Max997 Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 Sorry, I'm not buying it. That is a guess by the Baltimore Sun, and frankly not a very good guess. They have two terrific tackles, and the sensational RT played LT for a few games and didn't do very well though he was not horrible. So ... definitely they want to move the RT to LT. Right. how exactly did he not do very well? he started at LT against Minnesota and more then held his own against one of the best pass rushing ends in the NFL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R. Rich Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 If somethinglike this happens, I would totally be on board with the #9 being a defensive player like Carlos Dunlap or Derrick Morgan, bigger ends who would look real good at RE in the 3-4........#9 is way too high for Dan Williams. It's a reach to take Williams, arguably the best NT available in the draft, @ 9th overall, but not one to take Dunlap or Morgan? If a DE is in the plans, and considering the move to a 3-4 front, I'd rather see Jason Pierre-Paul or Jared Odrick (a DT who would be a good fit as a 3-4 DE) instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 It's a reach to take Williams, arguably the best NT available in the draft, @ 9th overall, but not one to take Dunlap or Morgan? If a DE is in the plans, and considering the move to a 3-4 front, I'd rather see Jason Pierre-Paul or Jared Odrick (a DT who would be a good fit as a 3-4 DE) instead. What do you think of Gaither? I find it just a bit odd to see a team wanting to trade a good left tackle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JStranger76 Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 Dunlap and Morgan are arguably top 10 talents, while Williams (sure, he may be rated the best NT) is a late 1st round pick talent wise. I live in East Tennessee and have seen all of Williams games, he would be a huge reach at 9. I know we need a NT badly, but I didn't ever see Williams having "dominant NT" potential. I'd like to have him, but not with the #9. He was also somewhat of a one year wonder, so be careful.........you are correct about Pierre-Paul, should of threw him in there. Odrick is a late 1st, early 2nd type guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R. Rich Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 What do you think of Gaither? I find it just a bit odd to see a team wanting to trade a good left tackle. My guess is that they figure they've seen enough of Oher to know he can handle the left side full time. They then figure it's a combination of getting good value (a 2nd round pick is good value; remember how much the Ravens gave up to acquire a very productive Willis McGahee?) for Gaither if they trade 'em and also figuring they can make do w/ either O'Neill Cousins or Tony Moll on the right side. Just a guess though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VanCity Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 24 year old monster LT for a 2nd round pick hell I would throw in a 5th or a 6th in addition to the 2nd. If the Ravens are truly set on trading this guy away the Bills need to be on the horn. If I was Nix I would say hey Gather is young enough to be a draft choice so trading away a 2nd and a late or mid round pick for him is like drafting him. I think that this move really makes us much more flexible at pick 9 with LT sealed up we can take a QB, NT, or McLain and then with our 3rd round pick go after a RT. This is a great move to be made Mr.Nix if the Ravens want a extra late round pick or a mid round pick next year do it we need a LT and we can't be drafting for a LT at pick 9 because Buluga or Okung aren't likely to be there. Although if Buluga is there at pick 9 I would say take him just imagine a line like this Gather Levitre Hangartner or Mawae Wood Buluga That line would assist with our QB issues without a doubt. Unfortunately, as another poster stated, no-brainers and our FO aren't on speaking terms currently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkc Posted March 7, 2010 Author Share Posted March 7, 2010 That line would assist with our QB issues without a doubt. Unfortunately, as another poster stated, no-brainers and our FO aren't on speaking terms currently. Remember dickie j is gone so there is hope. that said I could hear Dickei asking how fast he was and to make sure he was not to big Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 My guess is that they figure they've seen enough of Oher to know he can handle the left side full time. They then figure it's a combination of getting good value (a 2nd round pick is good value; remember how much the Ravens gave up to acquire a very productive Willis McGahee?) for Gaither if they trade 'em and also figuring they can make do w/ either O'Neill Cousins or Tony Moll on the right side. Just a guess though. Thanks Richie. You make the scenario sound very good. It would open the door in terms of taking McClain at number 9 lol. But as I said (and if I remember you concurred), McClain will be gone at 9. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JStranger76 Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 Gaither may also be in line to get a HUGE pay raise. Just another guess by another guy, but maybe the Ravens are expecting a Jason Peters situation on the horizon........