Skip to content
The Browns Board
  1. Home
  2. The Browns Board
  3. How likely, now, do you'all think it is, that the Browns trade down from #2?

How likely, now, do you'all think it is, that the Browns trade down from #2?

The Browns Board
96 28 3.4k
  • LogicIsForSquaresL LogicIsForSquares

    Erving will step right in and replace Mack. I believe in him.

    /mommairving

    @logicisforsquares said:

    Erving will step right in and replace Mack. I believe in him.

    /mommairving

    HA!....Ive been with you all the way......until now.....😉

  • I would like to see Wisnewski brought in or, worst case, a rookie takes the job.

  • MudflyM Mudfly

    Interesting how we are getting slammed for having a bad day...yet Denver and the horse face are getting articles of praise for standing pat and "not signing" players who dont want to be there.....and the players they let walk are actually good.....weird eh?

    @mudfly said:

    Interesting how we are getting slammed for having a bad day...yet Denver and the horse face are getting articles of praise for standing pat and "not signing" players who dont want to be there.....and the players they let walk are actually good.....weird eh?

    Well sure- the Donkeys just won the SB- so what if they currently don't have a QB who's worth a damn?

    The difference? They won't have to overpay to attract talent.

  • MudflyM Mudfly

    @texasag1969 said:

    Maybe if they had negotiated better before open season then those things would not be happening now.

    or....maybe the players just wouldnt sign because they wanted more $ or just to leave....considering Mack and Schwartz signed for less than we offered, Id say thats the more likely scenario......and Benji has been "negotiating for 5 months now, with BOTH FO's, yet didnt sign.....5 months.....and Gipson?....you think he's a $7 million safety?.....seriously?....

    @mudfly said:

    or....maybe the players just wouldnt sign because they wanted more $ or just to leave....considering Mack and Schwartz signed for less than we offered, Id say thats the more likely scenario

    I was unaware that the guaranteed money the Browns offered was public knowledge. The overall value of a contract might have been higher but I'm guessing the most important part "guaranteed money" might have been less. Then again one or both of them could have had enough of the Browns BS.

  • I'm usually a fan of trading down. The draft is a crapshoot and the more times you can roll the dice the better chance you have for a winner.

    We have more glaring holes today and we did 2 days ago and logically if you get two or three guys in the draft that can even play in the league you are lucky.

    WSS

    www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons

  • Prolly going to take jason spriggs with our 2nd or 3rd. Analytics say he will be about as good as joe thomas

    T 1 Reply
  • MudflyM Mudfly

    Interesting how we are getting slammed for having a bad day...yet Denver and the horse face are getting articles of praise for standing pat and "not signing" players who dont want to be there.....and the players they let walk are actually good.....weird eh?

    @mudfly said:

    Interesting how we are getting slammed for having a bad day...yet Denver and the horse face are getting articles of praise for standing pat and "not signing" players who dont want to be there.....and the players they let walk are actually good.....weird eh?

    Nah... not weird... just consistent with the narative of "Broncos genius; Browns bad."

    @cainedesoulis said:

    Prolly going to take jason spriggs with our 2nd or 3rd. Analytics say he will be about as good as joe thomas

    Don't know about Joe, but certainly has a shot of equally Mitch with a lil' seasoning.

    Unfortunately that's why he now appears to be headed into the bottom half of the 1st round.

    "When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196
  • C CaineDeSoulis

    Prolly going to take jason spriggs with our 2nd or 3rd. Analytics say he will be about as good as joe thomas

    @cainedesoulis said:

    Prolly going to take jason spriggs with our 2nd or 3rd. Analytics say he will be about as good as joe thomas

    Springs won't be there @3, so it's 2 or not at all.

  • Wentz's left tackle could easily be there in the third...top of the fourth.... if you read up on

    both players, there isn't that much difference in their physical abilities, imho.

  • Haeg ain't bad, cal, but if you watch a little of both, you'll see a difference.

