Draft Discussion 3.0

[TheeRealDeal]

6 minutes ago, Hockey5djh said:

Man and I came in here thinking I'd read some legit talk about the top 4....you realize 12 and 22 is probably enough to get to #4 alone right? Not even including the extra 2nd or future first. Also, #4 is nowhere near as valuable as #1/#2 because as was mentioned earlier in the thread you're picking from the likely 3rd best available QB prospect at that point.

Personally, I think with Tyrod in the building you have the ability to take Barkley #1 and develop someone taken at #4 (hell, maybe trade up from 4?). That said I don't blame you for going Rosen #1 and....BPA at 4 and/or trade it.

Good for you and that stupid chart. Washington, Philadelphia, Tennessee and even Los Angeles gave up more value to get their QB.

 

So don't tell me what is fair value based on some stupid chart. I know how desperate teams will get for their QB and I don't want my team being the team to except anything less. 

[LETSGOBROWNIES]

3 minutes ago, TheeRealDeal said:

Don't view Rosen, Allen 

That’s fine, but Rosen and either Mayfield or Allen (if not both) will go top 11.

3 minutes ago, TheeRealDeal said:

There is my Top 12 with no positional value in equation. I would prefer not be stuck taking Marcus Davenport as our prized 1st round pick.

He wouldn’t be, Sam Darnold would.

3 minutes ago, TheeRealDeal said:

 

and Vea also have there flaws. Also if we traded Shelton for peanuts just to draft Vea I'm going to be slightly pissed. And Quentin Nelson is great but taking a OG at #12 is just as shaky as taking a RB at #4 IMO.

For sure, but imo Vea and Nelson are both just as likely to be good/great players as guys we’d have selected at 4.

Also, I like Guice and 22 a lot more than Barkley, but I know some nut huggers will disagree.  (Just kidding ladies, dont get triggered because I didn’t slurp on Barkley ? )

3 minutes ago, TheeRealDeal said:

No matter who is on the board I'd still be unhappy in a trade down with Buffalo if all we got was pick #12 and #22.  Philadelphia gave up more to get Wentz, Tennessee gave up more for Mariota, and Washington gave up more to get RGIII

Agreed, I’d want something else.

[MSURacerDT55]

Dont sleep on us and Marcus Davenport, I think we showed a lot of interest in him at the Senior Bowl (of course not at #1 and #4, but if we trade down)

[dawgdish]

2 hours ago, LETSGOBROWNIES said:

Haha - nice. Just like with the Star Wars prequels, there are some big caveats for me: I'd only want to trade off from 4 of Barkley and Chubb are no longer there, otherwise I'd just want to take one of them.

That means assuming we took QB at 1, teams wanting to move to 4 are moving for the next/second QB on the board (and potentially their #1) and we can absolutely get great value for that. Buffalo wouldn't have been attractive with 21 & 22 to me, but moving down to 12, we are still in range of a top shelf guy like Ward, Edmunds, James, Vea, and then still have 22 as a first rounder this year. I'd also angle to recoup the 3rd we gave them for Tyrod back. With that war chest, we could even slide back up into the 20s again with one of our 2nd rounders, and really start putting some strong pieces on the field this season. If a non top 10 team came calling us to trade back with only mostly future picks, I'm hanging up the phone unless they offer something ridiculously unprecedented like their 1 & 2 this year and two more future 1s. 

[dawgdish]

2 hours ago, Hockey5djh said:

Man and I came in here thinking I'd read some legit talk about the top 4....you realize 12 and 22 is probably enough to get to #4 alone right? Not even including the extra 2nd or future first. Also, #4 is nowhere near as valuable as #1/#2 because as was mentioned earlier in the thread you're picking from the likely 3rd best available QB prospect at that point.

