Jump to content
AngusMcFife

Post Draft Roster Review

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, AngusMcFife said:

I wasn't impressed with RGIII's play last year, and I think he's somewhat self-centered. He didn't protect himself running either, he could easily injure himself. I just don't see the point in keeping him. If McSorely regresses we can send him to the practice squad and keep RGIII. Keeping 3 QBs on the roster is unnecessary since we don't need a developmental QB. We just need one guy who can step in and perform if Lamar goes down.

RG3 doesn’t have to be special to be a backup QB. He just needs to have league experience that he can add to the QB room and he needs to be able to execute the offense. He’s got 4.4/4.5 speed still at this point. We need someone that if Lamar goes down for any reason we have a guy who can still play aggressively as a running QB because he knows there’s ANOTHER backup option. But remember in 2018 where RG3 ran the offense a lot more passively when he was the only healthy QB after Lamar went down? We don’t want that. We want him going in and making the best option reads at the mesh point to win football games until Lamar returns.

If we ran a more “traditional” offense than sure having two QBs was plenty. But we don’t.

Your major point for Jaleel Scott was the team support from carrying him on the roster all season, they did the same thing for Jordan Lasley the year before he got cut. What’s more the team showed more support for both RG3 and McSorely as RG3 got the start against the Steelers and McSorely actually saw game time for a play against the Steelers. Scott on the other hand was simply insurance on the roster.

RG3 making the roster is just realistic. NFL teams don’t like to bank on untrustworthy options. Why trust Trace McSorely when you don’t have to? Plus considering Trace might not see as much preseason experience considering our starters might need to see more time so as to build more chemistry before the season... it’ll be even harder for him to jump Griffin on the roster.

Scott will have to compete this year with defensive players that can actually contribute on special teams... would I rather have a backup receiver that we likely never use? Or a backup defensive player that could impact special teams if called upon? I’ll take the latter.

Lastly, Boykin as one year removed from being a 3rd round pick getting cut for Scott isn’t very realistic. And I say cut because the roster decisions will likely come down to a 3rd QB, 6th WR, 4th RB, 5th LB, and an 8th DL. We just set the record for least receiving yards to WRs in NFL history. I would start that list off with WR being the most likely to be cut and go from there. We should be able to trade either Gus or Hill... and considering the focus on speed in the draft plus the additional year, I’m guessing it would be Gus. Then from there I agree with you that DL or LB could go either way.

Edited by diamondbull424
“Traditional“ not “transitional” 😂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, diamondbull424 said:

RG3 doesn’t have to be special to be a backup QB. He just needs to have league experience that he can add to the QB room and he needs to be able to execute the offense. He’s got 4.4/4.5 speed still at this point. We need someone that if Lamar goes down for any reason we have a guy who can still play aggressively as a running QB because he knows there’s ANOTHER backup option. But remember in 2018 where RG3 ran the offense a lot more passively when he was the only healthy QB after Lamar went down? We don’t want that. We want him going in and making the best option reads at the mesh point to win football games until Lamar returns.

If we ran a more “transitional” offense than sure having two QBs was plenty. But we don’t.

Your major point for Jaleel Scott was the team support from carrying him on the roster all season, they did the same thing for Jordan Lasley the year before he got cut. What’s more the team showed more support for both RG3 and McSorely as RG3 got the start against the Steelers and McSorely actually saw game time for a play against the Steelers. Scott on the other hand was simply insurance on the roster.

RG3 making the roster is just realistic. NFL teams don’t like to bank on untrustworthy options. Why trust Trace McSorely when you don’t have to? Plus considering Trace might not see as much preseason experience considering our starters might need to see more time so as to build more chemistry before the season... it’ll be even harder for him to jump Griffin on the roster.

Scott will have to compete this year with defensive players that can actually contribute on special teams... would I rather have a backup receiver that we likely never use? Or a backup defensive player that could impact special teams if called upon? I’ll take the latter.

Lastly, Boykin as one year removed from being a 3rd round pick getting cut for Scott isn’t very realistic. And I say cut because the roster decisions will likely come down to a 3rd QB, 6th WR, 4th RB, 5th LB, and an 8th DL. We just set the record for least receiving yards to WRs in NFL history. I would start that list off with WR being the most likely to be cut and go from there. We should be able to trade either Gus or Hill... and considering the focus on speed in the draft plus the additional year, I’m guessing it would be Gus. Then from there I agree with you that DL or LB could go either way.

