The Rumor Mill

[Jaybirds]

9 minutes ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

That's not building your draft off of a 3rd round player though. All you can do is set up your board and take your guy when your pick is up, we need an ILB but it's not like it will cripple the team if we don't address it. In a 34 ILBs are an easily masked deficiency, especially when only one is weak. I'm saying that ragland isn't worth it anywhere in the first for us because he doesn't fit anywhere on this team in a place where he brings a big upgrade

Good point.  I think of our picks as being more integrated than they are, because doing a mock draft nobody is off the board yet.  That changes in real life.  So I wouldn't mock VH3 in the first AND Alexander or Jackson in the 2nd (well, maybe. but not too seriously).  If I'm always going to mock Brothers to us in the 3rd, then I'm not mocking Jack in the first.  Hope that explains what I meant.  But you're right, no draft works that way in reality. 

I would say Ragland is an upgrade over Orr.  Not saying we can't start with Orr.  But that might count as a big upgrade.  Just not the biggest we could make.  That's probably Bosa/Guy. 

[Jaybirds]

14 minutes ago, RaineV1 said:

At this point it wouldn't shock me too much if the Browns pick up RG3, and then use their second round pick on a QB (Lynch, Cook, or whoever). Though this would obviously be a bad thing for the Ravens since they can prevent one of the top people from falling to us (Ramsey, Buckner, Jack, or Bosa).

If Wentz and Goff are both there for us at 6, our phone will be ringing.  That's probably best-case scenario for getting value in a trade back. 

[Edgar]

13 minutes ago, RaineV1 said:

At this point it wouldn't shock me too much if the Browns pick up RG3, and then use their second round pick on a QB (Lynch, Cook, or whoever). Though this would obviously be a bad thing for the Ravens since they can prevent one of the top people from falling to us (Ramsey, Buckner, Jack, or Bosa).

I still think Kelly,LA,Chicago, Philly would at that point go all in on getting Wentz

[Edgar]

6 minutes ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

I wouldn't mind. I kinda prefer vh3 to buckner and if buck goes before our pick then I think we take vh3 OR surprise folks and take lawson, I'd prefer either to buckner personally, but by a slim margin.

I've changed my opinion on Buckner. Always liked him but I now really see him as one of the six best players in this draft. Given choice between the three you mentioned I have to take Buckner.

[JoeyFlex5]

12 minutes ago, Jaybirds said:

Good point.  I think of our picks as being more integrated than they are, because doing a mock draft nobody is off the board yet.  That changes in real life.  So I wouldn't mock VH3 in the first AND Alexander or Jackson in the 2nd (well, maybe. but not too seriously).  If I'm always going to mock Brothers to us in the 3rd, then I'm not mocking Jack in the first.  Hope that explains what I meant.  But you're right, no draft works that way in reality. 

I would say Ragland is an upgrade over Orr.  Not saying we can't start with Orr.  But that might count as a big upgrade.  Just not the biggest we could make.  That's probably Bosa/Guy. 

It's an upgrade for sure but it's also taking a serviceable coverage LB our for a guy who very well could be even more of a liability in coverage than mosley, so is it really and upgrade? Its quite literally just adding another slow thumper which I don't think does anything to help us, even if he's an upgrade over our current option.

[Jaybirds]

3 minutes ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

It's an upgrade for sure but it's also taking a serviceable coverage LB our for a guy who very well could be even more of a liability in coverage than mosley, so is it really and upgrade? Its quite literally just adding another slow thumper which I don't think does anything to help us, even if he's an upgrade over our current option.

Like I said earlier, a lot of sites are saying Ragland is ready for zone coverage.  So it might not be that much of a change from Orr's small sample size.  I honestly don't know myself.  I'm trying to guess at what our front office may think.  Of all the teams picking as high as us, we seem to be spending the most time scouting the guy.  I know you don't like him, but I'm trying to figure out why we seem to, and how much. 

But this is our 2nd or 3rd Ragland debate.  We don't agree; time to move on. 

Edited March 21, 2016 by Jaybirds

[Ravens4Real]

41 minutes ago, trevorsteadman said:

If the Browns are putting all their chips on RG3 they will be at the bottom of the NFL for another 10 years at least. RG3 will be competing for a starting job I wouldn't be suprised if they still draft a quarterback to compete with each other. 

 

Ditto I would still be happy with Hargreaves who I think has the potential to be a safety and a cornerback. I am not afraid of his size with what tape he has shown. He is physical for his size. I also wouldn't be surprised if they take a quarterback at #4. They said they would take Johnny Manziel a couple years ago and passed on him. Maybe them saying they won't go quarterback is a smokescreen so another team doesn't leap frog in front of them. I also feel this way about the Eagles. They paid high for Bradford so he wouldn't leave but I could see them taking a quarterback as well because I still feel they have uncertainty around that position.

It will end up much worse for the Browns if they continue to take QB's at the top of the draft and those end up being busts. They should have learned this fact already. None of the QB's this year belong in the top 15 picks. QB's are always over valued.

It would be better to get a stop gap QB and take a guy like Ramsey/Bosa/Jack than spend another high pic on a QB and miss. Hue Jackson is not an idiot and I believe he will pressure them into taking the actual smart road and taking a player who is actually worthy of a second pic.

Edited March 21, 2016 by Ravens4Real

[JoeyFlex5]

10 minutes ago, Edgar said:

I've changed my opinion on Buckner. Always liked him but I now really see him as one of the six best players in this draft. Given choice between the three you mentioned I have to take Buckner.

And I wouldn't argue against that. On a pure talent board id have buckner 5th after tunsil jack ramsey and bosa. And he's the transition guy between the first and 2nd tier of players, meaning I have him in a tier of his own between bosa and vh3, his ceiling and floor keeps him from being in tier 2 but the solid chance that he doesn't hit his ceiling keeps him out of tier 1.

 

On the ravens board, while I think a 3 and 5 tech hybrid is a very underrated need, I am just so sick of seeing our corners get torched and seeing a lack of playmaking in the secondary. I will absolutely reach on a guy like vh3 because I just love his skill set, such a polished player and so fluid and explosive and skilled. He's simply the cleanest college corner I've ever seen and it's not close. Buckner could be an inconsistent player at the next level if he doesn't really work on his pad level and could really disappear against maulers, so I would only take him over vh3 for the ravens if he was a spotless prospect, which he isn't. I DO like buckner a lot though and wouldn't mind not one bit if we took him over vh3.

[Ravens4Real]

2 minutes ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

And I wouldn't argue against that. On a pure talent board id have buckner 5th after tunsil jack ramsey and bosa. And he's the transition guy between the first and 2nd tier of players, meaning I have him in a tier of his own between bosa and vh3, his ceiling and floor keeps him from being in tier 2 but the solid chance that he doesn't hit his ceiling keeps him out of tier 1.

 

On the ravens board, while I think a 3 and 5 tech hybrid is a very underrated need, I am just so sick of seeing our corners get torched and seeing a lack of playmaking in the secondary. I will absolutely reach on a guy like vh3 because I just love his skill set, such a polished player and so fluid and explosive and skilled. He's simply the cleanest college corner I've ever seen and it's not close. Buckner could be an inconsistent player at the next level if he doesn't really work on his pad level and could really disappear against maulers, so I would only take him over vh3 for the ravens if he was a spotless prospect, which he isn't. I DO like buckner a lot though and wouldn't mind not one bit if we took him over vh3.

I really disagree with your opinion on VH3. There's no way he is the cleanest college CB prospect. He was absolutely torched multiple times in their bowl game against Michigan. Will face much tougher QB's and WR's in the NFL. I do not like VH3 at 6.

Jimmy was a much better football player than VH3 coming out. Personal reasons caused him too drop. VH3 wasn't even the best CB on his own team last year.

