DawgTalkers.net Forums The Archives 2017 NFL Season 2017 NFL Draft If we trade up from #12 .....

OK, so there are reports that the Browns are exploring moving up from #12. Hmm .... interesting.

Imagine that it's not a QB they want to move up for. What player, other than a QB, would you want?

I would go through the ceiling with joy if we grabbed Garrett, ad then were able to add Jamal Adams as well.

Man, talk about getting the defense on the fast track to massive improvement!

So, if we trade up from 12, who would you want, and why?

Browns reportedly reached out to three top-eight teams about trading up from No. 12 - CBSSports.com
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/browns...-up-from-no-12/

The Browns, who own the first pick in Thursday's NFL Draft, are reportedly waffling between taking defensive end Myles Garrett and quarterback Mitch Trubisky. So, why not draft both?

According to NFL Network's Michael Silver, the Browns have contacted three teams in the top eight about trading up from the No. 12 pick, which they also own. Presumably, the Browns would do so to take a quarterback after using the first overall pick on Garrett.
From NFL.com:

"The Browns have been doing their due diligence and investigating the possibility," Silver said on Tuesday's edition of Up to the Minute Live.

"I've learned that at least three teams in the top eight have been contacted by the Browns and discussions have taken place about the prospect of moving up. Now this is something that would likely happen in real time when these teams were on the clock because obviously if the target is Mitchell Trubisky and he goes earlier than expected, then those discussions would be moot.

"The Browns could still take Trubisky at No. 1. They could still trade down and try to take him a little lower than one. The more likely scenario right now would be trying to use that 12th pick and get up a little higher to get the quarterback of the future."

The top eight looks like this:
Browns
49ers
Bears
Jaguars
Titans
Jets
Chargers
Panthers

We can eliminate the first team, because the Browns aren't trading with themselves. Other than that, it's tough to eliminate anyone else. But because it's fun, let's take a few guesses at which teams the Browns have contacted.

To be clear, this is pure speculation. I don't know anything more than you do. For the record, NFL.com's Jeremy Bergman provided his own guesses. His three teams were the Titans, Jets and Panthers.

My first guess: The Panthers, because Silver's report said the top eight teams and the Panthers pick eighth overall.

My second guess: The 49ers, because they're a team that is completely devoid of talent and could use the extra draft picks. Furthermore, reports have linked the 49ers to Trubisky. Those reports could be the 49ers' way of either pressuring the Browns to take Trubisky No. 1 overall, which would result in Garrett falling to the 49ers, or it could be the 49ers' way of incentivizing the Browns (or any team, really) to trade up to No. 2 to get Trubisky.

My third guess: The Jets, because WalterFootball.com reported that the Browns and Jets have discussed a trade. If the Browns really do want Trubisky, this trade would work only if Trubisky is still there after the first five teams pick.

The Browns own 11 picks in all, so they have plenty of draft ammunition to attach to any potential trades.

If we trade up I think it'll be for a QB (I am not convinced it is Trubisky they want).

If we trade up I hope it is not for a QB, but then that probably means we will probably not be trading up.

If we took a DB at 12, after taking Garrett, it'd be a good draft. Getting two outstanding prospects on defence is something I could definitely live with.

If we trade up its gotta be for a QB, and while I kinda hope they don't do that , IMO it would be Trubisky.

Adams and Hooker.... I'd absolutely be behind trading up for either. Would hate to trade up for a QB.

Two players come to mind(in my opinion of course) if it's not a QB. One is Fournette. He is said to be a Peterson type running back. IF that is the case, trading up for him makes sense... a running game really helps your defense. The second in my mind would be Jonathan Allen. Plug him into the DT spot alongside Shelton and we have a really solid defensive line with a good amount of depth to rotate in to keep them fresh. Hooker or Adams are also possibilities.

Mitch ... NO-BRAINER ...

I think Fournette is a big upgrade from crow and would fit our team perfectly at 12. If Crow don't sign that tender I say grab him!

If we trade up then I would love to grab Allen. Adams or Hooker would be great too. Solomon is great but if we draft garrett then we don't need a DE.

Hell to be crazy I would move up to the top 10 again by using a first from next years draft. I would take Garrett then Solomon and then Allen. Put those three with Danny Shelton and our defense will kill poor QBs. We could have the most dominant D-line in the history of the NFL with those 4.

Then next year we just draft a QB from where ever we end up.

j/c:


https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/857163618231754753

IMO, if you are seriously considering trading up into the top 5 to get Trubisky - and its sounding like that's what it will take to get him - then you should just take him at #1, and then follow with Barnett, or best avail defender at 12.

So if Garrett goes 2 then Thomas and Allen would probably go 3 and 4 in one order or the other. Then Barnett could go 7 to SD who is switching to a 4-3 and doesn't have the personnel or 8 to Carolina who doesn't have a DE or 9 to CIN who is taking BPA. So you're looking at a CB who is the BDPA at 12 or you're taking Takk McKinley at 12.

To me, that would be a very disappointing 1st round...

If that happened, I'd probably go CB, or trade down for more picks. It might also happen that by taking a QB at #1, you start the run on QBs early by teams like Niners, Bears, Jets, Bills, and find that something good falls to you at 12. Mostly what I think is you should just stay put, let the draft come to you, and take the best guy on your board when your time to pick comes up. Having said that, if you don't have a QB in the NFL, you got stugats.

Be patient and don't move! If your guy falls, great! If not you get a nice consolation prize! There'll be great quality there at 12!

Win, win for them IMO.

Garrett then trade up w/ the Titans if Adams is still there at 5.

But if you draft a QB high and he busts, you've got 3 years of that, and likely a FO and coaching staff change. If you rinse and repeat that a half a dozen times, you've got the Browns.

