Houston - our 2nd first round pick

[jiggins7919]

13 hours ago, MLD Woody said:

Well, having 0 Free Safeties on our roster is getting on my nerves. We need to play Peppers out of position each week because he is still our best option there. He has improved as the season has gone on, no doubt, but I'm not sure what the super deep safety position has much of an upside. 

Draft a guy that has played the pure ball hawk / centerfielder role to take  this Safety Spot and let Peppers get in the box where he can use his skillset. 

What hurt the most was this previous draft was probably the best one for safeties anybody has seen in forever. Yet we didn't draft one. 

[jiggins7919]

9 hours ago, Nero said:

Then you realize that a fair comparison would be between Watson and Peppers+our Texans' first round pick in 2018, don't you? 

Because that was the actual exchange. 

I am optimist about Peppers, because he has played in a new position and he has been improving throughout all the season, though I'd say he hasn't been stellar -- yet?

I don't know if it would be really positive to make him play SS again now that finally seems to get used to his new position. Having a FS/Centerfield as fast and as good tackler as Peppers is really something that I'd consider investing into, because if he learns to play the position and improves reading the QB and his coverage skills, he could be a great 'big play shut down' safety.

I think Williams wants to have some kind of Earl Thomas in Peppers. Let's hope it works.

I WANT to be positive, but I just haven't been given much hope, ya know? I don't think Peppers has any meaningful stats. A few tackles, some missed tackles, and possibly one pass defensed? Maybe in wrong, but I don't remember him having too much in the stat world. No game changing moments (although he got screwed one time by ref), no special teams moments (just a fumble), and no picks. I'm not sure WHAT he can do. 

[Nero]

1 minute ago, jiggins7919 said:

I WANT to be positive, but I just haven't been given much hope, ya know? I don't think Peppers has any meaningful stats. A few tackles, some missed tackles, and possibly one pass defensed? Maybe in wrong, but I don't remember him having too much in the stat world. No game changing moments (although he got screwed one time by ref), no special teams moments (just a fumble), and no picks. I'm not sure WHAT he can do. 

Looking at his raw skills, he's fast and a good tackler. That's what his college tape showed, at least to me. 

So for me the main question is about his position. In the pros you can't just play SS in the box the whole time, you have to learn covering if you want to make a NFL team. And a safeties covering skills aren't the same as a CB's so let's hope he gets it and we find a way to make him contribute. 

Adapting to playing as a safety in the NFL is not as easy as in other positions, some veteran cornerbacks never develop into good safeties when they get old for their original position. 

[Tour2ma]

Wasn't Peppers a LB/Rover at UM?

All the "natural position" debate I've read here seems to ignore this.

[stillmotion]

15 hours ago, MLD Woody said:

He doesn't belong on the field????  Haha, alright. 

And I'm the ridiculously biased one.

 

 

Good night

He does belong on the field. He’s not as bad as people say he is, but he’s not amazing either. That being said he’s young and I hope he works out, but don’t be on his nuts so much man. He’s being played out of position and we get that. I’m not bitchin about the pick anymore.

[MLD Woody]

3 hours ago, stillmotion said:

He does belong on the field. He’s not as bad as people say he is, but he’s not amazing either. That being said he’s young and I hope he works out, but don’t be on his nuts so much man. He’s being played out of position and we get that. I’m not bitchin about the pick anymore.

No one has said he's amazing. Plenty have said he doesn't belong on the field, is terrible, should be cut, etc. Apparently if I ever respond to those comments and explain why they're wrong I'm on his nuts. Nothing new

[MLD Woody]

3 hours ago, Tour2ma said:

Wasn't Peppers a LB/Rover at UM?

All the "natural position" debate I've read here seems to ignore this.

We call it a Viper. It's a hybrid LB / Safety. Blows up screens, blitzes, contains outside runs, etc.  All of which is taken into account. 

Now, if a DC makes this position in his scheme, that would be his fit. In most schemes, that is most similar to an in the box safety / SS IMO. What do you think it's closest to?

[stillmotion]

7 minutes ago, MLD Woody said:

No one has said he's amazing. Plenty have said he doesn't belong on the field, is terrible, should be cut, etc. Apparently if I ever respond to those comments and explain why they're wrong I'm on his nuts. Nothing new

I never said you said he's amazing. You just put the guy on a pedestal. I was saying he Isn't amazing. You're on his nuts because any slight criticism of anything he does you go ballistic.

[MLD Woody]

2 minutes ago, stillmotion said:

I never said you said he's amazing. You just put the guy on a pedestal. I was saying he Isn't amazing. You're on his nuts because any slight criticism of anything he does you go ballistic.

I never said you said I said he was amazing.... Lol

 

I don't think posting a response equals going ballistic. But like I've said, I don't expect every response to be sensible on this subject. I'm also not responding to every slight criticism or worse, I'd be here forever. I respond to some, and generally those that seem the most ridiculous (ex, doesn't belong on the field). 

 

But again, this has been the same song and dance for months. 

[Send in the Clowns]

5 hours ago, stillmotion said:

He does belong on the field. He’s not as bad as people say he is, but he’s not amazing either. That being said he’s young and I hope he works out, but don’t be on his nuts so much man. He’s being played out of position and we get that. I’m not bitchin about the pick anymore.

Draft Peppers, a guy with no position, another terrible mistake by the Harvard genius.  The one consistency with Browns GMs is they are always think they know more than the other guy and are one step ahead.  In the end, they are left holding something in their hand and it';s not a golden draft pick who succeeds..  

[Orion]

7 hours ago, Tour2ma said:

Wasn't Peppers a LB/Rover at UM?

All the "natural position" debate I've read here seems to ignore this.

He was a player that played closer to the LOS.  Of course, US, in our finite wisdom, play him out on the warning track.

.....saw my cousin, a Browns fan, at the family Christmas party Saturday night.  We had some good laughs about where Peppers is played.  "We're so good that we spot offenses a player."    "He should be allowed to have his phone out there.  He'd get some GREAT pictures."  -  He and I don't see much of each other any more.  -  Too bad.  

 

[Dutch Oven]

What I love about this Texan pick is there are numerous players at a need position that could very well fall into our laps...

LT Mike McGlinchey, Notre Dame

CB/S Minkah Fitzpatrick, Alabama

RB Saquon Barkley, Penn State

WR Calvin Ridley, Alabama

[Nero]

2 hours ago, Dutch Oven said:

What I love about this Texan pick is there are numerous players at a need position that could very well fall into our laps...

LT Mike McGlinchey, Notre Dame

CB/S Minkah Fitzpatrick, Alabama

RB Saquon Barkley, Penn State

WR Calvin Ridley, Alabama

I think the pick is too high to get either Barkley or Ridley, and I don't want to hear Ghoolie if we draft a "fat butt" in first round. Even if you draft a future HOF LT he will be ranting about it.

Some people also mentioned Derwin James.

 

[MLD Woody]

7 hours ago, Dutch Oven said:

What I love about this Texan pick is there are numerous players at a need position that could very well fall into our laps...

LT Mike McGlinchey, Notre Dame

CB/S Minkah Fitzpatrick, Alabama

RB Saquon Barkley, Penn State

WR Calvin Ridley, Alabama

FS Derwin James

[Dutch Oven]

6 hours ago, Nero said:

I think the pick is too high to get either Barkley or Ridley, and I don't want to hear Ghoolie if we draft a "fat butt" in first round. Even if you draft a future HOF LT he will be ranting about it.

Some people also mentioned Derwin James.

 

I can't stress how much I do not give a flying Shmuck what Ghoolie thinks or says.

I'm going to have to do a little more research on James.

[The Gipper]

9 hours ago, Nero said:

I think the pick is too high to get either Barkley or Ridley, and I don't want to hear Ghoolie if we draft a "fat butt" in first round. Even if you draft a future HOF LT he will be ranting about it.

Some people also mentioned Derwin James.

 

Browns are in desperate need of a killer cover corner....and a Free Safety.

[calfoxwc]

and Minkah can play any position in the secondary - some like him BETTER

as a cover corner. He's that good.

[Nero]

1 hour ago, The Gipper said:

Browns are in desperate need of a killer cover corner....and a Free Safety.

Agreed. I think that's what the majority of the board thinks we need to pick with Houston's pick.

[blitzz2]

Would hate to pass on MF. Guy is a beast, Don't think a CB has ever been drafted at 1, but having the possibility of 2 top 5s and quite a bit of talent up there, sure makes it a tempting "1st time for anything" pick.

 

[Tacosman]

On ‎12‎/‎10‎/‎2017 at 10:11 PM, MLD Woody said:

He doesn't belong on the field????  Haha, alright. 

And I'm the ridiculously biased one.

 

 

Good night

not in today's nfl....no, he doesn't belong on the field.  Wherever you play him in the secondary, he's going to be a liability in the passing game.  If you move him up and expect him to function more against slot guys, he doesn't match up well.  Much better off with someone with more coverage/corner type skills in that extra secondary guy.  This 'rover' idea where he plays more like a college linebacker at times is nice and all, but if you want to use him that way.....why not utilize an actual nfl outside linebacker?  Which peppers isn't.....

Peppers is like a ball nba four....except he doesn't shoot 3s so he can't spread the floor.  So whats the point of using him as a stretch four then? 

[Tour2ma]

21 hours ago, MLD Woody said:

We call it a Viper. It's a hybrid LB / Safety. Blows up screens, blitzes, contains outside runs, etc.  All of which is taken into account. 

Now, if a DC makes this position in his scheme, that would be his fit. In most schemes, that is most similar to an in the box safety / SS IMO. What do you think it's closest to?

Actually I think its closest to LB. The "new" S/LB hybrid position is coming... hell, it's what Gregg Williams did with Baron in LA... and that's how Baron is still being used.

21 hours ago, MLD Woody said:

I never said you said I said he was amazing.... Lol

Beat me to it... lol

4 hours ago, Nero said:

Agreed. I think that's what the majority of the board thinks we need to pick with Houston's pick.

And I once again remind the majority of... Howard Wilson.

Oh... and BPA...

3 hours ago, blitzz2 said:

Don't think a CB has ever been drafted at 1...

1956

Gary Glick

DB

Colorado A&M

Pittsburgh Steelers

7

0

Glick is the only DB ever taken #1 overall. Terminology was much different back then. Pro Football Reference lists him as a "Defensive Halfback" in his first seasons, then later as a Left or "Right Safety".

As best I can recall "Defensive Halfback" = "Cornerback" once upon a time. Maybe some fellow codgers can chime in.

[Tour2ma]

3 hours ago, Tacosman said:

not in today's nfl....no, he doesn't belong on the field.  Wherever you play him in the secondary, he's going to be a liability in the passing game.  If you move him up and expect him to function more against slot guys, he doesn't match up well.  Much better off with someone with more coverage/corner type skills in that extra secondary guy.  This 'rover' idea where he plays more like a college linebacker at times is nice and all,

but if you want to use him that way.....why not utilize an actual nfl outside linebacker?  Which peppers isn't.....

Ooooh... I know... I know... Because LBs aren't fast enough?

And don't look now, but you are evaluating players...

[Nero]

 

 

Conditions (in blue, teams that currently pick ahead of Houston):

1. Houston has to lose all his remaining games: at Jaguars, vs Steelers, at Colts. I think it's feasible, the hardest one to lose would be at Colts, though. 
2. Colts have to win the Texans. Even if they won 2 games (vs Broncos, at Ravens) and Texans lost both weeks, if in the last week Texans wins, they pick higher.
3. Denver has to win at least 1 game of the remaining: at Colts, at Redskins, vs Chiefs. I think they can win at Colts. Check 
4. Tampa Bay has to win at least 1 game of the remaining: vs Falcons, at Panthers, vs Saints. No comments. 
5. Chicago wins 1 of its remaining games: at Lions, vs Browns, at Vikings. Guess which one they have their best shot at...
6. San Francisco has to win at least 2 of his remaining games: vs Titans, vs Jaguars, at Rams. This is the hardest one to get, IMO. 1 win remaining. 
7. New York Giants have to win at least 2 of his remaining games: vs Eagles, at Cardinals, vs Redskins. This gets really ugly. 

http://www.tankathon.com/nfl

We have #1 and #4 currently. Triple tie at 4-10 between Texans, 49ers and Chicago favors us. Denver just overtook Houston too.

EDITED by error on 12/18/2017. 

[The Gipper]

I don't think anyone here is worrying about having both #1 and #2 picks.    Browns history suggests that they would likely fkkk them up anyway.

My worry is about getting players that can play...no matter where they are drafted.

[Nero]

12 minutes ago, The Gipper said:

I don't think anyone here is worrying about having both #1 and #2 picks.    Browns history suggests that they would likely fkkk them up anyway.

My worry is about getting players that can play...no matter where they are drafted.

Then we are on the same page, only that I wanted to check out how does this pick look like in the future.

[Tour2ma]

2 hours ago, Nero said:

Conditions (in blue, teams that currently pick ahead of Houston):

1. Houston has to lose all his remaining games: at Jaguars, vs Steelers, at Colts. I think it's feasible, the hardest one to lose would be at Colts, though.
2. Colts have to win the Texans. Even if they won 2 games (vs Broncos, at Ravens) and Texans lost both weeks, if in the last week Texans wins, they pick higher.
3. Denver has to win at least 1 game of the remaining: at Colts, at Redskins, vs Chiefs. I think they can win at Colts.
4. Tampa Bay has to win at least 1 game of the remaining: vs Falcons, at Panthers, vs Saints. No comments.
5. Chicago wins 1 of its remaining games: at Lions, vs Browns, at Vikings. Guess which one they have their best shot at...
6. San Francisco has to win at least 2 of his remaining games: vs Titans, vs Jaguars, at Rams. This is the hardest one to get, IMO.
7. New York Giants have to win at least 2 of his remaining games: vs Eagles, at Cardinals, vs Redskins. This gets really ugly.

Good news is that by the looks, it is harder for the Houston pick to be higher than lower. They don't have an easy schedule and bear in mind that every one of these conditions, if condition #1 is fulfilled, is equal to one team overtaking Houston. That means that is easier for our current #6 pick to become a #4 pick than a #8 pick.

1, 2 and 3 are quite possible as is.

When teams are playing out the string you always have to consider leaders whose last game (or two) have no impact on their playoff seeding. Those teams often rest starters.

#4... Winston can get hot and the Saints might be on cruise control Week 17.

#5... Besides beating us, which I do not believe will happen, again it is possible that the Vikes' playoff seeding will be set by Week 17.

#6... SF is playing better lately, they have a real shot vs. TN and then it's ditto the above for the Rams Week 17.

#7... ugh... well, I'll settle for the #1 and #3 overall...

[Nero]

4 minutes ago, Tour2ma said:

1, 2 and 3 are quite possible as is.

When teams are playing out the string you always have to consider leaders whose last game (or two) have no impact on their playoff seeding. Those teams often rest starters.

#4... Winston can get hot and the Saints might be on cruise control Week 17.

#5... Besides beating us, which I do not believe will happen, again it is possible that the Vikes' playoff seeding will be set by Week 17.

#6... SF is playing better lately, they have a real shot vs. TN and then it's ditto the above for the Rams Week 17.

#7... ugh... well, I'll settle for the #1 and #3 overall...

I thought about your #4 and #5, and the result affects their playoff seeding, so I didn't comment on them. The only team whose seeding isn't affected by the last game, if everything goes in a range of 'normal' and they don't suffer two straight loses, would be Philly.

[Tour2ma]

32 minutes ago, Nero said:

if everything goes in a range of 'normal'

Sh!t tends to get weird in a season's last weeks...

[Nero]

Conditions (in blue, teams that currently pick ahead of Houston):

1. Houston has to lose all his remaining games: at Jaguars, vs Steelers, at Colts. I think it's feasible, the hardest one to lose would be at Colts, though. 
2. Colts have to win the Texans. Even if they won 2 games (vs Broncos, at Ravens) and Texans lost both weeks, if in the last week Texans wins, they pick higher.
3. Denver has to win at least 1 game of the remaining: at Colts, at Redskins, vs Chiefs. I think they can win at Colts. Check 
4. Tampa Bay has to win at least 1 game of the remaining: vs Falcons, at Panthers, vs Saints. No comments. 
5. Chicago wins 1 of its remaining games: at Lions, vs Browns, at Vikings. Guess which one they have their best shot at...
6. San Francisco has to win at least 2 of his remaining games: vs Titans, vs Jaguars, at Rams. This is the hardest one to get, IMO. 1 win remaining. 
7. New York Giants have to win at least 2 of his remaining games: vs Eagles, at Cardinals, vs Redskins. This gets really ugly. 

http://www.tankathon.com/nfl

We have #1 and #4 currently. Triple tie at 4-10 between Texans, 49ers and Chicago favors us. Denver just overtook Houston too. 

[Tour2ma]

Thanks... I was wondering about the update.