So I've heard a lot of people suggest that, from an analytics perspective, taking non-premium position players that early in the draft is a bad idea. And they ultimately may not be entirely wrong.
My only problem is... if all you do is isolate yourself to the 4-5 "critical" position groups as first or maybe even second round picks, I think your bust rate goes sky high.
Assuming you can get consensus on what a "premium" position is, most would probably say QB, Pass Rusher, Corner, and WR. Those are the big four. Maybe LT enters that group, but I think its debatable.
So if all teams universally adopted this, there would just be a ton of whiffs early in drafts, because there's no shortage of prospects in those groups that fail and fail miserably in this league.
Most of the "pro Linderbaum" camp would lean on the fact that a) almost everybody that evaluated him had him highly ranked as a C prospect, and many thought he's the best Center coming out of college they've seen in a long time". The bust rate on first round Centers is very low, and about half in recent memory have ended up as basically Pro Bowl level players. So while its not a sexy and risky pick, I think he's far less likely to be a total bust than most people taken.
I think a lot of people are just focused on the fact that they largely took TWO non-premium positional players in the first round, when there were higher "needs" potentially in play. Like I don't know if Linderbaum or Hamilton is going to be a more impactful player than Jermaine Johnson, a guy we passed on not once, but twice. I don't know. He plays a more premium position and was a bigger need than both of those guys.
But I think they're just nitpicking. To a certain extent, I understand, because the Ravens are being herald more for the "value" of where they got players than the actual talent of those players. And at the end of the day, in the long term, all that matters is production, not where you're drafted.