• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

2017 Browns Mock Draft Thread

Do Not Sell My Personal Information
Pick6 said:
Funny thing is I actually looked at the Harvard draft chart for that. 3rd seemed to be a lot closer to equal value than a 2nd, but I could have been looking at it wrong. Also didn't see anything about a discount on future year picks, which is what could be throwing it off for me.
Click to expand...
Yeah, actually, the more I analyze the Harvard chart, the more I realize that I firmly disagree with it based on true past NFL trades. I think Jimmy Johnson's chart is significantly more reflective of the trades we see.

I mean, shit, according to the Harvard chart if we wanted to go from #12 to #2, it should mathematically only cost us #51.

As we know, that is not going to happen.

So great, now I am questioning everything I've ever known.

What I do know is, if Tampa Bay wanted 12 and came to me with 19 and a future 3rd, I'd tell them to fuck off and we will just take BPA at 12.
 
Pick6 said:
Funny thing is I actually looked at the Harvard draft chart for that. 3rd seemed to be a lot closer to equal value than a 2nd, but I could have been looking at it wrong. Also didn't see anything about a discount on future year picks, which is what could be throwing it off for me.
Click to expand...
Do not use the harvard chart to come up with a trade, use the old chart. While that may be how the browns use draft picks the league as a whole uses the other chart. Basically if a team is going from 19 to 12 that would almost perfectly owe their 2nd rounder this year as well. Or conversely a 2nd round next year and a 4th this year.
 
thedarkness2332 said:
Yeah, actually, the more I analyze the Harvard chart, the more I realize that I firmly disagree with it based on true past NFL trades. I think Jimmy Johnson's chart is significantly more reflective of the trades we see.
Click to expand...

That's not surprising. The basis of the Harvard chart is that most NFL trade-ups are skewed in favor of the team trading down.

The Harvard chart isn't about what teams actually pay -- it's about what they should pay. And if you pay more than that, you're probably screwing your team. Of course, if you use the Harvard chart if you want to trade-up, but other teams use the Johnson chart if you are trading down, then you end up winning trades in the long run.

That's the moneyball angle of trades.
 
thedarkness2332 said:
Yeah, actually, the more I analyze the Harvard chart, the more I realize that I firmly disagree with it based on true past NFL trades. I think Jimmy Johnson's chart is significantly more reflective of the trades we see.

I mean, shit, according to the Harvard chart if we wanted to go from #12 to #2, it should mathematically only cost us #51.

As we know, that is not going to happen.

So great, now I am questioning everything I've ever known.

What I do know is, if Tampa Bay wanted 12 and came to me with 19 and a future 3rd, I'd tell them to fuck off and we will just take BPA at 12.
Click to expand...
I did a write up about it on friday morning, but long and short the harvard chart is how the browns would weigh draft picks based on historical data. But they have a shit ton more holes to fill so they are willing to take a shot gun approach to the draft. Another team trading up is trading up specifically to target an individual player which is where the old chart comes into play. So the browns realize 10 guys that hit at 50% is better than 2 guys that hit at 75% (made up numbers).
 
To me the Harvard is more of the "True" value of a pick, while the older Jimmy Johnson on is the "actual" value of the pick. So essentially the FO brain trust is going to use a mix of both charts plus a chart that says the value of the player. Which is why you won't see the team trade up a whole lot, but will see the trade down. If a trade is equal or plus for the Browns on both charts then they will make the move.

Personally this is my opinion, but the way I see things is this, the Harvard chart says the value of each pick when it comes to impact on the team itself. Johnson Chart says the value of the pick via trade value and the last thing they mix in is the value they grade each player. Since Garrett's value equals the number one pick in their mind, they will stay at the number one pick. Let's say there was 5 guys of equal value and they all were rated below the 1st pick, they would trade down to the pick is equal to the player available/targeting. Now you cannot always do this, but they will trade down with the plan of still getting the player they want at the value they feel he is. Aka it is more complicated than this, but these are three big factors that they are looking at when drafting.
 
Real Deal said:
Kiper did say early on ESPiN don't be surprised if Cleveland doesn't draft a QB at 12 if they like Kessler.
Click to expand...

That's why they pay him the big bucks.

Take a look at Kessler's combine numbers in terms of ball velocity and hand size last year as compared to the crop this year.

I'd be inclined to roll with him too.

This QB class ain't great. I already regret taking one in the RCF mock.
 
AZ_ said:
That's why they pay him the big bucks.

Take a look at Kessler's combine numbers in terms of ball velocity and hand size last year as compared to the crop this year.

I'd be inclined to roll with him too.

This QB class ain't great. I already regret taking one in the RCF mock.
Click to expand...

Though I thought it was kind of funny that the top 4 QBs are all gone before the second round when they are not really in my mind a first round grade lol
 
AZ_ said:
That's why they pay him the big bucks.

Take a look at Kessler's combine numbers in terms of ball velocity and hand size last year as compared to the crop this year.

I'd be inclined to roll with him too.

This QB class ain't great. I already regret taking one in the RCF mock.
Click to expand...

Kessler over Mahomes long term?
 
AZ_ said:
It's possible, but Mahomes is way more talented.
Click to expand...

If you're a guy who still believes a bit in Kessler, especially with growth from year 1 to year 2, Mahomes makes a ton of sense.

Kessler is somewhat limited from a tools standpoint, but he's smart, accurate, and the hope would be he can be an efficient game manager at his peak, no? Build up the defense, O-Line, and win old school style with a quarterback who doesn't turn it over.

So if he's, at best, a B- quarterback, you don't take a guy in the draft with a B- floor and B+ peak in the first two rounds. You already have a similar player. Instead, you take a guy with an A+ peak and a C- floor. That guy this year is Mahomes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-14: "Time for Playoff Vengeance on Mickey"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:14: " Time for Playoff Vengeance on Mickey."
Top