Trading down
-
I don't think "trading down" is what necessarily kills so many of us Browns fans. It's the trading down SO FAR that kills us. You know, we all love the excitement and potential these multiple early round picks brings, but most of us aren't pleased with HOW we got them.
Now, I'm fine with trading down A LITTLE bit, but ONLY after we select our favorite QB at #1. In fact, I almost don't care who it is as long as it's NOT Josh Allen. Our team has made it abundantly clear that we don't want to start our new rookie QB in 2018, and I believe giving up so much for Tyrod really shows that. What people seem to forget regarding Tyrod is that he's pretty much a .500 QB. When you look at Buffalo last year, it's not exactly like they were LOADED with talent. We get a little avoidance from the injury bug this year, and we'll have just as much talent as they did, that's for sure. Can you IMAGINE the epic excitement around Cleveland if the Browns were 7-9, or even *gasp*.....8-8?! If Tyrod Taylor does what he usually does, we're going to have a fun year (compared to 0-16, ANYTHING is fun btw).
So we draft a rookie at 1, we know we don't want to play him, and this year we finally get some help with injuries so we don't have to play every qb in our stable. That means whoever we draft at #4 simply HAS to be a bluechip, ready to go, impact, frothing at the mouth, stab-yo-grandma-with-a-steak-knife tough, MoFo. The guy at 4 HAS to be a hit. We all know there are no sure things in the draft, but we have to pick someone who is as close to that as possible, and by trading down we reduce those chances significantly. Yes, we have the #1 and the #4 picks, but but since we're not trying to PLAY the #1, it's like he's not even on our team this year. A backup QB isn't like other positions. He doesn't play special teams or things like that (technically, he could hold for FG's, but I seriously doubt we'd use our rookie for that). Drafting a QB at 1 basically means we won't SEE this kid beyond preseason if everything goes right (Hahahaha....funny).
Knowing that, #4 has to be potential impact. He has to be a guy who can play a large amount of snaps, do several things, do THEM WELL, and not be some sort of project. I think this is some of the appeal of someone like Chubb. Chubb can play running downs, passing downs, provides invaluable depth, and does so at a key position. He's also known to be a grown man with no character issues, and his presence gives our defense flexibility to lineup different ways and attack creatively. He's as adept stopping the run as he is hitting the QB, and to me, THAT'S value. THAT'S #4 type stuff. Could you go Minkah Fitzpatrick at 4? Surely. This is a guy thought to have the ability to play in space and defend WRs. He's also a "field general" and someone who is talked about like being a coach on the field and the best of the best character wise. THAT'S #4 to me. Lots of people want Saquon. I do not. Nothing against him, but I feel we can get somebody CLOSE to his ability in round 2 or even by trading back into the end of the first. If you pass on Minkah Fitzpatrick or Chubb, I DON'T think you can find a defender anywhere CLOSE to their talent level later on.
If a team like the Broncos or Bucs wants to trade with us, and we only move down A FEW spots, I think many of us could live with that. It's not the trading down that deflates us, it's the trading down SO FAR. Our team is ripe to get exponentially better very quickly. For one, we can't get worse, and for another, we have lots of young talent and some offensive weaponry that we simply haven't had in years past. Unfortunately, much of our success will depend on Josh Gordon, and that's just how it is. Josh opens up everything for us with his bizarre blend of speed, power, and ability to catch almost everything. He demands attention, and you better give it to him. That leaves the middle open for Duke, Jarvis, Njoku, and Corey. We need an impact defensive stud picked EARLY in the draft, and we can get a talented RB prospect later like SO MANY TEAMS.
It's going to be difficult to draft a QB at 1 and hopefully NOT see him play this year. We see Deshawn Watson, we see Carson Wentz, and we WANT that. But I also don't want people to overlook what Tyrod can do, and if he does what he always does, we Browns fans are going to think we died and went to heaven because we'll go from the worst team in history to potentially being involved in the wildcard discussion in November (probably not December, but who knows?). Imagine being like 5-6 next year....and needing a late season push to maybe fight for a wildcard slot. It's what the Bills did, and I think we're just as good as they were.
Good point to the "distance" of trading down. However, there is a caveat to trading down. The question is, "what are you trading down for?" The reason I think this is important is because of how the browns board maybe stacked and trading down does not always just mean draft picks. Fans don't want the browns to acquire more draft picks, they want tangible ready to compete players. This is the adversity to trading down. Analyzing who is on the board when you pick is most important and this is what makes a great GM. Chubb is far and away the best DE in this draft. Fitzpatrick is very good and multi-dimensional but the next few CB's are not nearly as far back as the other DE's in the draft compared to Chubb. The same goes for Barkley. This is why "what" you are trading down for becomes the most important. Let's take the Bills scenario. I have said this in a few boards but if the bills offered #12, 22, 53, 56 and Tre'Davious White for #4, I jump on that in a second if I'm the browns. Why? 1.) The bills are going up for a qb, meaning that at least 4 out of the first 5 picks are going to be qb's pushing very good talent down the board. 2.) Adding White gives the browns a proven, elite player and perhaps one of the best up and coming secondary's in the nfl with all kinds of flexibility 3.) The browns now have 5 second round picks which is important for the next point 4.) They now have even more ammo to move up from #12 or #22 to get the guys they want. With all of the qb's going early, Barkley, Chubb, Nelson, etc are going to be sliding down the board. I bet if Cleveland called the Colts and said we will give you 2 more second round picks for #6, they still get Chubb. Now they have added another first round pick, White, and got the player they were probably targeting at #4. Once again, there are a lot of "If this happens then..." in this scenario and a lot of things need to go correctly for this work. But it is very plausible.
In addition, IF the browns Love them some Allen and the jets really really want Darnold, I think it would be wise for the Browns to trade #1 for #3 and Leonard Williams. No draft picks involved. The browns could then take Allen at #3 and Chubb at #4 or even make the trade above. They have created one of the best DL in the NFL. Now, this does not have to happen right as the first pick comes out either. If both teams want to make sure they get "their guy" the Browns can wait until the Jets are on the clock to ensure they get Allen and then make the deal (see Eli Manning deal). If Allen goes 2, then they hold onto Darnold and they have a very good qb whom they feel is just as good. (Yes, I understand there is a sense that the browns would be "settling" but if the reports of them being basically equal in their eyes, this theory works).
Trading down is not wrong. It's how you manipulate the draft from there. The browns need proven players which is what they are doing in FA, but they also have some big holes that need to be filled such as LT. Targeting specific players is the reason you acquire tons of draft and salary cap capital. It's to manipulate FA and the draft how you see it.
Good point to the "distance" of trading down. However, there is a caveat to trading down. The question is, "what are you trading down for?" The reason I think this is important is because of how the browns board maybe stacked and trading down does not always just mean draft picks. Fans don't want the browns to acquire more draft picks, they want tangible ready to compete players. This is the adversity to trading down. Analyzing who is on the board when you pick is most important and this is what makes a great GM. Chubb is far and away the best DE in this draft. Fitzpatrick is very good and multi-dimensional but the next few CB's are not nearly as far back as the other DE's in the draft compared to Chubb. The same goes for Barkley. This is why "what" you are trading down for becomes the most important. Let's take the Bills scenario. I have said this in a few boards but if the bills offered #12, 22, 53, 56 and Tre'Davious White for #4, I jump on that in a second if I'm the browns. Why? 1.) The bills are going up for a qb, meaning that at least 4 out of the first 5 picks are going to be qb's pushing very good talent down the board. 2.) Adding White gives the browns a proven, elite player and perhaps one of the best up and coming secondary's in the nfl with all kinds of flexibility 3.) The browns now have 5 second round picks which is important for the next point 4.) They now have even more ammo to move up from #12 or #22 to get the guys they want. With all of the qb's going early, Barkley, Chubb, Nelson, etc are going to be sliding down the board. I bet if Cleveland called the Colts and said we will give you 2 more second round picks for #6, they still get Chubb. Now they have added another first round pick, White, and got the player they were probably targeting at #4. Once again, there are a lot of "If this happens then..." in this scenario and a lot of things need to go correctly for this work. But it is very plausible.
