DawgTalkers.net Forums The Archives 2017 NFL Season 2017 NFL Draft Options at #1

OK, before anyone flips out, I understand Garrett is the consensus #1 prospect, I get it, I do. If I was a betting man, I'd say that's who we end up taking. But, there have been some who have argued for a quarterback, and some who have argued for Allen, me included, being other options for us.

What about, and don't crucify me for this I'm just trying to create some discussion, a trade down scenario? I can see the argument for staying pat, but I can also see the argument for moving down too. If no quarterback is worthy,and that is my opinion, then no other player effects the game the same way a quarterback does. So why not move down and maximize your draft capital. What could be done with the capital you could get for the #1 pick. We could control this draft and drafts to come.

Now, like I said, I understand the argument for Garrett, he has all the physical gifts you'd want from the position, but how will that equate to wins and losses? Can one guy who can get after the quarterback change the win loss columns that much? A & M only finished 8-5, 4-4 in the SEC, did Garrett make them that much better. How many of those wins can be attributed to Garrett himself?

I understand the argument that teams will have to game plan for him. I don't know if see it on the field, maybe a game here and there but not on a game to game basis. There were teams who assigned one blocker to him and had no problem running at him. In the NFL it will happen even more until he shows that he truly is a difference maker. And he may very well be, this is not a knock against him, at least It's not my intention to be. But looking at all the great edge rushers through history, how many of them truly won games on their own?

So, if there is no true cut and dry franchise QB, should we move down to maximize our draft capital? I know how much everyone loves Garrett, but I do think with Sashi and company It could be a real possibility.

Again I only put this on here to create discussion,It's just one POV, not necessarily mine, I do expect some fireworks though.

I would be totally fine with trading down, if we don't trade to far back.....but what would we get?

Can we go back just enough to grab Allen, maybe just a little bit more and get Barnett, maybe Hooker. Then what would we gain, a 2nd, maybe two 2nd's, a 2nd and two 3rd's?

That would mean we still have a top 5-6 pick and keep #12.

If we could do something like I've mentioned, then drop the hammer and trade down and grab Mahomes II in the second round.

No trading down. Take the best player in the draft (my opinion Garrett) and start building your team.

I bet Blaine Gab....I mean trubisky falls after he measures 6'1

I hope your right then maybe we can grab him @ #33 ...

#1 should be Miles Garrett for sure, #12 pick we could trade up or down, but if we don't pick MG better to be a QB because if not, I will not understand it.

I would agree with you if we were holding the #2 spot, #1 I think this draft has only one clear player, trading down isn't an option.

No thanks

Not even an option, you draft Garrett #1 even if your thinking about trading down. If a team is willing to give up the moon and the player you want is there maybe. If not he's ours end of story. You hold the cards, if they want to play make em pay!!

Every year I advocate for trading down. Literally every year. The reason you trade down is to accumulate more draft picks. Accumulating more draft picks is a sound strategy because it gives you more players. Selecting more players increases your odd of getting quality players. Getting quality players wins games.

I am against trading down, from the first overall pick, this year because I believe we have a quality player staring us straight in the face. You don't have to trade down because you know he is going to be a quality player.

With all that said, if there is a belief within the front office that Myles Garrett is not as close to a sure thing as possible (which I think he is) then we should trade down.

You absolutely could make the argument for all sorts of scenarios, but the way I view it is this - we're sitting pretty atop the entire draft and the consensus #1 player is a generational talent. It's a no-brainer - take Garret and don't look back. At #12 is where you start to look at maneuvering (or sitting still and taking Best Available Defensive Player).

Going by this statement you made, and to play devil's advocate to you, wouldn't more picks give us a better chance to do that, maybe add more then one cornerstone but add several from one draft?

So long as we don't trade out of the top three I am ok with it. I think spots 2 and 3 are looking at drafting a QB. I am very positive that we can pick up a second or maybe even future first to move down to pick #3. It's very possible that at pick three we could still have our pick of Garrett or Allen if the team moving up from three doesn't select that QB that the 49ers covet whoever that might be.

So then we are at pick #3 and Garrett and Allen are both on the board and now we have an extra 2nd or 1st round pick. That is a win win situation. I would not trade down any further though unless it involves another 1st round pick to move down to #4. I don't think any team does that trade but that's what it would take for ME to trade down further.

I would have thought all you trade down guys would have learned your lesson last year and the years before. We already have enough crappy players. Lets get some studs.

