Text Size

Cleveland Browns & The NFL

Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Talk Browns football and discuss the NFL here.

Moderators: peeker643, jb, swerb, pup

Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby jb » Mon Apr 16, 2012 10:19 am

Since he's not here this week we can talk about him.

The Browns need offensive talent. Mo Clabourne is unacceptable, and overrated. Average measurables and umber than a box of hammers. A product of surrounding talent.

TR or trade down. Only acceptable moves at this point.
jb
 
Posts: 17730
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Defend Youngstown
Favorite Player: Daddy Rich / Carwa$h
Least Favorite Player: Hines Ward

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby swerb » Mon Apr 16, 2012 10:20 am

I'm with JB on this one. I'm on the Richardson bandwagon. Unless Kalil is there. Then I take him and go RB/WR at 22/37.
"It's like dating a woman who hates you so much she will never break up with you, even if you burn down the house every single autumn." ~ Chuck Klosterman on Browns fans relationship with the Browns

http://www.twitter.com/theclevelandfan
User avatar
swerb
JoBu's bee-yotch
 
Posts: 17916
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 5:04 pm
Location: Twinsburg, OH
Favorite Player: Mango Hab
Least Favorite Player: Bob LaMonte

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby gotribe31 » Mon Apr 16, 2012 10:20 am

Did you just question someone's intelligence while misspelling "dumber"?

:hide:
You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves
-----Abe Lincoln

Let me tell you, if any of you douchebag empty headed stuffed suit nanny politicians tries to fuck with my bacon, I’m going after you like a crazed chimpanzee on bath salts.
-----Lars
User avatar
gotribe31
 
Posts: 2490
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 5:38 pm
Location: Fairfax, VA
Favorite Player: Francisco Lindor
Least Favorite Player: Michigan

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby jb » Mon Apr 16, 2012 10:21 am

swerb wrote:I'm with JB on this one. I'm on the Richardson bandwagon. Unless Kalil is there. Then I take him and go RB/WR at 22/37.



Swerb - an ORTat 4 ? On this team?

Just duct tape a plastic bag around my head now and while you're at it put on some Rush.
jb
 
Posts: 17730
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Defend Youngstown
Favorite Player: Daddy Rich / Carwa$h
Least Favorite Player: Hines Ward

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby Hikohadon » Mon Apr 16, 2012 10:43 am

I like Mo and would have no problem with him at 4. I'd rather have Richardson or Blackmon, but Claiborne can play and drafting an elite talent to further shore up an already solid D will not make me sad.

Also wouldn't die with a Kalil pick. He'd be my 4th choice (if we disregard the trade-down option).

The only pick that makes me start measuring my mouth against double-barreled shotgun width would be Tannehill.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4276
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby pup » Mon Apr 16, 2012 10:44 am

JB been looking for a RB since they passed on AP.

Finally has another one to be smitten over.

If you are taking a RB top 5...you are in trouble. Unless you are finishing off an offense. This guy will be beaten to a pulp by time your offense is ready to take advantage of having him.

Not to mention, we run the ball about 30% of the time. Top 5 pick for 15 carries a week? Yikes.
Home Run Leaders as RHB 5/7/13

Mark Reynolds (10)
User avatar
pup
Closet Shapiro Fan
 
Posts: 12019
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:15 pm
Location: Eastlake, Ohio
Favorite Player: Vince Shubrownicek
Least Favorite Player: Any other coach

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby jb » Mon Apr 16, 2012 10:48 am

Hikohadon wrote:I like Mo and would have no problem with him at 4.



He would as he can't count that high.
jb
 
Posts: 17730
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Defend Youngstown
Favorite Player: Daddy Rich / Carwa$h
Least Favorite Player: Hines Ward

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby jb » Mon Apr 16, 2012 10:49 am

pup wrote:JB been looking for a RB since they passed on AP.

Finally has another one to be smitten over.

If you are taking a RB top 5...you are in trouble. Unless you are finishing off an offense. This guy will be beaten to a pulp by time your offense is ready to take advantage of having him.

Not to mention, we run the ball about 30% of the time. Top 5 pick for 15 carries a week? Yikes.



Prefer a trade down over TR but you just can't draft defense that high. O is unwatchable. Doug Pederson unwatchable. TR is by far BPA offense there if they get jammed.
jb
 
Posts: 17730
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Defend Youngstown
Favorite Player: Daddy Rich / Carwa$h
Least Favorite Player: Hines Ward

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby SoulDawg74 » Mon Apr 16, 2012 10:51 am

jb wrote:Since he's not here this week we can talk about him.

The Browns need offensive talent. Mo Clabourne is unacceptable, and overrated. Average measurables and umber than a box of hammers. A product of surrounding talent.

TR or trade down. Only acceptable moves at this point.


SD:

Would rather start the future this year not next year .

At four after the Vikings take Kalil, I trade down with the lambs who take Clay or Blackmon , and I take Tannehill after the Bucs take TR , and mitigate any loss of not adding an immediate starter at the four spot with my future signal caller , and a number one pick next year.

I draft Hill at 22 a RB at 37 a Rt in the third another RB in the fourth and my first linebacker with my second fourth with the balance rinse lather repeat DE Dt safety WR QB RB OL etc etc etc.



SoulDawg
SoulDawg74
 
Posts: 3103
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 1:36 pm

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby peeker643 » Mon Apr 16, 2012 10:54 am

jb wrote:
Hikohadon wrote:I like Mo and would have no problem with him at 4.



He would as he can't count that high.


I don't call myself an expert on anything. Just reading tea leaves. No different than anyone else out there with a keyboard and a brain.

It just makes sense. You tell me that front office that paid too much to move up and get Hardesty is ready to admit their mistake and that they're going to fix it with pick #4. After knowing where those guys came from which is an organization that stockpiled DBs and found RBs and guys like D Jackson and Maclin with picks outside top ten?

You might be right, dude. I'm just trying to erase the clutter and start fresh without all the shit.

You can tell me I was right and buy me a beer in person now though. :thumb up:
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22632
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby JCoz » Mon Apr 16, 2012 10:56 am

swerb wrote:I'm with JB on this one. I'm on the Richardson bandwagon. Unless Kalil is there. Then I take him and go RB/WR at 22/37.


