stillmotion Posted March 2, 2016 Report Share Posted March 2, 2016 Cam Erving........... Maybe we can trade cam for a first, and draft that C kelly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasAg1969 Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 Watching NFL Network this morning they indicated that Benjamin was the top wide receiver FA though their list had him around he 31st best FA overall. But they also rate this draftable WR class as a "C" compared to the back to back "A+" classes the last 2 years. Analytics is gonna kill us off if it's not tempered with common sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osiris Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 Watching NFL Network this morning they indicated that Benjamin was the top wide receiver FA though their list had him around he 31st best FA overall. But they also rate this draftable WR class as a "C" compared to the back to back "A+" classes the last 2 years. Analytics is gonna kill us off if it's not tempered with common sense. Analytics generally tends to confirm common sense in my experience as a bioinformatics analyst. One of the reasons the Browns have sucked at drafting in the past is because a disregard for analytics by the previous regimes. Manziel was not an analytics decision, that was an emotional one (Bridgewater would've been the analytics decision). What analytics won't help you much with is understanding a player's character and mental fortitude. Analytics can also mislead you if you aren't asking the right questions with it. That's why smart teams use analytics as one of many important tools in the eval process along with tape, interviews, the combine, and pro days (and that's in order of importance). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 Analytics generally tends to confirm common sense in my experience as a bioinformatics analyst. One of the reasons the Browns have sucked at drafting in the past is because a disregard for analytics by the previous regimes. Manziel was not an analytics decision, that was an emotional one (Bridgewater would've been the analytics decision). What analytics won't help you much with is understanding a player's character and mental fortitude. Analytics can also mislead you if you aren't asking the right questions with it. That's why smart teams use analytics as one of many important tools in the eval process along with tape, interviews, the combine, and pro days (and that's in order of importance). So in hindsight Bilgewater is the number 1 quarterback you would want out of that draft? If you could go back in time and take one? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 So in hindsight Bilgewater is the number 1 quarterback you would want out of that draft? If you could go back in time and take one? WSS If memory serves, Haslem paid for an analytics report that said Bridgewater was the best pick available in that 22nd spot. He opted to listen to the advice of a guy who lives in a shopping cart over said report. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 If memory serves, Haslem paid for an analytics report that said Bridgewater was the best pick available in that 22nd spot. He opted to listen to the advice of a guy who lives in a shopping cart over said report. That has nothing to do with my question pal. In our newfound zeal over analytics I'm asking that if that study was as it has been reported is Bilgewater the best quarterback of that draft or not? In hindsight. You'd rather have him than any other? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osiris Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 So in hindsight Bilgewater is the number 1 quarterback you would want out of that draft? If you could go back in time and take one? WSS I'd certainly have taken him over Manziel. Their were four first-round QBs available and the Browns managed to pick the only that turned out to be a bust. Knowing what we know now, maybe I go back and take Carr over Bridgewater, but I don't think many people would complain about any of the other three QBs from that draft. If you sentiment is that we shouldn't all be bowing to the analytics gods and using analytics as the sole piece of evidence for composing a draft board, I agree with you 100%. But nobody is doing that anyway. It's the Cleveland media that is making it out that analytics is the end-all-be-all, not the team itself. Listen to how the team talks about it, it's very different than how the media does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 I'd certainly have taken him over Manziel. Their were four first-round QBs available and the Browns managed to pick the only that turned out to be a bust. Knowing what we know now, maybe I go back and take Carr over Bridgewater, but I don't think many people would complain about any of the other three QBs from that draft. So in hindsight the analytical report, at least in your opinion, was bullshit? (sorry, let me rephrase that not quite as accurate as it should have been for the money. ) WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 I think you're missing the point of the report....it wasnt intented to predict who would be the best quarterback...it was to predict the least likely to fail....big difference... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasAg1969 Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 I think you're missing the point of the report....it wasnt intented to predict who would be the best quarterback...it was to predict the least likely to fail....big difference... OK-then why hasn't analytics and common sense kept Benjamin when we know this is a weak FA and draft when to comes to WR? The question is for everyone, not just you Mud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osiris Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 So in hindsight the analytical report, at least in your opinion, was bullshit? (sorry, let me rephrase that not quite as accurate as it should have been for the money. ) WSS I'm not sure how you arrived at that conclusion other than deciding that's what I meant based on your dislike for him. He's a very good quarterback. If a report tells me he is the best choice and he turns out to be very good, I'm not going to feel too bad that in hindsight that he didn't get turn out to be the best QB available. He has, in my opinion, the highest floor but also the lowest ceiling of the four available QBs. I'm pretty sure that's what the analytics said, too. He has it when it comes to the most important skill of a QB: the ability to quickly process a defense and make the correct decision with the ball. The reason we have the FO we have today is to correct the poor process that was in place with Farmer and Pettine: a process that disregarded analytics, disregarded the character issues of Manziel and Gilbert, and bought into the Manziel hype train. When people talk about Sashi's primary trait being a consensus-builder, that tells you all you need to know about Farmer and Pettine's regime. They were not about building a consensus, they were about taking their flavor of the week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osiris Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 OK-then why hasn't analytics and common sense kept Benjamin when we know this is a weak FA and draft when to comes to WR? The question is for everyone, not just you Mud. You are speaking as if the team has ultimate authority on the issue. Every FA this year knows their is a ton of money to be had especially after the salary cap increase. Keeping Benjamin requires Benjamin wanting to be kept, and he'll only stay in Cleveland if Cleveland overpays for him. And if a guy is good enough to overpay for, he's good enough to franchise tag, and Benjamin is a #3 wide receiver on any other team in this league. He's not worth a tag, and he's not worth overpaying for. Common sense also suggests that Hue Jackson has a pretty good chance attracting Marvin Jones and/or Mohammed Sanu to Cleveland. I'm pretty sure we'll have Josh Gordon back, too. Would it be nice to keep Benjamin? Sure. Is he a must-keep, no way. I'd much rather the effort is expended on retaining Gipson, Mack, or Schwartz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 OK-then why hasn't analytics and common sense kept Benjamin when we know this is a weak FA and draft when to comes to WR? The question is for everyone, not just you Mud. Um...im not sure whats up with Benjiman, but I thought we were trying to sign him..... At the same time....you cant break the bank on average talent.....dont know the #'s, but everyone has their price and Im starting to think Benji must be asking too much.....and Im not on the Benji love train.....one OK season out of 4 is just that...... I see a lot of folks tearing up gordon for his "slacker play" and taking plays off in those 4-5 games he played last year....yet, even as a presumed drug addict slacker taking plays off, he produced(in 5 games) the same #'s Benji did over 16 games.... Example....in 4 years, Benji has 109 catches for 1685 yards......... an average of 27 catches for 421 yds..... and in only 3 years. Greg Little had 155 catches for 1821 yds.....an average of 51 catches for 607 yds..... and Little sucked....we ran him out and is out of the league.....sooooo.....why would we pay big $$ for a guy with crap numbers??? So........to me, he's only worth keeping "at the right price"....but, second/third receivers are dime a dozen..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 I think you're missing the point of the report....it wasnt intented to predict who would be the best quarterback...it was to predict the least likely to fail....big difference... I think you are sugar coating the report. This has nothing to do with whether you love Johnny or hate him only the worth of the analytical report. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 I think you are sugar coating the report. This has nothing to do with whether you love Johnny or hate him only the worth of the analytical report. WSS What am I sugar coating?....the report said he was most likely to succeed.....not the one with most potential or the highest ceiling, etc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 What am I sugar coating?....the report said he was most likely to succeed.....not the one with most potential or the highest ceiling, etc...Uh, well that's great. Just saying that if it turns out he isn't the most successful of the group the report wasn't worth the money. I basically just poking a little fun at analytics. I would trade Ozzie Newsome for every computer in DePodestas office. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 Uh, well that's great. Just saying that if it turns out he isn't the most successful of the group the report wasn't worth the money. I basically just poking a little fun at analytics. I would trade Ozzie Newsome for every computer in DePodestas office. WSS Clearly it wasnt worth the money, because they didnt listen to it.....BUT, Id say it was worth it, had they listened.....because we would have a decent starting quality QB right now, instead of party boy Manziel(and negative $12.5m)....so, in hindsight, that woulda been worth a LOT more than the 100k they paid for that report.... and, instead of talking about another new QB with our #2 pick....we'd be looking at a top defensive player, or RB, or WR....but we're just starting over...one more time.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 Clearly it wasnt worth the money, because they didnt listen to it.....BUT, Id say it was worth it, had they listened.....because we would have a decent starting quality QB right now, instead of party boy Manziel(and negative $12.5m)....so, in hindsight, that woulda been worth a LOT more than the 100k they paid for that report.... and, instead of talking about another new QB with our #2 pick....we'd be looking at a top defensive player, or RB, or WR....but we're just starting over...one more time.... Well that's assuming that bilgewater would have made Jack shit in the way of difference here.Maybe you believe he would have been that much better in his rookie season then Josh McCown. Maybe you think our defense and running game would have been stellar because he was there. And if we had him and went 3 + 13..... WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 I didnt say that by us picking him, we'd suddenly have a great D...thats a lame premise and no QB would do that for our team....its only a piece of the puzzle........I said he'd be a better QB than Johnny was/is....and its pretty clear that he is.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 I didnt say that by us picking him, we'd suddenly have a great D...thats a lame premise and no QB would do that for our team....its only a piece of the puzzle........I said he'd be a better QB than Johnny was/is....and its pretty clear that he is....I see no reason that he'd have been better than Josh McCown given the same circumstances.Especially if Josh had Adrian Peterson in the backfield. Or that it would have made any difference to the WL list. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 Id venture to say we wouldnt have even needed Josh McCown, because Bridgewater would've beaten out Brian Hoyer the year before and, unlike with Johnny, we wouldnt have had the same needs in early 2015 due our our rokkie QB being in rehab and absolutely terrible on the field....and he looked pretty good in Minnesota without Peterson in 2014, considering he was first runner up for rookie of the year and in the playoff this year....Vikes went from 5 wins, to 7 wins to 11 wins.....so, argue away, as if picking Johnny is was just as good as picking Bridgewater would have been.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 Id venture to say we wouldnt have even needed Josh McCown, because Bridgewater would've beaten out Brian Hoyer the year before and, unlike with Johnny, we wouldnt have had the same needs in early 2015 due our our rokkie QB being in rehab and absolutely terrible on the field....and he looked pretty good in Minnesota without Peterson in 2014, considering he was first runner up for rookie of the year and in the playoff this year....Vikes went from 5 wins, to 7 wins to 11 wins.....so, argue away, as if picking Johnny is was just as good as picking Bridgewater would have been.... Dude you're obsessed with Johnny. That ain't the point that never was. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 ha!...obsessed?.....I think the discussion was about the report and where we would be had we followed it....Johnny is the unfortunate by product of not doing that.... I only mentioned Johnny, because he was the alternative to Bridgewater(who Ive been talking about and you keep shooting down) and because you suggest that picking Bridgewater wouldnt have been a better move because 1) our defense would still suck....or 2) we still wouldnt have won more games(which I doubt).....or 3)McCown might have beaten him out...??? And, now its because Im obsesses?.... You seem to be the one obsessed with protecting him from us baddies and acting as if he's an angel and perfectly fine draft pick, who just wants to have a lil fun and is getting a raw deal.... Much to your chagrin, I guess....people who are obsessed with football(me) and love their team(me) happen to notice when their first round pick is a complete douche and a loser(especially when we saw it from day one)....its also a topic of discussion nation wide, as a matter of fact....so, yeah I talk about it.....surprise surprise.... Ive talked about plenty of other bad picks too....you just haven't noticed cause they're not your boy.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 That ain't the point that never was. Re read the comments again........it's exactly the point.... I see no reason that he'd have been better than Josh McCown given the same circumstances. Especially if Josh had Adrian Peterson in the backfield. Or that it would have made any difference to the WL list. WSS Id venture to say we wouldnt have even needed Josh McCown, because Bridgewater would've beaten out Brian Hoyer the year before and, unlike with Johnny, we wouldnt have had the same needs in early 2015 due our our rokkie QB being in rehab and absolutely terrible on the field....and he looked pretty good in Minnesota without Peterson in 2014, considering he was first runner up for rookie of the year and in the playoff this year....Vikes went from 5 wins, to 7 wins to 11 wins.....so, argue away, as if picking Johnny is was just as good as picking Bridgewater would have been.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 So what if we drafted Derek Carr, Blake Bortles or Jimmy Garoppolo? Would anyone still be bitching about that stupid report? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 So what if we drafted Derek Carr, Blake Bortles or Jimmy Garoppolo? Would anyone still be bitching about that stupid report? WSS No one knows what exactly the report said. Word only got out that with the 22nd pick, Bridgewater was considered to be the best available player/QB. For all we know it could have said that the Browns should have picked Thurman Thomas in the top 10. No one will ever know. It could very well have said that Bortles was the best QB but that he wasn't available for the first Browns pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 So what if we drafted Derek Carr, Blake Bortles or Jimmy Garoppolo? Would anyone still be bitching about that stupid report? WSS I doubt it, because we'd have a quarterback now..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoorta Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 You are speaking as if the team has ultimate authority on the issue. Every FA this year knows their is a ton of money to be had especially after the salary cap increase. Keeping Benjamin requires Benjamin wanting to be kept, and he'll only stay in Cleveland if Cleveland overpays for him. And if a guy is good enough to overpay for, he's good enough to franchise tag, and Benjamin is a #3 wide receiver on any other team in this league. He's not worth a tag, and he's not worth overpaying for. Common sense also suggests that Hue Jackson has a pretty good chance attracting Marvin Jones and/or Mohammed Sanu to Cleveland. I'm pretty sure we'll have Josh Gordon back, too. Would it be nice to keep Benjamin? Sure. Is he a must-keep, no way. I'd much rather the effort is expended on retaining Gipson, Mack, or Schwartz. Exactly. Flugels was dancing around my question of- Exactly how much do you think Benjamin is worth? Not, gee, let's keep our homegrown talent. Of course not franchise tag for at best a #2 wr. Not Emmanuel Sanders $5 million a year either in my book. BTW, looking at Sprortrac, Both Sanu and Marvin Jones were making peanuts this past year for the Bengals. Upgrade or downgrade form Benji? You can bet Hue has a pretty good idea. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gumby73 Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 OK-then why hasn't analytics and common sense kept Benjamin when we know this is a weak FA and draft when to comes to WR? The question is for everyone, not just you Mud. We cannot continue to roll our FO period. Jimmy at bye week. Boots Farmer, puts Sashi in then, even as interim GM. We may not be here with Gipson, Schwartz & Benji. That was the time to get them re signed. Mack, no way thanks to Farmer genius idea of offer sheet leading to a great opt out clause contract. We have been drafting them, developing them & no FO has had enough sense since Ward & Skrine to say "Hey we need to lock him up" before end of season. Yes, they all want to play for winners but look at Denver $$ (they not going there for $$) We have always got the cap, we had some talent, We just need the talent in the FO & Jimmy to want to Win with what we can build on & pay them to stay.