Buzz: How Bad Do the Ravens Want Ryan?
Charles Robinson of Yahoo! Sports writes a very long, but very compelling piece on the Ravens and their craven desire to get consensus top QB Matt Ryan. How far are they willing to go? Look at this quote from training camp last summer (2007) with which Robinson leads his piece:
When the subject of a franchise quarterback arose, Newsome didn’t even wait for a visitor to finish his question: “Next year, would you be willing to spend a first-round …”
“Yes,” Newsome said, leaning forward with conviction. “That might be the time. We were involved in the talks (to draft) Brady Quinn. There have been some good quarterbacks to slip down in the first round the last few years.”
Outside that excerpt, Robinson makes other points like the Ravens being stuck in QB no-man’s land at #8 and that they have a trio of Quarterbacks all with separate questions.
Watching NFL Path to the Draft and Total Access last night, the hosts outlined (NB Mike Lombardi also has McFadden falling to the Ravens at #9) that they think that Matt Ryan is the guy for the Jets. While I don’t agree, could the Jets be trying to make a plausible case that they do want to take Ryan there, just to get some picks from a team like Ravens?
In my mind, it’s a hell of a bluff, and one that they might actually have to pull the trigger on to make work like the Chargers did with Eli. From a quick scan, using the value chart (which is outdated) the Jets could be looking for the Ravens’ first (8th overall), the Ravens’ third (99), first fourth (106) and possibly a sixth rounder as well.
Amazing what two little draft slots can be worth.
If Ozzie Newsome wants Ryan that badly, Trader Mike would pull the trigger. I still believe that trading down is their number one option if the opportunity presents itself.
Very surprised if the Jets actually stay at 6.
The Ravens won’t trade up (with us at least). They have the 8th and we have the 6th, while tha Pats have the 7th.
No way they’ll leapfrog the Pats, who obviously are set at QB. Plus everyone know the Pats will select either a LB or a CB.
Mike I know your point, but it’s a question of nerves, like Texas Hold ‘Em.
I think the Jets wouldn’t mind Ryan in the right circumstances (no Gholston, Longs or McFadden left) but that they’d like to address other areas first. Their only way to make a trade with the Ravens would be to actually select him, and then use the next 20 minutes to make the move back.
There simply is no reason for a team like Baltimore to trade up for Ryan, just as there is no reason for Miami or Atlanta to reach for him early. The second round quarterbacks- Henne, Flacco, Brohm- are nearly as good a group of prospects, and acquiring them will cost infinitely less and entail less risk. If this was a draft where there were three top quarterback prospects and they were all expected to go in the first round, there might actually be more leverage, but as it is, most teams should prefer trading up into the late first or early second as necessary- it costs so much less in terms of draft picks and in terms of money devoted to the guy selected.
SeanMac, there is little chance Baltimore will get a shot at the top two and possibly top three QBs if they don’t use their first round pick on one.
Also, there was once talk about a team like Carolina thinking future QB. Any team wanting a top QB after Baltimore could trade with us, knowing what I know — Baltimore needs a QB and has to get one in the first round or risk getting a fourth choice later. Ryan may have questions, but not having a shot at Ryan, Brohm and Henne might make a team trade with us or the Pats if Ryan is on the board.
harlan
Whether a team is going to trade up for a specific player is always impossible to predict. While I agree that Henne, Flacco, Brohm, etc. are prospects that may offer better “value” than Ryan, what does that really mean. Teams evaluate players as individuals and assign value based on their own criteria. Some scouts and GMs are better at it than others and have the track record to prove it. Baltimore may feel that Ryan is significantly better than the other three for whatever reason. Clearly, a lot of other observers do. Or they may think that Flacco is going to be better than Brohm, or vice versa, etc. They make decisions on trades and the like based on those specific, internal evaluations, not on whether a player, or group of players, may offer better “value” in some general sense. Phillip Rivers certainly offered a better “value” than Eli Manning. I’d say the Giants are pretty happy with their decision. There are a lot of examples where the opposite is true. KC was certainly a better value than Lienart. If it turns out that he can’t play and Lienart turns into a star then the relative draft “value” will be meaningless. Maybe the opposite will happen. I just don’t think the concept of draft value realy enters into it when a team is thinking of taking a QB in the first or second round.
There’s bound to be movement in the top ten – there always is – but whether the Jets will get involved is anyone’s guess.
The Giants shouldn’t be happy- they paid twice as much for a quarterback who isn’t anywhere near as good as the guys they could have had by just staying put. Eli Manning has not been a very good quarterback. Yes, they won the Super Bowl, but so did Baltimore with Trent Dilfer, and Eli was much closer to a Dilfer-style quarterback than a franchise player this year. (I happen to like Eli and think he can play better and showed that towards the end of the year, but the Giants got hosed.)
