Another after the 1st round receiver I like is Romeo Doubs. Does a good job of catching with his hands. The vid also gives a look at a QB I like, Carson Strong.
[youtube][/youtube]
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn.
Not loving Doubs. He seems to catch the middle of the ball and does some bobbles and body catches. Though he looks fast and seems to run good routes. Caveat: this video is the 1st time I have seen him play at all.
Regardless of the players involved, the more I watch video of these mid round Wr's, the more convinced I am that we take 2 Wr's in this draft.
Last edited by Jester; 03/02/2208:50 AM.
People who lack accountability think everything is an attack
More receivers are in college because of that. There are more receivers to choose from when the draft begins.
Receivers numbers can be limited by quarterback play and rosters. So guys who could be really good get pushed down in the draft.
This draft is deep in receivers.
I am beginning to believe we take a pass rusher first.
I think so as well.
As Purp said, FA will tell much, but i think we will sign somebody. Maybe not a marquee name, but a solid receiver none the less. With the dept of the receiver position in this draft, I see the first guy we take will be in the 2nd round. This draft looks to have solid receivers in through the 3rd for sure, probably the 4th round.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn.
I listened to a pod cast with Peter King and Daniel Jeremiah.
Both said this draft is loaded with receivers. In fact they felt teams with a number of mid round selections are in good shape.
They felt that there will be many good players available in the mid rounds.
We have 2 thirds and 2 fourths.
This draft is really in line for the Browns. There is depth at positions of need. We have ammo to move around.
We can target guys.
Berry has a word he likes in "investment." I think he is a planner and see value in "investing." That to me means it may take time to get a return on a player. I am really curious about how Berry plays this draft.
I don't disagree - but what I would speculate or ponder: If, for example, Wilson and London were graded about evenly (or even if they aren't) and they are the top rated WR in this draft and stand alone as "best in class" - and they are also BPA when the Browns draft. Clearly (or - most probably, even after FA) also position of need ... What then?
The drop off in grade between them (BPA) to the next position would be a factor. Drop off in grade between - for example - the best edge player forecast to be available at 13 vs 44 - and the comparison to the drop off between London/Wilson and the next best WR forecast to be available at 44 ? Lots of factors - not the least is free agency.
The more things change the more they stay the same.
I am not saying it is impossible we will daft a receiver at #13, it is very possible.
It is my opinion there isn't much of a drop off between the top 3-4 receivers and maybe the next 10. At some point a guy like berry has to weigh his options. If he can get a very good receiver at #13, but a not nearly as good(pick a position) in the 2nd round, maybe it makes more sense to take the other position player in the 1st round and then stock up on receivers in the 2nd and 3rd rounds where it is projected to have multiple choices.
Think of it as a scale. If picking a wide receiver after the first round gives you more net value weight after 3 rounds, are you better off?
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn.
I said this a while back. I don't think we draft a wr at 13. If we are set on a wr in the 1st we will trade down. Too many evenly rated wr's in this draft.
People who lack accountability think everything is an attack
Think we are all on the same page. I am probably falling into the trap of starting to covet one or two players... But I agree - the deviation in talent between Edge at 13 and 44 is likely significantly higher than the deviation at WR. Ditto DT and LB for that matter. There are players at those positions that would make an impact also.
The more things change the more they stay the same.
Think we are all on the same page. I am probably falling into the trap of starting to covet one or two players... But I agree - the deviation in talent between Edge at 13 and 44 is likely significantly higher than the deviation at WR. Ditto DT and LB for that matter. There are players at those positions that would make an impact also.
I'm only picking on you because you offered the best explanation of "why"... and it makes sense when just looking at the draft as a whole.
But in this case, you're forgetting about 1-12. And every angle needs to be addressed with "expected availability" in mind.
Nearly every mock I see has FOUR Edge players drafted before our slot.
I don't see any mocks where more than one WR is tagged before 13... many mocks have us as the first team to take one.
The 5th best EDGE is better value than "pick-of-the-litter" at our position of greatest need? How many 1st round grades can we possibly have on EDGE? That field wouldn't be watered-down, it would be obliterated.
No worries - what you suggest makes sense, but the same still holds true. Is the 4th or 5th best Edge prospect and the Xth best (at #44) WR a better combo / value ... than the top or 2nd best WR and the Xth best (#44) EDGE ?? That'll be a Berry call. And that's why I also mentioned DT and LB.
