Marcus Mariotta?

miktoxic

@tim-couch-pulls-out said:

Are they? They are needs for sure, but "far,far" greater than that of QB? What's the most important piece to have to be a playoff team?

My personal stance is that we need a QB more than we need a DT, however I'm not sure how I feel about Mariota or Winston being that guy. I'd personally love for one of them to be the guy, but that's neither here nor there. There's been a few arguments rolling around about who to take, when to take them, and what's more important, so I just compiled something during my lunch break to show both sides.

(Keep in mind, the following isn't an argument about draft position, it's purely about what is more of a need for the Cleveland Browns in today's NFL. )

Argument #1: You don't need to invest heavily in a defensive line for it to be good.

The top 5 defensive lines last season (against the run) were Detroit, Denver, St. Louis, Buffalo, and Seattle.

Detroit has three first round picks(#2, #5, #13 )and a second rounder (#54) along their defensive line. (ADP= 18.5)

Denver has two first round picks (#11, #28), a second round pick (#36) and a third round pick (#72) on their defensive line. (ADP = 46.5)

St. Louis has four first round picks (#2, #13, #13, #14) along their defensive line. (ADP 10.75)

Buffalo had three first round picks (#1, #3, #31) and a fifth round pick (#134) on their defensive line (ADP= 42.25)

Seattle had one first round pick (#9), one third round pick (#72) and two undrafted players on their defensive line. (ADP=153.75)

It's clear that, in order to have an elite defensive line, it helps to invest heavily in it...as evidenced by the fact that most of the top 5 have multiple, if not all, of their positions filled by first round talent.

Seattle, the only team in the top 5 to make it to their conference championship (and, by extension, the Super Bowl), has only one first round player along their defensive front. So, while investing heavily in your defensive line is clearly a good way to make it "elite", it's not the only way.

The Browns clearly don't have many highly drafted players across their defensive line. Assuming Rubin returns, which isn't going to happen, that still only leaves Cleveland with one first-round player, two sixth-round players, and one undrafted player across a four-man front. That's why, as most analysts have been saying, Cleveland's biggest hole is likely DT.

Average top-5 defensive line ADP: 54.35

What the Cleveland Browns currently have: 168

Differential= 113.65

Conclusion: Busted. The top defensive lines are mostly composed of solid first and second round talent.

Argument #2: You don't need an elite defensive line to win a Super Bowl

The defensive line rankings of all playoff teams (against run, then pass, then averaged):

Patriots (18th, 19th, 19th)

Broncos (2nd, 23rd, 12th)

Steelers (20th, 20th, 20th)

Colts (22nd, 9th, 16th)

Bengals (27th, 31st, 29th)

Ravens (7th, 5th , 6th)

Seahawks (5th, 14th, 10th)

Packers (26th, 13th, 20th)

Cowboys (17th, 29th, 18th)

Panthers (10th, 7th, 9th)

Cardinals (6th, 28th, 17th)

Lions (1st, 18th, 10th)

Average (run, pass): 13th, 23rd

Overall average: 18th

*bolded teams are teams that made it to their respective conference championships.

It doesn't seem like a truly dominant defensive line is something that any of the top playoff teams had last season. Playoff teams averaged together had the 13th ranked defensive line in rushing and 23rd in passing. Overall, playoff teams had the 18th ranked defensive lines.

Further, the top defensive lines didn't necessarily result in top playoff performances. For example, Detroit and Denver, who finished #1 and #2 in defensive line production last year, respectively, of course did not have favorably playoff performances.

Cleveland's defensive line performance last year was less-than-stellar, to say the least. Some can be attributed to injuries, sure. However, there is an argument to be had that there simply isn't enough talent. Rubin is likely gone and that leaves a 350 pound hole to be filled (and I'm not talking about Ghoolie's mom).

