Browns would have traded with GB to get Quinn

[Tiger]

Savage got a nibble from Green Bay at 16. Cleveland offered its first-round pick in 2008, and offered to flip picks with the Packers in rounds two, three and four. "I thought it was going to work,'' Savage said. "But they thought about it, called back and said no.''

what think ye of this situation?

 

[kmac]

When you were 1 win away from the playoffs, and you didn't lose multiple contributers, you do not trade out of the 1st round completely.

 

[Bobby Roberts]

The sad thing is that Harrell likely would have been available for the Browns 2nd round pick, which means GB would have lost nothing by trading down.

 

[Arles]

The sad thing is that Harrell likely would have been available for the Browns 2nd round pick, which means GB would have lost nothing by trading down.

Are you insane? KC and Denver were on record saying they liked Harrell and he would have been gone by 23.

I love this - on one hand everyone's pissed because we didn't get anyone to help Brett. Yet, now they are saying we should have traded our first this year for one next season and had no first round pick. And, to be honest, a future first and moving up in some later rounds isn't necessarily a great deal for the #16 pick - esp a team that wanted an impact player like Harrell for this year.

 

[Bobby Roberts]

The sad thing is that Harrell likely would have been available for the Browns 2nd round pick, which means GB would have lost nothing by trading down.

Are you insane? KC and Denver were on record saying they liked Harrell and he would have been gone by 23.

I love this - on one hand everyone's pissed because we didn't get anyone to help Brett. Yet, now they are saying we should have traded our first this year for one next season and had no first round pick. And, to be honest, a future first and moving up in some later rounds isn't necessarily a great deal for the #16 pick - esp a team that wanted an impact player like Harrell for this year.

I could be totally wrong, but I'm not impressed by the Harrell pick. Not that he might not become a good player, but because we had many needs and our 1st round pick goes to our deepest position on the team. With Corey Williams, Pickett, Jolly, Jenkins, Cole and Allen we were just fine at DT.

Fine, Harrell likely would have been gone, I take it back. It doesn't mean that getting the Browns 1st rounder next year (along with and additional high 2nd rounder and moving up in several rounds this draft) wouldn't have been worth it. There's a very high probability that Cleveland would be in the top 10 next year, so how is that not worth trading down??

In the end it doesn't matter, Harrell's our guy and I hope he turns out to be a great player! I'd love to be wrong about this and it turn into a good move for GB.

GO PACK GO!!!

 

[Timmons]

I too was shocked by the Harrell pick only because I thought our D line wa strong enough. If he is above our current d-line players in ability, then it's a great pick. If he's only as good as what we have, then it was a miss. Time will tell. I choose to remain positive about it. I'm not familiar with any players in the draft, so I only look at it from GB's need. We hit on the Safety, WR, and RB. If those players contribute, that's the question. As for who and where we drafted them. Ted did fine and I believe time will prove that this too was a successful draft.

I was surprised to see no CB picks.

 

[OregonPackFan]

bad trade

 

[Tiger]

it will be interesting to see what the cowboys get for clevelands 1st rounder next year. Darren Mcfadden perhaps? i cant see the browns getting more than 4 wins.

 

[Zero2Cool]

Savage got a nibble from Green Bay at 16. Cleveland offered its first-round pick in 2008, and offered to flip picks with the Packers in rounds two, three and four. "I thought it was going to work,'' Savage said. "But they thought about it, called back and said no.''

what think ye of this situation?

if I am understanding this correctly, I would have done it. We could still have traded down.

wait ... we'd be losing a pick to gain a few positions in each round?

no way, i wouldn't do that.

 

[all about da packers]

Ted was asked about why he didn't do something with the Browns, and this is what TT said (paraphrase):

I don't like trading picks for future drafts, because I have no idea of what to expect in next years draft. I worked real ******* getting my board right for this draft, and I have little to no idea what to expect next year. This years draft, I have somewhat control over, next year I don't even know how deep the draft will be.


Seems to me that he had a good reason for not trading with the Browns.

 

[PackFanInSC]

Savage got a nibble from Green Bay at 16. Cleveland offered its first-round pick in 2008, and offered to flip picks with the Packers in rounds two, three and four. "I thought it was going to work,'' Savage said. "But they thought about it, called back and said no.''

what think ye of this situation?

if I am understanding this correctly, I would have done it. We could still have traded down.

wait ... we'd be losing a pick to gain a few positions in each round?

no way, i wouldn't do that.

It would be a little more than a "few" positions.

Round 2 we would have gone from 47th to 36th -- 36th is one pick before SD gave a 2nd, 3rd, 5th, and 3rd next year to the Bears to get Eric Weddle S and 2 picks before Oakland drafted Zach Miller TE

Round 3 we would have gone from 78th to 67th.

Round 3 we would have gone from 112th (which we traded to Pittsburgh, turning it into Barbre and Bishop so they can draft a punter) to pick 103.

Plus, we would get their 1st round pick next year which since 1999 has been 1st, 1st, 3rd, 16th, 21st, 6th, 3rd, 13th, and 3rd. That averages somewhere around pick 7 or 8 with 5 of the 9 years being in the top 3. How many picks next year could Ted have turned the #3 pick into? In addition to having our own pick toward the end of the round.

 

[Zero2Cool]

Savage got a nibble from Green Bay at 16. Cleveland offered its first-round pick in 2008, and offered to flip picks with the Packers in rounds two, three and four. "I thought it was going to work,'' Savage said. "But they thought about it, called back and said no.''

what think ye of this situation?

if I am understanding this correctly, I would have done it. We could still have traded down.

wait ... we'd be losing a pick to gain a few positions in each round?

no way, i wouldn't do that.

It would be a little more than a "few" positions.

Round 2 we would have gone from 47th to 36th -- 36th is one pick before SD gave a 2nd, 3rd, 5th, and 3rd next year to the Bears to get Eric Weddle S and 2 picks before Oakland drafted Zach Miller TE

Round 3 we would have gone from 78th to 67th.

Round 3 we would have gone from 112th (which we traded to Pittsburgh, turning it into Barbre and Bishop so they can draft a punter) to pick 103.

Plus, we would get their 1st round pick next year which since 1999 has been 1st, 1st, 3rd, 16th, 21st, 6th, 3rd, 13th, and 3rd. That averages somewhere around pick 7 or 8 with 5 of the 9 years being in the top 3. How many picks next year could Ted have turned the #3 pick into? In addition to having our own pick toward the end of the round.

Regardless, I wouldn't do it. It's not worth it.

 

[Arles]

Doing that deal would have told me this is a rebuilding year and we were playing solely for the future. Not having a 1st round pick makes it very difficult to get an impact player from the draft.

 

[PackerLegend]

if the Browns end up with anywhere 1-9 next year for there 1st I would have loved to do this trade, anything after that I wouldnt really want to do.