@the-gipper said:

Hoorta. And I am not saying I want MT #1....but I do want him. If he goes to #12, great. (he won't slip that far). If the Browns trade up to #5 or 6, also good.

I fully expect the Browns to take Garrett. The question, for me, is how can they also get MT.

Exactly Gip. Taking Mitch #1 over Garrett would be a huge risk, and would be universally critised.

I've already said the 49ers #2 is out of reach from what we'd have to give up. But if he's still there @ #5 with the Titans on the clock, it gets interesting. For all we know, the Jets who supposedly love Trubs could move up to #2. That would probably only cost them their 2018 first round pick.

@mudfly said:

Because you are wrong and the guy that they want this year is better...in their opinion... than that guy from last year. That is why.

@orion said:

The OL has gotten a lot of help now. Zeitler, Tretter, Martin etc. But skill areas of improvement needed ...besides QB: a productive TE and WR.

I think we get a TE. Not sure about WR give last year's quadruple picks.

@comeonman said:

Somewhat, perhaps. But they would only be better with him and about 4-5 additional quality players.

@comeonman said:

Hoorta. And I am not saying I want MT #1....but I do want him. If he goes to #12, great. (he won't slip that far). If the Browns trade up to #5 or 6, also good.

I fully expect the Browns to take Garrett. The question, for me, is how can they also get MT.

@beare said:

Because franchise QBs make more of a difference than any other position on the field. Now see is you can come up with a harder question.

The reason I am sure it's not true statistically is the Meers Chart.

@mudfly said:

I agree 100%.

The picks of the later rounds are no different than the guys who don't get drafted.

@comeonman said:

Wait... I could have made a career out of this? How good are the bennies?

@mudfly said:

Me too....

So, when people speculate we will trade up to get our QB, it makes me wonder why we would pass on one when we have the pick(this year AND last year).....but then suddenly give 2 firsts(or the equivalent or more) for one thats not deemed to be so great....

Doesnt make any sense....

Sure it does... just as our FO is looking ahead to 2018 so were they in 2017. And in the over 30 minutes of tape they then had on Trubs, they saw greatness.

#sarcasm

@mudfly said:

Me 2.

@texasag1969 said:

Right.....that would be key.....

Shashi did say they value picks too much to want to give 2 picks for one guy.......lets hope thats true.....

And, lets also hope that they dont value 2 picks(so much) that they pass on the great players to get em......(ala 2016)

Edit: speaking on higher picks only.....no issue with grouping some late picks to move up a bit.....I just have this thing that I feel we should tap "good" players instead of larger groups of bad players.....thats just me tho

@mudfly said:

And hopefully it doesn't make sense to the FO either.

@gumby73 said:

Me too....

So, when people speculate we will trade up to get our QB, it makes me wonder why we would pass on one when we have the pick(this year AND last year).....but then suddenly give 2 firsts(or the equivalent or more) for one thats not deemed to be so great....

Doesnt make any sense....

@gumby73 said:

Mary Kay all mad because Sashi said she has the Patriots on speed dial. I don't doubt it's true. I heard more Garropolo crap to the Browns on ESPN before the Celtics-Bulls game. They won't let that one die either. Unless Sashi is totally lying- that rumor should have been dead and buried after the presser.

La-Can't-for-ya hates the Browns and his stuff is click fodder. You would hope after the Johnny Football fiasco Haslam has learned not to listen to street people, and let the Front Office do the picking.

@orion said:

The abysmal defense certainly does need help doesn't it.......and so does our abysmal offense.......we were abysmal.

We were the Abominable Abysmal.

@comeonman said:

The abysmal defense certainly does need help doesn't it.......and so does our abysmal offense.......we were abysmal.

We were the Abominable Abysmal.

@mudfly said:

Point taken & I stand corrected. Thanks John.

Mike

@comeonman said:

Nope..But I'd take Wentz over this QB draft class. Image all the free time we'd have 4 WR's minus 1 still equals us landing Kessler too

@comeonman said:

...and yet, WE beat Bosa's team.....with an OL of Joe Thomas and some refugees.

I'm not saying that we shouldn't take Garrett.....but don't be counting on him to win us football games. He can't throw any TD's. He's one of the eleven guys that are supposed to tackle people.

@canton-dawg said:

And they couldn't beat the Browns.

@ghoolie said:

ONly for an idiot Browns fan. Who wants to keep losing. Garrett is ordinary. He can be duplicated in the 2,3 and 4th rounds. Not a difference maker, doesn't touch the ball, and is easily nullified with play selection and double teams. Bosa is better than Garrett by far (smarter and more physical) but he didn't make squat difference in SD.

Trubisky is the #1 pick of this draft. Not even close.

Paxton Lynch.

@comeonman said:

Bosa had 10.5 sacks and won NFL DROTY while missing four games at the second most important position in the game. I'll take it.