Skip to content

Good idea? Maybe Browns trade down with Atlanta?

The Browns Board
60 14 1.7k 1
  • YES!!!  Especially if the end game could be a a guy like Josh Jones 

    They were rumored to be after a QB Just a few days ago.  
     

    6 spots in the first round for a player they covet??? Make them pay ALOT 

    I love our spot.  I have feeling we get a Tua slide or A team really wanting Love and moving ahead of a few teams just behind us that could take a QB.  

  • There is already a Draft Trade thread on here. Merge maybe.

    But....tell us how, with your trade scenarios,  the Browns come out if it with both a top notch LT and a top notch LB....either Queen or Murray

    I have seen Jones rated anywhere from mid  1st to late 2d round.  

  • I'm more in favor of trading up than trading back. We HAVE to land starting LT and everybody knows it. I doubt Thomas is there at 10 regardless of what the experts say. Hes a proven LT and I bet hes the first one off the board. If he isn't doesnt land in striking distance than I would probably stand pat at 10 and take Jones. No reason to get cute.

  • Atlanta sits at 16. If Thomas and Simmons were both gone by 10... I'd seriously think about trading down absolutely.

    The trouble is, Jones could be gone...

    but it's a draft deep in OT's. So, if there is a second tier guy you really believe in, why not?

    If indeed, Ruggs is in that high a demand - we won't draft a wr in the first (I'm pretty sure)...

    the extra picks would come in handy, especially with this staff - who I believe will rock every one of their picks.

    https://www.si.com/nfl/browns/news/atlanta-falcons-potential-trade-partner-for-cleveland-browns

    @calfoxwc said:

    So, if there is a second tier guy you really believe in, why not?

    Hello.... is this thing on?

    image.thumb.png.3398c7bdc90d7a3d0f9d4cc38c50bc4f.png

    🙂

  • There is already a Draft Trade thread on here. Merge maybe.

    But....tell us how, with your trade scenarios,  the Browns come out if it with both a top notch LT and a top notch LB....either Queen or Murray

    I have seen Jones rated anywhere from mid  1st to late 2d round.  

    @the-gipper said:

    There is already a Draft Trade thread on here. Merge maybe. 

    Fuck your useless thread and for God's sake... learn how to change the size of the images you copy into your posts.

    At least fuckin' DraftTek didn't have a fuckin' photo of the fuckin #395th player in the fucking draft...

  • There is already a Draft Trade thread on here. Merge maybe.

    But....tell us how, with your trade scenarios,  the Browns come out if it with both a top notch LT and a top notch LB....either Queen or Murray

    I have seen Jones rated anywhere from mid  1st to late 2d round.  

    @the-gipper said:

    There is already a Draft Trade thread on here. Merge maybe.

    But....tell us how, with your trade scenarios,  the Browns come out if it with both a top notch LT and a top notch LB....either Queen or Murray

    I have seen Jones rated anywhere from mid  1st to late 2d round.  

    It's ""easy" lol.

    Trade down, get Jones, or trade down again, and reach on a LT.

    Then, "with 2 picks in round 2".... you nab either Tiam's Jeremy Chinn, or Kyle Dugger with one pick, and either another OT, or...

    you draft one of the top wr's available.

       In round three (three picks in round 3 >???), I really, really like Logan Wilson, LB.

  • @the-gipper said:

    There is already a Draft Trade thread on here. Merge maybe. 

    Fuck your useless thread and for God's sake... learn how to change the size of the images you copy into your posts.

    At least fuckin' DraftTek didn't have a fuckin' photo of the fuckin #395th player in the fucking draft...

    @tour2ma said:

    Fuck your useless thread and for God's sake... learn how to change the size of the images you copy into your posts.

    At least fuckin' DraftTek didn't have a fuckin' photo of the fuckin #395th player in the fucking draft...