[JoeyFlex5]

17 minutes ago, Jaybirds said:

Like I said earlier, a lot of sites are saying Ragland is ready for zone coverage.  So it might not be that much of a change from Orr's small sample size.  I honestly don't know myself.  I'm trying to guess at what our front office may think.  Of all the teams picking as high as us, we seem to be spending the most time scouting the guy.  I know you don't like him, but I'm trying to figure out why we seem to, and how much. 

But this is our 2nd or 3rd Ragland debate.  We don't agree; time to move on. 

So you like ragland 6th overall?

[Jaybirds]

4 minutes ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

So you like ragland 6th overall?

You're not hearing me. 

The Ravens are spending a lot of time on Ragland.  They seem to be spending more time on him than anyone picking around us.  I'm trying to figure out why.  He's not just a trade back target because he seems too redundant to Mosley.  So either they disagree with that problem, or this is the biggest smoke screen in a long long time.  It seems pretty clear the Ravens have him ranked that high.  They're not being subtle. So I'm way past "will they or won't they".  I'm asking why would they? 

Edited March 21, 2016 by Jaybirds

[Tru11]

2 minutes ago, Jaybirds said:

You're not hearing me. 

The Ravens are spending a lot of time on Ragland.  They seem to be spending more time on him than anyone picking around us.  I'm trying to figure out why.  He's not just a trade back target because he seems too redundant to Mosley.  So either they disagree with that problem, or this is the biggest smoke screen in a long long time.  It seems pretty clear the Ravens have him ranked that high.  They're not being subtle. So I'm way past "will they or won't they".  I'm asking why would they? 

because they can?

maybe he has more question marks then others in which they need more time to figure out his worth.

personally if they spend a lot of time on a player then its a red flag.

[rmw10]

Visits hardly matter in regards to getting a feel for who we're interested in. We've drafted guys we've met with 83.5 times and we've also drafted guys we never met with. 

[Jaybirds]

Just now, Tru11 said:

because they can?

maybe he has more question marks then others in which they need more time to figure out his worth.

personally if they spend a lot of time on a player then its a red flag.

I'm not convinced we have red flags on every single one of the guys we're bringing in.  I do see your point, that maybe there's more we want to know.  But if we're trying to turn a "maybe" into a clear "yes" or "no", then we're still considering him even though we already have Mosley.  So I still think there's more to it than just that.  We have every reason not to look twice:  not a need position, and there's better guys out there.  But we ARE, clearly, so they disagree with all of us about something. 

In other words, we wouldn't be doing this.  So why are they? 

[ludy51]

Can somebody explain to me why DeForrest Buckner is so popular around here? I haven't seen any tape so i'm genuinely curious

[JoeyFlex5]

25 minutes ago, Jaybirds said:

You're not hearing me. 

The Ravens are spending a lot of time on Ragland.  They seem to be spending more time on him than anyone picking around us.  I'm trying to figure out why.  He's not just a trade back target because he seems too redundant to Mosley.  So either they disagree with that problem, or this is the biggest smoke screen in a long long time.  It seems pretty clear the Ravens have him ranked that high.  They're not being subtle. So I'm way past "will they or won't they".  I'm asking why would they? 

Ok I was just trying to figure out if you were vouching for  him at 6 or if you we're speculating on the ravens interests. 

[Edgar]

36 minutes ago, Jaybirds said:

You're not hearing me. 

The Ravens are spending a lot of time on Ragland.  They seem to be spending more time on him than anyone picking around us.  I'm trying to figure out why.  He's not just a trade back target because he seems too redundant to Mosley.  So either they disagree with that problem, or this is the biggest smoke screen in a long long time.  It seems pretty clear the Ravens have him ranked that high.  They're not being subtle. So I'm way past "will they or won't they".  I'm asking why would they? 

Perhaps they like him enough that if he falls into late one they move up?

[trevorsteadman]

48 minutes ago, Ravens4Real said:

It will end up much worse for the Browns if they continue to take QB's at the top of the draft and those end up being busts. They should have learned this fact already. None of the QB's this year belong in the top 15 picks. QB's are always over valued.

