Draft Talk
-
I'm looking at WalterFootball and Charlie Campbell has got us:
1. Myles Garrett (DE/OLB)
9. Mike McGlinchey (OT)
33. Gareon Conley (CB)
50. Marcus Maye (S)
Two questions:
1. What does everyone think about us skipping an offensive lineman and stocking up on stud defensive players? I wouldn't mind grabbing Marlon Humphrey (if he slides to the 9th) or Jamal Adams as opposed to another OL. I know that this draft class is loaded with defensive backs, but why not og after the two best ones? Humphrey looks special.
2. Charlie Campbell has Tim Williams at 27, and he questions his ability to be an every-down backer/end. Isn't he the more reputable one vs. Walter?
Me qb #1, BPA defense with the Eagles pick, and BPA o-line with either of the second round picks.
-
all said and done, I don't believe any team will have Kizer or Watson rated higher than Trubisky, and perhaps
a lot of teams will have Rudolph in the later first round.
all said and done, I don't believe any team will have Kizer or Watson rated higher than Trubisky, and perhaps
a lot of teams will have Rudolph in the later first round.
I believe plenty will have Watson above Mitch, but there's no way to know. We'll only know one team, and that'll be the one that takes the first QB.
-
I feel myself starting to settle with the first two picks of the draft. We take Mitch with the first pick, REGARDLESS of "overdrafting" and the temptation of taking an impact defensive guy. If we have Kizer or Watson rated higher than Mitch, we take them first. No matter what, we take the QB we like the best, and tell the world to screw off. I've seen ENOUGH of poor QB play. The ONLY caveat I will put in, is if we don't have ANY of the QB's rated high enough to take right there. If we truly don't believe that any of the top QB's can be an NFL starter, then we can't force it. But if we grade any of the guys as able to be a successful NFL QB, we take who we want. With the Eagles' pick, we take Reuben Foster at linebacker. It's obvious we need help on defense, so why not get a guy who will be in on the statistical highest number of plays?
We take Mitch with the first pick, REGARDLESS of "overdrafting"... No matter what, we take the QB we like the best, and tell the world to screw off.
If we truly don't believe that any of the top QB's can be an NFL starter, then we can't force it.
Not sure how we do both...
"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 -
Overdraft for your QB even if it might be Geno Smith.
Gotchya.
-
-
I've had enough of watching black Tarkenton, and I cringe at the thought of returning McCown, RGIII, and Kessler as our QB's next year.
They need a QB badly, and not another 3 rounder either.
-
Pick #1 Garrett or Allen
Pick #7 (Eagles) Best LB available Foster or McMillen
Pick #15-25 (trade up from #33) Best Safety or Corner Hooker or Lattimore
Then draft OL throughout draft.
Maybe trade other 2nd for McCarran or Garopolo. Id be quite fine with Kessler he was making strides as a qb till coaches mindfucked him against Baltimore. I don't believe Seth Devalve has caught a pass since Kessler was benched. His last catch was a 22 yrd TD on time and in stride.
-
If we draft more than 2 OL, either they will be cut, or other good OL will get cut. I think it'll be very stupid to take 3 or more.
-
If we draft more than 2 OL, either they will be cut, or other good OL will get cut. I think it'll be very stupid to take 3 or more.
If we draft more than 2 OL, either they will be cut, or other good OL will get cut. I think it'll be very stupid to take 3 or more.
I'll go so far as to say we shouldn't draft more than one.
Pick up Joeckel in FA, resign Cooper and move Greco to C as your day one starter and I think that gives us an offensive line that can easily compete, along with three young backups that have starting experience that can sub in without much of a loss.
Reiter, Pasztor and Erving wouldn't be the worlds worst backups.
-
If we draft more than 2 OL, either they will be cut, or other good OL will get cut. I think it'll be very stupid to take 3 or more.
I'll go so far as to say we shouldn't draft more than one.
Pick up Joeckel in FA, resign Cooper and move Greco to C as your day one starter and I think that gives us an offensive line that can easily compete, along with three young backups that have starting experience that can sub in without much of a loss.
Reiter, Pasztor and Erving wouldn't be the worlds worst backups.
I'll go so far as to say we shouldn't draft more than one.
Pick up Joeckel in FA, resign Cooper and move Greco to C as your day one starter and I think that gives us an offensive line that can easily compete, along with three young backups that have starting experience that can sub in without much of a loss.
Reiter, Pasztor and Erving wouldn't be the worlds worst backups.
Totally agree. And I've been banging the "0-1 picks" drum for at least several weeks now. Just trying to get some of these folks that want to draft a half dozen OL to see the light a bit.
-
One caution would be Greco... return to full form from LizzieFrancaise is not guaranteed.
Hasn't Joeckel struggled throughout his rookie deal?
"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 -
We take Mitch with the first pick, REGARDLESS of "overdrafting"... No matter what, we take the QB we like the best, and tell the world to screw off.
If we truly don't believe that any of the top QB's can be an NFL starter, then we can't force it.
Not sure how we do both...
Not sure how we do both...
In other words, if we feel that Mitch is the guy we want, we take him first...no matter what people say. If we DON'T feel there is a QB that can lead us, we don't force it. When I say "no matter what", what I meant to say was, "No matter what people say". Forgot to type that part.
-
kk... in essence you're saying we need to believe in the board we build.
I do not think there is any doubt that we will do that. Kessler is exhibits 1 thru 4 making that case.
"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 -
An interesting thought I had that could benefit us is the surprising play of Matt Barkely for the Bears. I remember laughing to myself when I saw he was the starter, but I have to admit, he's played pretty well. Nothing earth-shattering, and he's turned it over too much, but the guy has them playing competitive football, and who thought THAT would happen? I mention this because Barkley's play MIGHT be good enough for the Bears to just think twice about drafting a QB early. Bears might skip taking a QB around #4, and that could bode well for us with the Eagles' pick. Just a thought. The 49's are still awful, and they obviously need a QB. It's hard to imagine they'd pass up on a QB early, but I want to say their coach prefers defensive studs...so who knows. What would be SUPER nice is for the Jets to win another game because we KNOW they need a QB. I don't see it happening, but whatever. LOL. Never mind, Jets have 4 wins and play the Patriots and Bills. Even if Jets beat Bills, they'd still pick ahead of Eagles.
-
kk... in essence you're saying we need to believe in the board we build.
I do not think there is any doubt that we will do that. Kessler is exhibits 1 thru 4 making that case.
kk... in essence you're saying we need to believe in the board we build.
I do not think there is any doubt that we will do that. Kessler is exhibits 1 thru 4 making that case.
I'm not sure that's what he's advocating. For example suppose you have the following board and grades:
1. Garrett - HoF
2. Allen - HoF
3. Trubisky - Perennial Pro Bowler
Then you take Trubisky? Even if he's not quite grading out as well as the others and the board may say slightly differently, you take him first because QB is such an important position.
Of course, it all comes down to analytics to quantify 'biggest impact' and that's what your board should be. If you're grading a player and he's mostly 10/10 on all attributes, and you give him 99/100, but he's a kicker, you don't draft him first overall, so there's inherent positional weighting involved. Same, you probably don't draft a WR first overall (unless it's megatron), or SS, or an interior OL. So you grade your college prospects out of 100 or whatever, as long as it's all normalised and we're on the same scale. Then you apply weighting like:
QB = 1.00
EDGE = 0.95
LT = 0.9
...
K = 0.05
P = 0.02
LS = 0.001
So a left tackle grading out at 90/100 is not as high on the board as a QB grading at say 83/100, but then you have an edge rusher who is 92/100 and he wins overall.
-
Man, this is a total brain screw. It's so hard when you're a team that hasn't had a reliable starting QB in 17 years, but it's also difficult when you have SO many needs. Think of it THIS way. How excited are you going to be if Cody Kessler is our starting QB next year? A guy with next to zero mobility, can't take a hit, and most of all...has two concussions and a documented difficulty of staying on the field. We NEED a QB. If we take Garrett or Allen with the first pick, how certain are we that we can get a potential starter with our Eagles' pick? Can we really afford to gamble on perhaps finding our franchise QB? It's tough, and it's going to get tougher as the weeks and months go by and the draft nears. And let's not act like it's that far away...we're almost at the end of December here.
Listen, Jimmy Haslam has preached "staying the course", and knows that our franchise needs continuity. That being said, going 0-16 tends to place a few chinks in that armor. Fair or not, time is running out faster than maybe it should. Perhaps I'm wrong, and I hope that I am, but losing every game certainly doesn't instill confidence, does it? Perhaps the biggest gamble, but also quickest reward, is the Jimmy Garoppolo trade option. We've traded with the Patriots a few times already, and multiple analysts have said to keep an eye on this situation. It's incredibly risky because we've all seen the Osweiler's, the Matt Flynn's, the Ryan Mallet's, and litany of others that showed SOME promise in limited time as a starter, but ultimately couldn't cut the mustard for whatever reason. The upside is obvious, as a veteran QB knows the NFL life, knows how to learn an offense, has the benefit of NFL weight training for a few years, and other things. However, the biggest upside is that it COULD be a faster turn-around time. No rookie learning curve, no adjustment to the league, and possible immediate respect of teammates.
