tough because we dont know what holes get filled/created by Berry in FA.
if we roll with the most likely scenario that Baker is our guy, then im trying to see who's the best FA we can get for WR and DT. i think CB, OL, and DE's are depth positions and can be filled in the draft/back end of FA.
on offense the biggest "need" would be a big body WR. Baker would benefit from a big catch radius weapon. we have big targets at the TE spot but i think we really need a 6'4-6'5 WR. we need more DT's, so who's the best FA's on the market for that, or we could possibly trade for?
depending on that is where we should decide draft strategy. i dont know if it would be beneficial to trade up or down. staying where we're at would give us a solid DT or WR, which would be the biggest need. i'd lean toward DT simply because we have to sure up the trenches on that side of the ball. Oline can be addressed in the middle of FA/draft for depth purposes. we're good at defensive back. maybe if there's a big body WR that has a high ceiling but doesnt get drafted in the top 10, so we trade down to 11 from 13 to make sure to grab him?
but a serious trade down from 13 to top 7 would - i hope - mean we're eyeing one the best DT in the draft. this team's biggest need is somebody in the middle creating chaos. i feel like Garrett and Clowney just need consistency in the middle to really eat.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
I think, in terms of need, we are 'in the red' at both WR and DT.
If we started the season now, our WRs would be DPJ and Schwartz (I'm making 2 fairly safe assumptions here, obviously). I think this calls for 2 not-cheap FA moves, plus at least 1 somewhat legit draft pick. IMO, I would be disappointed if we came out of FA and draft and Schwartz is still penciled into a starting job.
DT - We've got Togiai, Malik, Day, and Elliot (I keep forgetting about him). I'd say we have 2 (optimistically) starters in there, needing at least 3, plus some depth. *listing those out doesn't seem like DT is as bad as I thought when I started writing this
You don't have a Myles, Trevor, Joe Thomas, Calvin Johnson. Those types just do not seem to be there.
The receiver I love is Drake London. He is that big target. He broke his ankle but is expected to be ready to go. When he played. He dominated. He was the offense. At 6'5" he is like a TE wide receiver. A former very good basketball player who posts guys up as a receiver. He does not lose 50/50 balls.
I don't think Berry places DT as a priority position. He will do as he has done regarding DT. Draft guys in the mid rounds and sign free agents on short deals to patch holes.
DE is a a different story. He will invest big for pass rushers. And he wants depth there as well. So, IMO he will go hard after Clowney. If the medical is bad on Takk. He will go after another guy like him. And if there is a DE they rank high and he is there at 13. He will grab him.
I don't know what will done with Jarvis? I really don't.
I do think he will sign at least one FA receiver and it will be a high value guy. Chris Godwin, Mike Williams, Allen Robinson, Michael Gallup.
Pick 13 will be BPA at DE, WR. Depending upon who they sign in FA.
I don't think Berry places DT as a priority position.
Just my thoughts as an aside, but I think Berry places priority on positions within the scope of his coaches' schemes. If the D-Coord and HC have a lower value on DT, then Berry does. If they feel that a premier DT is what makes things tick, then Berry values it more. I think he is smart enough to know that the coaches are the chefs and he is the ingredient shopper and he needs to take it from them on which spots they can skrimp and which ones they should splurge. Beyond that, they all have said numerous times that they work together when reviewing roster moves; nothing is done in a vacuum.
As for Trade Up or Trade Down..... it's just way too early to even make a real guess, I think, and I also think that with how weak the top of this Draft class is shaping up to be, a LOT of teams will be shaping their draft strategy based on what they can get done in Free Agency.
If the QB class is as weak as folks think, then there's a chance that Pitt is able to sit still at 20 and still get a QB. I mean, they got Ben at 12, so at worst they only need to trade up maybe 10 spots. Again, though, if the class is as soft at the top as we're saying here, then you will probably see a bunch of the more stable/established teams try to trade back with the teams that are in rebuild mode and have plenty of draft capital; the teams that need more bodies and are trying to get younger.
Probably a bigger factor that we need to look at as we head into free agency is teams like Tampa Bay and New Orleans; teams whose runs are done and will be needing to shed massive amounts of cap space to rebuild. Teams that are WAY over are Green Bay, New Orleans, Dallas, Rams. Then there are teams like Bills and Chiefs that have a little space, but are VERY tight up against the cap. These are teams who will be shedding contracts and potentially be open to trading some players. If the right player(s) are made available, this *may* be a better use of our draft picks.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
This isn't a great draft, it has a bunch of decent players but lacks the blue chippers. It's the kind of draft where it would be better to trade back an acquire more picks in the 2-4 round range or even picks for next year.
However, the cost to move up is really stiff. Washington is mocked with Willis at 11 on a number of Boards.
If he were to drop to them they would take him. But the cost to go from 20 to 10 would cost way to much and the risk is high.
Trading back for the Browns would be an option. However, finding a trade partner may be really hard. I just don't see teams in this draft wanting to move up.
Well, since not many will want to trade up due to the complete lack of blue chippers, the cost of doing so will likely be lower than typical. Not by a large margin, but enough.
Teams that want to move down need a team that wants to move up.... they have to decide if they're better off paying a kid based on where they're currently slotted, or can they get him a few picks later, save a little cash, and still pick up an extra pick somewhere? Never look a gift horse in the mouth.
Probably half the league will want to move back during the 1st round. The meat of this draft is likely in the 2nd and 3rd rounds, though, and that is where you will see more trades. It's also where you may see lots of moving back in the first in exchange for 2023 picks.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
Even though the draft is short on blue chippers there are still some pretty good players in the draft, someone may want to trade up to get a certain one of those WR's that best fits their scheme or if they need a OC they may want to trade up to secure Linderbaum as he's a pretty good player and the only OC in this draft that I see as a starting material and someone always seems to trade up for a QB.
I've looked back through the last few drafts and it's hard to find real "premium" for a team trading down from middle of the pack.
LAST YEAR: Jets and Vikings: The Jets traded picks No. 23, No. 66 and No. 86 to the Vikings for the No. 14 pick and the No. 143 pick. The Jets used the No. 14 pick to select USC guard Alijah Vera-Tucker. With the 23rd pick, the Vikings drafted Virginia Tech OT Christian Darrisaw.
2019: The Denver Broncos traded their 10th overall NFL draft pick to the Pittsburgh Steelers on Thursday evening. In exchange for the pick, the Steelers sent the Broncos their first-round pick (20th overall) second-round pick (52nd overall) and a third-round pick in 2020. (Steelers drafted Devin Bush)
About the only scenario I see as a no-brainer is highlighted. It would be very hard to turn down those assets. The Saints were lambasted for that trade at the time. One of the reasons for the expenditure is that fact that four QBs had already been drafted, pushing a lot of talent (and the competition for that talent) down the board.
I guess there is a chance that a team will pay dearly to move up and snatch a QB, and we're the lucky recipient of their zeal, but that is about the only scenario that fits this year... and the QBs are few and far between.
As for as the WRs?
A team would want to move in front of us, in a trade with another team, since we are the first team that's very likely to take a WR, if one has already been drafted, that just makes the point even more true.
You mentioned Drake London the other day, I am intrigued by what I’ve been reading since. I usually don’t like taking a WR in the first round but this might be a year that we have to.
WR is the greatest area of need and our draft slot is intersecting with two important factors... Most of the teams in front of us have "bigger fish to fry" and there is a lot of talent at WR available.
Most mocks have us taking the first WR off the board. So, you don't have to do anything cute to get your guy. If I'm GM, I'm crossing my fingers that the mocks hold true and grabbing Burks... If Burks is gone, I'm fine with London. Can't really screw this up unless you try.
John 3:16 Jesus said "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life."
We should get a shot at the top three receivers in the draft.
Most mocks have us getting the second receiver. Hard to say who will go first.
Some love Wilson. Some my prefer Burks. I like London. However, I would be good with any of the three. They are different guys.
My preference is London because I love his game. At 6'5" he is not that quick burst separation type. Wilson is plus Wilson is a precise route runner.
Burks has strength and speed plus enormous hands. Like he needs special gloves. Huge upside guy.
London just takes the ball away from anyone who tries to cover him. He high points the ball and he shields with his size. He has a giant catch radius. He has played the slot and the X. Versitile, smart player with very good YAC.
