Draft / FA / Offseason Roster Moves (Merged)

**wickedsolo** · 02-06-2013, 03:53 PM

David Diehl may become available.

**The Excellector** · 02-06-2013, 03:57 PM

Originally Posted by leachisabeast

IDK man, I'd still rather take a more developmental player, than move up to take him. We need to get faster on D.

The key to this Super Bowl run was Joe Flacco and the line's ability to protect him. That will be the key to the team's success going forward. There are only really two starting spots up for grabs on D. FS, if Reed is not resigned, and Ray's spot. Upshaw will start opposite Suggs. You are only going to get, but so much speed from your NG, even if you get someone to replace Cody. Ellerbe is in. Jones is in.

**leachisabeast** · 02-06-2013, 03:57 PM

Originally Posted by wickedsolo

David Diehl may become available.

back up guard, nothing more

**leachisabeast** · 02-06-2013, 03:59 PM

Originally Posted by The Excellector

The key to this Super Bowl run was Joe Flacco and the line's ability to protect him. That will be the key to the team's success going forward. There are only really two starting spots up for grabs on D. FS, if Reed is not resigned, and Ray's spot. Upshaw will start opposite Suggs. You are only going to get, but so much speed from your NG, even if you get someone to replace Cody. Ellerbe is in. Jones is in.

True, and like I keep saying, when Suggs comes back healthy next season (maybe a bit of an IF) and hopefully Ngata comes back healthy after surgery, our D will be top ten again, because they are both THAT good, plus Upshaw has shown he can replace Jarrett Johnson, so no loss there, we need a NT, a ILB, and possibly a FS, we will see.

**alien bird** · 02-06-2013, 03:59 PM

Originally Posted by The Excellector

The key to this Super Bowl run was Joe Flacco and the line's ability to protect him. That will be the key to the team's success going forward. There are only really two starting spots up for grabs on D. FS, if Reed is not resigned, and Ray's spot. Upshaw will start opposite Suggs. You are only going to get, but so much speed from your NG, even if you get someone to replace Cody. Ellerbe is in. Jones is in.

True, but if the Ravens don't get faster on defense, it could get ugly.

**bmorecareful** · 02-06-2013, 04:19 PM

Originally Posted by alien bird

Well, that's the key - if the value is right. The Ravens do need to get some impact players, so trading a bunch of early round picks for one move up would probably be a mistake.

Besides, is it really true that LT is such an overwhelming need, even if McKinnie isn't resigned? Yes, the offensive line played lights out after moving McKinnie to LT, but that wasn't the only move. The much bigger move lost in all this (in my opinion) was Osemele to LG. He made just about every defensive lineman he faced his bitch. Total domination. So maybe it was the huge improvement to LG (over Jah Reid) that was the key.

Take a look at what Flacco was able to do as a result. Early in the season he never was able to step up into the pocket because the pocket was collapsing in the middle. After Osemele is moved inside, that pocket was really open to step into, and Flacco made big plays in doing so. McKinnie was able to push the edge rushers deep, but maybe another LT could do that, even if to a lesser degree. So all this talk about McKinnie being the key might just be wrong - maybe it was Osemele that made that line work.

This is a REALLY good post and if you review Filmstudy's grades of McKinnie and Oher over the last few games you'll find even more support for this theory. In the Super Bowl, McKinnie put up a C- and Oher a D, yet Osemele an A+ and Ken's analysis matches my own: that our interior OL was outstanding but our pass protection and run blocking on the edges less so.

The same was true vs. New England. Now, admittedly... McKinnie and Oher were both near-flawless vs. Denver and McKinnie was excellent vs. Indy. Those games may not have been won without good protection from the tackles. But Osemele at LG has just been so, so good that the interior is really the dominant part of the line. I've always said that you need to be strong at 3 spots in a row on the OL, and we didn't have that all year really until now. The Saints, for example, work the same way, protecting Brees well with a rock-solid interior that he can step up into.

I'm not saying LT isn't important, clearly we need to get one that can stick, but maybe our interior OL has improved to the point that Oher at LT and Reid at RT might be non-devastating options.

**leachisabeast** · 02-06-2013, 04:29 PM

Originally Posted by bmorecareful

This is a REALLY good post and if you review Filmstudy's grades of McKinnie and Oher over the last few games you'll find even more support for this theory. In the Super Bowl, McKinnie put up a C- and Oher a D, yet Osemele an A+ and Ken's analysis matches my own: that our interior OL was outstanding but our pass protection and run blocking on the edges less so.

The same was true vs. New England. Now, admittedly... McKinnie and Oher were both near-flawless vs. Denver and McKinnie was excellent vs. Indy. Those games may not have been won without good protection from the tackles. But Osemele at LG has just been so, so good that the interior is really the dominant part of the line. I've always said that you need to be strong at 3 spots in a row on the OL, and we didn't have that all year really until now. The Saints, for example, work the same way, protecting Brees well with a rock-solid interior that he can step up into.

I'm not saying LT isn't important, clearly we need to get one that can stick, but maybe our interior OL has improved to the point that Oher at LT and Reid at RT might be non-devastating options.

You are so right, and I think the Oline is fine the way it is. You can't have a perfect all around Oline, so we are getting by with average to solid play at OT, but with arguably top 3 all around interior Oline. KO is going to be a beast, Yanda is Yanda, the center spot may be up in the air, but I'll say this, Birk looked the best he's ever been in a Ravens uni in this play off run. KO reminds me of Mike Iupati.