In short, I have no clue what to do. LMAO.
-
Kessler as our starter is fine. Manning and Brady have no mobility and they're grand. In fact most QBs. Not being able to take a hit is a valid point, and McCown suffers from the same, but Kessler has shown enough to be a game manager with a solid OL and D.
-
kk... in essence you're saying we need to believe in the board we build.
I do not think there is any doubt that we will do that. Kessler is exhibits 1 thru 4 making that case.
I'm not sure that's what he's advocating. For example suppose you have the following board and grades:
1. Garrett - HoF
2. Allen - HoF
3. Trubisky - Perennial Pro Bowler
Then you take Trubisky? Even if he's not quite grading out as well as the others and the board may say slightly differently, you take him first because QB is such an important position.
Of course, it all comes down to analytics to quantify 'biggest impact' and that's what your board should be. If you're grading a player and he's mostly 10/10 on all attributes, and you give him 99/100, but he's a kicker, you don't draft him first overall, so there's inherent positional weighting involved. Same, you probably don't draft a WR first overall (unless it's megatron), or SS, or an interior OL. So you grade your college prospects out of 100 or whatever, as long as it's all normalised and we're on the same scale. Then you apply weighting like:
QB = 1.00
EDGE = 0.95
LT = 0.9
...
K = 0.05
P = 0.02
LS = 0.001
So a left tackle grading out at 90/100 is not as high on the board as a QB grading at say 83/100, but then you have an edge rusher who is 92/100 and he wins overall.
I'm not sure that's what he's advocating. For example suppose you have the following board and grades:
1. Garrett - HoF
2. Allen - HoF
3. Trubisky - Perennial Pro Bowler
My position, and I assumed, jigs, is the factors you cite are all rolled into "the Board". Grade... Need... Position Weight... I'd add "confidence" to the list, but I build this into the grade. I take your HOF/PerProBowl notes as at least in part, confidence factors. Injury and character concerns would roll into "confidence" as well.
Where I may differ from any number of, if not all, the folks here, is how I'd use Need and Position Weight. To me they are simply tie-breakers within grade groupings.
If the three you list are our in our top grouping, then the tie would go to the QB. Despite lower confidence, the position weight would close the gap and break the tie. On the other hand should the grading show Garrett and Allen alone atop our board in a grouping of two, then no amount of need would make me pass over them for the QB. To do so would be to reach... to move away from BPA... and into the trap that is need.
All the above is determined before Draft Day. It won't impact us at #1, but another factor does emerge on Draft Day... positional runs. If a R1 run on CBs develops and we have one in our pick #33 grouping we really like, then depending on my view of later round CBs, the run might elevate my interest in him. Not to the point of jumping a late R2 prospects to 33, but within the group at 33. Of course, if there's still a mid-R1 group name on the Board, he'd trump the run.
Started to get into "Grading", but that's a whole 'nother can o' worms... and we've lots of time to time between now and draft day. So no rush...
-
Would love this to be our first 3 picks....more chance of us winning a game tho
Your Picks:Round 1 Pick 1: Myles Garrett, DE/OLB, Texas A&M (A+)Round 1 Pick 8: Jonathan Allen, DE/DT, Alabama (A+)Round 2 Pick 1: Jamal Adams, SS, LSU (A+)Round 2 Pick 17: Brad Kaaya, QB, Miami (Fla.) (B+)Round 3 Pick 1: Gareon Conley, CB, Ohio State (A-)Round 4 Pick 1: Nick Chubb, RB, Georgia (A)Round 5 Pick 31: Chris Godwin, WR, Penn State (A-)Round 6 Pick 1: Julie'n Davenport, OT, Bucknell (B-) -
One caution would be Greco... return to full form from LizzieFrancaise is not guaranteed.
Hasn't Joeckel struggled throughout his rookie deal?
One caution would be Greco... return to full form from LizzieFrancaise is not guaranteed.
Hasn't Joeckel struggled throughout his rookie deal?
He has, mostly due to injury and the Cam Erving treatment. "Oh, you're a RT? Let's try you at LT. Oh, you're a LT? Let's try you at RG."
It's a risk, but a calculated one. Like RG3, but less to lose. I see us taking a few of those risks year after year.
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 💗
Register Login