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

2017 Draft Prospects Thread

Do Not Sell My Personal Information
Juice Is Loose said:
Is trading up in the cards for someone like DePodesta? We've seen them stock pile picks cause that is Moneyball philosophy. So why would they trade a bulk of their high picks to move up and select someone they may be able to get at 12?
Click to expand...

I may be crazy, but this is what I think:

*Garrett at 1

*They're looking to trade up from 12 but not for a QB (The fact that it was reported we've told teams in the top 8 we want Trubisky led me to this)
 
Trading up for a player who isn't a QB just doesn't seem like something this FO would do to me.
 
I'd shit my damn pants if Browns select Garrett and Hooker tonight. It'll be the best time of my Browns fandom life.

Listen, fuck these crop of QBs... Kessler could be better than any of them, we absolutely cannot predict a dice roll. I'm sick of crapping out though... Go a different route for once, try to create a Ravens defense and have Kessler manage.

Pretty much I'm tired of us wasting picks. Get those damn playmakers that can turnover field position. I'm not big on Kessler, but I'm huge on Garrett, Hooker, Kessler vs Trubisky.

Garrett/Hooker let's do it!!

Build the team, find your QB.
 
Pick6 said:
Trading up for a player who isn't a QB just doesn't seem like something this FO would do to me.
Click to expand...
Would be inconsistent with just about everything they've publicly said

If we trade up brace yourselves for a QB.
 
SanduskyCav said:
Have a close friend who is also close to Joe Haden. He says Garrett at #1 per Joe. Although I'm not sure how much Joe knows or why they would tell him anything???

Just passing along info… I know it sounds like a "my friends mom's brothers cousin knows a guy" statement. Which maybe it is
Click to expand...
Curious, is this the same friend who is close to LeBron that gives you some Cavs scoops?
 
Huber. said:
What would cost the Browns more...Trading up for Trubisky at #2 or trading up for Garrett at #2. I say Trubisky at #2 given the fact that 49ers need a QB. I could see the Browns taking Trubisky at #1 and trading up for Garrett at #2.
Click to expand...

I suppose so. Although if it is Garrett who falls, other teams may be interested in trying to trade up to grab him. But in a sense, it doesn't matter, because there's no way to know for certain what the 49er's would be willing to take in trade until after we made that No. 1 pick. There's always the chance they'd refuse to trade at all, etc..

So, we have to take the player we want the most at No. 1, and then see if we can trade up to No. 2 if we're really that intent on trying to get both. There is a real chance we could screw ourselves over by out-thinking ourselves, and end up getting only the second player on our board despite having used the No. 1 pick. We don't want to be this guy:

Vizzini-Princess-Bride1.jpg
 
MoFlo said:
I may be crazy, but this is what I think:

*Garrett at 1

*They're looking to trade up from 12 but not for a QB (The fact that it was reported we've told teams in the top 8 we want Trubisky led me to this)
Click to expand...

I think this is the plan if Adams or Hooker slip to 5.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-15: "Cavs Survive and Advance"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:15: Cavs Survive and Advance
Top