Statistics and Needs

[YtownBacker]

Why is it that when some of these draft analysts agree with you they are astute or geniou and when they disagree with your opinion they are idiots?

Sometimes it's the same people within a week that go from genius to idiot.

BTW your quote of what Brooks said came right before 3 out of the 4 analysts said the Browns should pick Peterson. Sometimes you got to tell the whole story and not just cherry pick quotes.

[Brown Warrior]

Y, honestly... I was being cheeky. I've never thought Grossi was a genius. It wouldn't be a fun debate if nobody agreed with the other side. I just think anybody who believes back to back top 10 corners is a good idea is absolutely nuts and not doing his homework. That part I'm serious about.

It is interesting that a lot of people will act all bold and say Peterson to the Browns could happen, but not many people are really willing to mock him there. He's about 40-1 going to SF in mocks.

[Brown Warrior]

BTW... more fun with stats.

First, teams ran a lot on the Browns. They didn't do it all that well (Browns were 12th in YPC, 8th on the day Fujita went down)... but they did it a lot. The most logical answer is that because the Browns were the lowest scoring team in football, nobody was playing from way behind against us... and they also got the ball a lot.

Did the proliferation of running plays lead to a lot of points against the Browns, though? No. The Browns had a good scoring defense (12th)... which supports the spreading notion that long drives are littered with minefields. Top running teams are NOT top scoring teams and are more likely to be out of the playoffs than in. Meanwhile, top PASSING teams are the top scoring teams and far more likely to be in the playoffs.

[YtownBacker]

Originally Posted by Brown Warrior

Y, honestly... I was being cheeky. I've never thought Grossi was a genius. It wouldn't be a fun debate if nobody agreed with the other side. I just think anybody who believes back to back top 10 corners is a good idea is absolutely nuts and not doing his homework. That part I'm serious about.

It is interesting that a lot of people will act all bold and say Peterson to the Browns could happen, but not many people are really willing to mock him there. He's about 40-1 going to SF in mocks.

I see Peterson getting a lot of love for Cleveland lately on NFLN and other mocks. That said, they have San Fran taking Prince and some teams behind them maybe with an itch to move up because the cupboard is pretty bare after those two.

Might be right up there with the rumors that Heckert thinks he can find a WR later in the draft.

You got to believe most of what you hear until April 28th is smoke and mirrors. Hell, Cleveland is supposedly one of the teams saying that they believe that Bowers's knee is fine as indicated by the combine medical recheck and teams that have had him medically checked out. I don't even know if he's been to Cleveland yet, so point is you believe what you want and you keep quoting the guys you think have got it right.

[Brown Warrior]

I don't see Kiper, Mayock, McShay, or the PFT guy taking Peterson for Cleveland. On Mock Draft Cruncher or whatever, he's the runaway at #7 to SF. I get that it's a provocative thing to bring up, the Browns taking back to back top 10 corners... but it's beyond goofy as a real notion.

It just can't be rationalized based on much of anything that's going on in the league. Really, the Bengals are the only real precedent unless you decide it's a Revere Millen. You'd take less shit for back to back DL or OL, frankly... but nobody says you build your team around WRs or corners.

If you take ONE high, there will still be plenty of purists saying that's not the right thing to do. But at least you can say it's your #1 WR or your #1 corner.

There's just nothing available to defend doing it again unless the first guy was jailed for five years or something.

Originally Posted by YtownBacker

I see Peterson getting a lot of love for Cleveland lately on NFLN and other mocks. That said, they have San Fran taking Prince and some teams behind them maybe with an itch to move up because the cupboard is pretty bare after those two.

Might be right up there with the rumors that Heckert thinks he can find a WR later in the draft.

You got to believe most of what you hear until April 28th is smoke and mirrors. Hell, Cleveland is supposedly one of the teams saying that they believe that Bowers's knee is fine as indicated by the combine medical recheck and teams that have had him medically checked out. I don't even know if he's been to Cleveland yet, so point is you believe what you want and you keep quoting the guys you think have got it right.

[Brown Warrior]

Speaking of trends... while there is no trend toward building a team around corners or WRs, there is a trend toward interior lineman on both sides of the ball, which is very interesting. It's always been QB, OT, and DE, but now DTs and guards are getting some love. But no... not building a team around corners (!).

This is a really nice round-up from Pompei in general. Predictably, teams LOVE Gabbert's smarts and understanding of the intricacies of both offenses and defenses, and more and more, they're getting what matters most in a QB (hint: it fits between his ears).

Then, somewhat related to the above, he lists guys who are ready now to produce in the NFL and says Jones might be more ready than Green... and, of course, Ponder has that in spades. Amukamara makes the list but not Peterson.

NFP Sunday Blitz | National Football Post

[Sez.EJ]

My no brainer approach to the Browns: We need to rush the pass better. stop the run better, stop the pass better ,we need to throw the ball better and score more points. any questions?

Point being ..we pretty much suck all over the place and need playmakers at NEARLY every spot on the field. We draft BPA while also keeping our biggest needs in mind.

[Brown Warrior]

Sure, Sez, but that's not a blueprint. It just says "pure BPA," and that's not a fantastic idea. Plus, nobody really knows who the "BPA" is within the top 10. So many other factors come into play, positional value being only one but scheme being another.

The truth is that we ranked 8th in interceptions and 25th in sacks. The combination made us 17th in pass defense, which is pretty damn close to smack-dab in the middle. It certainly suggests that we could move the dial more dramatically by having an actual pass rush than by drafting more corners early on.

Drafting Haden moved us from 5-11 to 5-11. Maybe drafting Peterson can do the same? Or maybe we wake up and realize we need to pass the ball better in a passing league, move up from 32nd in points scored, and rush the passer?

Just sayin'.

[Bronx Cheer]

Originally Posted by slowmo411

So how bout PP at #6 (cause Im not sold on any DL except Dareous that high) and a pass rusher or 2 in rounds 2-4 if they are BPA at a position of need of course.

I hope that smiley means you are joking! Let's take a guy to shut down the other team's no. 2 receiver, but not give our QB one guy worthy of being a starting NFL receiver. OK

[slowmo411]

Im only slightly joking Bronx. I really believe in going BPA at any position of need and we do need a corner. We can not fix the whole team in this draft.

[Bronx Cheer]

Know how to improve total rushing yards given up by your defense? Posses the ball. Do something other than 3 and out. Score so the other team isn't going to run the ball every play. If you have a good scoring team, the other team is going to have to pass against you more often.

Teams ran against us not because it helped them score. They ran against us because WE couldn't score and once they got ahead by two scores via a big pass play or two they were quite comfortable taking 5 minutes off of the clock and punting the ball back to inept offense every series.

[slowmo411]

I agree Bronx but I still feel it is ALWAYS best to go BPA instead of reaching to fill needs. When I say BPA im talking on Heckerts big board, So obviously Im not saying we should take a LT or SS or C at #6.