OBR Dishes Trade Talk With Giants Regarding WR Braylon Edwards
by Chris Pokorny on Mar 23, 2009 11:39 AM EDT
in General News
93 comments
"Frame this picture coach, I finally caught one!"
In today's Plain Dealer, Tony Grossi reported that a league source stated that anybody on the Browns is available in a trade except for two players: OT Joe Thomas and LB D'Qwell Jackson. While there are other players on our team who I'd find it difficult to part with (Eric Wright, Eric Steinbach), there is one player who should also be on the excluded list, in my opinion: KR Joshua Cribbs. That is, unless someone offers us incredible value for Cribbs, but in those cases, virtually anyone in the NFL could be on the block.
The names of Brady Quinn, Derek Anderson, Braylon Edwards and Shaun Rogers have surfaced in trade rumors. The Browns haven't addressed the rumors -- they won't even confirm visits from free agents -- but Mangini and Kokinis consistently have said they would consider anything to improve the team. ... They also would like to move down from the No. 5 spot in the draft.
Interestingly enough is a report that the OBR released today. While other news sources and blogs might have ripped off the OBR for their scoop, I think it's safe to say that Dawgs By Nature did not. Several weeks ago, rumors circulated that the New York Giants were interested in WR Braylon Edwards.
At the time, the rumor was that LB Mathias Kiwanuka would be shipped to the in exchange for last year's drop-ball expert. The OBR stated today that, in fact, Kiwankuka was never even mentioned in a trade situation by the Browns or the Giants. Instead, here's how thing's went down (not literally, of course):
Giants: We're interested in Braylon Edwards.
Browns: What is your offer?
Giants: We'll give you a 2nd and 5th round pick.
Browns: Not good enough. We want more.
Giants: Go on.
Browns: We'll take your deal, but you have to include Steve Smith.
Giants: Hmmm...we'd prefer to hang on to Smith. You can have either Mario Manningham or Domenik Hixon thrown in instead.
Browns: Bye.
That doesn't seem like a lot of value for the Browns, with respect to just a 2nd, 5th, and Smith for a player who may still be one of the best receivers in football. Now, if we were talking about the Carolina Panthers' version of Steve Smith, I'm pretty sure I'd have a little change of heart. With the recent news of Donte Stallworth's incident, perhaps our asking price for Edwards would go up by default.
0 recs |
93 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
I’ve been reading these OBR reports, and I try my best to avoid mentioning any of their insider content until the public gets a hold of it. I think this site does a nice job of respecting that
by Roger Dorn on Mar 23, 2009 11:52 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
We need a Owner
Its time to get a new Owner in this town, Eric Mangini or Rany Learner dont understand football in Cleveland. Brady Quinn is OUR VOICE, BODY and play’s FOR CITY.
We waited a long time for someone like BRADY and now we have a coach that takes a sjot at the Cleveland Fans and I have to say, I dont think I will show up at the games and I have 4 Seats
by Vonbron on Mar 23, 2009 11:59 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
i’m sure they’ll miss you desperately…
by DontCallMeJoey on Mar 23, 2009 12:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
so what should the appropriate trade value be for braylon edwards? now keep in mind that mangini & kokinis have NO attachment to edwards whatsoever. he’s a talented but spoiled brat of a WR. this is a rather deep pool for WR’s so i dunno if the 1 & 3 value for roy williams will fly? perhaps send him to oakland for michael bush, their 2nd this year & 6th round DC in 2010? this is just a suggestion.
by sleepy042 on Mar 23, 2009 12:46 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
there are 2 different questions when it comes to trade value: 1.) what’s he worth?; and 2.) what will it take for the browns to let go of him?
i have no idea what he’s worth on the open market…maybe you’re right that the WR draft pool is deep and that harms his overall value. if i’m the browns, though, there is no way i go for anything less than a 1 & 3 THIS year…and NO CHANCE i take michael bush, a 2nd and a 6th. zero.