    Do you really want to fuck my thread, i.e. insert your penis into it until you ejaculate?   You do know that that is the definition of the word "Fuck".   (its a common retort I make when people say "fuck you".  I ask if they seriously want to have sexual intercourse with me, right then, right there....it ires them) 

    And why do you care how much space that post took up here?  Are you paying extra for how much you have to look at?  (Besides, actually, when I copied it, that text was a very manageable size...but when it pasted, it came out huge like that.  

    So, just consider that I did this to aid the visually impaired. 

    And I edited it to include just those in the Top 150 prospects to make it more manageable. 

  • @calfoxwc said:

    So, if there is a second tier guy you really believe in, why not?

    Hello.... is this thing on?

    image.thumb.png.3398c7bdc90d7a3d0f9d4cc38c50bc4f.png

    🙂

    @tour2ma said:

    Hello.... is this thing on?

    image.thumb.png.3398c7bdc90d7a3d0f9d4cc38c50bc4f.png

    🙂

    LOL. You're right - Peart is very intriguing - but we need a starter that has the strength - not sure Peart is enough of a weight room guy yet.

    I like Ben Bartch better - he's meaner, loves the game - he's getting more and more attention:

    https://www.profootballnetwork.com/kyle-dugger-and-ben-bartch-help-boost-their-2020-nfl-draft-stock/

  • @the-gipper said:

    There is already a Draft Trade thread on here. Merge maybe.

    But....tell us how, with your trade scenarios,  the Browns come out if it with both a top notch LT and a top notch LB....either Queen or Murray

    I have seen Jones rated anywhere from mid  1st to late 2d round.  

    It's ""easy" lol.

    Trade down, get Jones, or trade down again, and reach on a LT.

    Then, "with 2 picks in round 2".... you nab either Tiam's Jeremy Chinn, or Kyle Dugger with one pick, and either another OT, or...

    you draft one of the top wr's available.

       In round three (three picks in round 3 >???), I really, really like Logan Wilson, LB.

    @calfoxwc said:

    It's ""easy" lol.

    Trade down, get Jones, or trade down again, and reach on a LT.

    Then, "with 2 picks in round 2".... you nab either Tiam's Jeremy Chinn, or Kyle Dugger with one pick, and either another OT, or...

    you draft one of the top wr's available.

       In round three (three picks in round 3 >???), I really, really like Logan Wilson, LB.

    Well, apparently it isn't that easy because you didn't suggest something that would achieve what I asked:   to get a top notch  LT and  either Murray or Queen.  

    And note that Draftek has Jones as only the  48th best overall prospect,  ergo,  perhaps he would be there when we draft at #41.   So, somehow maybe we take one of the LBs in round one, and Jones in round 2.  So...taking Jones in round one, per them....would indeed be "reaching" on a LT. 

    Further.....Draftek also has both Antoine Winfield and Ashtyn Davis rated higher than either  Dugger or Chinn.  So, maybe they would be better choices at safety in round 2. 

  • A trade down and drafting an OT like Austin Jackson seems like a good option if nobody on the board at #10 has great enough value. 

  • I say draft lamb and then trade him to raiders for two of their 1st rounders this year.

  • A trade down and drafting an OT like Austin Jackson seems like a good option if nobody on the board at #10 has great enough value. 

    @clevelandwantsplayoffs said:

    A trade down and drafting an OT like Austin Jackson seems like a good option if nobody on the board at #10 has great enough value. 

    And who, do you propose, who that person would be, not a tackle?  Someone that has dropped a far way?   Okudah? Simmons?    That I could see. 

  • If a trade down doesn't involve fleecing ATL then either Josh Jones or Matt Peart (as of typing this) then I don't want it.  

  • I say draft lamb and then trade him to raiders for two of their 1st rounders this year.

    @lbc-mike said:

    I say draft lamb and then trade him to raiders for two of their 1st rounders this year.

    Why would they trade picks #12 and #19  for the #10 pick?   I mean, I would do that, absolutely.....but I don't think the draft value charts would support that trade.

    Unless, maybe, we threw them back #41?    Even then I doubt it works  in either the Jimmy Johnson or Harvard charts. 

