Camp Trade Down

The Gipper

@texasag1969 said:

I agree they are not moving up, but for a different reason. There will be a quality pass rusher available @ #5. Too many excellent ones this year's draft besides Garrett. Let's say Garrett goes #1 as expected. And at least one of SF or Chi takes a QB. Then you have Allen, Barnett and Thomas with Allen likely to go before #5. That leaves two very excellent pass rushers, one of which the Tits can take.

Therefore, no trade with Cleveland by the Tits. Logical? I think so.

See my previous post. As you say, this draft is considered rich in edge rushers. What it is not rich in is WRs apparently....thus Williams may be a very in demand commodity. And the Tits may want the WR as badly as the DE/OLB....which maybe they think they can get with their #18 pick. They can't get a WR there on the order of Williams....can they?

BaconHound

I'm still on board with trading #1 to the 49ers for #2 & #34

The Gipper

@baconhound said:
I'm still on board with trading #1 to the 49ers for #2 & #34

That could work. But why would the Niners do that to move up one spot? My theory would be so that the Browns would not trade it to the Bears/Tits...or some other team that may want to jump the 9ers for the player they want.

But...who would that player be?

BaconHound

@the-gipper said:

That could work. But why would the Niners do that to move up one spot? My theory would be so that the Browns would not trade it to the Bears/Tits...or some other team that may want to jump the 9ers for the player they want.

But...who would that player be?

I think 49ers are going QB and the Browns could go whacky and take their guy. The insurance might be worth it for the 49ers.

The Gipper

@baconhound said:

I think 49ers are going QB and the Browns could go whacky and take their guy. The insurance might be worth it for the 49ers.

If that guy is Mitch Trubisky...then the Browns should go whacky and take their guy.

BaconHound

@the-gipper said:
If that guy is Mitch Trubisky...then the Browns should go whacky and take their guy.

I wish I was as confident as you.

Tour2ma

@poplarbluffman said:

last I looked QB's are sort of important...and this draft is filled with mid rd qb prospects and will likely need a late 1 for Garrappola..trading down for a mid #1 makes sense to fill your greatest need

Donald didn't make the Rams a winning team and neither did Bosa make San Diego a Super Bowl team..till you fidna QB the Browns will keep losing.

my question was fair but received a lot of scary stupid answers..hopefully the idiots will post elsewhere or I will

Not sure two posts by one person constitutes "a lot".

As for your approaches to posting and fixing the team... to each his own. Spending two, 1st-round picks on QBs this draft is not an approach I'd take.

Westside Steve

First pick in the draft should be an impact player right out of the gate. Just saying.

WSS

hoorta

@poplarbluffman said:

last I looked QB's are sort of important...and this draft is filled with mid rd qb prospects and will likely need a late 1 for Garrappola..trading down for a mid #1 makes sense to fill your greatest need

Donald didn't make the Rams a winning team and neither did Bosa make San Diego a Super Bowl team..till you fidna QB the Browns will keep losing.

my question was fair but received a lot of scary stupid answers..hopefully the idiots will post elsewhere or I will

Well, I see you need some education on what the Browns came up with going after "mid first round" quarterback prospects. Brady Quinn. Brandon Weeden. Johnny Manziel. That collective stink could fuel several garbage dumps. Other than Mitch Trubisky- who will go top five, there's not another qb in this draft I would touch in the first round. And that includes New England's wonder boy backup Garropolo.

I'm not 100% sold on Garrett yet, but he sure looks like he can be the next Von Miller. Trading down has resulted in us missing on Kalil Mack (got bust Justin Gilbert instead) Julio Jones ( drafted Phil Taylor instead) Haloti Ngata (took Kam Wimbley instead). So FYI, the group think of the Browns fan base is- enough of this trade down crap. You have a stud at where you're picking- take the stud.

CaineDeSoulis

7 of the next 10 picks after gilbert went to the pro bowl. Trading down was a great idea but farmer made a terrible selection

Suomi

A big NO to a trade down out of #1 - that's reserved for Myles Garrett. I'd actually prefer a trade UP from 12 to grab one of the two safeties or (licks his chops) Jonathan Allen.

Clevfan4life

garrett AND allen? jesus we'd have to give up quite a bit for that. Plus that leaves one hell of a traffic jam on the front line. We have other needs to fill on that defense let alone offense (QB?).

gftChris

@clevfan4life said:
garrett AND allen? jesus we'd have to give up quite a bit for that. Plus that leaves one hell of a traffic jam on the front line. We have other needs to fill on that defense let alone offense (QB?).

No secondary. Get to the QB in under half a second and it doesn't matter who's playing receiver. a DL of Garrett-Bryant-Shelton-Meder-Allen-Ogbah backed up by Collins-Kirksey-Davis-Orchard. Probably should keep a strong safety in case the runner gets through.

Mudfly

@baconhound said:
I'm still on board with trading #1 to the 49ers for #2 & #34

Id do it in a NY second.....

Then Id take 12 and one of my 2nds and get inside the top 8 for my second pick....increasing the possibility of us getting 2 elite players......difference makers.....

jcam222

Sure this is against the popular vote but this is a great draft to trade down in. I'd support a trade down as far as 5. We could likely make picks then at 5, 12 and somewhere around 17 to 20 using what we picked up in a trade up. In this draft that would be a big haul. Still would have pick 1 in the 2nd round too.

Mudfly

@jcam222 said:
Sure this is against the popular vote but this is a great draft to trade down in. I'd support a trade down as far as 5. We could likely make picks then at 5, 12 and somewhere around 17 to 20 using what we picked up in a trade up. In this draft that would be a big haul. Still would have pick 1 in the 2nd round too.

absolutely....and #1 overall always gets a great price.....so a "short" trade back should net enough to add another 2nd, PLUS the ammo needed to move up from 12.....

Would you prefer?

picks # 1 ....12.....33.....52......Or, for example, something like....

picks # 4.......7.....33....40....52......?

With the players available this year.....Id take the second option......all day every day.....

RoyceRolls

Yeah, that second option would be pretty tempting. 2 of the top 5 defenders from this draft could go along way in getting this defense turned around in a hurry. If Greg Williams can motivate these young guys the way we all hope, we could be looking at a defensive improvement that could add 4-5 wins to the schedule.

ElkDawg

@stillmotion said:
If we trade down to 15-22 and grab another medicore player i'll flip. take the best damn player available. It's not rocket science, maybe the browns are trying to overthink it.

I think it's mock draft boards and guys on forums who over think take Mahomes first and Barnett at 12. Real simple.

TexasAg1969

@elkdawg said:
I think it's mock draft boards and guys on forums who over think take Mahomes first and Barnett at 12. Real simple.

LOL Barnett won't be there by 12. But Mahomes will.

The Gipper

@baconhound said:

I wish I was as confident as you.

“...maybe sometimes it's riskier not to take a risk. Sometimes all you're guaranteeing is that things will stay the same.”

― Danny Wallace, Yes Man

“...If there is no risk, there is no reward.”

― Christy Raedeke, The Daykeeper's Grimoire

“Only those who play win. Only those who risk win. History favors risk-takers. Forgets the timid. Everything else is commentary.”

― Iveta Cherneva

The biggest risk is not taking any risk... In a world that changing really quickly, the only strategy that is guaranteed to fail is not taking risks. Mark Zuckerberg

But we also believe in taking risks, because that's how you move things along. Melinda Gates