The Marlon Mission: Finding the next great Ravens defensive back
Lamont Brightful, David Pittman, Lardarius Webb, Asa Jackson, Christian Thompson, Tray Walker – all I knew before setting off on this journey through the Ravens draft tendencies was that Ozzie loved a small school corner, he could not get enough of them. Though looking at this list, a one of out of six hit rate and you’re glad they stopped doing this as frequently as they used to. In fact one of the overall tendencies I’ve noticed, is that recently, we’ve reduced the frequency with which we take a player of any position from the small school ranks.
There have been only five drafts since 1996 that the Ravens have not selected a defensive back and in the last decade, we have never left a draft without a defensive back. And only three times during that run have we avoided selecting a cornerback. I would expect a defensive back in this draft at some point – playmaking safety is certainly a documented need but corner, despite our strength at the position is not out of the question at all.
I was curious to find out what more tendencies we might see from the Ravens front office in drafting defensive backs. A couple of disclaimers as always with these posts, I am looking at empirical data only, I evaluated a lot of these prospects at the time they were coming out, but opinions are unreliable for charting tendencies as they vary so wildly – we need hard data and that’s what I use for this.
I will, on occasion, bring in some knowledge of a prospect but it will only be to supplement the data. We also, need to note that this new front office, being led by Eric DeCosta, has some similarities to the one run by Ozzie, for obvious reasons, but they are breaking the mould in some subtle ways and so we must be careful to not draw too many conclusions about the future.
These posts are a labor of love for me, I look at any number of data points across our draft classes – the things I write about here are what I thought was worth mentioning.
And finally, the Ravens aren’t a team that has red lines. When I say that, I mean that they evaluate the tape first and foremost. Some teams will not a draft a player if they post a particular time in one of the many pre-draft athletic tests. The Ravens clearly have some athletic guidelines at some positions but they are exactly that; guidelines. They do not chase the outliers but they won’t rule them out. That’s why any players I suggest here as fits are just best fits and not guaranteed that the Ravens will draft from this list.
Having said all that, there are some things to write home about, with regards to the Ravens and defensive backs in the draft. I focused on the last ten years of selections, any further back and I find that trends in the league, rather than decision-maker philosophy start to really affect team tendencies.
Firstly, athletic testing. This first one makes sense given what the Ravens think helps you to succeed at the wide receiver position; speed is a pre-requisite at defensive back for the Ravens. Almost all of our selections in the past ten years have run under 4.5 seconds in the forty yard dash. It looks like there was almost a rare, hard rule floor for DB prospects, until Geno Stone and Iman Marshall under Eric DeCosta, who appears to have softened the philosophy a little. However Marshall was close to a 4.5 at 4.52 and Geno Stone was a seventh round safety so maybe he hasn’t softened and was simply willing to chase an outlier in the seventh round. I liked Stone’s tape too so I wouldn’t be surprised.
Explosion as measured by the jumps, strength as measured by the bench, change of direction as measured by the 3 cone sees barely any correlation at all, the prospects they have selected are all over the map on these tests. There does appear to be a floor of around 120 inches for defensive backs on the broad jump, possibly softened slightly under DeCosta again but that’s not a very athletic floor for DBs so it may just be that they don’t like those who have no explosion at all – not exactly a tendency.
For a long time, the short shuttle was important to them with many in the top quarter of prospects tested for their position or size though they have come off this in recent years. But this was a definite tendency. They also like a good ten time but it isn’t a rule. In fact this is true when you look at relative athletic testing overall – they are not a team that looks for those most relatively athletic defensive backs but we do not accept below average athletes.
Moving on to college production, all of their selections started at least 2 years in college, there are no one year wonders at all. Bringing in a little tale from my evaluation work over the years, I was very disappointed when I missed how much of a Raven Marlon Humphrey looked on tape. I thought highly of him, certainly, but watching him after the Ravens drafted him made me realise that his smarts and toughness were plain to see and he just looked like a Raven defender.
I mention this about Humphrey because I was surprised to see this toughness and, more specifically ability to tackle, was borne out in terms of the college production of our selections. And specifically surprised to see it show up in a volume data point – number of tackles. Now, this could say more about the scheme we like to take from, and clearly about our scheme when they get here but we like corners as well as safeties with a good number of tackles in a season – 40 is the floor for corners, 60 the floor for safeties.
And this isn’t that surprising to those of us that think we know what a Raven defensive back looks like, but it is interesting to see the numbers laid out so clearly and to see how few DBs meet the bar in this class (this comes later).
It could simply be that we like to see a lot of evidence of tackles being made – to ensure this isn’t something that will be a deficiency at the next level. PFF have only been charting missed tackles for the last few years but adjusting for volume the Ravens like to avoid missed tackles – this is likely not a hard and fast data rule but a trend that betrays their scouting priorities. Yards after catch (YAC) also bears this out – they don’t really like to select DBs who have given up more than 100 yards after the reception in a season.
