Who do you choose at 4? (No trade down option)

[buno67]

On 4/7/2018 at 8:02 AM, LETSGOBROWNIES said:

I agreed, hence my desire to trade down.

And the guy we hired as a consultant didn’t like him as much and Guice.

https://brownswire.usatoday.com/2018/02/04/scot-mccloughan-preferred-derrius-guice-to-saquon-barkley/

 

Partially. This pretty much covers my thoughts on the subject.

I’ve heard this before about a running back (every year almost tbh) and the last time this forum’s collective jeans were this tight was right about when this happened;

 

Agreed.

 

A lot of ppl liked TRich but I know some ppl had their doubts about him including myself but still felt comfortable taking him where they did. I know I had concerns about him because he had such an amazing OL in college that it made the game so much easier for him. Hell thats literally the opposite for Barkley. His OL made the game so much harder for him

[big poppa pump]

It's funny to me how folks come around years later to say that Richardson was bound to fail.  He was a very good NFL prospect who, like many, was lazy.  Barkley is a stud.  Chubb is very good too.  I think either scenario of taking Barkley, and whomever in the second, vs taking Chubb, and a RB in the second will work.

Also funny to me how all the folks that think Ogbah is the best thing since sliced bread shouldn't stop us from taking Chubb. 

[LETSGOBROWNIES]

39 minutes ago, big poppa pump said:

It's funny to me how folks come around years later to say that Richardson was bound to fail.  He was a very good NFL prospect who, like many, was lazy.  Barkley is a stud. 

He was a great prospect, “the best since AP”, etc., just like Barkley.

My only point is even these “can’t miss” players actually bust, and whether folks want to acknowledge it, Barkley may as well.

[MistaBohmbastic]

2 hours ago, buno67 said:

How do we know he has an above average football IQ? IMO you watch him play you don’t see him getting fooled by blocking schemes or false reads or rarely seen him make a wrong play on an option play. The dude is a little  cerebral with the things he does during games like the mind games he played with Bryant during the Clemson game. 

You say he had phenomenal technique and balance but yet think he can only be above average. Those are two damn good traits to have as a defensive linemen, specially as a DE. 

Do I see Chubb being a HoF player? Prolly not but do I see him having a very successful career? Hell yeah. 

Idk, I get annoyed when ppl think since it’s a weak positional group that the top guy at the position isn’t good. Chubb is prolly the 3rd best DL to come out in the past three years behind Bosa Garrett. He would of been a top5 pick last year and would of went before Thomas IMO

he is getting criminally underrated. 

You said it, though. He's not going to be a Bosa or Garrett. We're talking about taking him as the first non-QB in this draft. I think he's probably the safest pick at 4, and I would be happy if we did indeed select him. But passing on Barkley, I will always wonder what could have been, because that is a rare talent.

[BleedTheClock]

2 hours ago, buno67 said:

Chubb is prolly the 3rd best DL to come out in the past three years behind Bosa Garrett. He would of been a top5 pick last year and would of went before Thomas IMO

Disagree. I have Chubb as the 3rd best DL in THIS draft class behind Vea and Davenport. I think he's certainly one of the safest players you could draft, but he's not an impact pass rusher. The word "pretty good" will define his career IMO. I'd settle for "pretty good" at the end of the day, but I'm looking for "superstar" in the top 5.

[MistaBohmbastic]

6 minutes ago, BleedTheClock said:

Disagree. I have Chubb as the 3rd best DL in THIS draft class behind Vea and Davenport. I think he's certainly one of the safest players you could draft, but he's not an impact pass rusher. The word "pretty good" will define his career IMO. I'd settle for "pretty good" at the end of the day, but I'm looking for "superstar" in the top 5.

Well said. While I may not agree with your top 3, I think that philosophy is spot on. At 4, you should get the potential HOF'er, not the guy who holds it down. We have an opportunity to take Barkley who, though he might not be the greatest back for pounding up the middle at first, is so damn versatile that he could be used as a threat in SO many ways it's incredible.

At this point, I'm so torn, I'm just gonna be happy with what the Browns do because I trust this front office. But the "what if" factor will always linger, and with Barkley it will be greater than the rest.

[BleedTheClock]

2 minutes ago, MistaBohmbastic said:

Well said. While I may not agree with your top 3, I think that philosophy is spot on. At 4, you should get the potential HOF'er, not the guy who holds it down. We have an opportunity to take Barkley who, though he might not be the greatest back for pounding up the middle at first, is so damn versatile that he could be used as a threat in SO many ways it's incredible.

At this point, I'm so torn, I'm just gonna be happy with what the Browns do because I trust this front office. But the "what if" factor will always linger, and with Barkley it will be greater than the rest.