I just think Kalil is much more valuable to other teams than he is the Browns. We'd be foolish to not make a deal and drop down, perhaps to St Louis, or even further if the deal was worth it, you can get Martin and short up the right side and score a nice bucket of picks.

I'm for taking Richardson, because he's the BPA, even though I think we shouldnt be spending a pick that high in RB. But if Kalil is there hes a player too valuable to other teams to not take advantage. Its unfortunate for us that this draft didnt have a Peppers or AJ Green or Von miller. Next years draft may and I like alot of the WR's and RB's in the low first early second this year.

We can add the playmakers we need now and have extra bullets next season in that case for a special impact player at DE, LBer or QB. Best possible scenario IMO.
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby jb » Mon Apr 16, 2012 10:56 am

peeker643 wrote:
jb wrote:
Hikohadon wrote:I like Mo and would have no problem with him at 4.



He would as he can't count that high.


I don't call myself an expert on anything. Just reading tea leaves. No different than anyone else out there with a keyboard and a brain.

It just makes sense. You tell me that front office that paid too much to move up and get Hardesty is ready to admit their mistake and that they're going to fix it with pick #4. After knowing where those guys came from which is an organization that stockpiled DBs and found RBs and guys like D Jackson and Maclin with picks outside top ten?

You might be right, dude. I'm just trying to erase the clutter and start fresh without all the shit.

You can tell me I was right and buy me a beer in person now though. :thumb up:



Why are you always here when you are allegedly never hear? ;-)

And I read your WR. You called yourself a draft expert and blogger.
jb
 
Posts: 17730
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Defend Youngstown
Favorite Player: Daddy Rich / Carwa$h
Least Favorite Player: Hines Ward

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby peeker643 » Mon Apr 16, 2012 10:56 am

SoulDawg74 wrote:
jb wrote:Since he's not here this week we can talk about him.

The Browns need offensive talent. Mo Clabourne is unacceptable, and overrated. Average measurables and umber than a box of hammers. A product of surrounding talent.

TR or trade down. Only acceptable moves at this point.


SD:

Would rather start the future this year not next year .

At four after the Vikings take Kalil, I trade down with the lambs who take Clay or Blackmon , and I take Tannehill after the Bucs take TR , and mitigate any loss of not adding an immediate starter at the four spot with my future signal caller , and a number one pick next year.

I draft Hill at 22 a RB at 37 a Rt in the third another RB in the fourth and my first linebacker with my second fourth with the balance rinse lather repeat DE Dt safety WR QB RB OL etc etc etc.



SoulDawg


Are you coming a week from Thursday to the draft watch thing? I will trade the premium beer JB is buying me for two domestics, give one to you for future considerations and then toast the Claiborne pick once you guys calm down enough to hold a glass again. ;-) ;) :wink:
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22632
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby peeker643 » Mon Apr 16, 2012 10:58 am

jb wrote:
peeker643 wrote:
jb wrote:
Hikohadon wrote:I like Mo and would have no problem with him at 4.



He would as he can't count that high.


I don't call myself an expert on anything. Just reading tea leaves. No different than anyone else out there with a keyboard and a brain.

It just makes sense. You tell me that front office that paid too much to move up and get Hardesty is ready to admit their mistake and that they're going to fix it with pick #4. After knowing where those guys came from which is an organization that stockpiled DBs and found RBs and guys like D Jackson and Maclin with picks outside top ten?

You might be right, dude. I'm just trying to erase the clutter and start fresh without all the shit.

You can tell me I was right and buy me a beer in person now though. :thumb up:



Why are you always here when you are allegedly never hear? ;-)

And I read your WR. You called yourself a draft expert and blogger.


I called myself a blogger.

Not a draft expert. If it reads that way I need to fix that shit.

My availability will not be what it normally is. If that's 30% less than usual it still gives me 10 hours per day. I fly out at 3 today.
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22632
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby peeker643 » Mon Apr 16, 2012 11:07 am

Yeah... I had to fix that shit. That wasn't good.

So at least you were right about one thing today. Which is a banner day for you. ;-) ;) :wink:
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22632
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby Govbarney » Mon Apr 16, 2012 11:26 am

Peter King's reliable sources state Heckert is sold on Blackmon, however the Walrus is still debating the merits of taking Tannehill.

I am not crazy about Blackmon, but I trust Heckert's judgment more then the Walrus. If that ass pulls the same trump card bull shit he pulled when he stepped in and forced Heckert and Mangini to take McCoy when they both didn't want him , I will lose it.
"I don't think they're building chemical weapons in Berea. But they might be. I can't say for sure."
Chuck Klosterman
User avatar
Govbarney
 
Posts: 1279
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Favorite Player: Smallmouth Bass
Least Favorite Player: Sheephead

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby jb » Mon Apr 16, 2012 11:38 am

peeker643 wrote:Yeah... I had to fix that shit. That wasn't good.

So at least you were right about one thing today. Which is a banner day for you. ;-) ;) :wink:



Just having some fun with you Peeker. At ur expense of course.
jb
 
Posts: 17730
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Defend Youngstown
Favorite Player: Daddy Rich / Carwa$h
Least Favorite Player: Hines Ward

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby pod2dawg » Mon Apr 16, 2012 11:41 am

McShay just depicted a scenario where we take Richardson @ 4, the use our #22 to trade up in front of Miami and get Tanney. =
User avatar
pod2dawg
Warrior Poet aka Thread Killer
 
Posts: 1316
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 8:34 pm
Favorite Player: Phil Gordon
Least Favorite Player: Lane Kiffin

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby SoulDawg74 » Mon Apr 16, 2012 12:01 pm

peeker643 wrote:
SoulDawg74 wrote:
jb wrote:Since he's not here this week we can talk about him.

The Browns need offensive talent. Mo Clabourne is unacceptable, and overrated. Average measurables and umber than a box of hammers. A product of surrounding talent.

TR or trade down. Only acceptable moves at this point.


SD:

Would rather start the future this year not next year .

At four after the Vikings take Kalil, I trade down with the lambs who take Clay or Blackmon , and I take Tannehill after the Bucs take TR , and mitigate any loss of not adding an immediate starter at the four spot with my future signal caller , and a number one pick next year.

I draft Hill at 22 a RB at 37 a Rt in the third another RB in the fourth and my first linebacker with my second fourth with the balance rinse lather repeat DE Dt safety WR QB RB OL etc etc etc.