by DontCallMeJoey on Mar 23, 2009 1:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hes actually real good. I watched him in high school and in Louisville for 4 years and he was crazy until he got injured. this is the first year hes been healthy and when hes had a chance hes been good. one week he had 171 yards and 2 tds.
by BradyQuinnisBeast on Mar 23, 2009 4:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
One week doesn’t constitute the entire season. What did he do for all of last season?
by JDfromCLE on Mar 23, 2009 4:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He missed most of his rookie season recovering form the broken leg he suffered as a senior at Louisville. Had he not gotten hurt, he was projected as a late first rounder (I think). Most pundits thought the Raiders were crazy for using a 4th rounder on him since he probably wouldn’t play his rookie year, but the guy can play.
Would love to swap from 5 to 7 so Davis could select Crabtree and we get Bush back (not going to happen I know, but fun to dream about).
by talonk on Mar 23, 2009 5:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
lee suggs once rushed for 186 yds and 2 td’s in a single week. next.
by DontCallMeJoey on Mar 23, 2009 5:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ki Jana Carter also tore it up in high school and in college. Bush has performed for one week in the NFL…okay…
When he was coming out, I would have drafted him in the 4th round, knowing full well that he would have to sit out a year considering his talent. Is he really healthy, though? Why would it make sense to make a trade specifically for him versus other RBs? Why not just draft a RB this year? What is it about Bush that should put him at the top of our “wants” list?
by rufio on Mar 23, 2009 7:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Am betting this was in response to my post.
Didn’t say we need to get him. I’d be happy with quite a few of the RB draftees this year. But if Davis had to move up, and all we had to do is drop two spots and pick up a RB on the cheap, sounds like a good deal to me.
by talonk on Mar 23, 2009 7:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
In response to both you and BradyQuinnisBeast.
If all we were doing was dropping 2 spots, the draft value chart says we should get a mid 3rd rounder. I think that would be fair for Bush, maybe we could get a later pick as well.
The original poster, however, brought up the trade value established by Roy Williams: a 1st and 3rd rounder, then said that a good value for Braylon would be something like a 2nd this year, 6th next, and Bush. Granted, Braylon might not command the exact same deal as Williams, but we should at least be able to get something close—say a 1st and a 4th. I don’t see anything about Bush that would make the value of the picks go from a 1 and 4 to a 2 and future 6.
by rufio on Mar 23, 2009 8:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agree, Michael Bush, next.
"Have You heard of the Boom on Mizar 5?"
by Grockcubs on Mar 23, 2009 7:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The two players who have shown the most ability and produced on the highest level for the Browns since their resurrection are Joe Thomas and Braylon Edwards. In my opinion, the Browns cannot trade him. This is even though Edwards torpedoed the Browns season last year.
Finally the Browns have a modicum of high-end talent (albeit flawed) and everyone wants to trade it away?
by oxforddave on Mar 23, 2009 12:53 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I agree on Edwards.
Was he a tool last season? Yes.
Is he in the same class of obnoxiousness as Terrell Owens and Chad Johnson? No. But he’s also not going to be your class act player (i.e. Jurevicius).
A few solid build-up seasons, followed by one incredible season, followed by one “what the hell?” season should not force the Browns to dump him. I need to see another season, whether it’s full of more pain (drops) or solid play (what I expect).
Dawgs By Nature - Find out why Pittsburgh still sucks.
by Chris Pokorny on Mar 23, 2009 1:17 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
Yeah, I don’t get this either. I’ve been arguing this on this site for months. I have no idea why fans want to get rid of Edwards — especially after what happened to Stallworth, that would leave us with NO good, experienced wide recievers. Do people really think we’re going to have a successful offense with Cribbs, Steptoe, Hubbard and a couple of rookies at WR?!?
by Buckeye Brad on Mar 23, 2009 1:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Look, I agree with everyone about Edwards talent. I think he is incredible and outside of Cribbs is probably my favorite player on the Browns.
