Consensus Mock - 16. Baltimore Ravens

[goldfishwars]

Just now, IDOG_det said:

I'm saying get off your high horse and don't get so defensive and go after someone like @diamondbull424 when they make a legitimate criticism. You easily could have included any of those WR's (who absolutely have been mentioned as 1st round players) over guys like James Daniels, Dallas Goedert, Mike McGlinchey...

My high horse? They’re all listed as 1st rounders at positions of need for the Ravens. Whatever dude, someone else can pick this up.

[wackywabbit]

Why would DT be a position of need? The owner literally joked that he was pretty sure we wouldn't take a DT round 1 this year.

Anyway, Ridley was going to run away with this anyway. Why not just say that anyone can write in their two picks if they don't like the poll; it'd be impossible to have a perfect poll that everyone likes anyway.

[bananabucket]

Lets not get all bent out of shape for him not including guys who had 0.00% chance to win the poll.

[wackywabbit]

This would be a great board for the Ravens, btw. Our pick of the WR like we were promised last year, but didn't get. All of Corey Davis, Mike WIlliams, and John Ross were there for the Ravens pick in this exercise last year. That should tell you something about how this group views positions. 

It'd also be great if we were in a spot to trade down to someone wanting the last of the big 4 qbs, right after the Cardinals pull the third. Granted, I want Jackson for the Ravens, but the value of a QB prospect being there is a great thing overall.

[diamondbull424]

7 hours ago, goldfishwars said:

Haha, I’m the sensitive one? You said I listed few legitimate options and I asked you which ones. I love DJ Moore, but haven’t seen him as a consideration in the mid first round. The poll options are made up from consensus big boards, sorry there wasn’t more options at receiver, I tried to cover all directions the Ravens could go in.

So you laugh at a small criticism that is simply to include more options for whatever a teams main needs are?

And yet, I’m sensitive. I mean, you can’t invite different team forums to take part in your consensus mock and then not expect a dialogue.

In the Ravens forum, there is a strong consensus of people who are more partial to Moore/Kirk than to Sutton.

No one said make a list of ONLY receivers. Simply said perhaps you should include a few more options. It was a suggestion.

You laughed it off. So absolutely you felt some kind of way. Just admit to yourself and you will feel much better and the tension within you can finally dissipate.

[Soko]

Don’t you love when someone does something of their own, at their own leisure, and for fun moreso than anything...

And then people come out and say how it ought to actually be done? 

[goldfishwars]

7 hours ago, diamondbull424 said:

So you laugh at a small criticism that is simply to include more options for whatever a teams main needs are?

And yet, I’m sensitive. I mean, you can’t invite different team forums to take part in your consensus mock and then not expect a dialogue.

In the Ravens forum, there is a strong consensus of people who are more partial to Moore/Kirk than to Sutton.

No one said make a list of ONLY receivers. Simply said perhaps you should include a few more options. It was a suggestion.

You laughed it off. So absolutely you felt some kind of way. Just admit to yourself and you will feel much better and the tension within you can finally dissipate.

Sure, so maybe it's an easier conversation if you'd started out with this and we get a good dialogue going instead of announcing you would draft DJ Moore at 16 and there were no legitimate options on the poll. 

Essentially this is the problem with these things, I wouldn't have thought DJ Moore would be in consideration at 16. I doubt many people would to be honest. I tried to set out the criteria rules with poll options as best as I could based on consensus top 50 players - but there's not really a way of doing this without the conversation always drifting back to who should be on the poll. For every DJ Moore, there's a Christian Kirk, a James Washington, an Anthony Miller, an Auden Tate, a Michael Gallup, a Dante Pettis, an Equanimeous St. Brown, a DJ Chark. You include one, why wasn't another there? And what about the other top prospects at other positions of need? You've got to get them on. And what about other prospects who would have been great value here regardless of need? You gotta keep them on too. 

[diamondbull424]

4 hours ago, goldfishwars said:

Sure, so maybe it's an easier conversation if you'd started out with this and we get a good dialogue going instead of announcing you would draft DJ Moore at 16 and there were no legitimate options on the poll. 

Essentially this is the problem with these things, I wouldn't have thought DJ Moore would be in consideration at 16. I doubt many people would to be honest. I tried to set out the criteria rules with poll options as best as I could based on consensus top 50 players - but there's not really a way of doing this without the conversation always drifting back to who should be on the poll. For every DJ Moore, there's a Christian Kirk, a James Washington, an Anthony Miller, an Auden Tate, a Michael Gallup, a Dante Pettis, an Equanimeous St. Brown, a DJ Chark. You include one, why wasn't another there? And what about the other top prospects at other positions of need? You've got to get them on. And what about other prospects who would have been great value here regardless of need? You gotta keep them on too. 

Yeah, brevity has never been my strength. I’m generally told that I talk/write too much. So I have been making a conscious effort to write/talk less so as not to be convoluted.

So perhaps, I’ll begin again. The biggest need we have is WR. The two legitimate options are:

1. Calvin Ridley- Tight framed, great route runner, speedy, great hands, polished. More of a finesse speedy type.

2. Courtland Sutton- Tall player, solid hands, big frame, minimal separation. More of a red zone option.

This has two types of receivers. I’d argue that a third type of receiver would be a physical 3rd down option. A YAC receiver type.

