|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338
Dawg Talker
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338 |
4.)Cleveland trades to Washington 6.)Cleveland trades to Cinci. value chart 4th=1800 6th=1600 difference of 200 70th=240 6th=1600 17=950 21=800 difference of 150 100th=100 5th=40 we could have 6 picks in the first three rounds. There are many different formulas you can use including next years picks or different combinations but I chose these for illustration purposes only. I also believe that a Premium can be put on our picks considering after Richardson the talent field isn't of the "elite" status. That is up to discretion as to what teams think are elite but general consensus is Luck, Kalil, Blackmon, Claiborne, Richardson and some say Griffin. I would do this every day of the week. Sorry if it is hard to follow and am sure it is not error free. Like I said there are other combinations that can be used. You can also package picks to move back into the first. Leaves you options to do whatever you want and this is only through round 3. Any combination of player positions can be used I just plugged some in. 17-LB 21-WR 22-RB 37-DE 68-CB 70-OT
"Going from 4-12 to 6-10 isn't good enough. I believe we are going to be better than that. We're going to be a lot better than that." - Mike Holmgren (3/15/12)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
We're not trading with Cincy...
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338 |
Quote:
We're not trading with Cincy...
It was just a scenario...Cinci really like Richardson I hear. I know they are in the division but I think they would kill to add a dimension like Richardson to their game. In their heads they are probably envisioning a Dalton, Green, Richardson and Gresham combination looks real nice and admittingly so. Yeah facing him twice a year and being good is a probability but I don't think you can use that to determine the outcome of how you better your team. I think if we believed that adding two players for one is better for our team you do it. Just like they should be thinking we potentionally could have just drafted two probowlers for one, which is what you should hope your first round picks to be. If you trust Heckert and I do, I have to believe the odds are in our favor to come out on top in that deal. JMO
Last edited by LOYALDAWG; 01/16/12 05:04 PM.
"Going from 4-12 to 6-10 isn't good enough. I believe we are going to be better than that. We're going to be a lot better than that." - Mike Holmgren (3/15/12)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
I didn't mean that We aren't ganna do the trade, I meant that Cincy would have to be retarded (yes I know who owns them) to do that trade...
Would YOU give up two 1st Round picks to a Divisional opponent? One that you barely beat both times last season?
I wouldn't.
I would however glady give Cinci a running back if it meant I had 3 1st this year...
I'd then trade one of them away and get a 2 or 3 this year and another first next year...
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338 |
Quote:
I didn't mean that We aren't ganna do the trade, I meant that Cincy would have to be retarded (yes I know who owns them) to do that trade...
Would YOU give up two 1st Round picks to a Divisional opponent? One that you barely beat both times last season?
I wouldn't.
I would however glady give Cinci a running back if it meant I had 3 1st this year...
I'd then trade one of them away and get a 2 or 3 this year and another first next year...
Got it! You know he has to feeling pretty good about himself after getting a First and a second rounder for Palmer. He could be taking that into consideration..
"Going from 4-12 to 6-10 isn't good enough. I believe we are going to be better than that. We're going to be a lot better than that." - Mike Holmgren (3/15/12)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,950
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,950 |
If Blackmon isnt availible and were not going with RG3 an we have a chance to pick up another 2nd rounders and maybe a 5th along with swaping 1st why not we have many holes to fill and as long as we dont trade out of the top 15 I'm good,
I'd love to be in postion to see what the Redskins will give to get RG3
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,810
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,810 |
jc..
Trading down again?...it depends on what another team is willing to offer to land in the #4 draft slot.
The Browns still have too many holes to fill in just one draft...even with the picks we gained from the Falcon's trade.
If the Browns can do it again, pull off another trade that lands them another 1st round pick plus other valued picks...WHY NOT DO IT AGAIN?
I definitely could see Heckert trading down again, if the price is right.
The best way to accelerate the process of rebuilding the Browns is to make well thought out trades that gain extra picks.
For the sixth pick last years draft Atlanta gave the Browns five picks...1st- (27th overall), second- (59th) and fourth-round (124th) picks this year and their first- and fourth-round picks in 2012.
If the Browns can come close to gaining another 4 or 5 draft picks, for our #4 draft slot, they should do it.
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
The Browns still have too many holes to fill in just one draft...even with the picks we gained from the Falcon's trade.
If the Browns can do it again, pull off another trade that lands them another 1st round pick plus other valued picks...WHY NOT DO IT AGAIN?
There is only one reason to not do it again.. because you want/need a big time playmaker. And the odds of finding one are greater the higher you draft.