Average playoff team defensive line performance (run, pass, overall): (13th, 23rd, 18th)

Cleveland Browns 2014 performance: (29th, 25th, 27th)

Conclusion: Based off of last season, true. Basically none of the "premier" (read: full of first round picks + top performing) defensive lines made it very far in the playoffs, with Detroit losing immediately and Denver losing in the divisional round. St. Louis, obviously, didn't even make to the playoffs. Seattle, the 5th ranked defensive line, of course made it to the Super Bowl.

Argument #3: Good teams have good quarterbacks.

The QB rankings of all playoff teams:

Patriots (10th)

Broncos (4th)

Steelers (T-1st)

Colts (3rd)

Bengals (16th)

Ravens (12th)

Seahawks (15th)

Packers (7th)

Cowboys (14th)

Panthers (21st)

Cardinals (31st)

Lions (9th)

Average: 11th

Nearly all of the playoff teams had solid to exceptional play from their quarterbacks, with the exception of Arizona. Six of the 12 playoff teams (50%) had top-10 QB play. Nine of the 12 teams (75%) had QB play better than league average.

Average playoff QB rank: 11th

Cleveland Browns QB rank: Hoyer - 18th, McCown - 28th, Manziel - 55th (I included both Hoyer and McCown just to show the difference in their performances last season.)

Conclusion: QB play is very important to the success of a team, obviously. Hoyer has been the best, and most stable, Browns QB since 1999 and he was still significantly worse than the average NFL playoff QB in 2014.

Argument #4: You have to invest in franchise quarterbacks.

Patriots (6th round pick)

Broncos (1st round pick - acquired through FA)

Steelers (1st round pick)

Colts (1st round pick)

Bengals (2nd round pick)

Ravens (1st round pick)

Seahawks (3rd round pick)

Packers (1st round pick)

Cowboys (undrafted)

Panthers (1st round pick)

Cardinals (2nd round pick - acquired through FA)

Lions (1st round pick)

More than half of the teams in the playoffs (59%) had first round quarterbacks. Nine of them (75%) had a quarterback taken in the first two rounds. Nearly every playoff team (83%) had a quarterback they drafted.

Conclusion: While there are different ways to skin a cat, there has to be one way that's proven to be more effective than the rest. In this case, that's taking a QB in the first round. The biggest thing to acknowledge here is that taking a first round QB doesn't automatically guarantee success, especially when he's slotted for a later draft round (I'm looking at you, Brandon Weeden). It would be nice to find a Tom Brady or a Russell Wilson, but that isn't something you plan for. If there is a guy there that you believe possesses the tool set to turn your franchise around, you take him. You don't balk simply because you've fucked up in the past.

Both positions (DT, QB) are clearly needs, for sure. And, at the end of the day, I'll be happy as long as we address both positions. Personally, I'm of the opinion that it's much harder to win a Super Bowl with first round talent at every position and shit at QB than it is the other way around, but Brad Johnson and Tim Couch do like to prove me wrong on that front.

yo,i think flugel ran away.

you scared him with a 5+ paragraph retort.

Tim Couch Pulls Out

@tour2ma said:

No.... that's our job.

Good effort, but there are many ways to succeed. It's just that none include bad players in key roles.

ADP = average draft position?

Or they will be forced to lower their price...

It does not look to me that the price is being driven by the need to make it worth it for TN to hand over the pick. The price will be driven by what it takes to get them to give the pick to you vs. the "other guy". Same scenario in which StL found itself in '011.

In an auction it only take to determined bidders to drive the price up.

True, and there are very few teams with the summon took that we have right now. Offering solely draft picks, Philly can't compare with us.

We're in the driver's seat. If TN wants to set the bar at 3 firsts + a second...walk away. However, there aren't other teams who have the same draft ammo we have this year.

tiamat63

What I read when the average performance from a playoff team at QB ranks as #11 - you need a sound team with few holes or weaknesses and a slightly above average QB to challenge for a Super Bowl.

