Mock Draft Central

[jiggins7919]

I keep thinking how difficult it will be for our front office NOT to trade. For instance, I read a potential trade scenario that read like this: Carolina trades their #8 pick to us, with their second rounder, and next year's first and second to move up to #1. If a monster deal like THAT gets thrown on the table, I think it's difficult to turn down. Browns fans are VERY discouraged with trading down, and the general consensus I get is that "we need to stop getting cute and just make the pick." I think we've actually made the right deals in past years, we just haven't made the right PICKS. Does that history dissuade us from entertaining deals? Should we simply take the best player on our board and live with it? In this deal, we only go down to #8. There's a high chance of us either getting one of the top safeties, a QB, Reuben Foster at LB, or even another pass rusher such as Solomon or Barnett. Then at 12, we could pick whatever else we need (cornerback?)

 

My heart says to just MAKE THE PICK!!! But my brain says we need more picks to strengthen our roster.

[gftChris]

Jig - we got a deal better than that to go from #2 to #8. If it's Carolina - and there are a couple of teams like them and the bengals that have good foundations and might think they're only one player away - then I could see them wanting to move up, but it'll cost more than that I think.

 

For reference:

 

 

We swapped firsts, picked up another first, a third last year and a second next year.

 

I'm thinking at least two 1s and two 2s to move down to the panthers. Charge the Bengals the division tax to move up as well, like a third, or putney.

 

 

On the topic of future dated picks, there's apparently a 'rule of thumb' stating they go down in value one round per year. To me that's kind of bullshit. I'd be quite happy to trade a seventh round pick this year for a sixth next year; then that sixth for a fifth and the seventh for another sixth etc until you have a steady stream of extra first or second round picks every year. Trouble of course is being around long enough to see it out, maybe that's why there's a premium on the time frame of the pick.

[The Gipper]

I keep thinking how difficult it will be for our front office NOT to trade. For instance, I read a potential trade scenario that read like this: Carolina trades their #8 pick to us, with their second rounder, and next year's first and second to move up to #1. If a monster deal like THAT gets thrown on the table, I think it's difficult to turn down. Browns fans are VERY discouraged with trading down, and the general consensus I get is that "we need to stop getting cute and just make the pick." I think we've actually made the right deals in past years, we just haven't made the right PICKS. Does that history dissuade us from entertaining deals? Should we simply take the best player on our board and live with it? In this deal, we only go down to #8. There's a high chance of us either getting one of the top safeties, a QB, Reuben Foster at LB, or even another pass rusher such as Solomon or Barnett. Then at 12, we could pick whatever else we need (cornerback?)

 

My heart says to just MAKE THE PICK!!! But my brain says we need more picks to strengthen our roster.

It IS a vexing conundrum. On the one hand, yes, you want to get THE best player that is available with the #1 pick. On the other hand, this team is in such dire need at so many spots that this FO must consider a trade down to acquire more quantity of talent to fill those holes.

If you did the deal with Carolina you go from #1 to #8, then you also have #12, #33, #40, #52, #65. If good picks were made that would fill a lot of holes. Probably QB, OL, DE, CB, FS and more.

[The Gipper]

San Diego Tribune Mock Draft:

 

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sports/sd-sp-nfl-mock-draft-2017-three-rounds-20170124-story.html

 

They have Browns taking:

 

#1 Garrett

#12 Ruben Foster

#33 Cordrea TAnkersly CB Clemson

#52 Haason Reddick OLB Temple.

 

Haven't heard much about this last guy.

[Tour2ma]

I keep thinking how difficult it will be for our front office NOT to trade. For instance, I read a potential trade scenario that read like this: Carolina trades their #8 pick to us, with their second rounder, and next year's first and second to move up to #1. If a monster deal like THAT gets thrown on the table, I think it's difficult to turn down.

 

My heart says to just MAKE THE PICK!!! But my brain says we need more picks to strengthen our roster.

 

Here's your hypothetical deal per the old chart assuming the 2018 picks are both 24th in their rounds and discounted one round:

3000 <==> 1400 + 500 + 340 + 150 = 2390

... and per the Harvard:

494.6 <==> 318.0 + 162.4 + 138.9 + 105.3 = 724.6

 

Any offers that are anywhere close to equitable by the old, Jimmy J chart are going to be hard to turn down. They just look killer in our favor on the Harvard chart. Add in the depth of this draft with impact players going as deep as our 12th... very difficult. It makes whomever gets plucked with the #1 overall have to be not just an "impact player", but a generational player... at least in the eyes of the plucker... or the holder.

