DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Quarterback Options

I call fowl play !

Like I said, if we are that good, we have nothing to worry about. We know we had some injury issues last year. That can hurt any season...add in covid issues.

I just don't agree we need to go "all in: because those issue seem to magnify the problem in our mind.

Now if we do go next year and stall without any real issues, then we might need to make changes. I want to go with what we have except to bring in a receiver or two and trade Hunt.

I only say trade Hunt because it is time to sell high, or as high as it can get because I do see issues being able to get him to extend past next year. I am sold on Johnson as the 2nd back.

I agree. With the exception of trading Hunt - I believe he adds more value than we ever would see in a trade. I mean if you could get a high 3rd round pick for him? Sure. But I do not believe we would get anything close to that. And even for a 4th I would not be prepared to let him go. I'd like to offer Johnson the 2nd round tender and keep all 3 RB's in house.

j/c:

Yeah, but is he on their radar?

If NFL teams insist on getting the "good" players for "the right price", and are going to stand around until that situation presents itself.
Well those NFL teams can enjoy fabricating their own, "Did not overpay" Rings.

TB and Arians with a brand new fQB hole in their roster is perfect situation. I wonder if this rumor is a precursor to some news on the legal front. Until that gets sorted, any talks of teams paying to bring him on board probably are non-starters... but once that does get sorted out it's gonna be a madhouse.

I doubt much happens with Tampa Bay.
They're not exactly swimming in cap space (only ~$6 million), Brady just left, and Arians is working on becoming a walking pacemaker. Unless he goes there cheaply, or they cut a bunch of other talent, I just don't see it. I mean, they barely have enough to keep the people they have and sign rookies right now.

I just don't agree on Hunts value....unless of course Chubb or Johnson goes down. Make no mistake, I like Hunt. If we can extend him now, do it..that would be option #1. I just don't see him doing that so I would do it for a 4th round pick.

4th rounders alone aren't usually all that great, but the pick is good enough you can get a good player, and even more on point IMO, it is a good enough pick to be the sweetener you need if you are looking to move up in rounds 2 or 3 to help get the player you really want.

I am not sure, but since Hunt was a FA, I don't think we could possibly pick up a comp pick for him, which would mitigate losing him to some degree, so I suppose that would add to his value by keeping him this year.

I guess I just don't like losing good players and getting nothing in return. I don't know who said it, but I would rather trade a player a year early than a year late.

Maybe this is the year late and should have traded him last off-season??

We can get a compensatory pick for him if we lose his as a free agent.


https://overthecap.com/the-basics-and-methodology-of-projecting-the-nfls-compensatory-draft-picks/

I could see Hunt getting traded to a serious team that loses their main dude late in preseason. Purchase price would be good in that situation. I think there are too many carries in this offense to ship him out early. Chubb has missed games every year. He's a dynamite pass-catching back and represents very little drop-off from Chubb when he has to be RB1. If we keep Johnson and Felton takes a leap forward, I could see how you would want to try to move him then.

JMO, but I don't think Felton belongs in the same sentence with Chubb, Hunt, or D'Ernest Johnson.

Kareem is a very good player who wants to be a Brown. We just extended him, so unless we get a no-brainer sweet deal, why would we trade him? For a third or a fourth? Lmao, don’t think so.

If someone offered a third round pick for Kareem Hunt he would be traded as soon as possible so that the other team can’t back out.

And then wrap him in bubble wrap, put him on the teams private jet, and personally walk him to the teams doctors to have his physical done.

I hope we find a way to keep Hunt until he's out of gas.

Hunt is far more valuable on the team than what pick he would give us.

Cool. I was thinking a team had to have invested a draft pick in the player and not if the player was picked up as a free agent,

I agree. Also on the PS is John Kelly. He has looked good IMO. I think he can be a pretty good back behind our line and given the chance. One also has to consider that drafting a RB isn't out of the question. You don't have to draft a RB in the 1st or 2nd round to get a good back.

We don't know that. I could argue against that. Hunt is a back-up player, be it a very good back-up player. D Johnson is a very good back-up player.

Why is having redundant back-ups at one position more valuable than having a solid pick become a solid back-up at another position that doesn't have a decent back-up? I don't think it is.

