2021 Draft Prospects Thread

[Out of the Rafters at the Q]

You can call it "top 100" if you'd like because that sounds more impressive, but what I actually said would be somewhere between pick 89, and undrafted. And yes....I'd be fine with that. A late third round OT is not a year one or probably even a year 2 starter. If yCallahan/Berry thought he was good enough, he's the guy you'd move in for Conklin at some point as a starter. And given Callahan's evaluation skills, if we grabbed a guy there who showed a lot of promise during the snaps in which he was in, we could probably move him for something better if we wanted to.




I'm not sure how you're counting games missed, but I assume you're counting a "game played" if a guy plays even one snap before getting hurt. I wouldn't -- I'd count as a missed game if a guy missed more than a quarter. And you're also excluding missed playoff games in 2020. I wouldn't do that either in terms of assessing the need for depth.

Anyway, I don't want to see Hance in even one, much less two, playoff games next year. So I'm hoping for depth.

If we lose three tackles at once, we're going to be playing a guy off the street like Hance. The same goes for any team in the league.

Unless... you're campaigning for us to keep five tackles?

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

If we lose three tackles at once, we're going to be playing a guy off the street like Hance. The same goes for any team in the league.

Unless... you're campaigning for us to keep five tackles?

No. My point is that without Hubbard, Lamm and Hance get bumped up the depth chart. And if we're going to replace Hubbard, I'd rather it be with a legit developmental tackle rather than an emergency stopgap quality player.

 

[AZ_]

I think the OL depth is better than people think. All five starters are good/great.

Between Michael Dunn (26), Blake Hance (25), Drew Forbes (24), Alex Taylor (23) and Nick Harris (22), IMO the Browns have plenty of developmental depth.

Plus you still have Hubbard under contract for another year depending on how well he recovers from his knee injury. If he can't, they could always resign Lamm for peanuts as well.

If there's a guy who is no questions asked BPA or someone they're supremely confident can develop into a quality starter in time like Teller did, then so be it. Pick him.

But outside of that, I am not overly interested in using any picks on OL at this point. Let Callahan keep working with the young guys he already has.

I’d be more comfortable taking a tackle in the top 100 picks than labeling any of these five players good or great.

Dunn flashed in one good game. Harris was largely pretty bad in a position he should probably never play again.

The rest have seen few snaps, or in Taylor and Forbes case, none.

That, plus Conklin’s potential out after next year and he could be a player you’ll have to sacrifice in order to sign others.

 

[CBBI]

You can call it "top 100" if you'd like because that sounds more impressive, but what I actually said would be somewhere between pick 89, and undrafted. And yes....I'd be fine with that. A late third round OT is not a year one or probably even a year 2 starter. If yCallahan/Berry thought he was good enough, he's the guy you'd move in for Conklin at some point as a starter. And given Callahan's evaluation skills, if we grabbed a guy there who showed a lot of promise during the snaps in which he was in, we could probably move him for something better if we wanted to.

I'm not sure how you're counting games missed, but I assume you're counting a "game played" if a guy plays even one snap before getting hurt. I wouldn't -- I'd count as a missed game if a guy missed more than a quarter. And you're also excluding missed playoff games in 2020. I wouldn't do that either in terms of assessing the need for depth.

Anyway, I don't want to see Hance in even one, much less two, playoff games next year. So I'm hoping for depth.

I just think we should be careful to not overreact and subsequently overcorrect because of a fluke occurrence. Very, very rarely do you see 3-5 starting/rotation OL out with injuries or illness at the same time. Yes, it happened to the Browns late in the year, but overall it just doesn't happen that often. Throw in the fact that Wills and Bitonio each missed time because of a once in a lifetime global pandemic and not because of on-field injury and it becomes even less of a reason to overreact.

Blake Hance got on the field in the playoff game in Pittsburgh because four guys in front of him (Bitonio, Hubbard, Dunn, Harris) all got sick or injured. He got in against KC because three guys (Wills, Lamm, Hubbard) all got injured. And you could even say it was five guys in front of Hance at guard because Forbes would have been ahead of him too, but he opted out before the season ever began because of the pandemic. That odds of being down to your 6th choice at any of the five OL spots at any point during a season are just so remarkably slim.

