mock draft thread 2017

[Hambombs]

According to the last update, we took McCaffery at 17, so taking Mixon would be over kill... Just saying

Oh I didn't know we took mcaffrey

 

[Ritzarmy]

Oh I didn't know we took mcaffrey

Round 1
1. Cleveland Browns : Myles Garrett - DE - Texas A&M
2. San Francisco 49ers : Leonard Fournette - RB - LSU
3. Chicago Bears : Solomon Thomas - DE - Stanford
4. Jacksonville Jaguars : Derek Barnett - DE - Tennessee
5. Tennessee Titans : Jamal Adams - SS - LSU
6. New York Jets : Marshon Lattimore - CB - Ohio St.
7. Los Angeles Chargers : Malik Hooker - FS - Ohio St.
8. Carolina Panthers : Mike Williams - WR - Clemson
9. Cincinnati Bengals : O.J. Howard - TE - Alabama
10. Buffalo Bills : Corey Davis - WR - Western Michigan
11. New Orleans Saints : Reuben Foster - ILB - Alabama
12. Cleveland Browns : Mitch Trubisky - QB - North Carolina
13. Arizona Cardinals : Jonathan Allen - DT - Alabama
14. Philadelphia Eagles : Dalvin Cook - RB - Florida St.
15. Indianapolis Colts : Marlon Humphrey - CB - Alabama
16. Baltimore Ravens : John Ross - WR - Washington
17. Washington Redskins : Christian McCaffrey - RB - Stanford
18. Tennessee Titans : Gareon Conley - CB - Ohio St.
19. Tampa Bay Buccaneers
20. Denver Broncos
21. Detroit Lions
22. Miami Dolphins
23. New York Giants
24. Oakland Raiders
25. Houston Texans
26. Seattle Seahawks
27. Kansas City Chiefs
28. Dallas Cowboys
29. Green Bay Packers
30. Pittsburgh Steelers
31. Atlanta Falcons
32. New Orleans Saints

 

[Ritzarmy]

Then we have a deal in place for Browns 2nd rounder. What is everyone's 3-4 DE you like?

 

[Sharkinva]

Then we have a deal in place for Browns 2nd rounder. What is everyone's 3-4 DE you like?

I would still go with McDowell or Wormly if there. Possibly Brantly if both are gone.

 

[kbso83432]

The guy I really like and think could be a major steal for someone is Tim Williams from Alabama, but from all acounts, that guy is a broke stove. Don't think we should go OLB till 3rd or 4th though.

 

[Hambombs]

The guy I really like and think could be a major steal for someone is Tim Williams from Alabama, but from all acounts, that guy is a broke stove. Don't think we should go OLB till 3rd or 4th though.

He's very talented as well

 

[skinsdad62]

Richardson went to a Browns team that was completely devoid of talent. As we have seen quite clearly in DC... drafting a player to be the savior almost never works. Had Richardson gone to an offense like ours, or Philly's a few years back... or even Dallas... Ithink he would have done much better. Now I do agree you dont take a RB in the top five for the most part. BUt at 17, a guy with Richardsons skill set coming out, going to an offense that really only lacks a RB and a LG..... could do alot of good .

He did nothing when he was anywhere else

 

[skinsdad62]

I think wormley is gold at 33 then Tomlinson at NT in round 3

 

[Ruzious]

Yea I like that. I reallly like Charlton, Reddick, or McDowell there.

Yeah, sounds like you can steal someone there - and those are the 3 I'd probably target the most.

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

Richardson went to a Browns team that was completely devoid of talent. As we have seen quite clearly in DC... drafting a player to be the savior almost never works. Had Richardson gone to an offense like ours, or Philly's a few years back... or even Dallas... Ithink he would have done much better. Now I do agree you dont take a RB in the top five for the most part. BUt at 17, a guy with Richardsons skill set coming out, going to an offense that really only lacks a RB and a LG..... could do alot of good .

I saw Dad's response and had to go back and look for myself. Are you claiming Trent Richardson's lack of production was based solely on him playing for the Browns? They how can you explain his flame out on a more dynamic offenses in Indy and the Raiders? No there is no excuse, he was a bust. It happens.

 

[Sharkinva]

I saw Dad's response and had to go back and look for myself. Are you claiming Trent Richardson's lack of production was based solely on him playing for the Browns? They how can you explain his flame out on a more dynamic offenses in Indy and the Raiders? No there is no excuse, he was a bust. It happens.

True, Richardson was a flame out and a bust. I do contend though that certain teams are a death sentence for a career. But saying Richardson is the prime example of why we should NEVER take a QB in the 1st round period, is about as good a reason as saying Tom Brady and Tony Romo are prime examples of why you never draft a QB before the 6th round.

The first round pick SHOULD be used on a player that has a realistic chance of changing the dynamic of the team. I just think that some posters are forcing the defensive pick no matter who is there.

I would agree that RB would not be on the table IF we didnt need a better RB than what we have, and I would be rather disappointed if we took say McDowell at 17 if Cook and McCaffery were still on the board.