SoulDawg


Are you coming a week from Thursday to the draft watch thing? I will trade the premium beer JB is buying me for two domestics, give one to you for future considerations and then toast the Claiborne pick once you guys calm down enough to hold a glass again. ;-) ;) :wink:


The pick which would have gotten me excited enough to celebrate the draft is sitting in Washington ,

Im on death watch in regards to Holmgren.

SoulDawg
Last edited by SoulDawg74 on Mon Apr 16, 2012 3:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
SoulDawg74
 
Posts: 3103
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 1:36 pm

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby Hikohadon » Mon Apr 16, 2012 12:06 pm

I think the Browns should draft Richardson at 4, then trade up and draft Blackmon at 5 and Claiborne at #6.

Then take those 3 picks and trade back up to 2 and get RG3. And the Redskins #1 pick in 2015. And a bucket of extra-crispy KFC.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4276
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby mistero » Mon Apr 16, 2012 12:29 pm

Make sure you get some cole slaw with that KFC
In Chud We Trust
User avatar
mistero
 
Posts: 951
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 10:19 pm
Location: North Ridgeville Ohio
Favorite Player: Miller High Life
Least Favorite Player: Natural Light

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby Hikohadon » Mon Apr 16, 2012 1:11 pm

mistero wrote:Make sure you get some cole slaw with that KFC


Yeah, the slaw is good.

Barring a trade-down possibility, the order I'd want these guys at #4 would be:

1. Richardson
2. Blackmon
3. Claiborne
4. Kalil
5. Coples
22. Tannehill
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4276
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby rebelwithoutaclue » Mon Apr 16, 2012 8:58 pm

Not to mention, we run the ball about 30% of the time. Top 5 pick for 15 carries a week? Yikes.



You tailor your gameplan to your talent; taking Richardson would instantly increase the % of rushing plays called. If Montario Hardesty is the starting RB, I'd throw 80% of the time.


I'm ambivalent among Richardson or Claiborne. Love both of them and wouldn't mind either pick.

1. Trent Richardson just because I think he's the best RB prospect since AP and will be better/more durable in the NFL than AP and the Browns need offense
1A. Claiborne
3. Kalil
4. Blackmon

I'll do you one better Hiko:

67. Tannehill
Fuck the Browns...
User avatar
rebelwithoutaclue
 
Posts: 3639
Joined: Wed May 28, 2008 11:43 am
Location: Under them Skies of Blue
Favorite Player: Kyrie Irving
Least Favorite Player: Mike Lombardi

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby pup » Mon Apr 16, 2012 9:33 pm

rebelwithoutaclue wrote:
Not to mention, we run the ball about 30% of the time. Top 5 pick for 15 carries a week? Yikes.



You tailor your gameplan to your talent; taking Richardson would instantly increase the % of rushing plays called. If Montario Hardesty is the starting RB, I'd throw 80% of the time.



I am not sure what coaching staff you think we have, but there are no signs that this coaching staff does anything but exactly what their system is.
Home Run Leaders as RHB 5/7/13

Mark Reynolds (10)
User avatar
pup
Closet Shapiro Fan
 
Posts: 12019
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:15 pm
Location: Eastlake, Ohio
Favorite Player: Vince Shubrownicek
Least Favorite Player: Any other coach

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby rebelwithoutaclue » Mon Apr 16, 2012 10:09 pm

pup wrote:
rebelwithoutaclue wrote:
Not to mention, we run the ball about 30% of the time. Top 5 pick for 15 carries a week? Yikes.



You tailor your gameplan to your talent; taking Richardson would instantly increase the % of rushing plays called. If Montario Hardesty is the starting RB, I'd throw 80% of the time.



I am not sure what coaching staff you think we have, but there are no signs that this coaching staff does anything but exactly what their system is.


I should have clarified; I've already written off this year and am talking only in the future tense of the time after Shurmer/Holmgren are fired. The next coach will recognize the talent Richardson is and use him accordingly.
Fuck the Browns...
User avatar
rebelwithoutaclue
 
Posts: 3639
Joined: Wed May 28, 2008 11:43 am
Location: Under them Skies of Blue
Favorite Player: Kyrie Irving
Least Favorite Player: Mike Lombardi

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby Prosecutor » Mon Apr 16, 2012 10:48 pm

The column in the PD the other day titled, "Is there no place for running backs high in the NFL draft?" had these little nuggets:

Thirteen of the league's top 20 rushers last season played for teams that failed to reach the playoffs. Last season's Super Bowl teams -- the New York Giants and New England -- had no running backs among the top 20.

• Last season, the Giants ranked last in rushing yards gained as a percentage of total offense, and the Patriots ranked fourth from the bottom.
• Only eight of the last 20 Super Bowl opponents had 1,000-yard rushers. Of that total, only two of the last 10 Super Bowl teams had 1,000-yard running backs.
• The NFL's four top-scoring teams last year -- Detroit, Green Bay, New England and New Orleans -- ranked among the lowest in yards gained on the ground as a percentage of their total offense.
• The Patriots, Giants, Packers, Pittsburgh Steelers and Saints -- who have accounted for eight of the last nine Super Bowl champions -- haven't had a league-leading rusher in the last 30 years.


They also mentioned the percentage of running plays has continually declined over the years to the point where it's now down to 34%. That could partially explain why only 2 of the last 10 Super Bowl teams had 1,000 yard rushers. The better teams don't run the ball much, and when they do they tend to use a committee.

Combine that with the fact that RBs have shorter productive careers than any other position and it doesn't make much sense to take a RB at #4, no matter how good he is. The rules have been changed to protect the QBs and disallow contact with WRs, making it a passing league.

If you have a top five or top ten pick you take a QB, WR, or LT on offense or a pass rusher or cover corner on defense. Much as we need offense, I agree that Claiborne makes the most sense in terms of getting the BPA that plays a critical position. i'm assuming Tannehill is a late 1st round/early 2nd round talent.

But weren't Marino, Favre, and Brees considered late 1st/early 2nd talents?
Prosecutor
Plutonian Outliers
 
Posts: 2869
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 11:59 am

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby bookelly » Mon Apr 16, 2012 11:17 pm

I want TRich 'cause I'd just love to see them run him up the gut right at J. Harrison 10 times in a row. It'd be awesome just to hear that collision.

Best case scenario, we trade down to #6 and Trent's still there. Big gamble though if your sold on him.

