Fans. We better start thinking about this as a real possibility. Like it or not.

Hue made mention of it yesterday.

Let's keep it within the Top 6 (Jets) for realistic possibilities.

Most likely any move down would ASSumingly be for a QB for the team moving to #1. Possibly for Garrett?

This could be very interesting.

Don't just give us an "It would be stupid to not take Garrett".

There's Allen, Barnett, Thomas, Hooker, Adams in play here.

I'd LOVE to know what Williams would want in the Top 6 if Garrett is not an option. You'd have to think it would be Defense, unless we want QB.

What are your thoughts on where to move? Compensation for the move? And player options with the picks acquired?

Puzzles me why do we want the extra picks so bad when our problem has allways been picking players.

Don't move and pick the player, don't outsmart yourself.


Just take a look back and see what players could we have if we din't try to outsmart ourselves.

I think they'd want a QB at 6. The only team trading up for 1 would do it for a QB.

Take Garrett with the 1st pick and then see who wants him and what their willing to give for him. If their willing to give up enough and the player you want is still on the board do the deal. If the players gone we got Garrett. "A Bird In The Hand Is Worth Two In The Bush"

I agree. If Garrett is the consensus #1 graded player and it's not close, don't trade out. If we have Garrett, Thomas, Hooker, Allen or whoever closely graded I would trade down but probably no further than Chicago. They need a QB so may want to jump SF.

Get Chicago's 1st, 2nd and a future pick (min 2nd) and select whoever remains from our top 3. Then leverage one our 2nd rounders to ensure we get one of the remaining defensive standouts if we feel they won't fall to 12.

Mission statement is to pick up 2 impact, game changing talents as a minimum.

It would be stupid not to take Garrett.

This team passes on impact players all the time. There is a true impact player at the second most important position on the field, and people wanna trade down? Sorry, that is stupid.

+1

Just make the pick and prepare for #12.

Agree 100%.

#6 pick for 2 1sts, 1 2nd, and 2 4ths. Big haul, right?


But they got Julio Jones. And we got Phil Taylor, Weeden, Greg Little, Owen Marecic, and James Michael Johnson.

That was a great move wasn't it? If Garret is the best player in the draft stay at #1 and take him. Case closed.

I just threw up a little

This front office's REAL team building has officially begun. They've got the destruction of the existing foundation out of the way.

If they trade down, I'll lose a LOT of confidence in them being THE guys that get us where we need to be. Probably MOST of said confidence.

BPA! BPA! BPA!

I REALLY, REALLY, REALLY want Garrett but in the spirit of the topic. There are lots of scenarios that make it worth trading down so long as we don't move down beyond 6. So long as we end up with Barnett, Allen, Hooker, or Jamal then its all good with me. We have to gain at LEAST an extra first rounder to move out of 1 no matter what though.

If it means a first round pick for next year, take the trade. If you can land Trubisky, Allen, Thomas, Hooker, Adams, Foster or even Williams, I'm okay with moving down. I'd like to see them work hard to stack the roster with talent (it's a decent draft to do that), and come away with a QB. Even if it's Kiser, Kaaya or Mahomes. I'd also like to have a shot at Darold in 2018. Two firsts would help immensely.

If we can't get a first for 2018, NFW. Take Garrett and move on. See who's there at 12.

As far as worrying about past failed trades, every situation is different. This draft presents a whole new dynamic and an entirely different group of players. It's simply ridiculous to compare past results to future actions.

JMHO

If we were to trade it (which i hope we don't) and if its just picks for picks, I'd probably really only go with TN if they are buyers, get their 5th, 18th and 69. Might take swapping a future pick to make values work but that would really benefit the browns, and the TItans are alot closer to winning than we are

1st pick =3000

5th, 18th and 69=2845, so maybe another 2nd next year

That is juicy, but why would the Titans give up two firsts and a second this year plus a meaty pick next year, just for Garrett? I don't know, is he that good? Are the Titans one DE away from contending?

Shoot, if that was the offer on the table, I'd probably take it, even though I said above I wouldn't be interested in trading down (LOL). We'd have 5, 12, 18, 33, 50 and 69 (and whatever next year, if that was thrown in). At 5 we'd get Adams, Hooker, Foster or Watson and we already know about what's around 12.

Man, 6 in the top 70 and 3 of them in the top 18. With as many holes as we have...I don't know. That's a big haul. I doubt Tenn would offer.

The only catch to taking Garrett was that he said he didn't want to play in a cold weather city, plus we stink. So maybe he puts pressure on the Browns to not draft him, but that's a unknown right now.

The good news about that is we no longer have the guys who pulled that trade off then picked those players.

The jury is still out on whether the guys we have now are any better.

I wouldn't want them to trade down from pick #1, but at pick #12, then I would be open to trading down, depending on who is left on the board.

Please god no. Trading down and not taking garret is sooooo Browns, that would be the Brownsiest of Browns moves.

The last time we traded out of an elite player was Julio Jones.

I don't forsee TN moving up to #1, no way...

Garrett at #1 unless we get a king's ransom. Then see how it unfolds.

it would be unlikely sure, but I was just saying that would be the only scenario I think I'd consider given the haul we'd get..I want Garrett at #1, anything else is up for discussion

Trading out of #1, I can't think of a more Browns thing to do this upcoming draft.

Take Garrett and move on.

Browns have a habit of winning on paper instead of on Sunday's.

Lol. Was waiting to see who was first to say it.

I was looking more for NAMES if we moved.

How far from Garrett is Barrnet?

Move to 3. Barnett.

Make a move back up to say 7 and snag Hooker?

In addition to saying "we have not ruled out trading out of number one".

Hue also said: "Good QB trumps elite non-QB in draft".

Make no mistake the Browns marching orders from the top and all the way through to the Head Coach is: "find a quarterback".

I for one will not say that Garrett is the best player in this draft. A lot have people have said that he is. He may be, but I am not there yet. Still lots of time to decide.

Elite pass rushers are critical to defensive success. There is no denying that.

However, the quarterback holds the steering wheel.

I you don't have a quarterback who can lead; you go in circles.

As this drafts continues till draft day we will learn more and more about the players. In particular I enjoy Gruden's QB camp.

This QB class has been downgraded by most. Watch as time passes how that will change.

We know there is no squeaky clean four year stater in the mold of Peyton or Luck.

However, it is my belief that a guy will emerge. Somebody in this draft will succeed. There will be a Dak or Wentz. It could be a guy like Kelly. We may think we know but truth be told; we do not.

Muhammed Wilkerson
Randall Cobb
Richard Sherman
David DeCastro
Malik Jackson

The trade was great. We just sucked at picking players. Those are two separate things.

Hue also said: "Good QB trumps elite non-QB in draft".

Was watching a post Senior Bowl Practice interview. It was the Reporter that stated the above quote...Hue's response was we still have to process things before we can agree with that statement.


http://www.clevelandbrowns.com/news/arti...82-72451deff025

I understand moving down and would prefer it in almost every scenario. More swings increases the likelihood of hitting a home run.

With that said, we have a home run already sitting there with the first pick. Pick Myles Garrett and be done with it.

(I would be trying to trade down with pick #12.)

The more you trade down the more average the players get. Take Garrett or Allen and don't look back. Quit screwing around Browns you're not smarter than everybody else

I would try to trade UP from 12

This is true. But you also get more picks to attempt to pick non-average players.

I wonder why this isn't done more. It's clearly an option since it happened with Eli Manning. I could see players not necessarily loving it but since when does the NFL care about player's feelings? I mean, especially at the top of the draft, I wouldn't think it would be that big of an issue. Later on, you get drafted by the Patriots in the first round and they flip you to the Browns at the top of the second, that would suck but in the end you're not playing for the team that you'd be mad at, so what's the difference?

I agree. I wish the draft was before you had to commit to your season tickets. If we didn't take Garrett, I'd dump mine. That would be like the Buccaneers not taking LeRoy Selmon.

I know most of you don't know LeRoy Selmon as you are too young, but LeRoy was a stud.

Every now and then you can't overthink things. This is one of those times. Just take Myles.....please, just take Myles.

Well you could always do a Godly draft like this one where you trade back from garrett for a team that wants another player and then build the best D-line EVER!!!