Fair enough. There are just some things that RGIII does and says that really rub me the wrong way, personality-wise. IMO they aren't the traits you are looking for in backup QB. If McSorely has developed and passes RGIII in terms of ability, I would look for any excuse to cut RGIII. McSorely now has 1 year of experience so maybe he is ready. But that's just me. 

As for Scott, I don't think Lasley is a great comp because he clearly had personality issues. I'm not saying Scott is better than Boykin or Boykin will get cut. But, if Scott balls out in training camp/preseason, he has a chance to make the roster. Sometimes a player will make a leap and force his way onto the roster. The Ravens have shown enough faith in Scott so far that, if he plays well, I think they'll try to keep him. But it's up to him, how he performs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, diamondbull424 said:

 

Scott will have to compete this year with defensive players that can actually contribute on special teams... would I rather have a backup receiver that we likely never use? Or a backup defensive player that could impact special teams if called upon? I’ll take the latter.

 

Not sure those are mutually exclusive choices. Scott may end up being a backup that's rarely used (let's call it our 6th receiver), but someone does have to be inactive on game day. A defensive player who contributes on special teams won't necessarily make it over him because that guy would definitely have to be active. At that point, I feel like it's more about what he offers as a WR both now and in the future (obviously diminishing value in Y3 vs. Y2) against other WRs we may carry on the 53, with ST ability being a consideration. But I'm not sure he's competing as much against a ST player on defense, unless that guy is going to be pushing another young defensive player who isn't going to be looked to for ST contribution to not dress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, diamondbull424 said:

Not that the last day of the draft isn’t important, especially with our squad... but the vast majority of year one (CV19 influenced season) impact talents will come from the first two days of the draft.

We got 3/5 with defense. What’s more RB is the one position on offense noted for historically having the shortest learning curve in the NFL. So really I don’t count that as antithesis to the point I was making.

We went with 4/5 positions that could have shorter learning curves. Again my point isn’t that offense wasn’t “valuable” this draft, but that the team and it’s draft strategy may have been influenced by wanting to get an early advantage by prioritizing positions with a quicker learning curves. I’m sure the talent of the players drafted played the biggest part, but especially when you consider a decision such as Denzel Mims vs JK Dobbins... if you think Mims year one impact could be further hindered by a limited offseason to build chemistry with Lamar, that would make the decision to go with a RB even easier... a guy who can come in and very quickly have an impact on the explosiveness of the rushing attack to give the offense another gear of consistent speed.

But back to defense, those front 7 players can each be given specific roles that they excel at early to allow them to excel schematically and perform well in games, while not having to overwhelm them with too much.

Where’s going OL early, you’d rather have the protections be handled by seasons vets when prep time is a factor. You’d also rather have WRs who know the ins and outs of your offense already and have built a chemistry already with your QB.

Even the WRs that we did take were special teams specialized options with Duvernay having been a pretty good Kick returner and Proche a quality punt returner. They can come in and excel in those roles early until they can be relied upon within the offense by virtue of having the playbook down and chemistry built within the offense on the field.

Might want to count again, it's 3/6 on first two days. And I'm not sure how RBs often being quicker to contribute supports your comment re weighting of the draft away from offense and toward defense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, AngusMcFife said:

Yes I think there will be a position battle between Ellis and Mack. If Mack doesn't perform during camp he could easily be cut. Haven't seen Mack do much of anything yet. But he's young and under control, so he has that going for him.

The ILB battle is another one to watch. Any one of Ryan, Board, Alaka could make the team or be cut. It's all about performance (and injury, possibly). 

The Ravens did choose to keep Scott on the 53 man roster all of last year, so they must think somewhat highly of him. Boykin was okay last year but only caught 13 balls. If Scott outperforms Boykin during training camp, that would put the coaches in an interesting position. 

Also I love the potential of Duvernay and Proche, but if either one is not picking things up in training camp and gets dinged, they could be a IR-stash candidate. Not all rookie WRs are ready for the NFL. 

I wasn't impressed with RGIII's play last year, and I think he's somewhat self-centered. He didn't protect himself running either, he could easily injure himself. I just don't see the point in keeping him. If McSorely regresses we can send him to the practice squad and keep RGIII. Keeping 3 QBs on the roster is unnecessary since we don't need a developmental QB. We just need one guy who can step in and perform if Lamar goes down.

 

Honestly I like the way McSorley runs the ball better than RG3. He attacks more which is important when running the option. I feel like RG3 doesn’t have the suddenness he needs to run the ball the way we would like to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

OFFENSE (24): 

QB (3): Lamar, RGII, McSorely. 

RB (4): Dobbins, Ingram, Edwards, Hill

WR (5): Hollywood, Snead, Boykin, Duvernay, Proche

TE (3): Boyle, Andrews, Breeland

OT (3): Stanley, Brown, A. Smith

IOL (6) : Bozeman, Powers, Mekari, Bredeson, T. Phillips, Skura

Notable cuts: Scott, C. Moore, D. Thomas

 

DEFENSE (26): 

DT (3): Williams, Mack

DL (4): Wolfe, Campbell, Ricard, Madubuike,

EDGE (4): Judon, Bowser, Ferguson, Ward, vet FA

ILB (4): Queen, Harrison, Fort, Alaka

CB (6): Humphrey, Peters, Smith, Young, Marshall, Averett

S (5): Thomas, Clark, Elliot, Levine, Stone

Notable cuts: Ellis, Ryan, Board
IR Stash: Washington

 

ST (3): Morgan, Koch, Tucker

Mine would be pretty similar to most.  Main points are:

- I'd keep RGIII.  I just don't see it with McSorley, but I'd be very surprised if we don't carry 3 QBs so he still makes the roster
- Keep all 4 RBs, but would be willing to trade Gus if the offer was good enough
- Scott doesn't make it because he doesn't really contribute on ST
- I'm expecting Skura to be too healthy to be on PUP
- Ellis would be one of the last cut
- Might look like its a little light on DL, but with Ward frequently playing DL last year, and the fact that nickle is basically the base D league wide means its not as important imo
- I still expect us to sign a vet FA that makes the opening roster at EDGE (whether that is McPhee, or someone like Clay Matthews doesn't really matter at this stage)
- Alaka & Ryan to fight it out for the 2nd thumper ILB/special teams spot
- DBs are all fairly self-explanatory 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, sp6488 said:

Might want to count again, it's 3/6 on first two days. And I'm not sure how RBs often being quicker to contribute supports your comment re weighting of the draft away from offense and toward defense.

3/6, noted. Now what are the value of the picks spent on defense over the draft vs the value of the offensive picks spent? This isn’t rhetorical, I’ve done the math. We spent 608.3 pts on improving the offense; whereas we spent 1027.8 pts on improving the defense.

I said the team was making a concerted effort to building up the defense more than the offense. You disagree. Well let’s break it down further.

The team had two picks in the 2nd round initially, they spent one on providing the offense with a RB. This team just set the rushing record for most rushing yards in NFL history. Keep in mind I like the pick and I think JK Dobbins will be very good... but the law of diminishing returns is a real thing. How much more impactful is adding a RB in the second round going to be for the overall dominance of our rushing attack? Perhaps it will potentially be felt in moments similar to plays that only JKD can make in his own version of a diddle diddle type of fashion or special playoff performances where he personally can’t be stopped. Perhaps what he adds is that elite element that can get us over the top in the playoff games to get to the big dance. But a superior WR option also could have done those kinds of things and had special performances such as Denzel Mims... only without the diminishing returns part as he impacts another portion of the offense.

Thus even though I like the player and I feel JKD can make a big (and quick) impact there is some legitimacy to the concerns that @Danand @DreamKid @BaltimoreTerphave over the selection from a foundation standpoint within the offense. How much is that pick a “foundational“ move vs “new and improved” model?

Then we look at the fact that after adding two talented IDL in free agency they go back to the well with Madubuike with a high 3rd round pick (almost a 2nd). Then they even add another IDL in the 5th to boot. The DL was a pretty strong unit before the draft, after the draft the unit is YOKED.

After spending a high round pick on Queen, Harrison is also added with a day two pick.