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flugel Posted March 5, 2016 Report Share Posted March 5, 2016 Exactly. Flugels was dancing around my question of- Exactly how much do you think Benjamin is worth? Not, gee, let's keep our homegrown talent. Of course not franchise tag for at best a #2 wr. Not Emmanuel Sanders $5 million a year either in my book. BTW, looking at Sprortrac, Both Sanu and Marvin Jones were making peanuts this past year for the Bengals. Upgrade or downgrade form Benji? You can bet Hue has a pretty good idea. . I think he's worth keeping as I've stated so many times. Let's start by understanding this subject heading we're in and the other one we've disagreed in about our cap space of over 42 million $. It never looked like he needed to be franchise tagged; and it sounded like close to being signed ended in a nitpick barrier to signing him. I never got the financials to put a specific money value to it. We've never even come close to being in cap trouble especially now that there's a rookie salary cap tag teaming our tradition of keepers drafted so I give this how much a big fat DILLIGAF (Do I Look Like I Give A Flock?). My repetitive take on Benjamin is easy and it shouldn't hurt your feelings as much as it has Larry. For a franchise that has not had to pay any of its draftees a #1 WR salary and throughout 2015 (in a world of what have you done for me lately), why not pay Benjamin a good salary someone else will pay him anyway if we were as close to his yes tag as the subject heading implies? We've done way worse with free agency such as guaranteeing 9 million $ to a WR that played his last good football in 2011. Are you going to word surgery this into Flugel thinks Benjamin is way better than Antonio Brown? For the record I don't. If we're going to hear we have to build program continuity through the draft - why not KEEP our current success stories when they're beginning to play their best football? Cleveland invested 3-4 years (despite endless turnover w/ QBs,HCs, OCs and FO) for this 4th round draft pick to become just as productive as a WR as he's been in the return game. Now that he is a better WR, his 4.3 speed helps open up underneath routes for teammates as well as seams for the TE (who played the best football of his career as well). Is it Benjamin's fault he had to be our best WR in 2015? No. Building through the draft is important but you have to be GOOD at it while the Cleveland Browns have been awful at it. What WRs have we drafted that were good enough to make the team in 2013, 2014 and 2015? Understanding that, we don't have the following draftees rallying around the loss of an Emmanuel Sanders to free agency: Antonio Brown, Markus Wheaton, Martavis Bryant, and Sammie Coates. Another important variable to that is to understand how many of those guys joined that team without a 1st round contract/salary (2 of them before the current structure w/a rookie salary cap). If we had been drafting other WRs worth keeping in 2013, 2014 and 2015 - I wouldn't find it nearly as important to retain Travis at this time. Seriously, I'd be okay with it if I didn't have to take inventory of what is in the WR Corps today. So, where are you? Cleveland is going all in on free agency at WR this year (with 2 guys Sanu and Jones) right after we let a 4th round WR depart for free agency and not too long after press conferences revealed we won't be making any splash in free agency. Makes perfect sense coming from a guy calling me out about how much $ we can afford to part with. And you'll be excited we have Sanu replacing Benjamin? Part of what makes guys like Jones and Sanu seem attractive right now is their beneficiary status from opponents' match-up priorities to guys like AJ Green, Eiffert, and Bernard considerably easing their match-ups/attention. Meanwhile, Benjamin was often drawing the #1 corner or a corner plus Safety over the top in 2015 as our guy that had never even been asked to be our #2 WR all the while he was here before 2015. I like to think he was a pleasant surprise especially considering how many here even had him making our team in 2015 prior to training camp. If your reliable football messiah ever decides to show up and be a #1 WR for all 16 weeks for the very first time as a vet - one would have to think the sum of Gordon + Barnidge + Duke could give us an even better version of Benjamin than 2015. He'd have easier match-ups than he had in 2015 as our substitute #1 producer at WR. Keeping Benjamin to go with your most reliable hero of all time at WR also means we don't have to draft Doctson at #32 in lieu of going defense there. We can add a WR in round 4 or 5 with the understanding we're receiving 3 mid round comp/supplemental picks on top of what we are scheduled for. Seems like a formula for less growing pains in the passing tree around a rookie QB or just continuity for McCown when/if the rookie isn't ready. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.