Photo

Ezekiel Elliott should be considered at #6


  • Please log in to reply
76 replies to this topic

#1 primetime

primetime

    All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 942 posts
  • LocationHampstead, MD

Posted 26 March 2016 - 08:16 AM

From all indications, it seems as if we're going with a defensive player at #6 or perhaps Ronnie Stanley.

 

I completely understand and appreciate the idea of looking at a pass rusher or corner, especially considering the need. With that said, I think we'd be remiss to not take a long look at Ezekiel Elliott with the 6th pick.

 

Despite having players that occupy the running back spot, we don't have anyone that really stands out. West and Buck Allen are good depth, we don't know how good Forsett will be coming off the injury and entering his 30's. Plus, we really can't expect anything out of Trent Richardson, should we bring him in. For a team that desperately lacks playmakers on offense, Elliott is a guy that absolutely fits the bill. He's a rare talent; a guy that can hit a home run every time he touches the ball.

 

I know that everyone will say that the running back position has been devalued across the league but our organization obviously still values running back and we still build our offense around our the running game.  So when you take into account our offensive philosophy and our need for playmakers/talent at the skill positions, I think we need to give Elliott serious consideration at #6.


  • BSLChrisStoner and Greg Pappas like this
@primetime667083

#2 BSLRobShields

BSLRobShields

    BSL Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 83,969 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 26 March 2016 - 08:29 AM

No we shouldn't.

 

If we traded down to 15, I MIGHT consider it but even then, I wouldn't want to.

 

Too easy to get elite RBs than using a top 6 pick on one.

 

Besides, you shouldn't want to give a RB a second contract and when you pick 6th, you want to give that player a second contract.


  • Tranquil1 likes this
@BSLRobShields

#3 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 112,503 posts

Posted 26 March 2016 - 08:50 AM

Agreed completely Prime.

#4 BSLGabeFerguson

BSLGabeFerguson

    Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,186 posts
  • LocationCity of Angels

Posted 26 March 2016 - 11:08 AM

I don't think the team desperately lacks playmakers on offense.

Elliott is a top 10 talent, but the Ravens have too many needs on defense to pass on the elite defensive talent that is almost assuredly going to be available at #6.

If Ramsey, Jack, Bosa and Buckner are all gone I could potentially see it, but trading back would still be preferable.
@gabefergy

#5 primetime

primetime

    All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 942 posts
  • LocationHampstead, MD

Posted 26 March 2016 - 11:59 AM

Gabe (can't quote from my work computer).....Beyond Flacco, our best offensive player is Marshall Yanda. With all due respect to Yanda, that's not good.

 

If there are playmakers on this offense, I simply don't see them. When you break down our skill players, here's how I see it......

 

-Perriman - physically gifted with size and speed that you simply can't coach. That said, he's yet to suit up. So until he does it, he hasn't done it. Potential to be a game breaker is there but we have to see it.

 

-Gillmore - we've seen flashes of him being Gronk-lite but he has his own health issues, which are compounded by his double shoulder surgery this offseason. Similar to Perriman but with at least some track record of making an impact. Still, you can't really pencil him in.

 

-Sr - at 37 on Opening Day and coming off of a ruptured Achilles, what is he going to have left in the tank? Can he be counted on for 60-65 snaps a game? I can't say that with any confidence.

 

-other WRs Aiken, Campanaro, Butler, et al - complimentary pieces, nothing special from anyone in that group.

 

-M Williams - Potential but still raw, definitely wait and see.

 

-Watson - his numbers last year were an anomaly, IMO. He will be a nice compliment but nothing spectacular. 

 

-RBs - There's no one in current group of backs that flashes any special talent. Forsett going into his 30s and coming off injury is a big question mark, West and Allen are usable pieces but neither one is real feature back, IMO.

 

Bottom line, there is no one on this offense that would keep an opposing defensive coordinator up at night during the week. In my mind, that's the textbook definition of a lack of playmakers.

 

****EDIT****

 

I forgot to include Mike Wallace......I'm hopeful he can add an element to the offense. But I see as a slightly better version of 2012 Jacoby Jones. A 30-40 catch guy but hopefully his impact goes beyond just his stats. We'll have to wait and see with him as well.


  • BSLChrisStoner likes this
@primetime667083

#6 primetime

primetime

    All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 942 posts
  • LocationHampstead, MD

Posted 26 March 2016 - 12:12 PM

@Rob.....I know you're fearful of the 2nd contract to RBs; I remember how vocal you were against re-signing Ray Rice. You ended up right but I think it gets an asterisk because of how his career ended. Maybe his poor 2013 was a harbinger of doom but we'll never know.