It would be better to get a stop gap QB and take a guy like Ramsey/Bosa/Jack than spend another high pic on a QB and miss. Hue Jackson is not an idiot and I believe he will pressure them into taking the actual smart road and taking a player who is actually worthy of a second pic.

While I agree and I think it is best for them to go by BPA, the Cleveland Browns have been at the bottom for so long they are like the Raiders and Jaguars of a couple years ago. No players want to play in Cleveland unless they are getting overpaid. The way the Jaguars and Raiders both started getting out of that hole last year was with great quarterback draft picks. I think Cleveland needs to get a dynamic quarterback who can make plays or no one will want to play there. While I agree with the BPA... If you're a team that has been in that hole for so long with a front office like theirs you need a playmaker that can win you games to attract players there and the fastest way to do so is with a quarterback because they touch the ball every play.

[Jaybirds]

14 minutes ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

Ok I was just trying to figure out if you were vouching for  him at 6 or if you we're speculating on the ravens interests. 

Well... the latter if any.  But I don't think I have to speculate.  It seems pretty clear they're interested!  I'd like to know why. 

Okay, mental excercise. 
*  Tunsil, Ramsey, and Jack are surely in their top six. 
*  Let's pretend they don't like Bosa's character. 
*  Zeke is bad value that early unless you're Dallas. 
*  They're not fond of Buckner and Stanley.  Strange, but possible. 
*  Their grading system is fairly similar to NFL.com's. 

That is a ton of "what if", especially on Buckner.   But if ALL of that happens to be true, then their top six could maybe possibly be Tunsil, Ramsey, Jack, VH3, and two of Floyd, Robinson, and Ragland. 

If it were me:  I'd take VH3 all day, assuming Tunsil, Ramsey, and Jack won't make it to us. 
If I had to guess what they're thinking:  their 4-6 is some order of VH3, Floyd, and Ragland.  Maybe Buckner instead of Floyd.  Seems more likely. 

This is unlikely.  If I'm betting Ragland vs the field, I'm taking the field.  But this is the only thing that explains the time they're spending on this guy. 

Edit:  yeah, the more I think about it the more it seems to make sense.  If I had to guess, I'd say their top six is some order of Tunsil, Ramsey, Jack, VH3, Bosa, and Ragland.  Buckner might be ahead of one of those guys, but I don't think so. 

Edited March 21, 2016 by Jaybirds

[Jaybirds]

2 minutes ago, Edgar said:

Perhaps they like him enough that if he falls into late one they move up?

But that still disagrees with our consensus that he's too similar to Mosley that we don't start both of them. 

[trevorsteadman]

14 minutes ago, ludy51 said:

Can somebody explain to me why DeForrest Buckner is so popular around here? I haven't seen any tape so i'm genuinely curious

High ceiling defensive end who is a massive 6'7. He also played more snaps than any other defensive linemen I believe (maybe it was only defensive ends) than any other in college last year. His production didn't dip down at all and he showed great athleticism. Still a bit raw but physically gifted to play in the NFL. 

[trevorsteadman]

2 minutes ago, Jaybirds said:

Well... the latter if any.  But I don't think I have to speculate.  It seems pretty clear they're interested!  I'd like to know why. 

Okay, mental excercise. 
*  Tunsil, Ramsey, and Jack are surely in their top six. 
*  Let's pretend they don't like Bosa's character. 
*  Zeke is bad value that early unless you're Dallas. 
*  They're not fond of Buckner and Stanley.  Strange, but possible. 
*  Their grading system is fairly similar to NFL.com's. 

That is a ton of "what if", especially on Buckner.   But if ALL of that happens to be true, then their top six could maybe possibly be Tunsil, Ramsey, Jack, VH3, and two of Floyd, Robinson, and Ragland. 

If it were me:  I'd take VH3 all day, assuming Tunsil, Ramsey, and Jack won't make it to us. 
If I had to guess what they're thinking:  their 4-6 is some order of VH3, Floyd, and Ragland.  Maybe Buckner instead of Floyd.  Seems more likely. 

