SkippinTurtles Posted February 20, 2017 Author Report Share Posted February 20, 2017 I've been on the Garrett and Hooker train for a while now, but I think it will involve trading up into the top 7 or so. Whatever it takes. Having the best D in this division would be cool as fuck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 20, 2017 Report Share Posted February 20, 2017 Whatever it takes. Having the best D in this division would be cool as fuck. "Whatever it takes" is stupid, but if the price is right then absolutely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jiggins7919 Posted February 20, 2017 Report Share Posted February 20, 2017 I didn't read the first page of responses, but the title asks, "Why not?" Other than the fact that Hooker is likely to be gone, the main problem with these picks is they don't address the QB position. I don't see us moving up in the draft, as that goes strongly against our analytics approach, so if we take defense-defense with our two first rounders, it's going to be slim pickens' for QB's in the second round (I should say, SLIMMER pickens'). Hooker is the player that recently had two surgeries, correct? Labrum and hernia? The hernia doesn't scare me, but the torn labrum is something I had surgery for, and it took me A WHILE to recover from it. Now, I'm the furthest thing from an NFL player, and I'm quite sure I didn't have world-class medical care, but you get the point. If the surgeries are successful, and Hooker gets a clean bill of health, I wouldn't have an issue with the two picks. I guess it's possible the surgeries cause Hooker to slide a bit, so maybe he WILL be available at 12. The only issue is, "Who the hell do we get to play the most important position in sports?" It's the NFL silly season, we all know this. We're going to hear all kinds of crazy stuff for the next couple months, and only a sliver of it will be remotely true. Do we try and sign somebody like Tyrod and use him as a bridge until we find our "franchise guy"? Could Hue Jackson further develop Tyrod and make him the player we need? What about a crazy three-team trade for somebody like Alex Smith? Dallas trades Romo to Chiefs, Chiefs send Alex Smith to Cleveland, and we send out some assets? Don't get me wrong, I don't think Alex Smith is Tom Brady 2.0, but I would sure as hell take him. I would love to have Hooker and Garrett, especially if we can get our QB some way. Right now, I want Jimmy Garoppolo. Possibly we strike a deal with Patriots involving a second round pick, a 4th, and maybe Josh Gordon? Like I said, it's the silly season. What I DO know is, Garrett and Hooker BOTH fill giant holes on our beloved team, and if we get them AND our QB in one offseason...well...we might just finally be on our way to creating a winner. (ok, stop laughing, assholes). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gumby73 Posted February 20, 2017 Report Share Posted February 20, 2017 so maybe he WILL be available at 12. The only issue is, "Who the hell do we get to play the most important position in sports?" Do we try and sign somebody like Tyrod and use him as a bridge until we find our "franchise guy"? Could Hue Jackson further develop Tyrod and make him the player we need? Right now, I want Jimmy Garoppolo. Possibly we strike a deal with Patriots involving a second round pick, a 4th, and maybe Josh Gordon? . just a opinion but I believe Option 1 is Tyrod. Than at #12 draft his same player skills & better size in QB Watson with a better deep ball imo. Option 2 is JG, but only as a Rd.2 value & a comp. pick. RG3 is out in Option 1, not so much in Opt.2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted February 20, 2017 Report Share Posted February 20, 2017 When was the last time this team had a guy who could get double-digit sacks and pressure the QB? Or a dude in the secondary who could take picks to the house. Garrett and Hooker together would balance the D. Forgetting that Gilbert took one to the house vs Indy? Maybe the comparison was valid... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jiggins7919 Posted February 21, 2017 Report Share Posted February 21, 2017 My first choice is Garoppolo, using a combination of picks OUTSIDE our first rounders. If a deal can't be struck, my #2 scenario would be to sign Tyrod Taylor and draft Watson at #12. We don't have ANY clue if Watson will even be there, but whatever. We might get a better idea after the combine and pro days play out, but I doubt it. Just takes one team to fall completely in love with a player, and then #12 seems very far away indeed. It should be noted that Watson recently declared he will participate in "every single category of the combine". I thought this was a smart move, considering I thought he screwed the pooch by not playing in the Senior Bowl (even after the Browns ASKED him to play). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted February 21, 2017 Report Share Posted February 21, 2017 When was the last time this team had a guy who could get double-digit sacks and pressure the QB? Or a dude in the secondary who could take picks to the house. Garrett and Hooker together would balance the D. We don't know that either of those guys can actually do those things. ...in the pros. Every player the Browns have ever drafted we thought perhaps they were the greatest thing since sliced bananas.....but they turn out to be just banana slugs. Yes...it is a pessimistic approach....have you seen the Browns draft history? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 21, 2017 Report Share Posted February 21, 2017 While that article has some truths its also a blowjob piece to young myles. I don't care about the words they're using, just the numbers they're citing, that's what I was showing you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unsympathetic Posted February 21, 2017 Report Share Posted February 21, 2017 the ability to shed huge tackles effortlessly is a "premium" in my eyes. I value that over pure edge rush. First it was "clowney is more athletic than garrett" and now you come up with the "Someone's better because I see them as better even though there is no metric" BS? Keep moving those goalposts.. eventually you'll come up with a point! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted February 21, 2017 Report Share Posted February 21, 2017 First it was "clowney is more athletic than garrett" and now you come up with the "Someone's better because I see them as better even though there is no metric" BS? Keep moving those goalposts.. eventually you'll come up with a point! 1) i dont think i ever said clowney was better or more athletic. I think i said he may do a thing or two better than garett and vive versa, at this stage in their respective careers. 2) so because theres not a shedding offensive lineman metric it shouldnt be discussed? Its not a valuable skill if theres no metric for it? Seriously? Ill hold out thats probably not what u were trying to say. My point about garett having trouble locking out OL is absolutely valid and im not the only one thats noticed it. I read a right up about him from two years ago that gave him a "garbage" rating against the run. He's decent against the run now but alot of it is because he can pursue or dips underneath blocks. In the NFL they're gonna run right at him if some OC thinks he cant hold up at the edge. This will negate all his finesse stuff. This is why you study the game for yourself, helps to have played obviously, instead of relying on PFF to tell you how the game is played Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkippinTurtles Posted February 22, 2017 Author Report Share Posted February 22, 2017 Adding potentially the Next Von Miller and Ed Reed without having to trade up makes sense. Putting the QB on his ass and fucking up where he wants to throw in the pass-happy NFL is a must. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted February 22, 2017 Report Share Posted February 22, 2017 Adding potentially the Next Von Miller and Ed Reed without having to trade up makes sense. Putting the QB on his ass and fucking up where he wants to throw in the pass-happy NFL is a must. Or the next Kam Wimbley and Justin Gilbert. Though, I think we already went over this. Browns fan pessimism and all that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 Or the next Kam Wimbley and Justin Gilbert. Though, I think we already went over this. Repeatedly...... We know we know.....why draft the next Courtney Brown, when we can have the next Ryan Leaf? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkippinTurtles Posted February 23, 2017 Author Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 Repeatedly...... We know we know.....why draft the next Courtney Brown, when we can have the next Ryan Leaf? Dude exactly. At worst you can try a defensive player at different positions. Or special teams. A bust QB is just dogshit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasAg1969 Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 Repeatedly...... We know we know.....why draft the next Courtney Brown, when we can have the next Ryan Leaf? LOL! How many of these kinds of plays per game for the Browns would you need from MG to consider him a successful draft pick? Question is for all. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kru3zEAe4RM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 Repeatedly...... We know we know.....why draft the next Courtney Brown, when we can have the next Ryan Leaf? I guess it is just a mentality that Browns fans have unfortuneatly developed after so many years of poor drafting: Draft 4 QBs in the first round: all busts Draft 3 DEs in the first round: all busts Even when they hit on a Joe Thomas, they then take a Cam Erving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 LOL! How many of these kinds of plays per game for the Browns would you need from MG to consider him a successful draft pick? Question is for all. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kru3zEAe4RM We got all the same highlights from Brown, Mingo, Wimbley. If and when he does those things in the NFL..perhaps for the Browns.....THEN we can consider him to be a successful draft pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 When I look at the criteria the new Browns coaches and FO use, they would NEVER have drafted the busts. So, things are really looking up, bigly. My question is, given a selection criteria including work ethic, love for the game, character, football IQ... who would be a more dramatic impact player for the Browns - Garrett...or Jamal Adams? Not even Garrett can get to a qb before he throws to a wide open TE in 1.5 seconds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 who would be a more dramatic impact player for the Browns - Garrett...or Jamal Adams? Not even Garrett can get to a qb before he throws to a wide open TE in 1.5 seconds. A reasonable question... Personally I think it would be nice if it took 1.5-second passes to beat our pass rush as opposed to the 2.5+ QBs now have. When you can reliably bring pressure faster, you reduce the opposing QB's route options and shrink the field your DBs must cover. Front to back and inside out... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasAg1969 Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 We got all the same highlights from Brown, Mingo, Wimbley. If and when he does those things in the NFL..perhaps for the Browns.....THEN we can consider him to be a successful draft pick. That wasn't the question. The question was how many of those kinds of plays per game would make you think he was a good pick? Von Miller actually gets to QB's about 2-3 times a game and pressures 2 to 3 x's that number (just my guess). He's currently the best in the game. So what would you want from Garrett to say, "Yeah, great pick!"? What is your criteria? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 That wasn't the question. The question was how many of those kinds of plays per game would make you think he was a good pick? Von Miller actually gets to QB's about 2-3 times a game and pressures 2 to 3 x's that number (just my guess). He's currently the best in the game. So what would you want from Garrett to say, "Yeah, great pick!"