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Munch Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 If we did this trade, we could then trade down and draft Williams or brian price, use the 2nd rounder we would acquire trading down and get maybe Brandon Spikes or a WR. Sign Joey porter, grab a RT in rd 3, QB in 4 and maybe, MAYBE we would be on track finally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob in STL Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 That would take care of our greatest need and let us use our 1st pick to take the best DT or QB available player available. Fixed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R. Rich Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 Thanks Richie. You make the scenario sound very good. It would open the door in terms of taking McClain at number 9 lol. But as I said (and if I remember you concurred), McClain will be gone at 9. I wouldn't get all hyped up 'bout it. From what I've read, he could end up in San Fran. Then again, anything is possible. We'll see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R. Rich Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 Gaither may also be in line to get a HUGE pay raise. Just another guess by another guy, but maybe the Ravens are expecting a Jason Peters situation on the horizon........... By the very definition of him being a restrictred free agent, he would be in line to get a huge pay raise, plus the Ravens would have the right of first refusal. And living here in the Baltimore area, I've never heard or read anything resembling any discord from Gaither while w/ the Ravens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thoner7 Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 That would take care of our greatest need and let us use our 1st pick to take the best DT or QB available. I would still take a T at 9. I never thought Gaither was as good as advertised, and if Balt is considering moving him then they must agree. That doesnt mean I dont want Gaither on my team though. Him and Bulaga would be a dream scenario with an open competition for who is left, who is right. Trade them 2nd, 5th, Whitner, Schobel, Kelsay, and Ellison if they want them. Then send a 3rd or 4th for big Rogers in Cle. too please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 By the very definition of him being a restrictred free agent, he would be in line to get a huge pay raise, plus the Ravens would have the right of first refusal. And living here in the Baltimore area, I've never heard or read anything resembling any discord from Gaither while w/ the Ravens. Well, if they deal him for a 2, he's no longer an RFA, its a straight up trade. He was tendered at the 1st round level. But, any team trading for him would probably want to lock up Gaither long term. Personally, i'd make the trade in a heartbeart. Get a good LT who can play from day 1 for a 2nd round pick? Sure. What do you think of Tony Moll? He's only got the 5th round tender. Would it be worth tossing a chunk of change his way and hoping that the Ravens don't match? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dgrid Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 Gaither for a 2nd would be awesome! I actually thought our 1st for Gaither would have been ok, if you believe we'd pick an OT at #9 anyway, because: A) he's still young, has experience and you know what you're getting. B) there's a slight chance Okung, Bulaga, Davis will be gone by the 9th, and possbily even Campbell as well. for the 2nd, I have no idea what they're waiting for. LIke above posters have said, opens a world of possiblities for #9. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pirate Angel Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 If they do this trade it means that they aren't in love with the choices at #9 for LT, or they're looking more seriously at another position... ...CB, perhaps? not true, we can still select a LT and let him develop at RT like Oher did last year. This is a good idea since we need both a RT and a LT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manbeast Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 I say for a 2nd next year I would do it and still would draft a T in rd1 this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manbeast Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 I would still take a T at 9. I never thought Gaither was as good as advertised, and if Balt is considering moving him then they must agree. That doesnt mean I dont want Gaither on my team though. Him and Bulaga would be a dream scenario with an open competition for who is left, who is right. Trade them 2nd, 5th, Whitner, Schobel, Kelsay, and Ellison if they want them. Then send a 3rd or 4th for big Rogers in Cle. too please. Wow our draft and half our team is gne for 2 players sounds like something the old regime would have done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 Who cares if the guy turns out to be good? I couldn't give two sh#%s about what some douchebag "mock drafters" think. If he is slated to go in the teens and we draft him at #9 and he proves to be a good NT, then who cares if we could have gotten better "value"? "Who cares if the guy turns out to be good?" Hunh? Me, me, I do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts