|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,391
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,391 |
I still am a fan of Gilkey as well, but even more so than him, the dark horse I am really going to pay attention to this offseason is Chris Faulk.
Man, I really wanted to give the Browns up this offseason with all the instability, but I still find myself here again, feeding my hopeless addiction.
I do have to say I like the Tate move. Do wish be had a better OL gathering though.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,856
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,856 |
excellent post Vers. I agree that OL should have been a higher priority, it appears, at least on the outside, that this FO has been unable or unwilling to land the G / T that we so desperately need. that is worrisome. The only objection I had ( and you addressed it) was the calling them idiots, I don't see that (yet), you have to sign the players you want / need as the opportunities present themselves, even if it means signing a blocking TE before an OL. Those moves are not mutually exclusive, nor necessarily indicative of them ignoring the need. Nonetheless, their perceived failure to bring someone on board is a cause for concern. Oh well off to visit the big guy upstairs, I will put a word in for an OG. 
#gmstrong
A smart person knows what to say.
A wise person knows whether or not to say it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475 |
I still think it is easier to plug in a RB than a guard. Pretty close both get taken late first round a lot - cause they are not rare commodities actually every now n then you get a couple of RBs in the top 10...when was the last time an OG got taken in the top 10...Never? That alone is predicated on skill set needed and rarity.
2. Just what stellar FA were in this for OG...Lava was near the top and he was avg at best.
Why do yo neglect Pinkston. Right now he is our RG. And we still have the draft...that is the treasure chest for OG. The number one FA OG was Schwartz and you were on record of not liking him to come here?
This FA period actually has been stellar. Don't understand your disappointment. We are not a team ready to win NOW to go hog wild with FA like Denver...they got like a two year window with Manning then they got to reload. We needed to fill holes with reliable talent. We got 3 good starters now and a slot WR very soon, as well as a snot bubble blocking TE as we will be in 2 TE sets mostly.
Don't understand your love for Banner...he was not good for the team. He was a driving wedge and the sole reason that nobody wanted to come here. The little good he did was not enough. It was a plus getting rid of him. Farmer has been very good so far. No rookie GM mistakes. Hey maybe you and DJ will team up over this...lol 
This is looking so good back to real football and our team of destiny.  hang in there.
Defense wins championships. Watson play your butt off!
Go Browns!
CHRIST HAS RISEN!
GM Strong! & Stay safe everyone!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 |
Quote:
Pretty close both get taken late first round a lot - cause they are not rare commodities actually every now n then you get a couple of RBs in the top 10...when was the last time an OG got taken in the top 10...Never? That alone is predicated on skill set needed and rarity.
There were two guards taken in the top 10 of last year's draft.
Quote:
Don't understand your love for Banner...he was not good for the team. He was a driving wedge and the sole reason that nobody wanted to come here. The little good he did was not enough. It was a plus getting rid of him. Farmer has been very good so far. No rookie GM mistakes. Hey maybe you and DJ will team up over this...lol
I am going to try real hard to NOT reply to antagonistic comments such as this one. You are the one making it about regimes. Not me. Have a good one.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475 |
Quote:
Jc again
So this guy is a career injured backup? Excuse me when i don't jump for joy. I want someone who is a legit starter. I hope he proves better than that, but geez.
If you choose to look at it that way go right ahead. No knees problems, no shoulder problems no back problems - those are the injuries that are dangerous.
Point blank he was THE TOP FA RB on everybody's list. We got a couple others who can lighten the load but he also has some pretty good game. Lets put it this way, he's better than TRENT He knows the system we will run. Good vision good power good explosion didn't cost much.
Nothing wrong with the signing. Now we can draft without thinking we got to get a good RB for the work! But if you really want to look at it as a waste...go right ahead possibly you can fool yourself - I don't get the need for doom n gloom. Roster wise we got a pretty good team in the making.
jmho
Defense wins championships. Watson play your butt off!
Go Browns!
CHRIST HAS RISEN!
GM Strong! & Stay safe everyone!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475 |
I am going to try real hard to NOT reply to antagonistic comments such as this one. You are the one making it about regimes. Not me. Have a good one.
I was being jovial and kid glovish - I won't take it further...but you know.
top 10 OG... doh! figures - last year, pretty weak draft I guess but true 2 in top 10. Can't remember any before.
There is no "URGENT NEED" we need depth for sure...unless you got a report that Pinkston has a career injury. Just looking to talk football. I know we disagree greatly on our new GM and the job he has done. But one of us is way off on their football. I don't see how that is possible. Yeah I know I'm a Homer but many who have nothing to do with being a Browns fan have thought our FA signings have been pretty good.
jmho
Defense wins championships. Watson play your butt off!
Go Browns!
CHRIST HAS RISEN!
GM Strong! & Stay safe everyone!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 |
Quote:
Just looking to talk football.
Did you read my last post on page 3? It's the last one of that page.
I was talking football. I tried to give valid reasons for my opinion. Not sure what the beef is other than I am not sold on what we are doing.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,693
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,693 |
My earlier mocks after losing Ward & DQ had us taking WR, OG, FS, CB, RB & ILB with our 2nd 1st through 4th rnd picks almost exclusively, usually taking Hyde or Hill in the 3rd round because that position was such a need. Now it's clear that with the signing of Dansby, Whitner & Tate the roster is not only upgraded, but that those six spots in a fairly deep draft (in some positions) will be available to fill the remaining holes and upgrade the roster depth including potential future starters. WR, OG, CB, are clear areas of need and will likely, (almost certainly,) be addressed sometime within the first seven picks, (along with a QB). And there is also a good chance that an additional ILB & FS are taken somewhere in there. The signing of Tate not only upgrades the running game immediately, but pushes the need for an additional RB down to the 5th round or later, if the FO & coaching staff so choose.
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/hfMNC7T.jpg) "I am undeterred and I am undaunted." --Kevin Stefanski "Big hairy American winning machines." --Baker Mayfield #gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,558
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,558 |
Vers,
Who out their at OL would you sign or have signed? To me our only hole is at RG, though i would like to see someone push Schwartz. Of the OG's available the only 1 worth it was Beadles and he got a 5yr $30 mill contract from the Jags which to me is about as high as i would want to go for a OG.
#gmstrong
Live, Love, Laugh
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,855
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,855 |
Quote:
Quote:
I still think it is easier to plug in a RB than a guard.
Look, things can still work out fine. I just don't like how we are targeting skill guys and ignoring the OL and some of the comments both Pettine and Farmer have made about the QB position.
They could end up being great and I am not down on them yet. I am just concerned right now.
Free agency isn't over my friend. Now we enter the quiet time where players and agents start to get a grip on their worth. I am not sure who is left as far as O-line is concerned, but we have a long way to go before we can say we ignored the line.
Time to see if I can find a free agent tracker and see who is still out there.
http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/freeagency/
Might this work for you?
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,720
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,720 |
I agree with you in your concern over the OL. We've seen this same movie too many times.
I'm just not sure there were many targets out there to actually address it and whether they reached out to try to get those guys to visit.
But I'm certainly concerned. I keep hearing once again how the change of schemes gives some hope for the current G's we have to play better. Kind of sounds like how people thought Chud's system was going to be like waving a magic wand over Weeden.
Yes, the movie is in the fiction section.......
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 |
I really wanted either Beadles or Asamoah at guard and would have accepted Schwartz. I was almost positive we would bring in a FA guard, so I was pimping the two former guys over Schwartz. I never even contemplated that we would ignore the position.
I would have even went after Veldheer at tackle. I know he makes big money. So what. People keep saying we have so much money to spend, but don't want us to spend it on quality players that will help us in both the running and passing game.
Furthermore, don't you guys think OL is a priority in the zone blocking scheme? What if we start either Hoyer [relatively inexperienced] or a rookie? Isn't quality OL play imperative?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 |
You and YTown make a good point about saying that perhaps we never had a shot at any of the top offensive linemen. I have contemplated that and admit that it is a possibility. I still think that bringing in a top offensive lineman should have been a huge priority. Not sure who is saying that changing to zone blocking is going to make our guards better, but I wouldn't listen to them, Pit. The opposite is true. Think about it........zone blocking calls for the guards to be more agile. They gap block a lot. They trap more. The pull. The are asked to chip the guy across from them and then go get the LBer at the second level. That calls for great feet. Now, do you think our guards have great feet?  I know you are good at evaluating offensive lineman. So, you know that agility is not a strength of any of our guards. I'm curious as to what the plan is. I was certain that we were going to go after a Beadles, Asamoah, or Scwartz. I was hoping for Veldheer, too. I knew that was wishful thinking, but again, I was positive we would bring in at least one FA guard. I don't know, bro............ I have seen this movie, too.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,511
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,511 |
I agree I'm surprised we haven't brought any lineman in to interview... I still think that this is pointing to us drafting a lineman within our first 4 picks....
<><
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,635
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,635 |
Quote:
I keep hearing once again how the change of schemes gives some hope for the current G's we have to play better.
I think Lava would be worse in a zone blocking scheme. Lava had power, not all that good with technique/footwork/etc. Even with power, saw him putt on his butt one too many times for my liking. I can't see him being a master of picking perfect angles needed for the ZBS
I did however believe Norv's system would turn Weeden into something other than a bum, least make him look like he improved over the offseason. Convinced having him in the shotgun would be do wonder but IMO, I think Weeden played worst in an offensive system that seemed to be suited for him better than Pat's.
All in all, we need to address the guard situation. There is no one on this roster who can step in and make a damn. Those saying they like Gilkey must not have watched the Gilkey I saw. The kid was being man handled out there. He, O'Niel Cousins are not the type of solutions we need. Pinkston could perhaps be an anchor there but IDK and I wouldn't put all my eggs in that basket. Our right tackle could also use some attention. Looking like the draft rounds 2 or later should be used to address these holes.
All JMO
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,720
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,720 |
Quote:
You and YTown make a good point about saying that perhaps we never had a shot at any of the top offensive linemen. I have contemplated that and admit that it is a possibility. I still think that bringing in a top offensive lineman should have been a huge priority.
I do as well without a doubt. I'm hoping that possibility is the reality. But I have no way of knowing.
Quote:
Not sure who is saying that changing to zone blocking is going to make our guards better, but I wouldn't listen to them, Pit. The opposite is true.
I'm well aware of that. All too well...
Quote:
Think about it........zone blocking calls for the guards to be more agile. They gap block a lot. They trap more. The pull. The are asked to chip the guy across from them and then go get the LBer at the second level. That calls for great feet. Now, do you think our guards have great feet?
I certainly don't. These G's were acquired without that in mind. I do think that Pinkston may be able to be plugged in where Lavou was without really hurting anything but neither have the skill set for this scheme. And the depth is miserable considering the skill set that you properly pointed out that is needed.
Quote:
I know you are good at evaluating offensive lineman. So, you know that agility is not a strength of any of our guards. I'm curious as to what the plan is. I was certain that we were going to go after a Beadles, Asamoah, or Scwartz. I was hoping for Veldheer, too. I knew that was wishful thinking, but again, I was positive we would bring in at least one FA guard.
Well I certainly didn't see Shwartz fitting the scheme either, but all of the other candidates you listed would have been very good potential candidates to me. I don't really see anyone left on the FA market as much of an upgrade at this point but we could add some depth. I don't see anyone on the depth chart being of much if of any value in the new scheme.
At this juncture I can only hope that we draft a G at #26 or #35 to actually address it.
People can say it doesn't have to be addressed that highly, but the type of athletic G we will need won't be so easily found later in the draft. And in this scheme, the transition from the NCAA to the NFL will take some time. It's a more complicated system to learn and adjust to.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475 |
I did Vers...I read it - good football and understand your position. You did mention an urgent need predicated on the losing of Lava. If we go a couple of drafts without investing into OL - it will be a big mistake. But I would like to see our draft first. Right now we have a returning 5. Pinkston did play some RG at the end. Mack is going No where this season. I know you are not high on Schwartz but he is not a bum.
We got a starting 5 all who know each other and got a little chemistry.
I'm not going to debate you on the guys who have no clue about the OL and claim it sucks and why we had no running game and why we had 3 QBs start. You directed a lot to them. I cannot answer for them...except they don't have a clue. We had absolutely no commitment to run last season, it was my one negative on Turner. Then again they went and got an out of shape old RB off the couch and when they requested a snot bubble FB to aid in the Running attack - our GM chose not to give a simple variable to aid them. You got to have a will to run...and we had no will it had little to do with the OL.
Can we upgrade of course we can. I hope we do. I still say the safest pick is Robinson (I sorta know no way we do that cause rarely do NFL guys think like I do) but Teddy is first on my list Robinson 2nd JM I think he will drop but I do like him a lot. I even like Watkins but he is not top of my list. But where we disagree is with the Urgent need. The drop off with Lava to Pinkston is minimal and I think Pinkston lost weight and showed me a lot better movement the little I saw him (Jet game was eyeballing him a lot) Looked in good shape. So possibly better for the new O.
So we have the starting 5...upgrade through the draft. We have 5 picks that can pick up a kid with OG talent and compete. Rounds 1-3. A lot better than OGs that teams threw away. The best OG I know wanted to be an OT not OG so he would not have came here. We will probably draft some quick but considered small OT's with some nastiness to come and play OG for us. I hope that is the plan. Got to see the draft. FA is for urgent need. We definitely replaced everyone we lost - TJ, DQ, Bess, McGahee (starting roles) but did not replace Lava, of whom I was one of the few GM n a couple others did as well think he was actually decent. But we sort of did by plugging in Pinkston who is an NFL starter. We didn't have that with the other positions.
I don't view it as a testimony that they do not get it about the LOS. I don't wish to "BUILD" the team in FA just plug the holes and I see everyone plugged. Including OG just that one in house.
I know you understand that and you said it. But you seem to bank the entire FA body of work on the filling of Lava's position when to me its obvious that they view that to be Pinkston. We might get some depth...we might wait for the draft and a team who have an over load of OGs work a trade for a mid to late round pick or rob a couple that we like from Practice Squads. I was not impressed with the OGs in this FA market. Most places had Schwartz or Beadles flip flopping as the 1-2 top OGs.
Anyway thanks for the football. I know you get nipped on left n right. I ain't nipping. I don't agree with you all the times - we agree mostly when football starts. But I would hope I could joke with ya and I'm not piling on. And come on I know that you know that I am a Homer...you think that. I think that you don't believe in our GM - but I"m not going to say your football logic is no good cause of your emotions....just like my football is real regardless of my emotions.
But you are right I guess I should have taken that post and responded. But I was trying to bust your chops a little without making it personal. You can lower your guard with me...I ain't going to attack you. But I hope we can post with disagreement without it being personal. 
Defense wins championships. Watson play your butt off!
Go Browns!
CHRIST HAS RISEN!
GM Strong! & Stay safe everyone!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,276
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,276 |
I don't know enough about the various guards to comment on how Pinky/Greco will compare to Asamoah or Beadles. I do think spending money and attention in that direction would have been wiser than throwing money at Hawkins. Tate I don't really know, he seems pretty good when he isn't injured.
For all we know the FO might be in love with one of the late 1st / 2nd round guards this coming draft. In that situation picking up a FA might be seen as overkill putting both Pinky and Greco on the bench either immediately or sometime during the season.
I don't think it is a calamity but it is worth pointing out their priorities seem a bit askew with the Hawkins attention. If they draft a Guard high ignoring FA will make a lot more sense.
The true test of this FO will be the QB position in my opinion. I don't think the quality of our guards, 3rd/4th WR, and RB is going to matter one bit in comparison. What they have said so far troubles me as it sounds like we are taking a trip on the USS Hoyer this season.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 3,854
Hall of Famer
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 3,854 |
Quote:
You and YTown make a good point about saying that perhaps we never had a shot at any of the top offensive linemen. I have contemplated that and admit that it is a possibility. I still think that bringing in a top offensive lineman should have been a huge priority.
Not sure who is saying that changing to zone blocking is going to make our guards better, but I wouldn't listen to them, Pit. The opposite is true.
Think about it........zone blocking calls for the guards to be more agile. They gap block a lot. They trap more. The pull. The are asked to chip the guy across from them and then go get the LBer at the second level. That calls for great feet. Now, do you think our guards have great feet?
I know you are good at evaluating offensive lineman. So, you know that agility is not a strength of any of our guards. I'm curious as to what the plan is. I was certain that we were going to go after a Beadles, Asamoah, or Scwartz. I was hoping for Veldheer, too. I knew that was wishful thinking, but again, I was positive we would bring in at least one FA guard.
I don't know, bro............ I have seen this movie, too.
During the combine the offensive line position was really singled out as being the most athletic group that has ever been at the combine. We talk alot about how deep the drafts wide receiver class is but the offensive line group is also extremely deep. Maybe Shanahan and the staff wants to bring in some of that athletic ability.
David Yankey - Is considered a technician. Some scouts has said he is the second coming of David Decasto. Is balenced in blocking ability both run and pass.
Xavier Sua Filo - One of the fastest 40 times for a guard. Looked very fluid in his lateral moves, Well rounded blocker in both pass and run games.
Branden Thomas - Played Left Tackle for Clemson but is projected to play guard in the NFL. Ran anothetr fast 40 for an Olineman.
Cyril Richardson - Another left tackle at Baylor that projects as a guard in the NFL. Decent speed but more size than some of the other guards.
Gabe Jackson - In line power blocker that probably does not fit the zone blocking scheme but is powerful at the point of attack.
Dakota Dozier - NCAA Divison 2 player that was very impressive at the East West Shrine game and the combine. Played Tackle in college projects as a NFL guard.
