NFL Draft: WFNY Roundtable, Part III

So far, we’ve gone the general route with “need” versus “best player available.”  And while we have decided that the Browns have to err on the side of the player, we aren’t quite sure who exactly that player is.  Today, we discuss a third option: trading down…

Scott: Assume the same hypothetical from yesterday, but with the tertiary option of trading down.  A team is willing to match the infamous point scale and the Browns believe they can move down and still obtain value. 

That said, how far are you willing to move down in the first round to ensure that the Orange and Brown land a play-maker?

Kirk: If the right trade value is there, I would be willing to drop down into the 12-15 range.  At that point, I might try to grab Da’Quan Bowers or one of the other quality defensive ends that should still be available.

DP: They certainly can’t move down as far as they did in 2009.  While I like Alex Mack, there is much more talent in the top half of this year’s first round, and to pass it up simply to load up on lower-round picks isn’t something the Browns can afford to do. 

TD: I am wildly against trading a high pick in next year’s draft for one this year.  Remember Kellen Winslow? Brady Quinn? How did those turn out? I know it’s a new regime, but unless they can get someone like Robert Quinn or Nick Fairley at 12, not a chance I make the move.

Kirk: I agree with TD.  To pull that off, it has to be an absolute home run with someone who was supposed to go in the top-five or top-six falling to the 12 spot.  If we are doing this for Julio Jones or Ryan Kerrigan, I’m not sold.  This team has to be extremely cautious in giving up any picks because that’s why we got Tom Heckert – to draft and draft well.

TD: On the flip side, this team has so many holes and maybe filling two of them right away is intriguing.  But, as Kirk said, they simply cannot afford to miss.

Craig: Devil’s advocate here, but if this season has enabled the Browns to spend more time looking at prospects rather than messing with free agency because of the labor situation, then why not load up this year? The arguments against the Browns getting another first-rounder this year seem to be because Phil Savage drafted Brady Quinn.

While this may seem logical at first, there really is no logic at all.  All you’re saying is that Savage and the Browns got the wrong guy.  The risk quotient isn’t really all that different, especially if the Browns think they will make a significant jump in quality on the field with the 21st most difficult schedule.

Scott: I don’t think Savage/Quinn bothers people as much as Mangini/Veikune/Massaquoi where the team had a top-five selection and then left with a center (admittedly not a sexy pick despite talent level) and a “linebacker” who is no longer with the team.  That said, either is enough to garner a few upset stomachs.

TD: With the amount of holes the Browns have, I don’t think it’s a bad strategy, but maybe it’s just the Cleveland in me that has me leery of the move.  As I said before, they MUST hit on all picks or it’s a major setback.

Craig: The Browns must hit on every pick, but why put 364 daus between them if you don’t have to?

TD: I hear you, but think about how different we felt in September of 2007 and then in September of 2008.

Kirk: Piggybacking off of TD, this team, even with two first-round picks, is not going to be good enough (in my eyes)  to get out of the top 12-14 in next year’s draft without some serious free agent acquisitions.

And I agree, Scott.  If Quinn had worked out, Savage looks like a genius.  For the rest of my life, I will wonder what was running through Eric Mangini’s head with the Veikune pick.

Scott: You mean aside from Veikune’s “motor” and all-around jovial personality?

Steering things back on track, do selections in next year’s draft entice you at all or do the Browns purely need to add picks in this year’s extravaganza?

Kirk: I’m open to picks next year, but I will say that it’s quite a buzzkill if they trade away their first-round pick this year for one next year.  I think the fan base and front office is looking for someone that will add to the young core of Joe Haden, TJ Ward, Joe Thomas, Colt McCoy and Peyton Hillis.  Moving out of the sixth spot severely reduces the likelihood of this.

Andrew: I agree with this sentiment.  I think the Browns have such a talent deficiency that I would favor stockpiling picks this  year over next.  But in general, I don’t see a need to get too cute or creative with this.  Just make your picks when you have them, be smart about who you select and don’t make this more complicated than it already is.

Bowers: Kirk’s use of the term buzzkill in regard to trading down is pretty accurate here.  I think the fans want – and the team needs – a stud in the first round.  If you can get a great value for moving to the eighth or ninth pick, then maybe.  But I’d rather they just stay where they are and get a top-six talent.

Unless they want to trade back to 15 or so and draft my cousin Da’Quan.  I’d be cool with that.