Sounds about what the Browns are shooting for here. Minus McCown being a slightly above average QB.

Fact is, in a draft as such - Shelton takes premise over MM. Again, if there was that sure - fire, can't miss QB ... I'll trade my entire draft and then some.

If an Andrew Luck clone pops up next year, whatever franchise has the #1 pick, I'd offer my whole draft, the following years 1st, The Jake, The Gund and Lebrons first son.

Westside Steve

of course there's no way to prove this but I would venture a guess that if you traded the top 10 quarterbacks for the bottom 10 quarterbacks the teams at the top would not be quite as good as they were before but those bottom 10 quarterbacks would have better ratings then they had with their bottom 10 teams.

WSS

tiamat63

@westside-steve said:

of course there's no way to prove this but I would venture a guess that if you traded the top 10 quarterbacks for the bottom 10 quarterbacks the teams at the top would not be quite as good as they were before but those bottom 10 quarterbacks would have better ratings then they had with their bottom 10 teams.

WSS

Replace shitty players with good players? That.... might have some merit.

Westside Steve

@tiamat63 said:

Replace shitty players with good players? That.... might have some merit.

Well that's not quite The point as I'm sure you know.

I'm saying Josh McCown on the Patriots would mean the Patriots would suffer but McCown's record would be better.

WSS

tiamat63

@westside-steve said:

Well that's not quite The point as I'm sure you know.

I'm saying Josh McCown on the Patriots would mean the Patriots would suffer but McCown's record would be better.

WSS

I know, bud. Just having a bit of sarcastic fun this morning.

Westside Steve

~nevermind~

Tim Couch Pulls Out

@westside-steve said:

Well that's not quite The point as I'm sure you know.

I'm saying Josh McCown on the Patriots would mean the Patriots would suffer but McCown's record would be better.

WSS

For sure there is some talent transfer. But, in my opinion, there's a ceiling on that. There's not one QB who can turn Syndric Steptoe into Randy Moss just like there's not one WR who could turn Bruce Gradkowski into Peyton Manning.

Again, it's a numbers game. Surround any QB with 10 talented offensive players and 11 talented defensive players and he'll reach his ceiling. That's obvious. But, one, that's hard to accomplish and two, there's often not enough time...especially in Cleveland. People are already calling for Pettine and Farmer's heads and then turned a 4-win team into a 7-win team in one season. Granted, those people are stupid, but enough stupid people being stupid together can influence big, stupid change.

Another problem is that, at some point, you're reaching a point of saturation when you're adding talent to an already talented group. Adding a first round pick to our offensive line this year isn't probably going to result in as much of an overall performance upgrade as adding a first round pick to our defensive line would. That's because, as a unit, our offensive line is just better than our defensive line.

Our biggest talent/production deficits are at DL and QB. Right now, we don't have a quarterback on our roster who was ranked in the top 20 last year. Our defensive line, on a similar note, finished 2014 among the worst 12 defensive lines in the league. That's what we have to address first. Not offensive line, not WR. QB and DL. Unfortunately, we won't be able to address both in the first round this year, so it's just about deciding who adds a greater overall upgrade to the team. In my opinion, that's the QB. Like Farmer said, you look for the guy who is directly involved in more plays.

If money were no object and we weren't the Cleveland Browns:

-Sign Suh (Top DL)

-Sign Cobb (Top FA WR)

-Trade 12, 19, and next years #1 for Mariota (One of the top QB's)

-Take Bernardick McKinney in the second (One of the top ILB's)

-Draft Lorenzo Mauldin in the third (solid pass rushing OLB)

In a more realistic world:

- Sign Terrance Knighton

- Sign Brian Hartline

- Draft Malcom Brown at #12

- Draft Andrus Peat at #19

- Draft Bryce Petty in the second

Bryce Petty could be this year's Derek Carr - a guy with all of the athletic talent in the world, coming from a questionable system, overshadowed by the bigger quarterbacks in the draft.

JAFBF

Peter King on Mariota :

http://mmqb.si.com/2015/03/04/2015-draft-marcus-mariota-oregon-scott-frost/

Confirms my biggest observation, that his Receivers are always wide ass open, thus the high numbers and completion %.

Winston in the best QB this year, and he's got too many off field issues.

Mariota just doesn't show me NFL potential.

The Cysko Kid

I have little interest in Mariota

Westside Steve

And that is logical TC. And we are comparing the top 10 switched with the bottom 10. I would think that switching the middle 10 with the top 10 would be more telling. I mean of course replace a great quarterback with a terrible one is a lot different then replacing a great quarterback with a decent one. if it were a perfect world I would be on board 100% with your first scenario. I just, as should we all, look back over the years and see how many quarterbacks were projected as future Hall of Famers but never lived up to the hype. I always plan to make my predictions, like Hoorta who brags that he predicted Johnny would suck, by saying that every quarterback taken in the first round and especially everyone who wins the Heisman Trophy will suck. or at least fall far short of expectations. I mean make a blanket statement and you are going to win the vast majority of the time.

>>and if we sell the pocket watch in order to buy the pearl studded combs<<<

But regardless of the greatness of the quarterback receiver combination they need to be in sync. I think these guys just get used to the rhythms that each other naturally exhibit. like playing with the same musicians for a long time. they might not all be virtuosos but you get a feel for each other.

WSS

hoorta

@tim-couch-pulls-out said:

Why do you think it's unlikely? Outside of the logical "it costs too much to get him", there are many signs that point toward them possibly taking a shot.

EDIT: Here's a decent article (unfortunately, it's an MKC production) http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2015/02/oregons_marcus_mariota_nfl_com.html

That's exactly it TC.

@jafbf said:

Three #1's + a #2 . . . and maybe more - so that's #12, #19, and #43 this year, and then the #1 from next year.

That's the word on the street price to tag the #2 from the Titans.

Now add in the Heisman performances in the NFL :

http://www.nfl.com/photoessays/0ap2000000297440

Whaddya think ?

The RG III deal set the bar- and look where that got the Redskins. You look at the draft value chart- where the Browns sit it will take at least both firsts this year plus a first next year to move to #2. I see Mariotta as a taller version of Manziel, without the off-field issues, and same on field questions.

@tim-couch-pulls-out said:

True, and there are very few teams with the summon took that we have right now. Offering solely draft picks, Philly can't compare with us.

We're in the driver's seat. If TN wants to set the bar at 3 firsts + a second...walk away. However, there aren't other teams who have the same draft ammo we have this year.

Just because we have the ammo doesn't mean we should use it. Every report I've read declares MM to not be NFL ready. Andrew Luck he isn't-

Tim Couch Pulls Out

@hoorta said:

That's exactly it TC.

The RG III deal set the bar- and look where that got the Redskins. You look at the draft value chart- where the Browns sit it will take at least both firsts this year plus a first next year to move to #2. I see Mariotta as a taller version of Manziel, without the off-field issues, and same on field questions.

Just because we have the ammo doesn't mean we should use it. Every report I've read declares MM to not be NFL ready. Andrew Luck he isn't-

I get it, and I'm right there with you. I think three firsts is way too much to trade to move up 8-10 spots. However, I'd gladly give up both firsts and a second.

The thing is, if he were Andrew Luck, he wouldn't be available to anyone. The adage flying around here is that "[insert name here] isn't Andrew Luck, so I don't want him", but I bet most people here would trade both of our firsts this year for Wilson, or Flacco, or Newton. Hell, there's trade scenarios about us trading both of our firsts for Foles.

Aaron Rodgers wasn't Andrew Luck. Joe Flacco wasn't Andrew Luck. Ben Roethlisberger wasn't Andrew Luck. All of them had those, "yeah, he'd be perfect except for..." qualities. For Rodgers it was the system, for Flacco and Roethlisberger it was the competition. But teams took a chance on them and it paid off, to great fortune.

