2019 Potential Free Agency Targets

[CBBI]

I still believe Kitchens was forced to scrap a lot of his plays due to bad tackle play, and while limiting play calling hid the weakness, the tackles are still a glaring weakness. As I mentioned before, I'm also good with a strong bid in FA or high pick at right tackle to push Hubbard into a possible swing tackle role, keeping Robinson at LT. The left tackle FA crop is shallow, but there are some good RTs. Hubbard didn't play well enough to feel comfortable as a starter.

I mean was it *really* though?

The Browns gave up the fewest sacks and fewest QB hits allowed in the 2nd half of the season by a laughably wide margin. Like not even close.

Their offense was, by any measure, quite spectacular with these so called glaring weaknesses at tackle too.

I just don't see how anyone could watch the 2nd half of the year and determine that the OL is a "glaring weakness" when Mayfield got sacked just 5 times and hit just 9 times (the next closest team was at *TWENTY NINE* hits allowed) while the offense led the league in yards per play.

Like... even if the two incumbent tackles aren't all that talented, it didn't have a negative effect the offense in any way, shape or form once Kitchens took over.

 

[Randolphkeys]

I mean was it *really* though?

The Browns gave up the fewest sacks and fewest QB hits allowed in the 2nd half of the season by a laughably wide margin. Like not even close.

Their offense was, by any measure, quite spectacular with these so called glaring weaknesses at tackle too.

I just don't see how anyone could watch the 2nd half of the year and determine that the OL is a "glaring weakness" when Mayfield got sacked just 5 times and hit just 9 times (the next closest team was at *TWENTY NINE* hits allowed) while the offense led the league in yards per play.

Like... even if the two incumbent tackles aren't all that talented, it didn't have a negative effect the offense in any way, shape or form once Kitchens took over.

If the Browns retain Greg Robinson - which isn't a slam dunk - and look to add depth at tackle, nobody is declaring the offseason a disaster. I doubt anyone would watch the body of work Robinson and Hubbard put together over their careers as well as when Kitchens changed the playbook and say they are a strength of the offense. Isn't that what the offseason about? Find which components can possibly be upgraded and take a swing at upgrading. Seems like there is a lot of hyperbole surrounding how the tackles performed near the end of the year, and watching the run game as well as how they needed so much help protecting the edge, upgrading is worth a shot.

 

[CBBI]

If the Browns retain Greg Robinson - which isn't a slam dunk - and look to add depth at tackle, nobody is declaring the offseason a disaster. I doubt anyone would watch the body of work Robinson and Hubbard put together over their careers as well as when Kitchens changed the playbook and say they are a strength of the offense. Isn't that what the offseason about? Find which components can possibly be upgraded and take a swing at upgrading. Seems like there is a lot of hyperbole surrounding how the tackles performed near the end of the year, and watching the run game as well as how they needed so much help protecting the edge, upgrading is worth a shot.

Nothing you've said here is incorrect.

But even you would admit that this post has a far less dramatic tone than your previous post where you somewhat laughably suggested that Freddie Kitchens, who schemed up one of the very best offenses in the NFL and saw his offensive line keep Mayfield clean to a historically preposterous level, was forced to scrap a lot of his plays due to bad tackle play.

Considering how well the OL did as a pass blocking unit and how effective the Browns offense was as a whole, any plays that Kitchens was "forced" to scrap the Browns certainly didn't miss.

There's nothing statistically that would suggest the offensive line was a "glaring weakness" as you suggested.

Of course both tackle spots could stand to be upgraded, but that doesn't mean either one of them is a critical weakness that would cause the Browns massive issues if they weren't addressed.

 

[FiveThous]

I'm not really as sold on Brown as everyone else on this board seems to be.

View: https://twitter.com/Pat_Thorman/status/1095688362663575554


Combine that with the fact he'd be leaving the golden touch of Scarnecchia and I'd just be weary of giving him the kind of money it appears he'll be looking for.

He's obviously better than Robinson, but OL play can (and was last year) be masked pretty well by the OC calling quicker developing routes, a QB who is decisive with his decision making and more max protections on longer developing route combos.