BUT. There is a reason to potentially trade him. We have been over this. If he indicates to Mangini and Kokinis that he has no intention of signing an extension or being a part of the future of this organization, then it makes sense for them to trade him. I think it’s evident that these conversations have taken place and Mangini wants to make sure that Braylon buys into the path the team will be taking going forward
by Roger Dorn on Mar 23, 2009 2:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with what you’re saying. I don’t agree with people thinking we need to trade Braylon because he had a bad year last year or because they think he’s a bad character. Trading him now would leave us with almost nothing at reciever, as I said above. You can argue about how much talent you need at reciever, but I don’t think you can say you don’t need any talented, experienced recievers. The only way I would trade Braylon is if I got an experienced reciever in return AND a first round pick. Then we could pick Crabtree and still have good wideouts to throw the ball to.
by Buckeye Brad on Mar 23, 2009 2:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed. I try to ignore idle speculation and reactionary commentary, and instead try and think about it how Mangini probably is going through this process. I can definitely see a scenario where Braylon indicates he doesn’t see his future on the Browns, and Mangini is forced to move on
by Roger Dorn on Mar 23, 2009 2:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
adding to that, i could also envision a scenario wherein mangini sees an opportunity to turn braylon into 2-3 meaningful picks/contributors, and decides that moving one receiver in favor of 2-3 “other” impact players is good math for the browns. for an org that needs 12,000 impact players (or picks) those are the types of deals you have to make (see: winslow for 2 picks).
by DontCallMeJoey on Mar 23, 2009 3:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the Winslow trade makes Braylon less tradeable to ManKok. They know they don’t have many playmakers left, and they would need to be relatively sure they can get guys who can catch the ball and make something happen if they trade Braylon.
He isn’t the best, most consistent guy, but you he is still dangerous and a defense still needs to know where he is.
Guys like Eddie Royal who were drafted in the 2nd made an impact as rookies because of the people around them. Royal had established pass catchers in Marshall and Scheffler to draw attention, with Pro Bowl QB Cutler throwing to him. DeSean Jackson had McNabb throwing it to him and Brian Westbrook to draw attention. If we give up Braylon, is Heiden or Rucker or Stallworth really going to be the guy to take attention away from everyone else? Would Crabtree do that immediately?
I guess what I am getting at is those 2-3 “impact players” would need to make an immense impact, and not only that, they would need to make it on offense and one of them would need to catch the ball.
I think the deal would have to be crazy good for us to give Braylon up now.
by rufio on Mar 23, 2009 4:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
it would have to be a VERY good deal, absolutely. but if ManKok calculates that they can make a VERY good deal, then i believe it gets done. and i think it would include some plan to address the WR position, as evidenced by the reported ask for Steve Smith in this rumored conversation with the giants.
my point is you need a lot of players on this team. braylon is a single chip that could potentially bring you a number of chips in return. i’m not actively advocating a trade.
by DontCallMeJoey on Mar 23, 2009 5:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rufio I agree 100%
"Have You heard of the Boom on Mizar 5?"
by Grockcubs on Mar 23, 2009 7:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
6,6,9,10,0 and 0.
Those are the Browns point totals in the last 6 games of the past season.
And we want to trade our best outside playmaker? Awesome. We need to be adding offensive talent, not trading it away.
by Bernie19Kosar on Mar 24, 2009 6:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You realize I agree with you in wanting to keep Edwards, right?
Also, weren’t we playing with Ken Dorsey and Gradkowski for the last 4 games of the year? That pretty much excuses every other offensive player for those four weeks.
by rufio on Mar 24, 2009 10:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes I do, I wasn’t trying to disagree, just add in my two cents if you will.
