy one for someone to "grade", because it wasn't one where we needed to find our big time pieces that will take us to the promise land. Those are in place already.
This draft was about revamping our depth and finding replacements for players that left via free agency. And Ozzie accomplished just that.
We lost Jarret Johnson, a classic glue player who wasn't a premier pass rusher, but was someone who played sealed the edge, played the run, dropped into coverage a bit, etc. Who did we replace him with? Courtney Upshaw, a prospect who literally possesses all of the exact same attributes I mentioned that made JJ so good.
We lost Ben Grubbs. We went out and got Kelechi Osemele, a mammoth who many in the NFL feel has a great shot at transitioning from a college tackle to a guard. We also got Gino Gradkowski, who many may have seen as a reach, but was someone that was on our radar from day 1. Also was a prospect who a number of NFL teams were reportedly talking up for days leading up to the draft.
Ricky Williams retired. He had over 100 carries as Ray Rice's backup and was outstanding in his role. We traded up in the third and picked Bernard Pierce, who was extremely productive for Temple, has sub 4.5 speed, close to 220 lbs, and will be a perfect compliment for Rice.
Haruki Nakamura and Tom Zbikowski were both outstanding backup safeties and special teamers. We lost them this free agent period to Carolina and Indianapolis, respectively. This was a weak safety class, but we picked up Christian Thompson to make up for at least one of these losses.
Kick returner was an issue for us all year. We got Asa Jackson, who was one of the top return men available.
And finally, Anquan Boldin and Torrey Smith are great, but we need some depth at receiver. We picked up Tommy Streeter. Now I'm not saying that he should be counted on in any way to make a big impact, but no one can deny that he has as much potential as any 6th round pick in this draft.
Like I said, this wasn't a "sexy" draft, because for the most part it was all about restocking the key depth players that we lost in free agency. And when you look into the prospects that we got and then consider the roles that they will potentially fill, it's a good draft.
Oh, and it's Ozzie Newsome, as I stressed so heavily. I pointed it out pretty clearly. Outside of maybe the 2004 draft, there is not one draft in the history of the Baltimore Ravens that would be considered the "18th" best in the NFL.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LTF
Joined: 04 Aug 2010
Posts: 639
|
| Posted: Sun May 13, 2012 1:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Ozzie Newsome didn't become GM of the Ravens until November of 2002. In close to ten years as a GM he has no AFC title game wins and no SBs to his resume. The idea that his talent evaluations as GM are "close to unmatched league-wide" comes off pretty homerish because he's not even the best GM in his division (if you won't concede Colbert has been more successful you certainly have to admit it's an easily debatable point). He's a very good GM, but let's not get carried away. If someone doesn't like the Ravens draft class this year, that's their right. Every GM has down classes from time to time. I personally think the Ravens had the worst class of the four teams in the AFC North (their best pick is a relatively average talent at OLB IMO) but obviously time will tell. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jrry32
Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 32771
|
| Posted: Sun May 13, 2012 2:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| dcarey20 wrote: | | Oh, and it's Ozzie Newsome, as I stressed so heavily. I pointed it out pretty clearly. Outside of maybe the 2004 draft, there is not one draft in the history of the Baltimore Ravens that would be considered the "18th" best in the NFL. |
So basically we shouldn't judge your draft on how we evaluate players, we should just name it one of the best drafts because Ozzie Newsome is your GM?
That's ridiculous logic. Your 2004 and 2005 drafts stunk. Which basically proves that even the brilliant Ozzie Newsome can have a bad draft.
Nah, I'll evaluate the draft on its own merit. Not on who made the picks.
Now then, if you asked me what I thought of the Ravens draft, I'd say I like it. It looks like a very good draft to me. But that's based on the players they took and the schematic fit, not based on who made the pick.
This is how I'd grade each pick:
2. Courtney Upshaw - A-
2. Kelechi Osemele - B+
3. Bernard Pierce - B+
4. Gino Gradkowski - A-
4. Chrisian Thompson - C
5. Asa Jackson - B-
6. Tommy Streeter - B+
7. DeAngelo Tyson - B
I'd be happy to explain any grade. I'd say overall, the draft is a B+.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Flaccomania
Joined: 12 Aug 2008
Posts: 16746
Location: Parkville, MD
|
| Posted: Sun May 13, 2012 10:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| LTF wrote: | | Ozzie Newsome didn't become GM of the Ravens until November of 2002. In close to ten years as a GM he has no AFC title game wins and no SBs to his resume. The idea that his talent evaluations as GM are "close to unmatched league-wide" comes off pretty homerish because he's not even the best GM in his division (if you won't concede Colbert has been more successful you certainly have to admit it's an easily debatable point). He's a very good GM, but let's not get carried away. If someone doesn't like the Ravens draft class this year, that's their right. Every GM has down classes from time to time. I personally think the Ravens had the worst class of the four teams in the AFC North (their best pick is a relatively average talent at OLB IMO) but obviously time will tell. |
Except that while Ozzie wasn't officially the GM until 2002, he was in deed the one in charge of the personnel decisions since the team moved to Baltimore. So yes, he does indeed have a SB to his name.
Just wanted to clarify that.
_________________
Why not Michael Jordan?
XBL GT: kanxalanx |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Flaccomania
Joined: 12 Aug 2008
Posts: 16746
Location: Parkville, MD
|
| Posted: Sun May 13, 2012 10:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| jrry32 wrote: | | dcarey20 wrote: | | Oh, and it's Ozzie Newsome, as I stressed so heavily. I pointed it out pretty clearly. Outside of maybe the 2004 draft, there is not one draft in the history of the Baltimore Ravens that would be considered the "18th" best in the NFL. |
So basically we shouldn't judge your draft on how we evaluate players, we should just name it one of the best drafts because Ozzie Newsome is your GM?
That's ridiculous logic. Your 2004 and 2005 drafts stunk. Which basically proves that even the brilliant Ozzie Newsome can have a bad draft.
Nah, I'll evaluate the draft on its own merit. Not on who made the picks.
Now then, if you asked me what I thought of the Ravens draft, I'd say I like it. It looks like a very good draft to me. But that's based on the players they took and the schematic fit, not based on who made the pick.
This is how I'd grade each pick:
2. Courtney Upshaw - A-
2. Kelechi Osemele - B+
3. Bernard Pierce - B+
4. Gino Gradkowski - A-
4. Chrisian Thompson - C
5. Asa Jackson - B-
6. Tommy Streeter - B+
7. DeAngelo Tyson - B
I'd be happy to explain any grade. I'd say overall, the draft is a B+. |
Wow, I'm shocked to see someone grade Gino as anything higher than a C.
_________________
Why not Michael Jordan?
XBL GT: kanxalanx |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dcarey20
Joined: 15 Feb 2006
Posts: 7188
|
| Posted: Sun May 13, 2012 12:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
First, as Flaccomania mentioned, while Ozzie wasn't the official GM until 2002, he had a big say in which players were picked since our inception.
Also, don't see how considering Ozzie's previous success is ridiculous logic at all. And yes, Ozzie Newsome's opinions on prospects is more valuable to me than some poster on a message board, believe it or not. And yes, it should be taken into account.
Oh and I agreed that he's had a bad draft. I said that. Just that it rarely happens. (i.e. you can argue 1, maybe 2 sub-par drafts in 16 years.)
Why wouldn't his previous work be taken into account? He's got as much merit in his draft picks as almost anyone, how can we not consider previous success when judging potential future success? That's like saying we should give Matt Millen another shot because his prior work is irrelevant when judging how well he can do his job. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