In addition, IF the browns Love them some Allen and the jets really really want Darnold, I think it would be wise for the Browns to trade #1 for #3 and Leonard Williams. No draft picks involved. The browns could then take Allen at #3 and Chubb at #4 or even make the trade above. They have created one of the best DL in the NFL. Now, this does not have to happen right as the first pick comes out either. If both teams want to make sure they get "their guy" the Browns can wait until the Jets are on the clock to ensure they get Allen and then make the deal (see Eli Manning deal). If Allen goes 2, then they hold onto Darnold and they have a very good qb whom they feel is just as good. (Yes, I understand there is a sense that the browns would be "settling" but if the reports of them being basically equal in their eyes, this theory works).
Trading down is not wrong. It's how you manipulate the draft from there. The browns need proven players which is what they are doing in FA, but they also have some big holes that need to be filled such as LT. Targeting specific players is the reason you acquire tons of draft and salary cap capital. It's to manipulate FA and the draft how you see it.
You make an excellent point. I'd be far more pleased if a trade down involved a legitimate stud coming to our team, and not just more picks.
-
Yeah... we have a QB preference. We aren't trading the #1. So on the #4, or trade downs in general...
It still comes down to your valuation of the player at the top of the board vs those players you believe that you can land with the picks that are offered.
IMO every player at #4 has a potentially fatal flaw with the exception of Nelson... and if we have a position of minimal need, it's OG. If I am stuck at #4, then I will take one of them. However, if there's a trade offer, any reasonable trade offer, then I am outta there.
The player(s) ultimately taken with the pick(s) I trade away do not have to fail, but the one(s) taken with picks I receive need to succeed.
"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 -
Yeah... we have a QB preference. We aren't trading the #1. So on the #4, or trade downs in general...
It still comes down to your valuation of the player at the top of the board vs those players you believe that you can land with the picks that are offered.
IMO every player at #4 has a potentially fatal flaw with the exception of Nelson... and if we have a position of minimal need, it's OG. If I am stuck at #4, then I will take one of them. However, if there's a trade offer, any reasonable trade offer, then I am outta there.
The player(s) ultimately taken with the pick(s) I trade away do not have to fail, but the one(s) taken with picks I receive need to succeed.
Yeah... we have a QB preference. We aren't trading the #1. So on the #4, or trade downs in general...
It still comes down to your valuation of the player at the top of the board vs those players you believe that you can land with the picks that are offered.
IMO every player at #4 has a potentially fatal flaw with the exception of Nelson... and if we have a position of minimal need, it's OG. If I am stuck at #4, then I will take one of them. However, if there's a trade offer, any reasonable trade offer, then I am outta there.
The player(s) ultimately taken with the pick(s) I trade away do not have to fail, but the one(s) taken with picks I receive need to succeed.
But you know the drill every pick we trade away that turns out to be a star will be repeated here ad infinitum.
WSS
-
Yeah... we have a QB preference. We aren't trading the #1. So on the #4, or trade downs in general...
It still comes down to your valuation of the player at the top of the board vs those players you believe that you can land with the picks that are offered.
IMO every player at #4 has a potentially fatal flaw with the exception of Nelson... and if we have a position of minimal need, it's OG. If I am stuck at #4, then I will take one of them. However, if there's a trade offer, any reasonable trade offer, then I am outta there.
The player(s) ultimately taken with the pick(s) I trade away do not have to fail, but the one(s) taken with picks I receive need to succeed.
But you know the drill every pick we trade away that turns out to be a star will be repeated here ad infinitum.
WSS
But you know the drill every pick we trade away that turns out to be a star will be repeated here ad infinitum.
Absolutely... but had we hit on the picks we received, the critics would have been muted somewhat. But as long as the one "we gave away" was a QB they will never be silent... until we land our QB.
Might be this year...
-
To get #18 the Browns would likely have to give up #33+#64. Unless a guy like Tremaine Edmunds, Derwin James, Davenport, Vea, Ward, Minkah ect fall to #18, I don't want.
Hoping for #4 to the QB needy Bills for #12+#22+#56.
-
Yeah... we have a QB preference. We aren't trading the #1. So on the #4, or trade downs in general...
It still comes down to your valuation of the player at the top of the board vs those players you believe that you can land with the picks that are offered.