Sure, we can continue to trade back and load up on safeties and defensive tackles and centers and offensive guards and respectable linebackers and running backs and we can get to be a very consistent 8 or 9 win team that way with solid production from a lot of other positions.. but until we find a couple difference makers we will not be poised to take the next step.
I am of the opinion that we need to use our high draft picks to find our Calvin Johnson, find our Cam Newton, find our Mario Williams, find our Andre Johnson, find our Vernon Davis, find our difference makers..
it is absolutely not a coincidence that our two best players are arguably Joe Thomas and Joe Haden.. picks #3 and #7.
We need to go get a couple guys that strike fear in the hearts of other teams... then watch how a lot of those "holes" everybody thinks we have suddenly look at lot better.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
i agree. the reason to trade down would be because our FO doesn't think the guys left are going to be bigtime playmakers or they would play a position that our FO doesn't think has value at that spot (CB2 or RT --- decent chance our FO would see that as lesser value and take a trade down to anther team that values the same guy as a CB1 or LT and is willing to pay like it)
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728 |
Just fyi. Great Blue North just put out their latest positional and overall rankings today. #84 Vontaze Burfict I think your bet is safe. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
(O) indicates off-field issue
AND THAT DROPS HIM ALMOST TO THE 3RD ROUND? (based on rankings)
Ridiculous.
He's probably going in the 1st round, so putting him at 84 is just ridiculous...
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,577
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,577 |
I'd love to get Burfict in the 3rd. I'd have no problem with that at all.
I'd be sure to point out Ben to Burfict. Sic em dawg!
SaintDawg™
Football, baseball, basketball, wine, women, walleye
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,849
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,849 |
I think he could fall just like Mauluga did..
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
Quote:
I'd love to get Burfict in the 3rd. I'd have no problem with that at all.
I'd be sure to point out Ben to Burfict. Sic em dawg!
I think going in the 3rd would be good for him, take some pressure off, give him something to push for...
I just don't think there is a chance he's there at our 2nd round pick, if even #22..
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,577
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,577 |
Quote:
Quote:
I'd love to get Burfict in the 3rd. I'd have no problem with that at all.
I'd be sure to point out Ben to Burfict. Sic em dawg!
I think going in the 3rd would be good for him, take some pressure off, give him something to push for...
I just don't think there is a chance he's there at our 2nd round pick, if even #22..
Oh, don't get me wrong.. I think some one will take him quite before the 3rd round.. but if he falls to the 3rd and we draft him there I have zero problem with that.
SaintDawg™
Football, baseball, basketball, wine, women, walleye
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
i think the only team in the late 20s that might take him would be Baltimore or NE (they have 2 picks - NO from Ingram)
if he falls there, I'd suspect that one of the teams in the early 2nd will nab him as even if he just becomes another ReyM, then that has some value (2down LBer who can put out big hits).
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338 |
Quote:
(O) indicates off-field issue
AND THAT DROPS HIM ALMOST TO THE 3RD ROUND? (based on rankings)
Ridiculous.
He's probably going in the 1st round, so putting him at 84 is just ridiculous...
Well if it's "The Great Blue North" it has to be true..  If you search enough pages you can find anything you want.  Might be a good time for Hel dawg to jump in on a bet too!  I wasn't aware he had Off the field issues? I am pretty sure he doesn't. I actually agree with a lot of his board so that is better. I think he has DeCastro way too high. I can't imagine anyone taking DeCastro at 9 if they were going BPA.
"Going from 4-12 to 6-10 isn't good enough. I believe we are going to be better than that. We're going to be a lot better than that." - Mike Holmgren (3/15/12)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,089
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,089 |
Off field issues be damned.... I'd be thrilled if we grabbed him in the second or, for that matter, at #22.
I think the guy is a flat out stud. Plays intense and has the instincts to be a great LB.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338 |
Quote:
Off field issues be damned.... I'd be thrilled if we grabbed him in the second or, for that matter, at #22.
I think the guy is a flat out stud. Plays intense and has the instincts to be a great LB.
I agree. Maybe he doesn't think getting caught with Marijuana is an issue because I don't see an O next to Kirkpatrick..Maybe on the next one..
"Going from 4-12 to 6-10 isn't good enough. I believe we are going to be better than that. We're going to be a lot better than that." - Mike Holmgren (3/15/12)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
Off field issues be damned.... I'd be thrilled if we grabbed him in the second or, for that matter, at #22.
I think the guy is a flat out stud. Plays intense and has the instincts to be a great LB.
ok, let's forget about off-field issues. how about the fact that AZ State had to bench him for on-field issues?
