Adam Schefter Weighs in on Derek Anderson

Is Anderson really worth a 2nd?

If we get a 1st or 2nd for Anderson I’ll piss myself with excitement, and beleive Kokinis has us going in the right direction.

"There's nothing that cleanses the soul like getting the hell kicked out of you." Woody Hayes.

by rose_11 on Jan 27, 2009 6:02 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I would be ecstatic with anything 3rd round or higher for Anderson

by APV on Jan 27, 2009 6:05 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

A 3rd and I’d be happy to have the situation behind us. Anything higher and I’d be ecstatic

by Roger Dorn on Jan 27, 2009 6:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Definately. I’m surprised to hear anyone say that Derek Anderson would be a long-term solution for any team. Obviously, he hasn’t watched many Browns games this year.

The best thing probably is to hit [Grady] 2nd -- Jay

by Buckeye Brad on Jan 27, 2009 7:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I am all for getting extra draft picks, and to get a 2 or a 3 for Anderson would be great, who then is the Browns backup. Please don’t tell me Ken Dorsey.
Anybody have any backup ideas?

"Have You heard of the Boom on Mizar 5?"

by Grockcubs on Jan 27, 2009 7:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I’m sure there are plenty of vetern QB’s who could be signed in the offseason. Capable backup QB’s are not hard to find. I am definately sure it will NOT be Ken Dorsey.

The best thing probably is to hit [Grady] 2nd -- Jay

by Buckeye Brad on Jan 27, 2009 8:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

How bout a late round draft pick? A kid with a strong arm who had no line to protect him but can really throw?

Yes, I’m suggesting Todd Boeckman

"There's nothing that cleanses the soul like getting the hell kicked out of you." Woody Hayes.

by rose_11 on Jan 27, 2009 8:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Are you joking? Boeckman is a poor man’s DA. He’ll be lucky to get invited to a camp as an undrafted free agent.

The best thing probably is to hit [Grady] 2nd -- Jay

by Buckeye Brad on Jan 27, 2009 9:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

He could probably get drafted. How desperate are some teams for a QB? What else will be there in the 7th that you can’t pass up this guy who is a no-risk, possibly high reward pick?

Boeckman isn’t as good of an NFL prospect as Mizzou’s backup QB, though.

I also reject the notion that Boeckman had “no” line to protect him. Boone isn’t Orlando Pace, but he can be a good NFL player. Browning is good (although was probably playing out of position). Brewster was a promising freshman, and if he is as smart about playing the game as he was about being a one man recruiting force, he will be a great player at OSU.

by rufio on Jan 27, 2009 10:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Go watch the USC game, and then tell me how is line was. Against Texas he looked really good because he got the ball out quickly, and made good reads. The arm’s there, just mobility and decision making are ?’s.

Why not look into him as a late rounder, or UDFA? Definetly has potential.

"There's nothing that cleanses the soul like getting the hell kicked out of you." Woody Hayes.

by rose_11 on Jan 27, 2009 10:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Is it online? Unfortunately, I did not tape that game.

Its still going to take more than one game against the best defense in the nation to convince me that OSU’s line was so bad it was comparable to being nonexistent. I am not saying it is particularly good, just average or slightly above average nationally.

And why is it the line’s fault when Boeckman plays poorly against USC, but against Texas when he does well the line gets no credit? He also didn’t play a whole lot against Texas.

Also, I agree with you that Boeckman will get drafted.

by rufio on Jan 27, 2009 11:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Boeckman has very limited mobility, which you need in the NFL. Even the best O-lines get beat sometimes, and you also have to deal with so many exotic blitzes. He also stares down recievers too much and defenses would pick that up right away. He played well at the beginning of last season, but as he played more games and teams had film on him they were able to adjust to him and he played much worse. He’s similar to DA that way, who also played well at first for the Browns until the defenses adjusted to him.

I wish Boeckman the best of luck with the rest of his life, but I certainly don’t see him having much of a career in the NFL. Even if he gets picked up by some team for training camps, I don’t see him hanging on even as a backup in ‘09. I certainly hope the Browns don’t draft him. Is he really better than Ken Dorsey?

The best thing probably is to hit [Grady] 2nd -- Jay

by Buckeye Brad on Jan 28, 2009 9:00 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I hope the Browns don’t draft him either. Is he better than Dorsey right now? I do not believe so. BUT he does have physical tools to be much better than Dorsey. He isn’t Mike Vick, but he would beat DA, and some of the other starting QBs in the NFL in a footrace. He is definitely more mobile than Shaun Hill who starts for SF. And, because people are so desperate for QBs in this league, he is bound to get drafted. Coaches think they can coach anyone up who has the physical tools to play the game, and teams can rarely get players with only the physical tools to play in the NFL in the 6th and 7th rounds. If you were a fan of a SF, or a Minnesota, or even a team whose QB is getting old like NYJ or STL, would you not want your team to grab Boecks in the 6th or 7th round? What would you have to lose?

If you pick him and it doesn’t work out, oh well, he was your 7th rounder and no one will remember he was even in the NFL, just like a ton of 7th-rounders. If you pick him and he becomes the next Matt Cassel—even for just a few games—you look like a genius.

by rufio on Jan 28, 2009 10:21 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

as far as his mobility…he actually runs a faster 40 time than troy smith did.

rookies are rarely backups to untested guys like quinn. any rookie is likely to be a third QB for the browns, w/ a brad johnson-type sitting in the backup role.

by DontCallMeJoey on Jan 28, 2009 11:41 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Faster doesn’t mean more mobile. Anyone who has watched the Buckeys the past few years knows Boeckman has very little mobility in the pocket and takes sacks too easily. It’s not just about 40 times, it’s about awareness in the pocket, side-to-side mobility, and decision making.

The best thing probably is to hit [Grady] 2nd -- Jay

by Buckeye Brad on Jan 28, 2009 11:57 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I completely agree mobility-wise. Smith has a good first step, better multi-directional mobility, and more agility. All of that matters a whole lot more than your top-end speed in football. Teams should look at the first 10 yard split in the 40, the shuttles, and the 3-cone drill much more than the 40 time as a whole when judging speed.

Still, have you seen Shaun Hill drop back? The man can’t even shuffle back on a drop like a normal QB, he has to backpedal! And he looks like he is going to fall down every time! I laugh at him.

by rufio on Jan 28, 2009 1:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

The 40 time is irrelevant as far as mobility is concerned.

by gahnki on Jan 28, 2009 1:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Todd will be around the league a long, long time. He would be an excellent career back-up.

by gahnki on Jan 28, 2009 1:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Really? I don’t think so, but I guess we’ll see.

The best thing probably is to hit [Grady] 2nd -- Jay

by Buckeye Brad on Jan 28, 2009 2:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

You guys are selling low at just a 3rd rounder. We can get more than that for sure this year before the draft.

by rufio on Jan 27, 2009 8:25 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

This is an idea I am taking as an Indians fan who has watched Mark Shapiro pull off brilliant trades netting top prospects because of the owners willingness to eat salary. For example, when the Indians traded Casey Blake to the Dodgers this past season, they were able to net their current top prospect, Carlos Santana, because Shapiro and Dolan agreed to pay the remaining $2 million on Blake’s contract.

This is relevant to the Browns because of the roster bonus that Anderson is due of $5mm. Would we be able to convince a team to give us a higher draft pick if we agree to pay the $5mm?

by Roger Dorn on Jan 28, 2009 12:57 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

It’s an interesting question, and I’d be curious to see if there was any precedent.

My thought, though, is that there may be either some kind of restriction on that type of transaction or perhaps a timing issue. I think we’d need to hear from a real expert on this if we couldn’t find precedent.

Carmona for Cy Young 2009

by danvail on Jan 28, 2009 10:25 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

If it is going to count against our cap number anyway, why not pay DA? If we don’t pay him, teams could just wait until we cut him (we would have to if we didn’t trade him and didn’t pay him), and/or use the impending deadline as leverage against us. We need to at least act like we are going to pay him the bonus.

by rufio on Jan 28, 2009 1:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

My point was more that they could trade him prior to the bonus being paid and the other team would be responsible for the bonus. We could tell interested teams that we will pay this bonus, but we need a better draft pick in return

by Roger Dorn on Jan 28, 2009 3:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

If we really really don’t want to pay DA the roster bonus, we would typically have two options: trade him before the bonus is due to be paid, or cut him before the bonus is due to be paid. It was reported that even if we cut him, we would have to pay him the 5 million roster bonus.