Trai Turner - Most scouts feel he came out a year to early. Had he stayed in college 1 more year he would have possibly been considered the top OG in 2015. Played well at LSU as the main run blocker for Jeremy Hill. Needs to improve his pass protection. Ran a sub 5.0 40 at the combine.
Anthony Steen - Better run blocker than pass protector.
Also the team may look at taking a right tackle with athletic ability and play them a season at right guard for a year or 2 before moving them to right tackle.
I think at pick #35 they will go after a Yankey or Sua-Filo if available. They should also strongly consider a project like Turner in round 4 if available. That kinda athletic abilty is just too good to ignore.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,391
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,391 |
These are the posts I love to read. Thanks for the intel and insight.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,418
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,418 |
I have a hard time believing that a defensive coach will use his 2 top picks on offense .... so with that in mind .... who do you see as potential targets with our 2nd or 3rd round picks?
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: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,693
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,693 |
Seems to me the theme for this FA has been plug the holes and upgrade the positions we lost prior to, going into and during the FA period: Dansby for DQ, Whitner for Ward, Hawkins for Bess and Tate for T. Rich. We come out of this with a better team with talent more suited to the system, without more glaring holes than we had going into FA. Guard is a position that can be argued is no worse off than it was going into FA because losing Lauvao wasn't really a loss, and the issue would've have been addressed anyway, most likely via the draft. Like everyone else brought on board this off season, system must and mostly likely will be one of the key factors in the decision making process determining which guard they bring in. That, along with cost, may dictate and indicate a desire to draft as opposed to the enthusiastic pursuit of a top free agent.
"I am undeterred and I am undaunted." --Kevin Stefanski "Big hairy American winning machines." --Baker Mayfield #gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 3,854
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 3,854 |
Quote:
I have a hard time believing that a defensive coach will use his 2 top picks on offense .... so with that in mind .... who do you see as potential targets with our 2nd or 3rd round picks?
You can get top offensive guards in the 2nd round. I would look for the Browns to go after a QB with the 1st pick. Then after the failed attempt to get Revis, unless they sign someone else like one of the Cromartie's I see the Browns going Corner at pick #26. Then addressing the guard spot in the 2nd round at #35.
After that in the 3rd, 4th, and 5th rounds wide reciever or 2, linebacker, back up running back, and another Olineman.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,370 |
Quote:
My earlier mocks after losing Ward & DQ had us taking WR, OG, FS, CB, RB & ILB with our 2nd 1st through 4th rnd picks almost exclusively, usually taking Hyde or Hill in the 3rd round because that position was such a need. Now it's clear that with the signing of Dansby, Whitner & Tate the roster is not only upgraded, but that those six spots in a fairly deep draft (in some positions) will be available to fill the remaining holes and upgrade the roster depth including potential future starters. WR, OG, CB, are clear areas of need and will likely, (almost certainly,) be addressed sometime within the first seven picks, (along with a QB). And there is also a good chance that an additional ILB & FS are taken somewhere in there. The signing of Tate not only upgrades the running game immediately, but pushes the need for an additional RB down to the 5th round or later, if the FO & coaching staff so choose.
That's a rather fair assessment, I think. Well conveyed without having to get into too many specifics.
I can see the front office actually going heavy on the defensive side of the ball. Adding a WR (not at #4), a QB (also not at #4) and an OL or two, and that's about all. Investing even more heavily in the D with this draft with 6 or 7 selections going there. Then building up the offense heavily next year.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,366
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,366 |
I guess I'll retract on some of my criticism of Haslem, he has shown a commitment to spending some of the cap this offseason and they are doing it wisely.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,720
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,720 |
Quote:
I think at pick #35 they will go after a Yankey or Sua-Filo if available. They should also strongly consider a project like Turner in round 4 if available. That kinda athletic abilty is just too good to ignore.
While I agree with the part that I quoted, I disagree that this draft is loaded at what is projected to be the G position. At least as it pertains to the skill set needed in the zone blocking scheme.
Which is why I agree with you on the part I quoted.
There is certainly talent at the position, but when you start excluding the G's that simply won't fit the scheme, the list really shrinks IMO
The problem really is, we have zero depth as it pertains to this scheme. So I do believe waiting until round 4 puts us at the very real risk of being one injury away from no answer at the RG position. Much like we witnessed last year.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 3,854
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 3,854 |
Quote:
Quote:
I think at pick #35 they will go after a Yankey or Sua-Filo if available. They should also strongly consider a project like Turner in round 4 if available. That kinda athletic abilty is just too good to ignore.
While I agree with the part that I quoted, I disagree that this draft is loaded at what is projected to be the G position. At least as it pertains to the skill set needed in the zone blocking scheme.
Which is why I agree with you on the part I quoted.
There is certainly talent at the position, but when you start excluding the G's that simply won't fit the scheme, the list really shrinks IMO
The problem really is, we have zero depth as it pertains to this scheme. So I do believe waiting until round 4 puts us at the very real risk of being one injury away from no answer at the RG position. Much like we witnessed last year.
I get your point but most teams only carry 8 to 9 Olineman on the roster. With that the Browns will have
1 LT - Joe Thomas
2 - C - Alex Mack
3 - LG and back up Center John Greco
4 - RT Mitchell Schwartz
5 - LG Jason Pinkston
6 - Back up G/T Garret Gilkey
7 - Back up G/T - Chris Faulk - Has poetntail to be a starter if fully recovered from injry
8 - #35 pick David Yankey or Sua-Filo if selected
9 - 4th round pick Trai Turner
Who would you select different or cut to make room for another?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,693
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,693 |
Quote:
Quote:
My earlier mocks after losing Ward & DQ had us taking WR, OG, FS, CB, RB & ILB with our 2nd 1st through 4th rnd picks almost exclusively, usually taking Hyde or Hill in the 3rd round because that position was such a need. Now it's clear that with the signing of Dansby, Whitner & Tate the roster is not only upgraded, but that those six spots in a fairly deep draft (in some positions) will be available to fill the remaining holes and upgrade the roster depth including potential future starters. WR, OG, CB, are clear areas of need and will likely, (almost certainly,) be addressed sometime within the first seven picks, (along with a QB). And there is also a good chance that an additional ILB & FS are taken somewhere in there. The signing of Tate not only upgrades the running game immediately, but pushes the need for an additional RB down to the 5th round or later, if the FO & coaching staff so choose.
That's a rather fair assessment, I think. Well conveyed without having to get into too many specifics.
I can see the front office actually going heavy on the defensive side of the ball. Adding a WR (not at #4), a QB (also not at #4) and an OL or two, and that's about all. Investing even more heavily in the D with this draft with 6 or 7 selections going there. Then building up the offense heavily next year.
Not to hijack the Ben Tate thread, but what do you see those 6-7 selections being, and where do you see them happening? For example, I see this draft as being very deep at DT, WR, CB & RB, fairly deep at ILB, and not very deep at FS & OG (two areas of need), so I could see us taking a WR or two later, along with a CB and a RB but drafting a FS & OG fairly high because those positions seem thin to me. I would also expect us to take someone like Dennard or Mosely if either is there at 26.
"I am undeterred and I am undaunted." --Kevin Stefanski "Big hairy American winning machines." --Baker Mayfield #gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 |
j/c:
I enjoyed reading the replies since the last time I posted. There was some good football in there. A few points:
--Pit, I agree w/you about that a lot of the top guys in the draft don't fit the zone blocking scheme as well. They are bigger guys. I loved Gabe Jackson for awhile, but no way he fits in our scheme.
--Day: Good information. I like both Yankey and Sua-Filo. Both are pretty agile guys. I was surprised by Sua-Filo's lateral movement at the Combine.
--tab: I probably wasn't clear about the Lava thing. I wasn't saying we have to get a guard because he left. I was saying that our guards don't seem to fit the new scheme as well. I mentioned that we lost Lava and brought no one else in. I probably said it wrong, because no way would have Lava fit in at guard in Shanny's system. And I am not knocking Lava, just saying that his feet aren't good enough. I don't think Pinky's are either. Greco has better feet, but he's so tall. I really am concerned about our guards.
Schwartz? Well, we are obviously going to have live w/him again. Who knows, perhaps he will be better in our new scheme.
Oh, and we don't have to agree. I actually think it's good when posters have different opinions, as long as they are based on logic and reason. Good, solid debate helps us all learn.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,317
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,317 |
Just a few random thoughts...
On a whim I looked at some YouTube footage of Tate today. Granted these were all highlights but what I saw was a back who runs behind his pads, good vision, the one cut ability that is valued highly with zone blocking. He also displays good balance and decent speed, defenders had to really pedal to catch him from behind. He is adept at running inside and surprisingly outside as well. The highlights included very little footage of him catching the ball but he did that also. He brings a lot of ability to the position. I could see why the Browns were interested in him. Although I continue to have my concerns about injury, all backs have that risk. From what we're hearing the contract is structured to address that concern.
Taking another back at some point in the draft would reduce that concern for me. In spite of his documented character issues that back, for me, would be Isaiah Crowell. I think he is as talented as Tate possibly more so. Crowell in round 5, that would be tremendous value.
Last edited by guard dawg; 03/16/14 02:58 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
Let me preface this by saying that I spend a lot of time watching OG prospects play. I think I watched at least 2-3 games of every top 10-15 OG in this draft against the best opposition they faced.
That said, I came away absolutely not wanting XSF. I know he played OT in the games I watched, which makes him even more of a projection. He's also older then your AVG prospect, so he probably had a strength advantage.
I saw him get beat in pass pro way too often to want him. He was very inconsistent and was repeatedly beat by the Stanford prospects and it wasn't even Murphy he went against (I think Gardner or Mauro). I really fail to see how this dude is considered the best OG of this class. It's shocking to me. Maybe it's his Hawaiian cool name combined with prototypcial Sumo comparisons? Idk, but I knwo what I saw and he was FAR from the best OG I saw on tape.
Yankey was a little better overall and he's a terrific pull OG, but he too got beat too often at the LOS and that's more important to me than pulling, ZBS or not.
I do fear we might target one of these guys and really hope we don't waste a pick on them, as I really fail to see how they are better bets than some of the mid round OGs. It would be really bad value selecting them at 26 or 35 or anywhere in the top 50 picks imho.
Speaking of: I saw guys like Steen, G.Jackson and B.Thomas play at a much more consistent level than thos two "top" OGs and to me OL play is ALL about consistency first. That's what the Steelers don't get. They keep drafting OL players who "flash" elite skills but have always been inconsistent and as a result, they OL still is crap. Their best OL is a former UDFA with little talent but he's very consistent (R.Foster).
To me XSF and Yankey are those kind of "flash" OL. They have some wow plays to dream big on, but I'd rather take an "ugly" technichian guy like Steen, who does his job play by play without ever dominating. Of course the scouts' "fear" there is that he won't get away with that in the NFL, but reality is that he played a lot of NFL talent at Bama. I saw him dominate any LSU DL (Ferguson I think) that was lined up across him, so that really should not be an issue.
Of the top 50 OL I really, really love Z.Martin and would not hesitate taking him at 26, but he won't get there. I would even be ok with an uptrade (if not too expensive) to get him if he falls past 15 somehow. He combines consistency with versatility and high upside. He's a day 1 plug and play LG who can play RT too and maybe even LT again down the road. Reminds me of Cincy's Whitworth, who was considered a LG/RT guy too and now plays LT after starting off at LG, then RT (iirc).
Now RG is tricky....there really aren't many around. I really like Trai Turner for that role in the mid rounds. He probably is not day one ready but he can be a dominant RG and has very good athleticism for a ZBS combined with the run blocking strength asked of a RG.
Then there's the one dimensional RG version in Cyril Richardson. He had a terrible offseason with bad press in his SR Bowl practices in pass pro. He's over-hated right now and might be a good value in the 4th, but he's more the mauler type RG and might be a questionable RG fit.
So, even if we ignore OG for the top 3 rounds, we would still be able to land starting caliber prospects in the 4th/5th with guys like LG/C Steen and RG T.Turner. Those two guys represent the best draft day "bang for buck" imho
#gmstrong
"Players come along at different points in time" - Ray Farmer
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 |
Solid post and I am sure you have studied the guard/tackles more than I have.
I have a question for you. Wouldn't Sua Filo's deficiencies make him a better guard prospect than a tackle?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
we got a good solid player with Tate . Let's hope he stays healthy because he can be a top 5 or 6 back in this league. I feel that in the draft we should take BPA especially at our positions of need. As far as QB I don't feel any are worth a top 10 pick with the exception of TB. JMHO.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,341
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,341 |
Quote:
with guys like LG/C Steen
Not that I didn't think the rest of your post was informative and solid, but I found this the most intriguing of it.
With Mack seemingly on a possible one year lease, wouldn't it make sense to try to get a guy like this? Maybe he becomes a solid fill-in for now elsewhere on the line and next year steps in the C position. Would help bide time and allow for the FO to "re-address" the need next year....
If so, I'm all for it. Thanks for the post! 
#gmstrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
Quote:
I have a question for you. Wouldn't Sua Filo's deficiencies make him a better guard prospect than a tackle?
Absolutely, but the question becomes: why draft a guy top 50 that you project "to be better" at OG? It's not even a sure thing. There are other conversion candidates that simply have been more consistent at OT to begin with like Z.Martin, B.Thomas or Mewhort. I view them as "better, safer" bets, minimizing the investment with similar, if not better, odds at success. I say "better" because thos guys showed better at OT than XSF, so my conclusion would be that the "projection" to OG has better odds too. I hope that does make sense.
I don't hate XSF the player, he is absolutely draftable and has strengths to work with. I just don't see the value where he is currently slotted by most.
I also have to admit, that I tend to prefer "finesse" OL over the mauling types, although there is a fine line from finesse to lazy/not physcial, but in general I just want to see the OL execute his assignement or at worst not get beat. Getting beat is a no-no for me for OL and I have a feeling that those mauling types get beat badly more often. Those are the plays that get your QB on IR or sack-fumbles, INTs, big plays of all kinds imho
We've seen this last draft too. 3rd rounder Warford clearly outperformed top 10 pick Warmack, so it wouldn't be the first time this happens...and even if their play was equal, who was the better value? Lions aced the draft last year by going high value positions in rounds 1+2 (DE and CB) and THEN grab value at OG. Warford was the 4th OG taken and you don't get to draft the 4th best DE or CB in round 3, so they maximized their picks by getting 3xtop5 talent at their position. That's smart value drafting.
I keep hammering that interior OL value in almost any draft is in the mid rounds. If you draft the perceived "top OG" early you're left with scraps or boom/bust "gambles" at higher value positions with the following picks. It's bad drafting and the reason I was so harsh about the 2009 draft, where we did exactly that and I don't want to see us repeat the same mistake again.
#gmstrong
"Players come along at different points in time" - Ray Farmer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Getting back on topic. I love this FA signing of Ben Tate. If the contract is true, we have a steal. It covers us (The Browns) if he gets injured, yet the base salary is very cheap. Ben seems to have a chip on his shoulder, which I love, he wants to prove RBs are not an extinct species.
Regarding the OL, I say draft a 3rd round guard. I say this because IMO we don't know what we have in our current OL. It seems fine with pass protection, but how can you judge gap/run with the last two RB we have had (Richardson and McGahee). IMO OL is not a 1st or 2nd round need.
Draft a 3rd round guard, for depth and in case Mack leaves next year.
Btw should we open another thread to talk about the OL?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
Quote:
Quote:
with guys like LG/C Steen
Not that I didn't think the rest of your post was informative and solid, but I found this the most intriguing of it.
With Mack seemingly on a possible one year lease, wouldn't it make sense to try to get a guy like this? Maybe he becomes a solid fill-in for now elsewhere on the line and next year steps in the C position. Would help bide time and allow for the FO to "re-address" the need next year....
If so, I'm all for it. Thanks for the post!
Yes, Steen would be the perfect player for this scenario. He is a pure LG/C, although he played RG at Bama and many scouts project him to be best at C and it's easy to see why. He's VERY smart, understands angles, recognizes quickly how to handle what his opponent tries to do and adjusts. He just gets it. The kind of OL you win with.
He is de-valued because of scheme one dimensionality. Power blocking schemes may not even have him on their board or much later
#gmstrong
"Players come along at different points in time" - Ray Farmer
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 |
Alright. Good information. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,317
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,317 |
As with really good real-time conversations you start talking about one thing and it morphs into another. Not a criticism, just an observation.  About OL. Curious on other posters evaluation of the following as it relates to a possible fit for Shananhan's zone blocking scheme (ZBS)? Please include your projection of possible draft position. Brandon Thomas Dakota Dozier Cyril Richardson Trai Turner Chris Watt Jon Halapio Joel Bitonio Michael Scholfield Wesely Johnson By the way, given the uncertainty of the Alex Mack situation I'd draft a Center and move on. Martin Richburg Swanson Stork
Last edited by guard dawg; 03/16/14 06:10 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,720
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,720 |
Quote:
6 - Back up G/T Garret Gilkey
7 - Back up G/T - Chris Faulk - Has poetntail to be a starter if fully recovered from injry
Actually I believe neither of these two fit the zone blocking scheme. I feel they lack the athleticism it takes nor have the footwork to be effective in that scheme.
That's why I was hoping to at least garner one solid FA signing that fits our scheme. As it stands, I certainly hope we can land some FA back-up at the position.
But I did agree with you on the two picks of either David Yankey or Sua-Filo.
I do believe that one of either Gilkey or Faulk will be kept as depth at the T position though unless we find some other upgrade.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Browns sign Ben Tate.
|
|