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 |
Or the fact that we already have a top middle linebacker.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
but, I contend that if we want to fix LB and we have one that falls to us at one of our spots, then we can take either a MLB or WOLB. DQ can be our Briggs (faster MLB who plays WOLB).
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,363
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,363 |
Quote:
DQ can be our Briggs (faster MLB who plays WOLB).
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563 |
or the fact that he played like total crap this year?
you had a good run Hank.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 |
I would have no problem drafting a weakside linebacker, but why move D'Qwell Jackson of a position when we already know he is successful there?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
i don't like Burfict, but if we end up in a spot where there's a really good MLB and we don't think there are any WOLB left worth grabbing, then I think we use his potential versatility so we can grab the better player.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 6,331
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 6,331 |
Quote:
I would have no problem drafting a weakside linebacker, but why move D'Qwell Jackson of a position when we already know he is successful there?
I don't think Jackson is that successful at MLB. He's built more to be a WLB.
Jackson's strengths are tackling in open space. He has good reactions (unlike Andra Davis) and is a very sure tackler. He's pretty fast too. This all makes him perfect for the weakside position.
Jackson gets a lot of tackles, but he certainly is no enforcer at the MLB position. While we don't necessarily need a mamoth MLB like Burfect, someone who is more explosive and aggressive would be better in there. I'd like someone who can really penetrate and blow up the run. Create stops for losses. That's something Jackson doesn't do at the MLB position. And he stands more of a chance doing it at the weakside position, where he'll be able to shut down runs to the outside and get blitzes where he gets a free shot at the QB.
We only don't know how he plays there because we've never really had a chance to put him there. He should have been WLB all along. You've been here awhile, and we've been talking about how he'd excel in the WLB role all along.
Jackson can play MLB, and that's fine. Especially if we like a weakside linebacker like that Lavonte David. But I think moving Jackson to WLB will make him even better. I know he played MLB in college too, but that's college with college O-Linemen. Here in the NFL, Jackson is best fitted for WLB. And I don't think the transition would be difficult at all
UCONN HUSKIES 2014 Champions of Basketball
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 |
Quote:
I'd like someone who can really penetrate and blow up the run. Create stops for losses. That's something Jackson doesn't do at the MLB position.
Not true.
According to these two sites, NFL Data.com and Team Rankings.com, Jackson was actually one of the best at his position in the category of tackles for loss.
He had 12 tackles for loss this season. Best among all middle linebackers in the NFL that play in a 4-3 defense. There are other linebackers who had more than him but they are all outside linebackers that blitz pretty much every play they are in the game (guys like Suggs, Ware, Von Miller, Wake, Aldon Smith, etc.) The only guys that play in the middle and had more than him are Daryl Washington and Navarro Bowman and they both play in blitz happy 3-4 defenses.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338 |
Quote:
Quote:
I would have no problem drafting a weakside linebacker, but why move D'Qwell Jackson of a position when we already know he is successful there?
I don't think Jackson is that successful at MLB. He's built more to be a WLB.
Jackson's strengths are tackling in open space. He has good reactions (unlike Andra Davis) and is a very sure tackler. He's pretty fast too. This all makes him perfect for the weakside position.
Jackson gets a lot of tackles, but he certainly is no enforcer at the MLB position. While we don't necessarily need a mamoth MLB like Burfect, someone who is more explosive and aggressive would be better in there. I'd like someone who can really penetrate and blow up the run. Create stops for losses. That's something Jackson doesn't do at the MLB position. And he stands more of a chance doing it at the weakside position, where he'll be able to shut down runs to the outside and get blitzes where he gets a free shot at the QB.
We only don't know how he plays there because we've never really had a chance to put him there. He should have been WLB all along. You've been here awhile, and we've been talking about how he'd excel in the WLB role all along.
Jackson can play MLB, and that's fine. Especially if we like a weakside linebacker like that Lavonte David. But I think moving Jackson to WLB will make him even better. I know he played MLB in college too, but that's college with college O-Linemen. Here in the NFL, Jackson is best fitted for WLB. And I don't think the transition would be difficult at all
I agree! Jackson Moving to the outside and finding an enforcer in the middle would be a huge boost to our run Defense. We wouldn't be ranked in the bottom half of the league in Rush Defense if we had that guy! DQ is great but will never be that guy in the middle. He makes a lot of tackles but they are 6 yards downfield. You need a guyšthat can throw a lineman out of the way and stick a guy as he breaks the line of scrimmage. DQ is great in space and a sure tackler but once a O-Lineman gets his paws on him he has a hard time getting through.
