Wild thought on Browns #4 pick (1 Viewer)

[Bracie Smathers]

No one seems to know what the Browns will do with the #4 pick.

We've heard everything from, Trent Richardson, Justin Blakcmon, Ryan Tannenhill, and Morris Clairborne, and we've evern heard trading down and that is where I'm headed.

Hadn't thought of this but saw it and thought, hmmnn.

What if Jeff Fisher is seeking to trade-up from #6 to #4, not for Blackmon, not for Claibore but for RB Trent Richardson.

My link

Just in case Rams coach Jeff Fisher is bent on getting his next Eddie George ...

If Trent Richardson slips to the Rams at No. 6, might Steven Jackson be offered to Cleveland for, say, a fourth- or fifth-round pick?

Maybe, but the Jamal Lewis memorial red flag would apply. Jackson will turn 29 in July. His 1,145 rushing yards (4.4 per carry) didn’t keep the 2011 Rams from going 2-14.

If the Rams really want Richardson and are afraid the Browns might take him, how might this play? The Browns trade places from four to six in exchange for a Round 2 pick, then take Blackmon or Claiborne.

T-Rich is going to be a stud. Fisher has his QB, he might be looking for the next Eddie George which would free-up RB Stehpen Jackson and Browns HC Pat Shurmur was the OC in St. Louis so he is familiar with Stephen Jackson.I'm not entirely sure that is what will happen but thought it was interesting.

 

[cstu]

Would the Browns even want SJax at $7M?

 

[Brady Marino]

I've been curious if Cleveland would entertain an offer involving S-Jax myself. Browns might like another pounder since Hillis is gone, and S-Jax is (arguably) the best pounder in the league.

I honestly doubt, with all the needs the Rams have to fill, that Fisher would trade up to #4 to take Richardson if S-Jax is still on the roster. Richardson would be more of a luxury at this point.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

Would the Browns even want SJax at $7M?

Possibly.Shurmur would know his value and if he felt he could produce as he had in the past then he was producing at top ten NFL running back. Tough to see him stayling healthy all year.

Didn't even catch the Peter King linked from the front page.

Peter King MMQB

5. Jeff Fisher loves Trent Richardson, and the impact of the Rams ending up with the Alabama running back would be huge. First, the Rams would presumably either trade or release Steve Jackson if this happens. I don't see them paying Jackson $7 million in 2012 to share the job with a player certain to eclipse him soon. And that big number takes some logical teams (Steelers, Giants) out of the running for Jackson. Now, I view this scenario as unlikely anyway, because the Rams simply have to get receiver help for Sam Bradford. But if Justin Blackmon is gone here and Richardson's still there, he's logical for the Rams. Of course, Cleveland likes Richardson a lot, and rookie Tampa coach Greg Schiano does too, so I don't see Richardson making it to six.

Our view: New Rams head coach Jeff Fisher reportedly love Richardson. He's simply the best RB we've seen come out of college since Adrian Peterson in 2007. Richardson runs angry, loves to run over defenders, and has the speed to score from anywhere on the field. Even though Jackson isn't the same player he used to be we feel there would be several teams interested if he's on the trade block.

It is possible the Rams are not going to pay that salary so if he were dealt he would likely renegotiate his contract.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

I've been curious if Cleveland would entertain an offer involving S-Jax myself. Browns might like another pounder since Hillis is gone, and S-Jax is (arguably) the best pounder in the league.I honestly doubt, with all the needs the Rams have to fill, that Fisher would trade up to #4 to take Richardson if S-Jax is still on the roster. Richardson would be more of a luxury at this point.

I think the Steve-Jax insight is peripheral to any trade-up for T-Rich. They wouldn't keep him at that salary so to get something in exchange is the interesting part.To move up it would cost their second but if they also packaged Jackson and the Browns chipped in a couple of their late round picks then it is intereting for both sides.

 

[Donnybrook]

I could see the Rams taking Richardson at 6 but don't see a good enough reason to trade up. You have to be prepared in case Jackson's production falls off ala Shaun Alexander.

I remember when Steven Jackson entered the league and played along side of Marshall Faulk. I could see a similar senario happenning with Jackson and Richardson. They could definitely share carries until Richardson takes over.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Jackson will turn 29 this year. His 1,145 rushing yards (4.4 per carry) didn’t keep the 2011 Rams from going 2-14

Wouldn't this be an argument against taking Richardson, not one for taking him? It's basically saying that they already got good production out of their RB and still went 2-14, so why would they not only use a high pick, but also trade up to continue to stay strong at that position that didn't really help them much?Btw, this scenario has been thrown around a bunch of times in the TRich threads.

 

[cstu]

Jackson will turn 29 this year. His 1,145 rushing yards (4.4 per carry) didn’t keep the 2011 Rams from going 2-14

Wouldn't this be an argument against taking Richardson, not one for taking him? It's basically saying that they already got good production out of their RB and still went 2-14, so why would they not only use a high pick, but also trade up to continue to stay strong at that position that didn't really help them much?Btw, this scenario has been thrown around a bunch of times in the TRich threads.

It could be but I think it's flawed reasoning. The Rams have been near the bottom in points allowed since SJax has been there, but with the Browns defense I think having a RB like Richardson would help them tremendously. With Richardson and the other talent they can get in the draft I don't think they are too far away from being a playoff team like the Vikings became with Peterson.

 

[rizzler]

as a Browns fan, I say a whole lotta no thanks to this idea.