I'm kind of down with seeing if a top 4 QB falls to 33, or waiting for the next Free Agency to see what happens with Cousins/Jimmy G and that draft class.

If we come out of this draft with a dominant D and our OL performs up to expectations, we could be an attractive place for a FA QB.

If we didn't draft Wentz because we didn't see him as a top 20 QB, I don't see how they justify any of these QBs in the top half of round one.

Just don't see the need to trade up .. I would love Adams or Hooker and even Howard , but what will it cost .. Move up for one of this years Qb's is not very Football intelligent ..

Adams, Hooker, Allen. Possibly in that order, however, I would be happy with any of the three w/Garrett.

I think this is a bit overemphasized. I mean, if you don't draft well, and don't have a qb, you're probably in the same situation.

Teams that suck or underachieve for a period of time tend to fire coaches. IMO drafting a QB in the first round doesn't mean high. The 22 pick for a QB doesn't say, we expect this guy to be the future. More so like we hope he will be the future.

We've fired many coaches and haven't picked a QB high since Couch

Mike Silver let's out what the Browns want him to and nothing more. It's all a dance. If they didn't like what they saw in Wentz I'm not sure what more they think they see in Trubisky.

Sure hope so pertaining to Silver.

But as per Trub vs Wentz, they have seen things we haven't. We've seen games, combine footage, maybe senior bowl footage, maybe the Gruden/Mariucchi shows, and some interviews.

They've brought them in for private workouts, meetings, probably dinner, probably met with college and high school coaches. So they've seen more than us. This is their job, and that is the most important position. So maybe there's something there we simply weren't able to see or haven't seen.

That or maybe the value of the trade down for Wentz last year was just that high in our opinions, and something like that this year just isn't there

Maybe I'm not looking at this right. It is silly season, but somethings not right with this. #1 If they wanted a QB bad enough to trade UP they would just take him at # 1. No, if they take Garrett at #1 then they would trade up for Hooker or Adams, not a QB. Doesn't make any sense to trade up for a QB. Just doesn't.

I just won't be happy with any scenario that has us trading up for Trubisky. I think it is a waste of valuable assets, and I don't think he's even worth a top 12 pick anyways.

Just take Garret, and the next two BPA. Howard/Baker, Hooker/CB, whatever

I agree right here... but I don't understand trading up at all, and I wouldn't be surprised to see it be a WR.

Obi would be a fine safety even at 12 if that's what we want. Kamara would be a good RB at 33... I'm not an expert by any means, but I don't know that there's anyone worth trading up for over another. Unless of course it's WR or TE.

If it's a trade up for a QB, I don't think it's Trubisky. My guess would be Watson.

Sorry Dave. I disagree with that. You take Garrett.

Just a thought on trading up. Maybe the ploy is to get to 4-5-6, which at that point might be high enough to land JG from the Pats. Maybe we have a handsake deal, get to 5, you have the QB.

Exactly what I said in the prediction thread I started the other day. I'd prefer to give up #12, #52 and the last 2nd rounder next year for #5 and a 5th rounder over giving up #12 and #33. #33 gives us the fleixibility to move up into the 1st if a QB is there we want, or move back for extra picks (or take a player of course).

I'd be ok with Hooker as well, but these are the only two guys.

This is the part that I don't understand with all of these stories...I think everyone agrees the QB prospects were better last year. We have the same group running the draft this year as last year, what makes anyone think the QBs in this draft would make sense to trade up for? I would think the analytics portion would point away from this move as well. JMO, but the rumors of trading up for a QB sounds like misdirection to me. Maybe they are hoping to start the run of QBs early hoping some players fall closer to 12 for us.

If we trade up, I bet it's for a Hooker.

If Garrett and Ogbah start terrorizing Olines, then a ball hawk safety would turn our D into a turnover cash cow.

A Hooker? Which one?

Just stay pat at number 12. We need every single draft pick we have for the next 3-4 years.

we moved back last year with titans for 3 and future 2 and I suspect that's similar to what it would take this year. a 2nd this year and a 3rd next. they worked together last year, I can see it this year.

We wont move up for anyone other than QB however. Even value pretty much dictates you don't move up unless for a QB.

According to what Silver just said on 92.3 it seems the reason for what you mentioned is a disagreement between the FO and the coaching staff. The coaching staff wants Garret, and some in the FO (although Mike said a small number) want Tribs. Therefore, they are looking to get both so everyone is happy.

I have a gut feeling the whole Trubisky thing is a farce. We want someone else to either trade up for him or take him before we pick at twelve.

At least that's what I am telling myself.

I still thinks it's smoke and mirrors. If this FO has proven anything, is that they are smart. Smart people don't release rumours that they want people to hear. Smart people release "rumours" they want people to hear.

I would surprised if the notion of a trade up was to placate a seeming divide. What in hell kind of equation does that satisfy?!?

I'm going with Occam's Razor. The story about contacting 4 of the top 8. Rumours of discord. I think it's to make the QB needy teams around us antsy and to pick before they want to. Hooker, Adams or Allen to drop, we pounce. I still think sitting there at 12 and letting the mayhem unfold around us is the best.

When you can keep your head when all around are losing theirs, you'll be a man my son.

Occam's Razor

I thought my explanation was simplest rather than some convoluted pacificistic move to please a portion of the FO I grant you it may not be the simplest explanation....

I agree. I just thought people might want an explanation of Occam's Razor. I know I did.

I agree that I think they are trying to create a QB frenzy at the top of the draft so they can have some other player they want fall to 12 or at least in range of moving up to grab them. It's certainly what I would do if I didn't want to draft a QB and wanted other teams to eat them up.

I don't believe for a second they won't take Garrett at #1 against the wishes of the coaches.