wackywabbit

^Dude stole my Ameer Abdullah idea

Liked for pretty much nailing what expected return would be. I have higher hopes obviously, but it doesn't take many years of starter level QB play to justify the cost. Alex Smith at age 34 getting traded for a promising young cornerback and a 3rd isn't that far off from what Jackson cost, depending on how you view Fuller. The ceiling for that trade is 3-5 years of slightly over average QB play. And then you have to account for the $84 million dollar difference in salary for Smith and Jackson over the next 4 years. Smith got 4/$94M and Jackson's rookie contract will be under $10M for 4 years and will have a relatively cheap 5th year option if they want it.

Murray can pass block I don't think he's a good runner at this stage either; that's why I suggested he might be an upgrade as a 3rd down back. Allen's talents you listed are not doing bad things. He doesn't fumble and he catches his short passes. But, you are sinking offensive plays by using him. His talents don't involve productive plays. I'd much rather give Collins those touches even with the propensity to fumble. The Ravens agreed, and I think we all saw the improvement with the shift. Even as a receiver, with that catch % difference, Collins is getting about a full yard more per target (career or just last season).

I don't know why I am on an island here. Not that I have a problem with holding a minority opinion, but I'm a little surprised that others saw anything to like with Buck Allen. Even more surprised that people would group him as similarly or even more valuable than Alex Collins and Dixon. We're going to replace Alex Collins instead of Buck if he doesn't look good in preseason? Really? Did we watch the same 2017 season? Buck Allen is reliable for being bad, inefficient offense. Check the game logs, he was heavily involved (carries and targets) in the first half of the season when our offense was at the very bottom of the league in terms of efficiency and his usage was sharply cut back when we recovered. It wasn't the only or biggest factor (Flacco's health) but it was definitely a part of it. He can catch the ball. But I'd prefer to do almost anything else on offense than chase those 4.17 yards per target. Give me guys who are unreliably or even potentially good over a guy that's reliably bad any day.

I still feel you are either missing or avoiding the point. It's not about comparing Darnold and Jackson (although I'd be willing to do that too). You go a lot further when declaring Jackson the worst "value" pick. Value is equal parts what you get and what you spend. What Darnold cost in draft capital to acquire exceeds the ENTIRE Ravens draft class by any chart out there. So Darnold busting is worse than all 12 Ravens draft picks busting if you want to talk value. You bring up Kaepernick and RG3 like they are examples against that pick. But, if you look at the approximate value chart, Kaepernick and even RG3 would have exceeded the AV expectation for Lamar Jackson's pick. Granted, I believe AV is mostly data-noise down on an individual basis, but more interesting on a larger sample averaging look. However it makes sense, that a single player greatly elevating one side of the ball for two seasons would exceed the average return on the two seconds spent on Jackson.

Give him all day to throw and play press aggressively at the LoS? Lamar Jackson has shown more than capable of hitting deep throws over the top if you are going to make it that easy. Or compare Lamar Jackson's age 18-20 seasons which were way better than Russell Wilson's age 20-22 seasons. Nah. Every GM would rather whiff on the guy that cost a mid and future second, than the guy that cost the #6 overall, a high second, a mid second, and a future second. If they whiff, what does it matter what you used to feel about them?

For the first paragraph, we both agree that it's a difference in evaluation. I don't subscribe to the written doctrine on the fate on athletic quarterbacks. In fact I think we may be at an all-time valley in terms of the perceived value of these types of QBs, after the ridiculous spike and drop of Kaepernick and RG3's stock. I think there're a lot more variables involved in their careers, just like with any QB's development. The idea that it's a rule that NFL defenses will magically "figure them out" and they are no longer effective, but it takes 10-20 games of tape to pattern-match to their specific brand of mobile quarterback-ness, that can never evolve on its own.... is quite the over-simplification. Also, Russell Wilson gets thrown out for this rule, even though his passing numbers in his first 3 year of college don't look any better than Jackson's. To me, you get the magic combination of a generational athlete, with a cannon arm, who has a burning passion to be great*** and you should be able to figure out how to make it work. Just the fact that Ravens are willing to try, is fantastic to see as a fan. *** This is the biggest key that I believe will separate LJ8 from some of the names thrown around with him. Granted, it's the hardest to discern/project, but that's the feeling I get. You need a near-psychotic devotion to the game to match up with the Brady, Rodgers, Brees, Wilson's... of the game. I had Wentz and Watson as elite QB prospects in 2016 and 17 because I got a similar vibe from them. Regarding the bold: I already said why I'm lower on this move in the other draft ranking thread, but I contest your wording here. IF Darnold whiffs, then everyone associated with the decision is going to lose their job and the Jets franchise will be set back for years. If Lamar Jackson whiffs, the Ravens could still chug along as borderline playoff conteder or be better or worse depending on how their other moves go. THAT's the difference in the two situations and the point I was making about value.

