ClevelandFanForLife Posted April 13, 2010 Report Share Posted April 13, 2010 I was just flipping through the channels and saw on ESPN that Trey Wingo was interviewing Joe Haden and was asking him a bunch of questions. When asked what teams he's been in contact with, he said that he's talked with Cleveland the most out of any teams. He also seemed to be wearing a Cleveland New Era hat. He did admit that the teams that have been contacting him were teams 7-13. Did the hat mean that he wants to be taken by Cleveland at number 7? Just fun speculation by my part but I still say he's a good pick up if Berry is gone. It doesn't hurt to have three corner backs. The past couple of seasons, we have barely had one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halfsane Posted April 13, 2010 Report Share Posted April 13, 2010 I like Haden as our pick if Berry is gone. Bring that shit! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
next2nothing Posted April 13, 2010 Report Share Posted April 13, 2010 Agree with Halfsane. Haden or Berry. Will be happy with either one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
playerjdd Posted April 13, 2010 Report Share Posted April 13, 2010 I would rather us trade down in the first then take haden. Im not impressed as some are. He seemed to get burnt alot which reminds me alot of Fuller. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choco Posted April 13, 2010 Report Share Posted April 13, 2010 im having a hard time finding anything to support that claim.... every CB gets burned eventually...frequency is what matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CLEVELandMILIDH Posted April 13, 2010 Report Share Posted April 13, 2010 Mangini selected and developed Revis, I trust he know's what he's talking about if we select Haden. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mopaji Posted April 13, 2010 Report Share Posted April 13, 2010 I like Haden but not at #7. I would much rather trade down and pick up Kyle Wilson, McCourty (who I really, really like), Earl Thomas, or even Nate Allen later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasont44094 Posted April 14, 2010 Report Share Posted April 14, 2010 why grab haden when we just traded for Sheldon Brown, i think we should draft a position of need before we add to cb that we're set at for at least this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JRex223 Posted April 14, 2010 Report Share Posted April 14, 2010 #7 means more money... $) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miktoxic Posted April 14, 2010 Report Share Posted April 14, 2010 why grab haden when we just traded for Sheldon Brown, i think we should draft a position of need before we add to cb that we're set at for at least this year. i still think it's a position of need. haden if berry is gone ONLY if one of the top OL aren't there or had dropped. imagine our OL if we can pick up one of the top 3 or 4? in the afc north you gotta have the run game in december and we all know mangini built a pretty good one in ny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaak Posted April 14, 2010 Report Share Posted April 14, 2010 I would rather us trade down in the first then take haden. Im not impressed as some are. He seemed to get burnt alot which reminds me alot of Fuller. If we can trade down with Buffalo (because they want Clausen) and get Haden at #9, I say we do it. Even with Berry on the board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaak Posted April 14, 2010 Report Share Posted April 14, 2010 why grab haden when we just traded for Sheldon Brown, i think we should draft a position of need before we add to cb that we're set at for at least this year. Heckert and Holmgren already said this is not how they are going to draft. They are going to draft what they consider to be the best player available. No reaching for position of need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasont44094 Posted April 14, 2010 Report Share Posted April 14, 2010 Heckert and Holmgren already said this is not how they are going to draft. They are going to draft what they consider to be the best player available. No reaching for position of need. I think thats a smoke screen saying all gms say so they don't tip there hand and hopefully a players they want fall to them. If a pure left tackle ( can only play that position ) is the best player available they would not grab just for the sake of taking the best available player, especially in the first round. That would set your team back, not help it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mopaji Posted April 14, 2010 Report Share Posted April 14, 2010 I think thats a smoke screen saying all gms say so they don't tip there hand and hopefully a players they want fall to them. If a pure left tackle ( can only play that position ) is the best player available they would not grab just for the sake of taking the best available player, especially in the first round. That would set your team back, not help it. I need to clear up this 'smokescreen' misunderstanding once and for all. Here is how a 'smokescreen' works. You don't say you're not taking a guy in order to confuse teams, that works against you and you have nothing to gain. So say if SF wants Haden and you say you're not taking him, well then, SF isn't going to worry about trading up if you're the only team that may need Haden. Afterall, you're not taking him right? Teams will then offer SF trades instead of you because you're not taking him anyways right? If you do end up taking him well then what's the point of lying about it? You gain nothing by saying you're not taking a guy. However, if you express interest in say, Jimmy Clausen even thought you know you're not taking him (see Mike's recent backtrack on clausen) and SF may really like him. And if they think you want him and he may not be there for them, then they will start making offers to move up. That, is how it works. I think some people call it a 'smokescreen' whenever they don't agree with the statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mopaji Posted April 14, 2010 Report Share Posted April 14, 2010 Drafting the best player available is the absolute best formula for winning. How many times have the Pats, Eagles, or Indy taken a position that they don't really need? That's how you flood your team with talent and avoid blowing draft picks. Drafting by need can cause a team to reach for somebody and narrow down your options which mathematically lowers your chances of getting a good player. That's not to say we'll take a LT because he's the best but it does mean we can take the best LB, CB, S, RB, G, or WR instead of looking for the best DB, we can now choose from the best out of multiple positions. Once you identify the best available, then you can decide whether or not the team can use him and make a sound decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasont44094 Posted April 14, 2010 Report Share Posted April 14, 2010 Drafting the best player available is the absolute best formula for winning. How many times have the Pats, Eagles, or Indy taken a position that they don't really need? That's how you flood your team with talent and avoid blowing draft picks. Drafting by need can cause a team to reach for somebody and narrow down your options which mathematically lowers your chances of getting a good player. That's not to say we'll take a LT because he's the best but it does mean we can take the best LB, CB, S, RB, G, or WR instead of looking for the best DB, we can now choose from the best out of multiple positions. Once you identify the best available, then you can decide whether or not the team can use him and make a sound decision. I agree, we have so many holes that we don't have to reach for one two position of needs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasont44094 Posted April 14, 2010 Report Share Posted April 14, 2010 mopaji I'm saying its a smoke screen, because scouts and reports are saying they're really interested in a couple players and there back tracking by saying ow we're not going to take that player our plan is to take the best available player. It could be that they're trying to rope in teams to move up and trade with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrownIndian Posted April 14, 2010 Report Share Posted April 14, 2010 why do we have to indulge i smoke screen to get Haden, given our high draft number we are going to get him for sure. The only way we dont get him if the ones ahead decide to take him but that frees some other talent for us - like Suh, McCoy or Berry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasont44094 Posted April 14, 2010 Report Share Posted April 14, 2010 why do we have to indulge i smoke screen to get Haden, given our high draft number we are going to get him for sure. The only way we dont get him if the ones ahead decide to take him but that frees some other talent for us - like Suh, McCoy or Berry. Because we do, thats called being a fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choco Posted April 14, 2010 Report Share Posted April 14, 2010 Going bpa will set you back rather than help? OK...that's a first... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasont44094 Posted April 14, 2010 Report Share Posted April 14, 2010 Going bpa will set you back rather than help? OK...that's a first... if its a position your really strong in. Only applies in the first round. Like us taking a LT or Indy or NE taking a qb ( and i'm talking about a hybred like Teabow ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cribbs is the man Posted April 14, 2010 Report Share Posted April 14, 2010 I need to clear up this 'smokescreen' misunderstanding once and for all. Here is how a 'smokescreen' works. You don't say you're not taking a guy in order to confuse teams, that works against you and you have nothing to gain. So say if SF wants Haden and you say you're not taking him, well then, SF isn't going to worry about trading up if you're the only team that may need Haden. Afterall, you're not taking him right? Teams will then offer SF trades instead of you because you're not taking him