Skip to content
The Browns Board
  1. Home
  2. The Browns Board
  3. Broncos Trade To 4?

Broncos Trade To 4?

The Browns Board
70 17 3.1k
  • S SDBrownsFan wrote on
    #28

    All I'm saying is...Sooner or later its time to take the AJ Greens or the Adrian Petersons of the draft class.

    We used to have a guy that was good for 1 or 2 wins a year (Josh Cribbs) the NFL is all about mismatches. Look at NE with Gronk- he is half himself in the Super Bowl and the offense looks lost.

    If Josh Cribbs wasn't returning kicks for TDs or 40/50 yard gains- he was making punters directional kick it and we would have field position at midfield. That's the kind of player that makes your offense if its respectable a lot better. Give the Browns 1 guy that you have to gameplan for and watch some of these other smaller pieces like (Little) play at a higher level.

    I'd much rather have some elite players with a guy like Heckert drafting I expect him to hit on a few late round picks with guys that have 2nd or 3rd round type careers. Do you think his ego gets in the way? If you or I had to pick at 4 this season we'd do fine with Blackmon or Richardson- we'd keep our jobs and not have to worry about filling that spot next draft year. If he's confident picking his guys- he has 12 picks from the end of round 1 to round 7 to make himself look good.

  • The GipperT The Gipper

    @clevelandbigdawg said:

    At the same time Doug Martin plus 3 starters could turn into: William Green, Jeff Faine, Brady Quinn, and David Vaikune. And Trent could be as good or better than AP.

    I know there are a lot of if's and's or but's, but it's not a guarantee, either way as Trent could be the next... Ronnie Brown/Cadillac etc..

    Faine was not bad. It was the trading of him for a guy that played one day for the Browns that was bad.

    The others were products of poor talent evaluation, and some bad luck, for sure. I have more confidence now in the eye of Tom Heckert than that of any of the guys that made those picks. Oh, he can miss, like perhaps with Montario....but I will put better odds on him than on others we have had.

    C ClevelandBigDawg wrote on
    #29

    @the-gipper said:

    Faine was not bad. It was the trading of him for a guy that played one day for the Browns that was bad.

    The others were products of poor talent evaluation, and some bad luck, for sure. I have more confidence now in the eye of Tom Heckert than that of any of the guys that made those picks. Oh, he can miss, like perhaps with Montario....but I will put better odds on him than on others we have had.

    Well we traded him and our pick to move up in the draft, not for Bentley. Bentley was our big Free Agent signee.

    The GipperT 1 Reply
  • miktoxicM miktoxic

    @usfbrown said:

    Well, Browns suck in general at drafting. Just saying...

    yeah like taylor, sheard, and little are bums.

    yeah little dropped the ball a lot last year. he better get over that real quick. i think cameron has a chance to be a good TE and hagg i'm still on the fence about. but 5 guys to contribute right out of the gate for a single year's draft is hardly drafting bad.

    heckert has made the difference. hopefully holmgren keeps his nose out of the dude's biz on draft day and we don't end up with some WR turned QB.

    USFBrownU USFBrown wrote on
    #30

    @miktoxic said:

    yeah like taylor, sheard, and little are bums.

    yeah little dropped the ball a lot last year. he better get over that real quick. i think cameron has a chance to be a good TE and hagg i'm still on the fence about. but 5 guys to contribute right out of the gate for a single year's draft is hardly drafting bad.

    heckert has made the difference. hopefully holmgren keeps his nose out of the dude's biz on draft day and we don't end up with some WR turned QB.

    Yeah, those guys played really well. A 4-12 record is really something to be proud of. Our defense played lights out.

    Yes i'm bitter and really Heckert hasn't drafted bad, but we can't afford to trade down any more. We need stars.

  • chocoC choco wrote on
    #31

    no...you want stars.

    we need football players.

  • chocoC choco

    no...you want stars.

    we need football players.

    USFBrownU USFBrown wrote on
    #32

    @choco said:

    no...you want stars.

    we need football players.

    We have plenty of football players. We need good ones. The teams who go to playoffs, win superbowls, they have stars.

    Who do we have???

    miktoxicM 1 Reply
  • R Represent

    Denver gives us the 25, 67, and 87 this year, and their 2013 and 2014 first round picks to take Blackmon for Peyton Manning.

    With Peyton Possibly having 3 decent/good years left or a little more i heard they might be interested in making the deals they need this year to contend for the superbowl right away for Manning.

    As a Browns Fan

    Yes or No?

    Personally I would say no and take our play maker at 4 but i know some people LOVE the trade down scenerios so whats the answer?

    Tour2maT Tour2ma wrote on
    #33

    @represent said:

    Denver gives us the 25, 67, and 87 this year, and their 2013 and 2014 first round picks to take Blackmon for Peyton Manning.

    Yes... The flexibility it would give us for the next three drafts would be tremendous. This year I would not set at 22 and 25. At least one of those gets bumped back up into the 10-12 area this year.

    And not wishing Peyton ill, but should Denver's dice roll come up craps those future #1's would start moving higher and higher...

    So yes, I'd pull the trigger on this one in a heartbeat... if only it were real...

    @cambridgeho said:

    We need a playmaker and we have some great options at 4.

    We are not a "playmaker" away from anything. This trade is the type of trade that could set us up to be a playmaker away...

    @cribbs-is-the-man said:

    I look at it as: would you rather have T. Richardson or Doug Martin plus 3 more starters (2 1st round picks and a 2nd). For me, that is a no brainer. Richardson might be great, but is he THAT much better than the next tier that you would turn that down?? For me he is not. If he was a QB I would look at this differently.

    Brilliant post... cuts right to the heart the matter.

    @the-gipper said:

    Sounds like you've been hanging around with Jed Clampett.

    More like Wayne LaPierre... violent-smiley-004.gif

    "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
  • C ClevelandBigDawg

    @the-gipper said:

    Faine was not bad. It was the trading of him for a guy that played one day for the Browns that was bad.

    The others were products of poor talent evaluation, and some bad luck, for sure. I have more confidence now in the eye of Tom Heckert than that of any of the guys that made those picks. Oh, he can miss, like perhaps with Montario....but I will put better odds on him than on others we have had.

    Well we traded him and our pick to move up in the draft, not for Bentley. Bentley was our big Free Agent signee.

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on
    #34

    @clevelandbigdawg said:

    Well we traded him and our pick to move up in the draft, not for Bentley. Bentley was our big Free Agent signee.

    Refresh my memory on who we got with that traded up pick. I don't recall.

  • USFBrownU USFBrown

    @choco said:

    no...you want stars.

    we need football players.

    We have plenty of football players. We need good ones. The teams who go to playoffs, win superbowls, they have stars.

    Who do we have???

    miktoxicM miktoxic wrote on
    #35

    @usfbrown said:

    We have plenty of football players. We need good ones. The teams who go to playoffs, win superbowls, they have stars.

    ok on the superbowl giants who are the stars? yes eli was coming out of college. a top 5 pick. cruz wasn't drafted. bradshaw (who is a second tier rb at best) was a seventh round pick. hixon was a fourth pick cut by the broncos and picked up off of waivers. the only offensive weapon manning has that was picked in the first round is hakeem nicks who is hardly a first tier receiver.

    now on the defensive side kiwanuka, pierre-paul, rolle all first round. umi 2nd. and tuck 3rd.

    i'd rather follow the business plan of a winner, most of which address defense first, beefing up lines on both sides of the ball, then looking to find rbs and wrs in the later rounds, than a team like oakland who always goes after the fastest receiver and rb with best college stats.

    PoeticGP 1 Reply
  • chocoC choco wrote on
    #36

    &nice catch mik.....thought it would go by the wayside.

  • miktoxicM miktoxic

    @usfbrown said:

    We have plenty of football players. We need good ones. The teams who go to playoffs, win superbowls, they have stars.

    ok on the superbowl giants who are the stars? yes eli was coming out of college. a top 5 pick. cruz wasn't drafted. bradshaw (who is a second tier rb at best) was a seventh round pick. hixon was a fourth pick cut by the broncos and picked up off of waivers. the only offensive weapon manning has that was picked in the first round is hakeem nicks who is hardly a first tier receiver.

    now on the defensive side kiwanuka, pierre-paul, rolle all first round. umi 2nd. and tuck 3rd.

    i'd rather follow the business plan of a winner, most of which address defense first, beefing up lines on both sides of the ball, then looking to find rbs and wrs in the later rounds, than a team like oakland who always goes after the fastest receiver and rb with best college stats.

    PoeticGP PoeticG wrote on
    #37

    @miktoxic said:

    ok on the superbowl giants who are the stars? yes eli was coming out of college. a top 5 pick. cruz wasn't drafted. bradshaw (who is a second tier rb at best) was a seventh round pick. hixon was a fourth pick cut by the broncos and picked up off of waivers. the only offensive weapon manning has that was picked in the first round is hakeem nicks who is hardly a first tier receiver.

    now on the defensive side kiwanuka, pierre-paul, rolle all first round. umi 2nd. and tuck 3rd.

    i'd rather follow the business plan of a winner, most of which address defense first, beefing up lines on both sides of the ball, then looking to find rbs and wrs in the later rounds, than a team like oakland who always goes after the fastest receiver and rb with best college stats.

    Shit, the Giants don't have stars... they have a constellation. You might need something stronger than an over the counter soap to was the choco off your nuts..

    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-
    cribbs is the manC miktoxicM 3 Replies
  • PoeticGP PoeticG

    @miktoxic said:

    ok on the superbowl giants who are the stars? yes eli was coming out of college. a top 5 pick. cruz wasn't drafted. bradshaw (who is a second tier rb at best) was a seventh round pick. hixon was a fourth pick cut by the broncos and picked up off of waivers. the only offensive weapon manning has that was picked in the first round is hakeem nicks who is hardly a first tier receiver.

    now on the defensive side kiwanuka, pierre-paul, rolle all first round. umi 2nd. and tuck 3rd.

    i'd rather follow the business plan of a winner, most of which address defense first, beefing up lines on both sides of the ball, then looking to find rbs and wrs in the later rounds, than a team like oakland who always goes after the fastest receiver and rb with best college stats.

    Shit, the Giants don't have stars... they have a constellation. You might need something stronger than an over the counter soap to was the choco off your nuts..

    cribbs is the manC cribbs is the man wrote on
    #38

    @poeticg said:

    Shit, the Giants don't have stars... they have a constellation. You might need something stronger than an over the counter soap to was the choco off your nuts..

    Ok, I guess the Giants dont work for you. How about the Packers?? We are going to leave QBs out of this because we cant draft a franchise QB with #4 (unless you reallllly wanna bring up Tannehill) so the conversation is irrelevant. So all the Packer's offensive "stars" (and by stars you are saying high picks which I dont agree with but for the sake of the argument..):

    RB Starks 6th round, Grant Undrafted

    WR Nelson 2nd round, Jennings 2nd round, J. Jones 3rd round, D. Driver 7th round

    TE Finley 3rd round

    Quantity does not necessarily outweigh quality, but 5 good players (outside 1st round) greatly outweigh that one "star". Ill trade back and pick up 2nd and 3rd rounders all day long...

    The GipperT 1 Reply
  • PoeticGP PoeticG

    @miktoxic said:

    ok on the superbowl giants who are the stars? yes eli was coming out of college. a top 5 pick. cruz wasn't drafted. bradshaw (who is a second tier rb at best) was a seventh round pick. hixon was a fourth pick cut by the broncos and picked up off of waivers. the only offensive weapon manning has that was picked in the first round is hakeem nicks who is hardly a first tier receiver.

    now on the defensive side kiwanuka, pierre-paul, rolle all first round. umi 2nd. and tuck 3rd.

    i'd rather follow the business plan of a winner, most of which address defense first, beefing up lines on both sides of the ball, then looking to find rbs and wrs in the later rounds, than a team like oakland who always goes after the fastest receiver and rb with best college stats.

    Shit, the Giants don't have stars... they have a constellation. You might need something stronger than an over the counter soap to was the choco off your nuts..

    cribbs is the manC cribbs is the man wrote on
    #39

    @poeticg said:

    Shit, the Giants don't have stars... they have a constellation. You might need something stronger than an over the counter soap to was the choco off your nuts..

    Still not convinced? Fine lets go the the team with the most yards last year, the Saints:

    RB Sproles 4th round, Thomas undrafted, Ingram 28th pick (and 3rd most effective RB)

    TE Graham 3rd round

    WR Colston 7th round, Moore Undrafted, Meachem #27 pick (and hardly a "star")

    All these teams do have elite QBs but considering we dont have a shot anymore at an elite QB at 4, how about we build a team around a future one with a high quantity of quality players (1-3 rounders) maybe we can find a Colston with one of our 7ths but I wont count on it

  • PoeticGP PoeticG wrote on
    #40

    Everyone on the Browns save for Joe Thomas, Alex Mack and Phil Taylor are from outside the first round... Is it a coincidence that those are our best players? We need more first round talen on this team to compete. The Browns have 2 picks in the first round, they should add two big first round names to the above 3.

    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-
    Harry BuffaloH cribbs is the manC The GipperT Tour2maT 4 Replies
  • cdl15C cdl15 wrote on
    #41

    I think we just let H & H do what they do and if u dont like go root for another team. I will be happy with what ever they do. Even if its not what I woulda done. Nothin is as bad as watching mangina on draft day.....tnat zhit was a phucking joke

    "We are Americans. We don't quit doing something because it's wrong. We just keep doing the wrong thing till it turns out right." Browns maybe the most American Football team ever.
    Tim Couch Pulls OutT 1 Reply
  • PoeticGP PoeticG

    Everyone on the Browns save for Joe Thomas, Alex Mack and Phil Taylor are from outside the first round... Is it a coincidence that those are our best players? We need more first round talen on this team to compete. The Browns have 2 picks in the first round, they should add two big first round names to the above 3.

    Harry BuffaloH Harry Buffalo wrote on
    #42

    @poeticg said:

    Everyone on the Browns save for Joe Thomas, Alex Mack and Phil Taylor are from outside the first round... Is it a coincidence that those are our best players? We need more first round talen on this team to compete. The Browns have 2 picks in the first round, they should add two big first round names to the above 3.

    Joe Haden.

    Ruining threads since 1897.
  • PoeticGP PoeticG

    Everyone on the Browns save for Joe Thomas, Alex Mack and Phil Taylor are from outside the first round... Is it a coincidence that those are our best players? We need more first round talen on this team to compete. The Browns have 2 picks in the first round, they should add two big first round names to the above 3.

    cribbs is the manC cribbs is the man wrote on
    #43

    @poeticg said:

    Everyone on the Browns save for Joe Thomas, Alex Mack and Phil Taylor are from outside the first round... Is it a coincidence that those are our best players? We need more first round talen on this team to compete. The Browns have 2 picks in the first round, they should add two big first round names to the above 3.

    I'll only look at what Heckert has done and ignore the awful talent evaluator that was Mangini, and the troubled Phil Savage. Id much rather have twice as much 2nd and high 3rd round talent than first round talent (excluding QBs). I believe that would make us a much better team both short and long term. IMO the top 10 is really valuable for QBs, LTs, a #1 CB, and Dline or a cant miss talent such as a Calvin Johnson (mayyyybe Trent is one of those, but I think the positional importance of one RB is very low). No chance at a QB this year, we have the LT and CB, and there is a lack of Dline talent this year. Obviously the best players will go top 10, and you have a better shot at getting for example a better WR in the top 10 than in the second round, but I'd argue that if you could get 2 second rounders by dropping 10 spots in the first round, you do it in a heartbeat this year.

    miktoxicM 1 Reply
  • PoeticGP PoeticG wrote on
    #44

    Maybe we can offer the Vikings a third rounder, 2 fourths and 3 sevenths for AD??

    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-
  • PoeticGP PoeticG wrote on
    #45

    Hell, why stop there? How about:

    1- 3rd

    2- 4ths

    2- 5ths

    1- 6th

    3- 7ths

    AND- a 3rd rounder and 4th rounder next year for Peterson? Would they do it, and why?

    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-
  • PoeticGP PoeticG wrote on
    #46

    That's 11 picks for 1, according to all these experts here, this would be acceptable.

    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-
  • cribbs is the manC cribbs is the man

    @poeticg said:

    Shit, the Giants don't have stars... they have a constellation. You might need something stronger than an over the counter soap to was the choco off your nuts..

    Ok, I guess the Giants dont work for you. How about the Packers?? We are going to leave QBs out of this because we cant draft a franchise QB with #4 (unless you reallllly wanna bring up Tannehill) so the conversation is irrelevant. So all the Packer's offensive "stars" (and by stars you are saying high picks which I dont agree with but for the sake of the argument..):

    RB Starks 6th round, Grant Undrafted

    WR Nelson 2nd round, Jennings 2nd round, J. Jones 3rd round, D. Driver 7th round

    TE Finley 3rd round

    Quantity does not necessarily outweigh quality, but 5 good players (outside 1st round) greatly outweigh that one "star". Ill trade back and pick up 2nd and 3rd rounders all day long...

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on
    #47

    @cribbs-is-the-man said:

    Ok, I guess the Giants dont work for you. How about the Packers?? We are going to leave QBs out of this because we cant draft a franchise QB with #4 (unless you reallllly wanna bring up Tannehill)

    (the Packers drafte Rodgers at #22, so indeed it can be done)

    so the conversation is irrelevant. So all the Packer's offensive "stars" (and by stars you are saying high picks which I dont agree with but for the sake of the argument..):

    RB Starks 6th round, Grant Undrafted

    WR Nelson 2nd round, Jennings 2nd round, J. Jones 3rd round, D. Driver 7th round

    TE Finley 3rd round

    Quantity does not necessarily outweigh quality, but 5 good players (outside 1st round) greatly outweigh that one "star". Ill trade back and pick up 2nd and 3rd rounders all day long...

    I would not object to that strategy. The weakness of this Browns team is not that they might not have a couple of people capable of being "stars", it is that they have a plethora of holes in their lineup where they do not have quality NFL players filling them. We need to fill all those holes.

Log in to reply