Yeah Penn State and their fans weren't too concerned with the lack of running up the middle that Barkley did. I never crucify a prospect for doing something that works. Is bouncing it to the perimeter going to work as well as it did in college? Probably not, but it worked all the time at Penn State. Kind of hard to crap on the dude for using something that led to unreal success.

People wanted to crucify Mariota for playing in a spread scheme at Oregon. People wanted to crucify Cam Newton for playing a 1-read and take off style at Auburn. The problem with critiquing these things is that they were extremely successful strategies. I know people are going to crap on Lamar Jackson for taking off and running as much as he did, but it worked. Nobody could stop these things. And even if they don't translate to the NFL, it doesn't mean they won't realize this and do something different. I'm banking on these dudes not being complete idiots and realizing that they need to be more diverse in the NFL. I think Barkley will figure it out. It's not like he's soft or afraid of contact. He has shown the willingness to run between the tackles when necessary, especially early in his career when his OL was better. There's not anything in Barkley's game that concerns me other than the fact that he plays RB. But even with that, he's one of the rare cases where the stigma of being a RB doesn't matter to me when drafting in the top 5. He's one of maybe 3-4 guys I would have taken in the top 5.

Peterson, Fournette, Gurley, and Barkley. Those are the 4 dudes in my 11 years of watching college game tape that I would go to bat for as being top 5 picks.

[NudeTayne]

10 hours ago, BleedTheClock said:

Or we could elect to take a good player that plays the QB position. Back again to call Browns fans idiots and ride the Lamar Jackson hype train right off a cliff?

I wouldn't trust the Lamar Jackson hype train to take me accurately off the cliff.

[buckeyesNut0623]

1 hour ago, BleedTheClock said:

Yeah Penn State and their fans weren't too concerned with the lack of running up the middle that Barkley did. I never crucify a prospect for doing something that works. Is bouncing it to the perimeter going to work as well as it did in college? Probably not, but it worked all the time at Penn State. Kind of hard to crap on the dude for using something that led to unreal success.

People wanted to crucify Mariota for playing in a spread scheme at Oregon. People wanted to crucify Cam Newton for playing a 1-read and take off style at Auburn. The problem with critiquing these things is that they were extremely successful strategies. I know people are going to crap on Lamar Jackson for taking off and running as much as he did, but it worked. Nobody could stop these things. And even if they don't translate to the NFL, it doesn't mean they won't realize this and do something different. I'm banking on these dudes not being complete idiots and realizing that they need to be more diverse in the NFL. I think Barkley will figure it out. It's not like he's soft or afraid of contact. He has shown the willingness to run between the tackles when necessary, especially early in his career when his OL was better. There's not anything in Barkley's game that concerns me other than the fact that he plays RB. But even with that, he's one of the rare cases where the stigma of being a RB doesn't matter to me when drafting in the top 5. He's one of maybe 3-4 guys I would have taken in the top 5.

Peterson, Fournette, Gurley, and Barkley. Those are the 4 dudes in my 11 years of watching college game tape that I would go to bat for as being top 5 picks.

Elliot is not on your list? I could make the arguement that he is right up there with the players you listed. But as with everything else that is imho

[BleedTheClock]

49 minutes ago, buckeyesNut0623 said:

Elliot is not on your list? I could make the arguement that he is right up there with the players you listed. But as with everything else that is imho

He's certainly in that category. But I'm talking about these guys as prospects. I had Elliot at the top rated player in his draft class, but I didn't think he warranted the grades that the other 4 guys had. I had their grades as:

Peterson: 98

Barkley: 97

Gurley: 95

Fournette: 94

Elliot: 92

 

And thinking back to it now, I thought Elliot was a perfect pick for Dallas at #4, so I guess I did consider him worth a top 5 selection...but more because of the way Dallas was constructed and how that need lined up.

[Fofsadness]

On 4/4/2018 at 9:21 PM, bruceb said:

This is a sort of our bad luck draft class (except for Darnold #1 at QB, of course.)

The best D guy available to us at #4 is meh; the best O guy is a RB with significant limitations.

Punt.

You lost credibility at significant limitations...

[LETSGOBROWNIES]

4 hours ago, BleedTheClock said:

Yeah Penn State and their fans weren't too concerned with the lack of running up the middle that Barkley did. I never crucify a prospect for doing something that works. Is bouncing it to the perimeter going to work as well as it did in college? Probably not, but it worked all the time at Penn State. Kind of hard to crap on the dude for using something that led to unreal success.

Unreal success?  He was 4th in the Big 10 in rushing yards and 9th in ypc.  In the CONFERENCE.

4 hours ago, BleedTheClock said:

People wanted to crucify Mariota for playing in a spread scheme at Oregon. People wanted to crucify Cam Newton for playing a 1-read and take off style at Auburn. The problem with critiquing these things is that they were extremely successful strategies. I know people are going to crap on Lamar Jackson for taking off and running as much as he did, but it worked. Nobody could stop these things.

People DID stop Barkley though, he only had 4 100 yard rushing games all last season.

Yall act like he was some unstoppable force, but he really wasn’t.

 

[MistaBohmbastic]

1 minute ago, LETSGOBROWNIES said:

Unreal success?  He was 4th in the Big 10 in rushing yards and 9th in ypc.  In the CONFERENCE.

People DID stop Barkley though, he only had 4 100 yard rushing games all last season.

Yall act like he was some unstoppable force, but he really wasn’t.

 

He kinda was. Even in those games, you look at those sub 100 games and still see the potential. Let's take the OSU game for example...crap stats, but a huge kickoff return TD, and I remember this one spin move he busted out that was like an "Oh snap" moment for me. Even when the run game isn't going, he can impact the passing game and special teams significantly. His lone weakness, and I thought @BleedTheClock addressed it brilliantly, is that sometimes he tries to break outside instead of running it up the gut. That's something that can be adjusted no problem. I still think Chubb is the selection at 4, but Barkley is the homerun. 

I won't be mad with Chubb, but I'd be ecstatic with Barkley because he can be used in so many ways, and instantly provides Darnold with a great weapon.

At the same time, you look at these RB, DB, and DE classes. You can land a Ronald Jones, Sony Michel, Nick Chubb, etc in round 2, but you're not going to find anyone anywhere near as immediately effective as Chubb in the second round. The CB class is deep too, which makes me feel less upset about passing on Ward and Fitzpatrick. 

Whether it turns out true or not, I think based on potential, you're choosing between a future HOF'er with Barkley, versus perennial pro bowlers in rd 2, plus Chubb -OR- Barkley, plus a shot in the dark at DE in rd 2. 

I don't think there's anything that will convince me of one side or the other, I'm so torn.

 

[Aztec Hammer]

7 minutes ago, LETSGOBROWNIES said:

Unreal success?  He was 4th in the Big 10 in rushing yards and 9th in ypc.  In the CONFERENCE.

People DID stop Barkley though, he only had 4 100 yard rushing games all last season.

Yall act like he was some unstoppable force, but he really wasn’t.

 

Yeah it's an interesting one. I don't think he's the perfect prospect he is made out to be, but there's no doubt he has a number of really special abilities. I remember watching a few of his games live last season. He fell into a bit of a trend for the 0, -1, 3, 0, 1, 4, 42 type line. Northwestern comes to mind. He was being stoned constantly. To the point where it would be easy to feel a bit underwhelmed by him. At one stage my eyes were even telling me that his burst off the snap didn't look great. Then he broke a beautiful 40 yard or so TD run where he made a lateral cut that I swear 95% of backs can't make. It was ridiculous. This pattern happened over the span of a few games. I remember it because they were hyping him for Heisman still as he was getting TDs elsewhere from returns and passes. But it gave me some pause rather than just declaring him the GOAT RB prospect.

Having watched a lot of his games after the season ended, it does stand out to me that his OL was diabolical. And running him out of a read with McSorley was repetitive and uncreative. A lot of times the OL was pushed back into his lap before he had even been given the ball.

His question/weakness is whether he is a true power back. He didn't display it constantly. Maybe he was going for the bounce it out homerun too often. Maybe he didn't want to get jacked up unnecessarily in college. Maybe the OL issues weren't allowing him to gain a head of steam downhill and slam it in the tackles. He is also interesting because his contact balance is often amazing but then sometimes frustrating as he goes down from just being clipped. That might even be because he is too fast for his own good at times.

If the trade with the Bills is there and it's fruitful with a 2019 1st as well, I take that. If it's not, I probably take Saquon.

For as much as RB is supposedly devalued now, it is still the position that touches the ball the second most. We have a chance to upgrade massively at the first and second position for most touches in QB and RB. Darnold and Barkley would be legit. Whenever I'm in doubt about what way to go, I just watch the USC-Penn St Rose Bowl to remind myself what we could have.

[BleedTheClock]

I don't think this is a superstar RB class. I think there's 1 superstar (Barkley) and 1 excellent (Guice). After that, there are some good rotational backs and 1 more full-time starter (Chubb), but I am not in love with the class outside of those three. And Guice/Chubb caliber RB's exist in every draft class. I'd rather not draft a RB at all if we elect to skip on Saquon. He's the only big-time difference maker at RB that significantly adds value to the group of Hyde/Duke we already have. Guice is great, but he's probably going in the 1st. I don't want to take a guy like Ronald Jones or Rashaad Penny in the 2nd round. Those two guys aren't game-changing RB's and I don't really want to see them taking away carries from Hyde or Duke, which is an admirable duo by themselves.

I don't really think we need a RB, but Barkley's star power makes that selection worth it. Anybody else in this draft doesn't really excite me given our current RB situation is not an issue.