I think what we are seeing specifically with tackle production is one of two things. That the Ravens don’t necessarily need you to have made 40-60 tackles as a defensive back but they need to see a requisite number of tackle attempts (2 year starter rule also plays into this) to ensure that you are going to be able to tackle consistently at the next level. Or that the Ravens prioritise tackling as a trait to scout for defensive backs and they like consistency in the tackle which only happens to show up in prospects that make more than 40-60 tackles.
Another apparent hard and fast rule, which I think betrays the kind of prospects that end up as their “guys” is run stops. They like prospects who get consistently involved in stuffing the run – i.e. stopping a run themselves from their DB spot for little or no gain. PFF charts this pretty reliably for individual players and they have a consistent floor of around 13-15 stops in a season that the Ravens like to see, that’s a high average for your draft picks to have, so is worth noticing.
They also like predominantly outside corners – even Tavon Young played outside at Temple – this probably says more about the college ranks than it does the Ravens but still interesting that they haven’t taken any of the more heralded mostly nickel corners who have come out – interesting when thinking about Elijah Molden this year who ticks so many of the other Ravens’ boxes at DB.
In terms of alignment, their safeties are also usually jacks of all trades – again says more about our scheme and college defenses in general but we don’t project versatility at this position – you have to have proven you can be in college. Both our current starting safeties in Clark and Elliott played a lot of free safety but they also lined up a lot in the box and over the slot. Geno Stone was similar albeit less so.
There are some other data points I looked at that have a weaker correlation that are worth mentioning as they had a majority of selections adhere to these principles. The first being passing downs sack rate of the defensive line that the defensive backs played behind – they like corners who have played on teams where they are efficient at getting to the QB on obvious passing downs. Again, I think this betrays scouting priorities more than being an actual tendency – but it appears that they may like corners from defenses who are predicated on getting pressure on 3rd down for similarity to our own defense. This perhaps actually says that we don’t prioritise corners who can hold up on an island for long periods of time, as much as other teams do.
We also like players to come from a pass defense that has been elite or very good in relation to the nation in one or more categories, with a few notable exceptions – DeShon Elliott, Maurice Canady, Marc Anthony, and Jimmy Smith all came from really very bad college pass defenses. Notable because it suggests that they like players from good overall units at defending the pass, unless you stand out as a good player on a really bad defense.
And finally, this one is also not an exclusive rule and may just be a coincidence but many of their selections had pedigree going back to their high school careers with almost exclusively 3, 4 and 5 star recruits, with more than a fair share of 4 and 5 stars.
Much of what I’ve found here and with other positions shows that often the Ravens mean what they say when they reference past performance being the best predictor of future behaviour. They like to see it on tape. They like to see a defensive back they draft attempting a lot of tackles, they like to see them stuff the run from their spot on the field, they like to see them make sure tackles in space and reduce the amount of yards gained after the catch, they like to see safeties be versatile. It doesn’t guarantee that you’ll be selected by the Ravens, they might not like what they see; and it doesn’t guarantee that they won’t select anyone else, they might occasionally project a player based on potential. But it’s rare and I think we can safely look at some lists of the best fit players in this class based off the clues we find in their tendencies at defensive back.
Here is the profile in summary:
Must have:
4.5 or under in the 40 – softened under EDC slightly
Average athleticism overall – nobody less than 4 on RAS, 120 or more on broad jump, 10 time in 1.5s or better
2 year starter
CB – 40 tackles//S – 60 tackles
Under 150 yard YAC in a season
At least 13-15 run stops in a season
Predominantly outside corners//safeties jack of all trades – lined up all over
Nice to have:
Close to 4.0 second short shuttle
Good passing downs sack rate from the defensive line
Played as part of an elite or very good pass defense (or a very bad one)
Time to look at the potential fits in this year’s class for this profile and it has to be said that I was surprised at how many prospects this eliminates. I would be fascinated to understand whether these prospects are eliminated on spec or whether the tape study eliminates them, as they start to see lack of evidence for certain traits they prioritise…
Safety
At safety, I first wanted to mention some close fits for the profile that didn’t make the cut as best fits, in case you were interested. Caden Sterns, Talanoa Hufanga and Jamar Johnson are favourites of many in this class at the safety position, the latter being one of my favourites regardless of position. All three don’t quite make it based on the profile already outlined but got close. Sterns is worth the highest mention of the three as he was on track to hit the production floor but was derailed by injuries. I still left him off with my hypothesis being that the Ravens prioritise having the evidence and he didn’t give them that, plus he didn’t give them too much versatility to see, playing predominantly free safety for Texas. Hamsah Nasirildeen was also eliminated for incomplete testing.