So if we really don’t want to pay him, we have only one option: trade him.

I was confused on that, thinking that even if we traded him we had to pay the bonus, and that our only option for not paying him was to cut him.

If the other teams know we really don’t want to pay him, and we shop him around before the bonus is due, they have leverage against us: “we don’t want to give you the higher pick because then we will have to pay the roster bonus and you guys will save money/cap space, you should cut us a deal because we have to pay the money”. Therefore, I agree that trading him pre-bonus will not maximize his value.

Eliminating the possibility of trading him (because it would be selling really low), we have two options left: keep him on the roster (and pay him) or cut him (and still pay him). So, why not just pay him and keep him on the roster (also poorly articulated on my part above) if we are going to pay him anyway?

If we do as you suggest (trade him before the bonus is due, but offer to pay the 5 million), it might still count against the other team’s cap, which I think is really the big deal. They still might not give us a better pick because DA would count against their cap number and not ours. I do not know the details of DA’s contract, nor the intricacies of the salary cap, so I am just speculating. I do believe that 5 million cap dollars will matter more to NFL teams than 5 million real dollars.

Regardless, I think we should look for situations where other teams are desperate and we are not. If we have already paid DA, and some team is hoping that Stafford or Sanchez drops to them but both of them get picked in the top 5, DA’s value goes up. A lot.

by rufio on Jan 28, 2009 4:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Why not just pay DA the $5mil ahead of time? He is going to get it anyway, and then it is easier to trade him on or before draft day.

Note that I prefer them not to trade Anderson. I also still think he can net a 1st rounder from the vikings, if they believe he is better than Jackson. If they don’t think DA is better, than they are not getting anything from Minnesota.

by oxforddave on Jan 30, 2009 5:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree, pay him the 5 million now and just erase all doubt from other teams’ minds. It would send the message “if you want him, you are going to need to pay up”.

To me, a better offer for DA is worth 5mil from Lerner’s pocket and 5mil in cap space.

by rufio on Jan 31, 2009 2:16 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Agree

by Roger Dorn on Jan 31, 2009 12:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Speaking of Schefter, I am watching him on the Mike Francesa show in New York discussing various items throughout the NFL. Schefter commented that Mangini is coming to a talented, but selfish team. His suggestion was to trade both Kellen Winslow and Braylon Edwards.

His rationale behind trading Edwards was that he is nearing the end of his deal and you either have to pay the guy huge money or watch him walk as a free agent. Why not get something for him now

by Roger Dorn on Jan 28, 2009 5:06 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

and followed that up with the fact that he would rather have Chad Ocho Cinco than Braylon

by Roger Dorn on Jan 28, 2009 5:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

That Chad Ocho Cinco statement just lost that guy all crediblity.

"There's nothing that cleanses the soul like getting the hell kicked out of you." Woody Hayes.

by rose_11 on Jan 28, 2009 7:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yup. Braylon hasn’t done anything near what Chad has done to sabatoge his own team.

The best thing probably is to hit [Grady] 2nd -- Jay

by Buckeye Brad on Jan 28, 2009 7:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

+1

by rufio on Jan 28, 2009 9:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Why not get something for him now

We could re-sign him now after hopefully his worst season ever (buying low) and therefore NOT have to pay him ridiculous mega-bucks, then let him mature in to a great NFL WR for whom we underpaid?

by rufio on Jan 28, 2009 9:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Obviously I would be for this, but how likely is it that Braylon will extend now? Especially given some of his rumored statements about the fans near the end of this season

by Roger Dorn on Jan 28, 2009 10:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I honestly don’t know. Braylon does seem to be motivated more by fame than fortune, more by being a star and being liked than by big dollars. He seems to like Cleveland and being close to home. We should at least give it a shot.

by rufio on Jan 30, 2009 1:36 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I think one needs to be traded for sure. It is hard to have two prima-donnas on the same side of the ball. They will always be more worried about their “touches” than the team.

by gahnki on Jan 29, 2009 7:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

No thanks. Keep both and at least see if Mangini can keep them in line.