    Under the Jimmy Chart.......if we gave them  #10....1300 pts  # 41  490 pts, and #74  220 pts   Total  2010   For #12  1200 and #19  875...total  2075...

    we would still be   65 pts short....which means we would also have to give them #115...64 pts.

    So, would you do that:

    #10  + #41 + #74 + #115......FOR

    #12 and #19? 

    I think it would take some serious thought.      (of course, that would require using the out of favor JJ approach.)

    That deal, would be much worse for the Browns using the Harvard chart.    Without listing all the values....that trade would be the Browns giving up 661.9   vs. receiving back  528.2.   NYET

    Under the Harvard Chart.....a more workable situation would be  trading #10,  #41 and  #115   (keeping #74)

    That would be trading  543.5 pts for 528.2 

    THAT could get us  a LT we need, plus either Murray or Queen.   

  • @clevelandwantsplayoffs said:

    A trade down and drafting an OT like Austin Jackson seems like a good option if nobody on the board at #10 has great enough value. 

    And who, do you propose, who that person would be, not a tackle?  Someone that has dropped a far way?   Okudah? Simmons?    That I could see. 

    @the-gipper said:

    And who, do you propose, who that person would be, not a tackle?  Someone that has dropped a far way?   Okudah? Simmons?    That I could see. 

    I’m not sure who will drop. But having the opportunity to draft Derrick Brown would be nice. Andrew Thomas is Worth it at 10. 
    It should cost at least a 2nd to trade back 5 spots to Denver, who is looking for a WR

  • @tour2ma said:

    Hello.... is this thing on?

    image.thumb.png.3398c7bdc90d7a3d0f9d4cc38c50bc4f.png

    🙂

    LOL. You're right - Peart is very intriguing - but we need a starter that has the strength - not sure Peart is enough of a weight room guy yet.

    I like Ben Bartch better - he's meaner, loves the game - he's getting more and more attention:

    https://www.profootballnetwork.com/kyle-dugger-and-ben-bartch-help-boost-their-2020-nfl-draft-stock/

    Derrick Brown? A slower, less agile version of Danny Sheldon... no thanks...

    @calfoxwc said:

    LOL. You're right - Peart is very intriguing - but we need a starter that has the strength - not sure Peart is enough of a weight room guy yet.

    I like Ben Bartch better - he's meaner, loves the game - he's getting more and more attention:

    https://www.profootballnetwork.com/kyle-dugger-and-ben-bartch-help-boost-their-2020-nfl-draft-stock/

    The problem with Bartch... his arms scream GUARD!

    image.png.25a214528d6f122470f6796d6a28aefa.png

    image.png.45d7932130508b7d53fdd414ce33dac2.png

    Peart has the longest arms in this draft class and the #2 wingspan behind only S. Carolina State freak, Alex Taylor... who will be a nice 7th round project for some team to pick up...

    http://thebrownsboard.com/topic/55720-combine-ol-measurements/

  • If a trade down doesn't involve fleecing ATL then either Josh Jones or Matt Peart (as of typing this) then I don't want it.  

    @tiamat63 said:

    If a trade down doesn't involve fleecing ATL then either Josh Jones or Matt Peart (as of typing this) then I don't want it.  

    And it ain't just ATL apparently... which means the price is rising.

    https://www.si.com/nfl/broncos/news/denver-broncos-targeting-blockbuster-trade-up-with-cleveland-browns

  • @lbc-mike said:

    I say draft lamb and then trade him to raiders for two of their 1st rounders this year.

    Why would they trade picks #12 and #19  for the #10 pick?   I mean, I would do that, absolutely.....but I don't think the draft value charts would support that trade.

    Unless, maybe, we threw them back #41?    Even then I doubt it works  in either the Jimmy Johnson or Harvard charts. 

    Under the Jimmy Chart.......if we gave them  #10....1300 pts  # 41  490 pts, and #74  220 pts   Total  2010   For #12  1200 and #19  875...total  2075...

    we would still be   65 pts short....which means we would also have to give them #115...64 pts.