No doubt there is the assumption we would get a solid pick for Hunt. If we can't get a higher 4th or better, then I would agree. Keep him. If we can't get anything but a 5th or lower, I don't even see the point in thinking he is all that valuable. I think we should get a 3rd for Hunt. I think he is valuable now, thus the time to sell is now. That is unless we can get him in to another 2 year extension over the next month or so.

The thing that Kareem Hunt does a little better than Chubb (IMO) is catching passes in space and making the first guy miss. I think Felton could bring that to our offense if he takes a big leap forward. The drop-off is that his game is much more 1-dimensional.

Baker is a lot like Matthew Stafford. Both were #1 overall picks. Stafford was blamed for most of the Lions problems by the fans and Detroit sports media like Baker is being blamed in Cleveland. Look what Stafford did his first year away from that mess in Detroit. Would Baker to the same if traded to a team that is loaded like Stafford was? Who knows? Maybe a healthy Baker can lead the Browns to a SB if he has a #1 reliable WR like Stafford has with Kupp and the Rams.

I can see how you make that comparison - but the Browns had a pretty stacked roster (or rooster if you prefer) ... certainly more so than Detroit. Omitting the injury to Baker this year as the obvious talking point, and omitting the discrepancy in WR talent, a big difference here is that I believe the KS offense vs the Rams offense are very different and more WR friendly.


This made me think about how to look at the production numbers of the #1 and #2 WR in the two systems: Interestingly OBJ as the number 2 WR with the Rams had similar number of catches and YPC as he did here as the #1 for CLE. During the 8 weeks of regular season OBJ was with the Rams he caught 27 passes. Kupp caught 71 in that time frame. Obviously there is an impact by the QB and Baker was struggling all year, but I think it more-so reflects on the scheme and why some posters have questioned if a stud FA WR would choose to come play for KS. I think the targets for WR in the KS offense will be lower than some of the other explosive offenses in the NFL - but I think this year was more so impacted by Baker playing badly and KS dealing with a raft of injuries above and beyond the norm. I think we have to wait to get a fair and balanced view of what the KS offense is really all about.

Poor guy.

Unfortunately, there is a well documented history of Stefanski's scheme of passing reduction. When he took over the OC job in MIN he cut Cousins attempts by 26.7% from the previous year. This cut in attempts was the main reason Diggs demanded an immediate trade. In 2020, when Stefanski arrived in Cleveland, his offensive scheme immediately cut Mayfield's attempts 8.9% from 2019 and then another 14% in 2021 for a total reduction of 21.7% over the 2-year period. Add into those stats that the Browns went out and signed Hooper to what at the time was the richest contract ever for a TE only to cut his targets 27.8% in year 1 and then another 12.9% in year 2 for a two year reduction of 37.1% of the targets Hooper was getting before signing the mega deal with Cleveland. It doesn't matter whether you like Hooper or not, even the most simplistic mind would have to question investing 42 million over 4-years into a player only to cut his targets by 37.1% over the first 2-years of the deal.

Now OBJ demanded a trade somewhere in the timeframe of May-June 2021. That demand came 1) about 4-months prior to Mayfield being injured and 2) after the Browns playoff run that was executed with OBJ missing 9 games in 2020. If you don't believe that Stefanski's scheme had anything to do with OBJ being disgruntled then you haven't been following OBJ's career.

That leads the Browns to the FA market in 2022. It will be a hard sell, due to documented history, to convince a #1 WR like Williams LAC, Adams GBP or Godwin TBB to come to Cleveland to have their targets cut 25 plus percent. Especially when you have to consider that at age 25-26, they would all be looking at another deal prior to age 30 and looking for huge dollars. These 3 players would surely be looking not only at the current deal but how they would be positioned for the next mega deal while having your targets cut 25 plus percent. There's no question that this is going to be problematic for the Browns in free agency.

The other option is getting the #1 WR via trade. Unfortunately, you either have to give up an asset player or draft pick(s) to do the trade. Now, IMHO, the Browns have 3 players they could use but don't come without issues. Landry is a trade candidate or just a plain cap casualty. Problem with Landry is because of his contract, the Browns would have to take on some of the contract in order to move him via trade. Tretter is in the final year of his deal and age 31. Dumping Tretter would save the Browns 8.2 million but could be used in a package deal. With Harris ready to take over for Tretter, it might be a good time to get something for him since it's pretty obvious the Browns won't be giving Tretter a new deal in 2023.