 

The big thing for me with Elliott is this, when he gets the ball in his hands, good things happen. He can take the ball to the house at any time. I don't think it should be held against him that he happens to play running back.

 

We need playmakers and IMO, Elliott is a pretty special talent but I can certainly understand the trepidation of looking at him at 6.


@primetime667083

#7 BSLMikeRandall

BSLMikeRandall

    Sr. Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,339 posts

Posted 26 March 2016 - 12:45 PM

-Gillmore - we've seen flashes of him being Gronk-lite but he has his own health issues, which are compounded by his double shoulder surgery this offseason. Similar to Perriman but with at least some track record of making an impact. Still, you can't really pencil him in.

Not to derail the topic, but Gillmore only needs one shoulder surgery what what I've heard. The other they feared required it, did not. 

 

On Elliott, the only thing I'm worried about is how hard he was ridden in his last two years, Trent Richardson was abused in college, as was Melvin Gordon who might have been one of the least efficient RBs last year, and went off the board at #15. 

 

I think when you draft in the top ten, you should want the guy to step in a start from day one. They are that good, or filling a hole, or both. Doesn't always happen that way though. If you take Elliott at #6, I'm not sure he'll make it through the season with the wear on tear on him. It's a larger salary for these earlier picks that the Ravens haven't had in a long time. Do you want to carry the larger rookie contract for a guy who has to earn a job, or they stash with little playing time until his second year?

 

Now, If the pulse of the league is to pass on RBs until later, can they move up from their #6 in round two to the tail end of round one and take him there. Then the investment isn't as big at a volatile position for a guy with a couple question marks. 

 

Definitely playmaker ability though. 


@BSLMikeRandall

#8 BSLGabeFerguson

BSLGabeFerguson

    Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,186 posts
  • LocationCity of Angels

Posted 26 March 2016 - 01:27 PM

Yanda is the best offensive lineman in football so saying he is the second best player on offense isn't really that bad, in fact I would say he is actually the best player on our offense.

The receiving corps doesn't look phenomenal but it could easily end up being a top 5-10 unit overall.

The RBs also are not great, but they aren't awful. Forsett is a year removed from being the most efficient RB in the NFL. Getting some better depth on the OL will help the run game just as much if not more than a great RB.

Most importantly the defense needs play makers. If I'm looking at both units and ask which one needs more help it is the defense and it's not close.
@gabefergy

#9 bnickle

bnickle

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 38,177 posts

Posted 26 March 2016 - 05:59 PM

Elliott will be in play for the Ravens at #6.

#10 BSLRobShields

BSLRobShields

    BSL Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 83,969 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 26 March 2016 - 08:13 PM

@Rob.....I know you're fearful of the 2nd contract to RBs; I remember how vocal you were against re-signing Ray Rice. You ended up right but I think it gets an asterisk because of how his career ended. Maybe his poor 2013 was a harbinger of doom but we'll never know.
 
The big thing for me with Elliott is this, when he gets the ball in his hands, good things happen. He can take the ball to the house at any time. I don't think it should be held against him that he happens to play running back.
 
We need playmakers and IMO, Elliott is a pretty special talent but I can certainly understand the trepidation of looking at him at 6.


It's the easiest position to find elite level talent later in the draft.

How many elite RBs were first round picks and how many were second round or later?
  • Tranquil1 likes this
@BSLRobShields

#11 primetime

primetime

    All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 942 posts
  • LocationHampstead, MD

Posted 27 March 2016 - 08:22 AM

@Rob.....I know you're fearful of the 2nd contract to RBs; I remember how vocal you were against re-signing Ray Rice. You ended up right but I think it gets an asterisk because of how his career ended. Maybe his poor 2013 was a harbinger of doom but we'll never know.

 

The big thing for me with Elliott is this, when he gets the ball in his hands, good things happen. He can take the ball to the house at any time. I don't think it should be held against him that he happens to play running back.

 

We need playmakers and IMO, Elliott is a pretty special talent but I can certainly understand the trepidation of looking at him at 6.



It's the easiest position to find elite level talent later in the draft.


How many elite RBs were first round picks and how many were second round or later?


You have RBs that put up numbers because of the system they're in and then you have RBs that are just good.

For example, anyone that was ever in Kubiak's system gets an asterisk. Those backs have put up big numbers but it has less to do with ability and more to do with scheme.

As far as big time 1st round backs....going back to 2000, there have been 39 backs picked in round 1. "Elite" is a relative term but I'll give you the guys that I think were/are impact players....

