Camp Trade Down

Tour2ma

A little new fuel for this old fire...

Browns keep laying the foundation for a trade down
Posted by Mike Florio on April 11, 2017, 10:50 PM EDT

It started with a leak that running back Leonard Fournette is “in play” for the first overall pick in the draft. It continues with a leak that the Browns are torn between two other players: pass rusher Myles Garrett and quarterback Mitchell Trubisky (pictured).

The latest nugget comes from Adam Schefter of ESPN, who reported that Cleveland hasn’t made up its mind between Garrett and Trubisky not long after tweeting that an unnamed NFL executive told him not to be surprised if Garrett isn’t the top pick.

The game here is simple and clear: Cast a wide net as to what the Browns could do with the top pick so that if/when they trade down and take someone in a lower spot, they can claim that’s the guy they would have taken at No. 1.

The bigger question is whether the Browns can get the deal they want to trade out of the top spot. It requires one team to fall sufficiently in love with a guy who otherwise would be gone by the time that team picks to make the right offer. For the Brown, who seem to value the promise of a future pick more than exercising a current pick, the interest in trading down is becoming more and more clear.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/04/11/browns-keep-laying-the-foundation-for-a-trade-down/

TexasAg1969

Nose meet razor blade.

domcucch1994

Yeah let's trade down and pass on blue chip talent..

FUCKIN' NOOOOO!!

STAY PUT AND TAKE GARRETT, ASSHOLES!

The Gipper

One thing fueling these various reports/rumors is the fact that any number of people who are scrutinizing Garrett are coming up with a variety of "holes" in his game. I know the Gays for Gayrett don't want to hear it, but it is a fact, from Booger McFarland to any number of other "analysts", they say he has weaknesses in his game that are a bit concerning.

That, plus the fact that QB is such a dire need for the Browns (and DE is not), and the fact that it is believed that a potentially equally or nearly equally talented edge rusher can be obtained later on in the draft, perhaps at #12.

Tour2ma

Hey... at least it's only "Scoop" Schefter...

LondonBrown

Silly season in full swing

The Gipper

@londonbrown said:
Silly season in full swing

Certainly. If so, why are we all talking about any of it?

I did put up a trivia thread....relating to Browns drafting. You could go there to get away from the silliness for a bit.

TexasAg1969

@londonbrown said:
Silly season in full swing

Yes it is, especially for anyone giving Booger McFarland any credence if it's not LSU. Worst LSU homer out there.

Obviously Von Miller is the guy to listen to.

The Gipper

@texasag1969 said:

Yes it is, especially for anyone giving Booger McFarland any credence if it's not LSU. Worst LSU homer out there.

Obviously Von Miller is the guy to listen to.

I would rather have him on my team... so just be seen and not heard.

darren15

Just out of interest if the Titans offered 5, 18 and 33 for the number 1 would you do it ... ?

We then have 5,12,18,32,33 and 52 in the first 2 rounds ...

Tour2ma

@darren15 said:

Just out of interest if the Titans offered 5, 18 and 33 for the number 1 would you do it ... ?

We then have 5,12,18,32,33 and 52 in the first 2 rounds ...

Well... since we already own the #33 and the Saints own the #32 and TN does not even have a 2nd round pick in this draft.... No.

But even if the trade you propose was possible? Hmmmmm... No... and I hesitated just to be polite...

The Gipper

@darren15 said:

Just out of interest if the Titans offered 5, 18 and 33 for the number 1 would you do it ... ?

We then have 5,12,18,32,33 and 52 in the first 2 rounds ...

5 and 18 might do it. But throw in say a 4th rounder. I would think long and hard on it...and probably favor it.

TexasAg1969

@the-gipper said:
5 and 18 might do it. But throw in say a 4th rounder. I would think long and hard on it...and probably favor it.

FO already said they are not in the trade down business this year because of the # of quality picks we have the 1st two days and the depth of talent in this draft. I think I actually believe them this year.

The Gipper

@texasag1969 said:

FO already said they are not in the trade down business this year because of the # of quality picks we have the 1st two days and the depth of talent in this draft. I think I actually believe them this year.

Sure, but, the question was asked "what would YOU do"...not what would the Browns FO do.

The basic reason I might favor it is that 3 outstanding players on your team are better than 2 outstanding players on your team.

And as I pointed out elsewhere, based on a link that was provided, our dire needs at QB are 10 out of 10, at OLB its 9 out of 10, at DE, CB, FS, DT it is like 8 out of 10. I would like perhaps to see 3 of those spots go to 1 out of 10.....better 3 than 2.

RoyceRolls

5, 18 and a 2018 3rd and I'm on board.

I love Garret's potential, but it's still only potential.

MG is the best prospect in this class, but Picking at five guarantees another elite defensive prospect (Allen, Adams, Hooker, Lattimore, Thomas) and allows to add another first rd talent like Conley, Mckinnley or McDowell. The 2018 3rd is icing on the cake.

It's still close as I've fallen in love with the idea of Garrett coming at the QB from one side while Ogbah comes from the other but a 1st rd of: Allen, Howard, Conley is too good to pass up.

TexasAg1969

@roycerolls said:

5, 18 and a 2018 3rd and I'm on board.

It's still close as I've fallen in love with the idea of Garrett coming at the QB from one side while Ogbah comes from the other but a 1st rd of: Allen, Howard, Conley is too good to pass up.

There is no guarantee Allen would be there @ 5, so if he is off the table you're screwed right away. And Howard is likely gone by 12 and possible Conley too. So if you take that trade with one of those already gone and one of the others in jeopardy, it's a no go from the "git go". Think long, think wrong has been the Browns' mantra since 1999.

RoyceRolls

@texasag1969 said:

There is no guarantee Allen would be there @ 5, so if he is off the table you're screwed right away. And Howard is likely gone by 12 and possible Conley too. So if you take that trade with one of those already gone and one of the others in jeopardy, it's a no go from the "git go". Think long, think wrong has been the Browns' mantra since 1999.

I was just giving an example of one possible outcome. Either way, pick 5 will net an elite defensive prospect. If its up to me, allen will be gone by pick 5, but that means another stud will be there. The added value of the caliber of player available at 18 offsets the drop between Garrett and whoever the Browns would get at 5 in my humble opinion.

wargograw

@texasag1969 said:

There is no guarantee Allen would be there @ 5, so if he is off the table you're screwed right away. And Howard is likely gone by 12 and possible Conley too. So if you take that trade with one of those already gone and one of the others in jeopardy, it's a no go from the "git go". Think long, think wrong has been the Browns' mantra since 1999.

You'll get Adams or Allen. I'm good wth that.

TexasAg1969

War............So if the trade goes through and the picks go as below in no particular order after Garrett, who do you take @ #5? Lattimore, Hooker, Trubs?

1. Garrett

2. Allen

3. Thomas

4. Adams

5. ??

RoyceRolls

@texasag1969 said:

War............So if the trade goes through and the picks go as below in no particular order after Garrett, who do you take @ #5? Lattimore, Hooker, Trubs?

1. Garrett

2. Allen

3. Thomas

4. Adams

5. ??

Yes.