IMO every player at #4 has a potentially fatal flaw with the exception of Nelson... and if we have a position of minimal need, it's OG. If I am stuck at #4, then I will take one of them. However, if there's a trade offer, any reasonable trade offer, then I am outta there.
The player(s) ultimately taken with the pick(s) I trade away do not have to fail, but the one(s) taken with picks I receive need to succeed.
-
To get #18 the Browns would likely have to give up #33+#64. Unless a guy like Tremaine Edmunds, Derwin James, Davenport, Vea, Ward, Minkah ect fall to #18, I don't want.
Hoping for #4 to the QB needy Bills for #12+#22+#56.
To get #18 the Browns would likely have to give up #33+#64. Unless a guy like Tremaine Edmunds, Derwin James, Davenport, Vea, Ward, Minkah ect fall to #18, I don't want.
Hoping for #4 to the QB needy Bills for #12+#22+#56.
I've heard this rumor for weeks now also..Chad Forbes throws Smoke with 2 lines..1)Rumors this time of why are everywhere.2)hearing this one since before combine. It's simple Chad,Pete Carrol wants Shaq Griffin back playing with his brother in Seattle..Sherman is gone & Kam Chancellor maybe gone also..
-
I understand people not wanting to trade down, but people act like trading down is a TERRIBLE thing or never works. The pick that everyone is saying get this or that elite player at #4 (Barkley, Chubb, Fitzpatrick, Nelson, etc) is the result of... YEP A TRADE DOWN. This is what drives me crazy. Everyone will complain when the trade happens, but it worked out GREAT last year. Exactly what elite player were the Browns getting at #12 Last year besides Watson (Who got hurt). And they also got Njoku or Peppers from it.
So while I would be 99.9% positive the Browns aren't getting 12,22,53,56 and White, just say they do get AT LEAST 12 and 22, that means they got 12, 22, and 27 for the 12th pick. And if they dont make a trade, then they got #4 for #12. Seems pretty good to me
-
The trade down also cost them Wentz too. At some point you need to pick players and at #4 we will at a minimum have out pick of the #2 non-QB player in this draft, possibly #1. If we trade back we lose out on that. We need to start putting some blue chip players on this team. And if we do trade back there is no reason for us to drop back 8 plus spots.
-
Pick #1 - Your favorite QB (from the beginning I've wanted the QB with the best mechanics)
Pick #4 - I think they only trade out if Chubb and Barkley are gone....but maybe they like Fitzpatrick. (although I prefer offense...Cubb with Garrett and Ogbah might be able to seriously inhibit our opponents passing attack)
-
To get #18 the Browns would likely have to give up #33+#64. Unless a guy like Tremaine Edmunds, Derwin James, Davenport, Vea, Ward, Minkah ect fall to #18, I don't want.
Hoping for #4 to the QB needy Bills for #12+#22+#56.
To get #18 the Browns would likely have to give up #33+#64. Unless a guy like Tremaine Edmunds, Derwin James, Davenport, Vea, Ward, Minkah ect fall to #18, I don't want.I think it would cost more than two seconds to get back up to 18.
Just curious, but what is Minkah Fitzpatrick's potential fatal flaw Tour? IMO Fitpatrick might be about as "safe" pick there is in this draft.
First... fatal in terms of not being elite... in terms of not being worth a high first.
In Minkah's case it is insufficient burst... I think it shows in his first steps and, maybe more importantly as indicated by is sub-average 33" vertical, his ability to compete for the high pass.
-
The trade down also cost them Wentz too. At some point you need to pick players and at #4 we will at a minimum have out pick of the #2 non-QB player in this draft, possibly #1. If we trade back we lose out on that. We need to start putting some blue chip players on this team. And if we do trade back there is no reason for us to drop back 8 plus spots.
The trade down also cost them Wentz too. At some point you need to pick players and at #4 we will at a minimum have out pick of the #2 non-QB player in this draft, possibly #1.
Pretty sure that point is our first pick this year. I love it when folks haul out Wentz as if he was a sure thing. This just in... he's still not a sure thing.
As for the top or second non-QB... are you sure either unnamed player's value is greater than the sum of the #12, #22, and #53?
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