    So, would you do that:

    #10  + #41 + #74 + #115......FOR

    #12 and #19? 

    I think it would take some serious thought.      (of course, that would require using the out of favor JJ approach.)

    That deal, would be much worse for the Browns using the Harvard chart.    Without listing all the values....that trade would be the Browns giving up 661.9   vs. receiving back  528.2.   NYET

    Under the Harvard Chart.....a more workable situation would be  trading #10,  #41 and  #115   (keeping #74)

    That would be trading  543.5 pts for 528.2 

    THAT could get us  a LT we need, plus either Murray or Queen.   

    @the-gipper said:

    Why would they trade picks #12 and #19  for the #10 pick?   I mean, I would do that, absolutely.....but I don't think the draft value charts would support that trade.

    Unless, maybe, we threw them back #41?    Even then I doubt it works  in either the Jimmy Johnson or Harvard charts. 

    Under the Jimmy Chart.......if we gave them  #10....1300 pts  # 41  490 pts, and #74  220 pts   Total  2010   For #12  1200 and #19  875...total  2075...

    we would still be   65 pts short....which means we would also have to give them #115...64 pts.

    So, would you do that:

    #10  + #41 + #74 + #115......FOR

    #12 and #19? 

    I think it would take some serious thought.      (of course, that would require using the out of favor JJ approach.)

    That deal, would be much worse for the Browns using the Harvard chart.    Without listing all the values....that trade would be the Browns giving up 661.9   vs. receiving back  528.2.   NYET

    Under the Harvard Chart.....a more workable situation would be  trading #10,  #41 and  #115   (keeping #74)

    That would be trading  543.5 pts for 528.2 

    THAT could get us  a LT we need, plus either Murray or Queen.   

    No I would not do that trade.

     I think the strength of this draft is in middle and Then there are some serious sleepers that are getting 5/6/7 round grades by experts.

    41 74 and 105 will have better production than 19- Just My opinion 

  • Depends on how the Draft is developing, but I'd certainly consider packing the 10+41+115 for the 12+19...

    ... then I'd turned around and see what I can get for the 19.

  • Derrick Brown? A slower, less agile version of Danny Sheldon... no thanks...

    @calfoxwc said:

    LOL. You're right - Peart is very intriguing - but we need a starter that has the strength - not sure Peart is enough of a weight room guy yet.

    I like Ben Bartch better - he's meaner, loves the game - he's getting more and more attention:

    https://www.profootballnetwork.com/kyle-dugger-and-ben-bartch-help-boost-their-2020-nfl-draft-stock/

    The problem with Bartch... his arms scream GUARD!

    image.png.25a214528d6f122470f6796d6a28aefa.png

    image.png.45d7932130508b7d53fdd414ce33dac2.png

    Peart has the longest arms in this draft class and the #2 wingspan behind only S. Carolina State freak, Alex Taylor... who will be a nice 7th round project for some team to pick up...

    http://thebrownsboard.com/topic/55720-combine-ol-measurements/

    @tour2ma said:

    Derrick Brown? A slower, less agile version of Danny Sheldon... no thanks...

    The problem with Bartch... his arms scream GUARD!

    image.png.25a214528d6f122470f6796d6a28aefa.png

    image.png.45d7932130508b7d53fdd414ce33dac2.png

    Peart has the longest arms in this draft class and the #2 wingspan behind only S. Carolina State freak, Alex Taylor... who will be a nice 7th round project for some team to pick up...

    http://thebrownsboard.com/topic/55720-combine-ol-measurements/

    That is true - but he is very quick and mirrors very, very well, and in strong. Is it just me? (probably lol) Peart, from reading about him here and there, reminds me of Cameron Erving, OT. 2" less wingspan, but ...Bartch has that mean streak, the physicality... the competitiveness. I think Erving just didn't have the love for the game. He's still around though -