Just a quick trigger on the reply button.
by Bernie19Kosar on Mar 25, 2009 8:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Forgive my ignorance, but if we offered Braylon a franchise tag next year and he declined, what would happen to his FA status?
by joeee on Mar 23, 2009 2:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Braylon has no say in the application a franchise tag. If the Browns wanted to use it, he would be forced to either sign the 1 year deal or sit out the season
by Roger Dorn on Mar 23, 2009 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Doesn’t the franchise tag mean we have to pay him the average of the top 5 reciever salaries, though?
DISCLAIMER: I may be bitter.
by zempf on Mar 23, 2009 3:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, but the way things are working in free agency, if a receiver like Braylon is on the market, he will end up being the highest paid WR in history—he will make much more than the average of the top 5 WRs.
If we could sign him long term to a deal that made him the 3rd or 4th highest paid WR in football during next season—as he is proving that last year was a fluke by having a good year and not dropping so many balls—I would be really pleased.
by rufio on Mar 23, 2009 4:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
In addition, I don’t find it to be the end of the world paying a guy a high salary for only one year.
by Roger Dorn on Mar 23, 2009 4:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
assuming he is worth it, which I think Braylon is. If Braylon blows up this year, there is no chance we don’t use the tag on him
by Roger Dorn on Mar 23, 2009 4:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Do we have anyone else thats contract ends after this year. I think Brady’s and Derek’s do but im not sure
by BradyQuinnisBeast on Mar 23, 2009 4:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Anderson has 2 years left. I think Quinn has 2 or 3
by Roger Dorn on Mar 23, 2009 5:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No one who is going to command that kind of money
by rufio on Mar 23, 2009 7:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If 2010 is an uncapped year, Braylon Edwards will not be a UFA, but he will be a RFA. Letting the Browns match any offer that comes his way.
This is only if 2010 is uncapped. If this does happen, the Browns wouldn’t have to use a Tag on him until 2011. A long time away.
by Bernie19Kosar on Mar 24, 2009 6:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i hope that next year isnt capped. it wouldnt be fair to teams with more money
by BradyQuinnisBeast on Mar 24, 2009 7:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And another thing
I agree completely with us not needing to trade BE. Without him it doesn’t matter WHO the QB is he won’t have anyone to throw the ball to, as far as receivers go. And as contradictory as it may be the only way I see BE being traded is if the offer is too good to refuse. Don’t ask me because what constitutes an unrefuseable offer to Mankok is beyond me. But I would say a play maker and at worst a 2nd rnd pick.
by JDfromCLE on Mar 23, 2009 4:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
We’d have one of the worst offensive attacks in the history of football with that group of WRs.
by mgtbfb on Mar 24, 2009 9:38 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I Got it From......
the guy who called the OBR. Sorry if I put you in a bind chris but it’s public info on the web and I performed a service for the readers.
by vincefitz on Mar 23, 2009 3:19 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Heh, I wasn’t even aware you had posted anything. Once it goes out on other sources, it’s fine to post. I mean, I’m not saying it’s fine that other sources ripped the information, but if non-subscription services make it available, you can’t just completely ignore it.
No worries.
Dawgs By Nature - Find out why Pittsburgh still sucks.
by Chris Pokorny on Mar 23, 2009 3:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This just in
On Cleveland.com (PD website for those who don’t know) The Browns have/are in the process of signing Davis Patton to help fill the WR ranks. This, according to Konk, was done before the “Stallworth Incident” . Konk also went on to say that he did have talks with the Giants about BE and nothing came of it and he is happy that Edwards is with the team but that’s as far as it goes.
by JDfromCLE on Mar 23, 2009 5:01 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Here is the link to the report on Patten. Next time you mention a story from a website please provide a link so we can read it.
by Buckeye Brad on Mar 23, 2009 5:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for the link, Brad. But, man…reading those comments! Just proves that you don’t need to know much to post. (Yep, I’m living proof!)
by drjeo on Mar 23, 2009 9:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don’t read the comments at cleveland.com — that will only make you lose brain cells.
by Buckeye Brad on Mar 23, 2009 9:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’ve long suspected that the cleveland.com boards are actually some kind of sociological experiement.
Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win.
by BringBackKosar on Mar 24, 2009 3:50 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That gives us 3 midget receivers:
-Patten 5’10
-Steptoe 5’9
-Devale Ellis 5’11
by BradyQuinnisBeast on Mar 23, 2009 9:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
5’11" is not incredibly short for a WR. Plus, who cares about size if they have talent? Steve Smith (Panthers, not Giants) is pretty short…Wes Welker…
Steptoe’s problem isn’t that he is small, its that he just isn’t very good.
by rufio on Mar 23, 2009 11:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Trade BE to the Eagles: 2 reasons
they need to stop focusing in on the giants and start talking to the eagles. Here are the two reasons
1. The eagles are in great need of a no.1 receiver
1. The eagles have two draft picks in the first round
Think about this trade braylon to the eagles for one of their first round picks. We can take a more sound professional and not a head case in Crabtree and get a pick later that round to draft a real outside linebacker in Clay Matthews Jr. This guy would be excellent for McGienist spot and Kamerion Wimbley still has tons of potential. He is a pass rusher and teams just focused on him last year because Mel Tucker is the shittiest D Coord ever. WE NEVER BLITZED We rushed four the whole year. Rob Ryan has even said Kamerion has ton of potential and with a creative coordinator like him i’m sure more blitz packages will be implied to this horrible defense. Clay would perfect for that other weak side position (very fast and active not to mention good old pops was a great player here) and with bowens and D’Qwell holding the middle I think it would jumpstart the whole core backers. Not to mention CJ Mosely is going to be a sleeper. My roommate is a big jets fan and he watches all the games and the first thing I asked him when i heard of the new players is what he thought of them. he told me mosley is just a never stop player. He goes out proving a point which is players the browns need and Bowens just does his job and tackles (Andra Davis couldn’t do). With robaire and C-Will improving and making rodgers happy with more blitz packages our defense could be something. Our offense went to shit when BQ and DA went down and sad enough to admitt it our D kept us in some of those games with that ugly bend don’t break D.
I have been critizing Mangini for the winslow trade but he his headcase who never did his job as a TE and BE is another victim of this same mentality. HE’s getting rid of people who are about themsilves and not the team. Crabtree has that freak athletic abiltity not mention a very humble unlike braylon and hismodeling and huge head with NO HANDS
by cAVSkING23 on Mar 23, 2009 9:06 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
I think barton will play ahead of Bowens. Also, Yahoo has Bowens as an OLB are they wrong
by BradyQuinnisBeast on Mar 24, 2009 6:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bowens played primarily OLB for the Jets
by Roger Dorn on Mar 24, 2009 6:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
So our starting LBs as of now are Bowens and Wimbley with Hall as a backup
by BradyQuinnisBeast on Mar 24, 2009 7:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yea, I think you are looking at Bowens, Wimbley, Jackson, and Barton until we draft a LB in a month
by Roger Dorn on Mar 24, 2009 8:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldnt mind hall getting a few starts this year cuz i think he has great potential
by BradyQuinnisBeast on Mar 24, 2009 9:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I mean’t barton and what do you all think of matthews from usc
by cAVSkING23 on Mar 24, 2009 11:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hes good but cushing is faster, stronger, quicker, and more talented
by BradyQuinnisBeast on Mar 25, 2009 4:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
that would be inaccurate.
they’re different style players. matthews is actually much more fundamentally sound, and i’m pretty sure runs a faster 40.
by DontCallMeJoey on Mar 25, 2009 6:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
a 40 time isnt a real football speed. The most important part of it for most positions is the first 10 yards, where cushing was faster. Cushing also ran the fastest cone drill and did the most bench press reps at the combine.
by BradyQuinnisBeast on Mar 25, 2009 6:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
show me something that says that cushing runs a faster 10 than matthews, and we can talk. matthews runs a faster 40 time, ergo, matthews is faster. let’s dispense with the parsing of each 10 yards.
but they’re different players. matthews does everything well, cushing is less versatile, but excellent on the strongside. cushing may be stronger and quicker, but i think it’s hard to say he’s clearly more talented.
by DontCallMeJoey on Mar 25, 2009 7:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would disagree that Cushing isn’t more versatile. Remember Cushing played Safety, OLB, ILB, and DE at USC.