Meanwhile our biggest offensive needs were IOL, WR, and TE. We didn’t spend a pick on a TE in the draft and we didn’t invest a pick on our biggest offensive need until the our comp 3rd and didn’t spend a pick on our ancillary need at WR until the late 3rd. I wouldn’t call the draft we just had, one where we spent a “concerted effort” on making sure the offensive weaknesses were cured.

I don’t disagree with the plan. But besides MAYBE Tyre Phillips, I’m struggling to see a foundational/immediate impact player added to the offense from the draft. With the defense I’m not seeing as tough a task... Queen, Madubuike, and Harrison could all see serious impact roles from the jump in 2020 and be foundational players moving forward. Our offensive talents all seem like the type that will have to sit and wait at least half a season before they’re trusted to be able to start taking away reps from the veteran, especially in a shortened offseason. So yeah, I definitely find it intriguing that we gave such a concerted focus on defensive situation considering the free agents already brought in and the #1 defense allowed last year.

But perhaps since you see things differently as to our draft and it’s overall focus... then we’ll have to agree to disagree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, drd23 said:

Mine would be pretty similar to most.  Main points are:

- I'd keep RGIII.  I just don't see it with McSorley, but I'd be very surprised if we don't carry 3 QBs so he still makes the roster
- Keep all 4 RBs, but would be willing to trade Gus if the offer was good enough
- Scott doesn't make it because he doesn't really contribute on ST
- I'm expecting Skura to be too healthy to be on PUP
- Ellis would be one of the last cut
- Might look like its a little light on DL, but with Ward frequently playing DL last year, and the fact that nickle is basically the base D league wide means its not as important imo
- I still expect us to sign a vet FA that makes the opening roster at EDGE (whether that is McPhee, or someone like Clay Matthews doesn't really matter at this stage)
- Alaka & Ryan to fight it out for the 2nd thumper ILB/special teams spot
- DBs are all fairly self-explanatory 

Agree. Ultimately feel the same with a pass rusher. Ryan likely finds himself as the odd man out if we can add one of those two pass rushers you mentioned... or perhaps if there’s a surprise cap casualty that happens post June 1.

Not that I’m expecting it but I wonder what the team feels towards Suggs. If Suggs and McPhee were both available, would they choose McPhee or choose to go with veteran Suggs as an option (assuming Clay goes elsewhere)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UDFA Tyler Huntley could be the 3rd QB we carry into the season imo.

remains to be seen how both do in camp obviously but both are smallish dual threats who will have to battle it out against each other.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/26/2020 at 1:57 AM, BareYourTeeth said:

Yup. Jacob Breeland, Michael Divinity, and Nigel Warrior are a few other notable guys with good chances.

Fun fact, Warrior's father is Dale Carter, who had a cup of coffee in Baltimore on the back end of his career.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, drd23 said:


- I still expect us to sign a vet FA that makes the opening roster at EDGE (whether that is McPhee, or someone like Clay Matthews doesn't really matter at this stage)
 

Yep, this is definitely where I see us making one more move for vet depth. McPhee is I'm guessing the fallback option but Clay Matthews and Markus Golden likely in play here.

Starting at 4pm today FA signings won't count against the comp formula so we could see movement on this pretty quickly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BaltimoreTerp said:

Yep, this is definitely where I see us making one more move for vet depth. McPhee is I'm guessing the fallback option but Clay Matthews and Markus Golden likely in play here.

Starting at 4pm today FA signings won't count against the comp formula so we could see movement on this pretty quickly. 

According to Jeff Zrbiech from the athletic, we are apparently talking to McPhee already

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gotta think Jaleel Scott is gone unless he can contribute on ST. Chris Moore is a +ST player - especially at downing the ball inside the 20 - and Scott is going to have to compete with Brown, Snead, Boykin, Duvernay, and Proche now for "receiving impact".

Also think Ellis is probably gone, maybe even Mack. 

RG3 will be kept. Would be dumb not to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Ray Reed said:

Gotta think Jaleel Scott is gone unless he can contribute on ST. Chris Moore is a +ST player - especially at downing the ball inside the 20 - and Scott is going to have to compete with Brown, Snead, Boykin, Duvernay, and Proche now for "receiving impact".

Also think Ellis is probably gone, maybe even Mack. 

RG3 will be kept. Would be dumb not to.

Personally I think it's one, but not both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×