Fact is, there are very few college QB's who are "NFL ready". To me, NFL ready is akin to being a "Luck-type prospect". That talent is rare. Maybe once every 4 years. You just have to weigh the risks against the talents. I think Mariota's potential far outweighs his floor.

And, out of all of those reports that say he isn't "NFL ready", how many then go on to say that he has all of the tools to be a franchise NFL QB, he just needs to develop? And isn't that what McCown is here for?

In the most general of comparisons, I think Mariota compares very favorably to Rodgers in that they both are tall, athletic quarterbacks who come from a questionable system and took a majority of their snaps from shotgun. Tony Dungy also made this comparison.

Jim Mora- "He has everything you want to play at the next level...he's gonna be a great, great, great player."

Rob Rang - "Some might write Mariota off due to the offense he runs, but his skill-set projects well to the next level because he's a smart, confident passer who is just scratching the surface of what he can do."

Gil Brandt - "Mariota is a better long-term prospect than Jameis Winston."

Lumbergh

Now that the Browns hired mccown they won't be drafting a qb anyway.

Flugel

@miktoxic said:

yo,i think flugel ran away.

you scared him with a 5+ paragraph retort.

God bless ya Toxic! Just a couple clarifications:

1) The only time this old man ever runs is when the Warden breaks out her to do list. Don't get me wrong, I love exercise - I could watch it all day.

2) "Scared" doesn't apply to any fans here that had to bear witness to the following rent-a-wrecks at QB: Mike Phipps,Todd Philcox and Paul McDonald. On some franchises, Hail Mary Pass can mean as little as surviving the snap or playaction without playing Santa Claus to the opponent UNTIL the throw. And that ain't good....

Flugel

@tiamat63 said:

What I read when the average performance from a playoff team at QB ranks as #11 - you need a sound team with few holes or weaknesses and a slightly above average QB to challenge for a Super Bowl.

Sounds about what the Browns are shooting for here. Minus McCown being a slightly above average QB.

Fact is, in a draft as such - Shelton takes premise over MM. Again, if there was that sure - fire, can't miss QB ... I'll trade my entire draft and then some.

If an Andrew Luck clone pops up next year, whatever franchise has the #1 pick, I'd offer my whole draft, the following years 1st, The Jake, The Gund and Lebrons first son.

Well said!

Limited supply to a BIG demand at QB has been a huge part of our problem over the years. On the other hand, there's been years we had Donovan McNabb, Aaron Rodgers, Ben Riden&Rapen, Nick Foles, Russell Wilson, Tom Brady on our doorstep. I got the impression many of these guys were so far down on the priority list that our front office sent our cleaning staff to evaluate their workouts. The other part is we haven't always made this an easy place to come play QB for vets or inexperienced QBs...

As fans, it's okay for us to peg QB prospects wrong and bust chops about it after. As a front office well paid to research the horses they're betting on - the willingness to understand a Russell Wilson, Donovan McNabb or others mentioned is what separates the teams that will go places from the ones that never do. Try to imagine if we already had Russell Wilson or Nick Foles instead toilet papering a #22 overall that currently reads defenses like you'd expect Helen Keller to. Who gives a rat about arm strength if it comes from deaf, dumb and blind in the pocket?

Take McNabb for instance. The mock draft consensus all over the country (inclusive of this blowhard) said Tim Couch #1 regardless of the reality his only playbook at UK was huddle dirt. However, it was often said George DeLeone's Veer Option offense up at Syracuse was too unconventional to trust at the NFL level for a QB prospect. It only made sense that one of Favre's former offensive coaches (Andy Reid) remembered the offense at So Miss was very similar to the one McNabb came out of. Coming out of high school, Favre was more known for his rushing yardage surpassing 3000 yards than winning via his arm. While our higher ups were debating Akili Smith and Tim Couch in the 99 draft - McNabb went to the NFL team coming off the worst record. While all the brotherly love in Philly cried in their beers about the cruelty of no Ricky Williams, McNabb ended up leading them to the playoffs something like 9 out of his first 10 seasons, with 5 NFC Championship Game appearances and 1 Superbowl. Meanwhile the journey of Ricky Williams included a sabbatical leave from the NFL for marijuana while Philly would end up drafting a much better all purpose RB out of Villanova (Brian Westbrook) a few years later.

Flugel

@hoorta said:

That's exactly it TC.

The RG III deal set the bar- and look where that got the Redskins. You look at the draft value chart- where the Browns sit it will take at least both firsts this year plus a first next year to move to #2. I see Mariotta as a taller version of Manziel, without the off-field issues, and same on field questions.

Just because we have the ammo doesn't mean we should use it. Every report I've read declares MM to not be NFL ready. Andrew Luck he isn't-

RG3 got so drastically outplayed by Colt McCoy in 2014 that the only reason he is being named the starter in 2015 is the wounded ego of a man that once invested 100 million $ on the empty inner chest of Albert Haynesworth desperately wants to get 1 big investment. In the last couple of years, RG3 threw teammates under the bus when protection wasn't up to snuff. Well, wasn't he the guy that said he was GLAD to be going to Washington instead of Cleveland? Be careful what you wish for you football messiah you... The NFL plays a little more defense than that barn ball conference he came out of.

As for MM, I don't have extensive observation of him. I saw the beginning of the Pac 12 Championship where he missed 2 different give-me swing passes to RBs, which wasn't about to matter on the scoreboard for the more talented team. I also couldn't help but noticing that in the few games I saw him play the last 2 years - MM was MORE comfortable trying to run for TDs than throw for them inside the red zone. I never got the impression I was looking at the next Steve Young, who might have gone down as an epic bust if he never got the opportunity to get out of NFL hell in Tampa for a dynasty already in progress. There's other mechanical flaws like overstriding and things that may or may not be correctable at the next level. He's also used to multiple choice of mismatches to exploit all over the perimeter which can be a culture shock if he goes to a crappy team hoping to find 1 mismatch on any given pass play behind a line with suspect protection.

It might be fun to see what a Chip Kelly can get out of MM. He's the one NFL HC with the gonads under the acorn to get his team up to the line of scrimmage with his QB looking to the sidelines at the exact same pace he did this at Oregon. All it takes is 1 pioneer for the next trend to follow. The less than charming supply and demand of veteran FA QBs, should give some team in despair with their QB situation an escalated need to try to trade for a guy like Nick Foles. Is there a chance Kelly made the trade for Alonso to intrigue a defense looking for an absolute playmaker in their LBer Corps in a 34 D? If MM is Kelly's dream rather than his poker face, I can see him adding Alonso to Foles to get the #2 overall pick or future #1s. The only bad thing for MM is if he's already overthrowing RBs taller than Sproles - that's going to have to get corrected real quick.

There isn't any QBs in this draft that thrill me so I'd like us to continue striving to make this an easier place to play QB. Before the last draft, most of us we're looking forward to building the team around weapons like Gordon and Cameron. Mission accomplished as our running game improved considerably especially when our oline was 100% healthy. This year, we'll have opportunities to strengthen our WR in the draft and it may not even have to happen as early as round 1.

LogicIsForSquares

Flug, I hope you never have to warn someone about an oncoming truck.

"Sir, may I speak to you about a pressing matter that may be dange..." *splat*

Flugel

@logicisforsquares said:

Flug, I hope you never have to warn someone about an oncoming truck.

"Sir, may I speak to you about a pressing matter that may be dange..." *splat*

That's freakin funny! Sorry folks, I thought this 5 hour energy drink was suppose to pace itself over 5 hours. Man was I wrong!