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

Cleveland Browns 2019 Season

Do Not Sell My Personal Information
This is his last year under contract. Some people are worried about Dorsey putting us in “cap hell” ... giving Schobert a ton of money would be a great way to do it.

That doesn't make any sense at all. So because Dorsey is going to put us in cap hell by overpaying for a player, Dorsey is going to trade Schobert??? Like...why wouldn't he just not overpay for the guy in the first place?

Ditching Schobert because we might have to pay him too much next offseason, when we're already thin at linebacker, would be a nonsensical move. Especially for a guy who clearly believes we need to make a playoff run this year.

Fan fears that Dorsey may overpay for Schobert explains why those fans may want to trade Schobert. It doesn't explain why Dorsey would want to trade him.
 
By that logic, Garrett is the next guy gone.

I don't buy it. I think things like which GM picked a player may matter for borderline players, or guys whose salary may exceed their utility. But if Dorsey is the kind of guy who will ditch a critical player simply because he's not the one who drafted him, and we don't have anyone who remotely appears capable of replacing him, then we're in bad shape.

Garrett is the only non-Dorsey guy on the entire roster who I actually feel 100% confident will be on the roster come 2021.

Duke, DeValve, Kirksey, Tretter, Higgins are all almost certainly gone after this season.

Not willing to give Ogunjobi, Njoku or Bitonio a 100% chance of staying either.
 
FYI: I heard that this rumor is about two weeks old. I doubt it happens. I could be totally wrong though. Just passing along what I heard from my friend at Fox 8.
 
Garrett is the only non-Dorsey guy on the entire roster who I actually feel 100% confident will be on the roster come 2021.

Duke, DeValve, Kirksey, Tretter, Higgins are all almost certainly gone after this season.

Not willing to give Ogunjobi, Njoku or Bitonio a 100% chance of staying either.

I don't doubt that Dorsey may move on from a player he deems too expensive if Dorsey is able to bring in other players he believes can fill those roles competently between now and next season. Duke will be superfluous as soon as Hunt can play, so he's clearly gone. Devalve is nothing special. For the other guys, whether or not they stay will depend on how expensive they would be, and the availability of a replacement.

But free agency for this year is largely over, and we have nothing with which to replace Schobert other than the indomitable Ray-Ray Armstrong. Nor do we have a first round pick that might enable us to snag a high-end rookie capable of starting immediately.

It doesn't make sense.
 
That doesn't make any sense at all. So because Dorsey is going to put us in cap hell by overpaying for a player, Dorsey is going to trade Schobert??? Like...why wouldn't he just not overpay for the guy in the first place?

Ditching Schobert because we might have to pay him too much next offseason, when we're already thin at linebacker, would be a nonsensical move. Especially for a guy who clearly believes we need to make a playoff run this year.

Fan fears that Dorsey may overpay for Schobert explains why those fans may want to trade Schobert. It doesn't explain why Dorsey would want to trade him.
You’re missing the point.

Schobert is 25. He's made a Pro Bowl and may have made another if he didn't get hurt.

He's going to be looking for big money next offseason, and he should. He's a really good player and he'll never be in this good of a position again with regards to his market.

It's not about worrying about overpaying him. It's about what he commands, period.

Schobert is a really good player, but can we afford to give him top LB money long term with all the other guys we have? Almost certainly not.

So, then it's about maximizing value. Maybe that is just waiting and getting a 3rd round compensatory pick. Maybe that's trading him for better value before he hits Free Agency if at all possible. It depends on a lot of things.
 
You’re missing the point. Schobert is 25. He's made a Pro Bowl and may have made another if he didn't get hurt. He's going to be looking for big money next offseason, and he should. He's a really good player and he'll never be in this good of a position again with regards to his market. It's not about worrying about overpaying him. It's about what he commands, period.

I'm missing nothing. Here's what you said:

Some people are worried about Dorsey putting us in “cap hell” ... giving Schobert a ton of money would be a great way to do it.

Fans being worried about Dorsey putting us in cap hell is not a motivation for Dorsey to trade Schobert. If Dorsey wants to pay that for Schobert, he will.

Schobert is a really good player, but can we afford to give him top LB money long term with all the other guys we have? Almost certainly not. So, then it's about maximizing value. Maybe that is just waiting and getting a 3rd round compensatory pick. Maybe that's trading him for better value before he hits Free Agency if at all possible. It depends on a lot of things.

Any team to which we would trade him would know that he only has one year left on his deal, and that they are only getting him for a one- year rental before they'd have to pony up big bucks. That's going to limit his trade value. So what is the basis for assuming he'd be worth more to some other team for just one year than he'd be worth to us for that same year? How many other teams out there are 1) on target to make a serious playoff run, and 2) are as thin as we'd be at MLB without Schobert?

To put it differently...imagine if our roster was exactly as it is right now, minus Schobert. Ray Ray Armstrong is the only MLB on the entire roster, and we're all in a panic. Suddenly, Joe Schobert is on the market, looking for a one-year deal at $2.025M. We'd be absolutely ecstatic if we were able to fill a hole, even for just a year, with a player that good for that cheap a salary. Even if we didn't think we could re-sign him, it would fill that hole and give us a whole additional year to find another long-term solution at that position. It would be a no-brainer acquisition.

I can't imagine us getting more in return for Schobert than 1) what he would contribute on the field this year, and 2) the 3rd round compensatory we'd get if he left next year. That's why I think this is baseless, media-generated speculation rather than something based on the Browns' actual thinking.
 
Are we sure about this? Haven't looked at his numbers but he seems to have played very well the past few years.

As the saying goes, "Time is undefeated." I doubt that Ben is taking care of himself as well as Tom Brady does. That cliff is coming, and it's usually a steep fall.
 
Fans being worried about Dorsey putting us in cap hell is not a motivation for Dorsey to trade Schobert. If Dorsey wants to pay that for Schobert, he will.
It was simply meant to express the idea that there's only so much money to go around.

Any team to which we would trade him would know that he only has one year left on his deal, and that they are only getting him for a one- year rental before they'd have to pony up big bucks. That's going to limit his trade value. So what is the basis for assuming he'd be worth more to some other team for just one year than he'd be worth to us for that same year? How many other teams out there are 1) on target to make a serious playoff run, and 2) are as thin as we'd be at MLB without Schobert?
I mean, a pretty similar situation played out with Jamie Collins. He was on a Super Bowl contender, playing at a high level, and was traded before he hit FA.

To put it differently...imagine if our roster was exactly as it is right now, minus Schobert. Ray Ray Armstrong is the only MLB on the entire roster, and we're all in a panic. Suddenly, Joe Schobert is on the market, looking for a one-year deal at $2.025M. We'd be absolutely ecstatic if we were able to fill a hole, even for just a year, with a player that good for that cheap a salary. Even if we didn't think we could re-sign him, it would fill that hole and give us a whole additional year to find another long-term solution at that position. It would be a no-brainer acquisition.
I don't think anyone is suggesting we just dump Schobert without having a somewhat legitimate replacement. That'd be insane.

I can't imagine us getting more in return for Schobert than 1) what he would contribute on the field this year, and 2) the 3rd round compensatory we'd get if he left next year. That's why I think this is baseless, media-generated speculation rather than something based on the Browns' actual thinking.
I don't disagree with this at all...you're probably right.
 
It doesn't make sense to me at all.

Dorsey has made some clear "win now" moves, and likely believes we should be aiming for a significant playoff run. So why would you ditch your best linebacker now because he might become too expensive in the future? Especially given that LB is one of the weakest positions on the team. We went 0-3 in the three games he missed, and gave up 26, 33, and 37 points in those games. His absence was most noticeable against KC, where we were just killed in the underneath passing game.

Its because Dorsey doesn't value linebacker. All the win now moves are for 1st tier, 2nd tier and 3rd tier positions. He values the #1 inside linebacker as the same as strong safety or #2 corner. Its not a position he wants to pay 10 mill a year for, maybe 6 or 7 million, but the 2nd inside LB is a last tier position, so I doubt we keep Schobert.

Personally I value the position more than Dorsey, but 1, I am not our GM, and 2, I don't have a successful track record at being a gm, lol.
 
By that logic, Garrett is the next guy gone.

I don't buy it. I think things like which GM picked a player may matter for borderline players, or guys whose salary may exceed their utility. But if Dorsey is the kind of guy who will ditch a critical player simply because he's not the one who drafted him, and we don't have anyone who remotely appears capable of replacing him, then we're in bad shape.

So QB is in a tier by themselves, but left tackle, primary edge, #1 corner is the 2nd tier, no way he lets Myles walk, basically as top tier as you get. I think he would trade Scho in a heartbeat for a good left tackle that wants a big contract before he pays an inside linebacker that big contract (tier 4)

Its not about not being his guy, its just about it not being his position to spend money on.
 
Its because Dorsey doesn't value linebacker. All the win now moves are for 1st tier, 2nd tier and 3rd tier positions. He values the #1 inside linebacker as the same as strong safety or #2 corner. Its not a position he wants to pay 10 mill a year for, maybe 6 or 7 million, but the 2nd inside LB is a last tier position, so I doubt we keep Schobert.

Sure, Dorsey may decide he doesn't want to pay $10M/year for that position. But we're only paying Schobert's $2M this year, and that's why Dorsey planning on contending this year is relevant.

We'd be giving up a cheap, plus player for this season, with no substitute talent to replace him, in a year where Dorsey otherwise is "all-in". Dorsey's track record is getting rid of guys who are too expensive. It hasn't been getting rid of good players while they are still cheap.
 
Garrett is the only non-Dorsey guy on the entire roster who I actually feel 100% confident will be on the roster come 2021.

Duke, DeValve, Kirksey, Tretter, Higgins are all almost certainly gone after this season.

Not willing to give Ogunjobi, Njoku or Bitonio a 100% chance of staying either.

3 tech is tier 6, surprised we paid for Richardson, but with that, Larry is gone if he wants good money, TE is 5th tier, but I think he has a chance of staying because Freddie likes using the position, and interior lineman is 6th tier, I love Bitonio, think he is very important, but per Dorsey, not a valued position.

That pyramid is very interesting and mainly lines up with the moves we see Dorsey doing, so it is kind of the cheat code to what Dorsey is doing, not by who drafted the player.
 
Sure, Dorsey may decide he doesn't want to pay $10M/year for that position. But we're only paying Schobert's $2M this year, and that's why Dorsey planning on contending this year is relevant.

We'd be giving up a cheap, plus player for this season, with no substitute talent to replace him, in a year where Dorsey otherwise is "all-in". Dorsey's track record is getting rid of guys who are too expensive. It hasn't been getting rid of good players while they are still cheap.

Oh, yeah, I don't see him trading him right now, probably waits to get a 3rd or 4th round compensatory pick, I agree trading him for what you can get in compensatory pick is silly.
 

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-13: "Backup Bash Brothers"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:11: "Clipping Bucks."
Top