Jump to content

freakygeniuskid

Moderators
  • Content count

    8,397
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

221 Veteran

About freakygeniuskid

Favorites

  • NFL Team
    Browns
  • MLB Team
    Indians
  • NBA Team
    Cavs
  • College Team
    Buckeyes

Other Information

  • Location
    Woodlake, CA
  • Job
    Pastor
  1. Mock Draft/Off-season Thread

    Yeah. I know it makes it less fun to talk about, but we've got the #1 pick in a year with multiple 1.1 QB candidates. You take the freaking QB. Also, it would really hard to draft a QB who isn't in the draft. http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2018/01/06/nc-state-quarterback-ryan-finley-announces-return-for-2018-season/
  2. General discussion thread.

    Yeah, but those bonuses get pro-rated over the course of the contract. They actually end up reducing the one-year cap hit by making LARGER cap hits in future years. I'm perfectly fine with signing Cousins for a Brinks truck of money. I'm just saying that the WAY you are suggesting doing so is not possible under current contract rules.
  3. Mock Draft/Off-season Thread

    This is also true. So much of how a player plays is dependent upon their environment, scheme fit, etc. Case in point: I helped coach the JV team in town this year. Our HC was an #$%hat. Constantly chewing kids out who clearly didn't need it, no understanding of who needed what kind of motivation certain kids needed, ran the same drill for hours at a time long after it had stopped helping, etc. But he was mostly focused on the starters and paid next to no attention to backups. I can't think of a single starter who improved over the course of the year. I did however have 3-4 backups that we developed to the point that they were pushing for starting reps by the end of the year. Coaching and environment matter a LOT to the success of a team. And I, and every other analytics person, will tell you that that is something we just can't measure right now, and probably never will. And I think all of us know that, with a few happy accidents (RIP Chud) that's something we haven't really had in CLE since the return.
  4. Mock Draft/Off-season Thread

    Yeah, saying that trading down is automatically bad because it hasn't worked out for us in the past is a logical fallacy. It hasn't worked out for us because we had piss poor draft evaluations, and then in 2016 because we passed on a guy who took a massive leap year two. It could continue to not work out for us, or it could work out great. The draft is pretty much a lottery, you get yourself the most valuable combination of tickets that you can and then see what happens. You can't guarantee success, you can only guarantee the highest possible CHANCE of success. I mean, look at the scenarios you named. There were busts we could've taken in all those spots. Maybe we were targeting Gilbert from the get go and would've taken him at #4. And there were stars available where we moved down (The Mack/Sanchez swap, Donald and OBJ in 2015, etc.) It's all about what you do with the picks when you get there, and while the pick being higher USUALLY increases your chances of hitting, you have to evaluate it based on what gets you the higher overall chance of winning. Let's say I have two lottery tickets with a 50K jackpot and a 1% chance of winning. Now let's say you have one lottery ticket with a 50K jackpot (because stars come from everywhere) and a 1.95% chance of winning. My two tickets are better, even though yours is a higher percentage. That's trading down, it's figuring out where the breaking point is where 2 (or 3, 4, etc) picks will give you a higher chance of finding stars and starters, than the one higher pick would. This is a quote from Eric Decosta, the #2 guy in Baltimore, a perennially good team (even with Joe Flacco's corpse). This is the basic idea of draft analytics right now. And as the league catches on, it will change, and the value will end up somewhere else. But right now, there is an inherent advantage in taking advantage of teams who grow overconfident in their evaluations and are willing to give up boatloads to move up. So, let's say we get an offer from Buffalo, our #4 (so we already have our QB) for both of their 1sts, and a 2nd. Barkley and Minkah are both on the board and all of us rise up in rage when we move down once again! But here's the thing, we don't actually KNOW that Barkley and Minkah are gonna be studs. We think so, and maybe we're more confident than in guys we'd get in the early 20s. But let's say we get Guice and one of the CBs (Ward, Jackson, Davis) there. Let's say Minkah/Barkley have a 85% chance of hitting, being stars, history would tell us it's more like 50-60, but let's even give that it's 85% for Barkley and Minkah. And now let's say that it's 70% for Guice and our CB. Which group has more value? Guice and our CB actually do, because compounding their chances tells us that we have a 91% chance that one of them becomes a star, to Minkah/Barkley's 85%. AND we still have an extra 2nd round pick to come.
  5. General discussion thread.

    I'd be in on paying Cousins big money. But it wouldn't take 40M a year. Maybe 30M but that would be the absolute max, as that's the biggest QB contract by AAV right now. But we also couldn't frontload it that much. I think the max for base salary shifting year to year in a contract is about 7-8%. So while, by the end of the contract, we could have that 30 down to around 24, we certainly couldn't get it below 20, let alone if it was 40M AAV.
  6. Mock Draft/Off-season Thread

    A.J. McCarron as the reason we don't take a QB in one of the best QB classes in the last few years. This would be the breaking point for me. I moved out to the west coast earlier this year, I pimped Jimmy G pre-draft and ever since, I might just go be a 49ers fan until Truck Stop Jimmy sells the team. As to the draft: I highly doubt Michel, Penny, or Roquan are available where you have us taking them. Luke Falk is living off of two year old hype, he isn't an NFL QB in either accuracy or arm strength (and I'm the captain of the "arm strength doesn't matter much past a certain point" fan club).
  7. 2018 Off-season Coaching Staff Changes

    I think it's silly to have an opinion either way about how good of an RB coach a college OC will make. I'm just glad they're at least willing to hire from the college system rather than limiting themselves to pure NFL guys.
  8. 2018 Draftable QB Discussion

    That's a legit concern. I think I'm less worried about it since his teammates and coaches seem to really like him, but I definitely get it. That 4/5 though man... Those guys, especially Falk, over Lamar Jackson and Mason Rudolph is just... ick. Like, Allen at least has the elite physical tools. Falk might have the weakest arm in the draft and wasn't very good this year against PAC12 defenses (which were pretty much as bad as the BIG12).
  9. Browns OC search

    The exotic smashmouth was always a power run scheme built on insanely good run blocking OL, a pair of excellent RBs, and excellent blocking TEs who could also catch. It was the perfect personnel to run that system. And they also had a horrifically bad schedule for the eight game stretch in 2016 where everyone went gaga over them, like, I remember that during that stretch I don't think they played a single top half defense. I'll admit, this probably isn't as bad as I'd implied. But this is still an offensive minded coach whose QB regressed hard and whose scheme got way uglier and less innovative this year. And that's not just results-wise, like, I looooove me some Mariota and watched a few of their games and the offense was just boring. So much less interesting than the stuff that those articles were talking about this year. Which makes me wonder, was it scheme success in 2016, or just having an insanely good OL, RBs, TEs, and easy schedule, and the threat of a running QB (since, as has been shown elsewhere, the threat of a running QB can mean very good things for the rest of your rushing attack)? So I guess you're right in that it's not a turd burger. But I don't think it's a homerun either. Seems more like a gamble. Which is probably the best we can hope for right now, but that doesn't make it less underwhelming.
  10. General discussion thread.

    If Cousins decided to come here, I would not hate this plan. I still think that Rosen/Mayfield/Darnold are good enough that we could take one and sign a lesser vet to stopgap for a year to set us up for the longhaul. But if you get the chance to get a (I think) clear top 12ish QB, then you go for it.
  11. Browns OC search

    Yeah, that's kind of the problem. He was creative IN 1999!!! He got replaced in 2000! That means his reputation for innovation was before the Wildcat, before spread shotgun, before read option. You can only work off of stuff that long ago, in an industry that shifts this fast, for so long.
  12. 2018 Draftable QB Discussion

    Here's the thing though, we can't go off of one year of data. If you look back at the last five years, on average you only have 1 non-elite QB out of the four teams in the conference championship. You want to contend for 1-2 years? An elite defense and very good running game can do that. You want to contend for 5+ years, you have to have a top 8 QB. Also your script isn't really right. Bortles isn't a game manager, the easiest throws are the ones he often struggle bus's the most. His game is predicated more on taking some deep shots and scrambling. And the Eagles aren't in the #1 seed (maaaaybe a wildcard team) if Foles is starting all year. They are there because they got a bye and a home game on the back of an up and coming elite QB. We haven't taken a QB higher than #22 in 18 years. We've been awful that whole time, and the one guy we took high is the best QB we've had, the roster just wasn't ready for him. We have excellent pieces on both lines and at LB, change of pace RB, and TE. Use our cap space and other draft picks to shore up CB/FS, WR, and power RB, and this is a team ready to support a elite QB. And we happened to get the #1 pick in a draft with at least four guys who have very solid arguments to be first round picks. There have been maaaaybe 2-3 "no risk" QB prospects in the last twenty years. Roethlisberger had risk, Ryan had risk, Wentz has risk. You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. Take the freaking QB.
  13. Browns OC search

    I don't care who was calling the plays. If you're the head coach, your QB is a spread god, and you're running a 1980's offense, that's on you. Their offense was one of the ugliest, least creative things I saw this year. I am never excited for a hire who doesn't seem to realize that the game has changed in the last 20 years.
  14. Mock Draft/Off-season Thread

    Gotcha. I'm just not with you on Minkah. I think he's a Jalen Ramsey type. Will do whatever the heck you need him to do in the secondary and for Bama that meant more SS type stuff. I think he tests like Ramsey did at the combine, or better, and ends up being a boundary CB who moves into FS or SCB in certain alignments. But I could be wrong, secondary is not my strongest spot as far as scouting record goes haha.
  15. Mock Draft/Off-season Thread

    I would hate all of this except the Trumaine signing, Darnold (don't love, don't hate), Guice (but we don't get enough to move down that far IMO), Davis, and Miller. I have no idea on how a plan to immediately compete starts with Darnold. McCarron would need an EPIC supporting cast to hit 9-7 and I don't if this super young roster is ready for that. Richardson and Pryor as flyers make sense, but somebody is going to pay Landry WAAAAAY more than he's worth. We have a better version of him on the team already in Duke. Love the rest of your 1st/2nd round moves (although, again, not sure how making moves for future picks fits your 9-7 ASAP motto.
×