All Saquon, all the Time...
-
I think I'm the only one who doesn't completely love Barkley. My two biggest concerns are whether or not Saquon can run effectively between the tackles in the NFL, and whether or not he can be an asset in pass protection. He's certainly got the STRENGTH to do both, but I'm not sure I remember him doing much of either in college. Perhaps he wasn't asked to, or perhaps I simply wasn't paying attention, but I don't seem to remember those aspects of his game jumping off the film. This isn't to say the kid can't LEARN these things, and I think it's fair to say that many college RBs don't enter the league adept at pass protection, but it's just something I think about. Finally, I just have a very difficult time believing we're going to go offense-offense with our first two picks of the draft, ya know? Presumably our first pick is a QB, so we hope to not even SEE the kid this year, and then our next pick is going to be a RB even though our GM has been in the league FOREVER and has NEVER taken a RB in the first round of any draft? In fact, he's only taken a RB in the 2nd round once, and that pick was a bust. I honestly think we are comfortable with most of our offensive components, and I don't see us adding a player like Saquon when we have so much work to do on the defensive side of the ball.
Teams generally trade up for QBs and pass rushers, we know this, but Saquon is thought by many to be a transcendent talent, and if he's available at 4, will the phones be ringing for a trade? What if the Giants take Saquon at 2? To me, that's the best case scenario. It means I don't have to worry about our team taking Saquon, lol. In all seriousness, I REALLY want the draft to go QB for picks 1-3, as that makes our #4 very valuable. Teams like Buffalo, Denver, and even Arizona are going to be dying to trade up for the "last" available QB. I personally don't want to trade down, but I'm almost positive we're going to, fellas.
Buffalo is going to trade up for a QB, I think many of us expect this. In fact, I think they will announce a trade with the New York Giants in the next few days. If this doesn't happen, I'd expect OUR phone to blow up, and that's where it gets interesting (and by interesting I mean terrifying). Buffalo now has picks 12 and 22 in the first round I believe, and this seems like JUST the type of situation our beloved Browns simply CAN'T pass up. "OMG, TWO 1ST ROUNDERS! WE HAVE TO DO IT!" Buffalo wants their QB, as we currently have theirs from last year. They know they have to move up to get him, regardless of signing McCarron.
How do you guys feel about drafting at #12? It's JUST out of the range where we can probably get one of MY top tier guys, but I think we need to embrace the idea that we're trading down, and many of our fans should probably get the Saquon dreams out of their minds. It's simply too much draft capital for a GM not to muck with, and there won't be a shortage of teams who want to trade with us. So many years you'll hear fans of certain teams scream, "We should have traded down for more picks and players!" Well, that's all fine and good, but you actually need another team who is WILLING to trade first. In our situation, we're going to have multiple offers, and I don't see how we resist them all.
I think I'm the only one who doesn't completely love Barkley. Not even close- I'd bet at least 90% of the board doesn't want him at #1, and 50% plus are fine with passing on him at #4 too.
Teams generally trade up for QBs and pass rushers, we know this, but Saquon is thought by many to be a transcendent talent, Lately, these "transcendent talents" show up at least ever other year or so. Hype machine in overdrive. MHO? SB isn't even Adrian Peterson good.
Buffalo is going to trade up for a QB, I think many of us expect this. And my fervent hope is they trade up to #2.
How do you guys feel about drafting at #12? It's JUST out of the range where we can probably get one of MY top tier guys, but I think we need to embrace the idea that we're trading down, and many of our fans should probably get the Saquon dreams out of their minds. It's simply too much draft capital for a GM not to muck with, and there won't be a shortage of teams who want to trade with us. So many years you'll hear fans of certain teams scream, "We should have traded down for more picks and players!" Well, that's all fine and good, but you actually need another team who is WILLING to trade first. In our situation, we're going to have multiple offers, and I don't see how we resist them all.
Regarding trading down with Buffalo to #12 and #22? I'm against it. I want a truly elite player (Chubb). We've been severely burned in the past going the trade down route. Should we do a trade down, no farther than the Colts #6, and #5 with the Broncos is even better.
-
Just another overhyped individual being "sold" by people who want clicks.