The Browns could have made some great picks with the pics they got from trading down. Trading down was not the problem. It's their ability to evaluate talent and make good picks from those evaluations.

I was thinking they'd only move back a couple picks, couldn't a cornerstone player be had there? And I'd hate to argue but can't those type of players be found through out the draft? With good scouting? Stars are found in every round. Just trying to follow your train of thought.

In the spirit of the purpose of the thread:

Yes I'd absolutely trade down. . . . under the following circumstances:

Has to be within the top 8.
Based on this value chart ::: http://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart.asp ::: I'd need to "win" the trade by a landslide .... so if conventional wisdom says the #1 pick is worth 3000 points - I'd be looking for a minimum of 4000 points.

An example : Say we trade with the Jets at #6 1600 pts. I'd want their #38 520 pts. . . . Because of the uncertainty of where future picks would fall I'd then need their #1 pick next year. And then more - either their #2 next year too - or a even their #1 in 2019.

Then we have a deal .... I'd hope to get Solomon Thomas and Adams or Hooker. If Thomas is gone (he's climbing rapidly) I'd take the safety first and then Derek Barnett at 12.

The reality is - if I am the Jets I wouldn't touch that with a barge poll. No team in the top 8 is going to give up what I want in order to relinquish Garret.

I have been an advocate of trading down over the years. However, the last couple of years, I have adjusted my line of thinking to taking impact players at impactful positions.

I say this because the Browns are severely lacking in that area.

Take Garrett. No player is a sure thing, but I don't see how anyone could bash the Browns for taking the best player in the draft while factoring in he plays the second most impactful position on the football field.

Excellent points especially regarding Garrett.

Yes, Browns missed out on a freak of nature trading down over the years, but many teams don't get the best player over several years. How do they maintain playoff caliber? It also helps not blowing the damn thing up every two years too. Is it "the guy" or support that makes a team? Ah, the ol'chicken or the egg comes first argument!

What about depth? After all it is highly likely a team loses several starters. This in my opinion is Browns biggest weakness. Browns are competitive early. After their third lost starter season simply dies a slow and painful death.

I get you need studs to carry a team. Question is how many and at what position? Here I think you can go in a myriad of directions. I think placing focus on a particular part of the game to do well is key.

The big dark secret is where Sashi and Jackson focus attention. It is exactly how Seattle built their team. You watch and question what Pete Carrol is doing and all of a sudden their somebody. Did he get lucky or was it the plan? Ditto looking at Dallas.

Bottom line is we seen the worst and think perfection is the only cure. It also doesn't help listening to all the self proclaim media experts remind us of our misery.

You've got the #1 overall pick.

You either believe the Often injured RG3, or the young, Cody Kessler is the future at your quarterback situation, and that they can be the #1 of any 3 teams in your league, or

You take a quarterback.

You have to at #1. ( And I don't think Myles Garrett is good enough to be taken 1 overall.) (For that matter I don't even like the idea of him joining the Browns, to think he'd make the team better).

But after Justin Gilbert, and Cameron Erving, and Danny Shelton, have been noticeably nothing special

What should I expect from a future Cleveland Browns first round pick.

That philosophy only works when there is a QB WORTH drafting at #1. There is not a single QB in this draft worthy of the top ten much less the #1 pick.

Whenever you draft solely based on need you always end up with a bust. ALWAYS.

You have to draft the BPA that fits the needs of your team. We have a lot more needs than QB. Also RG3 might still end up working out. It's not like we had a good circumstance for him to play in. To be honest he played better than I thought he would when he came back.

I agree. #12 is still high enough that you can trade down in to the 20's and pick up a 1st rounder next year, and still get a good player this year.

There is really only one trade down option in my mind. That is to #3 with the Bears.
No reason for SF, Jax, Tenn to trade up that I can see.

The Bears would have to fall in love with a Qb and get worried that SF would take him at #2
To move down to #3 I would start with their 1st next year and their 2nd this year.

I could see the Jets falling in love with a Qb and wanting to move up but I don't think that they would be willing to give up what I would want to move to #6.
I would want there #1 in 2018 and 2019 and their 2nd this year, 2018 and 2019.

I wouldn't consider going any lower than that.

It'd have to be a really really good deal, and I don't see that coming. I always say, everything is for sale, all depends on the price.

Well sure the Number 1 Pick is available, but it's gonna take a lot to take it from us.

We can choose anyone we want. We're in the driver's seat. That's worth a lot, and Myles Garrett in a Browns uniform is the way to go. Barring choosing one of the QBs (and that I don't see), but if our FO sees a franchise guy (one of those QBs that DePodesta was talking about), obviously we have to take them.

I just don't see a trade down happening

I think that in every draft since Tim Couch,(Ditka was giving away the farm) we should have traded down. With that said, we have never been staring at a prospect like Garrett before.

I won't say that I would never trade down from #1 this year, but it would take a heck of a haul of picks and I don't see teams giving that up for a non-QB.

Trading down from #12 might be smart though depending on who is left on the board at that time.

best player at number 1. at 12 you should go best available but id take a chance at best qb

This is a no brainer. The Browns have the option of selecting the best player in the draft in Myles Garrett. Furthermore, he plays at the second most important position in the NFL next to QB.

Don't overthink it or try to outsmart everyone. For once, make the easy decision and turn in the card for Garrett.

I do. With the 12th pick.

To agree with you, I also don't see a trade down at #1. Myles Garrett is by far the highest rated player on the board. He fills a big need. His selection checks all the boxes, be it BPA or need.

Time to quit over thinking this. Just take a damn good player at #1, then try to shop the 12th pick for a future #1. We will need it to move up for our QB next year. Move down in to mid/late 20's and still get a great player for our team.

This isn't hard. Some years it is. This year isn't.

#1 pick - no trade down.

#12 pick - i'm okay with a trade down if and only if Hooker/Adams are gone.

I dunno how I feel about the 12. While I do think trying to get an extra 1 next year is nice, we keep on doing this same thing without getting better (trying to get an extra 1 so that we can trade up if we want to get our QB).

Maybe Trubisky will be there (or we can use it for Jimmy G). We've gotta get this QB situation figured out because if we don't, the likelihood of our front office getting fired grows and grows.

I think 12 this year, unless we get a really good offer, should be used on someone (hopefully to get our QB or someone in the secondary). Gonna have to be one of the corners, cause I don't see Adams being there. Don't know enough about Hooker to be honest

Don't get me wrong. I won't be upset if we stay at 12 and make a selection. I am only saying that if trading down is in the cards, don't let it be at #1.

Roger Roger, of course, if someone's offering us like 3 1's and 2 2's, that'd be hard to step away from. Like I said, I don't like saying "never". In general, everything is for sale. At least for me it is, except my dog and wife (although she got all annoyed at me lastnight cause i went to bed early instead of watching some netflix documentary with her).


I assume the #1 pick is, it's just not being marketed (the same way my condo would be, but it's not in the MLS listings)



I fully expect us to go Garrett #1. The 12 spot I have some questions about (QB trade, corner, or another trade down)

But if we trade down, I hope the main compensation is for next year. We've got 11 picks already. There's only so many roster spots. Last thing you want to do is release possible potential talent because of roster size restrictions.


I do like how we can trade these compensation picks this year. That's def made compensation picks more valuable, and certainly is one of the reasons we didn't sign anyone significant in FA this past year. I just hope that we don't use that as one of our reasons to let Pryor leave.

good point here

I don't know what kind of compensation you guys expect to move down from 12 but you won't get more than a 3rd rounder unless you drop to the 20s.

If loading up draft value is your game the move would be from 1. What would garner you a 3rd rounder to move from 12 would produce likely a future 1st and 2nd round pick. I love garrett but if someone wants to come up garrett is not equal to say #6, a 2nd and a future 1st.

You'd also get some pretty good compensation for moving back at pick 33. teams have all night to re-arrange boards and think ... that's a nice perk of having the #1 pick too

What about Cory Brown? He didn't work out so well.

Since next years QB class is light years ahead of this one I would definitely consider trading down a few slots to gain another first round pick in 2018.

Neither Garret nor Watson WANT to play for Cleveland. Say what you will, but these kids know how to use the media these days, and stating in public venues that you want another team to trade up to draft you was not happenstance. The comments by Garret and Watson were calculated plays hoping to deter the Browns from drafting them. No other way to see it IMHO.

Fix the OLine in FA and draft heavily on D in April.

Draft your franchise QB in 2018.

Most players won't want to play for Cleveland. But when they get drafted by us, they'll come play for us and they'll embrace us. Save re-entering the draft (and losing millions upon millions), we have them for four years, a fifth if they play well (which they'd want to do to maximize their contract anyway). So whomever we draft will make the best of it......... You don't get to be the elite number 1 pick on talent alone, unless you're Jadaveon Clowney. And they'll embrace whoever they play for