<![CDATA[We've been asking the wrong question]]>Everyone's been asking if the Browns will draft Goff or Wentz at number two. After listening to Andrew Healey, author of this analytics study I'm more convinced than ever that real question is this: will the Browns draft Goff, Ramsey, or trade down at number two. Let's look at the facts before us:

The evidence for Goff:

1) We now have an analytics-friendly front office that was put in place after the analytics-hostile guys got fired. They are very likely to have already come to the same conclusion about Goff that Healey's analytics study came to. Why? Because it's extremely likely that they use similar methods in generating these studies.

2) Some facts about the Healey study: Goff is ranked the 9th-best QB prospect since they've been doing this study (about 20 years), ahead of Aaron Rodgers. If you look at the top-10 prospects as predicted by the study, 8 of them are already proven franchise QBs, 1 of them is Mariota (still being proven but looks like he'll work out), and the only bust was Byron Leftwich. So the study's been 80-90% accurate on top prospects. If you then look at the ten worst prospects as predicted by the study, 70% of them turned out to be busts. So for the people who think analytics are a waste of time, think again.

3) A key methodology of the study is looking at the QB's stats but adjusting them on two factors: supporting cast and strength of the defenses the QB played against. Goff ranks so high because his stats are not just good, they are good with a poor supporting cast against decent defenses. He was recruited into a terrible Cal team with a bad offensive line and no playmakers and took them from 1-11 to 8-5 in three years. That speaks volumes to me about his drive, competitiveness, and talent. If the Browns draft him, he'll be going to a team with a bad offensive line and no play makers that finished 3-13 last year. Let's see what he can do with this team in three years.

The evidence for Ramsey:

1) The Browns may have tipped their hand by letting Gip go and releasing Whitner here, especially at the time they did. I think the unusual timing of Whitner's release speaks to some recent decisions being made about the players currently on the roster or about what they intend to do in the draft.

2) They've got an aging cornerback in Tramon Williams backed up by a 'hard-sleeper' and probably bust in Justin Gilbert. Campbell and Poyer might have potential, but drafting Ramsey can address multiple needs depending on how your other talent in the defensive backfield pans out.

3) This wouldn't just be a need pick, it's a widely-held opinion that he'd be the best player available at two. I have little doubt he'd score well on the analytics side of things being from FSU.

4) Hue is in love with RG3, apparently. He's been essentially been given a 1-year prove-it deal. While I really don't think RG3's signing will impact the draft strategy in any way, one could argue that the signing gives them the flexibility to take Ramsey at #2 and draft a QB later in the draft.

As for a trade-down, I honestly don't think this is all that likely, but I can't discount it. The one thing I thing we should discount is Wentz at #2. I don't think it's going to happen.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/topic/40083/we-ve-been-asking-the-wrong-questionRSS for NodeFri, 02 Oct 2026 13:00:11 GMTMon, 11 Apr 2016 12:25:32 GMT60<![CDATA[Reply to We've been asking the wrong question on Thu, 14 Apr 2016 11:41:07 GMT]]>

@gftchris said:

He's a browns QB who is not currently the starter - hence the adoration 😉

True.

WSS

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/595802https://brownsboard.com/post/595802Thu, 14 Apr 2016 11:41:07 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to We've been asking the wrong question on Thu, 14 Apr 2016 07:44:44 GMT]]>

@westside-steve said:

Possibly but that would mean that somebody sees more in Connor Shaw than I do. I really don't get the adoration.

WSS

He's a browns QB who is not currently the starter - hence the adoration 😉

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/595794https://brownsboard.com/post/595794Thu, 14 Apr 2016 07:44:44 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to We've been asking the wrong question on Thu, 14 Apr 2016 01:21:27 GMT]]>

@gftchris said:

I'm far from sure! As I say, just a hunch. Equally I wouldn't be surprised to see him try to coach up connor shaw or RG3 or whoever, and we just go for BPA.

Possibly but that would mean that somebody sees more in Connor Shaw than I do. I really don't get the adoration.

WSS

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/595747https://brownsboard.com/post/595747Thu, 14 Apr 2016 01:21:27 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to We've been asking the wrong question on Wed, 13 Apr 2016 14:20:30 GMT]]>

@westside-steve said:

I wouldn't be so sure just because that hasn't been his modus operandi so far.

WSS

I'm far from sure! As I say, just a hunch. Equally I wouldn't be surprised to see him try to coach up connor shaw or RG3 or whoever, and we just go for BPA.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/595486https://brownsboard.com/post/595486Wed, 13 Apr 2016 14:20:30 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to We've been asking the wrong question on Wed, 13 Apr 2016 14:09:06 GMT]]>

@gftchris said:

I think we go QB first, I think Hue wants a young QB to shape and build around. Just a hunch, though.

I wouldn't be so sure just because that hasn't been his modus operandi so far.

WSS

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/595478https://brownsboard.com/post/595478Wed, 13 Apr 2016 14:09:06 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to We've been asking the wrong question on Wed, 13 Apr 2016 03:29:13 GMT]]>So....

Did you lube up?

Is the wrong question?

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/595378https://brownsboard.com/post/595378Wed, 13 Apr 2016 03:29:13 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to We've been asking the wrong question on Wed, 13 Apr 2016 02:20:32 GMT]]>This same study for 2015 ranks Griffin 5th and prime target for a QB needy team.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/595367https://brownsboard.com/post/595367Wed, 13 Apr 2016 02:20:32 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to We've been asking the wrong question on Tue, 12 Apr 2016 14:11:53 GMT]]>Shame Aunt Jermima isn't a GM

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/595146https://brownsboard.com/post/595146Tue, 12 Apr 2016 14:11:53 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to We've been asking the wrong question on Tue, 12 Apr 2016 14:10:45 GMT]]>

@darren15 said:

Lets hire Costner for the day 🙂

It would be funny....to have him in and to at least make the initial calls to the other GMs about trade inquiries. It would have the other GMs freaking out and maybe get them off their game.

Anything to get an advantage.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/595145https://brownsboard.com/post/595145Tue, 12 Apr 2016 14:10:45 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to We've been asking the wrong question on Tue, 12 Apr 2016 14:08:03 GMT]]>

@gftchris said:

And tennessee. And the lions.

The pancakes? or the rookie?

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/595142https://brownsboard.com/post/595142Tue, 12 Apr 2016 14:08:03 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to We've been asking the wrong question on Tue, 12 Apr 2016 14:07:41 GMT]]>

@the-gipper said:

Right, we need some pancake eating motherfucker to make a deal with.

Or, a nervous rookie GM......Oh wait....that would be us.

Lets hire Costner for the day 🙂

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/595141https://brownsboard.com/post/595141Tue, 12 Apr 2016 14:07:41 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to We've been asking the wrong question on Tue, 12 Apr 2016 14:06:59 GMT]]>

@the-gipper said:

Right, we need some pancake eating motherfucker to make a deal with.

Or, a nervous rookie GM......Oh wait....that would be us.

And tennessee. And the lions.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/595139https://brownsboard.com/post/595139Tue, 12 Apr 2016 14:06:59 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to We've been asking the wrong question on Tue, 12 Apr 2016 14:04:19 GMT]]>

@gftchris said:

And there will be no concrete offers until about 5 minutes in to the draft. Might be preliminary discussions now, but nobody's going to draft up while the prospect of their guy not being there exists.

Right, we need some pancake eating motherfucker to make a deal with.