TD: Maybe it’s a contradiction, but you can’t sell this year’s high picks for something next year when the Browns are in dire need of help now.  Defensive line, linebacker, wide receiver, etc.  They need this all this year, not next.

Andrew: I think with a new coach, a new system and so many unknowns with regard to the lockout, there is just no way to know how good the Browns will be next year and where that first-round pick will be.  To me, there’s not enough information to make an informed decision, so I would favor sitting tight with the picks they have and not get too crazy loading up on picks at the expense of either this season or next.

Craig: Back to the original question, I am not interested in moving down this year.  If they can move down a couple of spots for a team desperate enough, I’m okay with it, but I would not want to move out of the top ten.  Also, the Browns would really have to hold somebody hostage for me to be happy about it.

Andrew: Yeah, if Julio Jones is the guy they want, and he’ll be there at 10, I’d be okay if they slid down to seven or eight.  But really, what are you going to get in return for moving down two spots?  Probably not enough to risk not getting the guy you want.

DP: Second-round pick.  Sincerely, Butch Davis.

  • mgbode

    just look at the thread from yesterday. if worst-case scenario plays out like you put it there, then yeah, trade down if someone is willing to pay for it.

    there are legitimate cases for 4-5 players at the #6 pick. So, trading down even to #10-12 range likely still garners one of those players. if we believe in a guy like Corey Liuget (example) or that a JJ Watt will slip, then even a little further down should be okay.

    the key will be to not miss on the extra picks we acquire which is what we always seem to do when we trade down. the arguments above as mentioned seem mostly based on past experience which is somewhat invalid based on a different FO.

  • B-bo

    If Peterson, Dareus, and Green are all gone by the time we are up, I’d be all for moving down if we can–but no further than 17. If the Pats want to give up 17 and 28 for 6, jump on that. Watt and/or Carimi could be options at 17, and Clayborn, Paea, Kerrigan, and Heyward could all be options at 28. In reality, though, that’s not how the Pats work when it comes to the draft, so I’m not holding my breath.

  • mgbode

    @B-bo – ‘the hood’ likes to trade down and accumulate more picks for the next seasons draft. however, this year, with so many picks, and a top-heavy 1st round, there is a chance that they could want a particular player and move up for him.

    Here are some of our ‘options’ if we do decide to trade down trying to match trade value (picking one from each region of the draft for examples)

    http://www.draftcountdown.com/features/Value-Chart.php

    #6 + #70 = 1840pts
    #9 + #40 = 1850pts (w/ Dallas)
    #17 + #28 + #60 = 1910pts (w/ NE)

    #6 = 1600pts
    #12 + #43 = 1670pts (w/ Minn)

    I like the NE trade the best because we then have the ammunition to actually get back into the 1st round if someone drops we really like (#37+#60 =~ 20th overall selection). 3 1st round picks from our 1st, 2nd, and 3rd round picks (possibly Watt, Carimi, and Liuget)

  • stin4u

    A dream scenario would be one or both of the QB’s still remaining on the board or Peterson. If Peterson is not their guy and Green and Dareus are gone you can definitely expect Dallas to want to move up for Peterson or Washington/Tenn/Minn. and even SF to move up for a QB. In that scenario you’re still looking at potentially Julio Jones, Quinn, Bowers, Watt, and Amukamara being available 7-12.

    If you can get a second or third rounder (this year) to move down a few spots I think you pull the trigger on it. I can’t condone moving down significantly (15-20) unless you’re getting spectacular value in return.

    I must say that I am unbelievably excited for tomorrow night.

  • Scott

    Would much, much, much rather have Peterson (and Green obviously if he is available) than say Jones and a 3rd rounder or even The Prince and a 2nd rounder. All signs are screaming to Peterson and Green being elite. it has happened plenty before, but a lot of people would have to be wrong for those 2 not to be All-Pros. Believe it or not, I think this team (and fan base) needs a game-changer on offense or defense more than it needs 2 solid starters. You can get them later but obviously you have a better chance of getting a game changer at #6. If you did draft over again, Revis would be the #1 pick as would the Johnson WRs (Andre and Calvin). Can’t just do what the fans want cause its sexy, but trading down just doesn’t do it for me.

  • Sactorious

    With the Falcons reportedly looking to get into the Top 10 to grab Green or Jones and the rumors of a Browns-Vikings trade involving #12 this year for our first rounder next year plus #37 this year, the Browns conceivably could grab 2 top tier guys (Peterson and whomever) this year, and have the Falcons #1 next year… Absolutely not going to happen, but fun to think about….

  • mgbode

    @Sactorious – you lost me. how do we grab 2 top tier guys if we trade away our #6 pick to the Falcons (so no way Peterson is there at #12)?

  • bobby

    The browns have such a talent deficit that they really need to just stay the track they are on. I dont think you trade down past 10, unless the Pats do offer both 1st rounds (but I highly doubt it). Even if the scenario presents itself, sticking at 6 and getting Quinn or Fairley would be my plan.

  • Scott

    By the way, the more i think about it, Green still being there at #6 is a total pipe-dream. He is long gone by then, we should accept that. One way or another (trade-up or one of top 5 teams) probably Peterson is gone as well. Only chance to trade down is if someone wants a QB. With San Fran and Tennessee right behind us though and potentially thinking QB, this is a possibility. To me, the gap between Dareus, Miller, Green, Peterson and the rest of the field is enormous. always feel like we are just outside the picture. although i felt that way last year also and we came away with Haden.

  • stin4u

    @Scott – The gap between Jones and Green isn’t as dramatic as you’re making it out to be. To me its a 1a/1b situation. I think he winds up being the pick and they’ll only slide back if they’re confident he’ll still be around by said trade choice.

  • Scott

    Hate to say it, but I’d love to be a fly on the Steelers WarRoom wall. If they ranked Jones high (1b) and another Hines Ward, then I’d believe it. Otherwise, everything you hear is that Green is a once every 5 or decade kind of guy and Jones could be good/great.

  • stin4u

    Every year there is a once in a decade player that is a can’t miss and flops. I would absolutely love to have Green but, I think you’re right, I think he’s gone at 6. And, Jones is too good of a fit size/speed/system wise to justify looking elsewhere. The fall off in WR talent is greater than the fall off in DE talent into the following rounds IMO. I wouldn’t stake my reputation on it, but I have a feeling both these guys are going to be impact receivers in the NFL.

  • Scott

    I am on record as saying we have to take Jones if Peterson and Green are gone because we need to pair up McCoy with a receiver and give him a fighting chance. I just like Green a lot, lot better. I agree with the fall off in WR talent so I take Jones before I take a DE or trade down.

  • bobby

    I disagree with you guys about Jones. Before the Combine Jones was not this high on any draft boards. He was not regarded at “1b” to Green. I think he had a good workout but I just was not impressed with him at Alabama. I watched too many times when he didn’t make the catch or got locked down or just didnt fight for the ball. That is not a guy we need for McCoy. Gotta go back to the tape. Green could have a complete highlight reel from 1 game. You cannot say that of Jones. If Jon Baldwin did not have the “character issues” would he be 1c? I dont know if you can say that Jones is head over heals this guy. Then there are plenty of later WRs like Young from Boise, or my favorite for a later pick, Vincent Brown from SDSU. WR is as tricky as any to predict NFL success and I would rather take a guy later who had great production in college (Brown) compared to Jones.

  • stin4u

    @14 – so because four months ago he wasn’t slated to go as high he shouldn’t be regarded as high a prospect as Green? Do you also think Ryan Mallet will be taken in the top 10? How about Adrian Clayborn?

    Also, Baldwin was never considered a first round pick due to lack of speed/route running/work ethic. So to answer your question no he would not be 1c.

    The point here is there are rumblings of teams willing to sell out big time to move up for a chance at Jones. He’s physically a great fit for this team. Am I saying he’s a cant miss? No. Is Green a can’t miss? No. But there is a reason teams are going bonkers for this kid and I think it’s a huge mistake to pass on him at 6 especially since you’ll have quality D linemen in round two.

  • bobby

    Gren- Mallet was not high on any boards at the end of the season. I am just trying to say when games were being played Jones was not as highly regarded as he is now. Plain and simple. I dont kno of any player that has risen through the end of the season to the start that has turned out to be what is expected.

    Also, Baldwin most certainly is considered a 1st round “talent” but because of character concerns is actually viewed as a 2nd or 3rd pick. Baldwin definitely has speed, hands etc. Not that I want the browns to draft him, but thats how it is.

  • B-bo

    And now the rumor is that the Browns and Pats are talking…