Thoughts on Potential Draft Trade With Cleveland!!!

[Longtimefan]

Originally Posted by TenandSix:Unacceptable

The most interesting side to this trade would be the effect on the players drafted in the top six. It all would come down to what happens at 1 and 2, but if we take CJ at three then the Bucs probably won't take a QB nor would Arizona. Cleveland could potentially add a low salary, high quality RB in Betts, and take Quinn or Russel at 6 while paying less for taking them later. We would end up with the best player in the draft. That trade looks like it could be potentially great for both teams. Although I imagine we might have to sweeten the pot a bit.

And trust me, with CJ our passing game would be so solid for years to come that it wouldn't matter as much if what our RB stuation was. Back up running backs are easy to come by. We might not find one as good as Betts this year, but who cares? You can't have everything. CJ helps our offense out year after year if healthy. On top of that he would REALLY benifit JC who is the future of our franchise. Sounds too good to be true.

True elite WR's, like QB's and CB's, are very hard to come by and give your team an edge. I think the skins have been guilty of overvaluing RB and LB for a long time. The real priority ranking in football is QB, LT, WR/CB, then OL/DL. The addition of CJ would have us looking very good in all those areas, except DL. Next year we could be in postion to go after d-linemen and make a serious run at the SB. This is the perfect time to help Campbell as well. This will most likely be the most crucial year in his development. I not only love this trade but it could potentially save the franchise.

We can have all the elite recievers in the league but they're not of much use on the sidelines. If we don't address our defense to the extent where we can stop somebody, we're going to look like we did last year. The offense we presently have can be effective with more opportunities.We can't alow teams to to get the ball and keep it like last year. I'll admit like most of us that CJ is a fine player, but he's not what we need at this time to win games. I want to see the area of this team that needs the most help addressed in order to have optimism for this coming season. Adding another WR, albeit a very good one, is not going to stop the run, or rush the passer. Herein lies our greatest NEED.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Longtimefan

We can have all the elite recievers in the league but they're not of much use on the sidelines. If we don't address our defense to the extent where we can stop somebody, we're going to look like we did last year. The offense we presently have can be effective with more opportunities.We can't alow teams to to get the ball and keep it like last year. I'll admit like most of us that CJ is a fine player, but he's not what we need at this time to win games. I want to see the area of this team that needs the most help addressed in order to have optimism for this coming season. Adding another WR, albeit a very good one, is not going to stop the run, or rush the passer. Herein lies our greatest NEED.

And our offense needs to improve its blocking before we get any better.

With Calvin Johnson, and improved blocking, we could be the best offense in the league. But with improved blocking alone, we'd be among the best offenses in the league. Calvin Johnson simply isn't worth to this team what he is to a bunch of others. This point is supported by the fact that we would have to trade up to get him. Getting into a bidding war for a guy whos role for his first two seasons in this league will be to sell as many jerseys as possible is NOT a smart football move.

I can't argue with the boost of moral to the fan base that would come with his drafting, but I can argue the irrelivance of that when compared to say, actually making smart football moves.

[TenandSix:Unacceptable]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

And our offense needs to improve its blocking before we get any better.

With Calvin Johnson, and improved blocking, we could be the best offense in the league. But with improved blocking alone, we'd be among the best offenses in the league. Calvin Johnson simply isn't worth to this team what he is to a bunch of others. This point is supported by the fact that we would have to trade up to get him. Getting into a bidding war for a guy whos role for his first two seasons in this league will be to sell as many jerseys as possible is NOT a smart football move.

I can't argue with the boost of moral to the fan base that would come with his drafting, but I can argue the irrelivance of that when compared to say, actually making smart football moves.

So trading up and getting someone who projects to be in the top 10 perhaps even the best at his position while giving up your back up running back and a sixth round pick seems like a bad football move? Are you really gonna tell me that taking D-Line or something more obvious is the only smart football move this team can make? And do our WR's, which like DL happens to be a very important position, really seem like their gonna be a strength for us for years to come? I mean, you take out Santana, and we probably have one of the worst receiving corps in the league after number one. And don't get me wrong, I love Santana, but does he project to get better and better? You really want JC having Santana and check down as his options while he develops?