I do remember tons of media gaffes and outbursts by Edwards and Winslow, but none of them seem to be about touches…staph, being from michigan, going to the OSU-michigan game in a helicopter, being a soldier, motorcycle crashes, being one of the best TEs in the league even at 90%…I can’t remember a “just get me the damn ball”. Am I wrong about that?

by rufio on Jan 30, 2009 1:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree. Edwards and Winslow have both said some dumb things, but they’re not in the media complaining about their touches or their role in the offense. I don’t know why everyone is so eager to get rid of them. First of all, you don’t trade a player when he’s at his lowest value. Secondly, those two guys are pretty much our only playmakers on offense so we’re going to need them next year, unless we can draft a guy like Crabtree.

I don’t know if I would classify them as “prima donnas”; neither of those two guys have said or done anything near what players like TO, Chad Johnson, etc. have done. Like rufio said, let’s see if Mangini can take care of them before making any rash moves.

The best thing probably is to hit [Grady] 2nd -- Jay

by Buckeye Brad on Jan 30, 2009 6:25 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I yelled “just catch the damn ball” a few dozen times this past season…

by JulioBernazard on Jan 30, 2009 4:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

That’s a fair criticism of Edwards. I thought he said something along the same lines like he just had to keep playing and he had to step up and catch it.

I truly believe he will never have another season with so many drops (it would be a hard feat to replicate). He will always drop some, but I really believe this season will be an anomaly.

A fresh offense, a fresh season, and an offseason to really get to work will help him.

by rufio on Jan 30, 2009 4:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Another vote here for hanging onto Winslow and Edwards for at least this year. Last year was a disaster of epic proportions. Lets see if a fresh start with a new coach helps these two return to form. Edwards especially should benefit from a fresh start.

On the Anderson trade rumors… if Schefter is accurate here and we could possibly get a 2nd or higher for D.A. I’d do cartwheels. We need to get at least three linebackers, another d-lineman, another corner, two more WR, another running back, a guard a RT and a running back. That’s at least 10 starters/key backups that need to be found and we are already short draft picks. Getting a 2nd and say a 5th for D.A. would be huge!

by mgtbfb on Jan 30, 2009 11:06 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

A center as well

by Roger Dorn on Jan 30, 2009 12:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I don’t agree with your needs assessment.

We need 2 LB probably, but not 3. Jackson is at least good enough to play the “cleanup” role even if he can’t be a true playmaker. I would love to see what he, Wimbley, Hall, and even Leon Williams can do in a scheme that says “this is your job: hit this gap, hit is hard, destroy everything in your path” and not “read the play and if X, then you should Y and if Z then you should N….” In other words, where they attack and don’t have to think too much. I would also see a coach who is willing to make Wimbley learn a rip move. Maybe then he could again become a threat to get double digit sacks. Regardless, one impact player will make that a whole new unit.

If Tucker can come back, he can solidify the right half of that line. Hadnot is young and Schaffer plays a lot better next to Tucker. We could probably use a young kid to develop there, but it isn’t a really big need. Center, as Dorn says below, is a need. Fraley used to barely have the physical attributes he needed to succeed in the NFL. He is getting older, and now he doesn’t have the physical attributes to play.

We could use a nickel CB.

Joe J will be back, and if he returns to anything close to where he was, he can play the 3rd WR. We could use one more.

You listed RB twice, and while I do think we could just cut Jason Wright, sign a cheap veteran, and upgrade the position, I don’t think we should get rid of Lewis. He can at least be a goal-line, old Jerome Bettis type of role player. He might not be the stud he once was, but the dude is strong.

The good part about all of this is that LB is arguably the easiest position to pick in the first round and know you are getting a stud. Small DEs who we can turn in to OLBs, RBs, and nickel CBs are among the easiest positions to get from the 3rd round on.

If we hold on to both K2 and BE, we don’t need to risk a 1st rounder on a WR, which is a tougher position to pick, and we can just take a flyer on a later-round prospect.

The really tough positions to get: game-breaking WR, QB, LT, NT…we seem to have all of those covered, or at least there is hope that the players we have there can be stars.

I do agree that if we can get something like a 2nd/5th for DA I would be really happy. I think we can.

by rufio on Jan 30, 2009 4:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Are you sure that Brandon McDonald is a starting CB? I think he’s more of a nicket and we should be looking for another starter. That’s why I would like to see us draft Malcom Jenkins (and I’ve seen a few mock drafts give him to the Browns).

The best thing probably is to hit [Grady] 2nd -- Jay

by Buckeye Brad on Jan 30, 2009 6:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

mcdonald is definitely not a starting CB. he’ll be a very good 3rd CB, but he’s not a starter.

by DontCallMeJoey on Jan 30, 2009 7:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Outside of a couple bonehead plays that hopefully he learns from (diving on the 90 yard TD pass), one could argue McDonald had a better year than Wright.

by kwoog on Jan 30, 2009 8:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I would not argue this

by Roger Dorn on Jan 31, 2009 2:14 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I would not argue either this either, but McDonald can start in the NFL. He definitely has the potential, it is all about his level of consistency. If he limits the amount of mistakes he makes and minimizes the impact of his mistakes, he would be a more than serviceable 2nd corner.

by rufio on Jan 31, 2009 2:18 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yes. At the same time, I wouldn’t be upset if we drafted Malcolm Jenkins, but would still prefer a LB at this point

by Roger Dorn on Jan 31, 2009 12:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

you may be right, actually. mcdonald’s ceiling is substantially lower than wright’s, though, b/c of the speed factor. while much faster than me, mcdonald doesn’t have the speed to be an elite corner, in my opinion, and while his ball skills seem to be pretty strong, he’s not big/physical enough to make up for the speed shortcomings.

by DontCallMeJoey on Feb 2, 2009 6:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

He isn’t big or physical, and he doesn’t have good top-end speed, but he is very quick, agile, and can jump.

We don’t need him to be Deion, we would just need him to do a good job on Nate Washington (once Ward retires), Chad Ocho-Cinco, or Mark Clayton.

Maybe if we make the playoffs, we can think about contending in the AFC/NFL and going up against Indy’s wideouts or ’Zona’s or anyone else with sick WRs. For now all he has to do is hold it down in the division.

McDonald has also done a good job on Andre Johnson in the past, who is probably right up there with Fitz as the #1 wideout in the NFL right now.

by rufio on Feb 3, 2009 1:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I would not be hugely disappointed if we drafted Jenkins. Philly basically has 3 #1 CBs and another stud in Brian Dawkins at S and that gives them the confidence to blitz the hell out of the QB. I do believe McD can start in the NFL.

If we get a stud CB out of this draft, great, but our real need is at pass rusher. I would be lukewarm on the Jenkins pick because it would probably mean leaving a guy on the board who can be a monster LB. Then again, this draft seems to be really, really deep at LBs that would fit the 3-4, so if we leave one on the board it might mean another could drop to us in the 2nd round.

B.J. Raji is another kid who I would draft even though we have someone who plays his position already. Apparently he dominated the hell out of the Senior Bowl practices and guys who are 334lbs and that quick don’t come around very often. He and Rogers might be able to stop the run by themselves.

by rufio on Jan 31, 2009 2:25 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I’ve heard great things about Aaron Curry and I wouldn’t mind getting him at 5, but if he’s gone I don’t know if there’s another LB worth that pick. Definately not Maleauga, maybe a DE/OLB like Orakpo. I agree that pass rusher is a bigger need than CB right now, but the Browns shouldn’t reach for a guy just to fit that position. I think Jenkins has a very good chance to be a dominant CB, and a secondary of him, Wright, and McDonald would be very hard to throw on (if we can get a decent rush on the QB).

The best thing probably is to hit [Grady] 2nd -- Jay

by Buckeye Brad on Jan 31, 2009 9:46 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Considering this in combination with our new head coach, should we be worried b/c of the Gholston pick? I don’t know anything about his year, except what his espn page tells me (13 tackles, no sacks, seemingly invisible all year). Did he ever end up starting?

by kwoog on Jan 31, 2009 3:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

in talking w/ some Jets friends, it sounds like Gholston was a total disaster this year, as the espn page would indicate. he was healthy, just couldn’t get on the pitch.

the same friends did say, though, that aside from Gholston, they were very very happy w/ Mangina’s drafts (which he orchestrated w/ Tannenbaum)…for whatever that’s worth.

picking jenkins turns the DBs into a weapon, and probably serves to help the pass rush even before addressing the line itself.

by DontCallMeJoey on Jan 31, 2009 9:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I’m not a draft guru, but since we’re running a 3-4 do you think we could get a starting LB with our (high) 2nd round pick (sure would be nice to land a Woodley)? I think it’s pretty obvious that we need at least one new starting LB. Or do you think we should go free agent route to fill that need (Scott?).

by kwoog on Jan 31, 2009 10:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yes, between now and draft day, any one of Maybin, Brown from FSU, Orakpo, Maualuga, the 3rd USC LB who is either Matthews or Cushing because I don’t know one from the other, or Clint Sintim could slip to our 2nd round pick. There are a lot of 40s to be run and a lot of reps on the bench to be lifted between now and then.

In fact, I would bet on it. I really really doubt that many LBs will get picked in the 1st round, and with Larry English out of Northern Illinois rocketing up draft boards there could be yet another guy there for us to select in the 2nd.

Mitch King is another ‘tweener who could probably help our pass rush and play DE. He will almost definitely be there in the 2nd round, probably even the 3rd where we would be picking. “3-technique” DTs like Peria Jerry, Fili Moala and Sen’Derrick Marks could play DE for us and help rush the passer. One of those “3-technique” guys will probably be there in the 2nd.

by rufio on Jan 31, 2009 10:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

i think the answer is actually “yes”. my opinion, we should draft a LB as well as spend a good chunk on a FA LB. running a 3-4, you need skill at that position, clearly.

i don’t know much detail, but i just read that karlos dansby is free (unclear if he’s restricted or unrestricted) and that guy is a freaking beast. he would look great in a browns uni.

matthews and cushing are both total studs, but in very different ways. cushing is a pure pass rusher, while matthews is a lot like his dad in that he does pretty much everything at the LB position quite well. you can bet that one of them will be there at the 5th pick in the 2nd round, and we should be looking very closely at both. sintim is a big time athlete who also rushes the qb quite well, and may even be there at the top of the 3rd round. (just so happens i live in LA and went to virginia, so these guys are all pretty familiar to me).

seems to me if you come out of the first 2 rounds of the draft w/ jenkins and cushing/matthews/sintim as well as scoop up scott/dansby off the street…well, things on defense are REALLY looking up. just my opinion.

as to the pass rush comment, my point is you may be able to send more guys (or even send corners) w/ cover corners like jenkins and wright protecting the outside. that’s where that helps…i realize that our line is a total disaster, and even w/ robust coverage we can’t sniff the qb (see: dallas game).

by DontCallMeJoey on Feb 2, 2009 6:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

We actually sent safeties and CBs to the QB at a decent rate last year. I think this was mostly because none of the people who were supposed to be able to rush the passer could actually do so.

Some people are saying the higher-rated of Cushing/Matthews will definitely go in the top 15. I think it’s Matthews. They both had good weeks at the senior bowl, and I think gained some ground on Maualuga. I wouldn’t count on either of them being there in the 2nd. It would be awesome to get Jenkins, Cushing/Matthews, Scott, and Dansby. Good lord our D could be awesome if that happened. Don’t know if we have the cap space, though.

by rufio on Feb 3, 2009 1:41 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

just to be clear, i’m suggesting picking up scott OR dansby…while getting both would be great, the cap implications could be rough, as you point out.

i’d be surprised if cushing went in the top 15, and just flabbergasted if matthews did.

by DontCallMeJoey on Feb 3, 2009 4:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I do agree that picking Jenkins turns the DBs in to a weapon, but that doesn’t help the pass rush out.

We covered some teams for 6+ seconds last year with teams able to triple team SR and we still couldn’t get to the QB.

I really thought Gholston should have played DE in the NFL. While he did drop in to coverage at OSU sometimes, he was never the most fluid guy and he definitely benefited from the draft “pre-season” in terms of where he was picked. Hopefully this was a case of a Jets’ draft bust and not another Cleveland coach’s refusal to play young players. I don’t want to see another season where our top picks never get in games.

by rufio on Jan 31, 2009 11:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I’d prefer getting another starter to pair with Wright and have McDonald be the nickel back. We could do worse than McDonald as a starter though.

by mgtbfb on Feb 3, 2009 11:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Jamal is serviceable, but I don’t think worth his current cost. I am a proponent of cutting him. I think we need to purge some players and have flexible cap space even if it means losing some depth for next year, putting ourselves in a better position for year 2 of Mangenius

by Roger Dorn on Jan 30, 2009 6:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

That’s a fair point. I have no idea how much Jamal is costing us and how much of his contract is guaranteed/on the cap.

At RB I just think Wright clearly needs to go. He just is average across the board and we could plug someone as cheap but better in right away. If we could get a studly load-carrying back this offseason I wouldn’t be against moving Jamal, but I feel like if we can only get one RB this year we should dump Wright.

Is the new salary cap out yet?

by rufio on Jan 31, 2009 2:28 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

New RBs to look at in the draft:
Andre Brown-NC State. 6’0" 225lbs with some burst and quickness for a big guy.
Rashad Jennings-Libery. 6’1" 234lbs with less burst but a whole lot of power. Still deceptively quick for a 234lb back.

by rufio on Jan 31, 2009 2:48 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I also like Knowshon Moreno – UGA. 5’11’’ 208 lbs

by JustBob on Feb 3, 2009 1:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Do you really want to reach for him at the #5 pick? He will be gone by the end of the first round.

by rufio on Feb 3, 2009 2:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

True. I wasn’t thinking in terms of the first pick. A lot is going to depend on free agency. I hope an Anderson trade happens. I wouldn’t mind having him as a backup, but we really need the picks.

by JustBob on Feb 3, 2009 7:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Needs assessment

I think we may have a center replacement in Dustin Fry (currently on the practice squad).
I think our needs are 1OLB, 1ILB, RB, RT, DE, CB. My vote for the first three would be: Aaron Curry, Bart Scott, Rashad Jennings. Tackle, end and cornerback are fairly deep in the draft this year.

by NM Dawg on Jan 31, 2009 3:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I disagree on DEs. There aren’t very many studs who would play DE in our scheme in this year’s draft. There about four or five of them (all who could play DT in the 4-3 too and are susceptible to being picked by all 32 teams) and then the dropoff is pretty big.

I also think a lot of the OTs will go very early. Last year there were 7 OTs picked in the first round, and a lot of those I felt were reaches. There are a good number of guys I wouldn’t mind seeing the Browns draft to play RT, but how many will be left late in the draft?

Who are you looking at at CB besides Davis, Jenkins, and Alphonso Smith?

by rufio on Jan 31, 2009 11:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I concede on the DEs, and perhaps that might be a possibility in free agency (especially if we clear more cap space).
Mickens and Butler come to mind for CB. I’m expecting that Daven Holly will be back, and while he may not be pro bowl material, having him, Wright and McDonald together (and Cousins out) would be reasonably solid (especially if they are getting more help up front).
I’m also hoping someone like Augustus Parrish from Kent State might be an option in the draft for OT. I really like Tucker, and Shaffer is not bad, but I’m worried about Tucker’s health.
To clear cap space, I would consider dropping, one way or another, Lewis and Anderson, and would even go so far as parting with Winslow and Stallworth. All of these have risks, for sure (and we’re already challenged at receiver). Draft picks and salary space are needed, though, and I am partial to having higher talent across the board rather than pro bowlers and dogs (not dawgs!). e.g. I think Rucker may never be a big star, but he is good and will get better.

by NM Dawg on Feb 1, 2009 3:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I think there is a potential DE becoming a free agent out of Dallas that a lot of people like. We should look for someone like Darnell Dockett, who dominated the Super Bowl. 6’4", 285lbs (not fat), with a good first step and some power. Too small to be a DT, probably just not quite fast enough to be a great 4-3 DE.

Tucker is clearly not a lock to be healthy, true. I think if we get him or Joe J back at 100% we will be lucky. The young kids we have as backups on the OL should either get chances to play or get replaced by draft picks. How big is Parrish? Fast?

by rufio on Feb 3, 2009 1:49 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Chris Canty, out of Dallas, is a free agent, and he would be great. I hear Tank Johnson may be a free agent as well, but that might be messy, right?
The web is such a funny place for information. Augustus Parrish may be 6’4" or 6’7", and he might be 290 or 315 lbs. It seems he has a good starting point, with ability to improve. He’s been playing left tackle and succeeding, which is promising.
I have been curious about Quarterman, the guard on our practice squad, simply because he is big and seems able to push back defenders (I’d love to see the Browns have a dominant run game).

by NM Dawg on Feb 3, 2009 1:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs