flyingfooldoug Posted January 10, 2017 Report Share Posted January 10, 2017 Ha, Savage getting retribution on the Browns for firing him. If they invite Watson, they should invite Mitch too, as he's graduated. I like Tru better if they take a QB. Getting Watson would be playing like a brown tho Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoorta Posted January 10, 2017 Report Share Posted January 10, 2017 Honestly I think that with the firing of Horton and the hiring of Williams, the decision has already been made to fix this defense first. It's too close to becoming a great one not to pour those resources into exactly that. People want to see a lot more wins and that strategy will produce them quicker than some project at QB who gets hammered out of play by mid-season. This year has proven that we don't keep QB's healthy. And we just started using those defensive "chips" with our mid-season deal with NE. To me that was the handwriting on the wall which was predictive of the coaching move and likely the coming draft as well. I agree with Canton Mike's sig Don't know we'll see..... This shouldn't play into the direction the Browns take- but I have a feeling it will. The PR pull for taking the local kid is going to be intense. Can I be the street guy telling Haslam- "draft Mitch?" Got a feeling he won't be listening this time. Sure you miss out on Garrett or Allen if you take the qb @ #1, but you can do some serious defensive upgrading with the next three picks. http://nflmocks.com/2017/01/09/cleveland-browns-mitch-trubisky-could-be-bernie-kosar-2-0/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted January 10, 2017 Report Share Posted January 10, 2017 Just wondering, since quarterbacks are usually overvalued rightly or wrongly what would have happened if for the last 12 years we had only drafted the BPA regardless of position? WSS Well, of course, the hard part is trying to tell WHO is the BPA regardless of position. Each team makes their own evaluation of players talents.....and I am sure they keep that a closely guarded secret. Let's face it, I seriously doubt that a GM would admit: "Well, we had Humbo Nooney rated as a better player.....but we took Tooney Lucas instead because we needed someone at that spot more". (Steve....you like those references.?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted January 10, 2017 Report Share Posted January 10, 2017 Weren't you the one who was slobbin' on Paxton Lynch's knob in the months leading up to the draft last year? I heard he's really tearing it up in Denver this year, so it looks like the Browns missed out on another one of your sure-thing prospects. I wouldn't be closing the books on Paxton Lynch. He was a rookie and he did what rookies should basically do: sit and learn. He is just developing. I am not saying he is certain to be great, I am only saying that it is far too early to judge him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Buffalo Posted January 10, 2017 Report Share Posted January 10, 2017 I wouldn't be closing the books on Paxton Lynch. He was a rookie and he did what rookies should basically do: sit and learn. He is just developing. I am not saying he is certain to be great, I am only saying that it is far too early to judge him. Same thing I have been saying about Wentz all year. Everyone viewer and pundit has already proclaimed him the franchise QB, but it all really depends how he plays the next 2 seasons. I mean hell outside of like 5 games, he was didn't play well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Make-Believe Posted January 10, 2017 Report Share Posted January 10, 2017 The more time goes by, the more confident I feel in being one of Mitch's Bitches. My first option would be if they could trade a second (not #33) and a future pick for Garrapolo... If that can't be done, just pull the trigger on Trubisky. Best receiver available with #12 regardless. The meat and potato BS was taken last year. And we can still attack those positions in free agency. Time to go get some skill players in the draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canton Dawg Posted January 10, 2017 Report Share Posted January 10, 2017 I like Tru better if they take a QB. Getting Watson would be playing like a brown tho If they get Watson it will "drafting like a brown". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VikingDawg Posted January 10, 2017 Report Share Posted January 10, 2017 I have been watching and paying attention to Trubisky and gotta say the possibility of drafting the guy is pretty freakin' exciting. Seeing him throw near perfect 40-60 yard bombs, quick release on shorter passes and pretty elusive ala Big Ben on the field. The only nig drawback and nervousness is lack of experience.... But screw it. Enough passing on QB's for the "next great player" that never pans out. Take a chance on the kid and draft him, go spend some of that $100 mil on Kevin Zeitler and another linemen, resign Pryor and go get Trubisky, a #1 WR, a Center and grab a good mid round RB and go for it. Call 50 run plays a game if need be to get the kid acclimated to the NFL but build a damn Offense for a change and get it running on all cylinders! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wargograw Posted January 10, 2017 Report Share Posted January 10, 2017 We have receivers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted January 11, 2017 Report Share Posted January 11, 2017 Same thing I have been saying about Wentz all year. Everyone viewer and pundit has already proclaimed him the franchise QB, but it all really depends how he plays the next 2 seasons. I mean hell outside of like 5 games, he was didn't play well. Of course. Look no further than our own RG. Great rookie year....star of the future. Apparently not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted January 11, 2017 Report Share Posted January 11, 2017 Here's why I doubt they pick Trubisky(or any QB 1st)....... Because, I think most of us and the world can agree that Trubisky is not a premium top top candidate....IE....he is a bit of a reach at #1 and not as accomplished as most would like to see, for that high of a pick.... And...last year....the Browns assessment and analytics said dont reach for a QB with that high pick......and, arguably, this years crops isnt as highly regarded as last years crop...... So, if our FO's system did not allow for Wentz at #2 or any of the prospects left at #15, then why would that grading and pick system suddenly change this year, allowing us to reach for QB at #1? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canton Dawg Posted January 11, 2017 Report Share Posted January 11, 2017 We have receivers. We need good receivers...several of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canton Dawg Posted January 11, 2017 Report Share Posted January 11, 2017 Here's why I doubt they pick Trubisky(or any QB 1st)....... Because, I think most of us and the world can agree that Trubisky is not a premium top top candidate....IE....he is a bit of a reach at #1 and not as accomplished as most would like to see, for that high of a pick.... And...last year....the Browns assessment and analytics said dont reach for a QB with that high pick......and, arguably, this years crops isnt as highly regarded as last years crop...... So, if our FO's system did not allow for Wentz at #2 or any of the prospects left at #15, then why would that grading and pick system suddenly change this year, allowing us to reach for QB at #1? Right, last year the FO said screw it lets not reach for a QB, let's reach for for a WR instead! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted January 11, 2017 Report Share Posted January 11, 2017 Right, last year the FO said screw it lets not reach for a QB, let's reach for for a WR instead! Ha!.....well, actually, they said....."we are not sure who we want at #2, so lets play it safe and get 5 ok guys, instead of 1 maybe great guy, who were are not sure of.."..... Sooooo.....no stars to be found in year 1 of the first 14 player bonanza......but #12, this year, could be the charm?....plus another 14 picks.....will they score this time?...... Lets guess.....how many stars will we get from these 28 picks?????............ My guess......1.....tops.....maybe 2.......and, no, just being a starter doesnt make you a star..... Cant wait...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canton Dawg Posted January 11, 2017 Report Share Posted January 11, 2017 Ha!.....well, actually, they said....."we are not sure who we want at #2, so lets play it safe and get 5 ok guys, instead of 1 maybe great guy, who were are not sure of.."..... Sooooo.....no stars to be found in year 1 of the first 14 player bonanza......but #12, this year, could be the charm?....plus another 14 picks.....will they score this time?...... Lets guess.....how many stars will we get from these 28 picks?????............ My guess......1.....tops.....maybe 2.......and, no, just being a starter doesnt make you a star..... Cant wait...... I'll admit, I don't know the first thing about applying analytics into the realm of pro sports...but is it simply throwing enough shit against the wall and see what sticks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoorta Posted January 11, 2017 Report Share Posted January 11, 2017 Here's why I doubt they pick Trubisky(or any QB 1st)....... Because, I think most of us and the world can agree that Trubisky is not a premium top top candidate....IE....he is a bit of a reach at #1 and not as accomplished as most would like to see, for that high of a pick.... And...last year....the Browns assessment and analytics said dont reach for a QB with that high pick......and, arguably, this years crops isnt as highly regarded as last years crop...... So, if our FO's system did not allow for Wentz at #2 or any of the prospects left at #15, then why would that grading and pick system suddenly change this year, allowing us to reach for QB at #1? I say the only question mark is lack of a long college resume. He puts up those numbers over a three year career- he's a lock #1, no doubt about it. Yeah Mud the analytics may say reach. But the analytics said Coleman was the #1 wr in the draft. After the first year- they may need to modify those analytics to get better results. I've said in another thread- the #1 is almost a luxury pick, just don't screw up #12. Hey- The Raiders totally blew it on Jamarcus Russell, and where are they now? I've changed my tune for one year- you don't stop swinging because you're afraid you're going to strike out. Go for the home run. It's the conundrum the Browns are going to face- Mitch may wind up your 10th highest rated player, but he's the #1 talented qb. I hope we're not drafting #1 again next year. (Will Jimmy stick it out with Hue in that scenario? I doubt it.) Which means- odds are the team drafting #1 is going to need a qb. So we're back to the good old #22 slot hoping the second or third best qb hits for a change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted January 11, 2017 Report Share Posted January 11, 2017 I guess I missed "the big game" Mitch payed in. Right, I am reading, not listening. I get it, you have YOUR sights set on some guy, just like I have my sights set on some guy. You think your guy is the next coming of Bruce Smith perhaps.....he may be the shit, but I think my guy is the equal shit...the next coming of Aaron Rodgers. And Its just that my guy does fit a more vital and needed role on this team. And what I AM hearing is fear. Fear that if we take a QB, he may fail that he is the next Joey Harrington, not the next Aaron Rodgers. Well, that fear goes both ways. My evaluation of your guy isn't any better than your evaluation of my guy. I fear that he is the next Aaron Curry or Aundray Bruce, and those fears are just as valid...and just as plausible as your fears. But I say: take the risk on the more vital role/need. And you are not listening... Fear has no role in my analysis, which by the way I have said all along is incomplete. I spent zero time on Mitch prior to his declaring for the draft. I simply reject need as a ruling principle for drafting and the dependence on Mock's to set my draft order. In other words, I reject the two pillars on which your pro-Mitch stance sits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted January 11, 2017 Report Share Posted January 11, 2017 Here's why I doubt they pick Trubisky(or any QB 1st)....... Because, I think most of us and the world can agree that Trubisky is not a premium top top candidate....IE....he is a bit of a reach at #1 and not as accomplished as most would like to see, for that high of a pick.... I don't think either most of us or the world agree at all on that. And...last year....the Browns assessment and analytics said dont reach for a QB with that high pick......and, arguably, this years crops isnt as highly regarded as last years crop...... That would likely be a losing argument. This year's group of QBs is better than last year's. So, if our FO's system did not allow for Wentz at #2 or any of the prospects left at #15, then why would that grading and pick system suddenly change this year, allowing us to reach for QB at #1? Because it would not be a reach? No more so than the pick of any other player on the board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted January 11, 2017 Report Share Posted January 11, 2017 I guess I missed "the big game" Mitch payed in. And you are not listening... Fear has no role in my analysis, which by the way I have said all along is incomplete. I spent zero time on Mitch prior to his declaring for the draft. I simply reject need as a ruling principle for drafting and the dependence on Mock's to set my draft order. In other words, I reject the two pillars on which your pro-Mitch stance sits. I am listening perfectly. You claim you reject need.....yet you rail on about how much we NEED and edge rusher...thus that brings you to conclude that we must draft an edge rusher. I also do not "depend" on mocks.....I simply look at them out of curiosity and for fun, knowing that, in general, the vast combination of all mocks out there generally seem to come out fairly accurate. I usually don't look at one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted January 11, 2017 Report Share Posted January 11, 2017 I do not reject need... I limit it's impact... it's influence. I've posted extensively, and repeatedly, on my view of need's proper role in the draft. Don't bother asking me to do so again here. You cite mocks constantly. You have posted about your use of them as a basis for your Trubinsky position and are a primary source of your defense of that position.. Mocks do not agree except in clear cut cases of talent, e.g., Luck. Your statement that "in general, the vast combination of all mocks out there generally seem to come out fairly accurate," are just another collection of what I like to call "weasel words". They represent ground you retreat to when pressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted January 11, 2017 Report Share Posted January 11, 2017 I do not reject need... I limit it's impact... it's influence. I've posted extensively, and repeatedly, on my view of need's proper role in the draft. Don't bother asking me to do so again here. You cite mocks constantly. You have posted about your use of them as a basis for your Trubinsky position and are a primary source of your defense of that position.. So what? Why the fuck not? You got a problem with that? Mocks do not agree except in clear cut cases of talent, e.g., Luck. Your statement that "in general, the vast combination of all mocks out there generally seem to come out fairly accurate," are just another collection of what I like to call "weasel words". They represent ground you retreat to when pressed. First off...I am NEVER "pressed". There is NO pressure in whatever I do here. It ain't that big of a deal. Its entertainment. Secondly, the facts are the facts. If you look at a ton of the mock drafts say, that are published by the Walterfootball mock draft database within the month leading up to the draft, they ARE a very accurate predictor of which players are going to be taken in like the Top 5 of the draft. They may not get the exact positioning right, but they mainly get the players right. The only caveat is if something happens like what happened to Laremy Tunsil last year, where something weird comes up last minute to knock some player down. Do you deny this to be a fact? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Couch Pulls Out Posted January 11, 2017 Report Share Posted January 11, 2017 I do not reject need... I limit it's impact... it's influence. I've posted extensively, and repeatedly, on my view of need's proper role in the draft. Don't bother asking me to do so again here. You cite mocks constantly. You have posted about your use of them as a basis for your Trubinsky position and are a primary source of your defense of that position.. So what? Why the fuck not? You got a problem with that? Mocks do not agree except in clear cut cases of talent, e.g., Luck. Your statement that "in general, the vast combination of all mocks out there generally seem to come out fairly accurate," are just another collection of what I like to call "weasel words". They represent ground you retreat to when pressed. First off...I am NEVER "pressed". There is NO pressure in whatever I do here. It ain't that big of a deal. Its entertainment. Secondly, the facts are the facts. If you look at a ton of the mock drafts say, that are published by the Walterfootball mock draft database within the month leading up to the draft, they ARE a very accurate predictor of which players are going to be taken in like the Top 5 of the draft. They may not get the exact positioning right, but they mainly get the players right. The only caveat is if something happens like what happened to Laremy Tunsil last year, where something weird comes up last minute to knock some player down. Do you deny this to be a fact? I think it depends on the date of the mock. A mock a week before the draft? Sure. A mock in January? Probably not as accurate. Here's a whole handful of mocks from last January. Very few of them are accurate. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000629975/article/fourround-mock-draft-cowboys-grab-qb-wentz-at-no-4 http://www.nfl.com/draft/2016/mock-drafts/daniel-jeremiah/275602 http://www.nfl.com/draft/2016/mock-drafts/lance-zierlein/275603 https://walterfootball.com/draft2016overreaction.php http://www.espn.com/nfl/insider/story/_/id/14551791/mel-kiper-releases-first-mock-draft-2016-nfl http://www.si.com/nfl/2016/01/06/2016-nfl-mock-draft-laremy-tunsil-jared-goff http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2609892-2016-nfl-mock-draft-full-order-and-1st-round-predictions-for-top-prospects http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/draft/2016/01/29/2016-mock-draft-top-10-laremy-tunsil-jared-goff/79490390/ This reinforces the point that Tour is making - the top five is varied except in cases of clear cut talent. Bosa and Ramsey were three of the top five ranked prospects on almost every big board last year, and as such were mocked in the top five even in January. Players like Wentz (and by extension, Trubisky) are the ones that are all over the board in these mocks because they aren't top 10 on the big board, yet top teams need a QB and may overdraft according to value. Basing any argument over a mock from WalterFootball in January is just ridiculous. There's three months until the draft and any number of things can happen in that timespan. If Trubisky and Watson were ranked in the top 5 on ANYONES big board, you might have a case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted January 11, 2017 Report Share Posted January 11, 2017 I think it depends on the date of the mock. A mock a week before the draft? Sure. A mock in January? Probably not as accurate. Here's a whole handful of mocks from last January. Very few of them are accurate. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000629975/article/fourround-mock-draft-cowboys-grab-qb-wentz-at-no-4 http://www.nfl.com/draft/2016/mock-drafts/daniel-jeremiah/275602 http://www.nfl.com/draft/2016/mock-drafts/lance-zierlein/275603 https://walterfootball.com/draft2016overreaction.php http://www.espn.com/nfl/insider/story/_/id/14551791/mel-kiper-releases-first-mock-draft-2016-nfl http://www.si.com/nfl/2016/01/06/2016-nfl-mock-draft-laremy-tunsil-jared-goff http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2609892-2016-nfl-mock-draft-full-order-and-1st-round-predictions-for-top-prospects http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/draft/2016/01/29/2016-mock-draft-top-10-laremy-tunsil-jared-goff/79490390/ This reinforces the point that Tour is making - the top five is varied except in cases of clear cut talent. Bosa and Ramsey were three of the top five ranked prospects on almost every big board last year, and as such were mocked in the top five even in January. Players like Wentz (and by extension, Trubisky) are the ones that are all over the board in these mocks because they aren't top 10 on the big board, yet top teams need a QB and may overdraft according to value. Basing any argument over a mock from WalterFootball in January is just ridiculous. There's three months until the draft and any number of things can happen in that timespan. If Trubisky and Watson were ranked in the top 5 on ANYONES big board, you might have a case. I agree with what you say....that is why I said that the mocks "WITHIN a MONTH" of the draft are the ones to really be more aware of. So, it really verifies what i was saying. And likewise, you cannot say that anyone's Top 5 on a Big Board right now will predict who the ultimate Top 5 will be. I can only say this: in my opinion, based on historical fact, if you have QBs that people are talking about...they WILL go Top 5, regardless of Big Board ranking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted January 11, 2017 Report Share Posted January 11, 2017 I also do not "depend" on mocks..... You cite mocks constantly. You have posted about your use of them as a basis for your Trubinsky position and are a primary source of your defense of that position.. So what? Why the fuck not? You got a problem with that? Mocks do not agree except in clear cut cases of talent, e.g., Luck. Your statement that "in general, the vast combination of all mocks out there generally seem to come out fairly accurate," are just another collection of what I like to call "weasel words". They represent ground you retreat to when pressed. First off...I am NEVER "pressed". Do you deny this to be a fact? First, yes, mocks tend to merge into group think and become more similar as draft day approaches... and for good reason. More work is done. The Combine and Pro days come and go. It's a natural process... it's also 3 months away. As for the rest... Sure, Gip... you start cussing because it's entertaining.... not because your nonsense has been challenged, called out... that you've been "pressed" to defend it... and cannot... You are becoming unhinged. It's one thing to not remember positions I have stated consistently, repeatedly, but now you can't even post without contradicting yourself three posts later. I'm now going to try and ignore you without putting you on "ignore", but if I end up having to put you on the shelf next to Ghoolie, I'll let you know. Also will let you know if or when I "Miss You Yet"... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted January 11, 2017 Report Share Posted January 11, 2017 First, yes, mocks tend to merge into group think and become more similar as draft day approaches... and for good reason. More work is done. The Combine and Pro days come and go. It's a natural process... it's also 3 months away. As for the rest... Sure, Gip... you start cussing because it's entertaining.... not because your nonsense has been challenged, called out... that you've been "pressed" to defend it... and cannot... Are you really all that worried about a few curse words? Goodness, gracious me oho my. Are you really that sensitive? You are becoming unhinged. It's one thing to not remember positions I have stated consistently, repeatedly, but now you can't even post without contradicting yourself three posts later. A. It is not me coming unhinged. Its just entertainment to me. You are the one with your panties in a bunch over a few F Bombs. Go see George Carlin's famous bit. B. You are the one contradicting yourself. You claim that you don't look at need.....then when I post some info about what each team's top needs are...you go balmy over it....claiming "no" those are not our top needs. (yet, you never did state what you thought those needs were. As for me, on mock drafts.....sometimes I look at them, sometimes I don't. Sometimes I look at ratings, sometimes I don't. Sometimes I change my mind about things, sometimes I don't. I'm now going to try and ignore you without putting you on "ignore", but if I end up having to put you on the shelf next to Ghoolie, I'll let you know. Also will let you know if or when I "Miss You Yet"... So...who is going unhinged. Sorry if you can't handle a basic conversation or debate. You go crazy because I disagree with you over who we think the Browns should draft. You go crazy because I develop some ...novel...theories about what the Browns FO may be thinking (e.g. that them may actually go DT rather than OLB/DE in the draft) I mean, if you want to go crazy, go ahead. At least have some fun with it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6nlkk9wSFY8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob806 Posted January 12, 2017 Report Share Posted January 12, 2017 I fear "Haden will be healthy" is no longer something that has a positive impact. We will see. People are down on the guy, and I get it. He wants to be here. We need guys like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted January 12, 2017 Report Share Posted January 12, 2017 We will see. People are down on the guy, and I get it. He wants to be here. We need guys like this. absolutely ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted January 12, 2017 Report Share Posted January 12, 2017 We will see. People are down on the guy, and I get it. He wants to be here. We need guys like this. Seems pretty clear he is not the same Joe we saw three-plus years ago injuries or no. He's not the shut down, #1 he once was. Hopefully Williams can find a role better suited to his current talent level... be it moving him to the #2 or other. I'd love to see him contributing to the Browns throughout his remaining days in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Couch Pulls Out Posted January 12, 2017 Report Share Posted January 12, 2017 Seems pretty clear he is not the same Joe we saw three-plus years ago injuries or no. He's not the shut down, #1 he once was. Hopefully Williams can find a role better suited to his current talent level... be it moving him to the #2 or other. I'd love to see him contributing to the Browns throughout his remaining days in the league. I am tepidly interested in seeing him move to FS. Speed and ball ability have never been an issue with him. He won't be a punishing center fielder but, then again, we haven't had one of those in some time now. However, I am still also wanting to see us throw bags of money at Eric Berry for a few years if only because I like him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.