I don't watch enough college games to know - so I am reliant on scouting reports and mocks - but I see a big drop off from the 5th and 6th EDGE guy to the next on the list. Not so much with WR - WR has a consistent sprinkling of talent through each Round. Seemingly. As Bone said - bottom line this is interesting with a 10,000 variables in play.
The more things change the more they stay the same.
Wouldn't the relative scarcity at EDGE drive some of those prospects to be picked higher? Teams could be more worried about missing out on a good EDGE guy, and hold off on a WR because "I can get one that's still good later because there are so many".
Regarding WR... Jamar Chase is obviously fresh in everyone's mind, but the bust rate on top-tier WRs is generally pretty high. Does this push GMs to "falling in love" with a specific player?
There is no level of sucking we haven't seen; in fact, I'm pretty sure we hold the patents on a few levels of sucking NOBODY had seen until the past few years.
Safe to say that all philosophies we've mentioned play a role in decision making.
I would be really interested in knowing if there are "mini guardrails" for how we evaluate draft talent, i.e... players falling into "tiers" and how those tiers apply to any given draft slot. I think "Don't Draft a 'Red' over a 'Blue'" may speak to that... but have no idea what that means.
And "position scarcity" is a double-edged sword, as oober pointed out. One GM may insist "too late, they're gone" and be speaking directly to his team's list of tier one prospects... another may say "get one before the rest are gone!".
Who knows. I think one thing that is also very safe to say is the thumb on the scale of "decision" is how highly you regard infusing veritable talent at that position vs your ability to do it in Free Agency... Even more factors in the "10,000 variables".
Interesting - You make a really good point about talent acquisition via draft and FA. I goggled but found too many articles without a satisfactory conclusion ... what are the safest positions in the Draft to pick? So on top of which player grades out better according to your scouting ... which of those positions is more likely to bust or be successful? And does that impact which position you try to solve via free agency?
Oober - you made me think of a conversation and a meme I saw last year from a Bengals fan who was hell bent on Lamar Chase being their pick. It resonates with my last post ... simply put, the argument was Young and any other OT in the second round made the Bengals a better offense than taking Sewell (who most thought they should take) and and player in the 2nd round (WR or otherwise). Well damn if he wasn't right !
Bone - I have watched a bit and read a lot on both Karlaftis, Johnson and Travon Walker who has been mocked to us on more than 1 analyst. All look solid. No idea which has the highest ceiling! The Johnson Senior Bowl clips were uber impressive.
Last edited by mgh888; 03/02/2207:45 PM.
The more things change the more they stay the same.
Talent acquisition is "easier" via FA, but that certainty comes at a much higher price tag. Draft picks are always free, but squandering them puts you behind the eight ball in the "cheap talent" department... which in turn makes acquisition via FA "less easy" within the confines of a salary cap. Good teams are good at "balance" in both areas.
1st round picks are over-valued before they're ever drafted. The Rams have traded theirs away every year since 2016, including this year's and next year's... they've been in the playoffs all but one of those years with two trips to the Superbowl. They finally won a championship, ironically enough, by trading two 1st round picks and the last player they used one on (Goff) to find their QB!
And that also plays into the "bust" argument, which is directly correlated to how high the player was drafted...
"Offensive Lineman at #13", the Tyler Linderbaum thread, had me examine past drafts to see that he would be the highest drafted Center since 1976. I looked at all the 1st round picks over 30 years to see very little evidence of "generational talent" that teams usually cite when using such high assets on non-skill position players (first dead-giveaway was how many times the Browns have done it vs our track record of success). I also saw how few had even reached Pro Bowl status.
You know where all the Pro Bowl centers were found? The 3rd and 4th round. Why? Because that's the value the league places on drafting centers, pure and simple. Analytics is simple in this case, if you're drafting one higher, you're going against the grain of when and where the talent pool lies for that position.
Now, that doesn't diminish Tyler's talent, or have any bearing on whether he'll reach the esteemed tier of "generational talent". There's a damned decent chance the team that drafts him can put a check mark next to center for the next decade. If he's not all those things, and just middle of the road serviceable center... is he a bust? Most would say yes merely because of the draft asset that was used.
So there's another in the long list of variables, acquisition cost vs where the league judges draftable talent per position.
Fate, this draft is very interesting, to say the least.
There are two players, Hamilton and Lenderbaum, who are the pick of the litter. I like both but understand their positions. Both of these players can very well be available at #13.
You would think teams drafting ahead of the Browns would be in need of more foundation players Edge, Left Tackle, QB, or Corner. Except for QB, a team in need can draft a reliable player.