 

Jig - we got a deal better than that to go from #2 to #8. If it's Carolina - and there are a couple of teams like them and the bengals that have good foundations and might think they're only one player away - then I could see them wanting to move up, but it'll cost more than that I think.

 

For reference: [CLE: trades #2 overall ===> PHI: trades 2016 #8, 77, 100 + 2017 R1 + 2018 R2]

On the topic of future dated picks, there's apparently a 'rule of thumb' stating they go down in value one round per year. To me that's kind of bullshit. I'd be quite happy to trade a seventh round pick this year for a sixth next year; then that sixth for a fifth and the seventh for another sixth etc until you have a steady stream of extra first or second round picks every year. Trouble of course is being around long enough to see it out, maybe that's why there's a premium on the time frame of the pick.

,

That is the "rule of thumb". Certainly there is an accounting element in the form of a qualitative, finance-style, future-value discount simply due to the delayed "payment", but even more it I think it reflects the uncertainty of how dramatically the addition of the player will help your trade partner. Which makes the other consideration the trade partner.

 

When we traded with Philly most here, IIRC, felt we were likely going to get 2017 2nd quartile picks which are at worst mid-round picks... and we pretty much nailed it. So the future "8th" picks were only discounted to 12ths.

 

Carolina? Beware... your partner would be a team one-year removed from a SB loss. They could be a coiled spring sending your apparent, future 8th-ish picks down to the 4th quartile's picks starting with the 25th... maybe deep into the 4th quartile at pick 30+. So you have to look at their greatest needs and decide, based on your player evaluations, if there is a pick at a position that will not last to their R1 slot that can uncoil them.

 

Not sure the same can be said of your envisioned other, divisional partner... anyway...

 

In the case of CAR their vaunted D pretty much paved the way to their 2016 downfall allowing the 12th most yards and 7th most points plus they are pretty set at QB, so if they can right the D with an elite defensive player... beware.

 

 

Some time ago I showed that assuming future, #8 overall picks the Philly deal was fairly even using the Jimmy J chart ( http://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart.asp?RequestTeam=cle ) and the rule of thumb:

2600 <==> 1400 + 205 + 100 + 500 + 86 = 2291

... but killer for us using the Harvard chart ( http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/pages/the-harvard-trade-value-chart ):

494.6 <==> 318.0 + 115.4 + 95.5 + 162.4 + 92.5 = 783.9

 

On the other hand IIRC our subsequent trade down from #8 to #15 with the Titans was very close to "even" per the Harvard chart. Have to believe we "settled for less" with TN due to less competition for the pick

[gftChris]

There's also the other option - trade down from #1 to, say, #4 or #5; then use some of that to trade up from #12 to say #6 or #7.

[Tour2ma]

I am not doing the math on that one!

[gftChris]

I am not doing the math on that one!

It's easy - all you need to do is add up the values of 1 and 12, then see which two picks in between are next to each other, and then if there's change what that pick would be. So:

 

Harvard

(#1) 494.6 + (#12) 283.6 = 778.2

(#3) 401.3 + (#4) 376.9 = 778.2

 

I can't help but feel that isn't coincidence.

 

 

Cowboys chart:

(#1) 3000 + (#12) 1200 = 4200

(#2) 2600 + (#6) 1600 = 4200

or

(#3) 2200 + (#4) 1800 + (#78) 200 = 4200

or

(#3) 2200 + (#5) 1700 + (#40) 500 = 4200

[The Gipper]

It's easy - all you need to do is add up the values of 1 and 12, then see which two picks in between are next to each other, and then if there's change what that pick would be. So:

 

Harvard

(#1) 494.6 + (#12) 283.6 = 778.2

(#3) 401.3 + (#4) 376.9 = 778.2

 

I can't help but feel that isn't coincidence.

 

 

Cowboys chart:

(#1) 3000 + (#12) 1200 = 4200

(#2) 2600 + (#6) 1600 = 4200

or

(#3) 2200 + (#4) 1800 + (#78) 200 = 4200

or

(#3) 2200 + (#5) 1700 + (#40) 500 = 4200

Lovely. Math. Thanks Russell Nash.

Now, who do you take with #3 and #4?

[gftChris]

Lovely. Math. Thanks Russell Nash.

Now, who do you take with #3 and #4?

If you're unlucky, Garrett and Allen go #1 and #2. If so, probably Adams and a QB. Otherwise, Garrett/Allen and Adams/QB.

 

I prefer #2 and #6 I think, you get Allen and then one of Adams, Hooker, Lattimore and QB.

[wargograw]

3 and 4 you better get Foster or Hooker.

[gftChris]

3 and 4 you better get Foster or Hooker.

The possibilities are endless, but it's not going to happen.

[jiggins7919]

Wow, some great posts. Wish I had time to write a response! Damn work...

[jiggins7919]

San Diego Tribune Mock Draft:

 

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sports/sd-sp-nfl-mock-draft-2017-three-rounds-20170124-story.html

 

They have Browns taking:

 

#1 Garrett

#12 Ruben Foster

#33 Cordrea TAnkersly CB Clemson

#52 Haason Reddick OLB Temple.

 

Haven't heard much about this last guy.

 

Reddick was recently announced as one of the top standouts in the Senior Bowl so far. He's a tweener guy that can apparently do a lot. Mayock and others were saying a ton of nice things about him. Other than that, I don't know much either.

[jiggins7919]

There's also the other option - trade down from #1 to, say, #4 or #5; then use some of that to trade up from #12 to say #6 or #7.

 

Now THAT'S interesting. If we did that, we'd have a zillion different ways we could go. QB and then Safety? How sick would THAT be? Trubisky and Jamal Adams, or Malik Hooker?

[Tour2ma]

That draft would rock...

 

Reddick was recently announced as one of the top standouts in the Senior Bowl so far. He's a tweener guy that can apparently do a lot. Mayock and others were saying a ton of nice things about him. Other than that, I don't know much either.

 

Not just "one of", but THE standout player by unanimous agreement between DJ and MM.

 

And he is like 6'1 and 230+ so it's not like he's undersized. Both saw him having great prospects at all three 4-3 LB slots and inside in a 3-4.

 

The kid played DE at Temple, and was a handful for every OT he drilled against, and then stood up for the LB drills like he'd been doing it his whole life... including covering TEs and RBs.

 

Impressive showing to say the least... can't wait to see him tomorrow.

 

Between Haason and Dawkins Temple is well represented.

[PoeticG]

Your score is: 10723 (GRADE: B+)

 

Your Picks:

Round 1 Pick 12: Leonard Fournette, RB, LSU (A+)

Round 1 Pick 16 (BALT): Cam Robinson, OT, Alabama (A+)

Round 2 Pick 1: Ethan Pocic, C/OG, LSU (B+)

Round 2 Pick 6 (LAC): Desmond King, FS/CB, Iowa (B+)

Round 2 Pick 15 (BALT): O.J. Howard, TE, Alabama (A+)

Round 2 Pick 20: Pat Elflein, C/OG, Ohio State (A)

Round 3 Pick 1: Jourdan Lewis, CB, Michigan (A)

Round 4 Pick 1: Justin Evans, SS, Texas A&M (A-)

Round 4 Pick 6 (LAC): Daeshon Hall, DE, Texas A&M (

Round 5 Pick 7 (LAC): Danny Isidora, OG, Miami (Fla.) (

Round 5 Pick 32: Donnel Pumphrey, RB, San Diego State (A)

Round 6 Pick 1: Ryan Switzer, WR, North Carolina (

 

Your Future Picks:

2018 Round 1 Pick (BALT)

2018 Round 1 Pick

2019 Round 1 Pick

 

 

Man would you look at this beauty! You've got Fournette running behind Thomas, Bitonio, Elflein, Pocic and Robinson with Isidora backing them up. Then you have Desmond King and Justin Evans manning the Safety positions. You have the best TE in Simpson out there who can block and catch. You get a shutdown corner in Jourdan Lewis and a MONSTER DE in Daeshon Hall! Then we clean up the draft by taking an explosive KR/PR/Scatback in Pumphrey and a possession receiver who can pick up the YAC yards in Switzer.