He is as legit as it gets.
by Bernie19Kosar on Mar 25, 2009 8:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The bench press is about as useful in determining a player’s functional strength as the 40 is in determining a player’s functional speed—especially when you are talking about doing a 20+RM and not a 1RM or at least less than 12RM.
by rufio on Mar 26, 2009 12:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
brady quin is way over rated
we need to trade your boy and make the browns a strong football team
by derekandersonistheman on Apr 1, 2009 6:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Id be all for Edwards for a 2, 5 and Smith
Abso-friggin-lutely. That would actually be my favorite offseason move this season if we didn’t squander the draft picks.
im not impressed with your performance
by troy145 on Mar 25, 2009 12:34 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
No way, Edwards is much more valuable than that. Two years ago he was one of the best WR in the NFL, and there’s no reason he can’t do that again next year. I don’t know why fans are so willing to get rid of him. We need MORE recievers on this team, not less.
by Buckeye Brad on Mar 25, 2009 8:47 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree, BE for a 2,5, and Smith would be a great deal for the Browns. You see, Smith actually catches the ball (a catch rate of 70%).
by Cols714 on Mar 25, 2009 2:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Any way you spin it, trading Edwards would mean trading a player who has proven that he can be pro-bowl caliber for someone that you just hope can hit that level. That is partly mitigated by the number of draft choices received, but only partially. You’ve still weakened the team at wide receiver, already a weak spot. I just can’t see the logic of that move.
by drjeo on Mar 25, 2009 3:25 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Derek Anderson proved he is probowl caliber
Should we refuse to trade him away as well? Especially if offered two draft picks and a guy who is already very good and with tons of potential
im not impressed with your performance
by troy145 on Mar 25, 2009 7:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
if we’re offered 2 draft picks and a good (i won’t give you “very good” for steve smith) player for derek anderson then we should take it and sprint in the other direction.
you offer a false comparison, though. our replacement level for edwards is steptoe…our replacement level for anderson is quinn, whom everyone agrees has the ability to at least be a serviceable starter in the nfl.
by DontCallMeJoey on Mar 25, 2009 7:50 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Agreed with the QB situation. It looks like we have 2, you can really only play 1 at a time, ergo we can afford to trade one. We have 1 WR when Braylon is catching the ball, and even if we had more you can effectively use many at a time. Getting rid of Braylon leaves us with less than getting rid of DA.
Also, Steve Smith is not “very” good. Steve Smith of the Panthers is very good. Steve Smith of the Giants is “good” (as you allow), “capable”, or “solid”.
by rufio on Mar 26, 2009 12:34 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
this deal is lunacy. considering edwards’ high ceiling, as well as the browns’ dire straits at WR, it would take a substantially more enticing offer to make dealing edwards a good move. steve smith doesn’t do it.
by DontCallMeJoey on Mar 25, 2009 4:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Smith doesn’t average 10 YPC for his career. Sounds like he is “catching” A LOT of screens.
by Bernie19Kosar on Mar 25, 2009 8:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, there are many more important stats than catch rate. Focusing on only one stat leads to poor analysis.
by Buckeye Brad on Mar 25, 2009 8:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Especially in football.
