Stay at #49 or trade down
-
I posted something very similar about Finley in Tour's thread about his Darkhorse QB.
You might want to review his games against Texas A&M & Clemson. A bit less impressive against decent SEC & ACC defenses. Total of 1 DT and 4 ints for those two games and QB ratings of 93.7 and 88.5 respectively. I wasn't sold watching the A&M game live. His team got routed 52-13 by A&M and 41-7 by Clemson. He was held to 139 yds passing by A&M and 156 by Clemson, his two lows for the season.
You might want to review his games against Texas A&M & Clemson. A bit less impressive against decent SEC & ACC defenses. Total of 1 DT and 4 ints for those two games and QB ratings of 93.7 and 88.5 respectively. I wasn't sold watching the A&M game live. His team got routed 52-13 by A&M and 41-7 by Clemson. He was held to 139 yds passing by A&M and 156 by Clemson, his two lows for the season.
I believe you Aggies and worthy of note. That said, how did Alabama's QB look against Clemson? And not to go hindsight 20/20 on you; but just because Texas Tech didn't always compete against much more talented rosters - that didn't have to mean Patrick Mahomes was a bad idea for the NFL team interested in him. Everybody has a bad day or 2 so it's important to understand whether it's the exception to the rule (and why) or is it the rule? The context of Ryan Finley as it pertains to this discussion isn't among 1st round QBs - it's about the bargain he offers to the right taker with the right situation. The same Coach that drafted Donovan McNabb out of SU's Veer Option Offense (after he was Favre's QB Coach) - traded up alongside John Dorsey to select Mahomes. Right Coach? Right situation? You bet! In his 1st year as a NFL starter, he won with way more frequency than he ever did at Texas Tech... Much better margin of error to work with. Speaking of that, when Tom Brady got injured Matt Cassell stepped in won 10 or 11 games with an ideal margin or error the right situation blessed him with.
Along with what I saw when Finley was keeping NC State in the same game his Defense never showed up to at Syracuse - below is a partial cut and paste of what I posted in the QB Darkhorse thread.
Here's Ryan Finley's stats during the 3 years he started for the Wolfpack:
2016 13 G 243-402 60.4 cmp% 3059 yds 7.6 ypa 18 TD 8 INT
2017 13 G 311-478 65.1 cmp% 3514 yds 7.4 ypa 17 TD 6 INT
2018 13 G 326-482 67.4 cmp% 3928 yds 8.1 ypa 25 TD 11 INT
Gotta have? No. Steady improvement? Absolutely. If this kid goes to the right situation like NE per say, he could learn from another QB who wasn't anyone's dream PRE-draft.
-
You might want to review his games against Texas A&M & Clemson. A bit less impressive against decent SEC & ACC defenses. Total of 1 DT and 4 ints for those two games and QB ratings of 93.7 and 88.5 respectively. I wasn't sold watching the A&M game live. His team got routed 52-13 by A&M and 41-7 by Clemson. He was held to 139 yds passing by A&M and 156 by Clemson, his two lows for the season.
I believe you Aggies and worthy of note. That said, how did Alabama's QB look against Clemson? And not to go hindsight 20/20 on you; but just because Texas Tech didn't always compete against much more talented rosters - that didn't have to mean Patrick Mahomes was a bad idea for the NFL team interested in him. Everybody has a bad day or 2 so it's important to understand whether it's the exception to the rule (and why) or is it the rule? The context of Ryan Finley as it pertains to this discussion isn't among 1st round QBs - it's about the bargain he offers to the right taker with the right situation. The same Coach that drafted Donovan McNabb out of SU's Veer Option Offense (after he was Favre's QB Coach) - traded up alongside John Dorsey to select Mahomes. Right Coach? Right situation? You bet! In his 1st year as a NFL starter, he won with way more frequency than he ever did at Texas Tech... Much better margin of error to work with. Speaking of that, when Tom Brady got injured Matt Cassell stepped in won 10 or 11 games with an ideal margin or error the right situation blessed him with.
Along with what I saw when Finley was keeping NC State in the same game his Defense never showed up to at Syracuse - below is a partial cut and paste of what I posted in the QB Darkhorse thread.
Here's Ryan Finley's stats during the 3 years he started for the Wolfpack:
2016 13 G 243-402 60.4 cmp% 3059 yds 7.6 ypa 18 TD 8 INT
2017 13 G 311-478 65.1 cmp% 3514 yds 7.4 ypa 17 TD 6 INT
2018 13 G 326-482 67.4 cmp% 3928 yds 8.1 ypa 25 TD 11 INT
Gotta have? No. Steady improvement? Absolutely. If this kid goes to the right situation like NE per say, he could learn from another QB who wasn't anyone's dream PRE-draft.
-
I'm guessing these trade up options are hopes and dreams and not actually thinking they would work.
I don't think any team would have that much love for Duke. Everyone here is thinking he has very little play after Hunt comes back. And every team also knows that, so the Browns are in a negative situation then. And teams also know they can get value late in Draft or undrafted for the position. In fact, I remember all the talk last year about how great Barkley was, most proclaiming the best prospect, but almost everyone didn't want to draft him at #1, and majority not to draft him at #4, because you can get similar production in someone like Chubb. There is a reason why he would be 3rd when Hunt comes back. So to think he would make a big difference in a trade up doesn't make sense.
First the double trade up is crazy, even in a dream. Most think the Browns will be good this upcoming season, so future picks will be low in a round. So to think trading a 3rd this year, Duke, and next year 1st to get a pick in the teens, well what benefit does that do for that team? But let's just say that were to happen miraculously. Lets say that is the 14th pick. What benefit does it do for the Jets to get the 14th, 47th, and next years pick at say 56. Do anybody really think that is even close to equaling this years #3?
Again there is a reason why future 1st round picks are valued a round lower. Its because of the unknown.
-
I don't see the point in trading down unless it is for a pick next year. We still have 7 draft choice. That is more than the probable number of roster spots that will be open.
Trade up if anything. I would like to see the 7 picks turn in to maybe 4 drafted players.
-
I'm guessing these trade up options are hopes and dreams and not actually thinking they would work.
I don't think any team would have that much love for Duke. Everyone here is thinking he has very little play after Hunt comes back. And every team also knows that, so the Browns are in a negative situation then. And teams also know they can get value late in Draft or undrafted for the position. In fact, I remember all the talk last year about how great Barkley was, most proclaiming the best prospect, but almost everyone didn't want to draft him at #1, and majority not to draft him at #4, because you can get similar production in someone like Chubb. There is a reason why he would be 3rd when Hunt comes back. So to think he would make a big difference in a trade up doesn't make sense.
First the double trade up is crazy, even in a dream. Most think the Browns will be good this upcoming season, so future picks will be low in a round. So to think trading a 3rd this year, Duke, and next year 1st to get a pick in the teens, well what benefit does that do for that team? But let's just say that were to happen miraculously. Lets say that is the 14th pick. What benefit does it do for the Jets to get the 14th, 47th, and next years pick at say 56. Do anybody really think that is even close to equaling this years #3?
Again there is a reason why future 1st round picks are valued a round lower. Its because of the unknown.
I'm guessing these trade up options are hopes and dreams and not actually thinking they would work.
I don't think any team would have that much love for Duke. Everyone here is thinking he has very little play after Hunt comes back. And every team also knows that, so the Browns are in a negative situation then. And teams also know they can get value late in Draft or undrafted for the position. In fact, I remember all the talk last year about how great Barkley was, most proclaiming the best prospect, but almost everyone didn't want to draft him at #1, and majority not to draft him at #4, because you can get similar production in someone like Chubb. There is a reason why he would be 3rd when Hunt comes back. So to think he would make a big difference in a trade up doesn't make sense.
First the double trade up is crazy, even in a dream. Most think the Browns will be good this upcoming season, so future picks will be low in a round. So to think trading a 3rd this year, Duke, and next year 1st to get a pick in the teens, well what benefit does that do for that team? But let's just say that were to happen miraculously. Lets say that is the 14th pick. What benefit does it do for the Jets to get the 14th, 47th, and next years pick at say 56. Do anybody really think that is even close to equaling this years #3?