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

True, Richardson was a flame out and a bust. I do contend though that certain teams are a death sentence for a career. But saying Richardson is the prime example of why we should NEVER take a QB in the 1st round period, is about as good a reason as saying Tom Brady and Tony Romo are prime examples of why you never draft a QB before the 6th round.

The first round pick SHOULD be used on a player that has a realistic chance of changing the dynamic of the team. I just think that some posters are forcing the defensive pick no matter who is there.

I would agree that RB would not be on the table IF we didnt need a better RB than what we have, and I would be rather disappointed if we took say McDowell at 17 if Cook and McCaffery were still on the board.

I agree with you, every position has busts in the first round. Some, like guards, have a low bust rate but it happens. But the argument that you can find a great RB later in the draft has some merit, just as you can find great players at other positions in the later rounds. So I'm not opposed to a RB at one, unfortunately it is still a big need (damn Alf sure would look good right about now). I'm just not a fan of the Stanford kid that early

 

[Sharkinva]

I agree with you, every position has busts in the first round. Some, like guards, have a low bust rate but it happens. But the argument that you can find a great RB later in the draft has some merit, just as you can find great players at other positions in the later rounds. So I'm not opposed to a RB at one, unfortunately it is still a big need (damn Alf sure would look good right about now). I'm just not a fan of the Stanford kid that early

The Stanford kid has started to grow on me, especially as a fit in our offense. IF we took him or Cook at 17, I would be pleased with it. But as I expect Cook to be gone before we pick, IM fine with a defensive player depending on who is there. Im not a fan of taking a Peppers or McDowell simply for the fact of going with the idea that we have got to take a defensive player at 17. And that does seem to be the prevailing line of thought on the matter in alot of cases.

 

[ehb5]

True, Richardson was a flame out and a bust. I do contend though that certain teams are a death sentence for a career. But saying Richardson is the prime example of why we should NEVER take a QB in the 1st round period, is about as good a reason as saying Tom Brady and Tony Romo are prime examples of why you never draft a QB before the 6th round.

The first round pick SHOULD be used on a player that has a realistic chance of changing the dynamic of the team. I just think that some posters are forcing the defensive pick no matter who is there.

I would agree that RB would not be on the table IF we didnt need a better RB than what we have, and I would be rather disappointed if we took say McDowell at 17 if Cook and McCaffery were still on the board.

Your first paragraph is the whole reason I brought up Richardson. I was poking fun at you saying Matt Jones was all you had to say about taking a RB with a later pick. Obviously you can't dismiss either strategy with one anecdotal example.

 

[Sharkinva]

Your first paragraph is the whole reason I brought up Richardson. I was poking fun at you saying Matt Jones was all you had to say about taking a RB with a later pick. Obviously you can't dismiss either strategy with one anecdotal example.

I mentioned Jones because he more than any one points out the flaw in the concept that we can easily find a more than serviceable RB later in the draft. We have been trying that approach for years, and we have passed on some of the more talented backs, generally because we picked for need over talent when some of these backs were available to us. We do need a better quality of RB, and we might actually be in a position to get that at 17, so yea I would be a bit perturbed if we passed on the RB out of some sense that we just have to upgrade the defense, or some concept that we are OK at RB.

 

[skinz2winz]

I would still go with McDowell or Wormly if there. Possibly Brantly if both are gone.

I would have to say as much as McDowell would be a steal there, I might be enticed to go Reddick since Brown is on a one year deal and both spots could use an upgrade. Hopefully we can upgrade DL in the 3rd.

 

[Sharkinva]

I would have to say as much as McDowell would be a steal there, I might be enticed to go Reddick since Brown is on a one year deal and both spots could use an upgrade. Hopefully we can upgrade DL in the 3rd.

If Reddick is still there at 33, I would be entitled ot agree with you. But IM assuming he doesn't last that long.

 

[ehb5]

I mentioned Jones because he more than any one points out the flaw in the concept that we can easily find a more than serviceable RB later in the draft. We have been trying that approach for years, and we have passed on some of the more talented backs, generally because we picked for need over talent when some of these backs were available to us. We do need a better quality of RB, and we might actually be in a position to get that at 17, so yea I would be a bit perturbed if we passed on the RB out of some sense that we just have to upgrade the defense, or some concept that we are OK at RB.

I get that but it's 1 anecdotal piece of evidence. It's no more predictive or informative than my tent Richardson comment. Reality is, a ton of successful RBs come from later picks and very few if any first round RBs end up being worth the pick.

 

[Sharkinva]

I get that but it's 1 anecdotal piece of evidence. It's no more predictive or informative than my tent Richardson comment. Reality is, a ton of successful RBs come from later picks and very few if any first round RBs end up being worth the pick.

To me, Matt Jones is just the latest in a long line of guys we drafted at the position thinking we could get by with them. We have either drafted guys who would make ok to good pieces as change of pace backs, or parts in a RB by committee setup. I have made no secret I want a set the pace RB. And if the mock board are correct, we might actually have a shot at one of those.

 

[Ritzarmy]

I would still go with McDowell or Wormly if there. Possibly Brantly if both are gone.

8 picks till Browns #33. Taco Charlton still available or still go McDowell or Wormley