Our 2016 Draft Class Game: Find the "Bust"
-
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.
-
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.
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.
Yeah nice enough we have him. May cost? LOL Mik. NE dumped him partly because he WILL cost- like on the high side of $10 million to get him to stick around. You want Von Miller money? Then play like it. Um, we've all seen examples of guys who play like their hair's on fire in a contract year- and then promptly slack off after they get paid.
-
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?
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?
Nope, but they might be a couple of decent plays and a bounce of the football luck away from winning a couple of games. That one player is good enough to add those couple of plays. Besides, it would fit the Browns kind of luck, accidentally win your way out of the best player out there.
-
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?
Nope, but they might be a couple of decent plays and a bounce of the football luck away from winning a couple of games. That one player is good enough to add those couple of plays. Besides, it would fit the Browns kind of luck, accidentally win your way out of the best player out there.
Nope, but they might be a couple of decent plays and a bounce of the football luck away from winning a couple of games. That one player is good enough to add those couple of plays. Besides, it would fit the Browns kind of luck, accidentally win your way out of the best player out there.
lol... I give up. Your negativity is much stronger than mine...
-
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.
Yeah nice enough we have him. May cost? LOL Mik. NE dumped him partly because he WILL cost- like on the high side of $10 million to get him to stick around. You want Von Miller money? Then play like it. Um, we've all seen examples of guys who play like their hair's on fire in a contract year- and then promptly slack off after they get paid.
Yeah nice enough we have him. May cost? LOL Mik. NE dumped him partly because he WILL cost- like on the high side of $10 million to get him to stick around. You want Von Miller money? Then play like it. Um, we've all seen examples of guys who play like their hair's on fire in a contract year- and then promptly slack off after they get paid.
10mil? try 12-13mil
-
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.
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.
Yeah I definitely agree with that. That's why it is important that they can consistently draft good players. It would be more correct for me to say "as man players entering their prime at the same time as the salary cap can handle."
This is part of the benefit of going for a quantity over quality approach in the draft. More replacements means you can get cheaper replacements for guys demanding team-unfriendly second contracts. That also gives you leverage in negotiations.
I have listened to 90% of Browns press conferences and interviews, as well as CBD just about every day where they talk about the team's strategy often. I have twelve years of work experience in an analytics field (bioinformatics, a field DePodesta worked in as well). Every move the Browns have made since Sashi Brown became GM makes sense when you look at it through the vision I have deduced. That's what gives me the confidence to say that this is their strategic vision.did i miss something? we have an insider that sits in with our FO and knows their vision?
"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
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