SJax is beaten, broken and bruised. And old. He's going to hit the wall extremely hard, very soon... Too soon to bother pulling this stunt off.

Rams would likely jump at any half-decent offer, let alone anything involving the #4. Ludicrous, IMO

 

[Raiderfan32904]

First of all, put down the crack pipe if you think T Rich is slipping to 6. Ain't gonna happen. No way in hell. Tampa would jump all over him, and Cleveland likes him as well. If Jeff Fisher wants Richardson, he needs to make a deal with Minnesota at #3, because Cleveland won't cooperate with their plans after they got screwed out of the pick bounty the Rams got for RG3.

As for SJAX, he had another great season last year. 7th year over 1,000 yards in a row. ~4.5ypc. A playmaking stud on a team with no playmakers and scrub QB's. He's a warrior. But at 29 and making $7M, he's not a valuable commodity that anyone is going to trade for. Not at that salary. He's also got a series of injuries on his docket, and so any GM has to know going in that he can expect maybe one or two more quality years and then likely falls off the 30+ year cliff of production. The Rams would be lucky to get anything in return for SJAX at his current salary, but Fisher might just dump him if he has to if he can fanagle a deal with the Vikings.

I agree with the premise of the crazy thought of the OP, but look to the Vikings, not the Browns for a possible Fisher-Richardson marriage.

 

[Donnybrook]

First of all, put down the crack pipe if you think T Rich is slipping to 6. Ain't gonna happen. No way in hell. ...

A little over the top don't you think. All it would take is Cleveland to draft Blackmon and Tampa to draft Claiborne and Richardson falls to 6.

 

[MAC_32]

St Louis might trade up to 4, but Cleveland won't trade for S Jacks.

 

[Cassius]

Why the crap would St. Louis trade down to 6 and then up to 4? If they wanted 4, they would have just traded down to 4 in the first place. This makes no sense.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

The craziest (like a fox) thought about the Browns pick is them taking Melvin Ingram.

 

[SWC]

what if they traded up to like number 2 and then took the same player they were going to take at their original spot who could have fallen there it would be totally mind bending like sort of what if the indians had lazer guns when luis and clark got there it would have been a total space alien war against them and they would probably not have gotten to see the pacific ocean or yellowtone national park at all so who knows what ifs sink ships take that to the bank and go tell your momma she is a brohan

 

[rizzler]

what if they traded up to like number 2 and then took the same player they were going to take at their original spot who could have fallen there it would be totally mind bending like sort of what if the indians had lazer guns when luis and clark got there it would have been a total space alien war against them and they would probably not have gotten to see the pacific ocean or yellowtone national park at all so who knows what ifs sink ships take that to the bank and go tell your momma she is a brohan

probably not.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

what if they traded up to like number 2 and then took the same player they were going to take at their original spot who could have fallen there it would be totally mind bending like sort of what if the indians had lazer guns when luis and clark got there it would have been a total space alien war against them and they would probably not have gotten to see the pacific ocean or yellowtone national park at all so who knows what ifs sink ships take that to the bank and go tell your momma she is a brohan

probably not.

Gotta admit though, the guys got a point about the lazer guns.

 

[Sabertooth]

I thought common speculation was that Browns, Phins, and Bucs were the teams targetting Richardson.

 

[ninerfanatic492000]

No one seems to know what the Browns will do with the #4 pick.

We've heard everything from, Trent Richardson, Justin Blakcmon, Ryan Tannenhill, and Morris Clairborne, and we've evern heard trading down and that is where I'm headed.

Hadn't thought of this but saw it and thought, hmmnn.

What if Jeff Fisher is seeking to trade-up from #6 to #4, not for Blackmon, not for Claibore but for RB Trent Richardson.

My link

Just in case Rams coach Jeff Fisher is bent on getting his next Eddie George ...

If Trent Richardson slips to the Rams at No. 6, might Steven Jackson be offered to Cleveland for, say, a fourth- or fifth-round pick?

Maybe, but the Jamal Lewis memorial red flag would apply. Jackson will turn 29 in July. His 1,145 rushing yards (4.4 per carry) didn’t keep the 2011 Rams from going 2-14.

If the Rams really want Richardson and are afraid the Browns might take him, how might this play? The Browns trade places from four to six in exchange for a Round 2 pick, then take Blackmon or Claiborne.

T-Rich is going to be a stud. Fisher has his QB, he might be looking for the next Eddie George which would free-up RB Stehpen Jackson and Browns HC Pat Shurmur was the OC in St. Louis so he is familiar with Stephen Jackson.I'm not entirely sure that is what will happen but thought it was interesting.

Always unconventional on who or where they find their talent, the spurs would prolly take this deal to get steph's contract off the books next year. Only if the rams throw in some 14yr old Brazilian kid with skills they have been hiding

 

[Buckna]

Sjax is due this year and next $7M plus 750K in bonuses. Few teams will be interested in a trade for SJax unless he's willing to take a paycut or sign a cheap extension. If he was willing to do that he'd do probably do so and stay in STL. His dead $ cap hit to STL if traded would be about $4M (but they would save $5M on this years cap and $9M next year.)

Also, as someone said, if they really were worried about missing out on TRich they would have just taken the Cleveland offer and moved down to 4 instead of 6. My guess is that they will be perfectly happy with whomever out of TRich, Claiborne or Blackmon is still sitting there at 6 when they are on the clock. Maybe they even have a darkhorse candidate that the group-think isn't considering right now.

