Our 2016 Draft Class Game: Find the "Bust"
-
So if you get it maybe stop wasting your time questioning it in every other thread? We get it. You disagree with it.
I'll look at what I want to.
-
So if you get it maybe stop wasting your time questioning it in every other thread? We get it. You disagree with it.
I'll look at what I want to.
So if you get it maybe stop wasting your time questioning it in every other thread?
I'll look at what I want to.
And Ill post what I want...when I want....deal with it....
Not your job to patrol the boards and tell people what they can and cant post...just because we have differing opinions, does not make mine(or anybody elses) opinion less valid.....
Every other thread?.....hell, I barely post every other week anymore......stop being an arrogant puss and talk some football instead of playing forum opinion police....
-
I agree with Mud's post. We replaced most of the aging veterans with shit. I don't see how parkey is so much better than coons. I'm optimistic about all of the young guys we're bringing in, and in many ways i like the trade we've made with new england, but I want to win games now.
I'm sick of ESPN or commentators making fun of the browns. The talent on defense is lacking so much it's ridiculous. Coleman looks like he can be a stud and Ogbah and Nassib look good too. I found myself a bit puzzled we drafted so many WR's to find a "diamond in the rough", but I like the effort.
Hue looks like he can be a great coach with more talent.... The players seem to love him and Kessler has looked very good in my opinion.
i'm not (ALL-IN) in the analytics game yet, and I think it would be extremely naive if anyone says that they are. We've yet to see what this strategy can do, but looking for diamond in the roughs and saving Jimmy money shouldn't be the main focus next year, or years to come. I guess if we go 0-16 this year, then we're really setting the bar low for improvement, because if we win one game next year we'll already be progressing.
However, If we continue to trade down and stockpile picks (lets say we have #1 and trade down to #22 next year), I'll be furious and might start doubting jimmy's strategy.
We need playmakers.... people who make an instant difference. Ezekiel Elliot or Carson Wentz didn't need a year to sit and learn.... I don't give a shit if Shon Coleman is a nice guy..... If he sucks and undrafted free agents beat him out why the heck is he on the team? What type of message does that send? If we can trade or cut Kruger or Gilbert, why don't we do the same with Cam Erving.... Can't we all agree that they all suck? People who aren't even playing in the NFL are better than Cam, and I think if anyone thinks he'll be a pro bowl center they're out of their mind.
The positives - offense looks legit. Pryor, Coleman, Crow, Barnidge (hasn't played upto the bar this year).
Next year, lets get some beasts on defense and get a D like the seahawks, panthers or vikings.
last comment: I have no idea how Ray Farmer get jobs talking about football on T.V. after the draft with manziel, gilbert, and vincent mayle.....
-
I agree with Mud's post. We replaced most of the aging veterans with shit. I don't see how parkey is so much better than coons. I'm optimistic about all of the young guys we're bringing in, and in many ways i like the trade we've made with new england, but I want to win games now.
I'm sick of ESPN or commentators making fun of the browns. The talent on defense is lacking so much it's ridiculous. Coleman looks like he can be a stud and Ogbah and Nassib look good too. I found myself a bit puzzled we drafted so many WR's to find a "diamond in the rough", but I like the effort.
Hue looks like he can be a great coach with more talent.... The players seem to love him and Kessler has looked very good in my opinion.
i'm not (ALL-IN) in the analytics game yet, and I think it would be extremely naive if anyone says that they are. We've yet to see what this strategy can do, but looking for diamond in the roughs and saving Jimmy money shouldn't be the main focus next year, or years to come. I guess if we go 0-16 this year, then we're really setting the bar low for improvement, because if we win one game next year we'll already be progressing.
However, If we continue to trade down and stockpile picks (lets say we have #1 and trade down to #22 next year), I'll be furious and might start doubting jimmy's strategy.
We need playmakers.... people who make an instant difference. Ezekiel Elliot or Carson Wentz didn't need a year to sit and learn.... I don't give a shit if Shon Coleman is a nice guy..... If he sucks and undrafted free agents beat him out why the heck is he on the team? What type of message does that send? If we can trade or cut Kruger or Gilbert, why don't we do the same with Cam Erving.... Can't we all agree that they all suck? People who aren't even playing in the NFL are better than Cam, and I think if anyone thinks he'll be a pro bowl center they're out of their mind.
The positives - offense looks legit. Pryor, Coleman, Crow, Barnidge (hasn't played upto the bar this year).
Next year, lets get some beasts on defense and get a D like the seahawks, panthers or vikings.
last comment: I have no idea how Ray Farmer get jobs talking about football on T.V. after the draft with manziel, gilbert, and vincent mayle.....
I agree with Mud's post. We replaced most of the aging veterans with shit. I don't see how parkey is so much better than coons. I'm optimistic about all of the young guys we're bringing in, and in many ways i like the trade we've made with new england, but I want to win games now.
Coleman looks like he can be a stud and Ogbah and Nassib look good too. I found myself a bit puzzled we drafted so many WR's to find a "diamond in the rough", but I like the effort.
i'm not (ALL-IN) in the analytics game yet, and I think it would be extremely naive if anyone says that they are. We've yet to see what this strategy can do, but looking for diamond in the roughs and saving Jimmy money shouldn't be the main focus next year, or years to come. I guess if we go 0-16 this year, then we're really setting the bar low for improvement, because if we win one game next year we'll already be progressing.
One - Coons was solid from under 50 but lost his way outside that distance. Patrick Murray was the guy who beat him out don't forget, btw, not Parkey. Parkey, though, was a pro-bowl kicker in 2014, was injured all of 2015, then signed with us like a day before the Miami game, where he missed three of six kicks. Since then he's been batting 1.000 so to speak. So that's on that.
On the analytics driven front office - we brought in Coleman, Ogbah, Nassib and Kessler because they were guys who had played for a long time at a high level in college, shown very good production there. Ogbah and Nassib were #1 and #2 in sacks in college in 2015. Coleman was #1 in TDs. Kessler is a different story but it looks like Hue's 'trust me' is worth more than it appeared at the time.
All of that, picking players based on tangible production, that's driven by analytics. Picking guys based on physical attributes in the hopes that you can make them in to a solid football player, that isn't. That's a low percentage play, especially in cleveland where in recent times it's brought us Erving, Gilbert and Mingo.
-
So if you get it maybe stop wasting your time questioning it in every other thread?
I'll look at what I want to.
And Ill post what I want...when I want....deal with it....
Not your job to patrol the boards and tell people what they can and cant post...just because we have differing opinions, does not make mine(or anybody elses) opinion less valid.....
Every other thread?.....hell, I barely post every other week anymore......stop being an arrogant puss and talk some football instead of playing forum opinion police....
And Ill post what I want...when I want....deal with it....
Not your job to patrol the boards and tell people what they can and cant post...just because we have differing opinions, does not make mine(or anybody elses) opinion less valid.....
Every other thread?.....hell, I barely post every other week anymore......stop being an arrogant puss and talk some football instead of playing forum opinion police....
I will deal with it. By pointing out what a raging and repetitive crybaby you are. You calling me a puss is rich.
-
I think the reason we had so many draft picks is that management feels that there are no guarantees when it comes to any draft picks. 50% of them will be busts.
-
Let he who has never jumped on the soapbox and overstayed his welcome upon it cast the first stone.
It won't be me...
-
OK-two plays from what could have been-indulge me on the soap box.
-
.....none really stand out as future stars(AllPro types)....maybe Coleman, but at WR, the competition is stiff.....
Well since trading out of the stars gave us a lot of draft picks that put us in good position for those stars, the real question will be did they learn anything from the 2016 draft that might make them go for star players?
Well since trading out of the stars gave us a lot of draft picks that put us in good position for those stars, the real question will be did they learn anything from the 2016 draft that might make them go for star players?
I couldn't find Mud's post to quote from, but regarding the draft I hope they have learned their lesson. One thing being really bad is going to get us is the first overall pick. Do Sashi and DePo see a once in a generation talent out there for us in 2017? This could be "Suck for Luck" revisited.
Ha Da Bears won, only need the 49ers to follow suit to lock that pick up.
-
Well since trading out of the stars gave us a lot of draft picks that put us in good position for those stars, the real question will be did they learn anything from the 2016 draft that might make them go for star players?
I couldn't find Mud's post to quote from, but regarding the draft I hope they have learned their lesson. One thing being really bad is going to get us is the first overall pick. Do Sashi and DePo see a once in a generation talent out there for us in 2017? This could be "Suck for Luck" revisited.
Ha Da Bears won, only need the 49ers to follow suit to lock that pick up.
-
it would make sense, but would hue actually do that?
if sashi and jimmy said "get real close to winning but lose every game so we can tank for the #1 pick, maybe we'll win a couple at the end of the year if we're still sure to pick #1".
I find that ridiculous..... but the colts for sure did tank for luck.
-
it would make sense, but would hue actually do that?
if sashi and jimmy said "get real close to winning but lose every game so we can tank for the #1 pick, maybe we'll win a couple at the end of the year if we're still sure to pick #1".
I find that ridiculous..... but the colts for sure did tank for luck.
it would make sense, but would hue actually do that?
if sashi and jimmy said "get real close to winning but lose every game so we can tank for the #1 pick, maybe we'll win a couple at the end of the year if we're still sure to pick #1".
I find that ridiculous..... but the colts for sure did tank for luck.
True, but the Colts decision to tank was completely on the FO. They simply refused to activate Manning after he was medically cleared. That sealed the deal.
As for Hue... I really don't believe it is in him to lose intentionally... but the word did cross my mind.
Do I believe that our FO stripped this team down with the knowledge that we'd be in the running for the #1 overall? Absolutely... and I do believe Hue knew this as well.
-
it would make sense, but would hue actually do that?
if sashi and jimmy said "get real close to winning but lose every game so we can tank for the #1 pick, maybe we'll win a couple at the end of the year if we're still sure to pick #1".
I find that ridiculous..... but the colts for sure did tank for luck.
True, but the Colts decision to tank was completely on the FO. They simply refused to activate Manning after he was medically cleared. That sealed the deal.
As for Hue... I really don't believe it is in him to lose intentionally... but the word did cross my mind.
Do I believe that our FO stripped this team down with the knowledge that we'd be in the running for the #1 overall? Absolutely... and I do believe Hue knew this as well.
Do I believe that our FO stripped this team down with the knowledge that we'd be in the running for the #1 overall? Absolutely... and I do believe Hue knew this as well.
You give them far more credit than I Tour. I think they did it strictly by the analytic numbers and had no real sense that it would leave such a shell of an NFL team. I mean why would they now seemingly add one of the best defenders in a position of need that just might shove us out of that #1 pick?
Nope it wasn't the rope a dope, just the dope and dopes.
-
Do I believe that our FO stripped this team down with the knowledge that we'd be in the running for the #1 overall? Absolutely... and I do believe Hue knew this as well.
You give them far more credit than I Tour. I think they did it strictly by the analytic numbers and had no real sense that it would leave such a shell of an NFL team. I mean why would they now seemingly add one of the best defenders in a position of need that just might shove us out of that #1 pick?
Nope it wasn't the rope a dope, just the dope and dopes.
You give them far more credit than I Tour. I think they did it strictly by the analytic numbers and had no real sense that it would leave such a shell of an NFL team. I mean why would they now seemingly add one of the best defenders in a position of need that just might shove us out of that #1 pick?
Nope it wasn't the rope a dope, just the dope and dopes.
C'mon... we're amateurs and we could see what the sum of the parts were... even before injuries further diminished our "shell".
As for our recent "addition"... I think your choice of "seemingly" is appropriate for now. But even if he is everything we'd hope and then some, does this D look to be one player away from competitive?
-
Do I believe that our FO stripped this team down with the knowledge that we'd be in the running for the #1 overall? Absolutely... and I do believe Hue knew this as well.
You give them far more credit than I Tour. I think they did it strictly by the analytic numbers and had no real sense that it would leave such a shell of an NFL team. I mean why would they now seemingly add one of the best defenders in a position of need that just might shove us out of that #1 pick?
Nope it wasn't the rope a dope, just the dope and dopes.
You give them far more credit than I Tour. I think they did it strictly by the analytic numbers and had no real sense that it would leave such a shell of an NFL team. I mean why would they now seemingly add one of the best defenders in a position of need that just might shove us out of that #1 pick?
Nope it wasn't the rope a dope, just the dope and dopes.
Signing Collins fits with the FO's strategic vision, which is to be in contention consistently from 2018 onward. To do that, the team must have as many of it's young players entering their prime at the same time. This is the importance of the huge 2016 draft class and the importance of giving them as many reps as we are now. Adding Collins fits this vision because by 2018 he should still be in his prime.
I'm pretty sure the FO doesn't value the #1 pick as much as you or the rest of the league. Analytics will tell you that the #1 pick (as well as the top 5 in general) is grossly over-valued. You just have to look at the success rate of these picks vs. the rest of the first round. The difference isn't that great. Therefore, from an analytics stand point, the best thing to do with the #1 pick (unless there is a surefire franchise QB) is to trade it because teams will overpay for it.
"I said, 'I need someone who's going to want to get on the roller coaster with me knowing that it's not always going to be fun,'" -Paul DePodesta -
I'm pretty sure the FO doesn't value the #1 pick as much as you or the rest of the league. Analytics will tell you that the #1 pick (as well as the top 5 in general) is grossly over-valued. You just have to look at the success rate of these picks vs. the rest of the first round. The difference isn't that great. Therefore, from an analytics stand point, the best thing to do with the #1 pick (unless there is a surefire franchise QB) is to trade it because teams will overpay for it.
I can pretty much guarantee that if they got an offer that involves swapping firsts, a first in 2018, and a second round pick or two (plus sundries) they'll take it.
-
You give them far more credit than I Tour. I think they did it strictly by the analytic numbers and had no real sense that it would leave such a shell of an NFL team. I mean why would they now seemingly add one of the best defenders in a position of need that just might shove us out of that #1 pick?
Nope it wasn't the rope a dope, just the dope and dopes.
Signing Collins fits with the FO's strategic vision, which is to be in contention consistently from 2018 onward. To do that, the team must have as many of it's young players entering their prime at the same time. This is the importance of the huge 2016 draft class and the importance of giving them as many reps as we are now. Adding Collins fits this vision because by 2018 he should still be in his prime.
I'm pretty sure the FO doesn't value the #1 pick as much as you or the rest of the league. Analytics will tell you that the #1 pick (as well as the top 5 in general) is grossly over-valued. You just have to look at the success rate of these picks vs. the rest of the first round. The difference isn't that great. Therefore, from an analytics stand point, the best thing to do with the #1 pick (unless there is a surefire franchise QB) is to trade it because teams will overpay for it.
Signing Collins fits with the FO's strategic vision, which is to be in contention consistently from 2018 onward. To do that, the team must have as many of it's young players entering their prime at the same time. This is the importance of the huge 2016 draft class and the importance of giving them as many reps as we are now. Adding Collins fits this vision because by 2018 he should still be in his prime.
I'm pretty sure the FO doesn't value the #1 pick as much as you or the rest of the league. Analytics will tell you that the #1 pick (as well as the top 5 in general) is grossly over-valued. You just have to look at the success rate of these picks vs. the rest of the first round. The difference isn't that great. Therefore, from an analytics stand point, the best thing to do with the #1 pick (unless there is a surefire franchise QB) is to trade it because teams will overpay for it.
Mostly agree with this very well done write-up. My one quibble would be the the number of players entering their prime at the same time.
The salary cap demands that you have a rolling set of talented youngsters on cap-friendly, rookie deals throughout the process.
"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 -
You give them far more credit than I Tour. I think they did it strictly by the analytic numbers and had no real sense that it would leave such a shell of an NFL team. I mean why would they now seemingly add one of the best defenders in a position of need that just might shove us out of that #1 pick?
Nope it wasn't the rope a dope, just the dope and dopes.
Signing Collins fits with the FO's strategic vision, which is to be in contention consistently from 2018 onward. To do that, the team must have as many of it's young players entering their prime at the same time. This is the importance of the huge 2016 draft class and the importance of giving them as many reps as we are now. Adding Collins fits this vision because by 2018 he should still be in his prime.
I'm pretty sure the FO doesn't value the #1 pick as much as you or the rest of the league. Analytics will tell you that the #1 pick (as well as the top 5 in general) is grossly over-valued. You just have to look at the success rate of these picks vs. the rest of the first round. The difference isn't that great. Therefore, from an analytics stand point, the best thing to do with the #1 pick (unless there is a surefire franchise QB) is to trade it because teams will overpay for it.
I'm pretty sure the FO doesn't value the #1 pick as much as you or the rest of the league. Analytics will tell you that the #1 pick (as well as the top 5 in general) is grossly over-valued. You just have to look at the success rate of these picks vs. the rest of the first round. The difference isn't that great. Therefore, from an analytics stand point, the best thing to do with the #1 pick (unless there is a surefire franchise QB) is to trade it because teams will overpay for it.
We'll see a few years down the road if passing on Wentz was a good idea or not. It only works if the analytics guys hit on the extra picks they have. Julio Jones anyone? About as sure-fire as you can get. And we got jack with the extra picks. That netted us Phil Taylor and Brandon Weeden. Sashi and DePo will have to do 10X better than that.
PS- Take a look at that 2011 draft- (where we passed on Jones) it was about as top heavy with Pro Bowl talent as any.
-
You give them far more credit than I Tour. I think they did it strictly by the analytic numbers and had no real sense that it would leave such a shell of an NFL team. I mean why would they now seemingly add one of the best defenders in a position of need that just might shove us out of that #1 pick?
Nope it wasn't the rope a dope, just the dope and dopes.
Signing Collins fits with the FO's strategic vision, which is to be in contention consistently from 2018 onward. To do that, the team must have as many of it's young players entering their prime at the same time. This is the importance of the huge 2016 draft class and the importance of giving them as many reps as we are now. Adding Collins fits this vision because by 2018 he should still be in his prime.
I'm pretty sure the FO doesn't value the #1 pick as much as you or the rest of the league. Analytics will tell you that the #1 pick (as well as the top 5 in general) is grossly over-valued. You just have to look at the success rate of these picks vs. the rest of the first round. The difference isn't that great. Therefore, from an analytics stand point, the best thing to do with the #1 pick (unless there is a surefire franchise QB) is to trade it because teams will overpay for it.
Signing Collins fits with the FO's strategic vision, which is to be in contention consistently from 2018 onward.
did i miss something? we have an insider that sits in with our FO and knows their vision?
uh........
who knows what the collins signing means but to say that you know it's part of a plan is like saying you have to breath air to survive. yeah they signed a dude that is as close to a vet this team knows besides JT and haden. will it be awesome if the dude wants to take on a leadership role to our suck ass middle line defense? will it be great if he loves cleveland and wants to be part of the 'FOUNDATION'? yep. but so far the FO is cheap and far between when it comes to doing anything close to landing top talent that may cost.
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