Could you please explain to me what some smart football moves would be? And please try to include anything you can come up with that doesn't include DL.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by TenandSix:Unacceptable

So trading up and getting someone who projects to be in the top 10 perhaps even the best at his position while giving up your back up running back and a sixth round pick seems like a bad football move? Are you really gonna tell me that taking D-Line or something more obvious is the only smart football move this team can make? And do our WR's, which like DL happens to be a very important position, really seem like their gonna be a strength for us for years to come? I mean, you take out Santana, and we probably have one of the worst receiving corps in the league after number one. And don't get me wrong, I love Santana, but does he project to get better and better? You really want JC having Santana and check down as his options while he develops?

Could you please explain to me what some smart football moves would be? And please try to include anything you can come up with that doesn't include DL.

GTripp thinks WRs are completely worthless.

the problem is, when you have a QB-WR combo, weak WRs can bottleneck your offense just like a weak QB can bottleneck your offense. having a WR that can beat double coverage helps everyone, including the oline (if the qb knows how to checkdown vs the blitz properly) and the other skill guys (less coverage on other receivers, more room for runners). it's hard to argue against having too many weapons in any way other than relative impact of taking a DL guy instead. BUT, if this is really our QB of the future, making sure the WRs aren't holding him back could be pretty important.

I really wouldn't be too upset about taking CJ. I think he'll have an anquan boldin type impact.

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Originally Posted by That Guy

GTripp thinks WRs are completely worthless.

the problem is, when you have a QB-WR combo, weak WRs can bottleneck your offense just like a weak QB can bottleneck your offense. having a WR that can beat double coverage helps everyone, including the oline (if the qb knows how to checkdown vs the blitz properly) and the other skill guys (less coverage on other receivers, more room for runners). it's hard to argue against having too many weapons in any way other than relative impact of taking a DL guy instead. BUT, if this is really our QB of the future, making sure the WRs aren't holding him back could be pretty important.

I really wouldn't be too upset about taking CJ. I think he'll have an anquan boldin type impact.

well said Calvin Johnson is good and i wouldnt mind getting him but what about the defense

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by EARTHQUAKE2689

well said Calvin Johnson is good and i wouldnt mind getting him but what about the defense

i think i've already made it pretty clear that staying at 6 or dropping a bit an taing one of the DL guys would probably be better imho. but this deal would be far less stupid than some of the other thing i've seen floated around.

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Originally Posted by That Guy

i think i've already made it pretty clear that staying at 6 or dropping a bit an taing one of the DL guys would probably be better imho. but this deal would be far less stupid than some of the other thing i've seen floated around.

i know to me you have made the most sense out of all this garbage that we have been hearing i just ran out of stuff to say

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by That Guy

GTripp thinks WRs are completely worthless.

the problem is, when you have a QB-WR combo, weak WRs can bottleneck your offense just like a weak QB can bottleneck your offense. having a WR that can beat double coverage helps everyone, including the oline (if the qb knows how to checkdown vs the blitz properly) and the other skill guys (less coverage on other receivers, more room for runners). it's hard to argue against having too many weapons in any way other than relative impact of taking a DL guy instead. BUT, if this is really our QB of the future, making sure the WRs aren't holding him back could be pretty important.

I really wouldn't be too upset about taking CJ. I think he'll have an anquan boldin type impact.

Well, no. I think they are evaluated improperly which is something completely different. The ultimate effect is that the guys who are evaluated to be the really, really cream of the crop best of the best are probably no better than the next tier. The success-failure rates of most top ten picks support my theory. Don't generalize when it isn't necessary.

Getting an Anquan Boldin impact from a 2nd round pick such as...Anquan Boldin is really good value. Getting equal production from a top 3 pick isn't all that special, and with our current D Line situation a WR that is of Anquan Boldin's caliber just doesn't improve our team much at all. It's not like we are a team without any receiving options--not even close.

Tell Kansas City and San Diego that ignoring WRs early in the draft can bottleneck your offense.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Well, no. I think they are evaluated improperly which is something completely different. The ultimate effect is that the guys who are evaluated to be the really, really cream of the crop best of the best are probably no better than the next tier. The success-failure rates of most top ten picks support my theory. Don't generalize when it isn't necessary.