'00-Jamal Lewis, Thomas Jones, Shaun Alexander
'01-LT
'02-no impact players
'03-Willis McGahee, Larry Johnson
'04-Steven Jackson
'05-this draft had Cedric Benson, Ronnie Brown and Cadillac Williams. Benson had a good career, Brown was OK; Williams had the injury
'06-DeAngelo Williams
'07-Adrian Peterson, Marshawn Lynch
'08-Chris Johnson, maybe Jonathan Stewart
'09, '10 and '11 were misses
'12-Doug Martin
'13 and '14 no 1st Rd backs
'15-still early but Todd Gurley looks like the real deal

So of the 39 1st round RBs since 2000, I think you can put 14 of them in the category of impact player. I would imagine that if you looked at round 1 as a whole, that's probably about the same percentage of overall hits on impact players.
@primetime667083

#12 primetime

primetime

    All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 942 posts
  • LocationHampstead, MD

Posted 27 March 2016 - 08:25 AM

And with regards to backs found in the later rounds, sure, there are impact guys.

I'll do the same thing I did with the 1st round backs going back to 200 0 when I get some time.

Hope everyone has a nice Easter.
@primetime667083

#13 BSLRobShields

BSLRobShields

    BSL Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 83,969 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 27 March 2016 - 08:52 AM

And with regards to backs found in the later rounds, sure, there are impact guys.

I'll do the same thing I did with the 1st round backs going back to 200 0 when I get some time.

Hope everyone has a nice Easter.

Of course you can have an impact by drafting a first round guy.

 

The question I have is drafting a RB in there first round, especially as high as the Ravens are drafting, the best use of that pick?  To me, its a clear and obvious no, especially when you consider how most of the elite RBs that have been in this league over the last decade or so, have been later round picks.

 

Now, I wouldn't overdraft a player at another position just because I don't want to draft a RB in the first round but the Ravens won't need to do that.


@BSLRobShields

#14 Biggsy

Biggsy

    MVP

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,948 posts

Posted 27 March 2016 - 11:49 AM

It will all be relative to who goes in the top 5 picks.

#15 BSLRobShields

BSLRobShields

    BSL Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 83,969 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 27 March 2016 - 01:04 PM

It will all be relative to who goes in the top 5 picks.


This shouldn't matter.
@BSLRobShields

#16 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 41,314 posts

Posted 27 March 2016 - 01:57 PM

There is zero margin for error when drafting a RB that high.  If he isn't a all-pro guy basically right away, then you've given away tons of value.  You can get a reliable starter at any point in the draft, or even undrafted, depending on your system.  So if you use a top-10 pick on a running back, you better have gotten someone who is dramatically better than just a solid starting running back.  You need a 3-down back who is one of the best 3-5 overall RBs in the league and someone defenses have to gameplan to stop regardless of who your quarterback is or who the offensive lineman are.

 

Anything less than someone who becomes one of the absolute top handful of RBs in the league is a massive disaster when drafting that high.  If the guy becomes just someone solid, then you've given away at least two rounds worth of value.

 

If we go for Elliot at #6, he better be freaking amazing, immediately.  Essentially you need to get the type of performance Gurley gave last year to be able to justify the pick.


  • Tranquil1 likes this

#17 BSLRobShields

BSLRobShields

    BSL Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 83,969 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 27 March 2016 - 02:13 PM

He also needs to be able to pick up the blitz very well.
@BSLRobShields

#18 PD24

PD24

    MVP

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,658 posts

Posted 27 March 2016 - 02:38 PM

Pretty much agree with what Mackus said, and for a team that needs an infusion of playmaking talent across the board, it's too much of a risk, although I see what the OP is getting at.

 

Although for everyone that says Watson's production last year is a fluke, I disagree. Trestman's system highlights the tight ends, similar to Owen Daniels in 2014 with Kubiak. I don't think Daniels production that year was a fluke after being signed to be the backup TE, I think he was a smart, dependable player who stayed on the field and who played within the system. I think Watson will be that guy for the Ravens and Joe. 


@PeterDiLutis

#19 BSLChrisStoner

BSLChrisStoner

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 112,503 posts

Posted 27 March 2016 - 02:39 PM

He also needs to be able to pick up the blitz very well.

 

Something Elliott excels at.



#20 BSLGabeFerguson

BSLGabeFerguson

    Ravens Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,186 posts
  • LocationCity of Angels

Posted 27 March 2016 - 02:53 PM

Not many RBs are able to able to play at an extremely high level regardless of scheme/OL. Adrian Peterson and Marshawn Lynch have been great in bad offenses. Gurley showed flashes of that last year. Elliott is a very good RB, but I don't think he is at that level, and it's an extremely risky gamble to make with the number of other positions that need help..


@gabefergy




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Partners