anyways right? If you do end up taking him well then what's the point of lying about it? You gain nothing by saying you're not taking a guy. However, if you express interest in say, Jimmy Clausen even thought you know you're not taking him (see Mike's recent backtrack on clausen) and SF may really like him. And if they think you want him and he may not be there for them, then they will start making offers to move up. That, is how it works. I think some people call it a 'smokescreen' whenever they don't agree with the statement. A smokescreen could actually work the other way around as well. I am not saying that the Browns are doing this, but by saying you dont particularly like a player or saying you wont take him may make teams not trade a spot ahead of you and pick the guy. For example, HYPOTHETICALLY (I DONT think we're actually doing this), we could say we arent interested in Clausen so that SF or Buffalo wont trade to the #6 slot to pick Clausen, thats a smokescreen as well. I dont think saying we are picking the BPA is a smokescreen, we need help everywhere (except LT and C, maybe TE) and we should pick the most talented player that would best help out team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choco Posted April 14, 2010 Report Share Posted April 14, 2010 So you think we are deep are corner? Have you checked the roster lately? Brown and Wright...and brown is out of his prime. Nothing after that.... Edit: did san diego suffer a setback taking eli? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cribbs is the man Posted April 14, 2010 Report Share Posted April 14, 2010 So you think we are deep are corner? Have you checked the roster lately? Brown and Wright...and brown is out of his prime. Nothing after that.... Edit: did san diego suffer a setback taking eli? C is center (Alex Mack), CB is corner. and no I dont think we are deep at the corner position Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasont44094 Posted April 14, 2010 Report Share Posted April 14, 2010 A smokescreen could actually work the other way around as well. I am not saying that the Browns are doing this, but by saying you dont particularly like a player or saying you wont take him may make teams not trade a spot ahead of you and pick the guy. For example, HYPOTHETICALLY (I DONT think we're actually doing this), we could say we arent interested in Clausen so that SF or Buffalo wont trade to the #6 slot to pick Clausen, thats a smokescreen as well. I dont think saying we are picking the BPA is a smokescreen, we need help everywhere (except LT and C, maybe TE) and we should pick the most talented player that would best help out team That's one of the points i was trying to make, thanks for explaining it for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasont44094 Posted April 14, 2010 Report Share Posted April 14, 2010 Edit: did san diego suffer a setback taking eli? That was a pre draft trade agreement. Eli still wanted to be #1 overall like his brother but would not sign with San Diego. About our corners good enough for this year that you can grab another one in the 2nd or 3rd. Right now we don't have a starting fs, unless you think Sorenson is the answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mopaji Posted April 14, 2010 Report Share Posted April 14, 2010 A smokescreen could actually work the other way around as well. I am not saying that the Browns are doing this, but by saying you dont particularly like a player or saying you wont take him may make teams not trade a spot ahead of you and pick the guy. For example, HYPOTHETICALLY (I DONT think we're actually doing this), we could say we arent interested in Clausen so that SF or Buffalo wont trade to the #6 slot to pick Clausen, thats a smokescreen as well. See, that doesn't make sense because what do we care if a team moves ahead of us to take a player that we don't want? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasont44094 Posted April 14, 2010 Report Share Posted April 14, 2010 See, that doesn't make sense because what do we care if a team moves ahead of us to take a player that we don't want? He's saying we don't want Clausen and somebody leap frogs over us to take him someone like Berry could be available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choco Posted April 14, 2010 Report Share Posted April 14, 2010 C is center (Alex Mack), CB is corner. and no I dont think we are deep at the corner position Sorry...but you snuck in there. That was at jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cribbs is the man Posted April 14, 2010 Report Share Posted April 14, 2010 See, that doesn't make sense because what do we care if a team moves ahead of us to take a player that we don't want? No I am saying that hypothetically if we do really want someone, lets use Clausen as an example, we could smokescreen and say that we dont want him so that teams later on wont feel the need to jump ahead of us to grab Clausen, thus the player we actually want (Clausen) is still there when we pick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.