Getting an Anquan Boldin impact from a 2nd round pick such as...Anquan Boldin is really good value. Getting equal production from a top 3 pick isn't all that special, and with our current D Line situation a WR that is of Anquan Boldin's caliber just doesn't improve our team much at all. It's not like we are a team without any receiving options--not even close.

Tell Kansas City and San Diego that ignoring WRs early in the draft can bottleneck your offense.

1200-1400 yards/season consistently is nothing special?
when exactly did KC or SD win their last SB? lack of a true grade-A #1 WR has definately hurt their offenses, though both have monster TEs to help.

what about the certain super bowl with 3 1,000 yard WRs? what about the colt's 3 target passing attack? It certainly didn't hurt them.

DE bust rate is about 50%, it's really not any better than QBs or WRs. I mean, if you want we can throw straw men around all day about why drafting any position other than offensive guard in the first round is likely to be a bust, but that'd be fairly pointless (and yeah, OGs and Cs bust rate are SUPER SUPER low cause very very few go in the 1st round, and those that do go that high are rate VERY highly, like hutch).

I do agree that DEs are always higher priority at equal talent, and even for us it'd probably be a better pick, since our need is dire. That doesn't mean CJ wouldn't help, that he's not the best WR prospect in quite a few years, or that we don't have a gaping hole at the #2 WR spot.

a true #1 WR beats an overpaid LB or a high contract SS, etc though. While signing ian scott and drafting adams or carriker would be much smarter in terms or winning games next year, this deal would beat the briggs or landry rumors in terms of usefulness.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by That Guy

1200-1400 yards/season consistently is nothing special?
when exactly did KC or SD win their last SB? lack of a true grade-A #1 WR has definately hurt their offenses, though both have monster TEs to help.

what about the certain super bowl with 3 1,000 yard WRs? what about the colt's 3 target passing attack? It certainly didn't hurt them.

DE bust rate is about 50%, it's really not any better than QBs or WRs. I mean, if you want we can throw straw men around all day about why drafting any position other than offensive guard in the first round is likely to be a bust, but that'd be fairly pointless (and yeah, OGs and Cs bust rate are SUPER SUPER low cause very very few go in the 1st round, and those that do go that high are rate VERY highly, like hutch).

I do agree that DEs are always higher priority at equal talent, and even for us it'd probably be a better pick, since our need is dire. That doesn't mean CJ wouldn't help, that he's not the best WR prospect in quite a few years, or that we don't have a gaping hole at the #2 WR spot.

a true #1 WR beats an overpaid LB or a high contract SS, etc though. While signing ian scott and drafting adams or carriker would be much smarter in terms or winning games next year, this deal would beat the briggs or landry rumors in terms of usefulness.

Both Briggs and Landry are defensive players, so I'd have to assume they'd bring more help than CJ. Still, the correct move is to go DT or at the very least DE.

Every year, 31 teams do not win the super bowl. That doesn't mean Kansas City and San Diego did not create cream of the crop offenses over the past few years without paying too much attention to WRs. The Patriots and Eagles don't overvalue WRs either and their track record is even more successful than KC or SD overall, just not on the offensive end.

Again, the Colts did not invest top 10 picks into highly hyped wide receivers. They obviously value the position, but when they got those top picks, they made selections like Edgerrin James, Peyton Manning, and Dwight Freeney (who was the 11th pick in 2002 I think).

Bust rate...it happens. When you aren't talking about QBs, drafting the right guy is at least somewhat a function of luck. But you can always increase your chances of drafting quality players by focusing on the guys with the most college experience. Once a guy hits the NFL, he's going to be subjected to the same amount of practice time as every player of his class, so it's impossible to make a gain on experience on someone after draft day. Obviously, injuries are relatively unpredictable and will hinder development (see: Grossman, Rex), but if a guy only started for 2 seasons in college and then came out, your team is better off looking at a 4 year starter.

Obviously all the experience in the world won't make up for a significant gap in skill, but 4 year starters who become high draft picks don't bust all that often.

