Trading Down
-
I only can see #3 SD & #1 Tits fighting over Tunsil at LT & both have a good reason. Heard on NFL radio which Texas board members could possibly confirm, Dallas may have locker room issues with G. Hardy possibly getting him out of Garrett's room. Leaving Dallas Bosa, Buckner or Jack to choose from. If am Sashi am telling Dallas am taking Bosa.
. Great idea AG69 if we still get Goff at 4. But Titians or SD would still be scary actually picking at 3 though. Take your guy at 2 & Risk nothing. -
I only can see #3 SD & #1 Tits fighting over Tunsil at LT & both have a good reason. Heard on NFL radio which Texas board members could possibly confirm, Dallas may have locker room issues with G. Hardy possibly getting him out of Garrett's room. Leaving Dallas Bosa, Buckner or Jack to choose from. If am Sashi am telling Dallas am taking Bosa.
. Great idea AG69 if we still get Goff at 4. But Titians or SD would still be scary actually picking at 3 though. Take your guy at 2 & Risk nothing.I only can see #3 SD & #1 Tits fighting over Tunsil at LT & both have a good reason. Heard on NFL radio which Texas board members could possibly confirm, Dallas may have locker room issues with G. Hardy possibly getting him out of Garrett's room. Leaving Dallas Bosa, Buckner or Jack to choose from. If am Sashi am telling Dallas am taking Bosa.
. Great idea AG69 if we still get Goff at 4. But Titians or SD would still be scary actually picking at 3 though. Take your guy at 2 & Risk nothing.Yep, but if your guy is an either/or tossup Goff or Wentz, there is nothing to lose.
-
So how many teams in the top 10 draft order desperately need a quarterback?
Seems like that would be a great place to trade the number two pick, if in fact they rate one of these two guys is highly as some of the Cleveland fans
WSS
-
The Browns hold the #2 position in the draft for a reason - they stink. They need a long-term solution at QB. There are only one or two players that fit that description in this draft. Stop trying to get cute by trading down - that strategy has EXPLODED in the Browns' faces every time they employed it. Stay at #2 and draft the QB. It's not rocket science.
The Browns hold the #2 position in the draft for a reason - they stink. They need a long-term solution at QB. There are only one or two players that fit that description in this draft. Stop trying to get cute by trading down - that strategy has EXPLODED in the Browns' faces every time they employed it. Stay at #2 and draft the QB. It's not rocket science.
I've been saying this for a long time. The Browns have totally dropped the ball for years in trading away picks and blowing it.
"Those who don't learn from history are destined to repeat it." I hope Hue hammers this message home at 76 Lou Groza.
-
If the Browns have their eyes on one of two QBs, the ONLY guarantee they have of getting one of 'em is staying right at #2
Mike
-
What about a big trade back, say to 15 or so, and taking Elliot?
-
Ummmm... No. Love Zeke. He's the best RB in the draft by more than a little, but he's not a game changer. There are a couple Day 2 RBs that I think run heavier than Crow, but with similar accel, speed and agility.
Were to drop to 15, I'd hope it was in increments where we could accumulate some R2 and R3 picks. Then assuming the top 2 QB(s)are gone, I'd look at the best LB. Probably Spence, but might be Ragland, who I have warmed to since I saw him work OLB at the Sr. Bowl. Not that I'd move him there, but it's nice to have the versatility...
-
If the Browns have their eyes on one of two QBs, the ONLY guarantee they have of getting one of 'em is staying right at #2
Mike
If the Browns have their eyes on one of two QBs, the ONLY guarantee they have of getting one of 'em is staying right at #2
Mike
It's going to be interesting to see how our analytics guys factor all of this in and what moves, if any, they make before making a pick. Will they decide QB is the key to a turnaround or will they decide edge rushers and run stoppers have more impact. Inquiring minds want to know their conclusions.
-
If the Browns have their eyes on one of two QBs, the ONLY guarantee they have of getting one of 'em is staying right at #2
Mike
It's going to be interesting to see how our analytics guys factor all of this in and what moves, if any, they make before making a pick. Will they decide QB is the key to a turnaround or will they decide edge rushers and run stoppers have more impact. Inquiring minds want to know their conclusions.
It's going to be interesting to see how our analytics guys factor all of this in and what moves, if any, they make before making a pick. Will they decide QB is the key to a turnaround or will they decide edge rushers and run stoppers have more impact. Inquiring minds want to know their conclusions.
agreed....I think they are well aware of the fact we need a QB....top priority.....but I think they are also well aware of our drafting history and dont want to be responsible for the next failure......sooooo, I dont see them picking a QB at #2, unless they feel positive he's the guy.....and, no matter what the pundits say, we have no concept of what the Browns think about any of these guys.....
If they engage in talks for an Osweiler, then that should be enough to indicate they dont want to pick one of these guys early......
-
Well today is the first day for franchise tagging. Last day will be March 1. I don't expect to see anything on Miller concerning the tag until the last minute unless it is to announce his new contract completion with Denver. They better not kill the goose that just laid them the two golden eggs in the SB. Too many great years ahead for him.
Edit-this must be really hard to see for some of you who want a QB as 2nd overall. This is Tour's fav. site for rating and it has Goff @ 10 and Wentz @ 15. So a reach maybe? It's why I'd trade down for extra talent.
-
It's going to be interesting to see how our analytics guys factor all of this in and what moves, if any, they make before making a pick. Will they decide QB is the key to a turnaround or will they decide edge rushers and run stoppers have more impact. Inquiring minds want to know their conclusions.
agreed....I think they are well aware of the fact we need a QB....top priority.....but I think they are also well aware of our drafting history and dont want to be responsible for the next failure......sooooo, I dont see them picking a QB at #2, unless they feel positive he's the guy.....and, no matter what the pundits say, we have no concept of what the Browns think about any of these guys.....
If they engage in talks for an Osweiler, then that should be enough to indicate they dont want to pick one of these guys early......
...but I think they are also well aware of our drafting history and dont want to be responsible for the next failure......sooooo, I dont see them picking a QB at #2, unless they feel positive he's the guy...
God, I hope the above is not the case.
If they pick scared based upon their predecessors' piss-poor results, then we've already lost...
"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 -
...but I think they are also well aware of our drafting history and dont want to be responsible for the next failure......sooooo, I dont see them picking a QB at #2, unless they feel positive he's the guy...
God, I hope the above is not the case.
If they pick scared based upon their predecessors' piss-poor results, then we've already lost...
God, I hope the above is not the case.
If they pick scared based upon their predecessors' piss-poor results, then we've already lost...
Well, clearly our draft history is hanging over their heads....whether it makes them nervous or not is another question.....
But, with this whole analytics thing, my take is that it may help them to pick the "safe bet", while eliminating the risk of them taking a full on gamble.....
-
God, I hope the above is not the case.
If they pick scared based upon their predecessors' piss-poor results, then we've already lost...
Well, clearly our draft history is hanging over their heads....whether it makes them nervous or not is another question.....
But, with this whole analytics thing, my take is that it may help them to pick the "safe bet", while eliminating the risk of them taking a full on gamble.....
But, with this whole analytics thing, my take is that it may help them to pick the "safe bet", while eliminating the risk of them taking a full on gamble.....
Baby steps... if year one we can eliminate the blatantly stupid, I'll be happy. I mean the Wheezy-grade stuff we all could see coming.
-
VesnaKociper said:
If we package our #1 - pick 2 with Joe Thomas, I believe we could move down to #15 or #19.
Seriously, if Joe Thomas died, how would it impact the Browns?
Why even have a line? just replace those aholes with QBs. That'll fix everything....
-
can the browns for once take their fricking pick and use it instead of wheeling and dealing like sashy is some kevin costner character and they hit on 3 great picks? pick the qb. then, next!
-
can the browns for once take their fricking pick and use it instead of wheeling and dealing like sashy is some kevin costner character and they hit on 3 great picks? pick the qb. then, next!
can the browns for once take their fricking pick and use it instead of wheeling and dealing like sashy is some kevin costner character and they hit on 3 great picks? pick the qb. then, next!
You mean like last year when we just picked Shelton, Erving, Orchard and Duke with our actual picks?
-
can the browns for once take their fricking pick and use it instead of wheeling and dealing like sashy is some kevin costner character and they hit on 3 great picks? pick the qb. then, next!
can the browns for once take their fricking pick and use it instead of wheeling and dealing like sashy is some kevin costner character and they hit on 3 great picks? pick the qb. then, next!
LOL! It isn't how they go about picking at all. It's who they go about picking. You can make some trade downs and still pick well, IF you pick well. THAT is the Browns's problem. Sure I liked the JM pick for the Browns (just not for JM). But then I didn't spend $100,000 and not find out what a major problem he had. How did the background investigators for the Browns miss on that anyway? And why did they not know Mayle could not catch? Or that Erving could be blocked consistently into the backfield? Or that our top draft in 2014 was a head case? Makes me question their whole scouting organization. And isn't most of that still intact other that the head honchos? That does not bode well for the upcoming draft.
-
can the browns for once take their fricking pick and use it instead of wheeling and dealing like sashy is some kevin costner character and they hit on 3 great picks? pick the qb. then, next!
LOL! It isn't how they go about picking at all. It's who they go about picking. You can make some trade downs and still pick well, IF you pick well. THAT is the Browns's problem. Sure I liked the JM pick for the Browns (just not for JM). But then I didn't spend $100,000 and not find out what a major problem he had. How did the background investigators for the Browns miss on that anyway? And why did they not know Mayle could not catch? Or that Erving could be blocked consistently into the backfield? Or that our top draft in 2014 was a head case? Makes me question their whole scouting organization. And isn't most of that still intact other that the head honchos? That does not bode well for the upcoming draft.
LOL! It isn't how the go about picking at all. It's who they go about picking. You can make some trade downs and still pick well, IF you pick well. THAT is the Browns's problem. Sure I liked the JM pick for the Browns (just not for JM).
Exactly.....the trade downs were never bad deals.....it was the ensuing picks that completely sucked.....
With the Watkins deal, we could have picked Beckham or Donald and would have made out like bandits.....it was bad picks not bad trades...
-
But when we made the Watkins deal, there was really only one choice at #4... wasn't there?
"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
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 π
Register Login