DawgTalkers.net Forums The Archives 2018 NFL Season 2018 NFL Draft Moving Down from #4

yeah, as someone said yesterday: a trade up for a QB has its own trade chart

I see no reason why Denver would be inclined to move up one spot unless they think we would want to trade down with Buff, which I do not want to do.

Denver knows we wont be taking a QB at #4(assuming #1 is our QB pick). SO they can it at #5 and get the same available QB, either way.

Key Phrase: "unless they think we would want to trade down with Buffalo"

I have zero desire to move down to #12 and #22. We have spent enough years building a roster with quality players. It is time to get a few elite players

Deleted

I must be getting Brain Dead.

IF THE BROWNS moved down to 12 and 22, WHO WOULD BE REALISTIC PICKS?

This isn't a WOULD YOU DO IT thing.

Derwin James/Calvin Ridley/Marcus Davenport/Da'Ron Payne/Mike McGlinchey/Vita Vea/Sam Hubbard etc...

I would move down from 4 for 12, 22, and 56.

That would give us 7 of the top 64 players in the draft. That is a lot of shots at the apple, and also could be a chance to trade a pick or 2 for future picks.

My bad. I jumped too quickly to what I thought the thread was going to be.

And helped us be where we are with draft picks. I don't think the plan was to go win less last season to get the 1st pick.

Each trade option is one in and of itself. What happened last year has nothing to do with this year.

That said, I have liked Chubb as a pick for this team. Even started a thread that maybe we take him at #1.

If he is there, it would have to be a pretty good offer. It's hard for teams to double team both edge rushers.

/thread

That seems like a big if. I mean if we were going to trade with Buffalo or Miami, why would we trade with Denver instead? And why risk trading down only to trade back up. Sounds like the stupid moves we've made in the past. And again, we don't need picks so I'm not understanding your logic. What am I missing?

The thing is none of us know which player any team is targeting.

Trading back with Denver assures us getting the same player we would get at 4. For instance, if Barkley is the target and the choices are to trade with Denver, Buffalo, or not trade at all, what do you do? Trade with Denver. We are still going to get Barkley. I'm not sure where the disconnect is here. Teams also trade up one pick all the time. Chicago did it last year. We've actually done it 3 times since 2004.

In fact, this entire scenario that you seem to think is so far fetched happened 4 years ago when we traded (ironically) to the Bills then traded back up for the player we wanted.

Also, two years ago the Titans traded out of #1 with the Rams to #15. Then traded back up to #8 for Conklin.

They aren't stupid moves. It's all a strategy to build draft capital and get the player you want. It's how you build a franchise.

I'm not privy to all previous draft trades, but I'm sure it's happened more than twice.

No trading down. Our GM said we're playing to win this year. It's time to cash in the chips we've been stockpiling for God knows how long. We don't need more chips, we need elite players from the top few picks in the draft. We have enough youngsters with potential. #4 isn't the same as #22 or whatever.

at this point, we don't need to keep stockpiling picks.

Exactly , it is time to cash in on these years of tanking

No more " wait until next year"

I'd guess if Barkley is there at 4, we take him.

Otherwise,....

We are trading down with Miami.

Bank on it.

So the more and more I think about these scenarios, the more I want to trade the #4 pick to Buffalo, if and ONLY if they offer us 12, 22 and either 2nd rounder this year or their first next year. Anything less, I am not interested. But if this is offered, here is my dream scenario.

Pick 1: Take the best QB

Pick 12: Trade 12 and 64 to someone in the 7-10 range. We then draft whoever falls between Chubb, Fitzpatrick or Ward. One of them will have to be there.

I then take picks 33 and 35, and trade up into the 15-20 range, and take either Connor Williams or Mike McGlinchey.

At 22, I take either the best edge rusher (Harold Landry, Marcus Davenport, Hercules Mata’afa) if we took Ward or Fitzpatrick. I take best cornerback if Chubb was pick (Jackson, Hughes or Oliver).

If we got the Buffalo 2nd rounder, I take the best RB there. Possibly try to trade up and get a higher spot to take one.

If we got Buffalo first next year instead, I trade whatever later picks I have left (maybe even a 2nd or 3rd rounder next year) to trade up and get whatever RB we are gunning for.

We walk away with first round QB,LT,CB,DE and a RB. I am not interested in adding more "quantity" young talent to develop. We have enough of that. It is time to trade up and get as many first round talent players that we can!

Oof, there's a lot of scenarios that you're hoping for there.

I dunno about that.

I prefer the safe route, especially now that the Jets traded up. I mean, you don't know the compensation to move back up to 7-10. And you don't know if we could do it.


I guess it's something you have to consider. But you're possibly giving up the chance of getting the player with all out super-star potential

I know that is a lot of wheeling and dealing, and a lot of moving. But even if just the first 2 happen. We get 12 and 22 (and 2nd rounder or 1st next year). We then trade whatever it takes to move from 12- 7,8,9 or 10. Even if it takes our first 2nd rounder.

We still net getting 22, and still likely get one of the players at 4 we wanted. That is incredibly huge!! The rest after that is all just MY dream scenario. But, there are plenty of options.

I hope we either trade w/Denver and move down one spot or stay at 4. Screw all the other crap.

We need impact players. We pass on guys like Wentz and end up Corey Coleman and hope. Pffftttttttt...

But that is kind of my argument for trading with Buffalo. By making the trade and one more trade, we can get one of Fitzpatrick, Ward or Chubb at 7-10, and still net another 1st rounder.

I fully agree that we need impact players, and by making 2 moves we still get that same impact player. This is not the year for the Browns to sit still with all these 2nd round and later picks. This is the time to move up, attack, and get as many impact players as possible.