    "When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196

  • I'm not good at scouting, so... lol

    I'm going more on cost-effectiveness. The cost of drafting Spriggs would be higher,

    as in, top of the second at latest, than drafting Haeg in the third. I don't think he'll be there

    in the fourth... we're talking RT anyways. I think Haeg has quicker feet...

    crap. Now I'll have to go watch their tapes. Dammit, Tour. 😡

  • C calfoxwc

    I'm not good at scouting, so... lol

    I'm going more on cost-effectiveness. The cost of drafting Spriggs would be higher,

    as in, top of the second at latest, than drafting Haeg in the third. I don't think he'll be there

    in the fourth... we're talking RT anyways. I think Haeg has quicker feet...

    crap. Now I'll have to go watch their tapes. Dammit, Tour. 😡

    @calfoxwc said:

    crap. Now I'll have to go watch their tapes. Dammit, Tour. 😡

    lol... in that case the least I can do is recommend one, 2015 tape each that demos their difference...

    For Spriggs watch FIU... good early season form... http://draftbreakdown.com/video/jason-spriggs-vs-fiu-2015/

    For Haeg check out his Montana game... http://draftbreakdown.com/video/joe-haeg-vs-montana-2015/

    "When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196

  • Spriggs is rated higher, but he got beat on a spin move badly... fell down on a good block when

    the defender backed off...

    Haeg nearly gave up a sack on a bull rush. but saved it...

    hard to see the difference great enough to warrant the Browns picking Spriggs at 2, if he's there,

    and Haeg in the third, assuming he may be.

    The Patriots are seriously looking at Haeg... since obviously Spriggs would be gone.

    Not seeing enough difference, cost-effectively... but what do I know, I ain't no profesunul on this stuff.

  • They should have kept Mitchell Schwartz. He's the one we will miss. We get compensory picks for next year? Is that how it works? Next year we would have more leverage?

    DAMN THE TORPEDOES! FULL SPEED AHEAD!

  • I found these two interesting little tidbits within this article: http://www.cleveland.com/pluto/index.ssf/2016/03/cleveland_browns_are_all_about.html

    1. "The analytics school of football is all about adding picks. It's about not being afraid to lose veteran players to free agency. It's also about trading down far more often than trading up in the draft."

    2. "It's why new coach Hue Jackson mentioned at the NFL Combine that the Browns may not re-sign any of their free agents. It's also why I expect them to trade Joe Thomas and others as the draft approaches."

    The gist of the entire article is that they plan to build almost exclusively thru the draft and that it's more a very painful 5 year plan than a fix it in 2 plan.

    It would have been easier to take this week if they had communicated this to fans in advance rather than to look like more fodder for the Browns joke of the league team.

    Tour2maT 1 Reply

  • Some people got it and some people moped haha.

  • They did communicate it, did they not?

    LogicIsForSquaresL T 2 Replies
  • W wargograw

    They did communicate it, did they not?

    @wargograw said:

    They did communicate it, did they not?

    I thought they were pretty clear.

  • Ive mentioned this before....Makes me think about a Belichick interview I heard years ago, where he explained his theory on winning with middling players....which he has found a way to do....

    Basically, he said you have A players and F players, and B, C & D players......and, due to salary structures, for every A player, you'll end up with more Ds & F's to balance the scale......and, often, when your A goes down, you're stuck with a D or F playing...

    So, his objective is to load the roster with all B's and C's, who collectively are better than mixing A's and F's.....because there might not be superstars, but there are no big holes(which is more important).....and, quite often, some of those lesser players will surprise you and play like A's.......which we've seen over and over again with the Pats.....

    So.....reading about Depodesta's history and trying to understand some of what the FO is doing....perhaps they are going to try to get a little better balance on the roster, instead of hoping for one or two big splash players to carry the load.....

    Personally....I like the theory.....

    The GipperT 1 Reply

  • A cursory glance at Google leaves nothing to the imagination. They have been open about it being a rebuild from the start.

Log in to reply