 

[mozzy84]

what if they traded up to like number 2 and then took the same player they were going to take at their original spot who could have fallen there it would be totally mind bending like sort of what if the indians had lazer guns when luis and clark got there it would have been a total space alien war against them and they would probably not have gotten to see the pacific ocean or yellowtone national park at all so who knows what ifs sink ships take that to the bank and go tell your momma she is a brohan

I like this thinking

 

[Bracie Smathers]

Jackson will turn 29 this year. His 1,145 rushing yards (4.4 per carry) didn’t keep the 2011 Rams from going 2-14

Wouldn't this be an argument against taking Richardson, not one for taking him? It's basically saying that they already got good production out of their RB and still went 2-14, so why would they not only use a high pick, but also trade up to continue to stay strong at that position that didn't really help them much?Btw, this scenario has been thrown around a bunch of times in the TRich threads.

I don't value stud RBs as much as some do, err for bad teams.Priority thing.

I love great RB play as much as the next fan but my issue is that bad teams should not try to build from the RB position.

Cleveland is a bad team that has some talent on the offensive line and is starting to build a defense but it lacks a , franchise QB, a #1 WR, and any sort of playmakers on offense. St. Louis has the franchise QB in place so they are a few years ahead of the Browns but they still need to protect Bradford and they need a #1 WR and playmakers.

The popular pick with Browns fans if Trent Richardson because he is a playmaker but the Browns still will need to get a franchise QB. They may not, likely, will not be able to land one till next year and it takes a few years for a guy to get up to speed. So any RB, even an uber stud like an Adrian Peterson type of back, T-Rich, would have years of production taken off his tread.

If Fisher sees Richardson as a far safer pick and a better playmaker than Blackmon and he undertands that a Trent Richardson doesn't come down the pike every draft and that he's within striking diestance and can make a deal then it works for him.

On the Cleveland side. My opinion is that the Browns don't have a shot at a franchise QB because I don't think Tannenhill is thee guy to build from. I actually like Blackmon and would prefer to take him if the Browns do not move down. If the Browns move down they would still need a RB so getting one or two years out of Steve-Jax for a late round pick works for me. Browns GM Tom Heckertt was in Philly when they got Westbrook and Shady, both second round RBs, so he has a good history of landing good backs outside of the first round. If the Browns traded down they could still get Blackmon or Tannenhill and get the Rams second round pick. If the Rams had T-Rich then the Shurmur connection makes a deal to get Jackson interesting. Normally I would not be in favor of getting an older RB but in this scenario it is interesting to me and the lazer indian crowd has things they need to do like take meds.

Both teams would still have holes to fill in the future. The Rams would have their franchise QB and could have a young RB moving forward and have extra future first round picks. Not a perfect stituation but I can see how it Fisher could have a playoff team in a few years. Without Richardson in the picture its a different team a year or two in the future.

 

[MAC_32]

Jackson will turn 29 this year. His 1,145 rushing yards (4.4 per carry) didn’t keep the 2011 Rams from going 2-14

Wouldn't this be an argument against taking Richardson, not one for taking him? It's basically saying that they already got good production out of their RB and still went 2-14, so why would they not only use a high pick, but also trade up to continue to stay strong at that position that didn't really help them much?Btw, this scenario has been thrown around a bunch of times in the TRich threads.

I don't value stud RBs as much as some do, err for bad teams.Priority thing.

I love great RB play as much as the next fan but my issue is that bad teams should not try to build from the RB position.

Cleveland is a bad team that has some talent on the offensive line and is starting to build a defense but it lacks a , franchise QB, a #1 WR, and any sort of playmakers on offense. St. Louis has the franchise QB in place so they are a few years ahead of the Browns but they still need to protect Bradford and they need a #1 WR and playmakers.

The popular pick with Browns fans if Trent Richardson because he is a playmaker but the Browns still will need to get a franchise QB. They may not, likely, will not be able to land one till next year and it takes a few years for a guy to get up to speed. So any RB, even an uber stud like an Adrian Peterson type of back, T-Rich, would have years of production taken off his tread.

If Fisher sees Richardson as a far safer pick and a better playmaker than Blackmon and he undertands that a Trent Richardson doesn't come down the pike every draft and that he's within striking diestance and can make a deal then it works for him.

On the Cleveland side. My opinion is that the Browns don't have a shot at a franchise QB because I don't think Tannenhill is thee guy to build from. I actually like Blackmon and would prefer to take him if the Browns do not move down. If the Browns move down they would still need a RB so getting one or two years out of Steve-Jax for a late round pick works for me. Browns GM Tom Heckertt was in Philly when they got Westbrook and Shady, both second round RBs, so he has a good history of landing good backs outside of the first round. If the Browns traded down they could still get Blackmon or Tannenhill and get the Rams second round pick. If the Rams had T-Rich then the Shurmur connection makes a deal to get Jackson interesting. Normally I would not be in favor of getting an older RB but in this scenario it is interesting to me and the lazer indian crowd has things they need to do like take meds.

Both teams would still have holes to fill in the future. The Rams would have their franchise QB and could have a young RB moving forward and have extra future first round picks. Not a perfect stituation but I can see how it Fisher could have a playoff team in a few years. Without Richardson in the picture its a different team a year or two in the future.

