Thomaspro Posted April 6, 2012 Report Share Posted April 6, 2012 If Kalil is there at 4 draft him. You then have 2 great bookend tackles for the next 4 to 5 years. Take best WR at 22. I would prefer Hill. Then at 37 best available RB since this draft is deep with RB's. Just an idea I wanted to throw out there and get your thoughts on it. Thomaspro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted April 6, 2012 Report Share Posted April 6, 2012 If Kalil is there at 4 draft him. You then have 2 great bookend tackles for the next 4 to 5 years. Take best WR at 22. I would prefer Hill. Then at 37 best available RB since this draft is deep with RB's. Just an idea I wanted to throw out there and get your thoughts on it. Thomaspro I don't think very highly of it. Here is what I predict the Browns will do. Among their first 3 picks will be a WR, a RT, a CB or a FS....but the RT will not be at #4. (yes, no QB, no RB) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomaspro Posted April 6, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 6, 2012 Well. I do think we should not take a QB. Colt deserves another year with actual weapons around him and a actual RT. Not revolving door Pashos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brownfish Posted April 6, 2012 Report Share Posted April 6, 2012 pretty sure we won't get any of those players..this would make me a lot happier Blackmon Jefferies Adams Mcnutt Turbin Kirk Cousins T. Johnson Malik Jackson Bentley Jarius Wright Bryce Brown Janzen Jackson Danny Coale Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Buffalo Posted April 6, 2012 Report Share Posted April 6, 2012 If I hear another person talk about drafting a RT at #4 I am going to go ape shit. Personally I think the best true RT is the draft is Massie and he will be available at #37. #4 and #22 should be used on offensive skill players. Whether thats a RB/WR, WR/RB, WR/WR I don't care but a RT at #4 is offensive suicide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
runyon27 Posted April 6, 2012 Report Share Posted April 6, 2012 If I hear another person talk about drafting a RT at #4 I am going to go ape shit. Personally I think the best true RT is the draft is Massie and he will be available at #37. #4 and #22 should be used on offensive skill players. Whether thats a RB/WR, WR/RB, WR/WR I don't care but a RT at #4 is offensive suicide. Yeah I dont understand this whole drafting a RT at #4. Makes zero since to me when we can get a good RT later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted April 6, 2012 Report Share Posted April 6, 2012 Yeah I dont understand this whole drafting a RT at #4. Makes zero since to me when we can get a good RT later. It is the concept of taking the Best Player Available. If Kalil is actually still there at #4 it is highly probable that he will be considered the BPA on just about everybody's board. Sure it doesn't make since (sic....are you from Tennessee?) to draft an LT that high and try to put him at RT...but you never know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baybrownsfan Posted April 6, 2012 Report Share Posted April 6, 2012 It is the concept of taking the Best Player Available. If Kalil is actually still there at #4 it is highly probable that he will be considered the BPA on just about everybody's board. Sure it doesn't make since (sic....are you from Tennessee?) to draft an LT that high and try to put him at RT...but you never know. No reason a LT can't be a stud RT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Buffalo Posted April 6, 2012 Report Share Posted April 6, 2012 No reason a LT can't be a stud RT. No reason to spend that high of a pick on a RT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canton Mike Posted April 6, 2012 Report Share Posted April 6, 2012 No reason to spend that high of a pick on a RT I agree 100%. Pick 4 MUST be an offensive playmaker, & that's Trich, IMHO. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted April 6, 2012 Report Share Posted April 6, 2012 Kalil is going to command Thomas type bucks, so in part the question has to be, "can you afford to pay a stud LT salary to play RT?" I think the answer is pretty obvious... If Kalil falls to us, our phone will ring off the hook... and we will answer it. I don't like Hill at 22... I tag Floyd in Round 1 either with the 1st Rnd pick I get trading down our #4 or by reinvesting some of the accumulated picks to get the #22 back up in Floyd-ville... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PoeticG Posted April 6, 2012 Report Share Posted April 6, 2012 The Browns can do whatever they want AFTER they take Richardson at 4... after that, it's a wrap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cuwoohio Posted April 7, 2012 Report Share Posted April 7, 2012 The Browns can do whatever they want AFTER they take Richardson at 4... after that, it's a wrap. I agree........he gives the offense a huge boost, and there will be good receivers all through the draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frenchie Posted April 7, 2012 Report Share Posted April 7, 2012 I would be surprised by Kalil at 4 but not angry. The only thing that would make me angry is a QB (T-hill) at 4. I would be OK with Claiborne at 4 if the next pick and 3 rounds that follow were on offence. To me, that would just mean he was too good to pass up. I could see a trade to fall back a few spots and I would not be angry if they did that. So many options! I don't think this team can really just draft bpa w/o consideration to position. I think they will look to pug holes and see the draft as