Browns Open to Trading No.1 Overall Pick in 2018 NFL Draft

[Augustiniak]

most of us and the media discuss the jets paying a fortune for cousins and then drafting help around him.  another route is to trade up to #3 or 4, use a 2nd rounder and other draft collateral, perhaps next year, and use all the cap room to beef up the other positions.  i would have no problem if they dealt both 2nd rounders to move up to get darnold and paid a lot for offensive linemen, for example. 

[UntouchableCrew]

6 minutes ago, JiF said:

No where near it.  I think he's a better receiver than RB.  He's a bit on the soft side.  You're taking Barkley that high but you're also looking to compliment him with a goalline/short yardage back because he cant push the pile.  That's not the type of RB I'm taking at #10 overall, let alone #1.  These other dudes that have been going early you never need to take out of the game...Gurley, Zeke, Fournette.  That's not Barkley.

Barkley is 230 and squats 600 pounds. You definitely don't need to take him out on short yardage.

Barkley is literally the best example of an "every down back" to come out in years.

[ZachEY]

34 minutes ago, Miss Lonelyhearts said:

I'm looking at it like your offer is kind of a wash with the deal Philadelphia made to go 8 to 2, with the second-rounder two years sooner but without the third and fourth. I think 6 to 1 costs more so it would have to be both. Right?

Yeah, I don't think my offer actually gets it done.  But, if the price is this year's entire draft, I'm not sure I'm comfortable going all-in on any one of these guys.  I'd get creative w/ 2019, I guess.

[JustInFudge]

6 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

Barkley is 230 and squats 600 pounds. You definitely don't need to take him out on short yardage.

Barkley is literally the best example of an "every down back" to come out in years.

Meh - i'll have to find it but someone broke his film down and there are numerous examples of him showing that he's not effective in short yardage situations.  You can be as strong as an ox but that doesnt just immediately translate to being great in short yardage situations.

He's a phenomenal receiver which in theory makes him a great "every down back" but game on the line and you need someone to get your 1 yard at the goalline, I'm not sure Barkley is your guy.

[ZachEY]

37 minutes ago, JiF said:

Meh, I understand the logic but I think it just doesnt make a ton of sense to go that route.   Especially as you just pointed out, this is a very flawed group.  

If I were the Browns, I'd take the Redskins approach but revised a little.  If they're in love with a QB at 1, take him.  If they're not and they're splitting hairs between the top 4 guys, I'd try to trade out of #1 and take the BAP at #4.  Then I'd take a guy in the mid rounds, like Faulk, Lauretta, White, Ferguson, etc.  And role into next season with Kizer, Darnold/Rosen/Mayfield/Allen, Faulk/Lauretta/White/Ferguson and let them a battle it out in camp.

This being a flawed group is all the more reason to do it in my opinion.

[UntouchableCrew]

1 minute ago, JiF said:

Meh - i'll have to find it but someone broke his film down and there are numerous examples of him showing that he's not effective in short yardage situations.  You can be as strong as an ox but that doesnt just immediately translate to being great in short yardage situations.

He's a phenomenal receiver which in theory makes him a great "every down back" but game on the line and you need someone to get your 1 yard at the goalline, I'm not sure Barkley is your guy.

I agree that for a guy his size he's not really a true "power" back but I'm not worried about his ability to pick up short yardage. His blocking, route running, soft hands, vision, speed and agility are all great and he's a tough to take down in the open field. Great stiff arm. He's about as well rounded a RB as you'll ever see. I'm not sure I'd ever take a RB at 6 but if you're gonna take one I think he's the type you'd take. Far more well rounded (and dynamic) than Fournette or Elliot IMO.

[Miss Lonelyhearts]

2 minutes ago, gEYno said:

This being a flawed group is all the more reason to do it in my opinion.

They get to take two before we can even take one! How is this even a thing?

[RichardTodd27]

11 hours ago, Smashmouth said:

"Still Just a RB ?"  thats pretty funny

Well you can Pose that Question to 90 % of all SB winners that had dynamic RB's on their squads and the Dynasties of the 70's Steelers with Harris the 90's Cowboys with Smith, The 70's Cowboys with Dorsett, The Niners Dynasties with Craig and Watters The greatest show on Turf with Marshall Faulk The Redskins with John Riggins. The list is long but there are even teams who didn't win SB's who had great RB's and were always in the playoff Picture. 

Not to mention if you have a great RB it takes all that pressure off your young QB or any QB for that matter.. Ask Drew Brees how much a great RB helps him especially one that can also pick up a blitz. They give a QB so many options beyond just the called play and are a great safety valve. Teams like the Jets that basically ignore the position have been and always will be sh*t on offense as long as they take that approach

The examples you gave are from decades ago. In today's NFL, stud running backs aren't neccessary to winning a Super Bowl. Just look at the recent Super Bowl Champs (Philly, NE, Denver, Seattle, etc...) I think Marshawn Lynch is the only RB that qualifies as a stud.

And the Saints running success had more to do with their improved O-line/system than their 2 running backs. That's why they traded away one of the greatest RB's of all time - Apete.

Focus on our O-line, not our RB. Quality RB's are dime a dozen in this league and easy to come by.

[ZachEY]

5 minutes ago, Miss Lonelyhearts said:

They get to take two before we can even take one! How is this even a thing?

Guard forbid (found it!!) they end up with two young QBs and can ship one of them off for 2 more 1st round picks.

[Smashmouth]

6 hours ago, JiF said:

Hmmm...a few more picks for a team that just went 0-16 or a RB at #1 overall???  I think the smarter move would be to acquire more picks and completely rebuild the roster from top to bottom. 

 

You would be right if the roster was terrible but its not I feel they need coaching more than anything, They are stacked at WR they have a good OL and they have some nice players on defense that they can add more too in the 2nd and 3rd round.

Imagine an Offense with Gordon, Coleman, Barkley, any 1 of the top 4 QB's coming out maybe even Lamar Jackson in which case they can trade back with the 4th pick and aquire the picks you mentioned... The only reason I say grab Barkley Quick is because I feel they can still get a QB at 4 Especially Josh Allen who they are reported to like a lot rather than losing out on Barkley if the Giants decide they want him. I mean if the Browns really are in love with Allen what difference does it make in what order they pick the RB and the QB if they can assure themselves the best RB in the draft. You can get both with the Barkley pick 1st over all but there is a chance you lose out on Barkley if you go QB first. I think Barkley is going to be that Marshall Faulk type player that can at times just take over a game and take enormous pressure of the young QB you draft

[Smashmouth]

4 hours ago, RichardTodd27 said:

The examples you gave are from decades ago. In today's NFL, stud running backs aren't neccessary to winning a Super Bowl. Just look at the recent Super Bowl Champs (Philly, NE, Denver, Seattle, etc...) I think Marshawn Lynch is the only RB that qualifies as a stud.

And the Saints running success had more to do with their improved O-line/system than their 2 running backs. That's why they traded away one of the greatest RB's of all time - Apete.

Focus on our O-line, not our RB. Quality RB's are dime a dozen in this league and easy to come by.

Philly was stacked with good to possibly great RB's. NE always seems to be able to plug in good backs that help them in the cold months but thats NE and thats a great system. Denver won their SB on defense alone since their offense was anemic. RB's in the playoff months or in December when on a run for the playoffs are extremely important especially when the wind is blowing 30 miles and hour and you just can't throw the football and make anything happen. The current NFL has been putting more emphasis on the RB Lately and I think they will continue too so at the very least teams can makes things much easier for the QB

[MaxAF]

Jets will stay out at 6 and pick a DE

[BrickTamland]

So interesting. So many things in play and so much at stake.

Personally Im not 100% sold that cleveland is done with kizer. They may see saquon as the guy who can help kizer develop...esp if they also take nelson. They could give kizer the year along with a decent vet in case kizer sucks. They could trade up next year if necessary while growing this year.

Giants may keep eli a couple more years. Their oline sucks. They too could use a rb. And they tend to love pass rushers. A trade down would help them alot due to a bunch if bloated contracts.

Colts got 2 qbs. I think theyd love saquon or chubb or a trade down.

If denver gets cousins, then i could see the top 5 have only 0 or 1 qb taken. At 5 with cousins anyone could be in play for them.

Trades obviously quite possible too.

Crazy.

[Smashmouth]

7 hours ago, gEYno said:

If the Browns were smart, they would do nothing resembling this.  This is an aggressively bad idea.  They have an unreal chance to secure a QB.  They should take Darnold/Rosen at one and then Mayfield/Allen at 4.  Then you draft your RB at 33.

They have a rare opportunity here, would be a shame for them if they blew it.  Potentially good for the Jets though, so I guess I hope it happens.

Taking 2 QB with 1 and 4 is insane and way worse than grabbing Barkley. If you want to take two QB's then maybe you take one in the second or thrid as an insurance policy and possible trade bait later on. The draft slot itself will net you much more in the way of picks in comparison to a player riding the bench on your roster for a few years contributing nothing. The Browns have the option to take a QB at 1 or 4 and trade either pick for a nice haul of draft picks rather then getting what usually amounts to 1 maybe 2 picks if they are lucky with the odd QB out.

Taking Barkley at number 1 insures you get probably the best talent over all in the entire draft not just at RB plus whatever QB you take at 4 which could be any of those you mentioned. Barkley insures much more than just getting a RB you get a valuable receiver which is his most important aspect along with taking enormous pressure off your young QB. By leaning on Barkley in his early years when hes able to carry the load you open up the entire offense loaded with WR's and make things so much easier for the Young QB. 

People need to get out of this stupid mind set that RB's are not what they used to be because if you have a great receiving RB what you are essentially adding is another slot guy, another safety valve, and another protector of the QB to pick up the blitz. 

[Smashmouth]

6 hours ago, gEYno said:

Guard forbid (found it!!) they end up with two young QBs and can ship one of them off for 2 more 1st round picks.

that's never happening ever. if they take 2 QB's and one rides the bench then that shows he lost out to the other QB lowering his price in a trade. You want more picks you trade the pick on draft day every single time. That or you draft a guy like Lamar Jackson in round 2 after getting 3 or 4 top picks for trading out of the 1 or 4 slot.

[Smashmouth]

7 hours ago, JiF said:

Lynch - Seattle. 

That's it.  Pretty much every other team in the SB has been RBC.

How many teams have gone to the playoffs with dynamic RB's ? I think you see those numbers rise by a large margin. The better teams always win out in the playoffs so that's not just relying on the QB and or a dynamic RB. Its been proven over and over that great QB's and great RB's can't just run all over the elite teams but they certainly play a huge part in getting you to the playoffs every year so eventually your going to win. It took Peyton Manning many years to win a SB because most of the teams he lost to were simply better teams. The trend in the NFL has been steadily throwing to the RB more and more and when you have that kind of fire power underneath it opens up the whole offense. Ever wonder if Alex Smith would have been putting up the great numbers he has in KC with out some of the best runner/receiver type running backs hes had the chance to play with over the past 4 seasons ? Those teams lost cause the defense sh*t the bed just like the defenses did in this years SB

[JustInFudge]

9 minutes ago, Smashmouth said:

How many teams have gone to the playoffs with dynamic RB's ? I think you see those numbers rise by a large margin. The better teams always win out in the playoffs so that's not just relying on the QB and or a dynamic RB. Its been proven over and over that great QB's and great RB's can't just run all over the elite teams but they certainly play a huge part in getting you to the playoffs every year so eventually your going to win. It took Peyton Manning many years to win a SB because most of the teams he lost to were simply better teams. The trend in the NFL has been steadily throwing to the RB more and more and when you have that kind of fire power underneath it opens up the whole offense. Ever wonder if Alex Smith would have been putting up the great numbers he has in KC with out some of the best runner/receiver type running backs hes had the chance to play with over the past 4 seasons ? Those teams lost cause the defense sh*t the bed just like the defenses did in this years SB

I dont disagree.  I'd like a dynamic RB as well, I just think you can find better value later in the draft.  The gap in the past few years hasnt been that wide from the 1st round guys to the 3rd round guys.  The Jets need all the help they can get, I'd prefer them not use #6 on what I would consider another, non-premium position. 

[ZachEY]

1 hour ago, Smashmouth said:

Taking 2 QB with 1 and 4 is insane and way worse than grabbing Barkley. If you want to take two QB's then maybe you take one in the second or thrid as an insurance policy and possible trade bait later on. The draft slot itself will net you much more in the way of picks in comparison to a player riding the bench on your roster for a few years contributing nothing. The Browns have the option to take a QB at 1 or 4 and trade either pick for a nice haul of draft picks rather then getting what usually amounts to 1 maybe 2 picks if they are lucky with the odd QB out.

Taking Barkley at number 1 insures you get probably the best talent over all in the entire draft not just at RB plus whatever QB you take at 4 which could be any of those you mentioned. Barkley insures much more than just getting a RB you get a valuable receiver which is his most important aspect along with taking enormous pressure off your young QB. By leaning on Barkley in his early years when hes able to carry the load you open up the entire offense loaded with WR's and make things so much easier for the Young QB. 

People need to get out of this stupid mind set that RB's are not what they used to be because if you have a great receiving RB what you are essentially adding is another slot guy, another safety valve, and another protector of the QB to pick up the blitz. 

Insurance policy for what?  That the 3rd best QB doesn’t work out?  That’s why you take 2 of them.  It’s an insignificant investment to greatly increase your odds of actually having one.  Something I’d think a team that’s hasn’t had one since the moon landing would appreciate.  The difference between Barkley and the next RB is irrelevant in comparison to doubling your chances at a real QB.  You can also get next years “once in a decade” running back because they literally come out every year.

Not to mention the fact that it’s already been demonstrated that these “once in a decade” RBs don’t actually win championships.

[ZachEY]

1 hour ago, Smashmouth said:

that's never happening ever. if they take 2 QB's and one rides the bench then that shows he lost out to the other QB lowering his price in a trade. You want more picks you trade the pick on draft day every single time. That or you draft a guy like Lamar Jackson in round 2 after getting 3 or 4 top picks for trading out of the 1 or 4 slot.

You are aware that he could lose out and still be good, and because of the value of the position, people would pay?  You’re also aware that every year some team gives up more than that value for 1 QB?  Jimmy Garrapolo was had for a two, and was rumored to have been valued at more, but the Pats wanted him outside the division, and got a high 2 for a guy that didn’t throw a meaningful NFL pass.  If the pats put him at auction, he’d be a Brown and they’d be picking at 4, at worst.  Any Jet fan who wouldn’t give up 6 and then some for him is a fool.

[sourceworx]

11 minutes ago, gEYno said:

Insurance policy for what?  That the 3rd best QB doesn’t work out?  That’s why you take 2 of them.  It’s an insignificant investment to greatly increase your odds of actually having one.  Something I’d think a team that’s hasn’t had one since the moon landing would appreciate.  The difference between Barkley and the next RB is irrelevant in comparison to doubling your chances at a real QB.  You can also get next years “once in a decade” running back because they literally come out every year.

Not to mention the fact that it’s already been demonstrated that these “once in a decade” RBs don’t actually win championships.

Completely agree. If the Jets don't sign Cousins, they should follow this strategy. Take the best available QB at 6, then take Lauletta or Falk in the second.

Use free agency to build the roster.

[MDL_JET]

1 hour ago, JiF said:

I dont disagree.  I'd like a dynamic RB as well, I just think you can find better value later in the draft.  The gap in the past few years hasnt been that wide from the 1st round guys to the 3rd round guys.  The Jets need all the help they can get, I'd prefer them not use #6 on what I would consider another, non-premium position. 

Outside of QB, what premium position/player is worth it at 6 right now? Corner?

[Pcola]

2 hours ago, JiF said:

I dont disagree.  I'd like a dynamic RB as well, I just think you can find better value later in the draft.  The gap in the past few years hasnt been that wide from the 1st round guys to the 3rd round guys.  The Jets need all the help they can get, I'd prefer them not use #6 on what I would consider another, non-premium position. 

Most years I would agree with you.  But Barkley is so much better than all of the other prospects, that this year is different.  This guy has better tools than Zeke Elliott without the off the field problems.  Unless he goes to the Browns, he is going to be the best RB in the league immediately.

[HighPitch]

At this point just package the 6, 2 seconds and next years 1st for the number 1 overall and take mayfield. 

I wonder if Cleveland has a guy with a bloated contract to unload. We have money. Essentially take that guy too and keep one of our second rounders. I dunno

[joewilly12]

15 minutes ago, HighPitch said:

At this point just package the 6, 2 seconds and next years 1st for the number 1 overall and take mayfield. 

I wonder if Cleveland has a guy with a bloated contract to unload. We have money. Essentially take that guy too and keep one of our second rounders. I dunno

Josh Gordon 

[Smashmouth]

49 minutes ago, sourceworx said:

Completely agree. If the Jets don't sign Cousins, they should follow this strategy. Take the best available QB at 6, then take Lauletta or Falk in the second.

Use free agency to build the roster.

Source this is exactly what I was talking about I disagree with taking a QB at 1 and 4  (in the Browns Case)but I agree with taking a QB in the second in our case. I'm also trying to explain the Browns can do both they can get a QB get Barkley and get a QB in round 2 or 3. I believe Barkley is going to be an absolute stud in the NFL he also has a very thick frame designed to take the beating of an NFL running back. If we get Cousins I would love Barkley to be there at 6

[YankeeJet22]

29 minutes ago, HighPitch said:

At this point just package the 6, 2 seconds and next years 1st for the number 1 overall and take mayfield. 

I wonder if Cleveland has a guy with a bloated contract to unload. We have money. Essentially take that guy too and keep one of our second rounders. I dunno

What

[Smashmouth]

10 hours ago, Miss Lonelyhearts said:

And he's not even the first running back off the board in hindsight. Is Barkley really anything close to Peterson or Bo Jackson? Those are the only two guys in our lifetime I would even consider taking first.

He's a better receiving back then both of them and in today's NFL one could argue Receiving it the best trait to have as an NFL running back.

[Smashmouth]

10 hours ago, prime21 said:

Darnold-Rosen-Mayfield.....Allen.   Are any of theses guys way better than the other 3?

Trading the first pick will bring in a haul of picks and you can still land a franchise caliber QB with the 4th pick.  If they are totally smitten with one of the the QB's then make the pick.  If not then you have to consider trades. 

IMO, Barkley at #1, one of the 4 QB's at #4 and you have won the draft without making another pick.   Cleveland has 3 second round picks.  They have a shot to be a pretty good team in a few years.

Bravo. Seems like a no brainer to me 

[ZachEY]

1 hour ago, sourceworx said:

Completely agree. If the Jets don't sign Cousins, they should follow this strategy. Take the best available QB at 6, then take Lauletta or Falk in the second.

Use free agency to build the roster.

FA to solidify the offensive line, to protect your investment at QB.  Otherwise, no reason to sign any bad contracts, and most of FA is bad contracts.

[hawk]

11 hours ago, Miss Lonelyhearts said:

And he's not even the first running back off the board in hindsight. Is Barkley really anything close to Peterson or Bo Jackson? Those are the only two guys in our lifetime I would even consider taking first.

http://www.nfl.com/draft/2018/profiles/saquon-barkley?id=2559901

Comparison - Barry Sanders fwiw

Dont know how to post article...sry

[ZachEY]

11 hours ago, prime21 said:

Darnold-Rosen-Mayfield.....Allen.   Are any of theses guys way better than the other 3?

Trading the first pick will bring in a haul of picks and you can still land a franchise caliber QB with the 4th pick.  If they are totally smitten with one of the the QB's then make the pick.  If not then you have to consider trades. 

IMO, Barkley at #1, one of the 4 QB's at #4 and you have won the draft without making another pick.   Cleveland has 3 second round picks.  They have a shot to be a pretty good team in a few years.

The Browns already have a "haul of picks," what they need is a QB.  Now is the opportunity to do that.  The Browns have talent all over the field too, much more than the Jets.  The reason the Jets were better was because the Browns played their Christian Hackenberg and the Jets kept theirs at 3rd string.

[RedBeardedSavage]

11 hours ago, Miss Lonelyhearts said:

And he's not even the first running back off the board in hindsight. Is Barkley really anything close to Peterson or Bo Jackson? Those are the only two guys in our lifetime I would even consider taking first.

 

Besides his size/speed combination, Barkleys receiving ability is special.  

And if you were the Browns and you had the #1 and the #4, you might, for strategic reasons, take Barkley first and then see which of the quarterbacks makes it to four.   

 

[ZachEY]

Just now, RedBeardedSavage said:

Besides his size/speed combination, Barkleys receiving ability is special.  

And if you were the Browns and you had the #1 and the #4, you might, for strategic reasons, take Barkley first and then see which of the quarterbacks makes it to four.   

 

And, what if you're unhappy about the one who makes it to 4?  Or, what if the one who makes it to 4 busts?  Then, you still have no QB for the receiver you drafted at 1.

[Pcola]

FWIW, no team EVER is going to take multiple QBs early in the draft.  Teams need to do the research and make the right choice.  Period.  Washington did it because ownership made the first pick and Shanghai made the second one.  

More importantly, just taking whatever QB is left over at 6 is complete evidence of draft failure that has kept this team in the tank the last 4 decades.

For instance, the Jets could see this year’s crop as Rosen being the best prospect and worthy of the number 1 pick.  They could like Darnold’s potential but rank him a little lower.  They could see Mayfield as potential a star but has the attitude and mental make up to possibly be a disaster.  They could look at Josh Allen as a long shot because of his accuracy issues and lack of any great film.

With this in mind and based on their intl, Rosen would warrant taking at 6 or they could make a move up to 1 to get him.

Darnold could be an option at 2 or 3 if Rosen is gone or at 6.  And under this scenario, no other QB is worth taking with our first pick.  There are other elite prospects in Barkley, Chubb, Fitzpatrick, heck even Nelson that are so much better than settling on the QB garbage left overs.  Just take a perennial star and target Falk or Lauletta and hope for the best.  

To be honest, if Macc can’t get Cousins, Rosen or Darnold, he is not going to get another offseason of work.

[Maxman]

On 3/1/2018 at 6:14 PM, joewilly12 said:

 

✔@RichCimini

 

Jets open to trading up, Browns willing to listen, so ... http://es.pn/2GUQubb 

5:50 PM - Mar 1, 2018

Jets open to trading up, Browns willing to listen, so ...

The Jets haven't traded up in the draft since 2009, but could be willing to this year if GM Mike Maccagnan sees a player he wants, particularly a QB.

espn.com

•  

Duplicate thread and then a link only. Double word score.