In this scenario in which St Louis trades up for Rich I would rather trade down, let St Louis have Rich, trade down again, add Floyd, then take Martin with pick 22, and have St Louis trade S Jacks to someone else or cut him if they don't think him and Rich to co-exist. Hopefully we can add a couple more #2's by moving back, that won't be wasted on a QB like Weeden, and we can walk into the year without any holes outside of maybe QB. And if we go 4-12 again we all know who's to blame. Bye bye Pat, bye bye Colt, then hire someone who wants to work with Barkley, then do whatever you have to do to get Barkley.Barkley on an offense with Doug Martin, Michael Floyd, Greg Little, Josh Cribbs, Jordan Norwood, Ben Watson, and Evan Moore as weapons and with a rebuilt line thanks to all those #2's? I can get behind that. Even better if Colt emerges though. Then we can look for a marquee pass rusher instead.

 

[rizzler]

Or we do what the Lions did.

We already have the A+ Defense in tact.

Now instead of trading down for the next 2 years, use the damn picks on stud offensive players.

Richardson and whoever else now.

Possibly Barkley next season.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

Or we do what the Lions did.We already have the A+ Defense in tact.Now instead of trading down for the next 2 years, use the damn picks on stud offensive players.Richardson and whoever else now.Possibly Barkley next season.

The Lions wandered in the woods for years drafting WRs till they got Megatron. Then they drafted Matt Stafford #1 and they got an uber-stud DT. They still don't have a stud or even a stolid RB.We don't have an A+ defense IMHO. We don't have pass rushers and have holes at, RDE, OLB, FS, CB opposite Haden, and could use depth at DT to get a decent rotation going to keep Rubin and Taylor fresh in addition we need to get depth at OLB and I think you build a dominating defense with pass rushers and they only guy who can rush the passer is Sheard so we not only need a RDE to get backside pressure but I like the Giants model with multiple pass rushers coming in on passing downs to terrify opposing QBs. Basically we are worlds away from an A+ defense in my opinion.Bad teams do not have success building from uber-stud RBs. The Chargers did not have a franchise QB and lacked a #1 WR and drafted LaDalian and even got Brees in the very same draft but it took Drew soo long to get up to speed that they had to go after Rivers four years later and start over again, basically wating all of the productive years that LaDalian had in the tank.The Vikes got AdP and had some decent WRs and then even went out to land Farve and got some stud defenders but it didn't work because they didn't have a solid enough base before they lost the QB and the WRs konked out.It is not wise to try and build from the RB position unless you have some key components in place. The Rams have the biggest piece in place with Bradford. They can get not just a RB but an uber-stud AdP type of RB in Trent Richardson. They would still hold a high second round pick this year and they can get a decent WR prospect and then they still hold extra first round picks in the next two years so they are perfectly positioned moving forward if they get a once in a decade RB.The Browns could get Blackmon. I like him but I'm sure you don't. You want T-Rich. I undertand that mentality but I do not agree with it because it is short sighted IMHO. If the Browns could get Blackmon and a high second round pick they could fill two needs and still have a shot at Barkley next year. Add the Stephen Jackson angle and it becomes more interesting to me at least.

 

[MAC_32]

Or we do what the Lions did.We already have the A+ Defense in tact.Now instead of trading down for the next 2 years, use the damn picks on stud offensive players.Richardson and whoever else now.Possibly Barkley next season.

We do not have an A+ defense. We have one very good player (Haden), three good ones (Rubin, DQ, and Sheard), and two that could be good (Ward and Taylor). The rest are filler. In my crazy-optimistic trade down scenario I would hope we use 2 of those 6 top 75 picks on defense - preferably CB (Casey Heyward?) and an OLB (Lavonte David?). Then that leaves the only glaring hole at DE which is filled with a rotating pile of stop gaps for now and hopefully a round 1 guy next year if (and yes it's a huge if) Colt emerges. FS too, but it's easier to get away with that than a pass rusher.

 

[rizzler]

5th in the league in pts against last season.

I personally expect as well or better this season with gelling and upgrades.

that to me is an A+ defense.

but we can agree to disagree

 

[Andy Dufresne]

5th in the league in pts against last season.I personally expect as well or better this season with gelling and upgrades.that to me is an A+ defense.but we can agree to disagree

No A+ defense ranks 30th against the rush.

 

[rizzler]

5th in the league in pts against last season.I personally expect as well or better this season with gelling and upgrades.that to me is an A+ defense.but we can agree to disagree

No A+ defense ranks 30th against the rush.

isnt it amazing that we can be that piss poor against the rush and still put up the 5th best points against per game?

 

[Andy Dufresne]

5th in the league in pts against last season.I personally expect as well or better this season with gelling and upgrades.that to me is an A+ defense.but we can agree to disagree

No A+ defense ranks 30th against the rush.

isnt it amazing that we can be that piss poor against the rush and still put up the 5th best points against per game?

Considering their schedule...not really.Scoring rank of the teams they played:Cincinnati Bengals - 18thIndianapolis Colts - 28thMiami Dolphins - 20thTennessee Titans - 21stOakland Raiders - 16thSeattle Seahawks - 23rdSan Francisco 49ers - 11thHouston Texans - 10thSt. Louis Rams - 32ndJacksonville Jaguars - 29thArizona Cardinals - 24thBaltimore Ravens - 12thPittsburgh Steelers - 22nd

 

[FUBAR]

5th in the league in pts against last season.I personally expect as well or better this season with gelling and upgrades.that to me is an A+ defense.but we can agree to disagree

No A+ defense ranks 30th against the rush.

They have an A+ pass defense. With no stud DT or LB being worth the pick, either trade down or take Richardson.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

They have an A+ pass defense. With no stud DT or LB being worth the pick, either trade down or take Richardson.

They have a B pass defense because Joe Haden is so good and it was so easy to run on them.

 

[MAC_32]

5th in the league in pts against last season.I personally expect as well or better this season with gelling and upgrades.that to me is an A+ defense.but we can agree to disagree

No A+ defense ranks 30th against the rush.

isnt it amazing that we can be that piss poor against the rush and still put up the 5th best points against per game?

No. If opposing offenses know they can run on you and don't need to score many points because your offense blows there's no reason to take gambles to try and tally up the points. Our pass defense was exposed late in tight games against Cincy, Arizona, and Pittsburgh.Our defense is decent, but the 5th in the league in pts allowed and 2nd vs. the pass stats are very misleading in of themselves.

 

[Matt Bitonti]

if it were me, i'd take Blackmon at 4. you can find RB's anywhere. And i do think TR will make to 6 as well. What's the point of drafting a top 10 RB? do these players EVER pan out? Best case is Adrian Peterson who just blew out his knee for the 3-13 vikings? who really cares? It's a non-elite position, why use an elite draft pick? i dont care if it's bo friggin jackson the NFL isn't about running anymore it's about passing. thats why Mario Manningham and Laurent Robinson got Brinks trucks full of cash in free agency. on positional value alone it should be Blackmon.

 

[beer 30]

No one seems to know what the Browns will do with the #4 pick.

We've heard everything from, Trent Richardson, Justin Blakcmon, Ryan Tannenhill, and Morris Clairborne, and we've evern heard trading down and that is where I'm headed.

Hadn't thought of this but saw it and thought, hmmnn.

What if Jeff Fisher is seeking to trade-up from #6 to #4, not for Blackmon, not for Claibore but for RB Trent Richardson.

My link

Just in case Rams coach Jeff Fisher is can get bent on getting his next Eddie George ...

If Trent Richardson slips to the Rams at No. 6, might Steven Jackson be offered to Cleveland for, say, a fourth- or fifth-round pick?

Maybe, but the Jamal Lewis memorial red flag would apply. Jackson will turn 29 in July. His 1,145 rushing yards (4.4 per carry) didn’t keep the 2011 Rams from going 2-14.

If the Rams really want Richardson and are afraid the Browns might take him, how might this play? The Browns trade places from four to six in exchange for a Round 2 pick, then take Blackmon or Claiborne.

T-Rich is going to be a stud. Fisher has his QB, he might be looking for the next Eddie George which would free-up RB Stehpen Jackson and Browns HC Pat Shurmur was the OC in St. Louis so he is familiar with Stephen Jackson.I'm not entirely sure that is what will happen but thought it was interesting.

Let me fix that for you. Ram's screwed the Browns on the RGIII deal, it will cost them more than this.

The craziest (like a fox) thought about the Browns pick is them taking Melvin Ingram.

I agree with the craziest assertion, after that you're off the reservation GB.

 

[Cookiemonster]

5th in the league in pts against last season.I personally expect as well or better this season with gelling and upgrades.that to me is an A+ defense.but we can agree to disagree

No A+ defense ranks 30th against the rush.

isnt it amazing that we can be that piss poor against the rush and still put up the 5th best points against per game?

If a team can get an early lead, and run the ball all day, and don't have much opposing offense to work against, then yes. Smashmouth, conservative football can end games quickly (meaning more time runs off the game clock resulting in fewer plays per game and more FGs because teams aren't worried about running up the score or may even be content playing a field position game after being up early). Take a step back and look at the big picture. Teams that wanted to run against the Browns could. Late in the season, some good passing offenses that had hobbled running games decided to light them up in the air. Nothing to brag about there.If the Rams wanted to move up to 4 to draft Claiborne or Richardson or Blackmon or Kalil, I think Cleveland should jump on it. They have many needs and would still get a great prospect at 6. Don't cut off your nose to spite your face. So what if they didn't get the #2 from St Louis, doesn't mean they should pass up a good opportunity.

 

[cstu]

5th in the league in pts against last season.

I personally expect as well or better this season with gelling and upgrades.

that to me is an A+ defense.

but we can agree to disagree

No A+ defense ranks 30th against the rush.

isnt it amazing that we can be that piss poor against the rush and still put up the 5th best points against per game?

If a team can get an early lead, and run the ball all day, and don't have much opposing offense to work against, then yes. Smashmouth, conservative football can end games quickly (meaning more time runs off the game clock resulting in fewer plays per game and more FGs because teams aren't worried about running up the score or may even be content playing a field position game after being up early). Take a step back and look at the big picture. Teams that wanted to run against the Browns could. Late in the season, some good passing offenses that had hobbled running games decided to light them up in the air. Nothing to brag about there.If the Rams wanted to move up to 4 to draft Claiborne or Richardson or Blackmon or Kalil, I think Cleveland should jump on it. They have many needs and would still get a great prospect at 6. Don't cut off your nose to spite your face. So what if they didn't get the #2 from St Louis, doesn't mean they should pass up a good opportunity.

Other teams wouldn't be able to do that if the offense could put up points. I agree though that the Browns need so much help that they should trade if they have the chance.

