Mike Wallace to Browns?

[Shakalu M.D.]

Here's a question to those of you saying, "no way would I give up 4 for Wallace." Do you think Blackmon will be as successful as Wallace? If not, then why would any of you want to draft Blackmon if you aren't willing to give up 4 for Wallace?

I realize they are different kinds of receivers, but I have to think that we'd be happy with any WR who played like Wallace. Could this be an indictment on the WR position? We want a good one, but not in the top 5 unless he's AJ Green?

Just wondering, I wouldn't give up 4 for Walace either, but then I had to ask myself why not. The obvious answer is I want RG3, but if he isn't there and we end up with Blackmon, would I feel like a fool for not making that move to acquire Wallace?

 

[B Mac]

Here's a question to those of you saying, "no way would I give up 4 for Wallace." Do you think Blackmon will be as successful as Wallace? If not, then why would any of you want to draft Blackmon if you aren't willing to give up 4 for Wallace?

I realize they are different kinds of receivers, but I have to think that we'd be happy with any WR who played like Wallace. Could this be an indictment on the WR position? We want a good one, but not in the top 5 unless he's AJ Green?

Just wondering, I wouldn't give up 4 for Walace either, but then I had to ask myself why not. The obvious answer is I want RG3, but if he isn't there and we end up with Blackmon, would I feel like a fool for not making that move to acquire Wallace?

Because the other side of that equation is that you give the Steelers the 4th pick in the draft as well.

 

[godfather]

I would love to have him on the team. Definitely not for the number #4 pick. I don't want Blackmon at number 4 either way. Claiborne or RG3 for me.

There are plenty of talented receivers in this draft that the Browns can pick up later.

 

[RealKingofCleve]

This conversation is pretty irrelevant because there is absolutely no way Heckert would consider moving the 4th pick for Wallace.

 

[godfather]

Yeah...no chance in hell for the #4, but I'd do it 100 times out of 100 for the #22. He's one of the best young receivers in the league, and aside from Desean Jackson, he might be the best deep threat. The player you get at #22 might amount to nothing in his career, where in Wallace you'd be getting a known commodity at a relatively low price. The Steelers are in cap hell right now and that's the only reason this guy might change teams. That being said, the Browns apparently can't use the #22 pick for him unless it comes in a trade, and I'm sure the league has some sort of restriction on how quickly a player can be traded after he's signed (meaning that setting up a gentlemen's agreement with another team may not be possible). I'd love to add a guy like Wallace, but definitely not at the cost of the #4.

On another note, why the hell wouldn't the Patriots be the ones going after Wallace? They have two 1sts this year and they always just end up trading them anyway. Can you imagine Wallace blowing the top off defenses with Hernandez, Gronk, and Welker cleaning up behing him? NE generally isn't the type to make these types of signings, but it'd be an opportunity to get a great young receiver for Brady and weaken one of their top competitors in the AFC. Pretty much seems like the ideal fit to me.

Damn, Brady would probably throw 60 tds if he went there. I don't think Pittsburgh would like him going there, since they view NE as heated rivals as well.

 

[kevinoc0]

I'm glad we still blindly throw up any IncarceratedBob tweets without actually looking into the consequences first.

 

[*L-Train*]

Evan Silva

Pittsburgh PG's Ed Bouchette on Mike Wallace: "They're not gonna franchise him. Would add another $9.5M & they can't do that, won't do that"

More Bouchette: "He's gonna hit free agency as RFA. Maybe New England will (give up a 1st-rd pick). They have two." Also mentioned SF & CIN.

More Bouchette on Wallace: "It would depend on the contract...If it's within reason, they'll match. If not, I think they might let him go."

interesting

 

[Shakalu M.D.]

I would love to have him on the team. Definitely not for the number #4 pick. I don't want Blackmon at number 4 either way. Claiborne or RG3 for me.

There are plenty of talented receivers in this draft that the Browns can pick up later.

Pretty much exactly how I feel except I MAY want Coples instead of Claiborne. I haven't entirely decided yet and could be persuaded either way. I really want RG3, think he's a total stud. After that it's a toss up between the two I mentioned.

 

[godfather]

We wouldn't be having this discussion if Mangini wasn't such a complete moron. The guy should have been a Brown.

 

[Huber.]

We wouldn't be having this discussion if Mangini wasn't such a complete moron. The guy should have been a Brown.

If he was drafted as a Brown he would be out of the league by now due to lack of good coaching.

 

[Soda]

Got to love the most irrelevant topics yielding the most posts.

 

[Phills14]

Pretty much exactly how I feel except I MAY want Coples instead of Claiborne. I haven't entirely decided yet and could be persuaded either way. I really want RG3, think he's a total stud. After that it's a toss up between the two I mentioned.

I absolutely do not want Coples. 2 seasons ago he was a top 5-10 pick. Last year, according to scouts, he played like a 3rd rounder at best. At the senior bowl he looked like a top 5-10 pick. I don't want that type of guy. WAYYYYYY to risky.

Clairborne, eh. I can't believe I'm saying this since I think it's generally a bad idea this high in the draft, I want Trent Richardson if RG3 is not available. I think Richardson will give us the most positive impact of any of the available talent and I think he's the safest pick as well.

 

[Urban]

Here's a question to those of you saying, "no way would I give up 4 for Wallace." Do you think Blackmon will be as successful as Wallace? If not, then why would any of you want to draft Blackmon if you aren't willing to give up 4 for Wallace?

I realize they are different kinds of receivers, but I have to think that we'd be happy with any WR who played like Wallace. Could this be an indictment on the WR position? We want a good one, but not in the top 5 unless he's AJ Green?

Just wondering, I wouldn't give up 4 for Walace either, but then I had to ask myself why not. The obvious answer is I want RG3, but if he isn't there and we end up with Blackmon, would I feel like a fool for not making that move to acquire Wallace?

I get what you're saying and the Browns need to worry about themselves but no way in hell do I give the Steelers #4 where you know they'll draft a stud like they always do. Imagine if the Steelers got Matt Kalil to be Roethlisberger's blindside for the next 10 years *shivers*

If Colt McCoy is our QB next year (hate to say it but it looks like that's where we're leaning) then it doesn't really make sense to me to get Wallace (even at 22) - despite his tremendous speed and playmaking abilities his talent would be wasted or diminished with a QB who rarely throws more than 20 yards.

And it's Incarcerated Bob here.

 

[GreasySpread36]

Here's a question to those of you saying, "no way would I give up 4 for Wallace." Do you think Blackmon will be as successful as Wallace? If not, then why would any of you want to draft Blackmon if you aren't willing to give up 4 for Wallace?

I wouldn't want Blackmon at #4 either. Actually, I wouldn't spend a top-five pick on a WR unless he had Andre Johnson/Calvin Johnson/Larry Fitzgerald-type upside.

And Mike Wallace, while a good receiver and a great deep threat, isn't in the class of those three. To me he's a very high-end role player and a major beneficiary of having a QB who can play-fake extremely well, has a huge arm and can extend plays.

I want no part of gifting the #4 pick to Pittsburgh, either. If the Steelers want a top-five pick let them earn it by going 4-12 or 3-13.

 

[DaNewCavs]

What the NFL failed to update for the CBA is making the #1 pick top 10 for restricted free agents protected. SF and NE have such a large advantage for restricted free agents because a number 1 to them is not as valuable as a number 1 to us. Top 10 picks should not be part of the equation and those top 10 teams should only have to give up a 2nd round pick, or at the very least go by a points system as they use to determine point value when teams trade for picks. Shitty teams can't get better because they can't afford to lose that pick, while good teams take away top talent at a much lesser cost.