 

This would be heaven as we also secure another first round selection in next years draft from trading back!

[calfoxwc]

http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/2017-nfl-draft-temple-haason-reddick-scouting-report-121616

 

Yes, they were talking about him - just makes plays, very, very smart,

tough, quick/fast, can become a starter at lb...

 

the kind of kid you can build with. Third round seems a bit high, though.

[Tour2ma]

Agree, cal, but he''s "hot".

Haasan Reddick's floor and ceiling have been raised because he has shown that his projected position change is not theoretical, but a plausible, borderline-certain, expectation of an even higher level than was envisioned.

Round 1 Pick 16 (BALT): Cam Robinson, OT, Alabama (A+)
Round 2 Pick 1: Ethan Pocic, C/OG, LSU (B+)
Round 2 Pick 20: Pat Elflein, C/OG, Ohio State (A)
Round 5 Pick 7 (LAC): Danny Isidora, OG, Miami (Fla.) (B )

My reservations about Robinson aside, you have spent four picks, three of which are prime ones, to overhaul an OL that does not need an overhaul, on players, who with one exception, will play positions they don't upgrade. The exception is Pocic at Center... and he actually looks bad at OG.

 

All the while you have ignored the Defensive side... and the impact players in the draft.

 

Gregg Williams would smother you as you slept.

[PoeticG]

I definitely think that if we're going to be bringing in a FRANCHISE QB in the following year then we NEED to overhaul that line.

 

Thomas won't be around forever and we need to start to find his replacement and train him up before he actually leaves.

 

Bitonio has been pretty solid but he's coming off an injury.

 

After that, who do we have that's a lock? We have a bunch of crap shots. A bunch of hopefuls.

 

I don't want us to come back to where we are now and everyone be afraid of drafting our franchise QB and putting him behind a broken line. We need the best supporting cast and the best line we can get.

 

Getting Fournette and O.J. Howard to go with Gordon, Pryor and Coleman and a great offensive line is a recipe for success IMO.

 

Kessler, RG3 and McCown will love you if those are the guys behind that line this year.

 

I don't know where you are seeing that those guys will not be an upgrade? Robinson, outside of the off the field concerns, is touted as the BEST OL in the draft.

 

Pocic is a fast and furious run blocking giant and Elflein has impressed for awhile as moving to center and not missing a beat.

 

I did address the Defensive side of the ball as well. Firstly, I'm of the opposite opinion that our Defense isn't really that bad. They just need an offense to take some of the pressure off of them and actually control the clock and put up some points.

 

I did address the defense though. King and Evans will step right into the starting spots at Safety on day one and they are electric.

 

Jourdan Lewis is also a standout CB that can be a #2 possibly even a #1 someday.

 

Daeshon Hall is an excellent DE. Is he Myles Garrett? No, but I think he is close to that level and he's far far cheaper.

[PoeticG]

Starting Lineup I'm proposing...


QB- Kessler, RG3, McCown

RB- Fournette, Crowell, Johnson, Pumphrey - what would it look like with Crowell at FB and Fournette at RB?

WR- Gordon, Pryor, Coleman, Higgins, Switzer, Hawkins

OL- Thomas, Bitonio, Elflein, Pocic, Robinson, Greco, Isidora and Erving waaay back here...

TE- Howard, Barnidge, DeValve

-----------------------------

DL- Hall, Shelton, Bryant, Nassib, Meder,

LB- Ogbah, Collins, Davis, Kirksey,

CB- Haden, Lewis, Taylor, Calhoun

SS- Evans, Kindred

FS- King, Poyer

I've bolded the players that would be taken in this draft and I think it's fairly even.

 

I took 4 offensive player and 4 defensive players.

 

I took 4 offensive lineman and fixed our issue there.

 

I took 9 STARTERS and fixed a lot of problems... because I didn't take any LBs this draft was a fail?

 

Come on bro-

 

9 Starters. 10 if you include Pumphrey as starting KR. 11 if you make Switzer you're starting PR.

 

... so in that vein, The Browns gain 11 Starters and OL depth with the 12th player.

 

Also, next draft we will also have 2 first rounder and 2 second rounders.... and we can do this all over again.

 

Next year we take the Franchise QB and the LB.