 

[eakfootball]

Jackson will turn 29 this year. His 1,145 rushing yards (4.4 per carry) didn’t keep the 2011 Rams from going 2-14

Btw, this scenario has been thrown around a bunch of times in the TRich threads.

 

[DoubleG]

what if they traded up to like number 2 and then took the same player they were going to take at their original spot who could have fallen there it would be totally mind bending like sort of what if the indians had lazer guns when luis and clark got there it would have been a total space alien war against them and they would probably not have gotten to see the pacific ocean or yellowtone national park at all so who knows what ifs sink ships take that to the bank and go tell your momma she is a brohan

I like this thinking

I need to drink more so I'll understand.

 

[JamesTheScot]

Or we do what the Lions did.We already have the A+ Defense in tact.Now instead of trading down for the next 2 years, use the damn picks on stud offensive players.Richardson and whoever else now.Possibly Barkley next season.

We do not have an A+ defense. We have one very good player (Haden), three good ones (Rubin, DQ, and Sheard), and two that could be good (Ward and Taylor). The rest are filler. In my crazy-optimistic trade down scenario I would hope we use 2 of those 6 top 75 picks on defense - preferably CB (Casey Heyward?) and an OLB (Lavonte David?). Then that leaves the only glaring hole at DE which is filled with a rotating pile of stop gaps for now and hopefully a round 1 guy next year if (and yes it's a huge if) Colt emerges. FS too, but it's easier to get away with that than a pass rusher.

We need to take Claiborne in the first. He can be that man lock-down corner for the next decade and with Cincy and Pittsburgh accounting for 4 games each season, that's going to be important. Having Haden opposite him can free up the defense (and safeties in particular) to do a lot of things they haven't been able to do for a while. I think Claiborne's impact on the defense actually helps Cleveland go BPA the rest of the draft.RIchardson, while a tremendous talent, isn't going to make as big an impact on this team as he might on others. I also don't think Blackmon is so special that we can't afford to pass on him either. And Tannehill at 4 just makes me cringe. I think Tannehill has potential, but the risk compared to how Claiborne grades out just seems like a no-brainer to me.

 

[MAC_32]

Or we do what the Lions did.We already have the A+ Defense in tact.Now instead of trading down for the next 2 years, use the damn picks on stud offensive players.Richardson and whoever else now.Possibly Barkley next season.

We do not have an A+ defense. We have one very good player (Haden), three good ones (Rubin, DQ, and Sheard), and two that could be good (Ward and Taylor). The rest are filler. In my crazy-optimistic trade down scenario I would hope we use 2 of those 6 top 75 picks on defense - preferably CB (Casey Heyward?) and an OLB (Lavonte David?). Then that leaves the only glaring hole at DE which is filled with a rotating pile of stop gaps for now and hopefully a round 1 guy next year if (and yes it's a huge if) Colt emerges. FS too, but it's easier to get away with that than a pass rusher.

We need to take Claiborne in the first. He can be that man lock-down corner for the next decade and with Cincy and Pittsburgh accounting for 4 games each season, that's going to be important. Having Haden opposite him can free up the defense (and safeties in particular) to do a lot of things they haven't been able to do for a while. I think Claiborne's impact on the defense actually helps Cleveland go BPA the rest of the draft.RIchardson, while a tremendous talent, isn't going to make as big an impact on this team as he might on others. I also don't think Blackmon is so special that we can't afford to pass on him either. And Tannehill at 4 just makes me cringe. I think Tannehill has potential, but the risk compared to how Claiborne grades out just seems like a no-brainer to me.

I don't think we end up with Claiborne unless it's a product of a trade down and if we trade down I highly doubt Claiborne slips, but just for fun - what do you suggest we do with fixing the offense if we go Claiborne #4?I think Claiborne is the highest rated prospect available, but if we select him it won't help us score more than 13 pts/game. If there were a way to take him at 4 and still get Michael Floyd or Kendall Wright and a competent running game, great, but I'm doubting that can happen.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

I don't think we end up with Claiborne unless it's a product of a trade down and if we trade down I highly doubt Claiborne slips, but just for fun - what do you suggest we do with fixing the offense if we go Claiborne #4?I think Claiborne is the highest rated prospect available, but if we select him it won't help us score more than 13 pts/game. If there were a way to take him at 4 and still get Michael Floyd or Kendall Wright and a competent running game, great, but I'm doubting that can happen.

You could go something like Claiborne, Martin, Hill/Givens/...JeffreyClaiborne, Randle, Wilson/Lamar Miller

 

[MAC_32]

I don't think we end up with Claiborne unless it's a product of a trade down and if we trade down I highly doubt Claiborne slips, but just for fun - what do you suggest we do with fixing the offense if we go Claiborne #4?I think Claiborne is the highest rated prospect available, but if we select him it won't help us score more than 13 pts/game. If there were a way to take him at 4 and still get Michael Floyd or Kendall Wright and a competent running game, great, but I'm doubting that can happen.

You could go something like Claiborne, Martin, Hill/Givens/...JeffreyClaiborne, Randle, Wilson/Lamar Miller

What would the Browns have to do to get Claiborne and either Floyd or Wright? What would they have to give up to get Floyd or Wright? What would the RB situation look like?I'm operating under the assumption the front office needs one of those top 3 WR's. The drop off after them is just too large for a team so lacking at the position.