Your score is: 10232 (GRADE: B+)

Your Picks:
Round 1 Pick 2 (S.F.): Myles Garrett, DE/OLB, Texas A&M (A+)
Round 1 Pick 4 (JAX): Jonathan Allen, DE/DT, Alabama (A+)
Round 1 Pick 7 (LAC): Solomon Thomas, DE, Stanford (A+)

Your Future Picks:
2019 Round 1 Pick

I'd actually feel bad for teams that had to fight those three plus Danny Shelton. I mean next year's draft wouldn't be sexy but my God the 4 horsemen of the apocalypse would be born for football.

I want Garret at #1, but I would be willing to trade down from 12, slightly, but only for the right price, and only if Hooker and Foster are gone.

Somehow, you missed the wink.

This is what he said:

"Doesn't matter (who drafts me) ... but I'd like not to go anywhere cold," Garrett said Tuesday, per The Houston Chronicle. "Whoever picks me up, I'm going to try and play my best for, to be the best player on the field at any given time. It doesn't matter who picks me up, I'm going to try and be a franchise player for them."

Yes, he said he'd "like not to go anywhere cold", which is understandable considering he's a 21 y/o kid who's probably never been north of Tennessee for more than a day in his life. I put much more weight on the rest of his statement.

Yes but we could have had Muhammed wilkerson, Justin Houston, Julius Thomas, Harrison smith and malik Jackson. There's at least 2-10 other pro bowl options within 15 at most slots of players at those picks we recieved. It's WHO you pick not where. I'm a fan of myles but the mentality that you can only pick impact guys high is bs. Again this is not FO or myles related purely mindset. Not to toot my horn but I chose those 5 because they were the guys I actually wanted at the pick. Brings a damn tear to my eye. We've picked horrendously but to say a trade down is foolish is foolish imo.

Somebody better be backing up a dump truck full of picks to make me pass on Garrett, but if it was down to #6, I would be targeting Hooker. If we missed out on him, then Solomon Thomas.

I love garrett and will in no way be upset if we take him. Relieved if anything. BUT if we traded down, got a haul and picked up hooker or Barnett I would be even more happy. Any other trade down no. I want one of those 3 guys, as of right now, for this draft to be a success for me. They are the only 3 imo that can make a massive impact and dominate their position immediately. I supposed allen too but those 3 are too rare for their position.

I want Garrett. To trade down, I take 1st and 2nd this year, 1st, 2nd, and 3rd next season, and a 1st and 3rd the following year.

I doubt it goes beyond 2 firsts and 2 seconds.

Now we're talking. Lol

I want Garrett too.

But would we be wise to take a package a little less than that (lol) and end up with Barnett?

How close is Barnett to Garrett?

What about Allen to Thomas?

Man I want to speak to Williams. Hehehe

If the Browns were willing to trade down.. "realistically" what could the Browns expect to get in return?

I realize that question is difficult to answer because of who the trading partner is and how far down the draft board they are.

If the Browns could trade down just a few places to say 3 or 4...they could (hopefully)still land one of the top defensive players..Jonathan Allen or Solomon Thomas...

Then the Browns could turn around and use some of what they gain in trading down to secure the trade with the Patriots for Garopplol...and still keep all or most of our 2017 picks.

...just a hypothetical but it might be a possibility.

I could see us trading down but hopefully not past #6 where we could still take Trubisky or Hooker if they wanted to stay with Defense ...

If this team even thinks about trading down in this draft...that's it for me.

Thank you!

If I was you, I'd dump them and do a wait and see. Then If this FO get's their head out of their behinds, pick them back up next year and it's not like you won't get them back. Wait and see if this team doesn't trade down and if they make some effort and spend some $$ in FA.

If I were to consider a trade down, here are my thoughts.

1, I have 5 top guys on my board. In no particular order, they are:
Myles Garrett
Jonathan Allen
Jamal Adams
Malik Hooker
Solomon Thomas

So I am not trading down so far that I am not guaranteed to get one of them.
So that means I wouldn't trade down past #5 unless I could get a guarantee from the Jets that they were selecting a Qb.

2, I must have a 1st round pick in next year's draft as part of the deal

Right, that's why earlier in the thread someone proposed getting the Titans on the phone. If they offered up their first three picks, it might be something to mull over (they have 5, 18 and 69 because we already have their #50).

That haul would guarantee one of those players you listed. And if we could get their 18th and 69th this year plus maybe a 3rd next year, that would give us 5, 12, 18, 33, 50, 65 and 69. That's 10% of the top 70 selections with a top 5 to boot.