Also remember guys, this team really needs a player that fires up the fan base, Trent would do that. Clairborn? Not really.
Nobody, I mean nobody, voluntarily becomes a Cleveland sports fan.

"This team could fuck up a ham sandwich." -CDT
User avatar
bookelly
Happy Easter!!
 
Posts: 3434
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 11:58 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Favorite Player: My bunny hunny
Least Favorite Player: Elmer Fudd

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby mistero » Tue Apr 17, 2012 5:28 am

String me up from the lamp post but I think we are ok at RB with a group of Hardesty,Ogbannaya,Jackson,Armond Smith and a 4th/5th rounder like Peirce,Pead or Ganaway. Shake 3 out during training camp.

It's the passing game.It's the QB.

1. Tannehill


at 22. Wright/Floyd/Hill/Jeffries
at 37. Sanu/Adams/Toon/ Randle
In Chud We Trust
User avatar
mistero
 
Posts: 951
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 10:19 pm
Location: North Ridgeville Ohio
Favorite Player: Miller High Life
Least Favorite Player: Natural Light

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby LakeErieWarriors » Tue Apr 17, 2012 7:36 am

Claiborne, Richardson, or Blackmon. I'm not sure which one, but I don't think they should trade down. If they do trade down, I would hope it wouldn't be so far as to where all three of these players are unavailable.

It doesn't seem like many people here are high on Blackmon at all like I am. I think one reason for that is you see Kendall Wright with our 2nd or 3rd pick. Wright is 5-10, Blackmon is 6-1. Wright is Lee Evans, Blackmon is T.O.. Do we want another year of Little being our #1, Cribbs trying to pull shit outta his ass, and, well, more SloMass? Not me.

Give me any one of those three and the Browns could be markedly better next year.
"Last time I saw a mouth like that, it had a hook in it!" -Al Czervik
LakeErieWarriors
 
Posts: 455
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 12:01 am
Location: Huron, OH
Favorite Player: Browns Draft
Least Favorite Player: Browns Training Camp

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby leadpipe » Tue Apr 17, 2012 8:47 am

Some things in the modern NFL are pretty evident, cause they're happening every year.

You don't need to run the football.

The times you do, a "less than elite" player at that position will do just fine.

Running backs are in their "prime" for about 3 years.

And rules being set up that if you do run, you're taking by far the worst of it in regards to the best way to move the football, or to be blunt, if you aren't passing it you're stupid.

The Vikings will win dick unless Christian Ponder develops. It will have very little to do with whether AP continues to be great. Or, look at it this way, give the Browns AP, or give them the 10th best QB in the league. Then tell me which one makes them better.

Look, I'm not gonna freak if they take Richardson. As running backs go, he looks to be as blue chip as they come without having yet played an NFL game. I also understand the Browns have prety much ZERO in the backfield. But he is what he is in modern football - no matter the talent level, that is, a guy that plays a position that doesn't matter all that much, and he'll play it well for only a short time.
User avatar
leadpipe
The Reverend
 
Posts: 6553
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 1:58 am

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby Hikohadon » Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:06 am

leadpipe wrote:Some things in the modern NFL are pretty evident, cause they're happening every year.

You don't need to run the football.

The times you do, a "less than elite" player at that position will do just fine.

Running backs are in their "prime" for about 3 years.

And rules being set up that if you do run, you're taking by far the worst of it in regards to the best way to move the football, or to be blunt, if you aren't passing it you're stupid.

The Vikings will win dick unless Christian Ponder develops. It will have very little to do with whether AP continues to be great. Or, look at it this way, give the Browns AP, or give them the 10th best QB in the league. Then tell me which one makes them better.

Look, I'm not gonna freak if they take Richardson. As running backs go, he looks to be as blue chip as they come without having yet played an NFL game. I also understand the Browns have prety much ZERO in the backfield. But he is what he is in modern football - no matter the talent level, that is, a guy that plays a position that doesn't matter all that much, and he'll play it well for only a short time.


These rules only assist teams with elite QB's.

If you don't have one, then you better be able to run the ball.

We agree that without an elite QB, teams cannot win SB's. But the Browns aren't going to be able to obtain an elite QB this year. So - assuming your mission is to try and win (not tank) - the best thing you can do with a mediocre QB is develop a good running game and a solid D and maybe you can be a wildcard team. See: Texans, Houston (with Yates) or Bengals, Cincy or - hell - 49ers, San Fran.

The league is set up to favor the pass. But you can't take advantage of that unless you have a guy capable of doing so.

I will accept arguments that the Browns should draft passing weapons, tank this year, and make sure they get an elite prospect next year (if one exists) and then they already have weapons for him in place. But outside of tanking, Richardson probably makes the biggest difference for improving this team right away.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4276
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby rk » Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:25 am

Govbarney wrote:Peter King's reliable sources state Heckert is sold on Blackmon, however the Walrus is still debating the merits of taking Tannehill.


Heckert has final say so it doesn't really matter what the Walrus wants if he has failed to convince Heckert.

jb wrote:The Browns need offensive talent. Mo Clabourne is unacceptable, and overrated. Average measurables and umber than a box of hammers. A product of surrounding talent.


You've got two things there that you are conflating and should not be. The Browns do need offensive talent. If they have Claiborne and any offensive player rated on the same tier then they should be drafting the offensive player. And I am fairly confident that they do have an offensive player rated close enough to Claiborne that he is not going to be the selection.

Your second point about Claiborne, while moot, is pretty dumb. You argued the same about Haden. Bad measurables, slow, etc. but performance on Saturdays for a CB does matter. And he is flat out the best pure cover corner in the draft and on par with Haden and Patrick Peterson. You are being awfully ignorant if you think his IQ is important as a cover corner in the Browns system. They would plan man coverage with him and Haden and would be able to lock them in place for the next 10 years.

Back to your first point. If you are a believer in the move/counter move that is prevalant in the NFL over the last decade or so then he is a great selection. Teams are doing more with TEs, WRs, and using RBs as outlets so improving pass coverage and pass rush is still the most affective counter.

It is certainly not the fan favorite move. Fans like to be lemmings and when they see bad offense they think you should spend all your money to fix the bad offense. While you're fixing it though your defense, which is the only reason we were in as many games as we were last year, starts to flounder.

In this pass friendly league having two of the top 20 coverage CBs on your team for the next 8-10 years is more than a little appealing. Use the other 12 picks on offense and you're bound to find a couple playmakers even if you're someone less capable than Heckert.

But for my money it's still Blackmon 1a and Richardson 1b so don't spend a lot of your crazy worrying over this.
"If your mouthpiece is strong, she’ll give you some money." - D. West
User avatar
rk
 
Posts: 792
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2007 4:06 pm
Favorite Player: Ozzie Newsome
Least Favorite Player: Ray Lewis

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby SoulDawg74 » Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:54 am

Hikohadon wrote:
leadpipe wrote:Some things in the modern NFL are pretty evident, cause they're happening every year.

You don't need to run the football.

The times you do, a "less than elite" player at that position will do just fine.

Running backs are in their "prime" for about 3 years.

And rules being set up that if you do run, you're taking by far the worst of it in regards to the best way to move the football, or to be blunt, if you aren't passing it you're stupid.

The Vikings will win dick unless Christian Ponder develops. It will have very little to do with whether AP continues to be great. Or, look at it this way, give the Browns AP, or give them the 10th best QB in the league. Then tell me which one makes them better.

Look, I'm not gonna freak if they take Richardson. As running backs go, he looks to be as blue chip as they come without having yet played an NFL game. I also understand the Browns have prety much ZERO in the backfield. But he is what he is in modern football - no matter the talent level, that is, a guy that plays a position that doesn't matter all that much, and he'll play it well for only a short time.


These rules only assist teams with elite QB's.

If you don't have one, then you better be able to run the ball.

We agree that without an elite QB, teams cannot win SB's. But the Browns aren't going to be able to obtain an elite QB this year. So - assuming your mission is to try and win (not tank) - the best thing you can do with a mediocre QB is develop a good running game and a solid D and maybe you can be a wildcard team. See: Texans, Houston (with Yates) or Bengals, Cincy or - hell - 49ers, San Fran.

The league is set up to favor the pass. But you can't take advantage of that unless you have a guy capable of doing so.

I will accept arguments that the Browns should draft passing weapons, tank this year, and make sure they get an elite prospect next year (if one exists) and then they already have weapons for him in place. But outside of tanking, Richardson probably makes the biggest difference for improving this team right away.



SD:

Did you just call JB :dumb ignorant and crazy in the same post .

And all this I've been laboring under the misunderstanding that you were useless :)




SoulDawg
SoulDawg74
 
Posts: 3103
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 1:36 pm

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby JCoz » Tue Apr 17, 2012 11:45 am

leadpipe wrote:Some things in the modern NFL are pretty evident, cause they're happening every year.

You don't need to run the football.

The times you do, a "less than elite" player at that position will do just fine.

Running backs are in their "prime" for about 3 years.

And rules being set up that if you do run, you're taking by far the worst of it in regards to the best way to move the football, or to be blunt, if you aren't passing it you're stupid.

The Vikings will win dick unless Christian Ponder develops. It will have very little to do with whether AP continues to be great. Or, look at it this way, give the Browns AP, or give them the 10th best QB in the league. Then tell me which one makes them better.

Look, I'm not gonna freak if they take Richardson. As running backs go, he looks to be as blue chip as they come without having yet played an NFL game. I also understand the Browns have prety much ZERO in the backfield. But he is what he is in modern football - no matter the talent level, that is, a guy that plays a position that doesn't matter all that much, and he'll play it well for only a short time.


Given that there are not top level prospects at the more impactful postions at the top of the draft this year, I think that you are left with the question of whether a "B+" WR prospect, an "A" CB Prospect, a "B" DE, a "B-" QB, etc..... rate higher than an "A+" RB prospect.
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby Gradysmanldy » Tue Apr 17, 2012 1:53 pm

JCoz wrote:
leadpipe wrote:Some things in the modern NFL are pretty evident, cause they're happening every year.

You don't need to run the football.

The times you do, a "less than elite" player at that position will do just fine.

Running backs are in their "prime" for about 3 years.

And rules being set up that if you do run, you're taking by far the worst of it in regards to the best way to move the football, or to be blunt, if you aren't passing it you're stupid.

The Vikings will win dick unless Christian Ponder develops. It will have very little to do with whether AP continues to be great. Or, look at it this way, give the Browns AP, or give them the 10th best QB in the league. Then tell me which one makes them better.

Look, I'm not gonna freak if they take Richardson. As running backs go, he looks to be as blue chip as they come without having yet played an NFL game. I also understand the Browns have prety much ZERO in the backfield. But he is what he is in modern football - no matter the talent level, that is, a guy that plays a position that doesn't matter all that much, and he'll play it well for only a short time.


Given that there are not top level prospects at the more impactful postions at the top of the draft this year, I think that you are left with the question of whether a "B+" WR prospect, an "A" CB Prospect, a "B" DE, a "B-" QB, etc..... rate higher than an "A+" RB prospect.


I'm actually 100% in agreement on this.

I make this comment before Souldawg's rant on how Colt is an F+, and how Tannehill has the potential to be an A. (Which I think we can all agree is possible, but somewhere south of 50% likely)

My question is: Can you get a B+ WR with 22/37? If so, I think you pull the trigger on the Freak, and move on. If the BEST you can hope for is a B/B- receiver, then I think you have to grab Floyd or Blackmon, which have the best chance to be a reliable #1/1A receiver for you, and grab the B+ running back later; your chances of the Boist ST/Miami studs being a B+ are pretty likely, and are harder to find than the dominant WR. (Even in this draft, which appears to be pretty deep on WR talent)

In Heckert I trust......grab the guys you want to build around, because y'all are definitely on the clock to build talent before Jammies loses his shite.
Check me out at Dawgsbynature, where I write stuff, or @twitter as Josh Finney.
User avatar
Gradysmanldy
 
Posts: 1530
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:58 pm
Favorite Player: Melts Parmageddon
Least Favorite Player: The East Coast media

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby Doc » Tue Apr 17, 2012 4:23 pm

Like every year, not much out there as to which way they are leaning. My gut says they aren't sold on anyone and they're still looking to move down. But I'm not sure there's a match. It'd be nice to drop down a few spots for a 2nd, but I don't see anyone in the top 8 moving up for someone. Unless Kalil falls. Or St. Louis wants Blackmon ahead of TB. Or Miami wants Tannehill. So, assuming we stay put, here are my scenarios.

-Blackmon and Weeden...lots of talk about both in Cleveland, so why not pair them up? Probably have to use 4/22 to get both, but it leaves you position to package 37 in a trade up for a targeted RB. Ditto the 3rd rounder for a RT. Offense is improved dramatically with 4 starters. 35%

-Claiborne/RT/WR...Throughout regimes, 2nd WRs are a Cleveland staple. None have worked out. Uber smart H&H go safe with Claiborne early, a premier RT prospect at 22 and target a pass catching target at 37. I've seen this one too many times. A likely solid start, though not flashy. 25%

-Richardson/WR/RT...There's nothing in Richardson's game that you wouldn't want in a player at #4, except that he's a RB. But, there's no player left on the board with the potential to help a bad team more than Richardson. With their QB snatched up by Washington, they listen to the fans and supplement a bad offense with premium talent. Richardson, Hill, a RT...and if they're feeling randy, deal #37 and move up for Fleener. The Ultimate "Give Colt McCoy Some Weapons" draft. 20%

-TRADE DOWN!...The team still has plenty of depth issues, and despite having 13 picks, they decide to deal down. They will be active on draft day(s)...they won't make 13 picks. They will move down some, and they will move up some. I suspect they move down from 4, ideally within the top 8, but I think they'd go as far as 16 or so in the right deal. A deal within the top 8 nets you, at worst, Michael Floyd, plus another 2nd day pick for a linebacker or ammo to move back into the late 1st. Back to 15-16 gets you a shot at a good pass rusher or OL, plus the extra pick for defense, plus something else. I think this is what they want to do, but I doubt they get sufficient return to make the move. 15%

-Tannehill/WR/RT...For how much he's risen in the last 2 months, he actually has some pretty impressive qualities, enough so that you could justify taking him at #4. It feels like we got 3rd in a 3 horse QB race, but he could be good. If the goal is to not be picking #4 in the foreseeable future, this is your last shot to get that guy in that spot. Even if he isn't quite worth #4, you might not have that shot next year. So, the Browns sack up and nab Tanny. Being that he's a #4 pick and his competition will be Colt McCoy and Seneca Wallace, Tannehill starts from Day 1. The Browns use next few picks adding weapons and a RT. 5%

So, Claiborne is the only defensive player the Browns target in top 3 rounds. Unless they deal back from 4 to acquire more picks. They know they have to focus on offense this year. With 4 picks in the top 3 rounds, I think they end up with WR/RB/RT almost definitely. If they like any of the QBs out there, it'll happen. I think Heckert wants Blackmon/Weeden, and I think that is ultimately what happens. If they add RB/RT after that, it will be a good draft.
Doc
 
Posts: 724
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 7:42 pm
Favorite Player: Matthew Dellavedova
Least Favorite Player: Chris Bosh

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby leadpipe » Tue Apr 17, 2012 4:37 pm

Hikohadon wrote:
leadpipe wrote:Some things in the modern NFL are pretty evident, cause they're happening every year.

You don't need to run the football.

The times you do, a "less than elite" player at that position will do just fine.

Running backs are in their "prime" for about 3 years.

And rules being set up that if you do run, you're taking by far the worst of it in regards to the best way to move the football, or to be blunt, if you aren't passing it you're stupid.

The Vikings will win dick unless Christian Ponder develops. It will have very little to do with whether AP continues to be great. Or, look at it this way, give the Browns AP, or give them the 10th best QB in the league. Then tell me which one makes them better.

Look, I'm not gonna freak if they take Richardson. As running backs go, he looks to be as blue chip as they come without having yet played an NFL game. I also understand the Browns have prety much ZERO in the backfield. But he is what he is in modern football - no matter the talent level, that is, a guy that plays a position that doesn't matter all that much, and he'll play it well for only a short time.


These rules only assist teams with elite QB's.

If you don't have one, then you better be able to run the ball.

We agree that without an elite QB, teams cannot win SB's. But the Browns aren't going to be able to obtain an elite QB this year. So - assuming your mission is to try and win (not tank) - the best thing you can do with a mediocre QB is develop a good running game and a solid D and maybe you can be a wildcard team. See: Texans, Houston (with Yates) or Bengals, Cincy or - hell - 49ers, San Fran.

The league is set up to favor the pass. But you can't take advantage of that unless you have a guy capable of doing so.

I will accept arguments that the Browns should draft passing weapons, tank this year, and make sure they get an elite prospect next year (if one exists) and then they already have weapons for him in place. But outside of tanking, Richardson probably makes the biggest difference for improving this team right away.


These rules have nothing to do with whether a team has an elite QB or not.

It's still a position that isn't going to make much of a difference and it's still a very short career, especially in regard to prime years.

Trent Richardson would make the offense marginally better - primarily because they currently have zero there now. But he's not going to make them a good offense, and he's not gonna make em win.

Christ, they ran every GD play within 5 yards of the LOS last year, how much room is the guy gonna get. And this is to your point Hiko, you can't take advantage of the pass with a shitty QB, well, you ain't gonna take advantage of the run with a shitty one either. If you don't have a QB, you aren't moving the ball. Trent Richardson or no Trent Richardson.

And again, I'm not hanging myself if they draft him. JCOZ's post makes sense. Clearly, this is subjective. I'm saying I wouldn't take him.

FWIW, in response to JCOZ, I would argue that there is no such thing as an A+ running back prospect in the NFL - if you are correlating a grade to winning. They took an A+ long snapper early once upon a time. And you are correct, you'd like A prospects at QB, DL, but I would take the A rated CB over the A+ rated RB in this league every day. I'm not saying it's close to my favorite draft option doing this, but if I'm the Browns here, that's what I'd do.
User avatar
leadpipe
The Reverend
 
Posts: 6553
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 1:58 am

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby peeker643 » Tue Apr 17, 2012 4:41 pm

You really thiknk these arrogant phucks are going to admit trading up for Hardesty was a mistake and that signing Brandon Jackson was too? Now?

Maybe next year...

They can get their change of pace guy in Pead or LaMichael James later if they want to get an explosive guy like that.

I don't see a RB there.

I don't see Blackmon because he's just not #4 worthy. He's not. I'd rather have Floyd. I'd also rather pass on both and get any number of explosive guys later.


I don't see Tannehill. At all.

