How likely, now, do you'all think it is, that the Browns trade down from #2?
-
Prolly going to take jason spriggs with our 2nd or 3rd. Analytics say he will be about as good as joe thomas
-
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?
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."
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.
-
Prolly going to take jason spriggs with our 2nd or 3rd. Analytics say he will be about as good as joe thomas
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.
-
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.
-
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.
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/
-
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.
-
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.
-
Some people got it and some people moped haha.
-
-
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.....
-
A cursory glance at Google leaves nothing to the imagination. They have been open about it being a rebuild from the start.
-
Trading down has always been a possibility depending on how strong they feel everyone in the draft is. If they feel anyone in the draft is worth the number 2 pick and they want them bad enough, they will take it but if they don't think anyone is worth the value of a number 2 pick in the draft, they will try to trade down.
-
What will we get for Sashi ?
-
They did communicate it, did they not?
Well they may have TRIED to communicate it, but I was not aware we were just going to let those 4 top FAs walk because SB communicated the opposite about how important it was to retain our own just before the FA door opened. That in my mind is miscommunication. There should have been either a qualified statement or none at all from SB.
-
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.
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."
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.
Well after 2 runs at quick fixes, I'd say a different approach was in order.
The trade down/accumulate picks approach is pure Belichick... enable casting of a wider net for the 2nd tier players.
Allows the kind of draft decisions made when the Pats took Edelman (IIRC), who Bill B. told when he called him on his draft day, "We don't know how we are going to use you yet, but you're a helluva football player."
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....
Personally....I like the theory.....
And that was clear from his first HC gig... Three years flirting with .500 before a breakout year. All enabled in part by going after an unpopular QB acquisition.
Also coincidentally he inherited a 3-13 team from Carson/Shofner.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login