DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Garoppolo Part Three

brisset sucked during the time he played. Bill wants these picks so he can draft another QB that will be ready closer to when Tom is going to retire.

I don't know about Bill wanting another qb, but Brisset did not play well when he took over for Jimmy G. He's a young player and that can happen.

However, this is a Jimmy G thread and you and I are in agreement that Jimmy G is the man for the Browns.

Sorry I had Osweiler on the brain, thinking about what kind of contract Jimmy would get. It was the Sam Bradford trade that Shefter was referring to for a 1st and 4th.

true he is young. Bill likes to always be developing a QB though so chances are he will draft one after he trades Jimmy G. one way or the other. I think he is ready to invest a #1 pick in one though and have him groomed and ready to go when Tom his that age wall and has to retire. Either way we will find out soon =)

I agree with all of that with one caveat... the difference between trading for Jimmy G out of desperation and not desperation is what you give up in that trade.....

Seems there are several teams now that view Jimmy G. as a franchise QB and worth at least a first round pick. I am beginning to think we don't get away from this with out spending our 12 or at least next year's first.

If any of the top 5 teams give up their pick to trade for Jimmy instead of drafting what's in the draft I will be very sad cause there is no way I could justify the #1 overall on Jimmy just to win the bidding war with Garrett and Allen at the top of the draft.

I will be glad when the superbowl is over and trading becomes open again. The suspense is killing me ^^

Next year's first round pick.. I can deal with .. I just do not like the idea of trading either first round pick this year. We need too much atm to trade away one of this year's first round picks.

I would never give a first round pick for an unproven commodity like Jimmy G. I don't want the Browns to end up buying a lemon. We as Browns fans need to quit being suckers for quick fixes and short cuts.

He's only played in a handful of games on a great team. We shouldn't fall victim to greener grass on a great lawn.

The highest I would offer is a 3rd round pick. It would see that would be a reasonable value. Negotiations would start there. If someone else wanted to overvalue Jimmy, so be it.

I don't agree with you at all. Who would you take as a QB then and how would you get them? OR do you somehow think we have the right QB on this team already?

I'm seeing ALOT of BS here with he's only worth a 3rd rounder. He's not worth a 1st rounder (12).

Then there's the Load up for a QB NEXT year crap.

If we like Polo, he can easily be OURS.

We've got a FREE pick at 12. Yes it's FREE. It's ExTRA.

Start with 33 and something else. But if we're getting noise from another team offering a better package? TRUMP that package. Stomp it into the ground. Bite the bullet and Seal the Deal by offering the #12 pick and move on.

It's an extra frickin pick. Use the DAMN thing if need be.

And don't speak this BS he don't wanna come here because we suck. Frisco, Chicago, Jets and Buffalo all SUCK too.

Grow some NADS and get this dude aggressively if need be.

If we're willing to do 33 + more and it's not enough, then pull 33 back and give them #12.

You guys hoping we load up next year for a QB fail to realize it's going to cost ALOT more than a 12 pick to get high enough to grab one of these so called great QBs coming out next year. And that's only happening if teams ahead of us DON'T need a QB.

Screw next year. We loaded up THIS year. Make the Gosh Damn offer. Bellicheck will take it.

i

Do your saying we could get Bridgett cheaper?

Jk guys. Before anyone gets weirded out

Uh oh...too late.

I'd rather draft a QB and let RG3 be the starter going into next year.

If that is not the route we go, of any free agent/player on the block, give me Romo.

j/c

I'm Draft illiterate, so my take may not be worth the valuable internet space it takes to type this but...

I'd offer this years 2B and a 4th, plus next years 2 and a 3-5th.

Let's face it, BB gets a lot of mileage out of those rounds. I also think that is a trade we can absorb fairly well without having to cut ourselves short in other areas.

Personally I don't like the idea of using #12 for JG. I think the only thing that would make me feel comfortable about that kind of a deal is if for our #12 we get JG and NE's 1st for this year. I'm hesitant to burn a #12 for a guy we don't know if we'll get re-signed after 1 season or have to go through the hassle of franchising him.

If this Draft is as deep as all you guys have said, we HAVE to take advantage of it.

Say what you will about the FO, but so far when it's come to these trades and acquisitions, they've done a pretty fantastic job in regards to the details.

In the end though I'll do what I do every year: watch the TV, look at the highlight tape for our selections, and say "Oh! He looks good!"

Next year's first, I've been thinking about that. I have a scenario in mind, which is a pipe dream. Since I don't live in Colorado or Washington it's more of a "bottle" dream.

We trade next year's first for Jimmy G. I think we offer that, we get him. So we are sitting at #1 and do not need a QB. And Jimmy is no longer an option for SF, Chi, Jets and Buffalo (Romo states he wants to go to a contender). So these teams look to the draft. There are 3 "consensus" top QBs in the draft: Watson, Trub and Kizer. I would be surprised if teams have them all ranked equally and are willing to see which one falls to them. I key in on Chicago and try to swap places with them and acquire their 1st round pick next year in the deal. I know it's only 2 places, but its the most expensive two places in the draft, and we paint it as a bidding war. Ideally, I would want their 2nd this year and 1st next year. Sure, that's a lot, but maybe, just maybe, possible to ensure they get the QB they want. So, say Chicago does it, and takes a QB. SF almost has to as well, because a QB is already gone. So we are sitting at 3, Garrett still on the board. We still have #12 and we still have a #1 the following year. And with Jimmy G on our team, with the addition of Garrett and another good pick at 12 (Hooker?) I think the Chicago pick is in 2018 is better than our original one.

Ok, the bottle is down.

Has been mentioned before ( trade down with Bears ) That is the only ( crap shoot ) trade out of first that work work for me .. We still might get a shot a Garrett that way

Every draft pick you use is for an unproven commodity. It becomes about a very simple question.. do you think Jimmy G is better than a guy like Watson at #12... you really just have to look at Jimmy G as if you were drafting him.

No. No it does not matter. Yet, here we are...again.

Re: Jimmy

Once this whole "Trade for Jimmy" topic came about, I was not at all for giving NE our second first rounder. Today, I'm still not happy about it. However, I've come to the realization that may be the real price for him if we want him, considering the competition. I'd like to be able to flip-flop picks with NE (although we're talking a possible of one or two positions late in the first and early second) but it isn't that significant. Not sure how to ease my mind if #12 is part of the deal.

I was hoping the Browns would be able to take Trubisky w/ #12 but I don't see that happening. So, if that means we have to give up the #12 to get that next QB, then so be it. But regardless what people say about not having to worry about the contract now with this transaction, that's absolutely not the case. It's part of the whole trade intention whether that money comes this year or in 2018. You make the trade assuming he's going to be the guy for the next several years. You don't deal the #12 for a one year rental. This is the same approach with Jamie Collins. Except Collins has more of a track record so the gamble on JG is much larger considering the sample size, the assets given up, AND the cost to keep him.

Very difficult decision.

My point wasn't that Brisset was good, my point was that the entire system surrounding these guys is so good that it puts a guy who is horrible into situations where they could win. A guy like Jimmy G who might be good or might not be good looks way better in that system than he would anywhere else. That's just my opinion.

Also giving them 12 and signing him to a 60m contract on a two game sample just doesn't instill confidence in me whatsoever. Not that I care about the money, I don't, I've been a long time advocate of spending Haslams money on anyone who would help. The problem lies in giving him a big contract, he stinks and they will stick with him for 1-3 years out of arrogance.

Someone gave us their pick? I thought we traded down.

This is not an "extra" pick. This is a pick that we have because we don't have Carson Wentz.

Just because we have an "extra" pick doesn't mean we shouldn't use it wisely. Using it wisely may mean trading it for Garoppolo, but let's not pretend we received some gift.