Beyond all of that, while I completely agree that teams should not draft for need, they shouldn't ignore roster construction or contract status either.

I can understand the argument in favor of picking an interior lineman given that Teller only has 1 year left on his contract and may price himself out the Browns future plans, although I'd counter that the Browns have Forbes, Dunn and even Hance as guys to develop as potential future replacements. But tackle? Both Wills and Conklin have multiple years of team control left on their contracts and aren't going anywhere anytime soon.

IMO you don't draft a third tackle, a player who will not get on the field for you unless there are injuries, with a 3rd or even 4th round pick when you can find another player at another position who likely be a rotation player as early as 2021 and could find a starting role by year 2.

I also don't really feel the rush to find a guy who could be Conklin's eventual replacement when Jack is only 26 years old, signed for 2 more years and coming off a first team all-pro season.

 

[CBBI]

I’d be more comfortable taking a tackle in the top 100 picks than labeling any of these five players good or great.

Dunn flashed in one good game. Harris was largely pretty bad in a position he should probably never play again.

The rest have seen few snaps, or in Taylor and Forbes case, none.

That, plus Conklin’s potential out after next year and he could be a player you’ll have to sacrifice in order to sign others.

To be fair, I didn't suggest and don't think any of those guys are starting caliber players right now. But given their ages, athletic profiles, etc, I don't see a huge difference between just trying to develop the guys who are already here and drafting another linemen in the middle rounds.

And for me personally, I'd be looking to give Conklin a new contract after 2021 that keeps him around while Wills is still cheap (relatively speaking) than I would be looking to move on from him after next year. The Browns already have plans to save money on the OL in 2022 by switching in Harris for Tretter (presumably).

 

[Out of the Rafters at the Q]

No. My point is that without Hubbard, Lamm and Hance get bumped up the depth chart. And if we're going to replace Hubbard, I'd rather it be with a legit developmental tackle rather than an emergency stopgap quality player.

Fair enough. Personally, the only way I'm taking a tackle in the third is if it's someone I perceive as a possible stud that drops. Niang and Jones were the two fallers I would've pulled the trigger on last year. Now, much like WR, 2020 was a historic tackle class. I don't expect players like that to be available in the third round again. But, when it comes to value at the position meeting BPA, that's probably the only scenario where I use a premium asset on a tackle.

I'd much rather us take some random developmental tackle in the 5th-onwards (like Forbes in 2019).

 

[col63onel]

What is everybody's hierarchy in terms of positional needs?

RB/QB
TE
OL
WR
DL
LB
DB

That goes from lowest need to highest need, IMO. OL is just not a need right now.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

I’d be more comfortable taking a tackle in the top 100 picks than labeling any of these five players good or great.

Dunn flashed in one good game. Harris was largely pretty bad in a position he should probably never play again.

The rest have seen few snaps, or in Taylor and Forbes case, none.

That, plus Conklin’s potential out after next year and he could be a player you’ll have to sacrifice in order to sign others.

We cannot afford to pay 3-4 Pro Bowl quality linemen into the indefinite future. The only way we're going to be able to maintain a quality OL over time is to have a pipeline of younger and cheaper talent. We have that in the interior, but we lack a legit developmental tackle.

If we see a guy at 89 that we really think projects as a legit starting OT down the road, that's good value, and would help maintain a sustainable salary structure across the OL. If that guy isn't there, I'm fine with waiting until deeper in the draft.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

To be fair, I didn't suggest and don't think any of those guys are starting caliber players right now. But given their ages, athletic profiles, etc, I don't see a huge difference between just trying to develop the guys who are already here and drafting another linemen in the middle rounds.

Well, that's kind of the point. If there isn't a significant difference between Lamm/Hance, and whomever may be sitting there from 89 on, then you don't take them. But if Callahan/Berry do see someone they project as a starter with the right development, and a significant upgrade over Lamm/Hance, then that's a different story.

And for me personally, I'd be looking to give Conklin a new contract after 2021 that keeps him around while Wills is still cheap (relatively speaking) than I would be looking to move on from him after next year. The Browns already have plans to save money on the OL in 2022 by switching in Harris for Tretter (presumably).

Conklin is a 26 year old First Team All Pro tackle. I really doubt we're going to be able to get him to take less per year than the contract to which he is currently signed. Teller also is going to get paid.

 

[CBBI]

We cannot afford to pay 3-4 Pro Bowl quality linemen into the indefinite future. The only way we're going to be able to maintain a quality OL over time is to have a pipeline of younger and cheaper talent. We have that in the interior, but we lack a legit developmental tackle.

If we see a guy at 89 that we really think projects as a legit starting OT down the road, that's good value, and would help maintain a sustainable salary structure across the OL. If that guy isn't there, I'm fine with waiting until deeper in the draft.

I don't disagree. They can't play 4 offensive linemen big money indefinitely.

But Wills isn't making big money relatively speaking until 2024 and they already have Harris to replace Tretter in 2022 so money is going to be shuffled off the line relatively quickly. Plus there's no guarantee they opt to resign Teller anyway considering they are likely to get a 3rd rounder in compensation if he signs a massive deal elsewhere.

 

[CBBI]

Well, that's kind of the point. If there isn't a significant difference between Lamm/Hance, and whomever may be sitting there from 89 on, then you don't take them. But if Callahan/Berry do see someone they project as a starter with the right development, and a significant upgrade over Lamm/Hance, then that's a different story.

Conklin is a 26 year old First Team All Pro tackle. I really doubt we're going to be able to get him to take less per year than the contract to which he is currently signed. Teller also is going to get paid.

I don't think Conklin is going to take less either, but you know how contracts work. If the Browns let him play out his deal and then sign him to a new deal, they'll structure it where the cap hit is the smallest it's going to be in 2023 with things progressively getting bigger with it easier to escape the further they get into the contract.

I just wouldn't be in favor of drafting a tackle unless they're absolutely ready to move on from Conklin after 2021 which IMO they shouldn't be willing to do.

If Conklin's going to play out his entire contract, I would address his potential replacement in the 2022 or 2023 draft.

 

[col63onel]

From what I have read, Conklin's deal voids after the 2022 season. If he signs elsewhere, we have 6 mil in dead cap for 2023.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

If Conklin's going to play out his entire contract, I would address his potential replacement in the 2022 or 2023 draft.

The problem is that the sooner you need that replacement, the higher the pick you must use. Give the right 3rd-6th round OT a year or two under Callahan, and he can slide right in. If you wait, you're at the mercy of the OT quality in the draft and FA, and may have to spend a first round pick or a boatload of money to get a guy. And if you draft the right guy -- and again, part of my rationale for all this is to maximize Callahan's knowledge/experience -- but keep Conklin, that drafted guy likely has gotten in some games, shown what he can do, and has become a more valuable asset.

It is much cheaper in the long term to draft a guy in the later rounds before you need him rather than waiting a needing to fill a position on short notice. Especially since we need to fill the swing tackle position anyway.

 

[CBBI]

From what I have read, Conklin's deal voids after the 2022 season. If he signs elsewhere, we have 6 mil in dead cap for 2023.

Correct.

While it was reported as a 3-year deal (and for practical purposes it was), the Browns technically signed Conklin to a 5-year deal with two automatic void years in 2023/2024 tacked on the end so they could stretch his bonus money out over five years instead of three.

 

[CBBI]

The problem is that the sooner you need that replacement, the higher the pick you must use. Give the right 3rd-6th round OT a year or two under Callahan, and he can slide right in. If you wait, you're at the mercy of the OT quality in the draft and FA, and may have to spend a first round pick or a boatload of money to get a guy.

It is much cheaper in the long term to draft a guy in the later rounds before you need him rather than waiting a needing to fill a position on short notice. Especially since we need to fill the swing tackle position anyway.

Or...

They could resign Conklin and not worry about a replacement until 2024 or 2025 or even 2026.