Jump to content
THE BROWNS BOARD

Is Haden on His Way?

ClevelandFanForLife

By ClevelandFanForLife
in THE BROWNS BOARD

Recommended Posts

Thaak Newbie

Thaak

Posted
Posted
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.

 

That is an incredibly incomplete way of looking at things.

 

I say this for two reasons:

 

1) From a draft board creation procedure, if a team absolutely does not want a particular player, they will remove him from the draft board. No matter how much skill the player may have. Amongst probably other reasons, this is done for character, injury, and/or lack of need. Dez Bryant is probably one removed for character reasons. The top rated center and long snapper are probably removed for lack of need. Some players may be so skilled, that you leave them on the board despite lack of need, much as the Vikings did with Adrian Peterson. But regardless, each teams draft board is going to look different. If a player is on their draft board, that means they think he’s worth drafting. Then they assign values to each player. Is he worth a top 10? Is he worth a 1st rounder? Is he worth a 5th rounder? If a the Best Player Available (BPA) is valued in the top10 to 15, and they can’t trade out of the #7 overall, they take him. For example, lets say that, in order, the Browns top 11 looks like Suh, McCoy, Bradford, Okung, Berry, Baluga, D Williams, T Williams, Haden, Spiller, Morgan… and Okung falls to #7 but Suh, McCoy, and Bradford are off the board. They take Okung (don’t debate this yet, take a look at my 2nd reason below). But if Suh, McCoy, Bradford, Okung, Berry, Baluga are all off the board, and the Browns for whatever reason have removed D Williams, T Williams, and Haden from the board, they take Spiller at #7. Teams might also rate players on there board in order, somewhat based on need. In other words, they might rate Bradford #1 overall because they need a QB more than they need Suh or McCoy.

 

2) The Browns right side of the offensive line is still very questionable, even with the addition of Pashos. I mean Womack/Pashos G/T on the right side (interchangeable?) might be a one or two season stop gap at best anyways. So they need a RT or RG in the draft. That’s why Okung, Baluga, or Campbell might be options. There are some Guards that are rated 18th through 32nd on the draft board. If the Browns trade back, they may pick up a Guard.

 

So yes, there is a ton of smoke and mirrors leading up to a draft. And depending on how you put your draft board together, you may skew it slightly based on need, but overall you should draft BPA regardless of any specific needs. For example: If the Browns have Odrick rated as a #18 to 24 and They have Haden, Spiller, and Dan Williams available, which they have rated #6 to 15, they take one of the later three instead of Odrick, unless they can trade back to where they have him valued.

 

BPA drafting doesn’t mean you don’t try to target specific players and specific positions, but you don’t reach for those positions if the value isn’t there.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Gipper Newbie

The Gipper

Posted
Posted
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.

 

 

I think we need a safety more at this point....though certainly a quality corner is still a need. The problem is the Browns need a lot, so maybe they should just go out and get the best guy out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Gipper Newbie

The Gipper

Posted
Posted
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.

 

We can choose the best out of multiple positions because, unfortuneatley we have needs at all those positions LB, CB, S, RB, G, or WR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mopaji Newbie

mopaji

Posted
Posted
We can choose the best out of multiple positions because, unfortuneatley we have needs at all those positions LB, CB, S, RB, G, or WR.

 

 

The term 'need' is relative. We did upgrade at QB, LB, RT, and CB which I know isn't saying much but we could justify ignoring all 4 of those positions in the 1st round. We probably won't though because the best player available at #7 will probably be at S/CB. For instance, if we took best available last year it would have been because it didn't matter what position it was, it was an upgrade. This year, we have more leverage and that's why I think we'll be looking at best player available. And that's a position I like being in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thaak Newbie

Thaak

Posted
Posted
ROFL. You serious, i'm talking about a legit starter.

 

He's a serviceable starter. Not stellar, but he's serviceable.

 

Right now, we only have three safeties under contract, Elam, Adams and Ventrone. I certainly don't want Ventrone as FS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...