What's that leave? For me it's clear. And yeah, they'll trade down if they can but unless it's someone coming from outside the top ten or so why would anyone need to move up? Guess someone could fall head over heels for someone.....

That's why it's Claiborne if they stay there.

YMMV
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22632
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby Ziner » Tue Apr 17, 2012 6:15 pm

I have stayed out of this since we lost out on RG3. I have finally decided that even though Peeker is generally an idiot he is right in this situation. Claiborne has to be the pick, nothing else makes sense.

My draft board looks like this

Luck
RG3
Trade Down
Claiborne
Blackmon

Richardson does nothing to this team. I have no doubt the guy will be a stud, but I can't justify taking Adrian Peterson when there are so many Matt Forte's and Ray Rice's and Arian Fosters, shit I'll gladly take a Ahmad Bradshaw.

Claiborne teamed with Haden helps to stop the pass, name of the game on the defensive end. Just makes too much sense to me, sure it isnt flashy, but neither was Haden and I dont hear people bitching about that pick. Just as teams now have to have two (or three) WR's, teams are going to need corners to have a prayer.

Claiborne, WR, OT, RB.

Give me that and I am satisfied. Not remotely surprising JB is dead wrong on this. I see no reason to waste a pick on a QB.

Oh, and taking some 2nd or 3rd tier QB does nothing but make it less likely we take a first tier QB should the opportunity come. Keep building the team.


Go Team Claiborne.
In the end, we're all "only for a limited time," you guys.
User avatar
Ziner
Tot-Lovin' Hippy
 
Posts: 7058
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 4:04 pm
Location: Boulder, Colorado
Favorite Player: Tater Tots
Least Favorite Player: Yam Fries

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby Hikohadon » Tue Apr 17, 2012 6:38 pm

leadpipe wrote:Trent Richardson would make the offense marginally better - primarily because they currently have zero there now. But he's not going to make them a good offense, and he's not gonna make em win.

Christ, they ran every GD play within 5 yards of the LOS last year, how much room is the guy gonna get. And this is to your point Hiko, you can't take advantage of the pass with a shitty QB, well, you ain't gonna take advantage of the run with a shitty one either. If you don't have a QB, you aren't moving the ball. Trent Richardson or no Trent Richardson.


I don't disagree with this. I'm just saying that Richardson will make more difference than anyone else to this offense so long as they have a meh QB. How big that difference is... probably not life-changing.
It's only progress if you eventually get somewhere.
User avatar
Hikohadon
 
Posts: 4276
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:33 am
Favorite Player: Scotch
Least Favorite Player: Gin

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby JCoz » Tue Apr 17, 2012 10:00 pm

Ziner wrote:I have stayed out of this since we lost out on RG3. I have finally decided that even though Peeker is generally an idiot he is right in this situation. Claiborne has to be the pick, nothing else makes sense.

My draft board looks like this

Luck
RG3
Trade Down
Claiborne
Blackmon

Richardson does nothing to this team. I have no doubt the guy will be a stud, but I can't justify taking Adrian Peterson when there are so many Matt Forte's and Ray Rice's and Arian Fosters, shit I'll gladly take a Ahmad Bradshaw.

Claiborne teamed with Haden helps to stop the pass, name of the game on the defensive end. Just makes too much sense to me, sure it isnt flashy, but neither was Haden and I dont hear people bitching about that pick. Just as teams now have to have two (or three) WR's, teams are going to need corners to have a prayer.

Claiborne, WR, OT, RB.

Give me that and I am satisfied. Not remotely surprising JB is dead wrong on this. I see no reason to waste a pick on a QB.

Oh, and taking some 2nd or 3rd tier QB does nothing but make it less likely we take a first tier QB should the opportunity come. Keep building the team.


Go Team Claiborne.


Stopping the pass is important , but that isn't accomplished in the back 4.
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby jb » Tue Apr 17, 2012 10:36 pm

peeker643 wrote:You really thiknk these arrogant phucks are going to admit trading up for Hardesty was a mistake and that signing Brandon Jackson was too? Now?



Yes. McCoy, too.

Heckert has no loyalty. He loads, plays 'em and if they can't play they done.

Can not draft a DB with this crap-po offense. It is self-evident.

Then again, I'm no expert. :hide:
jb
 
Posts: 17730
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Defend Youngstown
Favorite Player: Daddy Rich / Carwa$h
Least Favorite Player: Hines Ward

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby Ziner » Wed Apr 18, 2012 12:50 am

JCoz wrote:
Ziner wrote:I have stayed out of this since we lost out on RG3. I have finally decided that even though Peeker is generally an idiot he is right in this situation. Claiborne has to be the pick, nothing else makes sense.

My draft board looks like this

Luck
RG3
Trade Down
Claiborne
Blackmon

Richardson does nothing to this team. I have no doubt the guy will be a stud, but I can't justify taking Adrian Peterson when there are so many Matt Forte's and Ray Rice's and Arian Fosters, shit I'll gladly take a Ahmad Bradshaw.

Claiborne teamed with Haden helps to stop the pass, name of the game on the defensive end. Just makes too much sense to me, sure it isnt flashy, but neither was Haden and I dont hear people bitching about that pick. Just as teams now have to have two (or three) WR's, teams are going to need corners to have a prayer.

Claiborne, WR, OT, RB.

Give me that and I am satisfied. Not remotely surprising JB is dead wrong on this. I see no reason to waste a pick on a QB.

Oh, and taking some 2nd or 3rd tier QB does nothing but make it less likely we take a first tier QB should the opportunity come. Keep building the team.


Go Team Claiborne.


Stopping the pass is important , but that isn't accomplished in the back 4.



Right. Two stud corners would have no effect on helping to stop the pass.
In the end, we're all "only for a limited time," you guys.
User avatar
Ziner
Tot-Lovin' Hippy
 
Posts: 7058
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 4:04 pm
Location: Boulder, Colorado
Favorite Player: Tater Tots
Least Favorite Player: Yam Fries

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby JCoz » Wed Apr 18, 2012 7:11 am

Philly sure had a stout D last season, finishing right in the middle of the pack in yards per attempt, and just about every other passing defensive statistic, and they had 2 better CB's AND a third to boot.
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby SoulDawg74 » Wed Apr 18, 2012 8:25 am

Gradysmanldy wrote:
JCoz wrote:
leadpipe wrote:Some things in the modern NFL are pretty evident, cause they're happening every year.

