Draft Discussion 3.0

[Thomas5737]

2 hours ago, roger murdock said:

The best Darnold comparison is Romo IMO. 

Not as prospects. Might be who he projects to compare to as a pro but as a prospect Darnold is outclasses Wilson and Romo. I am starting to wonder if all of the comparisons to mid/late and UDFA make people believe that Darnold can't come in right away and not embarrass himself. Darnold came to a big time football school with a history of NFL QBs (sure most haven't worked out recently) and was asked to throw often in his 2 years as a starter after getting acclimated as a redshirt freshman year.

All of the strengths listed for Darnold make me believe you are wrong if you choose not to start him right away. If he is comfortable in the pocket, accurate and can escape pressure he has the hardest part down. Of course there is a learning curve in that regard adjusting to NFL players but that is where game experience helps. If it takes him a year or more to learn to protect the football I don't think he would have those other qualities. He may or may not be able to improve his throwing mechanics but that shouldn't be a deal breaker with playing him, he can either learn on the fly or we can just accept there will be a lot of strip sacks if we can't protect him.

[bruceb]

12 minutes ago, Thomas5737 said:

All of the strengths listed for Darnold make me believe you are wrong if you choose not to start him right away.

I do not see what that would gain us.

Maybe by game 7, 8 or so, but not before that unless we are in tank mode 3.0.

[Aztec Hammer]

Darnold can play straight away. It's not like he'd implode. I firmly believe this idea has stemmed from his crosstown rival being super pro-ready and that it makes a nice opposite.

Sure he could use some correcting of his mechanics and fine tuning in general, like pretty much all prospects could. But I actually tend to think Darnold would do alright if started straight away, because he has the improvisational ability to fall upon when the going gets tough. Rosen on the other hand might have a tough time with the speed of the game and not have that improv factor to call on in the early days.

[FGK]

46 minutes ago, Aztec Hammer said:

Darnold can play straight away. It's not like he'd implode. I firmly believe this idea has stemmed from his crosstown rival being super pro-ready and that it makes a nice opposite.

Sure he could use some correcting of his mechanics and fine tuning in general, like pretty much all prospects could. But I actually tend to think Darnold would do alright if started straight away, because he has the improvisational ability to fall upon when the going gets tough. Rosen on the other hand might have a tough time with the speed of the game and not have that improv factor to call on in the early days.

I would start any of the big three straight out of the gate. I'd aim for a more "vet mentor" type vet than a legit starting option (think Chase Daniels, Josh McCown, etc.) and the rookie is the presumed starter from the get go with Kizer as the pre-season competition. We aren't winning it all this year so as long as they have supporting, positive coaches (and the Oline keeps him modestly clean) all extra experience can do is help them be more ready for 2019 when we might actually be able to compete.

[Thomas5737]

1 hour ago, bruceb said:

I do not see what that would gain us.

Maybe by game 7, 8 or so, but not before that unless we are in tank mode 3.0.

There is no reason to tank anymore if we got our pass rusher, our QB and our LT (assuming Joe stays around). So no, we aren't in tank mode. If starting Darnold is equal to tanking then I'll pass. He can't be that bad and be an real option for #1 overall. We also aren't in playoff mode so if we do lose an extra gamer or two as he works out the kinks adjusting to the pro game that isn't a problem either. What would we gain by sitting him besides he magically becomes great while sitting on a bench for 3 hours every Sunday.

[bruceb]

27 minutes ago, Thomas5737 said:

So no, we aren't in tank mode.

If the coaches use the talent they are given as badly or worse than they did last year, then we may well be.

[Thomas5737]

1 hour ago, bruceb said:

If the coaches use the talent they are given as badly or worse than they did last year, then we may well be.

It isn't intentional though, right? I hope Hue, and Williams to a lessor degree, didn't intentionally tank last year. Maybe starting Kizer makes it look like it but he did have a decent preseason and was yanked a couple times. I don't know anymore. I'm going with it wasn't intentional last year nor will it be this year but it may still look like it.

[bruceb]

1 minute ago, Thomas5737 said:

It isn't intentional though, right? I hope Hue, and Williams to a lessor degree, didn't intentionally tank last year.

If that is not what they did, both playing the "we don't have good enough players" card to oust Sashi, then they are more incompetent than I could imagine.

[brownie man]

Does anyone have an opinion if they think Derwin James could play Free Safety?

If so I'd look at him at 4. Great athlete and began to look better as the season went on coming back from injury

If he killed the combine and looks like he was back to 100% and showed great range I could be open to him at 4 for sure 

[MWil23]

6 hours ago, brownie man said:

Does anyone have an opinion if they think Derwin James could play Free Safety?

If so I'd look at him at 4. Great athlete and began to look better as the season went on coming back from injury

If he killed the combine and looks like he was back to 100% and showed great range I could be open to him at 4 for sure 

Waiting for BTC to write 2,000 words on his man-crush

[Aztec Hammer]

11 hours ago, Thomas5737 said:

There is no reason to tank anymore if we got our pass rusher, our QB and our LT (assuming Joe stays around). So no, we aren't in tank mode. If starting Darnold is equal to tanking then I'll pass. He can't be that bad and be an real option for #1 overall. We also aren't in playoff mode so if we do lose an extra gamer or two as he works out the kinks adjusting to the pro game that isn't a problem either. What would we gain by sitting him besides he magically becomes great while sitting on a bench for 3 hours every Sunday.