I think, in terms of need, we are 'in the red' at both WR and DT.
If we started the season now, our WRs would be DPJ and Schwartz (I'm making 2 fairly safe assumptions here, obviously). I think this calls for 2 not-cheap FA moves, plus at least 1 somewhat legit draft pick. IMO, I would be disappointed if we came out of FA and draft and Schwartz is still penciled into a starting job.
DT - We've got Togiai, Malik, Day, and Elliot (I keep forgetting about him). I'd say we have 2 (optimistically) starters in there, needing at least 3, plus some depth. *listing those out doesn't seem like DT is as bad as I thought when I started writing this
I think DT is in the same boat as WR. No matter who we have we will have 2 starters. The question is could our starters be starters on other teams? I say no.
It is fairly easy to find decent receivers in FA and in the draft. The 2nd round receivers expected aren't that much of a step down from the best in the 1st round.
I guess what I am favoring is get a DT in round 1 and a receiver in round 2 and another in FA. As for free agent DT's, those guys are hard to find. Teams don't let them go very easily because they are hard to find. You end up with old guys who are wearing down or you end up with guys like Billings.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn.
The thing about London to remember is that he is a full year younger than Burks and Wilson; if past drafts mean anything, this is important to our FO, especially on early round picks.
London, being so young, still has room to grow and fill out.
For me, I'd love to see London or Wilson in the first round, or a DE. I just don't see a DT in this draft worthy of our pick.
Opinion 4. Winning the April Trophe, that does not exist. Whoa the Browns could have the best draft in the world, again, while often finishing in 3rd or 4th in the division.
Trade up? Trade down? I like it!, Up to 1, then down to 4, Pick at 4, ... the net: could be a value gain, and the Browns would make a strong case for that April trophe that does not exist. (Another year, another year.)
If we have our choice of the best WR in the draft at #13 - which is a real possibility - I would be very much in for that.
I watched more Wilson last night - guy is just flat out great at getting open and selling his route mis-directions. He is still my #1. Burks has tons of potential but I am not 100% sold yet. London is a big, fast WR that just seems to get open and catch the ball - he seems like he's going to run less routes with precision, but is that big target that can be the constant deep threat.
Wan'Dale Robinson who you mentioned in the other thread sounds like a great fit and replacement for Jarvis if Jarvis is gone. Great hands, slot receiver who is great fit for a PA offense. As you say I am sure there are others, just not sure there is another Wilson or London in the draft. I could be happy sliding 6-10 places and taking Olave too. Not as amazing a route runner as Wilson but damn close, faster I think and 1" taller.
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
Stay at 13 and take Burks...if he's there. He competed in the SEC...the conference of the two best teams in college last year and regular NCAA Champs. The first time I saw that guy in a game I was stunned. He produces all over the field.
London is intriguing...as he should be while playing in a defense-less conference that he's in. Too skinny for my taste when Burks is standing there.
There are (3) buckeye WRs to consider. There are a lot of terribly weak teams in the Big Ten to feast on...with Michigan being the conf Champ last year when they weren't even a speed bump in the playoffs. I don't like the size of any of the Buckeye receivers...of those who will be in this draft anyway. If I had to take one, it'd be Wilson.
I'd also like the Browns to figure out a way to get Jameson Williams from Alabama. He won't be ready on Opening Day...but he's going to be very good IMO.
I'd also like to see DJ Chark, Breshad Perriman (yes him...he's only 28) and Braxton Berrios (or C Kirk) in FA. Do-able and gives us lots of options in the draft.
Trade up, this comes down to an Individual player that we are targeting and they are a steal at this point of the draft and coming close to our pick so we must trade up to get him. Berry does like to do this as he has done it in the past.
Trade Down, this would happen if the draft is not that dynamic on individuals that stick out above and beyond but the draft would have several solid players within a realm of 20 picks so why not get two of these picks by trading down.
Both scenarios have to be close to the draft and planned with multiple options of who what and where.
So far I have been pleased with Berry's methods and decisions to build this team. Its not easy there are HITS and Misses all the time.
jmho... Oh and been waiting for this forum to come into fruition!