I actually like the Jets big move a lot less seeing how it played out. I am not a huge Darnold fan. But, even if he is the best QB prospect in the draft, is he SO much better as a prospect than Josh Rosen or Josh Allen that you give up THREE 2nd round picks just for the difference between them? At least one and probably 2 of those will be high seconds. Presumably the Jets had 3 QBs they liked when they made the move, so one of them would have still been available at 6. I mean, I'm in full agreement about franchise QB > all so if Darnold is that dude then it's all good. But, that's the ceiling of the draft given the investment, just "good". For the assets they put into him, he better a franchise QB. And he's like their entire draft (plus borrowing from next year) as you can see from how few other picks they had left.

I have Lamar Jackson as the best value pick in the entire draft. They also got the 132nd pick back No better ratio of (my predicted) return and investment. Hence an A+ draft for me. Also, Ozzie isn't retiring he's moving to a different less prominent role in the FO. Also, DeCosta was totally onboard with the Jackson pick, in fact he's the one who started the conversation in the draft room about trading back into the end of the first. The difference in opinion is going to be in how you view Jackson, but the real beauty of the Ravens draft is that it's NOT anchored to one pick. If Jackson is the game changer I believe, then the draft is automatically amazing. If Jackson ends up being a package player, then he can still add as much value as a starter-level player at a different position. If Jackson is a total bust, then there is still a near full draft of picks to play out. This is not like say the Jets, who gave up a fortune for Darnold, which is fine if he is the franchise guys, but if he's not... Ozzie and DeCosta had a clear approach of maximizing value. DeCosta gave a great interview on a podcast with the team's website guys. The trade backs in the first were because they felt the value of this draft was in the 3-4 round range, and that maximizing swings was better than taking Derwin James, who he said they would have taken at 16. He also said that part of the arithmetic of choosing between Hurst and Ridley was the historical returns of first round tight ends vs first round wide receivers. It was all very calculated. I was very down on the Hurst pick when it happened, but I've warmed up to it after understanding the logic behind it. We badly needed TE's more than any other spot, but they maneuvered in a way not to reach. The biggest complaint I had about the draft was that they didn't draft a RB. Would have liked them to take a shot in round 4 when they took defenders walking into crowded competitions.

I think our 3rd running back isn't on the roster right now. DeMarco Murray would be an upgrade as a 3rd down back over Buck Allen. He'd be a significant upgrade as a blocker and no I don't think Buck Allen has more upside than 30 year old Murray. I don't know of many young RBs with upside that would be available. Perhaps Ameer Abdullah will be with the Lions adding Blount and a high draft pick to go with Riddick. He's been a major disappointment from the player he was in college, though.

Nah, Flacco was terrible the first half of last season. If he was at least average we probably win 2 more games and are comfortably in the playoffs. Clearly he was limited by injury, so you can get into a semantic case about "fault", but as an entity that is supposed to help us win games, Flacco did keep us out of the playoffs in 2017.

The fact that the Giants are at the top of the list makes me disregard it as an indicator. The Giants would be at or very near the worst drafts for me. Keeping the #2 and drafting a RB was the worst move of the offseason.

Joe Flacco was closer to 2 SB rings TBH

Luck's not going anywhere.

Huh? This type of move means that we aren't planning to cut him. We are giving him more money now, and he's actually cheaper to keep later on. You guys are looking at it backwards. He doesn't need to play up to his cap hit to be kept, just his salary/bonuses for that year. Spotrac added a yearly cash column. That's what you want to look at to see what figure it will cost to keep him on a given year. As this type of move shows, the timing of cap charges are whenever you want them to be. They probably won't even spend this money and it'll rollover to no net effect, just like the last couple times they did this before a season.