This is unlikely.  If I'm betting Ragland vs the field, I'm taking the field.  But this is the only thing that explains the time they're spending on this guy. 

I still think they are looking at Ragland in the 2nd round. That is why I also think they took a look at Alexander as well. 

[GrimCoconut]

Didn't teams work Ragland out at edge defender? Maybe we think he can play edge. I'm not big on the idea but I recall it floating around.

[Jaybirds]

1 minute ago, GrimCoconut said:

Didn't teams work Ragland out at edge defender? Maybe we think he can play edge. I'm not big on the idea but I recall it floating around.

I think Walter Football mentioned that he's lined up on the edge in some blitzes. 

[Jaybirds]

2 minutes ago, trevorsteadman said:

I still think they are looking at Ragland in the 2nd round. That is why I also think they took a look at Alexander as well. 

I'm not sure how he falls that far.  But even if he does, it still means the front office is comfortable starting him and Mosley together.

[GrimCoconut]

3 minutes ago, Jaybirds said:

I think Walter Football mentioned that he's lined up on the edge in some blitzes. 

Not sure where I heard it. I thought someone posted it here in this forum somewhere. I know I read it somewhere though. Anyway, maybe we think he'll make a great OLB. Who knows. 

[Ravens4Real]

6 minutes ago, trevorsteadman said:

While I agree and I think it is best for them to go by BPA, the Cleveland Browns have been at the bottom for so long they are like the Raiders and Jaguars of a couple years ago. No players want to play in Cleveland unless they are getting overpaid. The way the Jaguars and Raiders both started getting out of that hole last year was with great quarterback draft picks. I think Cleveland needs to get a dynamic quarterback who can make plays or no one will want to play there. While I agree with the BPA... If you're a team that has been in that hole for so long with a front office like theirs you need a playmaker that can win you games to attract players there and the fastest way to do so is with a quarterback because they touch the ball every play.

There's not point in drafting a QB, who in no way should be the second overall pick to begin with, to a team that has no other weapons at this point. You can't throw a rookie into the fire while trying to throw to a bunch of career backups. It's set up for another dumpster fire.

The Browns aren't going anywhere fast. That's solely because they have missed on so many high QB picks. Like I said, I think Hue Jackson is going to bring some sort of sane decision making to the Browns. They will sign a stop gap QB, whoever that may be, and then draft Ramsey or Tunsil, which ever one is there. 

[Edgar]

3 minutes ago, Jaybirds said:

But that still disagrees with our consensus that he's too similar to Mosley that we don't start both of them. 

I have significant doubt they draft him in either round but playing along hypothetically I would say that if they were to draft him they would obviously view each as a starter and would not agree with whatever consensus might exist.

Just the fact that we are meeting with him suggests they hold a different view. It might be as simple as doing proper research if he does drop.

[Clmraven]

18 minutes ago, ludy51 said:

Can somebody explain to me why DeForrest Buckner is so popular around here? I haven't seen any tape so i'm genuinely curious

He's a tall athletic guy, a great run defender who fits what we do on defense. Also a developing pass rusher with a great first step. A lot of people see him as a Calais Campbell type player and I think it's a fair comparison but I think Buckner has a higher ceiling.

[JoeyFlex5]

21 minutes ago, ludy51 said:

Can somebody explain to me why DeForrest Buckner is so popular around here? I haven't seen any tape so i'm genuinely curious

Watch the tape and you'll find out lol. He brings pass rush from the 34DE spot and is a prototype there. He's a massive, very athletic, and extremely powerful man, he's nimble on his feet, good with his hands, great head on his shoulders, good football iq, great motor, work ethic, awareness, basically he's a nearly complete package who Will be a day 1 starter and we won't find a player who we need to rotate him with because he's too good to take off the field. He needs work because he lacks pass rush moves and his pad level is too high to consistently hold up in the run game, but with the right coach he could very easily be 2nd at his position only to jj watt. His ceiling is extremely high but his floor is the appealing part because he is just so good and physically dominant that you know he won't bust, even if he doesn't reach his full potential.