a whole. If it's deep in a position (not much drop-off), or if the position is not that important, they will draft a player there later in the rounds of the draft. So it depends on how they see draft and the positions of need, QB, WR, RB, FB, LT, OLB, DB, S, DE - that's 9 spots where we have needs. We need some of these more than others. Some of these positions are more important than others, and some of the players in the draft are far more talented than the next best. If they draft at 4, it's gotta be Blackmon, Richardson, or Claiborne. If it's not Blackmon, they'll go WR at 22 and RT in the second round. I think it's about BPA at that point. So perhaps the question we should be trying to answer is how much better are these three players over who would be available to us at 22. And remember WCO - so they have to be better as viewed from our system. In heckert we trust! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canton Mike Posted April 7, 2012 Report Share Posted April 7, 2012 Of course, I want Trich at 4, & since WR is one of the deepest positions in the draft, I go Fleener (Stanford TE) at 22. After all, we have Watson, who has been valuable but is almost done due mostly to multiple concussions, Moore (who can't or won't block) Cameron, who is still very raw & Smith. Fleener is a polished & very good TE for our WCO & we can still get a good WR or 2 later. Second round on I leave to Heckert, but they WILL draft another QB somewhere in the draft. I hope that's either Weeden, Cousins, or Foles, but we'll see. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PoeticG Posted April 7, 2012 Report Share Posted April 7, 2012 My Needs List: 1)RB 2)RT 3)WR 4)OLB 5)FS 6)CB 7)FB 8)QB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PoeticG Posted April 7, 2012 Report Share Posted April 7, 2012 I like Brock Osweiler for a backup project QB. He's young and really tall. Good arm and Mobile. Where do you guys think he'd fall? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Buffalo Posted April 7, 2012 Report Share Posted April 7, 2012 I would be surprised by Kalil at 4 but not angry. The only thing that would make me angry is a QB (T-hill) at 4. I would be OK with Claiborne at 4 if the next pick and 3 rounds that follow were on offence. To me, that would just mean he was too good to pass up. I could see a trade to fall back a few spots and I would not be angry if they did that. So many options! I don't think this team can really just draft bpa w/o consideration to position. I think they will look to pug holes and see the draft as a whole. If it's deep in a position (not much drop-off), or if the position is not that important, they will draft a player there later in the rounds of the draft. So it depends on how they see draft and the positions of need, QB, WR, RB, FB, LT, OLB, DB, S,DE - that's 9 spots where we have needs. We need some of these more than others. Some of these positions are more important than others, and some of the players in the draft are far more talented than the next best. If they draft at 4, it's gotta be Blackmon, Richardson, or Claiborne. If it's not Blackmon, they'll go WR at 22 and RT in the second round. I think it's about BPA at that point. So perhaps the question we should be trying to answer is how much better are these three players over who would be available to us at 22. And remember WCO - so they have to be better as viewed from our system. In heckert we trust! What I marked red we don't don't need. They just drafted Marecic last season in the 4th round, they won't draft another FB unless it's with one of those comp 7th rounders and that is very unlikely. Regardless of what you think of the guy they are not going to give up on a guy they drafted to be the starter after one season. LT obviously also isn't a need. We could use some depth yes but it's still not pressing, especially when you consider that Thomas has never missed a game due to injury. RT and G are more likely to be looked at before LT depth. Now I marked DB, S, and DE blue because you are confusing me. First DB covers literally CB, SS, and FS and S covers SS and FS soooo your saying our strength last year is a huge need? I'll admit that we need to address CB or FS at some point in the draft but it's not such a need that we NEED to take someone. Claiborne is an option just because he could be BPA. I think that is the only way we take a DB before round 4 is if someone they like falls to them. Now DE DEFINITELY isn't going to be drafted unless someone they like falls to them, as in they won't be taking a DE cause there is a guy they like and they don't think he will be there with their next pick. If someone falls to them and he is on top of the board they will grab him up, but with our FA signings Heckert has told us NO big DE draft pick is going to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted April 7, 2012 Report Share Posted April 7, 2012 Personally I think the best true RT is the draft is Massie and he will be available at #37 ******************************************** I was picking Bobby Massie in the third... but he's going to go in the second, especially after Pinkston talked about him changing his strength, agility, etc, at the oline camp. Trent Richardson at 4 is a no brainer. As much as I like Doug Martin - he's not the elite talent that Richardson is. The Browns will draft him because they play in Cleveland, because he IS all that and more. He is a major no risk. Besides, picking a LT at four, to play RT? Sure he can. But it isn't necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted April 7, 2012 Report Share Posted