@tour2ma said:

But as you know JOK is not a typical LB...

...and that's where the waters get a bit muddier.  

@sdbacker80 said:

The chart is reference point.

Yes... but not the old JJ chart. It's an antiquity based on one man's whim.

@orion said:

A trade-up for a LB'er does seem to run counter to the Browns current culture of downplaying the LB'er role.  I'm sure their specific denomination of analytics wouldn't support such a move.  But it really doesn't change the fact that LB'er is probably our biggest need and that a LB'ers value will match one of our first four picks. 

But as you know JOK is not a typical LB...

@sdbacker80 said:

Yuck.  I hope if we trade up it’s for one of those elite WRs or DBs

A trade-up for a LB'er does seem to run counter to the Browns current culture of downplaying the LB'er role.  I'm sure their specific denomination of analytics wouldn't support such a move.  But it really doesn't change the fact that LB'er is probably our biggest need and that a LB'ers value will match one of our first four picks.  

@orion said:

Yuck.  I hope if we trade up it’s for one of those elite WRs or DBs

Peter King - NBC Sports: LB Jeremiah Owusu-Koramoah (Notre Dame)

@tour2ma said:

Not by the standard chart of the time...

At the time Heckert was our GM and analytics had yet to come to town... so by the established chart of the day, the Jimmy Johnson chart. The rule of thumb is that future year picks are devalued by one round per year.

• We gave up 342.4.
• ATL paid 214.7+135.1+79.4+135.1+61.1 = 595.4. So we killed it... or so we thought.

However, by the Harvard Chart

• We gave up a pick worth 1600.
• So ATL gave up... 680+310+49+310+30 = 1379 assuming they finished 2012 in the same position... which they did not. They actually finished higher in 2012 and earned us the 29th pick.

So yeah... by today's standard we did not get full value for our 6th, but either way Chuckles Heckert blew the draft anyway.

Here's the old JJ chart... it has decimal points, so it must be more precise...

The chart is reference point...and demand can drive it favorably or unfavorably in either direction.  I think the chart could be favorable with a trade up in the first round if you have a run on QBs with the first four picks and four are off the board at pick 5 or 6. 

https://www.patspulpit.com/2017/4/23/15398184/2017-nfl-draft-creating-a-brand-new-nfl-draft-value-trade-chart

@tour2ma said:

Not by the standard chart of the time...

At the time Heckert was our GM and analytics had yet to come to town... so by the established chart of the day, the Jimmy Johnson chart. The rule of thumb is that future year picks are devalued by one round per year.

• We gave up 342.4.
• ATL paid 214.7+135.1+79.4+135.1+61.1 = 595.4. So we killed it... or so we thought.

However, by the Harvard Chart

• We gave up a pick worth 1600.
• So ATL gave up... 680+310+49+310+30 = 1379 assuming they finished 2012 in the same position... which they did not. They actually finished higher in 2012 and earned us the 29th pick.

So yeah... by today's standard we did not get full value for our 6th, but either way Chuckles Heckert blew the draft anyway.

Here's the old JJ chart... it has decimal points, so it must be more precise...

Another post a day late and a dollar short. 

@sdbacker80 said:

Cleveland traded the No. 6 overall pick to Atlanta for five draft picks (its first-, second-, and fourth-round picks in 2011, plus its first- and fourth-round picks in 2012).

Atlanta owned the 27th pick In the first round in 2011.

This would be the kind of deal that you would expect IF you moved into the 6-8 range.  Did we get ripped off in 2011...perhaps? 

Not by the standard chart of the time...

At the time Heckert was our GM and analytics had yet to come to town... so by the established chart of the day, the Jimmy Johnson chart. The rule of thumb is that future year picks are devalued by one round per year.

• We gave up 342.4.
• ATL paid 214.7+135.1+79.4+135.1+61.1 = 595.4. So we killed it... or so we thought.

However, by the Harvard Chart

• We gave up a pick worth 1600.
• So ATL gave up... 680+310+49+310+30 = 1379 assuming they finished 2012 in the same position... which they did not. They actually finished higher in 2012 and earned us the 29th pick.

So yeah... by today's standard we did not get full value for our 6th, but either way Chuckles Heckert blew the draft anyway.

Here's the old JJ chart... it has decimal points, so it must be more precise...

@unsympathetic said:

The point, though, is the extraordinarily cheap contracts that those day3 2020 picks are on through the end of the 2023 season. 

Dutch hates analytics...

People often hate that which they do not understand. 

Agree on Berry, but don't forget DePo is still around.

The point, though, is the extraordinarily cheap contracts that those day3 2020 picks are on through the end of the 2023 season.  We're getting low-end-starter performance for under 1M per.. THAT is how you have the cap space to maintain a championship roster & resign players we draft in rd1.  Most day3 draft picks are wasted.. but when they hit, they're genius.

@unsympathetic said:

Andrew Berry had a better day 3 in 2020 than any GM we've had since.. I got frustrated looking at day3's back through 2009, let's stop there.

All the picks didn't just make the roster, they're big parts of the team moving forward.  Bryant and DPJ get solid rep counts; Harris spot-started last year and is likely our starting C in 2022.

Eh, we'll see how those and the 2020 Browns draft in general looks in a few years. 

The 2020 picks didn't just make the roster, they're big parts of the team's future.  Bryant and DPJ get solid rep counts; Harris was C backup last year and will likely start in 2022.

@unsympathetic said:

It's a bad move to trade up -- we need those contributing later-round players on rookie contracts.  We finally have a guy who can identify later-round talent, let's use it.

We do? Who is this person you are speaking of? 

@the-gipper said:

Trade up to #6...for what?

All the national newspeople who assert the Browns trade up..... have a personal desire to see others make good use of Browns picks.  Assume their attitude always is: The Browns can't possibly be good, so let's just have them do stupid things to throw it away..

This isn't "hard-hitting journalism" - this is fanboi Madden-dynasty stuff.

It's a bad move to trade up -- we need those contributing later-round players on rookie contracts.  We finally have a guy who can identify later-round talent, let's use it.

@ballpeen said:

The people who should be fired are the goofy fans who are worried about his ability to block.

I'd be one of those 'goofy fans'.  If he's to be played at TE, I would want him to be able to block.  

Although I'm a fan of the passing game in today's NFL, we have Chubb & Hunt.  Both can run and both can catch.  Yes, maybe we bring in Hunt in more passing situations, but as a defense you KNOW that he can run the ball darned well.  That's a tactical advantage.  Now, if you have to send in your 'blocking' TE because you plan on running Hunt on 3rd & 4, then you're giving away some of that tactical advantage.  

I like my TE's to be able to Catch & Block.  And I like my RB's to be able to Run, Catch & Block.   I don't like having to send in specialists for each category.

@ballpeen said:

I will add to my above comment.  That was more in terms of say a first rounder. 

That's the way I took it.  The 'moving up' expense is just so high in round 1.  Subsequent rounds are different.

@tour2ma said:

Any coach who uses Pitts as a TE should be immediately fired.

Not a tradtional "next to the OTackle in the three point stance TE", but a guy who can line up on the wing, in close, in the slot, basically all over to make him a matchup nightmare. 

Executives

@sdbacker80 said:

Cleveland traded the No. 6 overall pick to Atlanta for five draft picks (its first-, second-, and fourth-round picks in 2011, plus its first- and fourth-round picks in 2012).

Atlanta owned the 27th pick In the first round in 2011.

This would be the kind of deal that you would expect IF you moved into the 6-8 range.  Did we get ripped off in 2011...perhaps? 
 

Big Trade up...slight trade up...stay put....slide back.  Could be interesting Thursday 

What did we get out of those picks?  Phil  Taylor,  Greg Little,  Owen Marecic...in 2011.    Brandon Weeden  and James  Michael Johnson in 2012.  

ATL got Julio Jones.    So, you could say it was a "rip-off"....even though it really was not.  What ripped us off was our completely piss poor talent evaluation in making those picks,  not the picks themselves. 

Examples:    Instead of DL Phil Taylor,  we could have had  DL  Cameron Jordan...who is still playing for NO.   (note...we did draft TE  Jordan Cameron that year...we could have had the set)

Instead of WR  Greg Little,  we could have had WR  Randall Cobb....still active

Instead of  FB  Owen Marecic,  we could have had FB  Bilal Powell...still active

In 2012  Instead of Brandon Weeden....we could have drafted a QB named Russell Wilson who went in round 3......or other first round  guys who went after Weeden like  Riley Rieff, David DeCastro, Whitney Mercilus, Donta Hightower

Instead of LB  James Michael Johnson,  we could have had a LB  Tahir Whitehead...still active. 

But note...the guy that was our GM those years was Tom Heckert.....who is the one guy  we all basically thought was a decent talent evaluator.  But, apparently not.

I mean,  to this day I would probably take him over the likes of Mike Lombardi,  Kokinis,  Phil Savage,   Ray Farmer....even Sachi Brown.  (plus Butch...and maybe even Dwight Clark)    Fair to say? 

@the-gipper said:

You would need 1000 extra points to move from 26 to 4 or 6 (hello Chicago). More than we have for our entire draft. 

Cleveland traded the No. 6 overall pick to Atlanta for five draft picks (its first-, second-, and fourth-round picks in 2011, plus its first- and fourth-round picks in 2012).

Atlanta owned the 27th pick In the first round in 2011.

This would be the kind of deal that you would expect IF you moved into the 6-8 range.  Did we get ripped off in 2011...perhaps? 
 

Big Trade up...slight trade up...stay put....slide back.  Could be interesting Thursday 

@tour2ma said:

It's not a matter of his blocking ability... the kid has monster, Megatron-like potential as a WR. I would not want him messing around in "the pit"... or even on the edges of it.

If Bryant gets rolled up while blocking, we won't miss him. If we had a Pitts and that happened? The HC should be summarily executed...

As for the trade... problem is the team on the other end of the deal would also be assuming that 2022 1st is #32 as well... that's why it's really not enough.

Plus there's going to be competing bids for Pitts... so the chart is just a starting point.... and a decade ago this chart was just beginning to take hold. The Jimmy Johnson "here's my gut feel" chart was still in wide use.

https://harvardsportsanalysis.wordpress.com/2011/11/30/how-to-value-nfl-draft-picks/

You would need 1000 extra points to move from 26 to 4 or 6 (hello Chicago). More than we have for our entire draft. 

@sdbacker80 said:

I think it would be a mistake to write off his ability to block 20-30% of the time.  My untrained eye saw Harrison Bryant improve here throughout the year- he wasn’t noted for blocking either.  Pitts would be a Swiss Army knife you would move him around and creat chaos on the other side or the ball.  Let Landry work underneath it all and give OBJ single coverage.  Good Lord!!!

I stated the precedent from going to 27 to 6.  Unfortunately we were on the wrong end of that deal a decade ago. 

We could conceivably go from 26 to 7 or 8.  Lions and Panthers both have MANY needs but probably not a QB need - those are trade partners IMO.  

My assumption is our first round pick is #32 next year. 

It's not a matter of his blocking ability... the kid has monster, Megatron-like potential as a WR. I would not want him messing around in "the pit"... or even on the edges of it.

If Bryant gets rolled up while blocking, we won't miss him. If we had a Pitts and that happened? The HC should be summarily executed...

As for the trade... problem is the team on the other end of the deal would also be assuming that 2022 1st is #32 as well... that's why it's really not enough.

Plus there's going to be competing bids for Pitts... so the chart is just a starting point.... and a decade ago this chart was just beginning to take hold. The Jimmy Johnson "here's my gut feel" chart was still in wide use.

https://harvardsportsanalysis.wordpress.com/2011/11/30/how-to-value-nfl-draft-picks/