2016 Draft Prospects Thread

JMcCurry08 said:

I'm not sure of this answer, but has trading down worked for anyone ever?

Click to expand...

Of course.

The Broncos ended up with Demaryus Thomas and Eric Decker after a trade down in 2010 that netted New England Aaron Hernandez.

KC acquired Justin Houston with the 3rd rounder they acquired in 2011.

Washington allowed Jax to trade up for Gabbert, they moved down and got Ryan Kerrigan. They also had the RGIII haul.

Every team who traded down with the Browns has worked out relatively well.

I'm positive I could find you more examples.

Take your QB at 2. Dont get cute.

Spend the entire draft, 2016 season, 2017 draft, & 2017 free agency to build a team around the QB you pick at number 2. We are probably going to be pretty bad this year. Trot RG3 out their as the sacrificial lamb.

AZ_ said:

Zero problem trading down if the aim is to acquire Goff.

If it's to acquire Kevin Hogan, who Zeirlein is insinuating is the target, then that's a fireable offense. But of course, that's certainly not going to happen so I'm not really worried about it.

Click to expand...

I honestly have no problem with either strategy.

Though, I can understand the logic if Hue really likes Kevin Hogan. He basically possesses similar traits to AJ McCarron. I know the Browns flew Hogan in last week for a workout. I assume it went really well. Big time leader, mechanics can be cleaned up, etc. I think Pep Hamilton was Hogan's recruiter at Stanford....

I don't think Zeirlein was insinuating the Browns would take Hogan in the 1st. I think he meant that Hogan is a target if the Browns trade down and fill other needs in the draft before taking a QB.

Trade down and taking Hogan in the 4th is probably the route I would take if I was filling out a mock draft today.

Personally, with RG3 at QB, I think the Browns biggest need for next season is at 5-tech-- target Buckner or Rankins or maybe Butler or Jones depending on how far down you want to trade down.

I don't want the Browns to trade down from 2, but I would be for trading down with 32 to get another 3rd. Plus, with extra comp picks this year that can be traded for the first time could potentially land the Browns future picks.

I believe farmer did that with trading 5ths and 6ths to gain future 4th and 5th rounders. They just really need to hit on some draft picks for any of this to mean something.

Randolphkeys said:

I have been quietly worried about a trade down since that atrocious first 48 hours of free agency. To have a team this full of holes, and then create four more holes without filling any slots... the Moneyball thing to do is trading down. In reality I do like the top 8 or 9 players in this draft.

Right now, the team lacks starting experience at nine key spots: two starting receivers, a starting H Back, two starting offensive linemen, a starting defensive end, someone to replace Armonty Bryant as a pass rush specialist, and two starting safeties. I'm not talking depth to develop this year... nine plug and play positions where at best the team has rostered a few intriguing young guys to push for playing time.

I don't prefer a trade down, but I could see it happening.

Click to expand...

Do you think that maybe the Browns think they can get positions like interior linemen or safety later in the draft with the comp picks they are going to receive? I remember reading an old Bill Barnwell Grantland article that talked about how Ozzie Newsome always preferred to take safety's later in the draft because he felt the position was undervalued and good players could be found late. I have a feeling this is maybe how the Browns FO feels?

I agree with you on the trade down, there are a lot of holes on this roster. I think it will either be QB or trade down and I think it is going to depend upon how much someone will pay to move up. I am sure the Browns are asking for a ransom for #2 and if they don't get it, maybe they sit still and use the picks in the 2nd and 3rd round to move back, especially since many scouts believe there isn't much of a discrepancy in the talent level of the players projected to go in those rounds.

I don't think these guys are going to take Tunsil or Ramsey at 2 either. If they believe good safeties can be found later in the draft, it goes with the same line of thinking of taking a RB early, the position is devalued and good players can be found later.

GonzoRatso88 said:

Do you think that maybe the Browns think they can get positions like interior linemen or safety later in the draft with the comp picks they are going to receive? I remember reading an old Bill Barnwell Grantland article that talked about how Ozzie Newsome always preferred to take safety's later in the draft because he felt the position was undervalued and good players could be found late. I have a feeling this is maybe how the Browns FO feels?

Click to expand...

Ozzie Newsome liked to target safeties late in the draft? Think that had anything to do with Ed Reed's presence at the other safety spot?

Not sure whether to believe these obvious leaks as a power play in response to Tenn's rumors about people trying to trade up to 1 to steal Wentz/Goff from us, or whether they're legit. It does seem to outwardly fit the analytic trend of acquiring more picks. That said, we have no data to go off of in this FA's drafting trends.

AZ_ said:

Of course.

The Broncos ended up with Demaryus Thomas and Eric Decker after a trade down in 2010 that netted New England Aaron Hernandez.

KC acquired Justin Houston with the 3rd rounder they acquired in 2011.

Washington allowed Jax to trade up for Gabbert, they moved down and got Ryan Kerrigan. They also had the RGIII haul.

Every team who traded down with the Browns has worked out relatively well.

I'm positive I could find you more examples.

Click to expand...

Being lazy, but how often has a team traded down from either #1 or #2 though? Sure trading down when you are drafting 5-10 makes sense as it becomes about value as arguably the top 10 guys left on the board are more or less interchangeable in value.

But is it worth an extra couple picks to miss out on elite talent? Especially this year? A trade with the Eagles guarantees missing out on Goff and Wentz. Or a Bosa, Tunsil etc. Cornerstone guys that a team this bad needs to build around.

Money-ball analytics values acquiring picks, however there is one variable that doesn't translate going from baseball to football: Quarterback. There is no comparable position in baseball that has as much vital importance and value. If the Browns were set at that position, I'd agree perhaps trading down is a good idea. But right now, unless they grab either Goff, especially Goff, or Wentz, a couple extra picks won't mean much unless their aim is to draft a QB next year.