I just don't know if OL was a big enough issue after Kitchens took over the playcalling to justify Brown's price tag.

If they sign him, I won't complain. It just feels like more of a luxury than a true need.

Thank you, I was trying to find this tweet! He's not bad but definitely overrated.

 

[Randolphkeys]

Nothing you've said here is incorrect.

But even you would admit that this post has a far less dramatic tone than your previous post where you somewhat laughably suggested that Freddie Kitchens, who schemed up one of the very best offenses in the NFL and saw his offensive line keep Mayfield clean to a historically preposterous level, was forced to scrap a lot of his plays due to bad tackle play.

Considering how well the OL did as a pass blocking unit and how effective the Browns offense was as a whole, any plays that Kitchens was "forced" to scrap the Browns certainly didn't miss.

There's nothing statistically that would suggest the offensive line was a "glaring weakness" as you suggested.

Of course both tackle spots could stand to be upgraded, but that doesn't mean either one of them is a critical weakness that would cause the Browns massive issues if they weren't addressed.

The tackles under contract right now are Hubbard and Desmond Harrison, with below replacement level at swing tackle. Robinson isn't under contract. I threw you some rope, you got agro. Save the Skip Bayless routine, because until Robinson or somebody better is under contract, I am wildly comfortable with my original post. You're out to do CBBI things, sweet. Enjoy that. I'm being real about the roster in the here and now, keeping it meta.

 

[UDcleveland]

Brady made Trent Brown look better than he really is, just like Baker made Greg Robinson look better than he really is.

God do I love having a decisive QB who gets rid of the ball.

 

[ajz20]

If the Browns retain Greg Robinson - which isn't a slam dunk - and look to add depth at tackle, nobody is declaring the offseason a disaster. I doubt anyone would watch the body of work Robinson and Hubbard put together over their careers as well as when Kitchens changed the playbook and say they are a strength of the offense. Isn't that what the offseason about? Find which components can possibly be upgraded and take a swing at upgrading. Seems like there is a lot of hyperbole surrounding how the tackles performed near the end of the year, and watching the run game as well as how they needed so much help protecting the edge, upgrading is worth a shot.

Yes keys I think people need to realize we are trying to make the playoffs not just go 6 and 10 and work around average play at the tackles. We know d line and lb are also big needs. No reason not to get agressive and adress all 3. Baker is on his rookie deal, let’s take advantage over the next 3 years while we can just like the Rams.

We won’t have this type of flexibility in a few years.

 

[CBBI]

The tackles under contract right now are Hubbard and Desmond Harrison, with below replacement level at swing tackle. Robinson isn't under contract. I threw you some rope, you got agro. Save the Skip Bayless routine, because until Robinson or somebody better is under contract, I am wildly comfortable with my original post. You're out to do CBBI things, sweet. Enjoy that. I'm being real about the roster in the here and now, keeping it meta.

There’s nothing agro or Bayless about it. You said something highly misguided at best or completely factually inaccurate at worst in your original post. I then pointed it out the silliness of your first take and then you moved the goalposts and tried to make it look like I was being irrational.

Your original post said...

“I still believe Kitchens was forced to scrap a lot of his plays due to bad tackle play.”

Which means you believe that the Browns offense was in some way hindered negatively because of Greg Robinson and Chris Hubbard’s play. Even though statistically the offensive line was the best pass blocking unit in the league by a hilariously wide margin and the Browns offense overall was pretty much at the top of the league (No. 1 in yards per play under Kitchens).

So I point that out and you move the goalposts to “well Robinson isn’t even signed!” And “if they bring Robinson back, it won’t be a problem” when your first point was suggesting the offense *including Robinson* wasn’t able to perform to the best of its ability because of the lack of talent of the tackles.

But by all means, I’m being irrational and aggressive for actually having factual evidence on my side versus some goofy “I feel like the Browns tackles were holding them up” argument.

 

[chrisrich91]

To be fair, I think both takes are rooted in some truth. 1) yes we scrapped some of the playbook 2) no it didn’t hinder us the last 8 games

We clearly scrapped some of the playbook due to bad tackle play. When Haley was calling plays it sure felt like we operated out of an empty backfield and with less TE blocking...and with longer developing plays.