You have hit on a general problem with NFL player evaluation, which is that they simply assign grades to players and respond accordingly. The Jets, for instance, really shouldn’t have dropped $32 million on Alan Faneca simply because he was the top graded player at a position they needed- the difference between the production he’ll provide and a replacement-level player isn’t worth the difference in cap room. The same holds true for the draft. To take Matt Ryan high, he doesn’t simply have to be good, he has to be better enough than the guys who go in the second round to justify the difference in cap space allocation.
The Giants should be happy – they won the superbowl!
I agree though that they won it in spite of that awful trade rather than because of it.
It will be interesting to see how Eli (and the Giants generally) cope next season. Are they that good, or did they just peak at the right time? Will they follow in the footsteps of Pittsburgh and miss the playoffs the year after winning it all?
My point is that performance on the field trumps everything. Winning the Super Bowl is the goal – and the Giants did it! Period. Saying they did it in spite of Eli is ridiculous. He was the QB that led them on the winning drive in the last minute. Wasn’t he? There are a lot of “great” QBs who have had great careers that have failed in that situation. Justin Tuck was the player that kicked the Patriots butt, not Shawn Merriman. Don’t get me wrong, I’m a Jet fan, I’m not here to trumpet the Giants. You’ve just got to give credit where it’s due.
There is a lot more going on than a player’s grade based of some notion of relative “value”. If you “overpay” for a player and he helps you win a Super Bowl, then it was worth every penny. If you get a guy who is a good “value” and spend the next few years in mediocrity, what have you accomplished? In sports, the intangibles matter. Finding the guys that will have an impact on the field beyond their percieved “value” is the hardest thing to do and what seperates the great GMs from the mediocre ones. It is possible to have a guy graded very, very high and BE RIGHT. If you believe in your analysis, you may be willing to “overpay” in that situation. All of this is in the context of what this post is about, namely whether Baltimore would be willing to trade up for Ryan. The answer is maybe. Certainly, Flacco, Henne or Brohm is a better “value”. So what? If you trade up for Ryan and he helps you win the Super Bowl then it was a good decision. Only Baltimore knows whether they think Ryan is worthy of that risk.
jvsn I like your analysis. I agree with the intangibles being part of the evaluation although for the most “Moneyball” approach minded among us, it goes against that philosophy. Of course this takes us back to the deabte of constructing a team to be good for a number of years, i.e. getting to the playoffs consistently and hoping to finally win the big one, or banking on some luck like the Giants, and cashing in at the perfect time. In a perfect world it takes both, which makes the Pats look so good and make us so sick. Unless the fates start frowning on their franchise (Maybe SB 42 was the first step?), expect them to be a perrenial contender.
By the way Bent, I truly expect the Gians will miss the playoffs next year.
There was once a debate on what kind of a team you would like: A one year SB wonder that took five years to rebuild or a perenial wild card team that went 10 and 6 all five years. Might be a good one to have now! Although no Jets fan would pass up a SB, think about the five rebuilding years!
Winning the Super Bowl is the goal of the team, and the team did it. That doesn’t validate or invalidate any given draft selection. The idea when picking a player is to get the best possible player for the longest time possible. There were three available quarterbacks and the Giants selected the worst one. It worked out for them anyway this year, but they have to play next year and the year after that and the year after that.
Seanmac, I don’t disagree with your points. My only thing is this: Winning is it’s own validation. If you pick a QB in the first round, the guy doesn’t miss a start for 31/2 years, you make it to the playoffs consistently, and the guy is the MVP of a winning Super Bowl team – if all of that actually happens – then you haven’t “gotten hosed” as some have suggested about the Giants pick of Eli. Compare that scenario to the D-Rob situation. I ask “who got hosed?” No team maximizes all of their opportunties and always makes the “best” decision. The trick to being a good franchise over the long term is to consistently make good decisions and never make a decision that is so bad it cripples the franchise. People forget that part of the Eli selection was getting a guy who wouldn’t blow up under the pressure of the NY spotlight, someone who could help the team’s brand, etc., etc. in addition to being the player who could lead the team to the Super Bowl. All of these things translate into big $$$ and create the long term stability that alows the team to do all the other things neccessary to have a successful franchise. Would Big Ben or Rivers been a better option than Eli in accomplishing all of that for the New York Giants during this period of time. Maybe, but who really knows. Maybe Ben doesn’t win the SB if he’s not playing with Bettis running behind Faneca. Maybe Rivers looks a lot shakier if he isn’t handing off to LT 25 times a game. I’m not saying Eli is the best thing since sliced bread. The same thing can be said of Eli if 100 other things don’t happen and a lot of the others criticisms of him over the last couple of years have been valid. But the guy is 26 years old and is now the reigning Super Bowl MVP. I just think that saying the Giants would be better off if they had drafted someone who represented a better “value” is pretty hard to make at this point. 4 or 5 years from now things may look different.
For a rational discussio of a QBs likelihood of success, check out this site:
http://www.bbnflstats.com/
the ravens need a qb, have never developed one, and will select ryan if available – he will not be available..