Yep: 2012 had (2) firsts from trade down with Falcons (netted Brandon Weeden ) 2014 had (2) firsts after trading Trent Richardson to Colts (traded up to 22 for Johnny football ) 2015 had (2) firsts from trading down with Bills (netted Cameron Erving ) 2017 had (2) firsts from trade down with Eagles (netted Jabrill Peppers) then traded back up to get a THIRD first rounder in David Njoku. Juries still out on this tridem of players..I thin the 2017 draft may end up being a productive one actually.. 2018 and of course that brings us to our most prolific draft in Browns history where we own 4 of the first 35 picks thanks to the Texans. So you see, it isn't that they were necessarily bad trades, it's that we made bad choices with the ammo we received...Hopefully that ends, (actually last year) with the current picks.
Yeah, we just need to hit the reset button on the ol draft day track record. It's hard to imagine one being worse. People like Dorsey, Highsmith and Wolf give me hope that we have restored order in the Browns war room. Unlike Sashi, those guys actually come in with loads of experience in the player personnel department, and a proven track record of success in talent evaluation...I think Haslam has finally got that right, but we all sure had to go through hell to get here. Not that we are out of the woods yet, but I do have high hopes looking at the ammunition Sashi left behind for our new front office to work with.
I'll be honest though, I hope they use their caller ID and just ignore any calls from anyone other than the Giants or Colts. If the Colts think the Giants want Barkley, they might just give us a pretty nice deal. I don't think the Giants are looking at Baker Mayfield, but that is still risky....I've come to the conclusion, if we don't come away with either Kirk Cousins or Baker Mayfield, I will be disappointed.
Just my theory, but I think when Dorsey said "Give me a call, and we'll see what's up.", that he was talking directly to Dave Gettleman....
lol, I know you are Lym...but THAT isn't happening. If they spend on Cousins, they will be loading the cupboard with weapons. That is an all in basket if they go after Cousins.
Why do you think NYG want to move up...they are sitting in a great spot to trade down or take their guy
We will simply have to agree to diagree because they have the assets to do both -and- still aquire weapons.
That depends on, who their guy is... That's the hard part, IF they are definitely looking at a QB and that is their guyu they have to have...well, currently the Browns are also looking to take a QB and the Broncos and Jets are both in position to trade ahead of them as well. This is a unique draft in that, there could be the top 6 war rooms have 6 completely different Big Boards. You are taking a risk if you have ONE guy that you want...because there is one spot being drafted ahead of you.
We don't disagree with your statement, but if you put that type of investment in Kirk Cousins, you are signing him to be your QB for he next 4 years AT LEAST. To draft a backup QB at #1, and deny your team a Saquon Barkley, Bradley Chubb, Minkah Fitzpatrick or Derwin James is irresponsible. You will be able to get one of those players at #4, but two of those players could be franchise changing...The backup QB in all likelihood will never play during his rookie contract.
Then there is still concern, as many have Barkley being the Colts target. If they believe the Browns are willing to drop to 3 and the Colts are taking their #1 target in Barkley, that would be another reason to trade up with the Browns...Honestly, the same goes for Bradley Chubb in the same exact statement I just made, exchanging out the names. Colts have been tied to both. In the end, it depends on who the Giants have on their Big Board at #1 and how much they covet that player. They will keep it secret, however, they could get skiddish IF they have him well above any other player and decide to make the move to secure that player.
Let me rephrase...if the Browns take Barkley...NYG will trade down for a team to jump the Browns...if the Browns take a QB NY will take Barkley
Who said anything about using the #1 pick on a QB? Assume for a second that they land Cousins in free agency then select Barkley at #1. That guarantees Darnold, Rosen and/or Mayfield will still be available at #4. (My guess is that Mayfield will still be there.) IF Cousins performs well, there will be opportunities to insert the back-up QB in real games to aid in his developement (something we're not used to seeing). If Cousins falls on his face, there will still be opportunities to insert the developmental guy. The trick is to write Cousin's contract so as not to cripple the franchise with dead money out past two years. {edit} In other words, you write Cousins' contract to give him his money now (2018 - 2019) and still give him the opportunity to go play for a winning franchise in 2020 if the Browns aren't there by the end of 2019.
My guess is that you would be wrong on Mayfield, but we are just guessing..and I DO NOT want Darnold or Rosen...it's that simple. If you don't take Mayfield #1, you are at major risk of losing him imho.
LET ME rephrase, if the Giants want Barkley...then they want Barkley. Why would you just give up on him instead of exploring a trade? You said, why would they trade up...THAT's why.
I understand what you are saying, Irish. I just don't see it as a MAJOR risk. If, in fact, Barkley is the Giants' target at #2 and he is gone at #1, then a trade down by tbe Giants could be in play if they don't think any of the three QB's are a fit for them. Truth be known, their target at #2 could be Fitzpatrick making a QB selection a mute point. The same risk logic would apply to the Colts except add another layer of "what ifs".