It's certainly possible there's something to that as I would imagine the biggest portion of draft analysts do just what we do here. Look at other draft analysts and put together our predictions and opinions. I don't think anybody starts from scratch in a vacuum.
Still I don't think it's a huge stretch of the imagination to think that player X or Y or Z might possibly be the best at his position to come around for years.
WSS
It's certainly possible there's something to that as I would imagine the biggest portion of draft analysts do just what we do here. Look at other draft analysts and put together our predictions and opinions. I don't think anybody starts from scratch in a vacuum.
Still I don't think it's a huge stretch of the imagination to think that player X or Y or Z might possibly be the best at his position to come around for years.
WSS
Just MHO Steve. Jeremiah and Mayock probably look at tape. Kiper is turning into more and more of a joke as the years go by....
-
I think I'm the only one who doesn't completely love Barkley. Not even close- I'd bet at least 90% of the board doesn't want him at #1, and 50% plus are fine with passing on him at #4 too.
Teams generally trade up for QBs and pass rushers, we know this, but Saquon is thought by many to be a transcendent talent, Lately, these "transcendent talents" show up at least ever other year or so. Hype machine in overdrive. MHO? SB isn't even Adrian Peterson good.
Buffalo is going to trade up for a QB, I think many of us expect this. And my fervent hope is they trade up to #2.
How do you guys feel about drafting at #12? It's JUST out of the range where we can probably get one of MY top tier guys, but I think we need to embrace the idea that we're trading down, and many of our fans should probably get the Saquon dreams out of their minds. It's simply too much draft capital for a GM not to muck with, and there won't be a shortage of teams who want to trade with us. So many years you'll hear fans of certain teams scream, "We should have traded down for more picks and players!" Well, that's all fine and good, but you actually need another team who is WILLING to trade first. In our situation, we're going to have multiple offers, and I don't see how we resist them all.
Regarding trading down with Buffalo to #12 and #22? I'm against it. I want a truly elite player (Chubb). We've been severely burned in the past going the trade down route. Should we do a trade down, no farther than the Colts #6, and #5 with the Broncos is even better.
Regarding trading down with Buffalo to #12 and #22? I'm against it. I want a truly elite player (Chubb). We've been severely burned in the past going the trade down route. Should we do a trade down, no farther than the Colts #6, and #5 with the Broncos is even better.
What about Chubb screams elite to you?
I ask because I do not see it... not as a 4-3 DE anyway. I see 2 elites in this class and neither is named Chubb.
"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 -
Regarding trading down with Buffalo to #12 and #22? I'm against it. I want a truly elite player (Chubb). We've been severely burned in the past going the trade down route. Should we do a trade down, no farther than the Colts #6, and #5 with the Broncos is even better.
What about Chubb screams elite to you?
I ask because I do not see it... not as a 4-3 DE anyway. I see 2 elites in this class and neither is named Chubb.
-
Regarding trading down with Buffalo to #12 and #22? I'm against it. I want a truly elite player (Chubb). We've been severely burned in the past going the trade down route. Should we do a trade down, no farther than the Colts #6, and #5 with the Broncos is even better.
What about Chubb screams elite to you?
I ask because I do not see it... not as a 4-3 DE anyway. I see 2 elites in this class and neither is named Chubb.
What about Chubb screams elite to you?
I ask because I do not see it... not as a 4-3 DE anyway. I see 2 elites in this class and neither is named Chubb.
20+ TFL 10 sacks junior year, 20+ TFL 10 sacks senior year. You no likee?
McCrystal had this to say:
"What holds Chubb back in my opinion is his lack of leverage. He isn't fast enough to dominate with speed, but he plays too upright to dominate with his strength/leverage. The better OTs are gonna be able to get into his pads and control him early in his career."
-
Ogbah is better than Chubb. Why do we want to burn a high pick on a inferior talent at the position?
Looking at the vitals- almost identical. And the combine #'s as well, very similar numbers across the board.
Two years of NFL experience will definitely payoff big time this year for Ogbah. He's going to be a beast this year.
The secret of getting ahead is getting started. The secret of getting started is breaking your complex overwhelming tasks into small manageable tasks, and then starting on the first one. -Mark Twain- "It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog." -Mark Twain- -
- I think I'm the only one who doesn't completely love Barkley.