"Going from 4-12 to 6-10 isn't good enough. I believe we are going to be better than that. We're going to be a lot better than that." - Mike Holmgren (3/15/12)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,419 |
Quote:
Quote:
I'd like someone who can really penetrate and blow up the run. Create stops for losses. That's something Jackson doesn't do at the MLB position.
Not true.
According to these two sites, NFL Data.com and Team Rankings.com, Jackson was actually one of the best at his position in the category of tackles for loss.
He had 12 tackles for loss this season. Best among all middle linebackers in the NFL that play in a 4-3 defense. There are other linebackers who had more than him but they are all outside linebackers that blitz pretty much every play they are in the game (guys like Suggs, Ware, Von Miller, Wake, Aldon Smith, etc.) The only guys that play in the middle and had more than him are Daryl Washington and Navarro Bowman and they both play in blitz happy 3-4 defenses.
That was one of my major problems with Jackson in the past, that he did not make "impact" plays, such as sacks, tackles for loss, forced fumbles, etc. This year he had 3.5 sacks, 1 forced fumble, 3 fumbles recovered, 9 stuffs, and an interception. He was much more impactful than he has been in the past. He had more "stuffs" this year than in the rest of his career combined. That's a god start for him in the 4-3. I have changed my tune on him, and am glad that he was brought back.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 |
Read my posts directly above your post. What you think about Jackson isn't actually true. He makes more plays in the backfield than any other 4-3 middle linebacker in the league.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 6,331
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 6,331 |
Quote:
Read my posts directly above your post. What you think about Jackson isn't actually true. He makes more plays in the backfield than any other 4-3 middle linebacker in the league.
I guess those numbers don't lie (and rarely do I say that because I'm not a stats guy). I must not have noticed them in the games I was able to watch (as I've said, I normally could only watch half of Browns games anyway, because I'd have to watch the bridge of the tugboat i was on for the other half)
Still, just from his style of play. Jackson would do even better at WLB IMO. But this does make me feel better about the possibility of him staying inside if we see a good WLB for us. Jackson is fine at ILB, he'd be fine at WLB too. That's a good thing and let's us be versatile in the player that we pick up for our other LB spot
UCONN HUSKIES 2014 Champions of Basketball
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338 |
Quote:
Read my posts directly above your post. What you think about Jackson isn't actually true. He makes more plays in the backfield than any other 4-3 middle linebacker in the league.
Thanks and yeah I read it and had already looked at his stats and Patrick Willis too. I never said He didn't do great and I have always liked Jackson when some on here didn't. I understand what the stats say and he did make an impact. I am sure he would make a huge impact on the outside too. What I am talking about is someone they run away from. No one runs away from Jackson and a lot of the rushing yardage we give up was straight up the gut. Yeah they got us outside a few good times too. But in between those great plays this year and his solid statistical numbers They ran it down our throats. I watched Jackson Closely and I am impressed with him. He is a leader and his Determination and effort to come back from two pectoral tears and to play at such a high level is inspirational and admireable. I have nothing bad to say about the guy, I just think in order to take that next step up that you need that guy and there are a few good ones in this draft. It's just my opinion on how we could better this team just like everyone has their own. I truly believe just by adding a DE and MLB we will have one of the best Defenses in the NFL bar non. If we add a CB and a safety or Hagg and these Young guys like Skrien or Patterson step up we will be solid throughout and really young and solid.
"Going from 4-12 to 6-10 isn't good enough. I believe we are going to be better than that. We're going to be a lot better than that." - Mike Holmgren (3/15/12)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 |
So you have always liked Jackson, think he's a good player, and know he made a positive impact on the defense. Yet you want to replace him and move him to another position? Quote:
No one runs away from Jackson
Can you prove this? I say no.
Quote:
a lot of the rushing yardage we give up was straight up the gut.
I don't remember that, but I'm sure a person smarter than me can find a stat that proves one of us wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338 |
Quote:
So you have always liked Jackson, think he's a good player, and know he made a positive impact on the defense. Yet you want to replace him and move him to another position?
Quote:
No one runs away from Jackson
Can you prove this? I say no.
Quote:
a lot of the rushing yardage we give up was straight up the gut.
I don't remember that, but I'm sure a person smarter than me can find a stat that proves one of us wrong.
Yes. What I wrote is what I said is what I meant.
"Going from 4-12 to 6-10 isn't good enough. I believe we are going to be better than that. We're going to be a lot better than that." - Mike Holmgren (3/15/12)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,401
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,401 |
Quote:
I say if Blackmon is gone at pick 4 the Browns should dangle their first pick to Miami and let them leap frog over Washington. Hopefully Richardson is still around pick 9.