As I stated in prior posts, it's possible that CJ could hurt our offense as a rookie if the human nature of playcalling underutilizes Moss and Cooley upon his arrival. Additionally, it reduces the number of packages we can use when he, Moss, and Cooley all need playing time. No one is saying that he doesn't represent a significant upgrade over Randle El in a vaccuum, but the practical application of a "dominant" No. 2 receiver to this offense seems like the epitome of overkill.

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Originally Posted by That Guy

1200-1400 yards/season consistently is nothing special?
when exactly did KC or SD win their last SB? lack of a true grade-A #1 WR has definately hurt their offenses, though both have monster TEs to help.

what about the certain super bowl with 3 1,000 yard WRs? what about the colt's 3 target passing attack? It certainly didn't hurt them.

DE bust rate is about 50%, it's really not any better than QBs or WRs. I mean, if you want we can throw straw men around all day about why drafting any position other than offensive guard in the first round is likely to be a bust, but that'd be fairly pointless (and yeah, OGs and Cs bust rate are SUPER SUPER low cause very very few go in the 1st round, and those that do go that high are rate VERY highly, like hutch).

I do agree that DEs are always higher priority at equal talent, and even for us it'd probably be a better pick, since our need is dire. That doesn't mean CJ wouldn't help, that he's not the best WR prospect in quite a few years, or that we don't have a gaping hole at the #2 WR spot.

a true #1 WR beats an overpaid LB or a high contract SS, etc though. While signing ian scott and drafting adams or carriker would be much smarter in terms or winning games next year, this deal would beat the briggs or landry rumors in terms of usefulness.

at least someone else agrees with me on signing ian scott

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by TenandSix:Unacceptable

So trading up and getting someone who projects to be in the top 10 perhaps even the best at his position while giving up your back up running back and a sixth round pick seems like a bad football move? Are you really gonna tell me that taking D-Line or something more obvious is the only smart football move this team can make? And do our WR's, which like DL happens to be a very important position, really seem like their gonna be a strength for us for years to come? I mean, you take out Santana, and we probably have one of the worst receiving corps in the league after number one. And don't get me wrong, I love Santana, but does he project to get better and better? You really want JC having Santana and check down as his options while he develops?

Could you please explain to me what some smart football moves would be? And please try to include anything you can come up with that doesn't include DL.

Well, let me clarify. I'm not suggesting we use the 6th pick to reach on someone who isn't a projected top 10 pick just to pick for need.

With the proposed trade, its reasonable to dismiss the 6th round pick as negligible due to the magnitude of the trade. Ladell Betts is hardly negligible. He carries a pretty significant cap hit, and is capable of running the ball 12-15 times a game to take some of the load off Portis and help extend his career. That is very significant.

In some cases, I would think that moving from 6 up to 3 would justify a trade of Ladell Betts. But only justifiable if there is a once in a lifetime prospect at a need position. So admitting a player meeting that critera could justify a move up, I can see your position on Johnson.

However, I personally do not view Johnson to be a once in a lifetime prospect, nor do I consider wide receiver to be a need position.

Ladell Betts is our 2nd running back. Calvin Johnson would be our 2nd receiver maybe even into his prime, but at least for the first few years of his career. With Cooley on board, he may not even be our second target. Betts, however, should find himself getting between 12 and 15 touches a game. This is significantly more than Johnson would be getting, even as a number one receiver. Certainly, trading Betts for Johnson would hurt our offense in the present, and maybe even in the future depending on how hard it is to find a replacement for Betts.

Additionally in a bind, we can always put Portis or Betts at a slot receiver for extra receiving options. We lose versatility with Johnson in, because we sort of have to keep him, Cooley, and Moss on the field together to have our best players on the field. He really isnt necessary, and he's going to keep some good players off the field.

Inevitably, a receiver will come along next year who is hyped just as much as Calvin Johnson. Then we will be talking about how we have to trade up for him. Truth of the matter is, receivers taken in the top ten do not have a production advantage over receivers taken latter in the round. There really is no reason to expect Calvin Johnson to buck this trend. Be careful of draft hype, it can really toy with your perceptions of a player.

Johnson is the uniamous top receiver in this class, but as soon as we pass the draft, that title means preciously little. He can't produce at a league average level and still justify a top 5 selection. He has to be dominant, and he hasn't proven that he can do that yet at the next level.

You are wrong one account, that WRs and DEs are positions of equal importance. DEs have a strong affect on the outcome of all plays excluding three step drop quick throws. Receiving ability has no baring on the outcome of any rushing play, and not every receiver is equally involved in any given passing play. We are talking 95% of defensive plays compared to maybe 60% of total passing plays, or about 30-35% of total offense. Additionally, theres a school of thought that a defense controls more over the outcome of a play than the offense. If this is true, it further seperates the positional value of DL vs WRs.

That doesn't mean receivers don't play a part in rushing plays. They play a significant part with their blocking. However, this simply is not a significant part of how a scout evaluates a receiver. It's a significant market deficiency, and taking Calvin Johnson in the top 3 picks is NOT exploiting this market deficency. Quality blocking, smart route running receivers can be found later in the round and throughout the draft. Whether or not Johnson is good at these things are irrelivant. We are talking about a player who can be found much, much later and much, much cheaper doing the same things Calvin Johnson is doing to help his team win without all the hype and flash.

Because of the significant market deficiency and of the reduced positional value, taking a WR in the top 10 is almost always a bad idea. If your WR corps need help because your WRs can't run good routes, and they can't or won't block, you have a problem that needs to be fixed. Drafting a receiver in the top 5 is overkill 99% of the time. Even if he can block with the best of them and is disciplined, you've just used a top 5 pick on a set widely available skills. Congratulations.

Evidence of this is found in the fact that teams that sustain sucess don't pick WRs in the first ten picks. They may have some pretty darn good receivers. With the Colts, Reggie Wayne and Marvin Harrison were both first round picks. But neither of them were TOP 10 picks. Reggie Wayne went 30th in 2001. In that same draft, the can't miss prospect of the decade was the incomprable David Terrell, who went 8th to Chicago with just as much hype as CJ has now. The unianimous 2nd best reciever, Koren Robinson, went a pick later. Rod Gardner was the 3rd reciever off the board. Santana Moss and Reggie Wayne didn't have the hype those other guys did, but have done just fine for their careers. Plus, their teams didn't burn top 10 selections for time.

In 1996, Marvin Harrison went 19th overall to the Colts. The Colts once again did not waste a top ten pick, and went on to select one of the greatest receivers ever. The top 2 receivers taken were Keyshawn Johnson first overall, and Terry Glenn seventh. While both have done good things over their careers, they were both bad picks. Johnson (k.) has every bit the amount of hype that Johnson (C.) does now. But that didn't ever make him an elite player. And I think you can agree with me that if CJ does not turn out to be an elite player, its not the best use of a top 5 pick.

Smart football moves involve paying attention to market value. Using your top 5 picks on players who will have the most responsibility within the franchise. Quarterbacks, Defensive Lineman, Left Tackles, Cornerbacks, and elite Running Backs all can justify top 5 picks. Elite players at other postions can justify picks 6-10 assuming you get what you thought you were buying.

We have a very rare case. A defensive line situation which lacks any competant players under the age of 28. Usually teams address this situation before it gets to this point. Now, its all about stopping the bleeding. As of last year, the DL began to show its age, and we are a year later, and still dont have any youth line up. Simply put, we can't go another year without adding youth SOMEWHERE on the DL. It's suicide in the future if we don't. We are already sentenced to another year of poor defensive play. If we don't address it this year, that period of poor defensive play extends through 2008. If we wait any longer, we might as well just onside kick every time.

However, in the interest of answering your question, any offensive line help or the selection of a middle linebacker or cornerback would be a helpful use of the pick. Assuming we get a good player at one of those positions, we fill a future need. It's just that we can't push off adding SOME DL youth any longer. We've waited too long as it is. There is going to be just as strong a facton next year to pass on DL help again. We can't be a good defense again until 1) we get highly touted youth in the system, and 2) the youth we get gaines experience and moves toward the prime of its career.

#1 can be satisfied later this month. #2 will take at least a season. But honestly, how much longer can we wait?

With the Briggs deal, at least we still can pick up some highly touted youth at No. 31. With the Johnson deal, we lose that option, and we don't even get the defensive help that Briggs brings. As much as I am against the Briggs deal, it's better for the team in most every conceivable way (excluding cap value) than a trade up to No. 3 for CJ.