Only reason I'd consider sitting Darnold (or any other first round QB) is because it might save him from an inept head coach like Goff was mostly saved from Fisher.

Let McCarron and Hue play him out of town or whatever. Then get the new QB in fresh with a McVay type of mind.

#1 pick Goff could've been damaged quite badly had he went through a full 16 game slate with Jeff Fisher. In the end I think he only had to withstand 7 games. He lost all 7.

Next year with a genius mind, he's 28TD, 7INTs and playoffs.

[LETSGOBROWNIES]

8 hours ago, brownie man said:

Does anyone have an opinion if they think Derwin James could play Free Safety?

If so I'd look at him at 4. Great athlete and began to look better as the season went on coming back from injury

If he killed the combine and looks like he was back to 100% and showed great range I could be open to him at 4 for sure 

Lots of folks think so.

He’s an absolute freak of a human being.

I’m personally not a huge fan of drafting players to switch positions, but it can be done.

[BrownLeader]

On 2/24/2018 at 5:30 AM, Mind Character said:

Darnold's play is nothing like Bradford or Derek Carr coming out of college.

Yeah...I actually watch football. If you think Lamar Jackson with Accuracy plays like Russell Wilson than I'd question if you actually watch football.

Russell Wilson makes exceptional plays late game, 4th quarter, and does his best work off-platform under duress extending plays with his legs outside of the pocket, but Wilson can win inside the pocket with poise and accuracy as well.

That is exactly Darnold's game. Darnold also like Wilson has a looping but explosive baseball release. Darnold has a baseball release from playing baseball. They both have off the chart intangibles, no off the field concerns, and rare leadership traits.

The only difference between Darnold and Wilson are the color of their skin, height, Russell being a more demonstrative leader, and Russell being a better athlete when it comes to running the ball.

Those differences are minor compared to how remarkably similar their play styles and other aspects of their game are.

The comparison between Darnold and Russell is a strong one that scouts and people that know the game have made. Wilson threw a lot of INTs like Darnold at NCState when he had a poor OL and tried to do too much as well.

Derek Carr has always been an upright pocket passer who rarely made off platform throws but won in the pocket with quick and powerful anticipatory throws. Carr didn't have the poise of Darnold under duress and was knocked because of it pre-draft.

Sam Bradford was a static/statue in-pocket quick decision decisive accurate thrower who crumbled under inside pressure.

In every NFL draft room, a scouting evaluation includes player comparisons as part of a scouting report and means a lot to evaluators; however, most care more about whether their core play traits and intangibles are comparable....not that everything superficial is exactly comparable (height, hands size, skin color, etc...)

Again....very good scouts and personnel execs have/and are starting to compare Sam Darnold's core play traits/styles and core intangibles to that of Russell Wilson.....and in fact, make the point that based on core play traits/styles and core intangibles Sam Darnold is more comparable to Russell Wilson than Baker Mayfield is.

 

Biggest differences imo are that Wilson has a stronger arm and he's more athletic. Those are significant differences in comparing and projecting Darnold to the NFL though. Darnold definitely has a lot of Billy Hoyle in him...you're just not expecting this guy to be as quick and elusive as he is. But he's not as quick and elusive as Russell and can't drill it into the same windows. Romo's a fair comp. But the thing that made Romo great wasn't physical...it was an intangible...it's why everyone missed it. Who knows if Darnold has that.

I'm getting comfortable with Mark Brunell as a safe comp for Darnold. Solid all around, durable and tough, improvisational guy with athleticism, could lead a team to wins, but not always a great game manager.

 

[TheeRealDeal]

12 hours ago, MWil23 said:

Waiting for BTC to write 2,000 words on his man-crush

Honestly I don't like much if any of his takes or his over the top one liners to push his agenda but BTC is on the money with Derwin James. I would take James over Minkah all day long and my only hesitation to James for the Browns is our coaching staff''s refusal to adapt to their talent. I believe Jabrill Peppers and Derwin James are both outstanding SS/Nickle prospect with elite athletic traits that make them more than capable of making plays as a single high rangy FS. The smarter NFL coaches get on offense and the more the offensive game evolves now bringing in RPO's and such the more and more the defenses are going to need interchangeable parts. They are needing guys who can play strong and weak side so the offense cannot scheme into going a certain way. They need LBs who can cover line DBs and DB who can play the run like LBs. It doesn't change with the safety position either. I think having two safeties who can play interchanging roles is huge in not letting offenses dictate where the ball is going so easily. 

If we had a more creative coaching staff I would love to have Derwin James on this team preferable in a trade down to the 7-10 range but I wouldn't even mind him at #4 depending on who was left on the board at the time.

[bruceb]

1 hour ago, TheeRealDeal said:

I would take James over Minkah all day long and my only hesitation to James for the Browns is our coaching staff''s refusal to adapt to their talent.

This.

We can talk about players all we want but until we have a coaching staff that knows how to win we will not win.