I agree. With 3 2nd round picks we have enough picks to fill needs. #33 and #35 will more than likely be players currently projected by some mock drafts as 1st round picks.

We disagree on the value of the players, but that's cool. You seem like a really good dude. Different opinions are going to occur and it helps make things interesting.

I do have a question for you that isn't related to any of this. I'm curious about your opinion on good LSU's OL was this year and last. Any info you would supply would be appreciated.

Their offensive line was actually pretty good. Losing 2 starters last year hurt them. But they generally have a pretty good group.

The problem that hurts them every year is the same problem the Browns have every year. It is the quarterback. When teams don't have to worry about the QB making great plays, they can key in on the run/pass rush and drop less in coverage.

I assume you are asking, in reference to Guice. My view is still the same, that he will be overdrafted because of what Fournette was able to accomplish. In no way am I saying Guice is no good. But he is not a first round talent, and truly, had Fournette not gone ahead of him, I think we would be talking about him as a 3rd round possibility. Still good. But not a game changer to me.

My biggest argument against him, other than just watching him with my eyes, is when Coach O would use him. When it came down to 4th and 1, or any goal line situations, he would generally put in a different back. This speaks volumes to me. In my opinion, in 4th and 1 or goal line situations, you put the back with the best vision, decision making, and power in to get that yard or 2. The fact that he was subbed out tells me that in LSU's case, this wasn't him.

Thank you, sir. Guice was exactly the reason I was asking. You're pretty smart.

I think Guice is overrated. I don't think he stinks or anything, but I don't see why he is rated so high. I started a thread about Evaluating and Ranking the RBs and I did a report on Guice. I was not very impressed. Well, I was somewhat impressed, but not first round impressed and I think there are other backs in the draft that are better. I have a 3rd round grade on him, as well.

I just wanted your take because I suspected that LSU's OL makes backs better than they really are.......just like Alabama's.

On a side note..........it is rather amazing at how LSU has had such great talent for a long time and have had less than average QBs. Hard to fathom at times.

JK

So moving down should only go as far as the number of players left in that tier allows you to without leaving that tier. Here are my players in that top tier of non Qb's:

Bradley Chubb
Saquan Barkley
Minkah Fitzpatrick
Denzel Ward
Quinton Nelson
Trumaine Edwards
Roquan Smith

That is a list of 7 players. After this list, you get a bunch of players that are pretty interchangeable down through probably the mid 2nd round.
If we count 4 Qb's that would allow a drop to #11
If we go to #12 then we would be dropping to the next tier.

Of course that is my list. If your list list is longer then moving to #12 would be okay. If your list is the same or shorter then you would be against the trade down.

It really is amazing! And with the talent all around. Great defenses. Great offensive lines. Wide receivers like Jarvis Landry, Odell Beckham, Rueben Randle, Dwayne Bowe, etc. Runningbacks like Leonard Fornette, Jeremy Hill, Spencer Ware, etc. But the best quarterbacks to come out of the school are Mettenberger and Jarrett Lee

I am not sure what it is. There are a lot of QB prospects that come out of Louisiana, and LSU is a big enough school to pull some out of other territories. It is amazing at the ineptitude they have at the QB spot. Something we as Browns fans can definitely relate to!

Agreed.

It's not that hard to figure out. It's a cycles thing. When defenses are hard wired to stop the pass it gets easier to have success running the ball. When teams gear up to stop the run it gets easier to pass.

That and when you have a great running game all you need is a QB who is accurate and gets rid of the ball fast. Once they put in that pass defense you just go hurry up and burn them out on the D-line by running it like crazy for a series or two and then as the defense is gasping you throw some bombs to really wear them out and go back to pounding them again.

With Tyrod if we land Saquan we will be in a similar situation.

What did Matt Flynn do to deserve this?

I stand corrected. But to me, he is the most ultimate *yawn* quarterback. Very easily forgettable. But you are correct. List him in front of Mettenberger. But my point still stands.

That's where I'm at.

I DO NOT want to go past 5. I want our QB and one of the 3 Blue Chippers at 4 or 5.

Ward would be gone by 12, so we're looking at guys like LB Roquan Smith, DT Payne, WR Ridley, SS James.

At 22 Davenport, Vea, Kirk, Alexander, Guice.

Not really impressed considering what we would be passing up at 4 or 5.

I'd rather package 33 or 35 and something else if one of our Top 15-20 guys fell below around 25.

Alexander?

I hate suggesting a trade back... but what if we don't want Darnold or Rosen and would rather have Mayfield or Allen (heaven forbid). Consensus seems to think Darnold is the #1 pick, and Rosen is the #2 pick...

I don't know what the Jets have left to deal, but it might be important for them to get ahead of the Giants.

I see the need to try to gather additional picks but I'm all for taking our guy at 1 without having to worry about what anyone else is doing.

or just go:

1. Browns - Darnold
2. Giants - Rosen
3. Jets - Mayfield
4. Browns - Allen


Play TT for a year ... see how Darnold/Allen develop, or dangle one for assets haha

With these things in mind:

Seeing what the Jets gave up to get into the top.

Signing Hyde.

Signing Randall.

Teams in position now (Us, Giants, Jets, Us) and the likeliness of all taking QBs.

... I'm getting intrigued about possibly still grabbing the player we wanted at #4, but with trading down and gaining additional capital. I don't think we could trade down much, even one spot ahead if Denver wants to move up and feels we might trade out to someone else and they lose their guy, for one example...

Don't get upset, I'm just having a conversation. It's not a personal attack on you or your thinking.



There are no assurances in this scenario. What if they want Barkely? They've signed Keenum to a 2 year, healthy contract. There's nothing saying they would absolutely take a QB. We potentially get boned for a later round pick.



I realize that. I'm saying it doesn't make sense this year.



I realize that too, we don't need draft capital at this point, IMO.