This team will suck until that hole is properly filled. Preferably by Goff. Fill that hole, Jared.

AZ_ said:

KC acquired Justin Houston with the 3rd rounder they acquired in 2011.

Click to expand...

This one still makes me cringe. Damn you Phil Taylor. Damn you to hell!!

King Stannis said:

Being lazy, but how often has a team traded down from either #1 or #2 though? Sure trading down when you are drafting 5-10 makes sense as it becomes about value as arguably the top 10 guys left on the board are more or less interchangeable in value.

But is it worth an extra couple picks to miss out on elite talent? Especially this year? A trade with the Eagles guarantees missing out on Goff and Wentz.

Money-ball analytics values acquiring picks, however there is one variable that doesn't translate going from baseball to football: Quarterback. There is no comparable position in baseball that has as much vital importance and value. If the Browns were set at that position, I'd agree perhaps trading down is a good idea. But right now, unless they grab either Goff, especially Goff, or Wentz, a couple extra picks won't mean much unless their aim is to draft a QB next year.

This team will suck until that hole is properly filled. Preferably by Goff. Fill that hole, Jared.

Click to expand...

I dont think its out of the realm of possibility to question whether Jared Goff (or Carson Wentz for that matter) is a truly elite prospect or just the best QB in a weak QB class. Needs aside, I wouldn't have either QB in my top 10.

For all the talk of needing a "franchise" QB, what I think is close to being just as bad as not having one at all is drafting a Ryan Tannehill and branding him a franchise QB.

How many "franchise" QB's are in the NFL anyways? I think there's a big difference between a "franchise" QB and a good "starting" QB. I see starting QB's in this draft, no franchise guys...

2 guys later in the draft that I want on this team.

Scooby Wright- ILB Arizona
CJ Prosise- RB Notre Dame

I think both could be really good pros.

EdMonix11 said:

I dont think its out of the realm of possibility to question whether Jared Goff (or Carson Wentz for that matter) is a truly elite prospect or just the best QB in a weak QB class. Needs aside, I wouldn't have either QB in my top 10.

For all the talk of needing a "franchise" QB, what I think is close to being just as bad as not having one at all is drafting a Ryan Tannehill and branding him a franchise QB.

How many "franchise" QB's are in the NFL anyways? I think there's a big difference between a "franchise" QB and a good "starting" QB. I see starting QB's in this draft, no franchise guys...

Click to expand...

Do you mind sharing your top 10?

EdMonix11 said:

I dont think its out of the realm of possibility to question whether Jared Goff (or Carson Wentz for that matter) is a truly elite prospect or just the best QB in a weak QB class. Needs aside, I wouldn't have either QB in my top 10.

For all the talk of needing a "franchise" QB, what I think is close to being just as bad as not having one at all is drafting a Ryan Tannehill and branding him a franchise QB.

How many "franchise" QB's are in the NFL anyways? I think there's a big difference between a "franchise" QB and a good "starting" QB. I see starting QB's in this draft, no franchise guys...

Click to expand...

Fair point and if that is the case, then, trade down with someone in the top 5-6 where an elite franchise player is still available.

However, I don't see how Goff is not an elite prospect.

QBASE analytics has him the third best prospect in the past decade (Mariota and Leftwich slightly ahead) and ninth since 1996. The guys in that top ten cohort, except Leftwich (and Mariota due to insufficient data) are all franchise quarterbacks (Manning, Rodgers, Ben the Rapist, Rivers etc., etc.). The exception, Leftwich, had flags which indicated a strong bust possibility in a meh wonderlic and questions about his work ethic. Goff does not.

Goff also passes the eye test. His fundamentals, ability to make reads and passing ability are either comparable, or surpass, those of other top prospects since 2010. His arm strength is very good but not great, but will improve as he adds muscle. He checks all the boxes of work ethic, intelligence, experience and physical attributes insofar as people are crazy if 6-4 isn't tall enough for the NFL (at 215 at 21 is ideal with a NFL strength program, they'll build him up right). The only reason everyone isn't on the Goff bandwagon is because people have fallen in love with size and speed over all hazards thanks to Cam Newton's coming out party this past season.

Based on every analysis, quantitative and qualitative, Goff is a no-brainer. And, contrary to conventional thinking in terms of best-player available and immediate elite impact, I feel a franchise quarterback is far more valuable to a team over the course of his career than any other position even if it takes three years for him to start.

As for Wentz, more difficult to determine. After reading that ESPN article I am starting to think he is too smart perhaps. Dude scored a combine best 40 on the wonderlic and has had straight-As his whole life. That is good.

But something else I saw in the article gives me slight pause. There is being prepared but he seems to over analyze things and exhibits a lot of anxious, restless energy. Sometimes a guy needs to be cool and collected as well as prepared and let the game come to him. I had LTs with that problem and it can become an issue when they don't have time to think as much as they want. Pressure can get to them more than others. A minor nitpick but it could be something to think about as the NFL tends to magnify potential weaknesses.

AZ_ said:

Of course.

The Broncos ended up with Demaryus Thomas and Eric Decker after a trade down in 2010 that netted New England Aaron Hernandez.

KC acquired Justin Houston with the 3rd rounder they acquired in 2011.

Washington allowed Jax to trade up for Gabbert, they moved down and got Ryan Kerrigan. They also had the RGIII haul.

Every team who traded down with the Browns has worked out relatively well.

I'm positive I could find you more examples.

Click to expand...

I am curious, if the Browns traded down, what is your ideal scenario and/or who would you take if they landed somewhere between #8 and #15 (Eagles and Rams both lusting for QBs)?