Defense wins championships. Watson play your butt off! Go Browns! CHRIST HAS RISEN! GM Strong! & Stay safe everyone!
That could be the problem. Most teams trade up in round 1 for a QB. Next year is the year to get a QB. Teams might be eager to hold their picks and be seeking to trade down themselves.
I don't see any way we trade up in round 1...well, ok, there is always a chance. Let's say slim chance.
I could see us look to trade up back in to round 2, or possibly just up in round 2 if see have a guy we feel we just have to have. Round 2 can be geared a little bit more towards needs if we haven't been able to get much done in FA.
Maybe it is for a WR we didn't draft in round 1 or some DT.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn.
I agree and also have a lot of trust in Berry .... he isn't going to nail every draf and at some point he's going to miss on 1st and 2nd round players as well as elsewhere in the draft. Statistically it is impossible not to - but he's really shown an adeptness to trades and player acquisition to date. It feels different adding to the team and building for the future with Berry than it has in the past.
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
I agree and also have a lot of trust in Berry .... he isn't going to nail every draf and at some point he's going to miss on 1st and 2nd round players as well as elsewhere in the draft. Statistically it is impossible not to - but he's really shown an adeptness to trades and player acquisition to date. It feels different adding to the team and building for the future with Berry than it has in the past.
That is why I am wary about a receiver in round 1. If you look at the hit rate for the position, it is pretty darn low.
I like that 1st rounder to be a "hit". You are far more likely in doing that by staying away from receivers. I don't mind if we do, I just worry about the elevated risk in doing so.
None of the receivers in this class are as good as Chase, so if we think we are going to get our Chase, we are starting out a loser.
As for which receiver, I respectfully disagree with Wilson.
From what I have seen of our passing game and the way Baker throws, it's not so much a deep attack and Baker tends to throw the ball to go up and get it. I am thinking we need a more physical outside receiver over a sleek WR.
I'd take Burkes for the reasons mentioned.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn.
I'm a little torn on who I would select at WR if every option was available to me. Much like you I'm big on London. My only concern is he seems very lean for his height. I'm not sure why it bothers me because he's very Randy Moss like in stature only a little taller and a little heavier. The physical stature of Burks makes me lean in that direction at the current time.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
I guess I have a little different take on both Peen and Bone - I see Baker's success with a somewhat average receiver like Higgins, and when he was playing his best - throwing WR open by releasing before cuts are made and heads are turned because of his accuracy and anticipation/trust in a WR being in the spot at the right time. It's the reason I believe there was never any chemistry with OBJ. To me seeing Wlison's advanced route running and ability indicates something that plays to Baker's strengths and something that translates to the NFL where simple speed and size and athleticism that worked in college are not guaranteed to work. London I can also see - because Baker showed ability to throw catchable bombs to the likes of Perriman and Calloway ... And London is taller and looks to have great body control. He might be Megatron-esque? idk.
It will be interesting to see what happens. I think Burks is going to be a combine sensation and a 6'3" WR running a 4.3 is going to shoot him up the boards. But when I watched some highlights and reviews - he seems very raw in route running with rounded routes and a lot to develop. I mean 6'3" and 4.3 speed translates to immense potential. But ... Like last year it will be an interesting 6 weeks.
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
I can see Berry Trading down especially if 3-4 of the Top WR's are still available ...
John 3:16 Jesus said "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life."
I guess I have a little different take on both Peen and Bone - I see Baker's success with a somewhat average receiver like Higgins, and when he was playing his best - throwing WR open by releasing before cuts are made and heads are turned because of his accuracy and anticipation/trust in a WR being in the spot at the right time. It's the reason I believe there was never any chemistry with OBJ. To me seeing Wlison's advanced route running and ability indicates something that plays to Baker's strengths and something that translates to the NFL where simple speed and size and athleticism that worked in college are not guaranteed to work. London I can also see - because Baker showed ability to throw catchable bombs to the likes of Perriman and Calloway ... And London is taller and looks to have great body control. He might be Megatron-esque? idk.
Garrett is the best WR in this draft, imo. Burks second and then I'd take London.
Deep WR class this draft and I can certainly see Berry waiting until the 2nd rd to address the position via the draft depnding on who is available on the DL at 13.
Trade down would be ideal if it is WR that is targeted. Need someone will trade up to 13 though. Would likely have to have a QB a team is targeting at 13 in order to find a trade partner. With the next pick behind us, Baltimore does not need to draft a QB and Philly has the next two picks. They could possibly take a QB to push Hurts. Saints pick at 18 and could QB so that is likely the trade partner that could be motivated to leap frog Philly to grab a QB. Next would be Pittsburgh at 20, but I do not see Berry dealing with Steelers to help them jump up to grab a QB.
That is why there is no consensus on who goes first. They are different but all three could be very good.
I could make a case for each guy. I love how Wilson sets guys up. He is very slick.
Burks, might have the biggest upside because he has Combine wows. He is a big, strong, fast guy who is learning but has all the raw power you look for. He will have a eye popping combine.
I love London because in the NFL corners are great. They have the speed and acquire great technique. It is hard to get separation.
London has speed but he is not as fast as Burks. Nor, is he as quick in and out of breaks as Wilson.
He just dominates corners. He out positions them for the ball, boxes them out and high points the ball. I did not see him in tape where a corner took the ball from him. He catches the ball away from his body. He shows great control of his body. I have no idea how a corner could handle back shoulder throws to him?
He also shows athleticism before and after the catch with good YAC yards. I see him as a guy who should be a safe bet in the NFL.
The more I think about it, the more I feel like if drafting from the POV of not making a mistake, London seems to have the most solid floor. I haven't done any deep analysis yet, so if there is some "must see TV", link me up.
I have a hard time walking away from what *I think* is the upside with Burks. Part of it is the different ways to use him as a legit weapon. I know, that makes scouts and fans alike "cringe" a little. But he does it all in "man amongst boys" fashion. If that doesn't translate to the next level, it does nothing to diminish his skills as a receiver. It's merely icing on the cake.
I was one of the first to compare him to Deebo, now I'll make another comparison... Josh Gordon. Don't hate on me, watch the tape. It's because of the way he makes everything look so ridiculously easy. The speed -- he glides. Body control -- so measured and effortless at actually looks a little mundane at times (and that's not a bad thing).
Ball skills are off the chart, and a lot of it is little nuances you don't often see in a young receiver. I've watched numerous times where he doesn't high-point high throws. He jumps a split-second early and makes contact after his apex. As a result, he dictates spacing with his defender. It's like standing in the ring with a boxer that just "get's off" faster, you have little chance of defending or winning. All of this takes place with great dexterity, strength, and an almost uncanny conservation of motion. His every-day stiff arm is just a "pop"... and he has the same demeanor in press-man if someone tries to get their hands on him. He just makes it look too damned easy... like that other guy we watched in Cleveland.
Check out this vid. Guy does a great job of breaking down his game without all "gush" plays.
Actual "tape" starts about 1:42 TD at 4:55 shows a lot of what I talked about above. 7:44 and beyond is a lot less about WR skills and more about what he does with the ball in his hands.
I feel like this is a pretty deep draft for WR and DE, and there's going to be a lot of value picking them in 2nd round.
My dream scenario for this draft would have us trading back with Detroit at #32, who is looking to move up to get a QB after passing on them with their 1st pick. I'd love to get pick #32 and their 1st next year, but if they balk at that, I'd be happy to get picks #32, #34, and their 2nd rounder next year (and maybe more!).
We could still get really good DE and WR prospects at #32 and #34, plus #44 to fill another hole (DT? OL? TE? LB?) or double dip with another WR or DE. Really whoever is BPA; and with the depth of this draft at DE and WR, that matches up really well with our needs.
Getting some draft capital for next year is important; I want Baker to succeed in the worst way, but if he falls flat next year and we need to move on, we need picks to either trade for an established starter or move up to get the rookie we want.
I agree. I don't see this as a great draft class, but a deep draft class. As you said, we should be able to draft receivers in the 2nd and 3rd rounds who won't be much of a drop off from the 1st round guys.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn.
The Lions pick would definitely be Ideal as their pick could possibly be high next year.
I think one of the enticing things for us this year is we have and extra 3rd (comp pick) and 4th (from the Lions) rounders. Those are valuable possible trading chips. We could use one to move up a round for a targeted player, we could use one sweeten the pot on moving back and picking up a next years first, if a team is hesitant on trading, or maybe get value by trading one for one round higher in next years draft.
I agree and believe also this is a deep draft especially in areas of need. And I know I sound like a broken record , but I want one of next years QB prospects, not this year.
I don't want a QB from next year's draft. I want Baker to play at a level that makes him the long term solution for the Browns !!
Agree we are set up nicely for flexibility in the draft.
I think all but the most ardent Baker haters want that. Just some context to keep in mind, so if I say I would rather select a QB next year v this year, which is true, my first choice is to not have to select a QB at all.
I do think that is a looming possibility, so it is best IMO to be prepared if such a move is necessary.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn.
You get that extra year of control in the first round.
If we could get Burks say around 27 that would be really good.
We have extra picks in the 3 and 4th round. It would take a 3rd and a 4th to go from 45 to 27.
You bring up a good point. Maybe a team would do that. It might take more for the extra year you mention.
Like I said, nearly anything is possible. My feeling is at this point we are talking about the draft and team needs in the same breath. Free agency is where you address team needs. If you haven't done it there, you are behind the 8 ball to a large degree. First, rookies are unproven and history shows a good number of them never end up being the player teams had hoped to draft.
Second, few rookies come in and take the world by storm. It usually takes a season or two, so if we are counting on rookies to immediately fill a big need, we are probably going to fall short.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn.
This is easy. Bad draft except for WR, which is the position of glaring need. Don't trade up or down in Round 1. Just pick the best WR on the board at 13. If you want to move up in Round 2, fine. It worked with JOK.
I don't want a QB from next year's draft. I want Baker to play at a level that makes him the long term solution for the Browns !!
Agree we are set up nicely for flexibility in the draft.
I get it. ……so do the trade anyways, I’ve stated a few times, if he works out, great don’t draft one next year. Now you have 2 first rounders to play with however u want.
Pulling this from a different thread because it has more to do with my feelings on this one:
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
I'm not sure that with such a WR heavy draft in terms of talent that I wouldn't wait until round 2 to address the WR position this year. I think there will still be a ton of talent on the board at that pick and the return on your investment may be better seen by doing that. But if Berry's history to date is any indication, he will hit the WR hard and early. If not I believe he may see DT or DE a more pressing immediate unit to address at the time if value can be found at those positions.
It will certainly be interesting.
I've been scoffing at this notion since it became a talking point. I've always felt like a lot of people see elite talent at the top, in any given category, and say "this is a ____ heavy draft".
"So are there more good WRs just because the top four are so good? Nope." (Talking to myself)
The more I think about it, the more I see the reasoning... for the simple reason that it, indeed, applies to "attainable talent" given your draft slot(s). It finally makes a bit of sense to me. If three or four teams draft WRs in the first round, they already have theirs, and now your competition at that position is severely diluted.
The sticking point for me is how I "tier" these players. It would be a lot harder to walk away from probable first day starter, probable #1, in some cases: probable "can't miss" star-in-the-league... in favor of "could be?" and trying to interpret upside against draft position. I don't think that's wise when the former is falling right into your lap... BUT, if you have a player targeted and believe that the only reason he's not tier one and going in the first round is because four already did, then I'm all for it.
Where this would impact my decision would be possibly trading down. And that would have to come at a big "discount".
I would trade down *if and only if* I get a 1st round pick next year as insurance for what may or may not happen in the QB department this year.
Ideally that partner would be a below average team with a fairly high second. I would swap picks and maybe even throw in next years 3rd (compensatory) for that teams 1st round pick in 2023.
I think what it means is you get what would be a WR ranked as a first round pick in most drafts in round 2. I don't ave any idea how many WR's our FO has on their "top tier" list. I don't know how many WR's will have been picked by the time we pick at #13. All of that certainly plays a part in their decisions I would think. But I believe that if they have two or three WR's they think stand out above all the others by a significant margin and one has already been selected by our #13 pick they would most likely take a WR in round 1. If they have five grouped together at the top and only one has been selected by pick #13 they may wait until round 2.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
Pulling this from a different thread because it has more to do with my feelings on this one:
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
I'm not sure that with such a WR heavy draft in terms of talent that I wouldn't wait until round 2 to address the WR position this year. I think there will still be a ton of talent on the board at that pick and the return on your investment may be better seen by doing that. But if Berry's history to date is any indication, he will hit the WR hard and early. If not I believe he may see DT or DE a more pressing immediate unit to address at the time if value can be found at those positions.
It will certainly be interesting.
I've been scoffing at this notion since it became a talking point. I've always felt like a lot of people see elite talent at the top, in any given category, and say "this is a ____ heavy draft".
"So are there more good WRs just because the top four are so good? Nope." (Talking to myself)
The more I think about it, the more I see the reasoning... for the simple reason that it, indeed, applies to "attainable talent" given your draft slot(s). It finally makes a bit of sense to me. If three or four teams draft WRs in the first round, they already have theirs, and now your competition at that position is severely diluted.
The sticking point for me is how I "tier" these players. It would be a lot harder to walk away from probable first day starter, probable #1, in some cases: probable "can't miss" star-in-the-league... in favor of "could be?" and trying to interpret upside against draft position. I don't think that's wise when the former is falling right into your lap... BUT, if you have a player targeted and believe that the only reason he's not tier one and going in the first round is because four already did, then I'm all for it.
Where this would impact my decision would be possibly trading down. And that would have to come at a big "discount".
I would trade down *if and only if* I get a 1st round pick next year as insurance for what may or may not happen in the QB department this year.
Ideally that partner would be a below average team with a fairly high second. I would swap picks and maybe even throw in next years 3rd (compensatory) for that teams 1st round pick in 2023.
No first round reward in 2023, pound salt.
Any player can be a 1st day starter. They just might not be as good.
In all seriousness, bust rates of 1st round receivers is fairly high. It isn't as high for 2nd and 3rd rounds. Those 2nd rounders may not turn in to superstar players, but many turn in to very good players. In the end, is that all that bad? I don't think so.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn.
I think what it means is you get what would be a WR ranked as a first round pick in most drafts in round 2. I don't ave any idea how many WR's our FO has on their "top tier" list. I don't know how many WR's will have been picked by the time we pick at #13. All of that certainly plays a part in their decisions I would think. But I believe that if they have two or three WR's they think stand out above all the others by a significant margin and one has already been selected by our #13 pick they would most likely take a WR in round 1. If they have five grouped together at the top and only one has been selected by pick #13 they may wait until round 2.
Yeah, but then you're playing a very dangerous game... Now you've traded at least three opportunities at a "sure thing" for the uncertainty of what the next 31 teams will do.
That's really the elephant in the room with this draft situation. Knowing how things play out before us is really simple (imo), one of these WR may be gone (plenty of mocks have us taking the first). We can be nearly positive that at least two of these guys will be available at 13.
We have no control how fast these guys go once other teams see the discount. If we have any inkling of passing in the 1st round we don't need to worry about 1-13, we need to worry about 14-43.
Pulling this from a different thread because it has more to do with my feelings on this one:
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
I'm not sure that with such a WR heavy draft in terms of talent that I wouldn't wait until round 2 to address the WR position this year. I think there will still be a ton of talent on the board at that pick and the return on your investment may be better seen by doing that. But if Berry's history to date is any indication, he will hit the WR hard and early. If not I believe he may see DT or DE a more pressing immediate unit to address at the time if value can be found at those positions.
It will certainly be interesting.
I've been scoffing at this notion since it became a talking point. I've always felt like a lot of people see elite talent at the top, in any given category, and say "this is a ____ heavy draft".
"So are there more good WRs just because the top four are so good? Nope." (Talking to myself)
The more I think about it, the more I see the reasoning... for the simple reason that it, indeed, applies to "attainable talent" given your draft slot(s). It finally makes a bit of sense to me. If three or four teams draft WRs in the first round, they already have theirs, and now your competition at that position is severely diluted.
The sticking point for me is how I "tier" these players. It would be a lot harder to walk away from probable first day starter, probable #1, in some cases: probable "can't miss" star-in-the-league... in favor of "could be?" and trying to interpret upside against draft position. I don't think that's wise when the former is falling right into your lap... BUT, if you have a player targeted and believe that the only reason he's not tier one and going in the first round is because four already did, then I'm all for it.
Where this would impact my decision would be possibly trading down. And that would have to come at a big "discount".
I would trade down *if and only if* I get a 1st round pick next year as insurance for what may or may not happen in the QB department this year.
Ideally that partner would be a below average team with a fairly high second. I would swap picks and maybe even throw in next years 3rd (compensatory) for that teams 1st round pick in 2023.
No first round reward in 2023, pound salt.
Any player can be a 1st day starter. They just might not be as good.
In all seriousness, bust rates of 1st round receivers is fairly high. It isn't as high for 2nd and 3rd rounds. Those 2nd rounders may not turn in to superstar players, but many turn in to very good players. In the end, is that all that bad? I don't think so.
I don't know how you quantify "bust rate" but that would probably apply to all 1st round picks then, right?
If that's your draft philosophy, just trade out of the first every year.
If that's your draft philosophy, just trade out of the first every year.
Yes!
(Maybe not out but definitely down.)
I'm nearly always a proponent!
This draft happens to intersect (by far) greatest actual need, with (perceived) talent, AND probable availability. That's the triple crown in 1st round draft choices.
Sometimes you don't try to outsmart yourself. This FO won't.
And as to your article, Peen, he states his case clearly, and it's the real "meat" of the argument... The problem with effectively separating the anomaly (highly productive starter / star) from the norm (average production all the way down to BUST) is the real demon. My reply to you is that is true with every draft choice. It's amplified with every first round pick, from every position.
Nobody wants to draft a bust with their first pick, but it happens (in large numbers) every year. Where I'll agree with you is the position of WR and QB (especially since we've effectively de-valued RBs). But that doesn't mean great players aren't available, it just means (in many cases) you suck at evaluating talent.
If that's your draft philosophy, just trade out of the first every year.
Yes!
(Maybe not out but definitely down.)
I'm nearly always a proponent!
This draft happens to intersect (by far) greatest actual need, with (perceived) talent, AND probable availability. That's the triple crown in 1st round draft choices.
Sometimes you don't try to outsmart yourself. This FO won't.
And as to your article, Peen, he states his case clearly, and it's the real "meat" of the argument... The problem with effectively separating the anomaly (highly productive starter / star) from the norm (average production all the way down to BUST) is the real demon. My reply to you is that is true with every draft choice. It's amplified with every first round pick, from every position.
Nobody wants to draft a bust with their first pick, but it happens (in large numbers) every year. Where I'll agree with you is the position of WR and QB (especially since we've effectively de-valued RBs). But that doesn't mean great players aren't available, it just means (in many cases) you suck at evaluating talent.
If you're not sure ~ trade down! (Most years)
Though I never posted as much over the years. I have thought the same and agreed with you both about that strategy through the years.
Funny enough Fate, I posted the same thoughts about throwing in a 3rd or 4th since we have the comp picks, if that sweetens the deal to get that future 1st.
As a leader, one thing I preach is being proactive then being reactive. That term has obviously been around for years. My caveat before I say this: the saying it takes two to tango, and you need a willing trade partner. The proactive side of this is we are still waiting to see what to do with Baker. While we are waiting, we are preparing for next year by getting that extra 1st rounder so we can move up to make our QB pick. If Baker shows that he is worth that second contract, then now we have options with our two first round picks. If the QB class is strong, that means two positional players will drop. That is a chance to add two 5 year rookie contracts at positions of need/BPA.
Or it means we can use one in a trade to fall back (and start the cycle over for the following year) or maybe trade for a top player that wants to move on from his Unit.
The key to this is really we are using free money (picks) instead of trading our own base picks. A way to think about it, this is expendable cash instead of pulling money out of your bank account. More picks acquired, more chances to hit on those picks. Baltimore is a prime example of this over the years with comp picks they acquire. While it's usually not first round picks, they have received extra comp picks over the years to play around with. This gives them more wiggle room to work with. I would like to think this lessens the stress during the draft, b/c it opens up more options with the extra collateral.
![[Linked Image from i28.photobucket.com]](http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c201/shadedog/mcenroe2.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