- How do you guys feel about drafting at #12? It's JUST out of the range where we can probably get one of MY top tier guys...
You are not alone. I share many of your concerns plus I do not see anywhere near the added value in his 3-down capability that others do. If it takes two backs to match his production, so be it. And once here, then the gap between Bark and the next tier of RBs shrinks.
The Bills trade down is my dream scenario. I think we can still land a Ward or a James at #12, but it we want to move back up a couple spots to help insure Ward is ours, we can and still keep the added picks BUF ponied up. Ditto for the #22 which I really want to use to land Vander Esch.
Who are your top tier guys?
That came out wrong. I meant, compared to all the talking heads and analysts. They ALL seem to love him and call him the best player in the draft.
For the record I don't see him as "the best player" in the draft.
You are not alone. I share many of your concerns plus I do not see anywhere near the added value in his 3-down capability that others do. If it takes two backs to match his production, so be it. And once here, then the gap between Bark and the next tier of RBs shrinks.
The Bills trade down is my dream scenario. I think we can still land a Ward or a James at #12, but it we want to move back up a couple spots to help insure Ward is ours, we can and still keep the added picks BUF ponied up. Ditto for the #22 which I really want to use to land Vander Esch.
Who are your top tier guys?
For the record I don't see him as "the best player" in the draft.
I can't believe I'm saying this....but I'm starting to come around to the Buffalo trade down scenario. Lord, strike me down, but I just don't see how our team turns down a deal that would land them the number 12 and 22 picks, AFTER we already get to take our QB at 1. In fact, the more I think about it, the more I think this deal is going to happen. The ONLY way it doesn't happen is if Buffalo trades with the Giants, and that's a definite possibility.
Unfortunately, the main reason we will probably execute this trade is the retirement of Joe Thomas. For the first time in forever, we find ourselves without a premier LT. Regardless of how bad the crap-storm was in Cleveland, we at least knew we had a badass tackle protecting our QB. Now Joe is gone, we fought hard for Nate Solder but didn't get him, and now we find ourselves in the unenviable position of needing a LT, and needing one NOW. This is problematic because college football simply isn't producing the type of OL quality NFL teams need and want. If we do the trade with Buffalo, I have to believe it's because we're drafting a LT at 12, and I think the only one worth a pick that high is Mike McGlinchey from Notre Dame. He's not as good a prospect as the Guard, Quentin Nelson, but he's still very solid.
Of course, we have to hope to heck McGlinchey is going to BE THERE at 12 because OT is a premier position and he could easily be gone by then, but whatever. Let's assume he is there, we draft him at 12, and now we're left with the #22. That's right people...the dreaded, vaunted, cursed, and franchise-destroying #22. I won't list them all here, but suffice to say we haven't had the best luck picking at 22. Who are my top tier guys for 22? CB Josh Jackson from Iowa, Leighton Vander Esh, LB from Boise State, and MAYBE Roquan Smith, LB from Georgia.
Who are my top tier picks overall? In no order:
Bradley Chubb, Minkah Fitzpatrick, Derwin James, Trumaine Edwards, Denzel Ward, and maybe the other CB from Louisville if his injuries check out.
Ya know, the more I think about it, the more I think we're going to make the Buffalo trade for 12 and 22, and that's not all. We very well might move BACK into the first round to take a FOURTH selection. Sound crazy? It's not. We obviously have the first selection of the 2nd round, and THAT is an extremely valuable asset. Teams love that pick, and I can see us wielding that as a means to vault back into the 1st round to nab our favorite RB before the "RB Run" begins. What does a draft like this look like?
1. Sam Darnold, Josh Rosen, Baker Mayfield
12. OT Mike McGlinchey
22. CB Josh Jackson
26. RB Derrius Guice
Ok look, maybe moving back into the 1st round for a 4th pick is excessive and unnecessary, but my point is that we're going to be wheeling and dealing come first day of the draft. I can almost guarantee it. I was so opposed at the idea of trading down, but now I have come to see the POTENTIAL wisdom of it. We need a LT, people. There's no way around it. We can't take a QB at 1 and then LT at 4 and be done with the 1st round. We need to make the trade with Buffalo, grab our QB at 1 and LT at 12, and then take the best defensive prospect at 22.