Thus, whether it’s DJ Moore or Christian Kirk, I think adding that third “type” of receiver would be beneficial. Thus it opens the dialogue of which type of receiver might be the optimal fit for the Ravens in the future.

Both Kirk and Moore are built like Ray Rice, but are just legitimate WRs. They’re also pretty young. The only reason I’m partial to Moore over Kirk is because I think he’s more versatile.

Would I want him at 16? Not ideally, but I’d want either him or Ridley. My biggest concern with Ridley is his frame. He’s an excellent receiver option, easily the most polished. But he’s also 3 years older and playing in the AFC North, can he hold up? He plays a little soft and in divisions like the AFC North (or NFC East for that matter) that’s not ideal.

[Danand]

3 hours ago, diamondbull424 said:

Yeah, brevity has never been my strength. I’m generally told that I talk/write too much. So I have been making a conscious effort to write/talk less so as not to be convoluted.

So perhaps, I’ll begin again. The biggest need we have is WR. The two legitimate options are:

1. Calvin Ridley- Tight framed, great route runner, speedy, great hands, polished. More of a finesse speedy type.

2. Courtland Sutton- Tall player, solid hands, big frame, minimal separation. More of a red zone option.

This has two types of receivers. I’d argue that a third type of receiver would be a physical 3rd down option. A YAC receiver type.

Thus, whether it’s DJ Moore or Christian Kirk, I think adding that third “type” of receiver would be beneficial. Thus it opens the dialogue of which type of receiver might be the optimal fit for the Ravens in the future.

Both Kirk and Moore are built like Ray Rice, but are just legitimate WRs. They’re also pretty young. The only reason I’m partial to Moore over Kirk is because I think he’s more versatile.

Would I want him at 16? Not ideally, but I’d want either him or Ridley. My biggest concern with Ridley is his frame. He’s an excellent receiver option, easily the most polished. But he’s also 3 years older and playing in the AFC North, can he hold up? He plays a little soft and in divisions like the AFC North (or NFC East for that matter) that’s not ideal.

It could also be an example of the "Newsome-Alabama" narrative, that we joke about, but everywhere else seem to be accepted as more of a scenario than it usually is. Ridley being the receiver he is (can play inside/outside, run routes, has hands, Alabama-pedigree) makes him an easy choice in a poll like this.

[Rich7sena]

Surprised Ridley ended up being the pick with most of the top tackles still on the board. I didd get a chance to vote, but I think I would've gone: Brown/Wynn.

[diamondbull424]

3 hours ago, Rich7sena said:

Surprised Ridley ended up being the pick with most of the top tackles still on the board. I didd get a chance to vote, but I think I would've gone: Brown/Wynn.

Receiver is a much bigger need than OT. We have a stop gap solution at RT and just spent a top 10 pick on a LT back in 2016.

Whereas our top receiver on payroll is either Jeremy Maclin or Chris Moore... and Maclin is going to be a cap casualty. Thus a receiver with 240 yds and 3 TDs. Even with adding a talented receiver in free agency the draft will see us take a receiver high regardless.

[Rich7sena]

17 minutes ago, diamondbull424 said:

Receiver is a much bigger need than OT. We have a stop gap solution at RT and just spent a top 10 pick on a LT back in 2016.

Whereas our top receiver on payroll is either Jeremy Maclin or Chris Moore... and Maclin is going to be a cap casualty. Thus a receiver with 240 yds and 3 TDs. Even with adding a talented receiver in free agency the draft will see us take a receiver high regardless.

I think the value at receiver is in the 2nd-4th round in this draft. If I'm betting on Ridley or the field, I'm taking the field. Further, both Brown or Wynn can be good starting tackles in the league or very good starting guards; the Ravens could use both.

[diamondbull424]

1 minute ago, Rich7sena said:

I think the value at receiver is in the 2nd-4th round in this draft. If I'm betting on Ridley or the field, I'm taking the field. Further, both Brown or Wynn can be good starting tackles in the league or very good starting guards; the Ravens could use both.

Meh. I like Brown, don’t get me wrong but I like other guys more.

Granted Connor Williams isn’t available in this poll, but I like him more. And I also like Tyrell Crosby more.

I get what you’re saying but I’d rather take the best of what the receiver position has to offer (be it Ridley or someone else) and then take a Crosby, Rankin, or Oniel in the second. They don’t have the same size, but all have similar ability IMO. And I think it’s close enough that I’d rather, like you said, choose the field when it comes to a RT. Especially when the Ravens front office have always had a great history with selecting OTs on day 2 and 3, but not the same kind of success can be said about the WR position. I’d rather give our biggest struggle, the biggest headstart.

[Teen Girl Squad]

The Ravens' biggest need isn't WR, its QB. I would have picked Lamar in this poll knowing that you have the WR fall back option. Wouldn't surprise me if he beat Flacco in camp (and I'm not a Lamar guy). There is only so many OCs and WRs you can cycle through before, maybe, you might consider that its a QB issue.