It could also play out something like Darnold at 1, then Barkley and Chubb with the next two picks, in which case #4 offers the second QB off the board, who easily could be the top QB on Buffalo's draft board. In that case, 12 and 22 plus another pick could be a lot more realistic. If I were Dorsey, a package like that would need to be table stakesjust to get in the game, because just staying there and having Darnold + Barkley or Chubb is looking very very sweet. 

[BleedTheClock]

That Buffalo pick at #12 looks really enticing if Barkley is gone at #4. That spot would likely net us Derwin James or Denzel Ward. Hell, I'd even be down to take Marcus Davenport or Vita Vea there at pick #12.

 

Sign me up for #12 and #21 if Barkley isn't on the board at #4.

[bruceb]

8 hours ago, TheeRealDeal said:

No matter who is on the board I'd still be unhappy in a trade down with Buffalo if all we got was pick #12 and #22.

Agree, I'd want a little more.

 

[DawgX]

1 hour ago, bruceb said:

Agree, I'd want a little more.

 

We could probably entice them to trade more (perhaps give us back pick #65) to ensure them that we don't trade with a team like the Jets instead.

[LETSGOBROWNIES]

3 minutes ago, DawgX said:

We could probably entice them to trade more (perhaps give us back pick #65) to ensure them that we don't trade with a team like the Jets instead.

That’s what’s great for us though, them missing out on getting the pick not only means YOU don’t get him, but that your division rival DOES.

Should help drive the asking price up a bit.

[Aztec Hammer]

I predict, if we don’t sign a Corner in FA, the draft will be:

1. QB (I hope Darnold but have a bad feeling)

4. Saquon will be available, we will pass and trade down with the Bills.

12. Trade up from 12 for falling Ward/Fitzpatrick

After that I don’t know.

[buno67]

1 hour ago, Aztec Hammer said:

I predict, if we don’t sign a Corner in FA, the draft will be:

1. QB (I hope Darnold but have a bad feeling)

4. Saquon will be available, we will pass and trade down with the Bills.

12. Trade up from 12 for falling Ward/Fitzpatrick

After that I don’t know.

I feel like trading down with the Bills is too big of a drop. I still think Denver and the Jets might still want to take a QB.

[bruceb]

I do not want to have anything to do with pick 22.

If we get it we should trade out of it immediately -- up or down.

 

[AkronsWitness]

9 hours ago, BleedTheClock said:

That Buffalo pick at #12 looks really enticing if Barkley is gone at #4. That spot would likely net us Derwin James or Denzel Ward. Hell, I'd even be down to take Marcus Davenport or Vita Vea there at pick #12.

 

Sign me up for #12 and #21 if Barkley isn't on the board at #4.

[bruceb]

10 hours ago, BleedTheClock said:

That Buffalo pick at #12 looks really enticing if Barkley is gone at #4. That spot would likely net us Derwin James or Denzel Ward. Hell, I'd even be down to take Marcus Davenport or Vita Vea there at pick #12.

 

Sign me up for #12 and #21 if Barkley isn't on the board at #4.

I think it is 12 and 22

[DizzyDean]

14 hours ago, LETSGOBROWNIES said:

He wouldn’t be, Sam Darnold would.

 

 

Wait, aren't you the same guy that had me in your sig last year just after the draft quoting me calling Kizer "the project" saying this dude is gonna look real bad?  Prolly should avoid QB scounting.  Darnold is not bad, but he is not #1 overall worthy.  I have both Allen and Mayfield ahead of him, he and Rosen are lumped together from a Browns perspective, and I am not sure that either of them are higher than Jackson on my board.  

Darnold has an average arm, a weird elongated throwing motion that he is unwilling to work on, confidence issues, and questionable decision making at times.  Not qualities that scream #1 overall pick franchise QB.  Could he be a franchise guy, yes, but not for my #1 overall pick.  Let someone else take that plunge.  Don't outsmart yourself as GM, take the best player in the draft at 1, Barkley, then decide what to do at 4.  There will be a ton of options, but chances are both Allen and Mayfield will still be there if you want a QB.