With Freddie we seemed to use our backs and TEs far more in pass protection and scrapped a chunk of the longer developing action when we didn’t flank the OL.

Scrapping some of the bunk shit Haley was running certainly ended up helping the Browns, but in the long run shoring up the tackles would absolutely increase our options with schemes. And as more and more tape of our offense gets out there and defenses start to adjust, I want us to have everything at our disposal to adjust right back.

 

[CBBI]

To be fair, I think both takes are rooted in some truth. 1) yes we scrapped some of the playbook 2) no it didn’t hinder us the last 8 games

We clearly scrapped some of the playbook due to bad tackle play. When Haley was calling plays it sure felt like we operated out of an empty backfield and with less TE blocking...and with longer developing plays.

With Freddie we seemed to use our backs and TEs far more in pass protection and scrapped a chunk of the longer developing action when we didn’t flank the OL.

Scrapping some of the bunk shit Haley was running certainly ended up helping the Browns, but in the long run shoring up the tackles would absolutely increase our options with schemes. And as more and more tape of our offense gets out there and defenses start to adjust, I want us to have everything at our disposal to adjust right back.

Scrapping plays and schemes that are not effective, regardless of *why* they are not working, is an extremely good thing. There shouldn't be any sort of negative connotation with scrapping plays and schemes that don't work in favor of ones that do.

I totally understand that in a vacuum the Browns can find players who are individually more talented then Robinson and Hubbard both, but they clearly showed they can be top of the league level effective on offense with both guys in their current roles. That alone makes me not feel like OT is a massive *need*, but more of a luxury spot to address.

A decisive QB and a high end play schemer (Browns appear to have both) absolutely lessens the need for strong OT play.

If there's a good deal to be made in free agency, then great. If the Browns are on the clock in the first round and an OT is the best player available, then go for it.

I personally just think it's a little bit silly to suggest that the OT position is some crazy glaring weakness when by literally any measurement you want to read the Browns performed SPECTACULARLY well both from a sack/hit/pressure avoidance perspective and from a moving the ball perspective with Robinson and Hubbard in place. That's all.

 

[natedagg]

Scrapping plays and schemes that are not effective, regardless of *why* they are not working, is an extremely good thing. There shouldn't be any sort of negative connotation with scrapping plays and schemes that don't work in favor of ones that do.

I totally understand that in a vacuum the Browns can find players who are individually more talented then Robinson and Hubbard both, but they clearly showed they can be top of the league level effective on offense with both guys in their current roles. That alone makes me not feel like OT is a massive *need*, but more of a luxury spot to address.

A decisive QB and a high end play schemer (Browns appear to have both) absolutely lessens the need for strong OT play.

If there's a good deal to be made in free agency, then great. If the Browns are on the clock in the first round and an OT is the best player available, then go for it.

I personally just think it's a little bit silly to suggest that the OT position is some crazy glaring weakness when by literally any measurement you want to read the Browns performed SPECTACULARLY well both from a sack/hit/pressure avoidance perspective and from a moving the ball perspective with Robinson and Hubbard in place. That's all.

It’s tough to talk about an upgrade at OT without talking about what we wouldn’t be upgrading (down to the specific player) in place of that.

We do have cap space. We do have picks. We do have more pressing needs. It’s also fair to say that with our new OC and whatever Kitchens cooks up in the off-season, we could very well significantly improve our offense with a better OT.

So it’s a good debate. High round draft capital will almost certainly be spent elsewhere, or consider if we go Incredible Hock in the draft. Maybe that helps as we send Njoku wide more often, stack the line with 3-4 players on one side of the center, etc.

And who else will be available in FA at positions of need? I certainly have no idea.

I would like to shore up the rush defense with a dominant DT more than anything and add a stud linebacker. It looks like the draft will allow for that.

I can’t wait for the NFL this year. Haven’t said that since.... well... ever. I have never been this excited for an NFL season to arrive.

 

[2 For The Brew]

I can’t wait for the NFL this year. Haven’t said that since.... well... ever. I have never been this excited for an NFL season to arrive.