Again there is a reason why future 1st round picks are valued a round lower. Its because of the unknown.
As far as I am concerned the value in Duke Johnson is NOT in whatever we can trade him for....but in whatever use can be made of him. He is...to my mind, that prototypical 3rd down back. A guy you can run the ball with....throw the ball to out of the backfield, and also use in the slot at times. He can be productive in all those situations. I am NOT certain that Hunt has all those attributes....and he certainly won't have them for the Browns to use in the first 8 games....and beyond likely. He seems to me to be more like Chubb than like Duke.
In my view...if we got rid of Duke, then we would have to be in the market to get a guy just like him. So, getting rid of him is counter productive...and if Dorsey does so then I see it as just a case of "he's not my guy" at play.
-
I'm guessing these trade up options are hopes and dreams and not actually thinking they would work.
I don't think any team would have that much love for Duke. Everyone here is thinking he has very little play after Hunt comes back. And every team also knows that, so the Browns are in a negative situation then. And teams also know they can get value late in Draft or undrafted for the position. In fact, I remember all the talk last year about how great Barkley was, most proclaiming the best prospect, but almost everyone didn't want to draft him at #1, and majority not to draft him at #4, because you can get similar production in someone like Chubb. There is a reason why he would be 3rd when Hunt comes back. So to think he would make a big difference in a trade up doesn't make sense.
First the double trade up is crazy, even in a dream. Most think the Browns will be good this upcoming season, so future picks will be low in a round. So to think trading a 3rd this year, Duke, and next year 1st to get a pick in the teens, well what benefit does that do for that team? But let's just say that were to happen miraculously. Lets say that is the 14th pick. What benefit does it do for the Jets to get the 14th, 47th, and next years pick at say 56. Do anybody really think that is even close to equaling this years #3?
Again there is a reason why future 1st round picks are valued a round lower. Its because of the unknown.
As far as I am concerned the value in Duke Johnson is NOT in whatever we can trade him for....but in whatever use can be made of him. He is...to my mind, that prototypical 3rd down back. A guy you can run the ball with....throw the ball to out of the backfield, and also use in the slot at times. He can be productive in all those situations. I am NOT certain that Hunt has all those attributes....and he certainly won't have them for the Browns to use in the first 8 games....and beyond likely. He seems to me to be more like Chubb than like Duke.
In my view...if we got rid of Duke, then we would have to be in the market to get a guy just like him. So, getting rid of him is counter productive...and if Dorsey does so then I see it as just a case of "he's not my guy" at play.
He is...to my mind, that prototypical 3rd down back. A guy you can run the ball with....throw the ball to out of the backfield, and also use in the slot at times.
Duke also blocks decently. His value is higher to us than to any other team....considering our situation with Hunt. But I won't be surprised to see him dealt on Friday and we go into the season with Hilliard is our 3rd RB.
-
I'm guessing these trade up options are hopes and dreams and not actually thinking they would work.
I don't think any team would have that much love for Duke. Everyone here is thinking he has very little play after Hunt comes back. And every team also knows that, so the Browns are in a negative situation then. And teams also know they can get value late in Draft or undrafted for the position. In fact, I remember all the talk last year about how great Barkley was, most proclaiming the best prospect, but almost everyone didn't want to draft him at #1, and majority not to draft him at #4, because you can get similar production in someone like Chubb. There is a reason why he would be 3rd when Hunt comes back. So to think he would make a big difference in a trade up doesn't make sense.
First the double trade up is crazy, even in a dream. Most think the Browns will be good this upcoming season, so future picks will be low in a round. So to think trading a 3rd this year, Duke, and next year 1st to get a pick in the teens, well what benefit does that do for that team? But let's just say that were to happen miraculously. Lets say that is the 14th pick. What benefit does it do for the Jets to get the 14th, 47th, and next years pick at say 56. Do anybody really think that is even close to equaling this years #3?
Again there is a reason why future 1st round picks are valued a round lower. Its because of the unknown.
As far as I am concerned the value in Duke Johnson is NOT in whatever we can trade him for....but in whatever use can be made of him. He is...to my mind, that prototypical 3rd down back. A guy you can run the ball with....throw the ball to out of the backfield, and also use in the slot at times. He can be productive in all those situations. I am NOT certain that Hunt has all those attributes....and he certainly won't have them for the Browns to use in the first 8 games....and beyond likely. He seems to me to be more like Chubb than like Duke.
In my view...if we got rid of Duke, then we would have to be in the market to get a guy just like him. So, getting rid of him is counter productive...and if Dorsey does so then I see it as just a case of "he's not my guy" at play.
As far as I am concerned the value in Duke Johnson is NOT in whatever we can trade him for....but in whatever use can be made of him. He is...to my mind, that prototypical 3rd down back. A guy you can run the ball with....throw the ball to out of the backfield, and also use in the slot at times. He can be productive in all those situations. I am NOT certain that Hunt has all those attributes....and he certainly won't have them for the Browns to use in the first 8 games....and beyond likely. He seems to me to be more like Chubb than like Duke.
In my view...if we got rid of Duke, then we would have to be in the market to get a guy just like him. So, getting rid of him is counter productive...and if Dorsey does so then I see it as just a case of "he's not my guy" at play.
I agree, but it seems that most expect him to be dealt, and some seem to value his trade value as a top tier player. I like him as a player, but he doesn't equal what those guys are saying
-
Hilliard has his spot. Time to move on.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. -
-
-
So what does that mean to you? Cut him? Trade him for a flip of 7th round picks?
Maybe package Our 3rd and Duke to get back in to round 2.
From Hilliard.
I doubt it. I don't know why so many think Duke a great player. If he was, he would have been playing more. Hilliard had 9 receptions last year on probably as many targets...I couldn't find that info. He will step in nicely.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. -
Oh....people say why trade him when all we will get is a flip of 7th round picks. I think that says it right...he is a dime a dozen player. There are all kinds of journeymen backs out there who go from team to team and catch 40 balls.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. -
So what does that mean to you? Cut him? Trade him for a flip of 7th round picks?
Maybe package Our 3rd and Duke to get back in to round 2.
From Hilliard.
I doubt it. I don't know why so many think Duke a great player. If he was, he would have been playing more. Hilliard had 9 receptions last year on probably as many targets...I couldn't find that info. He will step in nicely.
Maybe package Our 3rd and Duke to get back in to round 2.
I doubt it. I don't know why so many think Duke a great player. If he was, he would have been playing more. Hilliard had 9 receptions last year on probably as many targets...I couldn't find that info. He will step in nicely.
Duke was the best weapon this team had for a couple of years. Before Mayfield, before Chubb, before Calloway, before Landry. Perhaps that is why. Most of us do NOT believe his capability was diminished...only his utilization:
Rushing & Receiving
-
-
Games Rushing Receiving Total Yds Year Age Tm Pos No. G GS Rush Yds TD Lng Y/A Y/G A/G Tgt Rec Yds Y/R TD Lng R/G Y/G Ctch% Y/Tgt Touch Y/Tch YScm RRTD Fmb AV Career 64 10 299 1286 5 39 4.3 20.1 4.7 303 235 2170 9.2 8 52 3.7 33.9 77.6% 534 6.4719 3456 13 8 20 2015 22 CLE rb 29 16 7 104 379 0 39 3.6 23.7 6.5 74 61 534 8.8 2 52 3.8 33.4 82.4% 7.2 165 5.5333 913 2 1 5 2016 23 CLE rb 29 16 1 73 358 1 22 4.9 22.4 4.6 74 53 514 9.7 0 32 3.3 32.1 71.6% 6.9 126 6.9206 872 1 2 5 2017 24 CLE 29 16 0 82 348 4 19 4.2 21.8 5.1 93 74 693 9.4 3 41 4.6 43.3 79.6% 7.5 156 6.6731 1041 7 4 6 2018 25 CLE rb 29 16 2 40 201 0 23 5.0 12.6 2.5 62 47 429 9.1 3 32 2.9 26.8 75.8% 6.9 87 7.2414 630 3 1 4
-
To be reduced from 165 touches to 87 would reduce any player's output. Yet note that his yards per touch increase quite a bit last year...even though he had fewer touches.