With that said, you can make a strong case for Cleveland taking a receiver.
I don't think the three receivers London, Wilson, or Williams are substantially better than anything Berry can obtain in the second or third round.
I can make this same argument for the Edge position.
Cleveland heavily invested in corners.
I haven't looked at the OT. Is it possible the third or fourth-best tackle falls to the Browns?
Can you make a proper analytical decision in the draft?
Talent acquisition is "easier" via FA, but that certainty comes at a much higher price tag. Draft picks are always free, but squandering them puts you behind the eight ball in the "cheap talent" department... which in turn makes acquisition via FA "less easy" within the confines of a salary cap. Good teams are good at "balance" in both areas.
1st round picks are over-valued before they're ever drafted. The Rams have traded theirs away every year since 2016, including this year's and next year's... they've been in the playoffs all but one of those years with two trips to the Superbowl. They finally won a championship, ironically enough, by trading two 1st round picks and the last player they used one on (Goff) to find their QB!
And that also plays into the "bust" argument, which is directly correlated to how high the player was drafted...
"Offensive Lineman at #13", the Tyler Linderbaum thread, had me examine past drafts to see that he would be the highest drafted Center since 1976. I looked at all the 1st round picks over 30 years to see very little evidence of "generational talent" that teams usually cite when using such high assets on non-skill position players (first dead-giveaway was how many times the Browns have done it vs our track record of success). I also saw how few had even reached Pro Bowl status.
You know where all the Pro Bowl centers were found? The 3rd and 4th round. Why? Because that's the value the league places on drafting centers, pure and simple. Analytics is simple in this case, if you're drafting one higher, you're going against the grain of when and where the talent pool lies for that position.
Now, that doesn't diminish Tyler's talent, or have any bearing on whether he'll reach the esteemed tier of "generational talent". There's a damned decent chance the team that drafts him can put a check mark next to center for the next decade. If he's not all those things, and just middle of the road serviceable center... is he a bust? Most would say yes merely because of the draft asset that was used.
So there's another in the long list of variables, acquisition cost vs where the league judges draftable talent per position.
Nice post, and you bring up a good point about position value.
I suppose position value also plays out in salaries paid. As an example, top receivers usually make more money than centers. However, is that because the position is more valuable or simply the fact that starting as a higher draft pick brings you to a higher dollar amount from the start? I guess it just boils down to the fact that teams feel they can get by with avarage or good at some positions and seek better at others.
I am one who wouldn't be upset with Linderbaum if we selected him. I am also a realist and know that probably won't happen unless we drop back 10 or so slots because positional value and needs do come in to play. I am a big BPA guy, but also know that needs and position do have to factor in to decisions.
I guess the bottom line for me is this is a very deep WR class and teams won't give up much in selecting a receiver in the 30's or 40's over selecting one in the teens. The 5th year option is valuable, but at least to me, it is less valuable for all positions after QB. QB's do take a little longer to evaluate. We see players extended before the 5th year plays out all the time. If they are good, you and your brother know it and take the steps necessary to get him signed. If the player isn't signed, it is because he isn't all that good, or you are headed to a franchise tag because people can't agree on the players worth.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn.
got to go back all the to 1993 to find a center taken low where we are. At #14 the Cleveland Browns took Steve Everitt. You got guys like Bently taken #44 and stuff like that Also a first round pick was Jeff Faine also taken by the Browns - it seems we have taken Center pretty low. It is an important position but at #13 I don't know.
jmho
Defense wins championships. Watson play your butt off! Go Browns! CHRIST HAS RISEN! GM Strong! & Stay safe everyone!
I suppose position value also plays out in salaries paid.
I think we'll find out with how Ward's contract situation plays out. We've invested a ton into the position, draft-wise... I'm curious if we just up and pay Ward or string this along and then "allow him to test the market to gauge his value".
There is no level of sucking we haven't seen; in fact, I'm pretty sure we hold the patents on a few levels of sucking NOBODY had seen until the past few years.
I agree, but I'm curious if they decide to play hardball with him given they have Newsome and Greedy. Greedy has been meh, but Newsome looked fantastic given he was a rookie. We have some depth and AJ Green could take another step forward in his development. Our CB room is really strong.
There is no level of sucking we haven't seen; in fact, I'm pretty sure we hold the patents on a few levels of sucking NOBODY had seen until the past few years.
Just finished watching tape and reading some scouting reports on both Karlaftis and Jermaine Johnson.
Both are very good players and are first round picks.