I see they let just about anyone on the message boards these days....
Good to see you buddy. You have a long way to go to catch up to me.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 108
Practice Squad
|
|
OP
Practice Squad
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 108 |
Alright...let's say we can trade down again some how doesn't matter who is on the board when we pick and we trade down to a spot in front of Cincy to pick up an extra 2nd and 3rd this year.
With our first 4 picks we could possibly do:
1A - RB Richardson
1B - OG Glenn/Adams
2A - OL Zeitler/Osemele/Sanders
2B - WR Joe Adams
Could potentially fix the right side of the line, give us the top RB at a pick in the mid-teens where he should go, and a deep threat WR that can definitely stretch the field as well as help with the return game (Cribbs is getting old and has definitely taken some hits returning the ball).
With the 3rd and 4th round picks we could go after some defensive talent to possibly fix the holes we have. By taking the best player available for a defensive position of need could look something like:
3A - DE Curry/Johnson
3B - OLB Bradham - FSU
4A - CB Harris - Oregon (It's a stretch, but could he learn from our guys)
4B - SS Taylor - LSU
That could potentially be 2 - 4 more starters on defense....Thoughts??
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456 |
Quote:
Alright...let's say we can trade down again some how doesn't matter who is on the board when we pick and we trade down to a spot in front of Cincy to pick up an extra 2nd and 3rd this year.
With our first 4 picks we could possibly do:
1A - RB Richardson
1B - OG Glenn/Adams
2A - OL Zeitler/Osemele/Sanders
2B - WR Joe Adams
Could potentially fix the right side of the line, give us the top RB at a pick in the mid-teens where he should go, and a deep threat WR that can definitely stretch the field as well as help with the return game (Cribbs is getting old and has definitely taken some hits returning the ball).
With the 3rd and 4th round picks we could go after some defensive talent to possibly fix the holes we have. By taking the best player available for a defensive position of need could look something like:
3A - DE Curry/Johnson
3B - OLB Bradham - FSU
4A - CB Harris - Oregon (It's a stretch, but could he learn from our guys)
4B - SS Taylor - LSU
That could potentially be 2 - 4 more starters on defense....Thoughts??
If the Browns are not sold on RG3 being the man or Blackmon being a good value pick and moving down and getting more picks and better value lower in this draft Im all for it. To me though I would need to get a 1st next year in any move down to start. I would much rather have that then a 2nd this year.
I did see you said in a 2nd move down so if we gained a 1st in the 1st move down and then moving down a few more spots and getting Richardson would be a nice move. Its very close to what I have been thinking we will do but I see us trading with Seattle not Washington if that is indeed the FO's thought process.
Alot of things to happen between now and the draft though but fun to ponder about.
I guess i just dont see Richardson falling below the early teens if he even gets that far.
If you need 3 years to be a winner you got here 2 years to early. Get it done Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 108
Practice Squad
|
|
OP
Practice Squad
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 108 |
Ok, here is another scenario that I was thinking about last night as I was reading about us looking into resigning Hillis. Once again, let's say we trade down a few spots to pick up an extra 2nd and 4th.
With our first two picks solidify up our OL with taking 2 of the following:
Reiff, Martin, DeCastro, or Glenn...Boom offensive line set with decent backups already on our roster for rotational purposes.
Second round options I think that can come in and make an immediate impact on this team that we could take could be DE Curry (fills a need) and RB Doug Martin as Hardesty still needs to prove that he can make it in this league and stay healthy. That would give us.
Third round we could look at taking someone like WR Joe Adams to stretch the field and since we would have 3 4th round picks, maybe combine two of them to trade back into the 3rd round and grab LB Bradham.
Those 6 picks give us potentially 6 day 1 starters and fills needs on both offensive and defensive lines.
Free agency we can focus on resigning Hillis and throwing a lot of money at a #1 WR...
Thoughts??
Last edited by JE159; 01/31/12 10:14 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 |
I think I'd be very upset if we spent both of our first rounders on offensive line, especially when I don't think our offensive line is bad. Towards the end of the season Lauvao and Pinkston were going pretty good. Also, I don't think Mack was at full strength after playing three days after an appendectomy. He should be better as well. I would throw a late round pick at a potential right tackle, but that's about it. Our guys played pretty well.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums The Archives 2013 NFL Season NFL Draft (2013) Trading down...
|
|
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/Heldawg/rgiii2.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]](https://i.ibb.co/6WV79RV/Browns-Coach-Sig.png)
