I understand, however the two concepts are not mutually exclusive: Yes, Baker is better than what the Browns have had since Bernie. Agreed. But, at the same time, you would hope that the #1 pick overall in the draft would bring you a QB that is capable of beating teams beyond just the bad ones. He's not a rookie, as Burrow is. He is in his 3rd year. What should be expected of a QB who was the 1st pick overall in his 3rd year? Should he be noticeably improved as he was his rookie season? Is he?
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/M/MayfBa00.htm
He has regressed in many areas.
What have other top QBs accomplished from their rookie years to their 3rd? I don't know. Will the Browns roll out a massive extension at this point? Should Baker be paid like a Mahomes? Would that be wise?
Ok then in that case don't you think Andy Dalton should of been able to beat Bakers offense his rookie season? Believe me I know beating the Bengals is nothing to brag about but in a 16 game format Pisspuke always counted on 4 wins every season from the Browns twice and Cinci twice? I am not saying Baker is the answer by any stretch but he is healthy and can beat "weak teams" So why not keep him til we have something better ? Even if we do draft a qb let him sit behind Baker not to learn I would not say but to see what Baker can do with a High draft pick niping at his heels.