Chuck Wagon

Was Andre Holmes / Vlad Duccasse / Patrick Dimarco worth a 3rd round pick? Bottom line, it's how well run football teams operate. Drafted players represent 4 years of cheap club control, usually covering a few of a players prime years. Not getting comp picks for players like Gilmore / Woods cost us 3rd / 4th round picks, not just throw away 6th rounders.

Rumblings Honey Badger might be a cap casualty. I'd love to pick him up, he'd be EXPENSIVE, but a nickle package with White / Davis / Mathieu / Hyde / Poyer

That's the longest way of saying "do you think we can get Andrew Luck?" I've ever seen. Marijuana is a hell of a drug.

The draft can't get here soon enough. I'm done with the "Trust Peterman" / "Draft Rudolph at 21" / "We have too many holes" posts (not to mention "I have a brilliant idea that would be completely ignored in a current relevant thread" thread starting).

The Eagles just beat the Pats in a shootout. You aren't going to beat the Pats scoring less than 28 points. Tom Brady is going to be 41 this year. The Pats have no clear successor on the roster. Even if he does kick father times butt, the guy can't have more than 5 years left. Take a young QB, allow him and the team to grow for a couple of years and in 2-3 you'll actually be ready to take the division from NE on an annual basis.

In 2016 the Browns traded Wentz In 2017 the Browns traded Watson In 2018 it would be amazing if the Browns traded us the final ammo, took Barkley at #1 and allowed us to move up and get the best QB in the draft this year.

I'm not so sure. Hue's seat is pretty hot and the fans won't take long to turn on Tyrod if the team starts out slow and a rookie they took at 1 or 4 is on the bench. While I think it's entirely possible Tyrod thrives there, there's also a very real scenario where he's benched by week ~5 and he's turned into an after thought taking a backup job next summer.

Barkley is going #1 to Cleveland. I would much rather give up the first 5 picks this year. (Obviously would love to keep one of the 2nds, but need to be realistic). If we give up those 5 picks, we still have a 3rd / 4th / 2 5ths, so basically we are just down a 2nd from a normal draft year. I don't want to give up future obligations if it can be avoided, I think it's on the optimistic side to think our pick next year will come in at 22 or lower, and if something does go sideways I don't want to give up a top 10 pick if we can avoid it. That's my hope. Barkley goes #1 We move up to get Rosen #2 I could see Cleveland giving up a 2nd or 3rd to go from 4 to 3 to get Darnold or Allen, whichever they want.

The Browns traded the first pick in the 3rd round for a player who, if everything goes right, won't play more than 8 games or so for them. There's certainly a chance that he'll be surrounded by weapons, can win ~9 games for them and they can turn around and flip him for similar value. But there's also a chance by week 4 (heck, week 1 maybe) he's not even playing. On the flip side, the Bills got that pick for a guy who isn't in their long term plans BEFORE FA even opened, allowing them a blank slate to pursue any FA QB option. Taylor for #65 & Bradford / Keenum / McCown etc that's a win.

Posted in the other threat, but: #21 / #22 / #53 / #56 / #65 = 2,555 points #2 = 2,600 points

#21 / #22 / #53 / #56 / #65 = 2,555 points #2 = 2,600 points

Dorsey "Come on guys, I don't want to work Friday night, you guys don't want to work Friday night, let's just trade all these picks now"

"Taylor to Landry for 3 yards" is about to happen 75 times next year.

For #65?! No effin way!

Your argument is inherently flawed. Why does trading for a young QB mean the team is going to be very bad in 2018?

Massive overpay More like #21 / #22 / #96 / 2019 2nd / Glenn DTs / LBs / interior olinemen are players who can be found later in the draft and filled through FA. This was a playoff team with subpar QB play. The idea that this is some sort of near expansion talent team or that trading up for a QB would completely cripple the team when it comes to draft capital is complete rubbish, so is the notion that needing upgrades in a couple areas (especially at DT and LB) are going to preclude a rookie QB from succeeding.

Cousins going to Denver (or even the Jets or Browns) would be huge. It could put 2 / 3 / 5 / maybe even 4 into play. I think any of those teams would love to move down to add several pieces considering the "blue chip (or lack thereof)" talent in this draft. They could be shopping us on the best deal instead of us trying to beat out other teams for one particular pick. That's something the Browns would do.

He is, J.A.G.

So you don't want good WRs until we know we have a good QB, but how are we going to know we have a QB who is good without good WRs? If you evaluate a guy to be worth the money / draft slot and fit with the team, sign/draft them. It doesn't matter when the talent is added if they are on the field week 1.

That's dumb. Why does order of operations matter if we end up with the same result? FA is before the draft, why would signing a player like Richardson / Robinson preclude us from making a move for a QB? I'm not saying guys of that level would be interested in signing with us, but the notion that we couldn't possibly upgrade the receiving corps without a different QB already in place is dumb.

Tyrod is the "bridge" QB unless someone will trade for him. No, they aren't going to sign Bridgewater with Tyrod still on the roster, and Bridgewater isn't coming here with Tyrod on the roster. If Minny misses on Cousins, I think Bridgewater stays with them. I think they are likely shopping Tyrod hard right now, if they can move him now for a draft pick they'll sign another bridge QB. If they can't trade him now, he'll be looked at as the bridge unless the rookie clearly runs away with the job and there's an injury trade opportunity in camp.

Frankly, the full court press on QB shows they are more than willing to move up. You don't have the owner meeting with QBs who are going to be gone long before 21 if there's not across the board buy in on an aggressive move. The legwork they are doing is not "would we be willing to take this guy if he falls to 21?" legwork, it's "is this guy worth moving up to get?". As for the signings, I don't think that's a sign of anything beyond continually looking to add talent to the roster.

I think it makes a ton of sense You get pretty close on the draft value chart with: Giants out- #2 (2,600 point) Giants in- #21 / #22 / #35 / #65 / #96 (2,511) Browns out- #4 / #35 /#65 (2,615) Browns in- #2 (#2,600) Bills out- #21 / #22 / #96 (1,696) Bills in- #4 (1,800) This is probably a little too generous to us and the Browns (slightly) overpay, but it's a Bills board and screw the Browns. Likely assuming the Giants get Glenn out of the deal too, they could have 6 picks between 21-66, that's a lot of shots at adding talent. We guarantee one of Rosen / Darnold / Baker, the Browns guarantee their #1 QB choice.

They were on the same field in 2016. Jackson (with worse teammates, going against a better D) looked like the better player. He's got some warts, but he wouldn't be falling anywhere near 21 if he didn't, his ceiling is one of the very best in the league.

He's pretty good in NCAA Football 14