BareYourTeeth Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 (edited) 58 minutes ago, berlin calling said: so what to make of that? another DT? I could see them going DaRon Payne, Harold Landry, or Isaiah Oliver. Also, Derrius Guice or Frank Ragnow. Edited April 4, 2018 by BareYourTeeth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sp6488 Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 People think we should draft a WR or OT, I get that. What I don't get is the surprise at the FO not outright coming out and saying "We will only be picking a WR or OT." There was a mini freak out on Twitter when DeCosta answered a question saying that they "could" draft a defensive player first. Why would they outright rule it out? Especially in the media...? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DreamKid Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 1 hour ago, berlin calling said: so what to make of that? another DT? Ozzie's doing some corny azz smoking in his last run at the top. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DontTazeMeBro Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 I assume they’re mostly lying to us in these things. So when they list all the positions we might take I’m paying attention to which ones they don’t mention. And I don’t recall hearing OL or ILB which are probably where our worst starters are. Also the QB talk could all be to bait teams into trading up to 16. Although what’s his name did touch his face when talking about Lamar Jackson. Worth noting the whole panel seemed to get a little nervous when talking about Ronnie Stanley a couple years ago Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sp6488 Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 21 minutes ago, DreamKid said: Ozzie's doing some corny azz smoking in his last run at the top. Would it make sense for him to say: "You absolutely won't be surprised on who we pick at 16, and we're definitely going to pick at 16." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DreamKid Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 5 minutes ago, sp6488 said: Would it make sense for him to say: "You absolutely won't be surprised on who we pick at 16, and we're definitely going to pick at 16." Obviously not, you went to another extreme for no reason. It's like me critiquing the set-up for the big twist in a movie and you going, "Do you want them to spoil it in the trailer!" .?. I think it was a dopey contrived statement, you want to cosign it? Go ahead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sp6488 Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 Just now, DreamKid said: Obviously not, you went to another extreme for no reason. It's like me critiquing the set-up for the big twist in a movie and you going, "Do you want them to spoil it in the trailer!" .?. I think it was a dopey contrived statement, you want to cosign it? Go ahead. I went to the opposite for a very good reason. If people are going to act like it's nuts for them to make a specific (yet simple) statement, it's completely valid to ask if you would prefer the opposite. Your analogy is not particularly apt as it pertains to a scenario in which there are numerous moving parts and creative decisions. This is the opposite of that and its made in the context of pre-draft talk, which often involves being coy with the media and occasionally hinting at the truth. The statement isn't one I'm particularly excited about, nor is it one I dislike. I just find reading anything into it, particularly when you think through the counterfactual, to be somewhat silly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DreamKid Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 8 minutes ago, sp6488 said: If people are going to act like it's nuts for them to make a specific (yet simple) statement, it's completely valid to ask if you would prefer the opposite. I said it was corny, not nuts. 8 minutes ago, sp6488 said: The statement isn't one I'm particularly excited about, nor is it one I dislike. I just find reading anything into it, particularly when you think through the counterfactual, to be somewhat silly. You and me have very different definitions of silly. My original statement- 49 minutes ago, DreamKid said: Ozzie's doing some corny azz smoking in his last run at the top. How many more replies do you want to press me for off it? Do you want to go back throughout our different drafts and find Ozzie quotes? Maybe we can even throw a "Coy or Contrived" poll up for a collection of them? 16 minutes ago, sp6488 said: Your analogy is not particularly apt as it pertains to a scenario in which there are numerous moving parts and creative decisions. This is the opposite of that and its made in the context of pre-draft talk, which often involves being coy with the media and occasionally hinting at the truth. Why don't you take a minute and analyze how dumb this statement is. Don't message me when you figure it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diamondbull424 Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 3 hours ago, BareYourTeeth said: I could see them going DaRon Payne, Harold Landry, or Isaiah Oliver. Also, Derrius Guice or Frank Ragnow. I doubt Frank Ragnow, we should be able to sneak him into our plans in the 2nd, perhaps even the third round. But I could definitely see Harold Landry and Isaiah Oliver. I would add Marcus Davenport to that as well. You can never have too many corners or pass rushers. And they all have elite potential from what I’ve read/seen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mancunian Raven Posted April 5, 2018 Share Posted April 5, 2018 Doubling down on defense while leaving the offense to free agency and chance is just about the least surprising thing the Ravens could do. Ozzie is just saying this because it's what GMs do at draft time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danand Posted April 5, 2018 Share Posted April 5, 2018 Nothing will surprise me really. QB? Makes sense if a good one falls. DT? Well if Da'Ron Payne/Hurst/whoever is the interior pass rusher, that collapses the pocket and force a hurried throw or batted pass on 4 and whatever against the Bears, Steelers and Bengals which secure a win, then I am all for it. As long as they live and die by their decisions, because if we go into the draft thinking, that we are all set on LG, OC and RT, and Lewis once again is injured, Skura is another Gino Gradkowski and Hurst is a bad RT, and we then have to "work out the rinkles to get the offense going", then they deserve the criticism. If they add playmaking pieces to the defense, and we are a middle of the road defense again - see the above, they deserve the criticism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wackywabbit Posted April 5, 2018 Share Posted April 5, 2018 A QB, or a RB like Guice wouldn't really surprise me. Actually, the only possible options that would surprise me would a DT or a CB. Those just don't seem viable with our current assets and investments on the roster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diamondbull424 Posted April 5, 2018 Share Posted April 5, 2018 The only position that would surprise me would be quarterback... and that’s only because Harbaugh could potentially be in a playoffs or bust year, you take a quarterback and that’s removing an asset for him. What position do I think we take? I think the most likely candidate will be OL. Only because I see multiple scenarios where Connor Williams and/or Quentin Nelson are available and potentially BPA. The second most likely being ILB. Both Smith and Edmunds are likely to be gone, but if available, either could be BPA. Smith has size and medical concerns whereas Edmunds weakness is polish and experience. Either could fall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastsideEZ Posted April 6, 2018 Share Posted April 6, 2018 (edited) 5 hours ago, diamondbull424 said: The only position that would surprise me would be quarterback... and that’s only because Harbaugh could potentially be in a playoffs or bust year, you take a quarterback and that’s removing an asset for him. What position do I think we take? I think the most likely candidate will be OL. Only because I see multiple scenarios where Connor Williams and/or Quentin Nelson are available and potentially BPA. The second most likely being ILB. Both Smith and Edmunds are likely to be gone, but if available, either could be BPA. Smith has size and medical concerns whereas Edmunds weakness is polish and experience. Either could fall. As long as it isn’t OLB/DE type or a TE I’m cool with whatever... everyone think 4-5 QBs could go before us so we potentially can get a top ten non QB type prospect or get or maybe we take the 5th QB... All I know is we can’t afford to miss regardless... Edited April 6, 2018 by EastsideEZ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DontTazeMeBro Posted April 6, 2018 Share Posted April 6, 2018 Our worst starters are Onwuasor and Hurst if he plays tackle. Or whoever starts at TE. Skura at center is a huge question mark. We have no depth on the OL. No proven interior pass rusher, although Henry and Urban have potential. I really can’t understand why WR is a must. I honestly think it’s because we’ve never had an elite one and everyone is just obsessed with the idea of it and have been for years. But even if we do go need, it’s not the biggest one 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.