Or, a nervous rookie GM......Oh wait....that would be us.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/595137https://brownsboard.com/post/595137Tue, 12 Apr 2016 14:04:19 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to We've been asking the wrong question on Tue, 12 Apr 2016 13:44:10 GMT]]>And there will be no concrete offers until about 5 minutes in to the draft. Might be preliminary discussions now, but nobody's going to draft up while the prospect of their guy not being there exists.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/595126https://brownsboard.com/post/595126Tue, 12 Apr 2016 13:44:10 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to We've been asking the wrong question on Tue, 12 Apr 2016 13:39:29 GMT]]>Didn't ask if they'll fall in love. Teams can compose as many sonnets in iambic pentameter as they want.. until they make a concrete offer with picks to make that jump, it's just as good as not liking the player at all.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/595123https://brownsboard.com/post/595123Tue, 12 Apr 2016 13:39:29 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to We've been asking the wrong question on Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:58:57 GMT]]>The problem with this year's draft is that nobody in the top8 stands above the others like a Luck.

Depends on perspective though. People like Tunsil, Ramsey, Jack and Bosa are very good and I'm sure a team will fall in love with at least one of them.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/595098https://brownsboard.com/post/595098Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:58:57 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to We've been asking the wrong question on Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:52:56 GMT]]>"Trade Down" presumes that an offer exists. The problem with this year's draft is that nobody in the top8 stands above the others like a Luck.

I don't support trading down.. because the trade down statement ASSUMES that the pick in round1 would be in the top8.. and I don't think any team in those slots is interested in shoveling more picks towards Cleveland to get a player that wouldn't be demonstrably better than the one they're already going to select.

The only team stupid enough to do that would have been the Dolphins.. and they traded their slot already.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/595093https://brownsboard.com/post/595093Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:52:56 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to We've been asking the wrong question on Tue, 12 Apr 2016 03:50:36 GMT]]>I'm all in on Goff, still. The QB we've been searching for for 17 years is on the board - can't pass on him.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/595041https://brownsboard.com/post/595041Tue, 12 Apr 2016 03:50:36 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to We've been asking the wrong question on Tue, 12 Apr 2016 02:48:42 GMT]]>What I want to happen: draft Goff

What I think will happen: trade down if there is a favorable deal presented.

I'm ready for the draft already...

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/595037https://brownsboard.com/post/595037Tue, 12 Apr 2016 02:48:42 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to We've been asking the wrong question on Tue, 12 Apr 2016 02:24:34 GMT]]>Trade down if you can stay in the top 8 or so and you get a lot to do it. If not, take Ramsey

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/595034https://brownsboard.com/post/595034Tue, 12 Apr 2016 02:24:34 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to We've been asking the wrong question on Tue, 12 Apr 2016 02:05:22 GMT]]>I'd like to know what the data on RGIII is from the Healey study.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/595030https://brownsboard.com/post/595030Tue, 12 Apr 2016 02:05:22 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to We've been asking the wrong question on Mon, 11 Apr 2016 22:15:24 GMT]]>

@mike-h said:

I'm with Larry -- no trade down. Take the QB. Either one. And I'm probably Ramsey's biggest fan here.

Interesting to see what the QBASE study says about Wentz this week.

Anyone have insider who can send me both?

p

QBASE has him ranked very poorly.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/594957https://brownsboard.com/post/594957Mon, 11 Apr 2016 22:15:24 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to We've been asking the wrong question on Mon, 11 Apr 2016 19:28:29 GMT]]>I really want the Browns to take Goff, I'm been on the Goff train since the offseason began. With that being said, having watched a good bit of FSU football the past few years Ramsey is a superstar in the making who would likely step in day one and be a starter. This team needs players at literally every position and as long as they fill holes with this draft it won't be a bust.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/594914https://brownsboard.com/post/594914Mon, 11 Apr 2016 19:28:29 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to We've been asking the wrong question on Mon, 11 Apr 2016 19:26:25 GMT]]>I just looked at the article. It wasn't too favorable to Prescott, and it is really down on Cook, Hack and Lynch

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/594913https://brownsboard.com/post/594913Mon, 11 Apr 2016 19:26:25 GMT