Trevon Moehrig
The player that I think is most likely to force us to forsake fan-favourite Rashod Bateman, and who I’ve already written about in one of my Play like a Raven posts, appears on this list of best fits for the Ravens at safety. Anyone who has watched Moehrig’s tape could guess without looking at his stat line that he makes this list. Versatile as the day is long, Moehrig did everything for the Horned Frog defense, he hits on the data points in terms of production and versatility. His athleticism only just makes it due to EDC’s potential softening of the rules but he hits on some of the nice to have part of the profile too.
If you want to know what type of player he is on tape – read my piece about him.
Jevon Holland
Another one of my absolute favourite players in this class – I do like the top end of the safety group quite a lot – Jevon Holland hits on what we like at the position. Another versatile chess piece on the Oregon defense, Holland fits what we are looking for. The only challenge being that in the season that he gave the Ravens the production they are looking for, he played mostly in the slot, or in the box and very rarely at Free Safety. He did show the versatility to do that in 2018 which is why he makes the cut but it is an interesting nuance to test the profile with. He also has a great athletic profile.
In terms of on tape, I see a safety with outstanding movement skills in space and whose athleticism is deployed effectively in games. His speed and explosion combines well with how fluid he is to ensure he can cover in space. Not a box safety in the derogatory way that many use that label, but he is best when he is around the football, closer to the line of scrimmage where he can use his coverage skills as well as stuff the run with his explosion and toughness. I’m not sure he yet has the instincts and anticipation to play as a high safety but his range would certainly help him to do so.
Richie Grant
Grant only makes the profile due to DeCosta’s potential relaxing of the 4.5 rule as his 40 yard dash time at his pro day was 4.58. But Grant is such a strong fit for the production profile after being a versatile, play-making safety across three years at UCF, I had to include him.
I’m not as high on Grant as the other safeties at the top of this class based off my evaluation but I certainly think he will deserve his place as a likely day two prospect. He is a game-changer in terms of the plays he makes, there are times he fires himself out of a cannon at the ball carrier and he makes plenty of plays at or behind the line of scrimmage. He’s tough, physical and relentless as well as being a dangerous player in coverage because of his read and react chops. He has great ball skills and he just makes plays. Consistency is the watch-word for him, there are instances where he takes bad angles, loses his form on a tackle, or relaxes in his technique. If he can clean that up, then he will be a weapon at the next level, one the Ravens will be interested in.
Darrick Forrest
One of the two less heralded prospects on this list, Forrest will certainly hear his name called, probably on day 3 because of his physical gifts. That athleticism matches up well with what the Ravens look for at defensive backs. Having already watched him on tape I had a feeling Forrest would be on this list because he is tough and a tackling machine against the run so he has the production the Ravens would look for too.
In evaluation, I’m afraid the athleticism doesn’t often show up on tape because of his technique and on occasion the angles he takes to the ball carrier/receiver, as well as a general lack of consistent anticipation. He has a lot to work on, in his backpedal and transitions, which are high and tight respectively. You can see him take an initial bad angle to a ball carrier which he then has to correct, against better athletes that correction has been punished by long runs being broken off that he might have been able to stop. He is an outstanding tackler though and uses every bit of his length to make plays. His athleticism combined with his toughness will have teams intrigued on day 3 as a developmental player and I think you can count the Ravens among those teams.
Tyler Coyle
Coyle is the final fit at Safety, and I have to admit, I had not yet watched him on tape before this piece. He played mostly in the box for Purdue as a four year starter but he certainly showed some versatility in both his freshman and sophomore years lining up at free safety and in the slot. While allowing on the high side of YAC the Ravens would want to see, his tackling and run stops production matches what they would want. Purdue was also a pretty bad pass defense so he may fit the best player on a bad defense exception the Ravens look for in this.
I really struggled to get hold of any tape on him, I watched one rather limited game of his from 2019 at UConn, he transferred to Purdue last year but only really played any meaningful time in the Nebraska game which I cannot find. The little I could see him, he looked like a good linear athlete as his testing shows but perhaps a little limited moving laterally and in transition. He looked to have pretty average instincts and processing but a good nose for the ball and a form tackler.
Cornerbacks
Moving on to the corners, there are again five best fits for the profile with another few close but no cigar prospects. The guys that got close but for various reasons didn’t make the cut this time included Keith Taylor, Rodarius Williams, Camryn Bynum, Avery Williams and Deommodor Lenoir.
Asante Samuel Jr.
I was delighted to see Samuel on here because I am a big fan of his, but I do think he’s a top 50 player so I’d be surprised to see him in Raven purple but for a precipitous drop down the board for him. He hits everything you would look for in the Ravens profile – not quite getting near the floors for production this year, he was on pace for it and easily exceeded them in 2019. He was also one of, if not the best player on an awful Florida State passing offense this year.
A tough, smart and athletic player on tape, the thing I actually liked most about Samuel was how much of a technician he is. So smooth in his movement, especially moving laterally in transition and in his backpedal. He uses his smooth footwork and outstanding instincts to mirror receivers near perfectly in coverage. His speed shows up on tape too especially in his closing speed after his break on the football. He looks to be a sound tackler and shows toughness in defending the run but I’d actually like to see him get off wide receiver blocks more consistently to make even more plays. His aggression and instincts would be attractive to the Ravens.
Tyson Campbell
I was not the biggest fan of Campbell’s on tape but I wasn’t overly surprised to see him on the list with his ability to stay in phase in man coverage but his relative inability to make a play on the ball meaning he allowed a lot of completions. On tape this really was the biggest mark against him, if he could find the football and do better at the catch-point he’d be an elite prospect given his toughness and athleticism but he was so inconsistent. I also thought he got worked at the apex of the route a lot with some deficiencies in his technique and short area quickness. His anticipation and instinct level also probably won’t rise to the level the Ravens expect.
He also only just made the cut on production if I extrapolate out his production this season over a full year, which may not be enough evidence for the Ravens if they haven’t adjusted their bar for a curtailed 2020 season for many. He clears the athleticism bar easily but he did have a deficiency in the short shuttle which the Ravens did look at in the past and this was something that showed up on tape for me, as mentioned.
Ifeatu Melifonwu
Surprisingly given his size but I think Melifonwu is probably best suited to a more heavy zone coverage team at the next level but he certainly fit all of the Ravens boxes for defensive backs. He is one of the most impressive relatively athletic defensive backs to come out in a long time, given his length and speed. He may be slightly off what the Ravens look for in production because although he was a two year starter, you can only really see him engaged in stopping the run and making tackles consistently this past year.
I’m a big proponent of Melifonwu on tape, if he is allowed to sit back in zone, use his length, timing and prowess as a linear athlete you can use him to neutralise dangerous athletic freaks at the next level. If you ask him to defend in man too often, including moving laterally and locating the ball when in phase downfield you might be asking for a bit more trouble. He will do well as a block shedder, his ability to use his length to keep his body clean in run support will serve him well at the next level. You can see him miss tackles but on the whole he hits with power and form.
Thomas Graham Jr.
Graham is a really good example of a guy who may fit more with a relaxing of the rules slightly by EDC and if he is targeted a bit later in the draft as I expect he will, although I was a fan on tape of his as a later round guy. An opt-out in 2020, previous to that he was a three year starter with an excellent track record as a tackler and run stuffer. Athletically he is only slightly above average but he does have a sub 4.4 40 yard time.
On tape, he’s physical and tough, he is a willing run defender, more than that, when he is asked to sit back in zone, he keys on the run quickly and is eager to come up and make a play at or behind the line of scrimmage. He’s lightning fast in coming up to play bubbles and swing passes to his side and he will make excellent open-field, form tackles. In coverage, he’s more comfortable in zone where his smarts and his impressive ability to unlock his hips when he can anticipate shows up. He has good straight-line recovery speed and finds the football well, when in phase, but he finds it more difficult to react to a receiver’s break when he’s in man coverage. This is when he can’t use his smarts to lessen the impact of his lateral movement deficiencies and when he doesn’t have time to use his speed to recover.
Nate Hobbs
Finally we have Nate Hobbs out of Illinois, definitely a later round guy, Hobbs actually fits the bill for the Ravens at defensive back well. He’s a very impressive athlete, in explosion but also with a sub 4.5 40 time. His production certainly matched that for the Illini in terms of the Ravens DB profile, he had plenty of volume in the tackle and run stops as well as allowing a modicum of YAC and serving as a predominantly outside corner.
Tape was hard to come by on Hobbs but I did get my hands on one film courtesy of Michael Crawford, those of you will know as @abukari on Twitter. His tape is pretty uneventful and I’d want to watch more to get a real handle on him; he looks like a guy who spends most of his time working on the half-turn but looks pretty smooth, happy to prevent getting beat deep but gives up underneath stuff at a reasonably regular clip. He combines this with being an excellent form tackler and he uses his length well at the tackle point. He seems to have been stuck in a very specific defensive scheme that didn’t show off his best attributes for projection to the next level. Someone will definitely bet on some of those traits he has developing at the next level.
The Ravens do have a clear type at Defensive Back, we know this from guys we see on the team week in, week out and from what they have said about their higher-profile selections at the position. What’s surprising about the profile built is how strong it is, they clearly do need to see significant evidence of consistency in their evaluation of these players that can be the only really accounting for such a clear tendency on volume stats. It also eliminates a lot of prospects so it’s definitely worth checking if your “guy” fits the profile I’ve laid out here. I do think many of the prospects in this year’s class won’t be on the Ravens radar.