-
-
Oh....people say why trade him when all we will get is a flip of 7th round picks. I think that says it right...he is a dime a dozen player. There are all kinds of journeymen backs out there who go from team to team and catch 40 balls.
..he is a dime a dozen player. There are all kinds of journeymen backs out there who go from team to team and catch 40 balls.
.....I believe in another thread I called it, "Rent - a - Running Back".
Duke is a smart football player who can catch, run & block.
I think Dorsey made a mistake when he answered the Karem Hunt question by answering, "No, singing Karem Hunt doesn't make Duke expendable yet." - I wish he wouldn't have said the word 'yet'.
-
- There will be NO TRADING UP INTO ROUND ONE -
I just OK'ed the switch of band rehearsal from Wednesday night to Thursday night!
BEING A BROWNS FAN IS A TEST TO SEE HOW MUCH YOU CAN TAKE -
- There will be NO TRADING UP INTO ROUND ONE -
I just OK'ed the switch of band rehearsal from Wednesday night to Thursday night!
- There will be NO TRADING UP INTO ROUND ONE -
I just OK'ed the switch of band rehearsal from Wednesday night to Thursday night!
I've been rehearsing getting rid of those 6th & 7th round picks all week..My wife's birthday tickets to me, says Jimmy Buffett hits the Nashville stage at 8 pm Saturday night..Let's wrap this thing up by 6Pm Dorsey.. Come Monday..i might be alright
-
Ballpeen, you are contradicting yourself here.
If you think his value is swap of 7th round picks, or even by himself worth a 5th, 6th, 7th, then packaging him with a 3rd is not even close to moving to 2nd.
Now the thing I don't understand completely is people bringing up being the best player a couple years ago to assess value. I think he is more valuable on the team as I have said, and I can't get on board with packaging him to move up in 1st 3 rounds, as I don't see that value as I have said, but being the top playmaker on a bad team doesn't mean he had great value. What that says is that the team had bad talent. That doesn't mean he couldn't be a great talent, but using his as the "best" adds no value. The best player on a bad team doesn't mean that player would be good on another
-
Stay at 49 or move up if the right player / value exists. This team is not in need of collecting lower round draft capitol with a trade down.
Stay at 49 or move up if the right player / value exists. This team is not in need of collecting lower round draft capitol with a trade down.
Exactly. The FO already hinted they had determined any players left around pick 17 had second round value. Why would you trade back into the first if you think that? Hard to imagine a top 15 pick to fall far enough to jump that high. Moving up in the second seems far more likely, but what do I know?
“It is impossible to get a man to understand something if his livelihood depends on him not understanding.” -
10 potential picks @ # 49
-
Ballpeen, you are contradicting yourself here.
If you think his value is swap of 7th round picks, or even by himself worth a 5th, 6th, 7th, then packaging him with a 3rd is not even close to moving to 2nd.
Now the thing I don't understand completely is people bringing up being the best player a couple years ago to assess value. I think he is more valuable on the team as I have said, and I can't get on board with packaging him to move up in 1st 3 rounds, as I don't see that value as I have said, but being the top playmaker on a bad team doesn't mean he had great value. What that says is that the team had bad talent. That doesn't mean he couldn't be a great talent, but using his as the "best" adds no value. The best player on a bad team doesn't mean that player would be good on another
Ballpeen, you are contradicting yourself here.
If you think his value is swap of 7th round picks, or even by himself worth a 5th, 6th, 7th, then packaging him with a 3rd is not even close to moving to 2nd.
Now the thing I don't understand completely is people bringing up being the best player a couple years ago to assess value. I think he is more valuable on the team as I have said, and I can't get on board with packaging him to move up in 1st 3 rounds, as I don't see that value as I have said, but being the top playmaker on a bad team doesn't mean he had great value. What that says is that the team had bad talent. That doesn't mean he couldn't be a great talent, but using his as the "best" adds no value. The best player on a bad team doesn't mean that player would be good on another
I bolded the statements that, to me, say it all. I don't think Duke is/was as good as some think. I think he's an average back & the alleged picks suggested in trade pretty much verify that.
Mike
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