2021 Draft Prospects Thread

[DJTJ]

How did these numbers treat Juju? He broke out at a super young age.

Whats truly insane, JuJu is still only going into his age 25 season. 300+ catches by 25, and had two pretty awful years from a catches perspective. Legit shot for 1k catches.

 

[Out of the Rafters at the Q]

Whats truly insane, JuJu is still only going into his age 25 season. 300+ catches by 25, and had two pretty awful years from a catches perspective. Legit shot for 1k catches.

He will forever be linked with Amobi Okoye in my mind--examples of players where the fact that they were producing at such a young age didn't mean their growth curve would continue. Sometimes we overrate youth.

 

[Jack Brickman]

How did these numbers treat Juju? He broke out at a super young age.

Let's see...

He broke out prior to age nineteen, which makes him a "phenom" as far as these things go. He put up a 32% dominator rating in college. Not amazing, but certainly good. Not an elite athlete by NFL standards (note that this doesn't mean he's unathletic), but a good speed score. He's 6'1, 215 so no concerns with regard to size. He was obviously an early declare.

If I recall, he was regarded as a pretty rock solid prospect whose only red flag was that he underperformed relative to expectations his junior year after absolutely lighting it up in year two. Note that this doesn't mean he was guaranteed to be a stud, just that he was unlikely to be a bust. Which, true.

 

[AZ_]

We've got Centers out here posting numbers like this. That's a pretty great explosive skillset on the 9'4 broad.

 

[I'mWithDan]

I think there’s credence to drafting where you aren’t weak, but instead expensive. I am sure AB has studied what works and what doesn’t, and obviously I don’t mean drafting where we have a cornerstone like baker, but I wouldn’t dismiss any position where contracts are coming up.

That is more my position as well, especially in the latter 1st. Given the rookie scale, that back portion of the 1st provides a ton of value for contributing players at expensive positions. Cedee Lamb on a rookie scale deal in the 20's has insane value relative to his position. A linebacker? Honestly, not as much. I am not saying, unequivocally take a WR......but it is a position where we have 2 very high priced guys and in the very near future, it is not tenable. So if our FO deems a value too good to pass up, I get it.

I personally wouldn't take one but to me, your very first pick is more of a value exercise than a need exercise. If you get board alignment on value and BPA, to me, you just take a WR if it is a WR. Because being able to cycle that positional money out has a ton of value for a team that possibly has franchise guys at QB/DE/CB. You have 6 other rounds and multiple day two picks to target defense......but that 1st guy you pick has to extract maximum value to me.....just relative to the overall talent that is likely to be there and the ability to select what would normally be a very high priced position, at a discount.

 

[Triplethreat]

 

[Ohdang]

I think @natedagg made a great point that we might be looking at WR in the draft because we're for sure going to lose one of Jarvis/OBJ in the next 1-3 years due to price, and we may even lose both. DPJ looks like a keeper, and I do think we should try to keep Hollywood around because Baker seems to have something with him. But that's 2 guys who are neither #1 or #2's right now and probably never will be. Solid guys to have, but we might draft what we think is a future #1 or #2 WR because we're anticipating the loss of our current #1 and #2 in the near future.

I'm pretty okay with that, but I'd prefer they restructured and kept both and use the picks elsewhere. Realistically though we can't count on that to happen because we can't force OBJ or Landry to do it. If the options are restructure or be moved, they may choose be moved, and then what?

Ideally they're looking at really investing in the defense this year, but if they go WR I won't be mad.

 

[Randolphkeys]

I think @natedagg made a great point that we might be looking at WR in the draft because we're for sure going to lose one of Jarvis/OBJ in the next 1-3 years due to price, and we may even lose both. DPJ looks like a keeper, and I do think we should try to keep Hollywood around because Baker seems to have something with him. But that's 2 guys who are neither #1 or #2's right now and probably never will be. Solid guys to have, but we might draft what we think is a future #1 or #2 WR because we're anticipating the loss of our current #1 and #2 in the near future.

I'm pretty okay with that, but I'd prefer they restructured and kept both and use the picks elsewhere. Realistically though we can't count on that to happen because we can't force OBJ or Landry to do it. If the options are restructure or be moved, they may choose be moved, and then what?

Ideally they're looking at really investing in the defense this year, but if they go WR I won't be mad.

Is there any evidence that a highly drafted receiver needs 1-3 years to develop into a starter?

I see evidence to the contrary. It's clear from year one what a team is going to get.

 

[Ohdang]

Is there any evidence that a highly drafted receiver needs 1-3 years to develop into a starter?

I see evidence to the contrary. It's clear from year one what a team is going to get.

Needs? No, we just saw Jefferson prove that you can be pretty elite pretty fast. Likely to happen in the first 1-3 years? That I think is pretty debatable.

 

[Randolphkeys]

Needs? No, we just saw Jefferson prove that you can be pretty elite pretty fast. Likely to happen in the first 1-3 years? That I think is pretty debatable.

That's literally my point. There is no reason to draft a receiver because of 1-3 years down the line. None.

 

[Out of the Rafters at the Q]

That's literally my point. There is no reason to draft a receiver because of 1-3 years down the line. None.

I think players still develop.

Golladay wasn't a stud in year one. I still like someone like Denzel Mims.

But the old "man, it really takes three years for a receiver to develop" adage is complete garbage.

I would be absolutely shocked if Berry had WR as a critical positional need right now. If a WR is the BPA, you make the pick, but you're not heading into this draft saying you have to spend a premium asset on the position. OBJ, Landry, Higgins, DPJ and Hodge is a very complete and competent WR group.

 

[Ohdang]

That's literally my point. There is no reason to draft a receiver because of 1-3 years down the line. None.

I disagree, and the reason why I do is because most WR do not contribute at a #1 or #2 level in the beginning of their careers. The very select few who do will be very likely off the board by the time we pick. A late first round WR is definitely not what I want them to do, but if they have one they like on the board and none of the defensive guys they really liked are still there, I will understand the pick, regardless of whether I like it or not.

What I'd really like to see happen is them drafting JOK at 26, and then grabbing the best available DL/DB's in the 2nd-4th rounds. 5th round and beyond I would be happy with any position if they think they're good enough to make the roster on a contender and contribute. But we don't know how the draft board will play out, or how free agency will play out. I can definitely see a world where we sign defense and draft a receiver, or one where we draft all defense and sign basically nobody of consequence because we're prioritizing cap flexibility and re-signing our current guys coming up for big contracts. One thing I don't see them doing is signing any receivers because they have too much money tied up in the position already.

 

[Randolphkeys]

What I'd really like to see happen is them drafting JOK at 26, and then grabbing the best available DL/DB's in the 2nd-4th rounds. 5th round and beyond I would be happy with any position if they think they're good enough to make the roster on a contender and contribute. But we don't know how the draft board will play out, or how free agency will play out. I can definitely see a world where we sign defense and draft a receiver, or one where we draft all defense and sign basically nobody of consequence because we're prioritizing cap flexibility and re-signing our current guys coming up for big contracts. One thing I don't see them doing is signing any receivers because they have too much money tied up in the position already.

I agree with everything in this paragraph without question. I'd go as far as say 2nd and 3rd rounds are great for building the youth core, but then 4th round and onwards the goal is BPA regardless of position.

I just think a few people have been ultra focused on receivers, and it is valuable to back up and take a wider view. Getting caught up in any one position aside from QB can lead to overlooking the best blueprint for the team overall.

I'd be happy with literally any defensive position group on day one and two, and there better be an incredible value to pick an offensive player in rounds 2-3. The defense is currently the roadblock between the Browns and the Big Show.

 

[Out of the Rafters at the Q]

I agree with everything in this paragraph without question. I'd go as far as say 2nd and 3rd rounds are great for building the youth core, but then 4th round and onwards the goal is BPA regardless of position.

I just think a few people have been ultra focused on receivers, and it is valuable to back up and take a wider view. Getting caught up in any one position aside from QB can lead to overlooking the best blueprint for the team overall.

I'd be happy with literally any defensive position group on day one and two, and there better be an incredible value to pick an offensive player in rounds 2-3. The defense is currently the roadblock between the Browns and the Big Show.

I'll be quite worried if we don't address our defensive line. I don't like to draft for position, but I'd hope that at some point in the top three rounds, a defensive lineman is the BPA. I think that's a group we need to start bolstering, so we're not paying 10+ million a year to Sheldon Richardson free agents in the future to fix our deficiencies.

ETA: I hope I'm wrong on Jordan Elliott, but he's not someone I have pegged as a quality starter in the future. If you have him as a quality piece, and the Browns make a DE splash in free agency, that position group isn't nearly as bad as it looks to me. Myles, Sheldon, Billings, FA with Elliott as depth at DT, and Gustin and Weaver at DE could turn into some quality players... or it could be a whole lot of trash, with only Myles being an impact player.

 

[CBBI]

I have no problem picking a WR in the first round this year if that's the best player on the board. The Browns absolutely need more speed and athleticism at that position.

Unfortunately I think Higgins is going to sign elsewhere in the next week and one or both of Beckham/Landry will be gone as early as this time next year.