Bill Simmons had a pretty good article on the crazy new Basketball stats they are coming up with. If hoops still doesn’t have the kinds of stats to fully evaluate what a player does, Football is very, very far away.
by rufio on Mar 26, 2009 12:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, that was a really good article (and not what you’d expect from Simmons). Both football and basketball are along way from baseball in terms of statistical analysis because athletes in those two sports are much more dependent on teammates than baseball players, so it’s much more diffucult to isolate a player’s individual production. It’s very easy in baseball because it’s mostly pitcher v. hitter.
by Buckeye Brad on Mar 26, 2009 9:49 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Michael Lewis did a much better job, and had the same lead character.
but that was pulitzer-quality compared to simmons’ other drivel.
by DontCallMeJoey on Mar 26, 2009 12:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right, you can’t compare Bill Simmons to Michael Lewis.
I did find it funny that a few years ago I remember Simmons making fun of all the “stat geeks” with their VORP and OPS+ and now he says he’s all on board with the statistical revolution.
by Buckeye Brad on Mar 26, 2009 12:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
what if philadelphia offered the #21 & #28 pick for braylon edwards?
by sleepy042 on Mar 26, 2009 9:27 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I highly doubt Philly would offer two first round picks for Braylon, but if they did I’d have to jump at that offer. As much as I don’t want to trade Braylon because of what it would do to our recieving corps, the Browns couldn’t pass up the chance to get to first rounders for him. But I don’t think Philly would do that.
The only way I’d trade Braylon is if I got a first round pick AND a productive reciever in return. Then we could draft Crabtree and still have a decent receiving corps.
by Buckeye Brad on Mar 26, 2009 9:53 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
there’s nothing to even think about. done and done.
by DontCallMeJoey on Mar 26, 2009 12:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here is the thing I don’t get about the draft charts. According to the draft charts, pick 21 and 28 combined are worth less than pick 5. The Browns therefore would not trade pick 5 for both pick 21 and 28.
Are we then saying that Braylon Edwards is less valuable than the 5th pick in the draft? The only way this could possibly be rationale is that Braylon’s contract only has one more year on it, but that neglects the potential use of franchise tag or extension. In my min, Braylon is way more valuable than pick number 5
by Roger Dorn on Mar 26, 2009 12:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I certainly agree with that last sentence. And, yeah, I don’t get the draft charts either.
by Buckeye Brad on Mar 26, 2009 12:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i agree that braylon for the 5 is a no do…but my question for you, separate from the draft charts, is would you do braylon for the 21 and 28? b/c i would, which means i’m with you guys on scratching my head on the draft charts.
by DontCallMeJoey on Mar 26, 2009 3:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’d trade Braylon if it was clear he didn’t want his future to be with the Browns
by Roger Dorn on Mar 27, 2009 12:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have been against trading away our players for draft picks.
But two first rounders for BE would be a deal.
Take Crabtree and grab Beanie and Cushing with the other two.
But I don’t see any way the Iggles make that deal.
by Bernie19Kosar on Mar 26, 2009 3:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
need a quarterback
trade that pansy brady quin to anyone for anything hes not a starter
by derekandersonistheman on Apr 1, 2009 6:26 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
what we need
we need o line frist off the add some weapons for derek anderson we need to get him a back up and a few good dbs and the browns will be playoff ready
by derekandersonistheman on Apr 1, 2009 6:45 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
no
should of traded DA at the start of last year when we might of got something for him then laughed at the team that got him. we have an o-line and decent backs. we need d-line and lbs to get more pressure on pass so backs dont have to cover for so long. also they need to offer joe 2x the money and a formal apology to get him back.
by charliefryfanhaha on Apr 8, 2009 5:45 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Non-stop coverage of the team with the best fans in the NFL, the Cleveland Browns.
Related FanPosts on Dawgs By Nature
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Follow DBN on Twitter
Browns Links
Browns News/Information
Pro Football Critics
Official Browns Site
Orange and Brown Blogs
Orange and Brown Report
Cleveland Plain Dealer
Akron Beacon Journal
Browns Communities
The Watercooler
Dawg Talkers
Dawg Bones
The Browns Board
Waiting for Next Year
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