Karlaftis is more of a outside/inside player. He plays with power and stout at holding the edge. He plays with constant effort. He will be a good NFL player with a high floor.
Jermaine Johnson is more of a stand up looser player. He plays more like a traditional DE in a 4-3.
He has good balance and lean. He strikes hard with hand moves. Has a great motor. I see him a more of pure pass rusher than Karlaftis. At the same time he can come down the line and make plays against the run. He maybe easier to move than Karlaftis but he is quicker.
I am leaning toward Jermaine Johnson as a good fit for the Browns. As long as we have tackles that will hold down the middle.
Jeremaine has that Myles lean and bend capability.
Both would be good picks. I like Johnson a little more.
I suppose position value also plays out in salaries paid.
I think we'll find out with how Ward's contract situation plays out. We've invested a ton into the position, draft-wise... I'm curious if we just up and pay Ward or string this along and then "allow him to test the market to gauge his value".
True.
You need more than 2 good corners, we all know that, so that speaks to keeping him. I guess the biggest negative would be the guys availability. I know you have seen me call him "Hospital Ward". That doesn't mean I don't like him. I just question his ability to stay on the field. Maybe it is just bad luck and he will never get any sort of injury again other than the normal nicks and bruises associated with the game that keep him out of action for more than maybe half a game here and there.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn.
I agree, but I'm curious if they decide to play hardball with him given they have Newsome and Greedy. Greedy has been meh, but Newsome looked fantastic given he was a rookie. We have some depth and AJ Green could take another step forward in his development. Our CB room is really strong.
I think you make a valid point that we as a team have good CB's. Where the question comes in is do we have a good CB room with an injury or two without Ward? Who would we have other than Greedy as the second starting CB opposite Newsome? And do you really feel that having Greedy opposite Ward still makes us strong at the position?
The thought of having the ability to play hardball with Ward sounds great in theory. Problem being there are 32 NFL teams with CB salaries being high and many teams having great need at the position. It's very difficult to play hardball with a player who is one of the tops at his position and whose position is in high demand.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
Just finished watching tape and reading some scouting reports on both Karlaftis and Jermaine Johnson.
Both are very good players and are first round picks.
Karlaftis is more of a outside/inside player. He plays with power and stout at holding the edge. He plays with constant effort. He will be a good NFL player with a high floor.
Jermaine Johnson is more of a stand up looser player. He plays more like a traditional DE in a 4-3.
He has good balance and lean. He strikes hard with hand moves. Has a great motor. I see him a more of pure pass rusher than Karlaftis. At the same time he can come down the line and make plays against the run. He maybe easier to move than Karlaftis but he is quicker.
I am leaning toward Jermaine Johnson as a good fit for the Browns. As long as we have tackles that will hold down the middle.
Jeremaine has that Myles lean and bend capability.
Both would be good picks. I like Johnson a little more.
I'm still deciding how I feel with Karlaftis. His highlights start with plays where he is completely unblocked. I'm not sure how much the thinking of "if multiple teams aren't worried about blocking him, how good can he be?" colored everything after. He was an effective, high-effort player, but I didn't really see any pass rush move that made me stop and think, "alright, we might really have something here." Then again I also know I've had the thought "Why the hell did they not block TJ Watt?" on Sundays. I need to watch more full games of Karlaftis.
I like Johnson, but I'm not quite to the that's my guy stage yet. He's got a bit of a Ray Lewis vibe as far as his energy/getting people amped. I feel like we could use some of that. His range/length are pretty nice. He uses it well when not giving up the edge and gets his hands on the ball a lot it seems.
I'm kind of intrigued by Ojabo, the other Michigan edge guy. He's got a nifty inside spin move. It is pretty impressive, especially considering that he didn't start playing football until his junior year of high school. There is a bit of one year wonder worry, and he had a śtud playing opposite him.
You mess with the "Bull," you get the horns. Fiercely Independent.
Have not watched all of them yet - what I liked about the Johnson tape, he uses his hands really well and he looks like he doesn't over commit. Good vs run and pass.
Last edited by mgh888; 03/03/2203:14 PM.
The more things change the more they stay the same.
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
![[Linked Image from cdn.vox-cdn.com]](https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/zESzaJIl9Jd0Pzp_efLVWCj5gEQ=/0x0:1200x900/1120x0/filters:focal(0x0:1200x900):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13711944/DxrxbFaUwAE9bjD.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]](https://i.ibb.co/fkjZc8B/Bull-Dawg-Sig-smaller.jpg)