 

- Just a thought.

 

-P.S. - Personally I would take Trubisky #1 overall and trade SF a nice package to move up from 12 where they can grab Watson or Kizer or any other QB they would like while also have extra picks to build their shitty team with...

 

We get have Trubisky and Fournette... although I'm starting to turn on to Cook as well. I really like McCafferey too. But Fournette unless something crazy comes out, is the Prototype Franchise RB that teams covet for years....

[TexasAg1969]

All the while you have ignored the Defensive side... and the impact players in the draft.

 

Gregg Williams would smother you as you slept.

 

LOL!

 

And if KSU's Willis is there when you are looking at Hall PoG, go with Willis.

[Tour2ma]

Po...

 

All reasonable positions with which I simply disagree based upon my evaluations of our roster and the draft class.

• Two years ago there was another Robinson (Greg) who was touted as the best of his OL class... he wasn't. This year's version is better, but so, too, I believe, will be the version of Shon Coleman we will see.
• We have two more years of Joe under contract to replace him... and I think he's re-up. I think we may even see a restructured extension to bring money forward to 2017.
• Two years running Bito has been hurt... As a swami once said, "One is an accident, two is a coincidence, three is a trend." If Bito goes down again this year, color me done... but 'til then.
• You are casting aside demonstrated depth and versatility in Paz and Drango. Other than the Camster you don't have a swingman left on your squad... put another way, you don't have a swingman.
• You draft a one-position player, Pocic, and slot him out of position in favor of a lesser Center.

On the D-side...

• You have one blue-chip-ish pick, King, and move him to an unfamiliar position.
• You add three other nice pieces and expect impact performances.
• ... and our 2016 D was "that bad."

 

 

But always good to end on a positive note... I'd love OJH at TE.

[goozer]

Except, again, we have no clue what a "reach" is. As I said elsewhere, every pick if a risk.

 

And, can it not be considered that not taking a pick that you desperately need is also a "reach".

There is no risk at all in taking Garrett. The second sentence make little sense.

[ballpeen]

 

Garrett may be a no brainer, but how many times have we heard "next year's qb class is better than this one". Happens almost every year. So we take Garrett and another defensive stud, finish maybe 5-11 or 6-10, and lo and behold, there's another Andrew Luck sitting there for the taking at #1. Too bad we can't get him, because the qb needy team sitting at the pole position isn't listening to any offers.

I don't know how many times we have heard it. Since I don't remember, it probably hasn't been that many times.

 

The reality is next years class does project to be better. By a lot.

[ballpeen]

On another note, if OJ Howard is there at 12, I think I take him. Screw barnidge and Devalve. Not that I don't like them, but Howard is a beast.

[darren15]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000779541/article/bucky-brooks-mock-draft-10-senior-bowl-effect-on-first-round

 

Has us going Garrett and then O line

[TexasAg1969]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000779541/article/bucky-brooks-mock-draft-10-senior-bowl-effect-on-first-round

 

Has us going Garrett and then O line

 

I'd prefer another one of those CB's if Foster is gone @#12.

[Tour2ma]

On another note, if OJ Howard is there at 12, I think I take him. Screw barnidge and Devalve. Not that I don't like them, but Howard is a beast.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000779541/article/bucky-brooks-mock-draft-10-senior-bowl-effect-on-first-round

 

Has us going Garrett and then O line

 

But then it's only "Bucky"....

 

Was looking at his R1 mock yesterday... seeing who he passed over to tab Ramczyk at #12. OJH is the name that jumped out at me along with Williams, Clemson's now seemingly annual stud WR. But given our WR binge last draft and the relative depth of the two positions in this draft, I think I go TE.

 

But, God, I still want Foster... even more with the threat of Cinci grabbing him. CAR does seem to me to be a plausible trade partner and even by the more expensive JJ chart a trade-up from 12 to 8 should start around something like: 1.08 <==> 1.12 + 3.Comp + 4.01

 

There is no risk at all in taking Garrett. The second sentence make little sense.

 

Welcome to the Board and the fray...

 

I have a different take on Part 1... there's no risk with Allan at #1, but not much more with Garrett who comes with a higher.

 

Part 2? Just one of many examples...

[wargograw]

It would only cost a third and fourth to move from 12 to 8? DO IT.