**jonboy79** · 02-06-2013, 04:30 PM

Originally Posted by bmorecareful

This is a REALLY good post and if you review Filmstudy's grades of McKinnie and Oher over the last few games you'll find even more support for this theory. In the Super Bowl, McKinnie put up a C- and Oher a D, yet Osemele an A+ and Ken's analysis matches my own: that our interior OL was outstanding but our pass protection and run blocking on the edges less so.

The same was true vs. New England. Now, admittedly... McKinnie and Oher were both near-flawless vs. Denver and McKinnie was excellent vs. Indy. Those games may not have been won without good protection from the tackles. But Osemele at LG has just been so, so good that the interior is really the dominant part of the line. I've always said that you need to be strong at 3 spots in a row on the OL, and we didn't have that all year really until now. The Saints, for example, work the same way, protecting Brees well with a rock-solid interior that he can step up into.

I'm not saying LT isn't important, clearly we need to get one that can stick, but maybe our interior OL has improved to the point that Oher at LT and Reid at RT might be non-devastating options.

While I agree in principla, that last line scares the bejeezus out f me. It's also New Orleans strategy, btu then again, Brees gets rid of the all as fast as anyone in history.

**leachisabeast** · 02-06-2013, 04:31 PM

no no no no please no more Oher at LT, it cannot happen again!!!

**The Excellector** · 02-06-2013, 04:36 PM

Rolling the dice, and will be nowhere to be found when it comes up snake eyes.

**Carey** · 02-06-2013, 04:44 PM

Originally Posted by jonboy79

While I agree in principla, that last line scares the bejeezus out f me. It's also New Orleans strategy, btu then again, Brees gets rid of the all as fast as anyone in history.

My view as well, i think an adequate LT with the proper length for the position will be fine. So IMO you resign Mckinnie and draft a guy you can develop to play at that same level and hopefully eventually higher.

**The Excellector** · 02-06-2013, 04:52 PM

Originally Posted by Carey

My view as well, i think an adequate LT with the proper length for the position will be fine. So IMO you resign Mckinnie and draft a guy you can develop to play at that same level and hopefully eventually higher.

That's all I am really saying. If Ozzie sees a Joe Thomas type prospect in the first, this is the year to move up and get him. If he doesn't, but sees someone lower down who has similar potential but is less pro-ready, take him and develop him behind McKinnie.

I just don't think they can get away with one or the other. They need both.

**BigPlayReceiver** · 02-06-2013, 04:58 PM

Originally Posted by leachisabeast

no no no no please no more Oher at LT, it cannot happen again!!!

I lol'd

**leachisabeast** · 02-06-2013, 05:00 PM

Originally Posted by BigPlayReceiver

I lol'd

I really wanna get a gif of Ozzie saying that when answering a question on Cams firing, it was priceless hahaahahaha

**bmorecareful** · 02-06-2013, 05:19 PM

I agree that Oher is way, way less than optimal at LT in 2013. But if we don't re-sign McKinnie and don't draft a day-one starter at LT... what happens? What if our developmental LT really does need to develop and doesn't win the job in training camp? What then?

McKinnie might be gone no matter what happens with the money. If we draft Quessenberry, Faulk, Bakhtiari, Long, etc. and they need to sit for a year... who plays LT? Do we sign another scrap heaper, if there is one? Do we REALLY feel better about Demetress Bell or Max Starks at LT rather than Oher?

This is a serious question. I really don't think the Ravens are going to get a day 1 starter at LT in this draft and I'm also hesitant to say McKinnie is definitely in their future plans. Who plays LT next year if that's the case?

**Paintballguy** · 02-06-2013, 05:23 PM

I'm 90% sure we'll have McKinnie back. I don't see him getting a large offer from anyone.

**GOTA** · 02-06-2013, 05:38 PM

Originally Posted by Carey

My view as well, i think an adequate LT with the proper length for the position will be fine. So IMO you resign Mckinnie and draft a guy you can develop to play at that same level and hopefully eventually higher.

We might already have that developmental LT in KO. He was great for a rookie. I would not be shocked if he isn't competing for that LT job next year.

**arnie_uk** · 02-06-2013, 05:40 PM

Originally Posted by GOTA

We might already have that developmental LT in KO. He was great for a rookie. I would not be shocked if he isn't competing for that LT job next year.

I'd rather him stay as a hard, he's been dominate. He struggled at right tackle at times, but you could see he was at home at guard.

**jonboy79** · 02-06-2013, 06:39 PM

Originally Posted by bmorecareful

I agree that Oher is way, way less than optimal at LT in 2013. But if we don't re-sign McKinnie and don't draft a day-one starter at LT... what happens? What if our developmental LT really does need to develop and doesn't win the job in training camp? What then?

McKinnie might be gone no matter what happens with the money. If we draft Quessenberry, Faulk, Bakhtiari, Long, etc. and they need to sit for a year... who plays LT? Do we sign another scrap heaper, if there is one? Do we REALLY feel better about Demetress Bell or Max Starks at LT rather than Oher?

This is a serious question. I really don't think the Ravens are going to get a day 1 starter at LT in this draft and I'm also hesitant to say McKinnie is definitely in their future plans. Who plays LT next year if that's the case?

Unfortunately, Oher. Even worse, is that Reid is prob at RT.

This is why many of us want both McKinnie and a rook. Cuz the last thing we want to see is Oher at LT.