? What is your criteria? My criteria is that he prove it in the pros. Nothing he does in college will make me say "great pick". Or are you asking "how many of those kinds of plays that he makes per game in the pros would make you say "great pick". If so....sure, the numbers you give would be fine...if done in the pros. But nothing he does in college will make me say he is "the best in the game"...if you are talking about the pros. If you are talking about college...it don't mean shit. Nate Orchard had more sacks/pressures while in college. That don't make him a great pass rusher. No pick can be called a great pick until a couple of years into their pro career. Cleveland has made great picks in the past: they are called LeBron James and Kyrie Irving...but that's a different sport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasAg1969 Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 My criteria is that he prove it in the pros. Nothing he does in college will make me say "great pick". Or are you asking "how many of those kinds of plays that he makes per game in the pros would make you say "great pick". If so....sure, the numbers you give would be fine...if done in the pros. But nothing he does in college will make me say he is "the best in the game"...if you are talking about the pros. If you are talking about college...it don't mean shit. Nate Orchard had more sacks/pressures while in college. That don't make him a great pass rusher. No pick can be called a great pick until a couple of years into their pro career. Cleveland has made great picks in the past: they are called LeBron James and Kyrie Irving...but that's a different sport. He's done with college so the question was strictly for the pros in terms of what makes you say at the end of a year or two, "Great pick". Those college highlights are very similar to Von's which did translate to the pros, so I only placed them there to show what I mean by great plays. I would want the same from him on the pro level very near to Von, though it would be foolish of me to expect it all the first year to match a guy with several years in now that is the best. Clowney is beginning to reach that level after a couple of injury plagued years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 He's done with college so the question was strictly for the pros in terms of what makes you say at the end of a year or two, "Great pick". Those college highlights are very similar to Von's which did translate to the pros, so I only placed them there to show what I mean by great plays. I would want the same from him on the pro level very near to Von, though it would be foolish of me to expect it all the first year to match a guy with several years in now that is the best. Clowney is beginning to reach that level after a couple of injury plagued years. Well, weren't you one of them on here telling us how JMZ's college performance was going to translate to the pros? We see how that turned out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 In my eyes for garett to be a successful pick he also has to be decent against the run. If he's just a pass rushing specialist....meh. Teams just start running all over us so there negates his pass rush Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasAg1969 Posted February 24, 2017 Report Share Posted February 24, 2017 Well, weren't you one of them on here telling us how JMZ's college performance was going to translate to the pros? We see how that turned out. No one here or elsewhere saw his alcohol problem playing out the way it did. And you already know that Garrett isn't even close to those off-field problems. Apples and oranges. Manziel showed potential but he self destructed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkippinTurtles Posted February 24, 2017 Author Report Share Posted February 24, 2017 Garrett claims he benches 485lbs., runs a 4.45 40 and has a 40" vertical. If he tests that at the Combine combined with his college production he seems like a solid pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joedawg69 Posted February 24, 2017 Report Share Posted February 24, 2017 I really don't think Hooker will be there at 12 but they appear to have the potential to go at those picks. The big question is who else in this draft is worth the 1st and 12th pick that everyone would like instead. I really don't see a QB yet that jumps out enough to warrant either of those picks. I would like to upgrade at QB for sure; I am just not sure any of the QBs in this draft are a big enough upgrade to use our 1st or 12th pick on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gumby73 Posted February 24, 2017 Report Share Posted February 24, 2017 Far to many options.And a 5th year option on any of these QB's is not one of them. We can't stash them & we can't play them with this pass pro.(right Kess?) But we can run block for 4-5 yrds. per carry as Duke & Crow proved.(crazy).#1 it's Garrett/Allen pend Hue/Gregg....#12--It's what we do,now..Trade it.. for a additional 1st in 18. Even with adding S Tyvis Powell, I still prefer to trade-up #12 to Adams,Hooker or Foster. Imo, we got Powell cuz our FO also see's Adams nor Hooker being around at #12 either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted February 24, 2017 Report Share Posted February 24, 2017 No one here or elsewhere saw his alcohol problem playing out the way it did. And you already know that Garrett isn't even close to those off-field problems. Apples and oranges. Manziel showed potential but he self destructed. Apart from his off field issues, I don't think JFF showed much potential, at all. The potential to be a third stringer or a backup at best. Not as good as say the other most famous short QB: Doug Flutie. Maybe, like Flutie, he could play a little. Like Flutie Canada is where Johnny needs to go. His talents fit much better in that game than in the NFL. And maybe like Flutie he could come back after he has matured a lot and learned how to play some, and maybe contribute to some NFL team. Questionable, but maybe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted February 24, 2017 Report Share Posted February 24, 2017 Garrett claims he benches 485lbs., runs a 4.45 40 and has a 40" vertical. If he tests that at the Combine combined with his college production he seems like a solid pick. Then maybe sign him up for the Olympic Decathlon. The question will still be can he play pro football the way some people think he can. Workout warriors often fail when it comes to playing the actual game. I am not saying Garrett may not be just a workout warrior. But he still has a lot of proving to do. (as would every single every other rookie drafted or signed) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.