gftChris Posted November 4, 2016 Report Share Posted November 4, 2016 I think if you put any half way competent QB behind that line in Dallas, give them Elliott, Bryant and Witten, and I think they'll do just fine. How do you think Prescott would do in Cleveland with roles reversed? Regarding impact players - we have one in Coleman, we might have one in Kessler, we might get another couple in this upcoming draft, based solely on trading that pick. Had we stayed put, we might have taken Elliott, or Bosa for example - and had one impact player. No others, and no other starter level players to bring the overall talent of the team up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted November 4, 2016 Report Share Posted November 4, 2016 I think if you put any half way competent QB behind that line in Dallas, give them Elliott, Bryant and Witten, and I think they'll do just fine. How do you think Prescott would do in Cleveland with roles reversed? Only need to look at Wentz in Philly as a test. Layne Johnson goes on suspension and Wentz's numbers faded. I believe they were already down an OG when Layne's suspension kicked in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canton Dawg Posted November 4, 2016 Report Share Posted November 4, 2016 You need quantity when you have about 4 legitimate NFL calibre players on your roster. We're not one guy away. So you turn the number 2 overall pick in to Corey Coleman, Shon Coleman, Cody Kessler, Spencer Drango, Derrick Kindred, a 2017 first round pick, a 2017 second round pick, and a 2018 second round pick. That should be three-to-five guys who are starting or challenging to start next year, including a QB, plus two more draft picks that should be challenging or starting next year, plus one more the year after. So in 2018, instead of having one guy, we have 6 or 7 starters. Or we could have taken one guy only, Wentz perhaps, and seen him get destroyed behind the suspect OL with a only Pryor and Hawkins to throw to. If you draft 14 players, but only hit on 2, and you let 3 good players walk...what is the net result? To quote Billy Preston "Nothing from nothing leaves nothing". . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted November 4, 2016 Report Share Posted November 4, 2016 Only 2? C'mon, man... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Couch Pulls Out Posted November 4, 2016 Report Share Posted November 4, 2016 I think if you put any half way competent QB behind that line in Dallas, give them Elliott, Bryant and Witten, and I think they'll do just fine. How do you think Prescott would do in Cleveland with roles reversed? Regarding impact players - we have one in Coleman, we might have one in Kessler, we might get another couple in this upcoming draft, based solely on trading that pick. Had we stayed put, we might have taken Elliott, or Bosa for example - and had one impact player. No others, and no other starter level players to bring the overall talent of the team up. Untrue. We would still have been able to take everyone else on our board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canton Dawg Posted November 4, 2016 Report Share Posted November 4, 2016 Only 2? C'mon, man... Point being we're losing good ones faster than we can replace them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted November 5, 2016 Report Share Posted November 5, 2016 Your point was clear, CD... I was just questioning your math. Then there's the whole "we let Mack walk" thing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted November 5, 2016 Report Share Posted November 5, 2016 Your point was clear, CD... I was just questioning your math. Then there's the whole "we let Mack walk" thing... Mack may have stayed if we overpaid him. Worth it or not? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoorta Posted November 5, 2016 Report Share Posted November 5, 2016 Mack may have stayed if we overpaid him. Worth it or not? WSS IIRC, the Browns offered to make Mack the highest paid center in the NFL, he took pennies more to get out of town. BTW, Mack is 31- how many years he can play at that high level? It can be debated if Schwartz was just using the Browns for leverage to up his salary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hx214 Posted November 6, 2016 Report Share Posted November 6, 2016 Getting rid of Haden wasnt about getting something back in return,it was about getting that damn money off the books so you can use it elsewhere. Shit a 4th rounder to get that money off the books would just be gravy. Joe hasn't been good for a long time. Even if he is the best corner we got, what good is he when he is out 50% of the games and the other 8 games he plays he is playing through an injury in 6 of those... The day they should have moved on was after the Arizona game last year when get got torched and went for a desperation tackle from behind, fell and gave himself a concussion.... ugh... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted November 6, 2016 Report Share Posted November 6, 2016 Getting rid of Haden wasnt about getting something back in return,it was about getting that damn money off the books so you can use it elsewhere. Shit a 4th rounder to get that money off the books would just be gravy. This is the last year Joe has serious, negative, dead money impact... so no savings this year. Also hurts trade value. His last three years his bill is $14, $14 and $11mm with corresponding cap savings of $7, $11 and $10mm. http://overthecap.com/player/joe-haden/284/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flugel Posted November 6, 2016 Report Share Posted November 6, 2016 the Browns have made an art form of trading down, and drafting garbage with the extra picks. They also traded up for Trent Richardson, Kellen Winslow, Brady Quinn, Brandon Weeden and Johnny Manziel. The year after Brady Quinn, we didn't have a day 1 and netted only 1 keeper (Rubin) in our 2008 draft. If that wasn't bad enough, we only had 4 draft picks scheduled for 2009. While Winslow wasn't bad after swapping first round picks and losing a 3rd or 4th round pick - we could have probably stayed put and drafted him or taken Ben Roethlisberger there (or via possible trade back adding a pick). Winslow missed 2 of his first 3 years on IR while undergoing countless surgeries. He went from Superman at the U to rarely being able to practice prior to games. Again, he did well considering - but would we have traded up in round 1 if we knew the guy we were going to draft would miss 2 consecutive years and rarely be able to practice prior to games? While you can't predict injuries per say, you better be aware they exist if you're trading away a pick to move up when you're gift wrapping a QB talent from Ohio like Ben Roethlisberger to your most hated rival. We all want more game changing, impact players regardless of our varied of opinions on how and where to land them. We've also seen our front offices fail at trading up and trading back, which leads me to a question. Is it the trade up or trade back that should concern us or the people in the front office making those picks from those trades? We've had a lot of practice complaining about outcomes from a front office failing with the draft. The more we practice it the more we prefect it. Today, more than ever, guys all over the league are going down like dominoes regardless of what round they were previously drafted in. Add our history of 1st round draft picks going on IR throughout their careers and a big draft volume in 2017 doesn't sound all that bad (especially with 5 picks coming in the first 3 rounds). They also added some early round volume to our 2018 draft. Right now, we're getting rookies out of casts and back healthy enough to suit up while other rookies are filling in or getting situational reps. We all know it takes more than 8 weeks to define a draft so let's see what happens these last 8 weeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted November 6, 2016 Report Share Posted November 6, 2016 We've also seen our front offices fail at trading up and trading back, which leads me to a question. Is it the trade up or trade back that should concern us or the people in the front office making those picks from those trades? Agreed.....it's not the trades that were bad.....it was the players picked.....(with trade up and trade downs).... Nothing wrong with trades, so long as you pick good players.....and KNOW where you're going with the trades....IE: If you trade down, do you have a target in mind or are you just trading for bulk.....? Cause, I know if you trade UP, you know for whom and why you're doing it.....but, on a trade down, is there any guarantee your guy will be there????.......nope Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted November 6, 2016 Report Share Posted November 6, 2016 Agreed.....it's not the trades that were bad.....it was the players picked.....(with trade up and trade downs).... That depends on whether you believe we we snookered into the trade-ups. In the TR case, I still think we were. Was Quinn really done falling? Does anyone seriously think Wheezy was getting nabbed if we did not move? I don't care how well you think you know another GM... how well a player you covet seems to fit with a team supposedly looking to leapfrog you to grab him... this ain't tiddlywinks... livelihoods are at stake... perceptions are cultivated... and "win/win" ain't the predominant mindset... especially when you are talking about the high-priced, top-ten neighborhood. If you have to have a top ten player, by all means go get him. But do it because you are so sold on that player that price is no object. Otherwise.... Ignore the noise... Let the draft come to you... Overdraft if you like... take a Kessler (or a Prescott) a round ahead of everyone else and let them laugh... ... but let the draft come to you... End of sermon... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flugel Posted November 6, 2016 Report Share Posted November 6, 2016 Agreed.....it's not the trades that were bad.....it was the players picked.....(with trade up and trade downs).... Nothing wrong with trades, so long as you pick good players.....and KNOW where you're going with the trades....IE: If you trade down, do you have a target in mind or are you just trading for bulk.....? Cause, I know if you trade UP, you know for whom and why you're doing it.....but, on a trade down, is there any guarantee your guy will be there????.......nope Well said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.