That brings us to player #3 which is Hunt. The average life of a RB in the NFL is 4.5 years. If you look at the current Browns RB barn, Chubb 26, Hunt 27, Johnson 26 and Felton 24 at season start, it screams for an influx of new young talent. Now Johnson is a free agent and dumping any significant resources into the 3rd string RB seems senseless considering his age and lack of playing time. Felton is more of a specialist and searching for a 3-down back to replace him would seem to be a step in the right direction moving forward. Chubb is the bell cow so let's not make any attempt to say otherwise. Hunt is the elder statesman at this point and in the final year of his deal paying him 6.25 million in 2022. It would seem to be highly unlikely the Browns would invest additional capital into Hunt to be the backup moving in on age 30. Using Hunt's value now rather than just seeing him walk after 2022 is something Berry needs to highly consider. Using a Hunt to get a Ridley ATL via trade might be a significant consideration especially when you consider the scheme issue coming into play. There's some nice RB's that will be available in rounds 3, 4, and 5 of the upcoming draft that are 3-down backs coming in which would be an upgrade for the Browns.

As Berry stated, about 33% of the roster gets turned over every year. Landry 14.879 mil, Tretter 8.2 mil, Hunt 6.25 mil and Njoku 6.0 mil frees up over 35 million in cap. You can do a whole lot of team improvement with 35 million in additional cap availability.

The reason for the drop in Cousins' attempts was the emergence of Dalvin Cook, Cook had limited carries in 2018 as he was coming off a serious ACL tear and in 2019 he was healthy enough to play full time. As for OBJ he was telling people to get him out of Cleveland almost as soon as he got to Cleveland and in a 2019 game he told Steelers players to please come get him and he supposedly asked to be traded after that season (2019) so I highly doubt it was due to KS's scheme since KS didn't become the coach until 2020.

Oh, you mean the hand gestures OBJ made that some people decided meant to come and get him? And "supposedly" accounts for the things a lot of posters try to convince you are true.

I love it when you guys cherry pick the stats to prove a point. Cook was injured in 2018 for 5 games so his carries were down. You associate Cousins drop in attempts in 2020 being because Cook returned. However, in 2020, Cooks carries actually increased over 2019 by 24.8% but Cousins attempts also increased by 16.2% - all post Stefanski. Your one-year snapshot doesn't tell the true story. To take it further, in 2021 Cook had the same amount of carries as the 2019 campaign you reference yet Cousins pass attempts were up 26.4% from 2019. In fact, if you look at Cousins totals for 2017, 2018, 2020, and 2021 you'd see that he averaged 555.75 attempts per year compared to when Stefanski was OC where he had 444 attempts. That's almost 112 more attempts per year in a non OC Stefanski offense. The stats don't lie.......................

In 2018 the Vikings were 8-7-1.

In 2019 the Vikings were 10-6.

In 2020 the Vikings were 7-9.

In 2021 the Vikings were 8-9.

It seems post Stefanski doesn't look that good in the W/L column where it really natters. So much for the one year snapshot theory.

I thought the focus of the discussion was on pass attempts and the play calling - not wins and loses? Did the goal posts move?

And here I thought the entire objective of playing the game was to win. Unless of course he's trying to say Stenfanksi's approach was a positive thing. But that's not the picture I'm getting here.

So let me get this straight, talking about the variation in play calling is a part of the discussion but the results from it aren't? Alrighty then.

Stefanski's system is designed to be super efficient in terms of passing. The volume will never be there, but that's because the intention is more chunk plays/TDs on fewer pass attempts.

When you're not hitting on those fewer passing attempts... well let's just say that's a big problem.


Baker, Njoku, Landry, OBJ, Higgins were brought on prior to KS. I wonder if we're going to see an Offensive overhaul 2.0 to bring personnel more in line with KS's vision.

1. Does this O call for more of a 'steady-Eddy' QB?
2. Does this offense do better with a legit #1WR, or does it just need a bunch of capable pass-catching threats?

I'm not quite sure what it calls for. My only point was for all the negativity that's being associated with it, the net results in W's and L's was actually show more success under that system during the years being used as examples.

There are a couple of things I think that deserve attention here. Not only were the results in Minnesota the best when running his system either before or after he ran their O, in his first year here with a healthy QB we made the playoffs and had an 11-5 regular season record. I don't blamer Baker for the fact he was injured and I also don't blame Stefanski for the fact he had to adjust things because his starting QB had a bum shoulder.

