As I have been advocating since day 1, I think there is little chance the top tier talent was slip down to us at 17, and therefore we should trade down. There are several prospects who would be worth remaining at 17, but as they continue to perform well, the chances lessen they will be available to us without a trade up, which we really lack the picks to do. Those prospects are the elite offensive tackles: Greg Robinson, Taylor Lewan, Jake Matthews, and the top 2 wide receivers: Sammy Watkins & Mike Evans. Some like Eric Ebron, but I do not think the value at 17 is enough to prevent us from trying to trade down. Of course, you need a willing trade partner. The Eagles could be a good fit, especially since they might be targeting a Safety and have an extra 5th rounder. But assuming we could find one in that 21-26 range, we could really have a great draft.
I think ideal for us would be to have 2 picks in the 22-40 range.There will be some really good talent there for us, possibly at safety, wide receiver, tight end, offensive line, running back, etc.
For example if we traded back to 23, we could still have our pick of one of the players we like: Clinton-Dix, Pryor, Mosley, Zach Martin, Ebron, Amaro, maybe even Marquise Lee. You don’t think Ozzie would love that? Easier to go BPA when you have the ammunition to move around in rounds 2 and 3 to snag the guys you like. We could use one of the extra picks gained to trade up in the 2nd round for a WR like Matthews or Robinson, and use the other pick gained to trade up in the 3rd round for Troy Niklas.
Totally feasible: Martin/Dix/Pryor/Mosley, Matthews and Niklas or Fiedorowicz would be a home run of a draft!
Trade down from 17 to 23- gain 190 points which = 31 in the 3rd and 16 in the 4th. Trade 16 in the 2nd and 31 in the 3rd (420+120) for 36 (540). Trade 15 in the 3rd and 17 in the 4th (195 +70) for 65 (265).
So by moving down 6 spots in the 1st, we enable ourselves to move up to #4 in the 2nd (12 spots) and #1 in the 3rd (14 spots) and snag who we want!
We would end up with #23, #34, #65 and still have our regular compensatory picks to fill out the depth chart. So 17, 48, 79 when the value at the positions we need isn't there? Or 23, 34, 65? I think it is a no-brainer. But of course, Ozzie knows better than me, so we will see if Ozzie agrees with me like he did in 2010:
(Read through the comments for a good laugh, and to see the comparison of my trades to Ozzie's! Ridiculous how close I was: http://www.baltimorebeatdown.com/2010/4/22/1437263/if-i-were-the-ravens-gm).
Then again, I don't think too many of us are happy in hindsight with the result of 2010's draft: Kindle, Cody, Dickson, Pitta, Arthur Jones, Harewood. Pretty crazy that our above average players from that draft were our 4th and 5th rounders though.
So there are many ways for us to have a successful draft, but I believe that most of them include trading down!