It's a pipe dream because the Titans wouldn't offer that much, I don't think so at least.

Just think...

Hooker or Adams at 5
Tabor or Foster or Kizer at 12
Davis or Charlton at 18

I'd still probably want Garrett and Tabor, but getting one more would be nice (along with 69 and something next year).

A high 3rd is too much for Jimmy G because he is unproven but the #6 pick in the first round is good for Trubisky.. He looks like a QB but is unproven in college, let alone the NFL. Yuge gamble imho.

Garrett and Tabor would give us 2 top 10 prospects, if 2 QBs are drafted in the top 11.

That might also mean that pick 12 could net us some extra picks, by trading down (still in the top 20), but that would be dependent on who is left on our board at 12.

Like you I would be happy with the pair with our 2 1st round selections.

Because Trubisky is so experienced right? He has FAR less college experience and NO NFL experience but Jimmy G. is the one only worth a third because of lack of experience?!!! C'mon man!

Really Razor, last year all I heard on this board was Wentz, Wentz, Wentz and how much experience did he have and he played In a lower Division not the ACC, and now he is starting in Philly!!!

Maybe you didn't catch the vibe of my post. I am 100% in agreement with you. The poster I quoted is the one who said Jimmy was not worth a high 3rd (in the Jimmy thread) because he is unproven, but then suggests Trub at #6, Trub isn't even proven at the college level.

I may have been the first one to bring up going after Jimmy G, during the season.

Maybe not the first, but it was on October 10th:

link

I have been on the Jimmy G train from the start.

I'll chime in here.

I'm actually on board for trading down a couple of spots if it means picking up an extra 2nd rounder or something. (I'm not positive of the values of picks currently). There is a lot of talent in this draft, and in my opinion we have a lot of needs. Let's say the Jets want to move up to #1 and swap picks with us. If we can grab their 2nd & 3rd rounder in return, then maybe a mid-round pick next year, I'm taking that trade in a heart beat. If we can get a 1st rounder from them next year too, do it. As I said, I'm not positive what the picks are worth these days.

#6 - Derek Barnett DE/Tennessee (from Jets).
#12 - Malik Hooker FS/Ohio State
#33 - Antonio Garcia RT/Troy
#39 - Sydney Jones CB/Washington (from Jets).
#52 - Pat Elflein C/Ohio State
#65 - Dee Dee Westbrook WR/Oklahoma
#70 - Ryan Anderson DE/OLB/Alabama (from Jets).
#97 - Jake Butt TE/Michigan


Not sure how realistic this is, but in this scenario we get a lot better in a hurry.

The Jets have been known to be over aggressive, especially chasing QB's, so if they fall in love with one of them, you never know guys, they maybe willing to give up a bunch of picks to move up and get their guy.

If we could have a draft like this (or similar) I would happy, and OKAY with rolling with Kessler again next year.

np

rock on man I have wanted Jimmy G. since before he was drafted. I had him as my top rated QB in that draft and carr as my second pick. I felt carr would do great if he landed in a place with a good offensive line. I still think that way. I would have been far more happy drafting either of these two instead of having a dumb owner pick manziel

Razor is not making that up. I clearly remember him pimping Jimmy G more than anyone on this board.

Not a doubt about it.

The big question in my mind is.. Does analytics say that that you trade down and acquire picks at any given draft position or does taking the highest rated player at that draft position carry more weight?

Here is the problem with trading down... if you do it endlessly, you will never gain enough quality players to build a franchise around.

Julio Jones is the best example, but their are others.

The Browns drafter a boatload last year, and they will have another boatload this year. At some point in time, you have to stop turning over the bottom of the roster and build a team with the players you have.

I am not complaining about the move last year, it was the right thing to do, given the loss of established players, and the front office probably regrets losing the players that they did. But that was then, and this is now, so more draft picks does not necessarily equate to a better team.

Who is Jimmy G?

Give it up, cfrs. You know you can't change someone's nickname.

Is that someone's nickname?

(I will never give up.)

There was a man named Jimmy G!
Lord, we pray the Pats set him free.
And we can all agree
To shout out in glee
The day we sign Jimmy G!

Is there any way we can Photoshop a video of Garrett smoking a bong, so that he might drop to #12? Other than that, there's no scenario where I'd want to trade down.