It couldn't be more clear to me that three years of being observers during free agency has been just as crippling, if not more, than the draft choices made during that time. Every professional sports fan has heard the saying, "pick best player regardless of position." At times I've vocalized that saying as being guiding principle, not Orthodoxy.
The Browns lost the young starting CB, TE, bridge QB, and DT in 2015. They replaced with an older CB and older bridge QB. In 2016, they lost young starting C, RT, FS, and WR and cut or traded a few veteran starters for low picks. They did not add any significant free agent. In 2017, they lost more veteran starting talent at TE, CB while losing a starting WR. They finally signed two solid free agents which solidified the interior of the offensive line, but those holes were caused by putting up little resistance to free agents walking in the past.
So when the team loses starting level talent repeatedly year after year, both as players leaving after the rookie contract or veterans being pushed out for a draft pick, the team has been left with a talent hole at multiple positions.
Free agency has to be seen as plugging as many holes with vets as possible this year. What makes football different than basketball is free agency coming first. In the NBA, always go talent first, because holes can be filled with free agents. In the NFL, failing to fill holes in free agency creates need picks, or the losses will pile up due to the glaring holes in the rotation.
And if too many holes go unaddressed, the front office has to factor need into their day two and three selections. Irresponsible management who create holes and never fill holes is far worse than breaking the "best player available, regardless of position" principle.
