Lyman's move makes more sense, but in reverse. Barkley is not the ONLY RB in the draft but hardly no one would consider drafting Fitz at #1 unless it was an extremely dire need. Regarding Mayfield v Johnny Clipboard: one public intox arrest in college seems fairly tame to me. Mayfield is miles ahead of Johnny as far as maturity goes. By the way, Johnny started his illustrious rap sheet as a freshman at TA&M and ended up with a fucking novella. And Russell Wilson's NFL success should kill the "Randy Newmans" of the world knocking Mayfield's height. I'm having a hard time placing Sutton over Fitzpatrick. The defensive need doesn't change and you'll probably get better value on lower DBs (or WRs) v QBs, typically. Going the Sutton route pick # 2, you'd probably need to sign a FA DB to bolster the secondary along with your 3rd Rounder.
Sam, question on all the stats posted that were based on catchable passes at varying distances. If a qb does not throw a catchable ball (a la Kizer this year) most of the time, wouldn't this type of stat skew in his favor?
How's this for silly season: 1 (CLE): Saquon Barkley - create an instant riot on the streets of Cleveland, but sets them up for some great chess games at No. 4. 2 (NYG): Sam Darnold - if they keep Eli around (2 years left on his deal) it makes more sense to take Darnold and try to devleop him behind a Manning. 3 (NYJ f/IND): TRADE Josh Rosen - Jets move up from #6 to take Rosen (Cleveland's "perceived" target) 4 (CLE): Baker Mayfield - get the guy they wanted all along and add the bonus of making him the third QB taken to add fuel to the fire inside him.
What did I already say? Don't assume those teams like NYG anf NYJ don't want Mayfield and don't assume they won't move up because they think Rosen or Darnold is the perceived target. The Jets do their own scouting. Assuming Mayfield is clearly the best why are the Browns so special only they can see that? The Jets for example can move to 3 because they want their guy in Mayfield. They could think the Browns want Darnold but there are many reasons to move up anyways. Someone else could trade up to #3 or #5 to take him, the Browns could take him at #4, or like most teams do, when they recognize their target they make certain no matter the odds, like the Bears with getting Trubisky. You could just as easily get this 1 (CLE): Saquon Barkley 2 (NYG): Josh Rosen - QB Comp? Eli Manning and he's there to teach you 3 (NYJ f/IND): TRADE Baker Mayfield - Jets do their homework and love him 4 (CLE): Sam Darnold - The guy they wanted and bet on being there is gone. The Browns take another QB and pretend it was their guy, they trade back again because they missed, or they ignore QB again because they don't like the value because they goofed. SAS I know you don't like Darnold and this scenario would kill you. If you risk one player it's Barkley. The Giants and Colts have bigger issues and would be hard-pressed to take him anyways. And if you don't get him it's not as detrimental as missing your QB if he is the savior.
I agree... like the post said, it's "silly season". My draft for Cleveland looks like this: 1 - Mayfield 4 - Barkely/Fitzpatrick 33 - Davenport/Miller/Jones/Oliver 35 - Best DB/DL (if not addressed) 61 - Best WR/RB (if not addressed) 97 - Best OL
My hunch is Cleveland's actual draft looks something like: 1 - Darnold 4 - Chubb 33 - Best RB 35 - Best WR 61 - Best OL 97 - Developmental QB
That's not what I meant. I mean that I think Darnold is a developmental QB not ready to play yet, so that in essence makes 2. Rg3 was meant to start with Cousins developing.
I don't disagree. I'm working with what we've seen here. DeShone Kizer should have been shelved for two full NFL seasons before seeing a regular season game. Hue Jackson named him the starter after the third preseason game - in which he looked pretty inconsistent. The Browns draft Darnold, even with a veteran QB added in free agency or via trade, I bet he sees the field for 7 or 8 starts.
Cleveland could afford to cut Kizer early if that was the case. Heck, for teams well below the cap the dead money doesn't really have any affect.
Technically, it'd be the last 7-8 games, so he'd probably have gone 1-47 or 2-46 by the time he's let go. Look at next year's schedule. Unless the free agency QB is named Tom Brady, how many wins we realistically getting? Home: Baltimore, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Atlanta, Carolina, Kansas City, Los Angeles (Chargers), New York (Jets) Away: Baltimore, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Tampa Bay, New Orleans, Oakland, Denver, Houston One? Three wins max? And you get to three only if the Jets and Broncos are starting rookie QBs.
Part of the reason the Browns could have won six to eight this year with even mediocre QB play is because the schedule was such trash. Colts without Luck. Packers without Rodgers. Cincinnati that scored an average of 11 points per game when they rolled into Cleveland. The "tanking" New York Jets. The Chicago Bears? Obviously Jacksonville was exponentially better than expectations, as was Houston (with Watson). But c'mon... without major QB injuries the Browns are realistically looking at a three-year stretch of NFL football where they average less than 1 win a season.
