PDA

View Full Version : What would you do/Best nonQB talent in the draft


j05son
04-05-2012, 02:24 AM
The scenario: All 3 QB prospects go off the board before the 4th pick in the draft.

Obviously it's unlikely to happen but hypothetically let's say Miami panics and trades with Minnesota for the #3 pick and they take Tennehill.

The "hypothetical" Draft Board:
Indianapolis: Andrew Luck
Washington: Robert Griffin III
Miami: Ryan Tennehill
Cleveland:

My Question(s):
1) Who do you see as the best non-QB talent in this years draft?
2) What would you do/Who would you take in Cleveland's shoes?
3) How does position matter to you when evaluating a pick to a team?
(example = You have Matt Kalil as the best non-QB talent in the draft, but Cleveland has Joe Thomas. Do you go BPA or would you pass and try for more perceived need?)

While the poll is to be strictly best non QB in the draft, please feel free to answer the above questions. While seeing who the user-base likes more out of the prospects, I find it more interesting to see if the user-base values BPA over "need" or vice-versa; perhaps something else like acquiring more picks, etc.

edit: I guess this should've went into the draft forum however I visited the pro football section far more and automatically posted here. Sorry if it should've went in the draft section.

StickSkills
04-05-2012, 02:57 AM
Best player in terms in terms of athleticism and media hype: Trent Richardson
Best player in terms of career success: DeCastro
Best player in term so value at that spot: Matt Khalil

Richardson is the only with a possibility of being taken by the Browns.

That's just my opinion.

Caulibflower
04-05-2012, 02:58 AM
They don't have a stud running back, and Richardson is better at what he does than any of those other picks. He'll immediately impact a mediocre (being kind) offense. None of the other picks make sense when he's no. 1 BPA and possibly need as well.

niel89
04-05-2012, 03:11 AM
I went Claiborne but I could also go for Kalil. I wouldn't take a RB that high and I personally am not as high on Richardson as some, great RB but not top 5 elite. You can never have too many corners and Claiborne is reasonably BPA. Claiborne and Haden would be a great pair of CBs. Kalil would also be a great RT where they have no one. Yeah its a luxury but he wouldn't cost you much at all and he would solidify that position for the next 5 years.

Honestly if I were Cleveland I would look for a trade with maybe the Rams or Vikings even. Both of them would be stocked with picks and want still grab Kalil and the Browns would still be able to grab one of Richardson or Claiborne. Some team will make a move up for a franchise LT.

whatadai
04-05-2012, 03:40 AM
1) Who do you see as the best non-QB talent in this years draft? Richardson
2) What would you do/Who would you take in Cleveland's shoes? 1. Kalil 2. Coples 2. Claiborne
3) How does position matter to you when evaluating a pick to a team?
RB shouldn't go in the top 5. Kalil is BPA(due to position value) after Richardson and would fill a need at the same time. BPA after that is Claiborne, but Coples is the higher need...Rucker and Parker are not the answer.

Seamus2602
04-05-2012, 04:34 AM
I think with a Top 5 pick you need to tick a lot of boxes. It needs to offer not just value for the player but also value at the position. There simply isn't value at Guard or Right Tackle with the 4th Overall Pick. Additionally, there is the problem with what to do with the next contract. There is no point in taking a guy with the 4th Overall Pick, playing him for four years and then not resigning him. The problem is that if a 4th Overall Running Back lives up to his draft stock he will be able to command a salary that simply makes resigning him not worth it.

So with the 4th Overall Pick in the Draft you shouldn't take a Running Back, a Guard or a Right Tackle so in my opinion that should rule out Richardson, De Castro, Reiff and Kalil.

The Browns drafted Joe Haden a few years ago. While they could use some CB help but the contract question comes in again. Because of the rookie wage cap Morris Claiborne will have to be resigned only 1 year after Joe Haden. That could involve given out huge amounts of money to both players and saddling one position with too much money.

I normally stick rigidly to the take a Franchise QB, then a Franchise Pass Rusher, then a Franchise Pass Protector mantra. Consider there are no Franchise QBs left, and they all ready have the Pass Protector then it makes Pass Rusher more obvious. He's a Top 10 talent in my eyes rather than a Top 5 talent but probably so are the other people on the list after you've taken out Luck, Griffen, Kalil, Claiborne and Richardson. Justin Blackmon would probably be the pick for me. I would wary of taken a non Megatron Wide Receiver that high but (after removing players where the positional value isn't there) he is the Best Player Available and fits a huge need for the Browns.

Asteinebach
04-05-2012, 08:13 AM
Great topic.