I just find it terribly odd that the results he has had have been very good with a somewhat reliable QB and people are busy trying to act like that isn't the reality. I mean we were within one game of playing .500 ball with a QB who had a torn labrum for 15 weeks.

The other issues the Stefanski scheme creates is the inability to score quickly and closing out games becomes suspect. When you're in a division where you'll be at a disadvantage in every division game because your passing offense is below par compared to the other teams you have a problem. Stefanski's scheme is great if you're playing with the lead - not so much if playing from behind. The chemistry and rhythm needed between QB and his receivers isn't something you can just turn on every 3-4 weeks because now you're forced to pass. This was highly evident last year and with the chances of getting a true #1 WR through FA looking bleak - the Browns will have issues any time they are playing from behind. The Browns scored 111 points less than the Bengals in 2021. Only 6 teams in the entire AFC scored less points than the Browns (10th) did in 2021. Only 7 teams in the AFC scored less points than the Browns (9th) in 2020. Overall, the Browns were 20th in scoring in 2021 at 20.5 points per game. The league leader was Dallas (31.2) leaving the Browns 10.7 points per game less than Dallas. In 2020, the Browns were 14th in scoring at 25.5 points per game but compared to the league leader, GBP (31.8) the Browns were 6.3 points less per game.

I suspect that the Browns will see a lot more of 8 in the box to stop the run. They'll continue to see that until Stefanski adjusts his scheme and proves to the league that the Browns can compete thru the air just as effective as they do via the ground attack. It will never happen if Mayfield is still throwing 200 times less a season than the top tier QB's.

Has there ever been a time where cap space really stopped another team from getting a player.
And I don't mean the Browns, because I believe the Browns may use spending as an excuse to not get players, but other teams, popular teams, in this case Tamp Bay and it's (~6 million), or other teams the league offices would prefer. Is there a time we can point to where we remember a team that actually could not get a player, simply because of Cap room? Has that happened, in all the years the salary cap has existed?

well that system is broken.

A conversation about pass attempts and whether KS has an offense that high profile / top tier WR will want to play in has zero to do with the win loss column.

Based on your post - any and every discussion related to any aspect of the team, coaching and FO staff simply distills to what the W/L record is. ... that's not actually how it works.

I think there is a lack of memory, and too much emphasis on the 2021 Browns, and not the 2020 Browns, when the team was not hampered by the injured QB.

You can't disregard, that if Kooper Cupp had been on the Browns instead of OBJ, the Browns would have won more games?
OK, that may be a stretch.
You can't totally disregard that if the Browns had a better system of getting big plays and touchdowns from their wide receiver and Quarterback combo options, ...i.e. if the Browns had gotten more big plays and Td(s) from their Qb-Wr combos, then the Browns would likely have won more games in 2021-22.
Touchdowns and wins eventually go hand in hand.

Love Liberty more than you fear a virus.

The emphasis is not on a particular season - it's based on a trend. A douchebag or not, Diggs demanded a trade after Stefanski cut Cousins passing attempts by 25.2% in 2019. OBJ might not have wanted to be in Cleveland but his formal request for a trade came in May-June 2021 after Stefanski cut Mayfield's attempts by 9%. Add to that the Hooper situation where in year 1 he cuts Hooper's targets by 27.8% and then in year 2 an additional 12.9% or a 2-year total of 37.1%. To even suggest that the scheme had nothing to do with OBJ demanding a trade is just foolish talk - OF COURSE IT DID!

As a player, you cannot tell me that ANY #1 WR that's a free agent wouldn't know that as it stands - coming to Cleveland will result in a loss of 25% of your targets and all but kill your #1 WR status going into your next deal. You also have to realize that every one of those guys will also know that the Browns are in the bottom half of the conference in scoring. Less targets, less scoring, in a run-oriented offense does not bode well for a #1 WR coming to Cleveland. Now we get into a totally different bag of worms because the Browns are not giving Mayfield the weapons to be successful. Stefanski has ruined the TE position, chased off the #1 WR, fielded the highest PFF ranking for WR at 73rd in 2021 with Landry and no serious upgrade at the WR position apparent if the same scheme continues to be run by Stefanski.

If I can find this info easily you can bet that a Williams, Godwin, Robinson, or Adams already have that info tucked away in their hard drive. That means a level 2 or 3 in free agency which most likely won't be that much of an upgrade.