I had season tickets in the 80s. In 1984 we started out 1-8 (after eight games Rutigliano was replaced by Schottenheimer). We finished 5-11.

The following year we started 4-6 but ended 8-8 to win the division. We took a 21-3 lead on the defending AFC Champions & #1 seed Dolphins in Miami and lost 24-21. Bernie played but they wouldn't let him pass much (rookie season or Martyball, take your pick).

We were all excited for the next season -- which somewhat reminds me of where we are now. After a slow 1-2 start including getting absolutely blown out in the home opener by the Bengals we ended up 12-4, #1 seed, beating the Jets in OT and the losing in OT to the Denver Donkeys.

We had a good team but the key was Kosar. With him at QB the team and fans believed.

Baker Mayfield is better than Kosar -- not just by the numbers but relatively speaking. Baker will have a better career compared to his contemporaries than Bernie had compared to his contemporaries.

I've never seen a player take the field and so dramatically turn a franchise around.

I distinctly remember when Ben was drafted by Pittsburgh -- I thought "Oh Shit, this guy is going to terrorize us for ten years." I thought that because Ben was perfect for the Steelers and the AFC North. I was wrong -- he terrorized us for a lot longer.

Baker's going to terrorize the AFC North for a long time.

 

[Randolphkeys]

I’m being irrational and aggressive

Correct. It's possible to talk football without creating artificial conflict, Skip. After reading that, you might see why it isn't productive.

Robinson has displayed some good balance considering his size, which is ideal for left tackle. He is a lumbering man, however. He doesn't look comfortable on the move. Despite his size he was a liability on run blocking. That said, once Kitchens switched to some very creative concepts to hide Robinson's issues, his pass grades were excellent. Kitchens basically ran bunch formations but close to the tackles. Some players would be in to block, all the players in the bunch formation were a threat to run or catch the ball, and in general it was innovation. I'm not taking away from the innovation to say it may not be sustainable. Eventually, if you get a chance to upgrade to at least one tackle who you can leave on an island, you do it. That isn't moving the goal posts, it's saying you can live with basic but better than basic has to be the long-term plan.

 

[Lee]

I had season tickets in the 80s. In 1984 we started out 1-8 (after eight games Rutigliano was replaced by Schottenheimer). We finished 5-11.

The following year we started 4-6 but ended 8-8 to win the division. We took a 21-3 lead on the defending AFC Champions & #1 seed Dolphins in Miami and lost 24-21. Bernie played but they wouldn't let him pass much (rookie season or Martyball, take your pick).

We were all excited for the next season -- which somewhat reminds me of where we are now. After a slow 1-2 start including getting absolutely blown out in the home opener by the Bengals we ended up 12-4, #1 seed, beating the Jets in OT and the losing in OT to the Denver Donkeys.

We had a good team but the key was Kosar. With him at QB the team and fans believed.

Baker Mayfield is better than Kosar -- not just by the numbers but relatively speaking. Baker will have a better career compared to his contemporaries than Bernie had compared to his contemporaries.

I've never seen a player take the field and so dramatically turn a franchise around.

I distinctly remember when Ben was drafted by Pittsburgh -- I thought "Oh Shit, this guy is going to terrorize us for ten years." I thought that because Ben was perfect for the Steelers and the AFC North. I was wrong -- he terrorized us for a lot longer.

Baker's going to terrorize the AFC North for a long time.

I didn't have season tickets as I was still in school during the 80's, but I remember it all very well and very similar. I look back at Bernie, my 2nd favorite player of all time until now, and I realize he was over rated. But he did do one thing Baker does, rally the troops and the fans. He had the entire city and team believing in him. (maybe he wasn't over rated in that context)

We are on the verge of greatness, and this is the first time I am saying that. Baker, Freddie, Myles, and I will even through in Denzel (Ward not Washington, although Washington is a fine actor)

We have the same makeup as back then, maybe even better as Baker looks like he will be a top 3 QB in a few years.

And what the fuck is it with the B names already with AFC North QBs? Bernie, Bubby, Brian, Bradshaw, Boomer, Blake, Boller, Rapist, Baker, etc

 

[NorthCoastBias]

View: https://twitter.com/KPRC2AdamW/status/1098273474035044354