I think it's a toss-up. I picked Claiborne because of all the other positions (RB, LT, CB), a lockdown man-to-man coverage corner is extremely hard to find. Franchise left tackles probably come about every 2-3 years, and top shelf RB's are in less demand in the NFL nowadays.

Any pick would probably be a winning move for Cleveland. Even if you have Joe Thomas, there's always room for another dominate blocker on any offensive line in the NFL. A solid RB would likely take some pressure off of beleaguered QB Colt McCoy. And again, you just can't substitute the affect a lockdown Corner has in any defense.

One way or the other, regardless of who goes off the board at #3, Cleveland will have an enormous decision to make at #4. But, let's also keep in mind that they pick again at #22. And there should be some solid OT and CB prospects there as well.

Bearsfan123
04-05-2012, 08:26 AM
I disagree. If the best player at a position is rated as highly as Trent Richardson is and you have absolutely no one at the position I think you should jump at him. But you can make that argument about Justin Blackmon as well. Neither one has huge holes in their game so where am I differentiating them? Depth in the draft at the position. This RB group is okay I guess. I dont see too much from it to get excited about, with the exception of Richardson. While, at WR, there should be another talented wide out available to the Browns either late in round 1 or early in round 2.

I don't think Cleveland is in a position to quibble over the "next contract" thought because right now they are an irrelevant franchise. They need to put fans in the stands and the only way to do that is improve your team with what talent you can get immediately. They missed their chance this year to trade up for a Franchise guy in RG3, but in the long run if they can make some strides this year and draft good players. If I was controlling Cleveland it would be Richardson, Hill or Jon Martin in the first. Then next year try and find that Franchise QB to stick in what will hopefully now be a more supportive and ably supporting environment.

But in the end, my opinion is just of a guy on the internet.

RCAChainGang
04-05-2012, 08:37 AM
If I were Cleveland I would take Claiborne. The league has become so pass heavy that having Haden, and Claiborne would be huge to that defense.

EDIT: Although it would make most sense to trade down and get Richardson at a reasonable spot. It is just a matter of drawing trade offers.

Monomach
04-05-2012, 10:44 AM
My Question(s):
1) Who do you see as the best non-QB talent in this years draft?Trent Richardson


2) What would you do/Who would you take in Cleveland's shoes?Sell the pick to whoever wants Matt Kalil the most, since I don't see running back as a viable first round option.

3) How does position matter to you when evaluating a pick to a team?
(example = You have Matt Kalil as the best non-QB talent in the draft, but Cleveland has Joe Thomas. Do you go BPA or would you pass and try for more perceived need?)Yes, it matters. I have no problem with taking a first round right tackle, but top 5 is a little crazy. Cleveland needs a wideout, too, but none of them this year deserve to go top 5.

PoopSandwich
04-05-2012, 10:51 AM
If the Browns don't trade down and don't take Richardson this draft is a failure. I hate taking running backs high but if you can get an Adrian Peterson type player you have to. On top of that, Colt McCoy doesn't have a cannon for an arm, and would greatly benefit having him catch passes out of the backfield. Colt looked best when he was able to check down to Hillis in 2010 and rely on the running game to open up some passing lanes.

If the Browns get Richardson, Wright, and BPA at 37, I would consider this draft a great success (obviously people could bust, but going into the draft I would think this would be good).

Asteinebach
04-05-2012, 11:51 AM
Just pray the Browns don't go grabbing Ryan Tannehill with the 4th overall. That'd be ridiculous. Not only are you getting a reach at QB, you're telling your fans this is the guy of the future. And there's nobody in place that can really teach him much while he sits out. Colt McCoy is going to be fantastically average again this year, which means he'll get plugged in about week 5 and throw 30 picks.

Iamcanadian
04-05-2012, 12:07 PM
The Browns will have to decide between the higher rated Richardson or Blackmon because they are going to draft an offensive player. So it comes down to their system, do they want to throw the ball more or do they want a dominating RB. They also must decide whichever position they draft, what will they find at #22 to fill the other position.
So their options are:

Richardson/ Hill or Wright
Blackmon/ Wilson or Martin

It is a very tough call either way and only the Cleveland management team knows the answer.

King Carls 5 Year Plan
04-05-2012, 12:24 PM
BPA non QB: Kalil
Clevelands pick: Richardson
positional value: if i were Cleveland, i would look at my board and determine if taking Kalil @ #4 is better for my team than taking the next highest prospect (Richardson) on my board. IMO, taking Richardson helps the Browns more than Kalil. plus, i have never been one to believe that a specific position can't be drafted until a certain draft slot. i think every team would be much better off drafting the most talented players no matter where they are selected. give me a Pro Bowl caliber G @ #5 overall if he makes my team better than any other prospect at the same draft slot.

YAYareaRB
04-05-2012, 12:45 PM
ill just go with Kalil. book end tackle for years to come.

brat316
04-05-2012, 01:08 PM
Take Kalil even if it is RT. How much pass rush do you face now in the AFC N, and lot of teams now have 2 good pass rushers.

Richardson is great, but this isn't the 90s, and as much as I love running game, can't waste a top 10 pick on rb even in the first I would be hard pressed.

Another interesting tid bit, WRs have been drafted less and less in the first round each year. 1) cause they flame out quick, 2) they are the most position dependent, 3) easy to find later round picks that work harder, 4) they jsut divas.

That is my own take.

YAYareaRB
04-05-2012, 01:10 PM
i agree. i wonder what makes WR divas? is it because their so position dependent and they have someone to blame if they dont do well?

descendency
04-05-2012, 01:23 PM
The next best player at his position is David DeCastro. He's the only other 8.0+ (BLESTO) grade in the draft.

But the next best value is Matt Kalil, because of his position. (edit2: Kalil should be the 3rd pick unless the Vikings trade the pick to someone taking Tannehill)

edit: Richardson is not an 8.0+. His lack of game breaking speed won't be a big deal but that's what it takes to get an 8.0+.

Rosebud
04-05-2012, 05:11 PM
I take the Corner. Picking top 5 you really need to come away with a QB, WR, OT, DE, DT or Corner. With QB not an option, I think Claiborne is the best for Cleveland at any of those positions. Kalil is as good of a prospect but Cleveland has Joe Thomas on one side which means they can give their RT more help and so shouldn't spend a top 5 pick on one, I know having Haden negates that point to a degree but investing in two great corners is different than investing in two great OTs. In todays NFL you need 3 starting caliber corners to have a chance on defense, having two great ones has a huge impact on the other guys in taht secondary that having a great instead of just good OT doesn't since you never have more than two OTs on the field the way you do with defensive players. Leaving it down to Blackmon and Claiborne and even though I like Blackmon a lot, I see a lot of TO in his game, I like Claiborne a lot more.

RaiderNation
04-05-2012, 07:09 PM
My curent top 5 to answe the question:

Luck
RG3
Kalil
Richardson
Claiborne

Donnie D
04-06-2012, 04:04 AM
i just dont see the Brown picking at the number 4. their guy coming into the draft was Robert Griffin, and they already missed out on him. and if i had to make a guess where theyll trade down, it would be the Jaguars at no.7. Jacksonville desperately needs to bring talent into the passing game. they re-signed Jeremy Mincey and brought in Aaron Ross, so DE and CB arent the glaring holes they were when the NFL offseason started. but the best they could do at WR was Laurent Robinson. Gabbert will never be the type of QB that makes WR's play better than they actually are. Justin Blackmon isnt AJ Green, but he still upgrades their offense by a lot. they could just stay at no.7 and take Floyd, but i doubt theyll take someone of questionable character.

and the Browns front office gets to add picks while pulling themselves out of the decision making process and just grab BPA. i would also argue that they most likely still get Claiborne. Tampa Bay will take Richardson and St Louis already signed Finnegan to big money and its unlikely they spend a top pick on CB. at that point the Rams will try to trade down, but if they stay theyll reach on Reiff or Floyd.

although theres the chance that TB takes Claiborne instead, which then puts St Louis on the clock with Richardson. and even though it would be more of luxury pick than filling a need since they have Steven Jackson, i dont see how they can pass on him. so that makes the threat of Cleveland missing out on Richardson, Claiborne, and Blackmon very real.

when it comes down to it, especially after missing out on Griffin, who was Cleveland's to lose, Holgrem and Heckert are going to need balls of steel to trade down and risk the wrath of the fanbase. but i think H/H will roll the dice all the same.

holt_bruce81
04-06-2012, 06:23 AM
I actually would go...

1. Morris Claiborne
2. Trent Richardson

I know I'm like the only one on this forum but I actually think Riley Reiff is going to end up being a better Tackle than Kalil.

mdmgrand
04-06-2012, 10:06 AM
Best Player after the two main QBs?
Trent Richardson

What would I do in the Browns' shoes?

The Browns are now the key to the draft for so many other teams, they are stacked with picks, and willing to move all around the draft board. Lets look at two different scenarios where the Browns stay with their first three picks (4, 22, 37)

Scenario One:
R1 P4 - Trent Richardson RB
R1 P22 - Stephen Hill WR
R2 P5 - Bobby Massie OT
- These picks would be great additions to the Browns' current roster. All three would jump in and start immediately and perform well; Richardson would get the majority of the carries compared to Hardesty, and Greg Little would be the number one target with Hill as the second option.

Projections:
Trent Richardson - 252 carries, 1067 yards, 11 TDs, 24 receptions, 197 yards, 2 TDs
Stephen Hill - 36 receptions, 565 yards, 5 TDs
Bobby Massie - 16 starts at RT

Scenario Two:
R1 P4 - Justin Blackmon WR
R1 P22 - Cordy Glenn OG/OT
R2 P5 - Lamar Miller RB
- These picks would also be great additions to the roster, and some may argue that Blackmon is not worth the 4th pick, but compared to Richardson his position is more important. Each of these three would become starters, with Miller splitting more carries with Hardesty, and Blackmon would become the number one target.

Projections:
Justin Blackmon - 61 receptions, 842 yards, 6 TDs, 11 carries, 85 yards, 1 TD
Cordy Glenn - 16 starts at RT
Lamar Miller - 202 carries, 929 yards, 6 TDs, 15 receptions, 120 yards, 0 TDs


Either of these two scenarios would work out for the Browns specifically because they are adding offensive talent. Their defense is and has been competitive, but they need gamebreaking talent on the offensive side. I could argue that even LaMichael James could get drafted in that second round slot in Scenario Two, based on his speed and gamebreaking ability, or he could be had with their early 3rd round pick, opening the second rounder to a different position and player.

Like I said the Browns have a lot of options

brat316
04-06-2012, 10:29 AM
Why Stephen hill get no carries?

mdmgrand
04-06-2012, 11:52 AM
He could, I must have forgot to include it. Actually he would be a perfect receiver to give an occasional end around. He'd probably get a TD or two on a long run.

jimmylishis
04-06-2012, 05:32 PM
Trent Richardson easily.

Let's look back to 2007 when AD fell into the vikings laps. At that point RB was arguably the most solid position on the team outside of DT and G. People forget that Chester Taylor was a 1,200 yard rusher the year before and would have been more than capable of being a solid starter for another year or two. The thing the vikings didn't have though, was a game changer on offense. So the vikings took the physical freak in AD and we all know what happened from there.

Cleveland's situation this year is very similar to Minnesota's in '07

The point is that with a pick that high, you don't draft for need. You draft the guy that's going to be the superstar. You can get quality guys at positions of need later on in the draft, you can't find the freakish talents in the later rounds that will be available in the top 10. Right now, Cleveland is in the same situation that Minnesota was in five years ago. They don't have a guy that can score on any given play and break a game open. While the browns might not need a RB, they do need a playmaker and Trent Richardson is probably the best one in the draft.

Seamus2602
04-06-2012, 07:02 PM
Trent Richardson easily.

Let's look back to 2007 when AD fell into the vikings laps. At that point RB was arguably the most solid position on the team outside of DT and G. People forget that Chester Taylor was a 1,200 yard rusher the year before and would have been more than capable of being a solid starter for another year or two. The thing the vikings didn't have though, was a game changer on offense. So the vikings took the physical freak in AD and we all know what happened from there.

Cleveland's situation this year is very similar to Minnesota's in '07

The point is that with a pick that high, you don't draft for need. You draft the guy that's going to be the superstar. You can get quality guys at positions of need later on in the draft, you can't find the freakish talents in the later rounds that will be available in the top 10. Right now, Cleveland is in the same situation that Minnesota was in five years ago. They don't have a guy that can score on any given play and break a game open. While the browns might not need a RB, they do need a playmaker and Trent Richardson is probably the best one in the draft.

The problem with that is that you can create a great Rushing Attack with later picks utilising a committee system. Of the top 10 Rushing Attacks in the NFL last year only 3 had a single RB account for more than 1/2 their yardage (it would have been 4 if AD hadn't hurt himself). It is easier to rush without elite talent than it is to throw, catch, block or defend without elite talent.

Rosebud
04-07-2012, 09:33 AM
Plus at #4 Richardson isn't the only potential star left on the board. IMO Kalil and Claiborne are just as highly rated prospects and Blackmon is just a notch lower despite also having star potential. If those 3 and the 3 QBs are off the board then Richardson would make a lot of sense since he would be the highest rated prospect, regardless of position, but a significant margin, at #4 that's not the case.

NorrinRadd12
04-07-2012, 10:49 PM
Courtney Upshaw