 

[JamesTheScot]

if it were me, i'd take Blackmon at 4. you can find RB's anywhere. And i do think TR will make to 6 as well. What's the point of drafting a top 10 RB? do these players EVER pan out? Best case is Adrian Peterson who just blew out his knee for the 3-13 vikings? who really cares? It's a non-elite position, why use an elite draft pick? i dont care if it's bo friggin jackson the NFL isn't about running anymore it's about passing. thats why Mario Manningham and Laurent Robinson got Brinks trucks full of cash in free agency. on positional value alone it should be Blackmon.

You're kinda right. The passing game is where it's at in the NFL right now (and for the foreseeable next few years). Which means that pass defense is also where it's at.But who is the more elite talent at his position? Claiborne or Blackmon?And what do you need to add to Blackmon for him to have his impact? A quality QB. What do you need to add to Claiborne for him to have his? Think about the impact of Claiborne + Haden on every third down for the next few years. Think about the impact on our offense in terms of both opportunities and field position if we can make a couple more stops on third down each game!In my book, if I'm looking for single pick impact, it's going to be QB, DE or CB. If there's an elite one available and that's a position of need, you take him. Luck and RG3 will be gone and the concerns about Coples's attitude and drive scare me that high. So that leaves Claiborne. And as multiple WR set happy as the NFL is, I'd even go CB if I already had 2 lock down corners on the roster.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

I don't think we end up with Claiborne unless it's a product of a trade down and if we trade down I highly doubt Claiborne slips, but just for fun - what do you suggest we do with fixing the offense if we go Claiborne #4?I think Claiborne is the highest rated prospect available, but if we select him it won't help us score more than 13 pts/game. If there were a way to take him at 4 and still get Michael Floyd or Kendall Wright and a competent running game, great, but I'm doubting that can happen.

You could go something like Claiborne, Martin, Hill/Givens/...JeffreyClaiborne, Randle, Wilson/Lamar Miller

What would the Browns have to do to get Claiborne and either Floyd or Wright? What would they have to give up to get Floyd or Wright? What would the RB situation look like?I'm operating under the assumption the front office needs one of those top 3 WR's. The drop off after them is just too large for a team so lacking at the position.

To get Floyd would take something akin to the Browns/Falcons deal last year since he's going to go somewhere around #10.Wright's a wild card. I think he has a good chance of going to the Cards at 13 though. So that wouldn't be cheap either.

 

[JamesTheScot]

Or we do what the Lions did.We already have the A+ Defense in tact.Now instead of trading down for the next 2 years, use the damn picks on stud offensive players.Richardson and whoever else now.Possibly Barkley next season.

We do not have an A+ defense. We have one very good player (Haden), three good ones (Rubin, DQ, and Sheard), and two that could be good (Ward and Taylor). The rest are filler. In my crazy-optimistic trade down scenario I would hope we use 2 of those 6 top 75 picks on defense - preferably CB (Casey Heyward?) and an OLB (Lavonte David?). Then that leaves the only glaring hole at DE which is filled with a rotating pile of stop gaps for now and hopefully a round 1 guy next year if (and yes it's a huge if) Colt emerges. FS too, but it's easier to get away with that than a pass rusher.

We need to take Claiborne in the first. He can be that man lock-down corner for the next decade and with Cincy and Pittsburgh accounting for 4 games each season, that's going to be important. Having Haden opposite him can free up the defense (and safeties in particular) to do a lot of things they haven't been able to do for a while. I think Claiborne's impact on the defense actually helps Cleveland go BPA the rest of the draft.RIchardson, while a tremendous talent, isn't going to make as big an impact on this team as he might on others. I also don't think Blackmon is so special that we can't afford to pass on him either. And Tannehill at 4 just makes me cringe. I think Tannehill has potential, but the risk compared to how Claiborne grades out just seems like a no-brainer to me.

I don't think we end up with Claiborne unless it's a product of a trade down and if we trade down I highly doubt Claiborne slips, but just for fun - what do you suggest we do with fixing the offense if we go Claiborne #4?I think Claiborne is the highest rated prospect available, but if we select him it won't help us score more than 13 pts/game. If there were a way to take him at 4 and still get Michael Floyd or Kendall Wright and a competent running game, great, but I'm doubting that can happen.

Claiborne can give the offense more opportunities and shorter fields by virtue of third down defense, not to mention he helps keep the other team from scoring as well. What impact is Blackmon going to have with McCoy as the QB? Outside of some unforeseen trade, we aren't fixing QB this year.Getting the top prospect at 4 is a good deal.Claiborne is a one pick impact player. Blackmon won't be. So take Claiborne in the first and go RB or WR with the next pick or just go BPA. Cleveland isn't so loaded at any position that BPA would be a bad idea. This is a multi-year rebuild.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Claiborne can give the offense more opportunities and shorter fields by virtue of third down defense, not to mention he helps keep the other team from scoring as well. What impact is Blackmon going to have with McCoy as the QB? Outside of some unforeseen trade, we aren't fixing QB this year.

Getting the top prospect at 4 is a good deal.

Claiborne is a one pick impact player. Blackmon won't be. So take Claiborne in the first and go RB or WR with the next pick or just go BPA. Cleveland isn't so loaded at any position that BPA would be a bad idea. This is a multi-year rebuild.

Actually, Blackmon might be the ideal WR to pair with the weaker-armed McCoy since he's best used on slants and inside patterns. And despite his lackluster 40 time is quite good getting YAC.

 

[fatkid]

I think Cleveland needs to decide if they are going to be a great offensive team or a great defensive team. Once they make that decision, their top 3 picks should be on one side of the ball. The Packers, Saints and New England all did great last year with great offenses. Baltimore and San Fran did great with a great defenses. But not many teams did great by being just above average on both sides of the ball. By balancing picks across Offense and Defense, I don't think that makes them great long term. I think it makes them average.

I'd like to see them do the following

4 - Clairborne

22 - Hightower, Upshaw, Perry

37 - Perry/Branch/Crick

or

4 - Blackmon

22 - Decastro

37 - Martin/Fleener/Wilson

 

[PlasmaDogPlasma]

Or we do what the Lions did.We already have the A+ Defense in tact.Now instead of trading down for the next 2 years, use the damn picks on stud offensive players.Richardson and whoever else now.Possibly Barkley next season.

We do not have an A+ defense. We have one very good player (Haden), three good ones (Rubin, DQ, and Sheard), and two that could be good (Ward and Taylor). The rest are filler. In my crazy-optimistic trade down scenario I would hope we use 2 of those 6 top 75 picks on defense - preferably CB (Casey Heyward?) and an OLB (Lavonte David?). Then that leaves the only glaring hole at DE which is filled with a rotating pile of stop gaps for now and hopefully a round 1 guy next year if (and yes it's a huge if) Colt emerges. FS too, but it's easier to get away with that than a pass rusher.

We need to take Claiborne in the first. He can be that man lock-down corner for the next decade and with Cincy and Pittsburgh accounting for 4 games each season, that's going to be important. Having Haden opposite him can free up the defense (and safeties in particular) to do a lot of things they haven't been able to do for a while. I think Claiborne's impact on the defense actually helps Cleveland go BPA the rest of the draft.RIchardson, while a tremendous talent, isn't going to make as big an impact on this team as he might on others. I also don't think Blackmon is so special that we can't afford to pass on him either. And Tannehill at 4 just makes me cringe. I think Tannehill has potential, but the risk compared to how Claiborne grades out just seems like a no-brainer to me.

I don't think we end up with Claiborne unless it's a product of a trade down and if we trade down I highly doubt Claiborne slips, but just for fun - what do you suggest we do with fixing the offense if we go Claiborne #4?I think Claiborne is the highest rated prospect available, but if we select him it won't help us score more than 13 pts/game. If there were a way to take him at 4 and still get Michael Floyd or Kendall Wright and a competent running game, great, but I'm doubting that can happen.

Claiborne can give the offense more opportunities and shorter fields by virtue of third down defense, not to mention he helps keep the other team from scoring as well. What impact is Blackmon going to have with McCoy as the QB? Outside of some unforeseen trade, we aren't fixing QB this year.Getting the top prospect at 4 is a good deal.Claiborne is a one pick impact player. Blackmon won't be. So take Claiborne in the first and go RB or WR with the next pick or just go BPA. Cleveland isn't so loaded at any position that BPA would be a bad idea. This is a multi-year rebuild.

I don't know how much of an impact Claiborne can make on a team that opponents didn't really need to bother passing on last year. They just ran the ball against the 30th ranked run defense knowing that Cleveland wasn't going to put up many points. Claiborne doesn't change that equation at all.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

Claiborne can give the offense more opportunities and shorter fields by virtue of third down defense, not to mention he helps keep the other team from scoring as well. What impact is Blackmon going to have with McCoy as the QB? Outside of some unforeseen trade, we aren't fixing QB this year.

Getting the top prospect at 4 is a good deal.

Claiborne is a one pick impact player. Blackmon won't be. So take Claiborne in the first and go RB or WR with the next pick or just go BPA. Cleveland isn't so loaded at any position that BPA would be a bad idea. This is a multi-year rebuild.

Actually, Blackmon might be the ideal WR to pair with the weaker-armed McCoy since he's best used on slants and inside patterns. And despite his lackluster 40 time is quite good getting YAC.

My first preference is trading down but if the Browns stay put then I am on record that WR Justin Blackmon is the guy I prefer.The point of this thread was in pointing out that the if the Browns traded down and the Rams moved up for Richardson or if the Browns stayed put at #4 and took WR Justin Blackmon that the Rams likely would have Trent Richardson as their pick at #6 in which case RB Stephen Jackson would be expendable for a couple of late round picks.

The Browns are sitting on a pile of late round draft picks and the Browns head coach was Stephen Jackson's OC in St. Louis. The Browns GM, Tom Heckertt, was in Philly when they took two good RBs in the second round, RB Brian Westbrook and RB LeSean McCoy. So in the event the Browns took Blackmon at #4 they could wind up picking a solid RB prospect in the second round and additionally have a shot to package some late round picks together to get StephenJackson which would adequately fill the RB hole on the Browns roster and they would have a legit #1 WR prospect as well. With the #22 pick they could fill their ORT hole leaving the QB issue to address next year.

If all of the glaring holes were filled on offense it would give Colt McCoy a legitimate shot to prove or disprove himself but it would position the team to get a legit QB prospect next year if McCoy failed with the missing pieces in place. If McCoy fails the team would be assured of another high selection but if they had the missing pieces in place around the QB they could THEN package future picks if they needed to move up.

Right now in this draft they can plug three huge holes surrounding the QB to give him a fighting chance.

Anything extra that they can do to help the defense is gravy but this draft is about filling holes on the offense so if we stay put I think Blackmon is the logical pick.