Jump to content
Tomahawk

Browns Trade back into the 1st(Theories)

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Kiwibrown said:

Fans tend to overrate stars and underrate depth. 

We need to be 5 deep at corner, it's no good having 1 star an 4 scrubs.

The browns don’t have 4 scrubs at corner tho. There isn’t a team in the nfl that is 5 deep at corner. 

I would love it if the browns traded up and got the best corner in the end of the first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, buno67 said:

The browns don’t have 4 scrubs at corner tho. There isn’t a team in the nfl that is 5 deep at corner. 

I would love it if the browns traded up and got the best corner in the end of the first.

Honestly I love Byron Murphy he’s my number 1 guy 

but I’d rather keep my picks and get Julian Love at 49 over Byron Murphy at the end of the first. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, brownie man said:

Honestly I love Byron Murphy he’s my number 1 guy 

but I’d rather keep my picks and get Julian Love at 49 over Byron Murphy at the end of the first. 

I agree.

I think our best case senario is stay where we are and get the best player available.

We don't need the best Corner in the draft, we do have Ward, we need a solid CB for depth.

We need to start drafting depth to replace expensive players.  Trading up in drafts hinders our ability to do that...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, CBrownsman said:

I agree.

I think our best case senario is stay where we are and get the best player available.

We don't need the best Corner in the draft, we do have Ward, we need a solid CB for depth.

We need to start drafting depth to replace expensive players.  Trading up in drafts hinders our ability to do that...

The browns aren’t going to use all 8 of their picks this year. No way they bring into 8 rookies from the draft and how many rookies from UDFA. 

The browns already have a young team, they need to get the best players they think they can get and fill depth with the vets especially if the starters are the youth. 

I would much rather have a rookie corner playing as the #2 corner Than the #4 corner. 

If a guy they like falls I would have no issue with them going and get them. 

The only scenario that could play out that would make me upset is if the browns trade future picks to trade up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, buno67 said:

The browns aren’t going to use all 8 of their picks this year. No way they bring into 8 rookies from the draft and how many rookies from UDFA. 

The browns already have a young team, they need to get the best players they think they can get and fill depth with the vets especially if the starters are the youth. 

I would much rather have a rookie corner playing as the #2 corner Than the #4 corner. 

If a guy they like falls I would have no issue with them going and get them. 

The only scenario that could play out that would make me upset is if the browns trade future picks to trade up

This is true, but trading away later round picks (5, 6, 7) to move up higher in the 1st 2nd and 3rd is one thing.

Trading away 2's and 3's to move back into 1 is another.

I think we should go get players when they fall but I don't think we should be moving 2's or 3's to get back up and get one player.

Young depth is a good thing to have everywhere on the field, and we eventually need to replace a UT, DE, OLB, FS etc...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

27 minutes ago, CBrownsman said:

Young depth is a good thing to have everywhere on the field, and we eventually need to replace a UT, DE, OLB, FS etc...

TE3, OT, C, RB3, WR4, CB (multiple), SS, QB2....

There are plenty of active roster spots that are potentially up for grabs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/15/2019 at 10:09 AM, Tomahawk said:

What do they give up?  I think it would be this years 2nd, probably next years 2nd.  Thoughts?

Not sure that's going to be enough.  Just using Green Bay's pick as an example since it's been linked as a potential trade up spot, swapping 30 for 49 leaves the Packers roughly 210 points short of making a trade.  The Browns could include their 3rd round pick, but then they wouldn't have another pick until 119.  Do the Browns want to go from say 30 to 119 without making a pick?  Probably not.  Even in terms of value, the Browns would probably need to kick a 5th round pick to the Packers to make that trade.  On the other hand, do the Packers (or any other team) want to make that kind of move down the board?  Going from 30 to 49 is a pretty substantial drop.  If I'm the Packers, and I have a team whose looking to move up from the early second round (say 33-40) and they're willing to give up a 4th, I'd probably be more inclined to go that route than drop all the way to 49.  So then you start digging into future picks instead of depleting their picks this year.  Would a future 2nd round pick get it done?  Depends on how you devalue future picks.  Personally, I value them as the last pick of the next round (i.e. pick 96 in this situation), which would leave the Packers short roughly an early 4th round pick.  So would the Browns use a future FRP to move up?  Probably not.  I think the best would be something like 30/118 for 49/'20 FRP, which I don't think the Browns would do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, CBrownsman said:

This is true, but trading away later round picks (5, 6, 7) to move up higher in the 1st 2nd and 3rd is one thing.

Trading away 2's and 3's to move back into 1 is another.

I think we should go get players when they fall but I don't think we should be moving 2's or 3's to get back up and get one player.

Young depth is a good thing to have everywhere on the field, and we eventually need to replace a UT, DE, OLB, FS etc...

Well in the past trading up with a 2nd and 3rd would be pricey because of where their slots were but trading up like that this year is a difference of 17 slots. Trading into the back end of the 1st will be a difference of 20 potential players. That’s huge for talent differential, especially if the browns only handed out like 14/15 1st rd grades. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, buno67 said:

Well in the past trading up with a 2nd and 3rd would be pricey because of where their slots were but trading up like that this year is a difference of 17 slots. Trading into the back end of the 1st will be a difference of 20 potential players. That’s huge for talent differential, especially if the browns only handed out like 14/15 1st rd grades. 

I mean I get what you're saying but I'm not sure it is a huge talent differential.

People grade players differently, but a second round pick is not ALL That different talent wise from a  late first round pick, its all about hitting on the right player that fits your team.

I feel like if we were trading up for a top 10 talent who has fallen like Simmons thats one thing, but if were trading up for a corner thats available at 29 and not at 49 I don't know that there will be THAT big a difference.

Its all about the player and the grade the team has on them though, I just think now more than ever we need to start worrying about depth and not starters...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Just trade a 2nd and 3rd for New England’s 1st. Problem solved.

 

We always trade with them.

Edited by candyman93

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, CBrownsman said:

I mean I get what you're saying but I'm not sure it is a huge talent differential.

People grade players differently, but a second round pick is not ALL That different talent wise from a  late first round pick, its all about hitting on the right player that fits your team.

I feel like if we were trading up for a top 10 talent who has fallen like Simmons thats one thing, but if were trading up for a corner thats available at 29 and not at 49 I don't know that there will be THAT big a difference.

Its all about the player and the grade the team has on them though, I just think now more than ever we need to start worrying about depth and not starters...

A early rd 2nd isn’t all that different from a late 1st. Difference is the browns don’t have an early round 2nd. It’s a 17 pick difference if they trade up to 31/32nd pick. You should be able to easily pick a better player at 31st than 49th. 

That will be a big difference about that corner when you pick him and the 5th year is an option instead of being the 1st year of a new deal of his 2nd contract that prolly lands north of $10m if that player is legit

if we were taking top10 of the 2nd rd, not worth it but the browns are in the back half of the 2nd half I believe. If a player they like falls, go get him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's not forget diamonds in the rough can be found.  Richard Sherman was a 5th round pick.   Im not against trading up, but with the depth of this draft class at Dline, that would probably be the only way we trade up unless some character issue comes out and a top 20 player on their board starts to drop. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Tomahawk said:

Let's not forget diamonds in the rough can be found.  Richard Sherman was a 5th round pick.   Im not against trading up, but with the depth of this draft class at Dline, that would probably be the only way we trade up unless some character issue comes out and a top 20 player on their board starts to drop. 

Not all drafts have the same quality of players either though. Last year was considered a great year, this year outside of dline isnt as highly rated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×