I think it's actually possible Can but to be honest I am fine with next years for for jimmyG. I mean if we draft garret at #1 a RT like Cam at 12 and a new center/guard with one of the 2nd round picks I think our record will not be anywhere in the top 10 to be able to draft one of those QBs coming out anyways.

I'd much rather trade a known entity than an unknown one. The Rams probably didn't think they'd be bad. They were and now they don't have the fifth overall pick.

Think of it this way. We know JImmy G. can put up Tom Brady numbers in the same system Tom plays in. Hue says he will adapt to whatever works for the players. THerefore if we can get Tom Brady type number by building that system here in Cleveland Then we do it and don't look back.

Regardless of if we take a QB, trade for a QB, or even let RG3 have another shot at it After taking Garret at #1 I would spend the rest of the draft fixing the O-line so we can keep our QB safe whoever it might be. I think Cam would be an awesome RT for us at #12.

I can feel you on this one. It's not an easy choice to be sure. I just think the top 15 of this draft is going to be one of the best we have had in many years so I would rather draft this year than next. Also, I have to think Hue needs to win NOW and not wait around for another draft so if we can land players now and keep a great coach then that is more important to me than a draft slot difference next season. It's another reason I want Jimmy G. instead of drafting a guy who won't be ready to play this year.

Panicking because you want to "win now" does not seem like a good way to plan for the future.

It's not panicking imho. It's just going after good players that can make a difference right now instead of later.

I mean if we wanted to be smart we would trade out of the first and pick up a ton of second round picks as we go. There is a LOT of good talent in this year's second round and 10 second rounders will probably net more gain than just having Garrett.

Still having Garrett, Cam, and Jimmy G. THIS year could have a long lasting impact on how our team plays. It sends that message to the team that we mean business and we mean it NOW.

Not following the plan set forth by the team is panicking (to me). It is not my perception that this team was trying to win in year two.

Giving up future first round picks is not a wise strategy. If everything goes to hell and Garoppolo stinks you are totally screwed. I'd rather trade 12, 33, and more than a future first.

(Rather is not the same as should.)

I think, to a degree, "readiness" and "unproven" are almost pointless in the context of the mission statement - "Find a franchise QB". If Trubisky or Watson or Kizer are deemed to have higher ceilings than JG - I'm not saying they do by the way - then what does it matter if they need to sit and learn? Do it the right way for once in our lifetimes. If JG is viewed the best option to take the Browns from failure to success, we have the advantage he should be more ready to start from the off. However, I don't view that as a slight on a college QB.

If our scouts, coaches and analytics agree a QB is bonafide, franchise potential, then land him. I don't want to spend #1 on any of the QBs in the class; I'd be 50/50 at #12 dependent on who's still available.

#33 - hell yeah, get me a QB.

Therefore, if we deem JG the best option, I'd send #33 plus some future conditional pick(s) as my opening gambit knowing I may pull a draft day trade for #12 for JG and #32.

I also think those slating JG as being unproven - what would you call the college QBs??

For my 2p - I prefer Mahones at 52 or our 3rd in this draft or JG at 33. I caveat that with I am clueless at evaluating QBs.....

Unproven. . . but 22 years old with four year contracts that are cheap.

Now all you need is Tom Bradys receivers, Oline and running game and whoever calls the plays an we are all set LOL

j/c

If the Browns trade for Garoppolo they better not give up more then the 33rd pick because I don't see how a guy who was a late 2nd round pick and has had very limited playing time in three years is suddenly worth more then that.

If you have the QB the rest is a lot easier to get. If you don't have the QB the rest is pretty useless. Cleveland has proven that over and over again.

It's a fair point but if we deem JG the best option the money and draft pick(s) are just tool to facilitate the trade. Plus I don't get the obsession with having to sign him long term. Play him, sign him next offseason dependent on performance. Or tag him. Which is what the Patriots cannot afford to do.

Where he was drafted is irrelevant. It's how the market values him that matters.

Tell that to Andrew Luck.

If he got hurt playing for NE, imagine with the Browns...

First thing a Browns QB has to have is durability