-
You are not alone. I share many of your concerns plus I do not see anywhere near the added value in his 3-down capability that others do. If it takes two backs to match his production, so be it. And once here, then the gap between Bark and the next tier of RBs shrinks.
The Bills trade down is my dream scenario. I think we can still land a Ward or a James at #12, but it we want to move back up a couple spots to help insure Ward is ours, we can and still keep the added picks BUF ponied up. Ditto for the #22 which I really want to use to land Vander Esch.
Who are your top tier guys?
For the record I don't see him as "the best player" in the draft.
I can't believe I'm saying this....but I'm starting to come around to the Buffalo trade down scenario. Lord, strike me down, but I just don't see how our team turns down a deal that would land them the number 12 and 22 picks, AFTER we already get to take our QB at 1. In fact, the more I think about it, the more I think this deal is going to happen. The ONLY way it doesn't happen is if Buffalo trades with the Giants, and that's a definite possibility.
Unfortunately, the main reason we will probably execute this trade is the retirement of Joe Thomas. For the first time in forever, we find ourselves without a premier LT. Regardless of how bad the crap-storm was in Cleveland, we at least knew we had a badass tackle protecting our QB. Now Joe is gone, we fought hard for Nate Solder but didn't get him, and now we find ourselves in the unenviable position of needing a LT, and needing one NOW. This is problematic because college football simply isn't producing the type of OL quality NFL teams need and want. If we do the trade with Buffalo, I have to believe it's because we're drafting a LT at 12, and I think the only one worth a pick that high is Mike McGlinchey from Notre Dame. He's not as good a prospect as the Guard, Quentin Nelson, but he's still very solid.
Of course, we have to hope to heck McGlinchey is going to BE THERE at 12 because OT is a premier position and he could easily be gone by then, but whatever. Let's assume he is there, we draft him at 12, and now we're left with the #22. That's right people...the dreaded, vaunted, cursed, and franchise-destroying #22. I won't list them all here, but suffice to say we haven't had the best luck picking at 22. Who are my top tier guys for 22? CB Josh Jackson from Iowa, Leighton Vander Esh, LB from Boise State, and MAYBE Roquan Smith, LB from Georgia.
Who are my top tier picks overall? In no order:
Bradley Chubb, Minkah Fitzpatrick, Derwin James, Trumaine Edwards, Denzel Ward, and maybe the other CB from Louisville if his injuries check out.
Ya know, the more I think about it, the more I think we're going to make the Buffalo trade for 12 and 22, and that's not all. We very well might move BACK into the first round to take a FOURTH selection. Sound crazy? It's not. We obviously have the first selection of the 2nd round, and THAT is an extremely valuable asset. Teams love that pick, and I can see us wielding that as a means to vault back into the 1st round to nab our favorite RB before the "RB Run" begins. What does a draft like this look like?
1. Sam Darnold, Josh Rosen, Baker Mayfield
12. OT Mike McGlinchey
22. CB Josh Jackson
26. RB Derrius Guice
Ok look, maybe moving back into the 1st round for a 4th pick is excessive and unnecessary, but my point is that we're going to be wheeling and dealing come first day of the draft. I can almost guarantee it. I was so opposed at the idea of trading down, but now I have come to see the POTENTIAL wisdom of it. We need a LT, people. There's no way around it. We can't take a QB at 1 and then LT at 4 and be done with the 1st round. We need to make the trade with Buffalo, grab our QB at 1 and LT at 12, and then take the best defensive prospect at 22.
Unfortunately, the main reason we will probably execute this trade is the retirement of Joe Thomas.
First, congrats on coming around...
It's just a bad class to go OT hunting. Williams, IMO the best prospect, is at best a top 20 pick. There are probably 6 Senior prospects in next year's draft that are as good as or better than Williams. FYI, their #6 prospect as of now... Isaiah Prince, THE Ohio State University. And then there's underclassmen possibilities to consider... including BAMA's Jonah Williams and Wisconsin's Dave Edwards.