April 7, 2012 What about a trade scenario with Tampa where they can move up to get Richardson but we get Blount? If Kalil falls to us at 4 we really have to strongly considering trading back Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taco918 Posted April 7, 2012 Report Share Posted April 7, 2012 If we take Kalil at 4 it damn well better be because we couldn't get a trade done in time. Taking Kalil would be slightly less disappointing then taking Tannehill. Blackmon, Claiborne, or Richardson are the only acceptable picks at 4. With that said I'm expecting us to trade up to 3 to take Tannehill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frenchie Posted April 7, 2012 Report Share Posted April 7, 2012 What I marked red we don't don't need. They just drafted Marecic last season in the 4th round, they won't draft another FB unless it's with one of those comp 7th rounders and that is very unlikely. Regardless of what you think of the guy they are not going to give up on a guy they drafted to be the starter after one season. LT obviously also isn't a need. We could use some depth yes but it's still not pressing, especially when you consider that Thomas has never missed a game due to injury. RT and G are more likely to be looked at before LT depth. Now I marked DB, S, and DE blue because you are confusing me. First DB covers literally CB, SS, and FS and S covers SS and FS soooo your saying our strength last year is a huge need? I'll admit that we need to address CB or FS at some point in the draft but it's not such a need that we NEED to take someone. Claiborne is an option just because he could be BPA. I think that is the only way we take a DB before round 4 is if someone they like falls to them. Now DE DEFINITELY isn't going to be drafted unless someone they like falls to them, as in they won't be taking a DE cause there is a guy they like and they don't think he will be there with their next pick. If someone falls to them and he is on top of the board they will grab him up, but with our FA signings Heckert has told us NO big DE draft pick is going to happen. I apologize, I meant to say RT not LT and yes, I was saying CB and FS and agree that they are a need but not necessarily a huge need. I'm not saying anything that hasn't already been discussed on this board as a need numerous times - to one degree or another. I was just saying that there are too many holes not to consider positions as well as BPA and to look at the draft as a whole, rather than BPA at a particular pick. I've heard people talk about TE as well, so we could add that position as number 10. Also, I read that DE could still happen in the late rounds as a developmental project or pass rusher depth. And I also read that a punter could be drafted in the 7th round. As for Marecic, I've got to wonder if he's going to be good enough for them next year. Another point I was trying to make is that if they pass on somebody at a position of need - say Richardson. Well, it might be because they think they can get someone later on without a huge drop off. So for our pick at 4, it might not be the person as much as the drop off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frenchie Posted April 7, 2012 Report Share Posted April 7, 2012 If we take Kalil at 4 it damn well better be because we couldn't get a trade done in time. Taking Kalil would be slightly less disappointing then taking Tannehill. Blackmon, Claiborne, or Richardson are the only acceptable picks at 4. With that said I'm expecting us to trade up to 3 to take Tannehill. LOL - I don't see that happening. But if another team does trade for T-hill, that will set up the Browns nicely to either trade down or make a great pick between K, B, C, or R. I don't think they'll take K or B, C only if he's pro-bowl material. Likely pick will be Richardson. It's also the less risky - I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Mellon Posted April 7, 2012 Report Share Posted April 7, 2012 Better trade up to get RG3. Trade everything to get that guy. CLE's defense is good enough to keep them in all their games. All they need is a QB and a few Free Agents to catch some balls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted April 7, 2012 Report Share Posted April 7, 2012 No reason a LT can't be a stud RT. Sure, but not if the LT is drafted that high. You might do that with a 3rd rounder, but not a #4 overall pick, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miktoxic Posted April 7, 2012 Report Share Posted April 7, 2012 Better trade up to get RG3. Trade everything to get that guy. CLE's defense is good enough to keep them in all their games. All they need is a QB and a few Free Agents to catch some balls. you are a total Retard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Buffalo Posted April 7, 2012 Report Share Posted April 7, 2012 you are a total Retard. Please don't use the R word. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miktoxic Posted April 8, 2012 Report Share Posted April 8, 2012 ok, he is a fuckface. how's that, mr. PC? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baybrownsfan Posted April 8, 2012 Report Share Posted April 8, 2012 ok, he is a fuckface. how's that, mr. PC? Its funny because he is fine with giving people concussions and purposely injuring other human beings. But apparently calling someone a Retard is wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taco918 Posted April 8, 2012 Report Share Posted April 8, 2012 ok, he is a fuckface. how's that, mr. PC? I think fag is the correct PC word you're looking for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.