Solon16 Posted April 28, 2009 Report Share Posted April 28, 2009 For the love of god, Shut the hell up and root for another team....How in the hell can you rate this draft without even a regular season game being played. GMP i sure don't see you a GM of anyone except your fantasy football team, and I bet that is mediocre at best. We drafted a bunch of players that might contribute. Do you think that drafting a "potential" superstar would put us over the edge? One thing I have become customed to this board is the constant bitching....Let this play out........Enuff said.... do you think drafting a bunch of players that might contribute with #21,#36,#50 and #52....as a great draft? 4 picks in the first 50 better well damn contribute or its a freakin blown draft! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoorta Posted April 28, 2009 Report Share Posted April 28, 2009 do you think drafting a bunch of players that might contribute with #21,#36,#50 and #52....as a great draft? 4 picks in the first 50 better well damn contribute or its a freakin blown draft! 21,36,50,52. That hurts way less than Couch #1, Brown #1, Warren #3. Quantity over potential. Unless Sanchez turns into the next Joe Montana I like the trade down. Yeah, Curry can't bust. Orapako can't bust. Fill in the blank can't bust. you bat .500 on your first and second rounders, you're ahead of the curve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Aloysius Posted April 28, 2009 Report Share Posted April 28, 2009 21,36,50,52. That hurts way less than Couch #1, Brown #1, Warren #3. Quantity over potential. Unless Sanchez turns into the next Joe Montana I like the trade down. Yeah, Curry can't bust. Orapako can't bust. Fill in the blank can't bust. you bat .500 on your first and second rounders, you're ahead of the curve. I get passing on Orakpo. There were concerns about his ability to transition to linebacker, which were pretty much validated by three 3-4 teams passing on him. On top of that, there were the durability issues. But I think there has to be some limit to the "quantity over quality" argument. If you think a guy's the best player in the draft, I don't think you can pass on him. Sure, accumulating some average starters and good depth is great, but it doesn't justify passing on an immensely talented, high character player who'll be the leader of your defense for the next ten years. And from what I gather, the Browns weren't going to do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldcrow1945 Posted April 28, 2009 Report Share Posted April 28, 2009 But I think there has to be some limit to the "quantity over quality" argument. If you think a guy's the best player in the draft, I don't think you can pass on him. Sure, accumulating some average starters and good depth is great, but it doesn't justify passing on an immensely talented, high character player who'll be the leader of your defense for the next ten years. And from what I gather, the Browns weren't going to do that. The interesting thing about this FO's first draft is that there seemed to be a mix of both taking quality first and making sure that there was quantity as well. I think both Massaquoi and Veikune were both quality picks. Guys they had rated high and reached a bit for them due to the way the draft fell for them. I think this draft speak volumes that this regime thinks this team can win now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3074326 Posted April 28, 2009 Report Share Posted April 28, 2009 I get passing on Orakpo. There were concerns about his ability to transition to linebacker, which were pretty much validated by three 3-4 teams passing on him. On top of that, there were the durability issues. But I think there has to be some limit to the "quantity over quality" argument. If you think a guy's the best player in the draft, I don't think you can pass on him. Sure, accumulating some average starters and good depth is great, but it doesn't justify passing on an immensely talented, high character player who'll be the leader of your defense for the next ten years. And from what I gather, the Browns weren't going to do that. Being solid at all positions is better than being great at a few. Depth is important. It's good to see that they're building the team like they want, instead of building it how the fans want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrownIndian Posted April 28, 2009 Report Share Posted April 28, 2009 The way I see it -> the draft is over. Now let us get behind the team and cheer them as they try to win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
broncoinskinland Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 I think you guys made Filet Mignon from ground beef with this draft. From my perspective, it was a reportedly weak draft class anyway, which would indicate a bigger chance of busting on high round picks. By spreading yours out among the mid to lower rounds (which include roughly the same calibre of player in any draft) you gave yourselves a much increased chance of finding a hidden gem, or at the very least a larger amount of competent backups for depth and a few developmental players. It may not have been sexy (aside from 2 2nd round WR's), but it sure was functional. Help on both lines, a LB that probably would have recieved more attention if he hadn't been outshone by three day one LB's in college, two DB's with good measurables in the 6th, and an RB with a good upside that was projected much higher before a lukewarm Senior year. I can definately see how not cashing in on the high round pick could be frustrating, but overall I think you were very solid. It is very hard to grade a draft without ever seeing the players perform, but for effort, potential, and what I think the FO's plan was going into the draft I would say A- to a B+ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.