Never say never, but unless the moon and stars align on Day 2, I'm not picking an OT this draft... I'll ride with Shon.
Ya know, the more I think about it, the more I think we're going to make the Buffalo trade for 12 and 22, and that's not all. We very well might move BACK into the first round to take a FOURTH selection. Sound crazy? It's not.
Agree... it's not crazy. Just did so in a recent FirstPick.
- Round 1 Pick 1: Rosen, Josh, QB, UCLA (A)
- Round 1 Pick 12 (BUF): Ward, Denzel, CB, Ohio State (A)
- Round 1 Pick 18 (SEA): James, Derwin, SS/FS, Florida State (A)
- Round 1 Pick 20 (DET): Vander Esch, Leighton, OLB/ILB, Boise State
You want crazy? I've been looking at taking QBs at #1 and #4 again...
"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 want crazy? I've been looking at taking QBs at #1 and #4 again...
Taking TWO QBs....at #1 and #4??
Yes...sounds a little crazy. While it would mean the Browns would corner the market....what would be the reasoning behind such a move? (even though I am pretty sure you are not advocating it)
-
What about Chubb screams elite to you?
I ask because I do not see it... not as a 4-3 DE anyway. I see 2 elites in this class and neither is named Chubb.
20+ TFL 10 sacks junior year, 20+ TFL 10 sacks senior year. You no likee?
McCrystal had this to say:
"What holds Chubb back in my opinion is his lack of leverage. He isn't fast enough to dominate with speed, but he plays too upright to dominate with his strength/leverage. The better OTs are gonna be able to get into his pads and control him early in his career."
20+ TFL 10 sacks junior year, 20+ TFL 10 sacks senior year. You no likee?
McCrystal had this to say: "What holds Chubb back in my opinion is his lack of leverage. He isn't fast enough to dominate with speed, but he plays too upright to dominate with his strength/leverage. The better OTs are gonna be able to get into his pads and control him early in his career."
No, I like... I just don't love.
Best I can explain is along the lines of the McCrystal quote... If Chubb's burst wins, then he disrupts and makes plays on the other side of the LOS. However, if his burst doesn't do it, then he's pretty ordinary. I don't think that circumstance or his burst are special. I think the root cause of his "ordinariness" may be that his agility is wanting.
To get a little analytical... What jumped out at me at his Combine was that his 7.37 second 3-cone was not in line with his other, really good postings. I've always believed the 3-cone was big for DEs. Did a lil googling this time and...
... if you had to pick an event that might "matter most" when it comes to hinting at a player's future NFL production, you'd be hard-pressed to find a stronger correlation than that between the 3-Cone Drill and elite sack artists.
"(The 3-Cone Drill is) the single most important drill at the combine, plain and simple," an anonymous NFL Scout told SportsDay Dallas. "I want to know how the player performs in space and this helps show change of direction, explosiveness and overall athleticism. There is validity to this test translating to the football field."
http://www.stack.com/a/at-the-nfl-combine-the-3-cone-drill-reveals-the-next-great-pass-rushers
Then I look at his frame and see him ballooning into the upper 280's... a more natural weight for a 3-4 DE. This puts him in tweener territory for a 4-3. I'm betting he was on a strict diet to weigh in at 269 at the Combine. He was listed at 275 his Sr. year at NC St... same in 2016... 260 in 2015 and '14... Seems he's due for another growth spurt..
-
You want crazy? I've been looking at taking QBs at #1 and #4 again...
Taking TWO QBs....at #1 and #4??
Yes...sounds a little crazy. While it would mean the Browns would corner the market....what would be the reasoning behind such a move? (even though I am pretty sure you are not advocating it)
You want crazy? I've been looking at taking QBs at #1 and #4 again...
Taking TWO QBs....at #1 and #4??
Yes...sounds a little crazy. While it would mean the Browns would corner the market....what would be the reasoning behind such a move? (even though I am pretty sure you are not advocating it)
Goal is simply to increase the odds of hitting on our QB, Gip. If odds of hitting on one pick are 50/50, then the odds of hitting on one of two are 75/25.
I admit that I've started thinking about this more as Rosen's name has been mentioned less.
If both hit, a 1 in 4 chance, then we can always trade the one we like less in a couple years and recoup our #1.
If neither hit, also a 1 in 4, then we can all jump in the lake... on top of our new, "football guy".
"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 want crazy? I've been looking at taking QBs at #1 and #4 again...
Taking TWO QBs....at #1 and #4??
Yes...sounds a little crazy. While it would mean the Browns would corner the market....what would be the reasoning behind such a move? (even though I am pretty sure you are not advocating it)
Goal is simply to increase the odds of hitting on our QB, Gip. If odds of hitting on one pick are 50/50, then the odds of hitting on one of two are 75/25.
I admit that I've started thinking about this more as Rosen's name has been mentioned less.
If both hit, a 1 in 4 chance, then we can always trade the one we like less in a couple years and recoup our #1.
If neither hit, also a 1 in 4, then we can all jump in the lake... on top of our new, "football guy".
Goal is simply to increase the odds of hitting on our QB, Gip. If odds of hitting on one pick are 50/50, then the odds of hitting on one of two are 75/25.
I admit that I've started thinking about this more as Rosen's name has been mentioned less.
If both hit, a 1 in 4 chance, then we can always trade the one we like less in a couple years and recoup our #1.
If neither hit, also a 1 in 4, then we can all jump in the lake... on top of our new, "football guy".
Just to be the devil's advocate if they both hit only one of them will be the starting quarterback. So the odds of getting a number one pick from the second choice are somewhat slimmer.
WSS
www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons -
You want crazy? I've been looking at taking QBs at #1 and #4 again...
Taking TWO QBs....at #1 and #4??
Yes...sounds a little crazy. While it would mean the Browns would corner the market....what would be the reasoning behind such a move? (even though I am pretty sure you are not advocating it)
Goal is simply to increase the odds of hitting on our QB, Gip. If odds of hitting on one pick are 50/50, then the odds of hitting on one of two are 75/25.
I admit that I've started thinking about this more as Rosen's name has been mentioned less.
If both hit, a 1 in 4 chance, then we can always trade the one we like less in a couple years and recoup our #1.
If neither hit, also a 1 in 4, then we can all jump in the lake... on top of our new, "football guy".
Goal is simply to increase the odds of hitting on our QB, Gip. If odds of hitting on one pick are 50/50, then the odds of hitting on one of two are 75/25.
I admit that I've started thinking about this more as Rosen's name has been mentioned less.
If both hit, a 1 in 4 chance, then we can always trade the one we like less in a couple years and recoup our #1.
If neither hit, also a 1 in 4, then we can all jump in the lake... on top of our new, "football guy".
What kind of a brouhaha do you think the national media would make of the Browns taking a QB at both 1 and 2? Or local media for that matter.
-
Goal is simply to increase the odds of hitting on our QB, Gip. If odds of hitting on one pick are 50/50, then the odds of hitting on one of two are 75/25.
I admit that I've started thinking about this more as Rosen's name has been mentioned less.
If both hit, a 1 in 4 chance, then we can always trade the one we like less in a couple years and recoup our #1.
If neither hit, also a 1 in 4, then we can all jump in the lake... on top of our new, "football guy".
Just to be the devil's advocate if they both hit only one of them will be the starting quarterback. So the odds of getting a number one pick from the second choice are somewhat slimmer.
WSS
Just to be the devil's advocate if they both hit only one of them will be the starting quarterback. So the odds of getting a number one pick from the second choice are somewhat slimmer.
Ummmm, no... if they both hit, they both hit. Nothing in probability, in the odds, says the hits are equal... nothing in probability says the first choice turns out to be the best choice.
-
Just to be the devil's advocate if they both hit only one of them will be the starting quarterback. So the odds of getting a number one pick from the second choice are somewhat slimmer.
Ummmm, no... if they both hit, they both hit. Nothing in probability, in the odds, says the hits are equal... nothing in probability says the first choice turns out to be the best choice.
Ummmm, no... if they both hit, they both hit. Nothing in probability, in the odds, says the hits are equal... nothing in probability says the first choice turns out to be the best choice.
Oh well. Somebody has to start and somebody has to sit.
So the best you can hope for is your trading partner believes that they are both great. Call San Francisco. Oops somebody already did.
WSS
-
Ummmm, no... if they both hit, they both hit. Nothing in probability, in the odds, says the hits are equal... nothing in probability says the first choice turns out to be the best choice.
Oh well. Somebody has to start and somebody has to sit.
So the best you can hope for is your trading partner believes that they are both great. Call San Francisco. Oops somebody already did.
WSS
Oh well. Somebody has to start and somebody has to sit.
So the best you can hope for is your trading partner believes that they are both great.
And if in four years you decide to release one of them because there is no trade market for him, no one will care if the one you keep is leading us into the playoffs for the 2nd year in a row.
-
Unfortunately, the main reason we will probably execute this trade is the retirement of Joe Thomas.
First, congrats on coming around...
It's just a bad class to go OT hunting. Williams, IMO the best prospect, is at best a top 20 pick. There are probably 6 Senior prospects in next year's draft that are as good as or better than Williams. FYI, their #6 prospect as of now... Isaiah Prince, THE Ohio State University. And then there's underclassmen possibilities to consider... including BAMA's Jonah Williams and Wisconsin's Dave Edwards.
Never say never, but unless the moon and stars align on Day 2, I'm not picking an OT this draft... I'll ride with Shon.
Ya know, the more I think about it, the more I think we're going to make the Buffalo trade for 12 and 22, and that's not all. We very well might move BACK into the first round to take a FOURTH selection. Sound crazy? It's not.
Agree... it's not crazy. Just did so in a recent FirstPick.
- Round 1 Pick 1: Rosen, Josh, QB, UCLA (A)
- Round 1 Pick 12 (BUF): Ward, Denzel, CB, Ohio State (A)
- Round 1 Pick 18 (SEA): James, Derwin, SS/FS, Florida State (A)
- Round 1 Pick 20 (DET): Vander Esch, Leighton, OLB/ILB, Boise State
You want crazy? I've been looking at taking QBs at #1 and #4 again...
It's just a bad class to go OT hunting. Williams, IMO the best prospect, is at best a top 20 pick. There are probably 6 Senior prospects in next year's draft that are as good as or better than Williams. FYI, their #6 prospect as of now... Isaiah Prince, THE Ohio State University. And then there's underclassmen possibilities to consider... including BAMA's Jonah Williams and Wisconsin's Dave Edwards.
Tour, what are your thoughts on Martinas Rankin? I wouldn't be upset if the Browns took him in the 3rd.
-
It's just a bad class to go OT hunting. Williams, IMO the best prospect, is at best a top 20 pick. There are probably 6 Senior prospects in next year's draft that are as good as or better than Williams. FYI, their #6 prospect as of now... Isaiah Prince, THE Ohio State University. And then there's underclassmen possibilities to consider... including BAMA's Jonah Williams and Wisconsin's Dave Edwards.
Tour, what are your thoughts on Martinas Rankin? I wouldn't be upset if the Browns took him in the 3rd.
Tour, what are your thoughts on Martinas Rankin? I wouldn't be upset if the Browns took him in the 3rd.
I don't see him lasting quite that long...
I've followed Martinas since he caught my eye in a 2016 MSU game. He was raw, but had really good feet. Tad shy in height, but has wingspan of a taller OT so he works there and can slide inside either later in career of if his team lands someone who bests him
Only prospect that may be more ready to step in is tu's Williams... and neither is a sure thing to do. I'm still optimistic about Shon moving to LT.
-
Message to Po, keep repeating this mantra until it sinks into your one track Barkley Brain. BTW, Hue let it slip the Browns think there's 4 QBs in this draft that fill the bill. Just because you don't think so isn't going to make this inconvenient fact go away. Per Brian Billick:
"There is no player, now or ever, in the National Football League, no matter what his ranking coming out of the draft that trumps if you need a quarterback, taking a quarterback if you think he is a franchise quarterback...Are they a franchise quarterback? If they are, you take them before you take [Penn State running back Saquon] Barkley or [NC State defensive end Bradley] Chubb or [Alabama defensive back Minkah] Fitzpatrick or any of those guys."
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