You don't need to run the football.

The times you do, a "less than elite" player at that position will do just fine.

Running backs are in their "prime" for about 3 years.

And rules being set up that if you do run, you're taking by far the worst of it in regards to the best way to move the football, or to be blunt, if you aren't passing it you're stupid.

The Vikings will win dick unless Christian Ponder develops. It will have very little to do with whether AP continues to be great. Or, look at it this way, give the Browns AP, or give them the 10th best QB in the league. Then tell me which one makes them better.

Look, I'm not gonna freak if they take Richardson. As running backs go, he looks to be as blue chip as they come without having yet played an NFL game. I also understand the Browns have prety much ZERO in the backfield. But he is what he is in modern football - no matter the talent level, that is, a guy that plays a position that doesn't matter all that much, and he'll play it well for only a short time.


Given that there are not top level prospects at the more impactful postions at the top of the draft this year, I think that you are left with the question of whether a "B+" WR prospect, an "A" CB Prospect, a "B" DE, a "B-" QB, etc..... rate higher than an "A+" RB prospect.


I'm actually 100% in agreement on this.

I make this comment before Souldawg's rant on how Colt is an F+, and how Tannehill has the potential to be an A. (Which I think we can all agree is possible, but somewhere south of 50% likely)

My question is: Can you get a B+ WR with 22/37? If so, I think you pull the trigger on the Freak, and move on. If the BEST you can hope for is a B/B- receiver, then I think you have to grab Floyd or Blackmon, which have the best chance to be a reliable #1/1A receiver for you, and grab the B+ running back later; your chances of the Boist ST/Miami studs being a B+ are pretty likely, and are harder to find than the dominant WR. (Even in this draft, which appears to be pretty deep on WR talent)

In Heckert I trust......grab the guys you want to build around, because y'all are definitely on the clock to build talent before Jammies loses his shite.


SD:

If we give Colt a D + grade , can we agree at best , its still below average and not something that NFL team would hang their hats on .

So you have to draft a receiver whose talent you need , maynot compliment the weak armed sister we have now .

Stepehen Hill has homerun ability and would take the top off of defenses , but he would be wasted on a kid like Colt , but gives you the most talented receiver in the draft down the road ,

A man so big and so fast he can Moss you , "IF" you have a QB who can throw him the damn ball .

Fat chance , they'll go for the slot guy like Wright first , so the receiver can make their mutt rag armed gem look good throwing 3 yard passes for ten yard gains after the receiver does all the work .

The process will continue to slow true progress.

SoulDawg
Last edited by SoulDawg74 on Wed Apr 18, 2012 9:10 am, edited 1 time in total.
SoulDawg74
 
Posts: 3103
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 1:36 pm

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby leadpipe » Wed Apr 18, 2012 8:44 am

JCoz wrote:Philly sure had a stout D last season, finishing right in the middle of the pack in yards per attempt, and just about every other passing defensive statistic, and they had 2 better CB's AND a third to boot.


But now you're back to the original quandry.

I think that having two excellent corners makes a bigger difference on D, than having a goor running back makes on O.

And I've made my position pretty clear here recently, that the back 4 are handcuffed cause of the rule changes and the new NFL touch football idea - and the fact it's real hard to find a sungle shut down corner, let alone two. The Browns just so happen to perhaps find themselves in that position.

So I would say, taking best case scenarios, I'd rather have the team with two excellent corners, than the one with an excellent running back.

And clearly these two choices are well behind the teams with an excellent QB, or an excellent D-line, but ILO you still have to cover the pass (albeit it is imperative the back 4 gets help doing this) but you don't have to run the ball. This is a league where the good offenses are setting up the pass.....with the pass. Clearly.
User avatar
leadpipe
The Reverend
 
Posts: 6553
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 1:58 am

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby JCoz » Wed Apr 18, 2012 8:50 am

I don't think it does make a bigger difference. But it will make whatever difference it makes for 2-3 times as long vs a great rb, so there is that.....
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby jb » Wed Apr 18, 2012 9:23 am

Mo C has average size, average to below average speed, average ability, and is dumber than a box of cut hair.

So what make him an elite corner prospect? I see a bandwagon and benefit via association and "experts" in consensus more than a an elite prospect. He's the Justin Blackmon of DB's this draft.

Peterson was a far better prospect and he was "meh" on defense.

You aren't passing on a Suh to draft BPA offense here.
jb
 
Posts: 17730
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Defend Youngstown
Favorite Player: Daddy Rich / Carwa$h
Least Favorite Player: Hines Ward

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby rebelwithoutaclue » Wed Apr 18, 2012 9:46 am

Richardson does nothing to this team. I have no doubt the guy will be a stud, but I can't justify taking Adrian Peterson when there are so many Matt Forte's and Ray Rice's and Arian Fosters, shit I'll gladly take a Ahmad Bradshaw.



The problem with this line of thinking is that the Browns have proven time and time again that they just can't find those guys late. Arian Foster was there for the taking for every team in the league, 7 times over and the Browns weren't even smart enough to use a 7th rounder on him. They traded up for a guy they loved in the 2nd round and even when he's not in the trainer's room, he looks like a bum.


While I agree that, league-wide, teams always seem to find stud RB's late, it does not seem to apply to the Browns singular situation.
Fuck the Browns...
User avatar
rebelwithoutaclue
 
Posts: 3639
Joined: Wed May 28, 2008 11:43 am
Location: Under them Skies of Blue
Favorite Player: Kyrie Irving
Least Favorite Player: Mike Lombardi

Re: Peeker calls himself an expert and says draft a DB

Unread postby peeker643 » Wed Apr 18, 2012 9:55 am

jb wrote:Mo C has average size, average to below average speed, average ability, and is dumber than a box of cut hair.



Exactly.

Which is why all that SEC talent and speed he faced made the Jim Thorpe winner look like a chump all last season on the football field.

He put up two mid4.4's in his Pro Day, he hits like Haden in run support and he has arms like Haden on a bigger frame that make throwing against him difficult.

Let me know when you hve some evidence from on the field that the kid was confused and stupid. If you don't know where he is on the field, just look for the ball. He'll be around that.
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22632
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Next

Return to Cleveland Browns & The NFL

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Who is online

In total there is 1 user online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 1 guest (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 181 on Sat Feb 16, 2013 4:50 pm

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest