Skip to content
The Browns Board
  1. Home
  2. The Browns Board
  3. Catching on? Drafting a wide receiver in 1st round no sure fix

Catching on? Drafting a wide receiver in 1st round no sure fix

The Browns Board
23 7 1.4k
  • D dencyguy

    oldcow1945 said:

    I guess Lions coach and long Time Titan Defensive coordinator doesn't make sense then. It's not something I came up with on my own. It was he who talked about this very thing concerning OT's taken in the first round. His point was the same as mine. That history shows what positions are solid #1's and that a team needs to be sure with that #1 pick.

    Schwartz is a 'Stat" guy in the truest sense. He breaks down everything into numbers. You are arguing with one of the greatest defenive minds in the game today.

    I never said your points were obscure. I said they were were obvious. You said bad teams make bad picks. The obvious result of bad picks are bad teams. There is nothing more obvious than that.

    I wasn't aware that I was responding to Schwartz...who knew that he posted on the Browns Board? Stan, you need to alert the media on this one, since it will only help to bring in new members!

    The original post--which you will find at the top of the page--breaks down the number of wide receivers taken since 2000 in terms of how many of them have been to the Pro Bowl. My response to the original post--which you will find at the top of the page--was that looking at past drafts is, at best, of limited use, since each player is different and each team is different. It's quite simple, really.

    As for the whole obvious/obscure thing, it was a reference to the fact that your last reply to one of my posts had some version of "that's really obvious" or "I don't know what you're arguing" in each sentence--sometimes one of each. It seemed to me that those are somewhat mutually exclusive.

    Dennis

    @dencyguy said:

    I wasn't aware that I was responding to Schwartz...who knew that he posted on the Browns Board? Stan, you need to alert the media on this one, since it will only help to bring in new members!

    Dennis

    This is what people do who have lost an argument. They become blithe.

    Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote! - "Ben Franklin"
    D 1 Reply

  • I dont know how I feel about drafting Crabtree with Dez Bryant looming next year... hey... gotta think ahead

    Dez_Bryant2.jpg

  • Oldcrow1945O Oldcrow1945

    @dencyguy said:

    I wasn't aware that I was responding to Schwartz...who knew that he posted on the Browns Board? Stan, you need to alert the media on this one, since it will only help to bring in new members!

    Dennis

    This is what people do who have lost an argument. They become blithe.

    oldcow1945 said:

    This is what people do who have lost an argument. They become blithe.

    I wake up blithe. One has to do something to avoid getting bored when slowing things down for others.

    Again, I refer to the first post of the board:

    >>Thirty-seven wide receivers have been drafted in the first round since 2000. By our count, nine have been named to the Pro Bowl. <<

    Premise of the argument? It's a dangerous idea--if not an outright bad one--to draft a WR in the first round. That was what I responded to at first. Incidentally, it's also what you responded to:

    >>In the last ten drafts forty WR's have been drafted in the first round. Of those forty only SEVEN have become Pro bowlers while 14 have been complete bust. The rest are marginal players.

    (One of those seven pro bowlers is Braylon Edwards!)

    Think of that! Only one in six 1st round WR's in the last ten years have become big time players while almost 2 in 6 become complete bust!

    Michael Crabtree is a bust in waiting. Between the history of WR failures in the first round and his lack of size and speed, he scares me to no end.

    Any team drafting him high is going to be making a HUGE mistake!<<

    Note the lack of references to offensive tackles or to Jim Schwartz, who apparently has become your L. Ron Hubbard in only a few months. The discussion was about WRs, I questioned the premise of said discussion, and away we went.

    Again...the original post implied that it is a bad idea to draft a WR based on the history of people who have been drafted at that position. At best, the logic underlying the argument is flawed. If you want to make it an argument about taking an OT instead, I'm sure plenty of threads will open up about that (for the record, I'm in favor of taking one...I have questions about Crabtree's foot).

    Dennis

Log in to reply