Browns GM: Andrew Berry it is.

[Soda]

Also, I don't care whose opinions are what, refrain from personal attacks.

What about Hee Haw? Can I attack the fact that he let himself get into a position where he's got one candidate for GM left?

 

[Soda]

To be fair, if we end up with Berry, he was literally the front runner for the job until a week ago when we got Paton to agree to an interview and not many people had much of an issue with it.

I don't have an issue with Andrew Berry at all. If you want to bring up the club owner, I'll get hooked on that to a fault.

I have an issue as to how this charade has been conducted. ESPECIALLY if they knew the duo they wanted the entire time. The NFL doesn't do "hmm, don't finalize your life plans until after I sit on the info I gained from that interview for a week," but the Browns are seemingly trying to make it a thing. Now, they have one good GM candidate left, which is a process failure. If they go to unnamed guy #3 or #4, that also will have been mismanaged messaging from the organization.

 

[MoFlo]

To be fair, if we end up with Berry, he was literally the front runner for the job until a week ago when we got Paton to agree to an interview and not many people had much of an issue with it.

Precisely.

And if we didn't have Stefanski, it sounds like there was zero chance he even agrees to interview here.

Paton taking himself out of consideration is only bad because it fuels a bunch of false narratives that a lot of the media likes to spew.

While Haslam will have to keep proving he's changed to get top level guys, I have zero issue with how they've conducted either search this off-season. In fact, I've found very little about to complain about regarding either search.

 

[NorthCoastBias]

Me, watching a man melt down before my eyes

 

[red.]

This whole GM process was a sham. It was always Berry. Should have just hired him. This long out process for what? I’m just confused by all this waiting. They were probably trying to appease Stefanski with the Paton interview.

I have zero faith in Berry. Hopefully he can prove me wrong, but seeing that 2016/17 draft, I doubt it.

 

[Jack Brickman]

Precisely.

And if we didn't have Stefanski, it sounds like there was zero chance he even agrees to interview here.

Paton taking himself out of consideration is only bad because it fuels a bunch of false narratives that a lot of the media likes to spew.

While Haslam will have to keep proving he's changed to get top level guys, I have zero issue with how they've conducted either search this off-season. In fact, I've found very little about to complain about regarding either search.

It definitely feels like DePodesta is more or less running things, which to me is absolutely a good thing since he actually seems smart enough to know what he's doing. He got his coach and it looks like he's going to get one of his top two GM choices.

 

[Soda]

Me, watching a man melt down before my eyes

"Enjoy him"

I would be happy to discuss what's wrong with my statements, though.

 

[Jack Brickman]

This whole GM process was a sham. It was always Berry. Should have just hired him. This long out process for what? I’m just confused by all this waiting. They were probably trying to appease Stefanski with the Paton interview.

I have zero faith in Berry. Hopefully he can prove me wrong, but seeing that 2016/17 draft, I doubt it.

Outside of the Coleman pick, I don't really see what was so bad about either of those drafts. We drafted quite a few guys who are either starting for us now or were jettisoned by Dorsey and giving useful production to other teams.

And even with the Coleman pick, we traded down multiple times to that spot and got quite a few assets that we ultimately used to draft quality players.

 

[Soda]

Outside of the Coleman pick, I don't really see what was so bad about either of those drafts. We drafted quite a few guys who are either starting for us now or were jettisoned by Dorsey and giving useful production to other teams.

And even with the Coleman pick, we traded down multiple times to that spot and got quite a few assets that we ultimately used to draft quality players.

If this becomes the norm again, I may have to leave it all behind. That said, if we're counting Carl Nassib as giving useful production to other teams, then you can't say from the other side of your mouth that Chad Thomas is a bust.

 

[Jack Brickman]

If this becomes the norm again, I may have to leave it all behind. That said, if we're counting Carl Nassib as giving useful production to other teams, then you can't say from the other side of your mouth that Chad Thomas is a bust.

1. I hope we do start trading down again. That's what smart teams do. There's more value in having more picks. That's factual.

2. I've never said Chad Thomas was a bust, at least not this year. He provided useful production for us this season.

 

[Soda]

1. I hope we do start trading down again. That's what smart teams do. There's more value in having more picks. That's factual.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. Trading back from 2 to 15 is an abomination. If you're that bad, you need a difference maker. You don't need a few solid contributors; you can get depth in free agency. We needed a QB like Carson Wentz & we needed Julio Jones over Phil Taylor. I've always argued on your side of this, but it's becoming clearer and clearer to me that these past trade-downs have been poor on their returns. Generally, the shittier you are, the more you need to get an impact player.

 

[Smooth]

Until the Browns wash the stink off, the residue of what has occurred will cause candidates to think twice about taking jobs here...

This isn’t necessarily a indictment to who is here or indicative of where Browns are going, but the past does impact how things play out until the narrative can change...

 

[Jack Brickman]

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. Trading back from 2 to 15 is an abomination. If you're that bad, you need a difference maker. You don't need a few solid contributors; you can get depth in free agency.

You can get difference makers throughout the draft. Our best defensive player this year, a guy most of us want the team to bring back, was drafted in the fourth round.

The draft is a crapshoot. No team hits on every pick, and most hit on less than they miss on. That's why there's an incredible value in having more shots at hitting. The more picks you have, the better chance you have to hit on some of them. Yeah, it sucks to trade down from a fan's perspective, but from a statistical standpoint it is almost always smarter than trading up or standing pat unless you're getting a franchise QB.

 

[Soda]

You can get difference makers throughout the draft. Our best defensive player this year, a guy most of us want the team to bring back, was drafted in the fourth round.

The draft is a crapshoot. No team hits on every pick, and most hit on less than they miss on. That's why there's an incredible value in having more shots at hitting. The more picks you have, the better chance you have to hit on some of them. Yeah, it sucks to trade down from a fan's perspective, but from a statistical standpoint it is almost always smarter than trading up or standing pat unless you're getting a franchise QB.

I disagree with "the draft is a crapshoot". No, it's a relative crapshoot. Relative in that the success rate generally fades with draft position. So, you're going to have a higher chance at getting/stumbling-into a good player the higher you pick. That's quite literally what the draft value charts tell us.

 

[FiveThous]

Remember that time that Jarvis Landry was the 3rd best WR on the Browns? Good times.

Oh. Also, it's a national narrative. The Sloan Browns fans are on an island.

Jarvis was the leading WR of a 6-10 team with an underwhelming offense. That doesn't really help your point....