Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Trade #6 for Revis?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Cleveland Browns
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
duke2056


Joined: 21 Feb 2005
Posts: 8231
Location: Cleveland area
PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 6:04 pm    Post subject: Re: hmmm Reply with quote

Entropy wrote:
duke2056 wrote:
Entropy wrote:
fsubrowns9510 wrote:
Entropy wrote:
candyman93 wrote:
Mastercheddaar wrote:
NO! Period. We can get a younger cheaper maybe better CB in the draft.

that is all

Mastercheddaar


We're not going to get a better CB


How do you know that candy? Remember, no one but the Jets gets his first 6 years. We need to look at what he offers the Browns going forward.

I don't think, as of right now, that it is much of a stretch to see someone like Milliner do better than Revis over the next 5-6 years.


We are still trying to build our team. We have no 2nd and cant afford to trade #6 for a injury ridden cb who holds out on his team.

Yes, that's another reason why I don't want him.


And to duke:

If a team is able to stop the run and rush the passer, they still will get a pass off more than not. It's not like there are defenses that consistently prevent a QB from throwing the ball on over 50% of dropbacks or something.

And the truth is that we were able to stop the run and rush the passer more than adequately last year with our front 7. The problem was that our defensive backfield, as a whole, did not play the pass very well. We gave up 27 passing TDs for 21st in the NFL. We were 11th in the NFL in INTs, but only 11 of our 17 INTs were from DBs. We also were 25th in passing yardage given up.

No matter what scheme a defense runs, at least 4 or 5 good DBs are required to defend against the pass.

The Cards were #10 in the NFL in passing TDs allowed, and they were #2 in INTs. 18 of their 22 INTs came from DBs. (5th in passing yardage) They had 38 sacks.

The Seahawks were #2 in passing TDs allowed and #8 in INTs. 14 of their 18 INTs came from DBs. (6th in passing yardage) They had 36 sacks.
The 49ers were #4 in yards, #7 in passing TDs given up and #16 in INTs. They had 38 sacks.

The Ravens were #17 in yards and #19 in INTs, but they were #2 in passing TDs given up. The had exactly the same amount of sacks (37) as the Browns.

Our pass rush was not the problem last year, it was the defensive backfield.

Now, I'm not against acquiring more pass rushers, but certainly not at the expense of losing a good DB.


The we just simply disagree on what the most important part of the defense is.

The only part of what you said that I agree with is that we need 4-5 "good" defensive backs. That is correct, but we don't need two ELITE DBs.

Those other teams you mentioned might have had as many sacks as us, but it's pretty clear they have a much better front 7


I'm not sure we disagree that much duke. I never said that we need two elite DBs. But I will say that it wouldn't be bad. I also never said that the front 7 is less important than the secondary. I said our biggest weakness, by far, is in the secondary.

I don't think you draft a player or sign a FA to be elite in the first place. And certainly players that are drafted tend to produce elite results far more often than FAs.

We also don't need two elite pass rushers, but it doesn't hurt either.

Our disagreement comes from the idea that there is a "most important part of the defense". I could be wrong, but it seems like you, and some others, think that continuing to add to this "most important part" will fix glaring problems with other parts.

All parts of the defense are equally important since the opposing offense will try to capitalize on the weaker parts.

A pass rusher does not help a weak secondary unless he prevents pretty much all the passes from being thrown to receivers, right?

I am curious about what you think so many other front 7s did to be "much better" than ours.

Also, how many games do you think were lost last year due to weaknesses in our secondary?

How many were lost due to weaknesses in our pass rush or front 7?


A good front 7 can stop the run and get pressure on the QB with one less guy than an average front 7, allowing for an extra guy in the secondary to cover....if you choose to do that as a D coordinator.

I am not just going to look back at last year and try to figure out which part of the D was at fault for stuff. Seems silly, since as a general rule a good front 7 has more of an impact on the game than a good secondary playing with an average front 7. We can address weaknesses without trading good picks for Revis.

I will agree that having a WEAKNESS anywhere in the defense is bad, but if you have a really good front 7 then all you need are average secondary players to have a good defense.

If you have 4 hall of famers in the secondary and an average front 7, you aren't going to stop many people.
_________________
2014 draft prediction:

Zero chance the Browns draft a QB at pick 4, or trade up for a QB.

And Matt Ryan is so great he has one playoff win.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Entropy


Joined: 16 Jul 2012
Posts: 2736
PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 7:31 pm    Post subject: Re: hmmm Reply with quote

duke2056 wrote:


A good front 7 can stop the run and get pressure on the QB with one less guy than an average front 7, allowing for an extra guy in the secondary to cover....if you choose to do that as a D coordinator.



I agree. And I also think our front 7 was able to do that last year as well as most.

Quote:

I am not just going to look back at last year and try to figure out which part of the D was at fault for stuff. Seems silly, since as a general rule a good front 7 has more of an impact on the game than a good secondary playing with an average front 7. We can address weaknesses without trading good picks for Revis.


Again, I don't want Revis, not sure why you keep bringing that up. And no, a good front 7 doesn't have more impact on a game than a good secondary since even a good front 7 will allow the QB to throw the ball on well over 50% of his dropbacks.

The two units always work together, one is not more important or more impactful in general. And I thought we were talking about pass rusher vs DB.

The Steelers had 2 CBs that combined for 36 pass breakups. Their entire defense only had 37 sacks. Both PDs and sacks can have big impacts.

Quote:

I will agree that having a WEAKNESS anywhere in the defense is bad, but if you have a really good front 7 then all you need are average secondary players to have a good defense.

If you have 4 hall of famers in the secondary and an average front 7, you aren't going to stop many people.


We don't even have an average secondary. We would need to add 3 players or hope they all improve to even have that.

If we had 4 hall of famers in the secondary, the entire "average" front 7 would look like all-pros.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ditchdigger


Joined: 09 Jan 2005
Posts: 16051
Location: Gahanna, OH
PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 8:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dropkick_pride wrote:
ditchdigger wrote:
Dropkick_pride wrote:
Milliner
- cost #6
- would cost 500k per year for 5 years...


#6 overall makes a lot more than $500K, and rarely are contracts 5 years anymore.

Morris Claiborne signed a 4 year $16M contract last year.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/dallas-cowboys/morris-claiborne/

Revis for 6 is just a bad idea all around.



Teams hold the rights for 5th year under the new rookie wage scale for 1st rounders.

Your correct on the wage, bad info from the site I was looking at. Expected salary could be approx. 1.2-1.4 million first year.... WAY less than Revis.


5th year is at average of top 5 at the player's position. Essentially, a free franchise tag. For 2013, that number for CBs is $10.6M and only going to go up in 5 years.

Claiborne's 2012 salary was only $390K, but his cap number was just under $3M because of bonuses.

Revis' 2013 salary is only $3M. If we traded for him, New York would likely be on the hook for most if not all of his bonus money on their cap. His 2013 cap hit for any team that trades for him may very well be just his $3M salary.

$3M cap hit for a rookie #6 pick. $3M cap hit for Revis.

It's not nearly the discrepancy as you've made it out to be.

After 2013, Revis' contract is $3M in salary and $3M in bonuses each of the following 3 years for a cap hit of $6M each year.

Of course he will hold out, but that contract is not what is going to make teams question whether or not to trade for him. It's the knee, and if the injury brought him back to the pack, so to speak.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dropkick_pride


Joined: 18 Jan 2009
Posts: 10805
Location: C-bus
PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 8:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ditchdigger wrote:
Dropkick_pride wrote:
ditchdigger wrote:
Dropkick_pride wrote:
Milliner
- cost #6
- would cost 500k per year for 5 years...


#6 overall makes a lot more than $500K, and rarely are contracts 5 years anymore.

Morris Claiborne signed a 4 year $16M contract last year.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/dallas-cowboys/morris-claiborne/

Revis for 6 is just a bad idea all around.



Teams hold the rights for 5th year under the new rookie wage scale for 1st rounders.

Your correct on the wage, bad info from the site I was looking at. Expected salary could be approx. 1.2-1.4 million first year.... WAY less than Revis.


5th year is at average of top 5 at the player's position. Essentially, a free franchise tag. For 2013, that number for CBs is $10.6M and only going to go up in 5 years.

Claiborne's 2012 salary was only $390K, but his cap number was just under $3M because of bonuses.

Revis' 2013 salary is only $3M. If we traded for him, New York would likely be on the hook for most if not all of his bonus money on their cap. His 2013 cap hit for any team that trades for him may very well be just his $3M salary.

$3M cap hit for a rookie #6 pick. $3M cap hit for Revis.

It's not nearly the discrepancy as you've made it out to be.

After 2013, Revis' contract is $3M in salary and $3M in bonuses each of the following 3 years for a cap hit of $6M each year.

Of course he will hold out, but that contract is not what is going to make teams question whether or not to trade for him. It's the knee, and if the injury brought him back to the pack, so to speak.


Yup, teams have 5th year option, just as I said.

No, I don't want Revis, just as I said. Projected salary, what team takes on how much of the contract, and the rest is all opinion and fluff... Regardless, of the projected amount, I never said$ was the deciding factor, but rather just one of many. Milliner would be much less than Revis and come without all the baggage or injury. No way.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ditchdigger


Joined: 09 Jan 2005
Posts: 16051
Location: Gahanna, OH
PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 8:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't want him either, I just wanted to point out the fallacy of the way you were framing your argument. When it comes to Revis, money isn't an issue unless you're already over the cap.

Personally, I would agree with Bulldog (I think) who said that we could get two Free Agent DBs who played for Arizona last year for Revis' salary. It's a bit of an exaggeration, but a great idea.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dropkick_pride


Joined: 18 Jan 2009
Posts: 10805
Location: C-bus
PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 8:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ditchdigger wrote:
I don't want him either, I just wanted to point out the fallacy of the way you were framing your argument. When it comes to Revis, money isn't an issue unless you're already over the cap.

Personally, I would agree with Bulldog (I think) who said that we could get two Free Agent DBs who played for Arizona last year for Revis' salary. It's a bit of an exaggeration, but a great idea.


Money is ALWAYS an issue, but I never said it was THE issue.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ditchdigger


Joined: 09 Jan 2005
Posts: 16051
Location: Gahanna, OH
PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 8:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dropkick_pride wrote:
ditchdigger wrote:
I don't want him either, I just wanted to point out the fallacy of the way you were framing your argument. When it comes to Revis, money isn't an issue unless you're already over the cap.

Personally, I would agree with Bulldog (I think) who said that we could get two Free Agent DBs who played for Arizona last year for Revis' salary. It's a bit of an exaggeration, but a great idea.


Money is ALWAYS an issue, but I never said it was THE issue.


When it comes to the best player at one of the most important positions on the field, money is never an issue. The way you framed your argument in the quote suggested it was.

Keeping Revis around is horse of a different color, but by no means is his current contract prohibitive for potential buyers.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dropkick_pride


Joined: 18 Jan 2009
Posts: 10805
Location: C-bus
PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 8:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ditchdigger wrote:
Dropkick_pride wrote:
ditchdigger wrote:
I don't want him either, I just wanted to point out the fallacy of the way you were framing your argument. When it comes to Revis, money isn't an issue unless you're already over the cap.

Personally, I would agree with Bulldog (I think) who said that we could get two Free Agent DBs who played for Arizona last year for Revis' salary. It's a bit of an exaggeration, but a great idea.


Money is ALWAYS an issue, but I never said it was THE issue.


When it comes to the best player at one of the most important positions on the field, money is never an issue. The way you framed your argument in the quote suggested it was.

Keeping Revis around is horse of a different color, but by no means is his current contract prohibitive for potential buyers.


Maybe you should try reading all my posts again... I have said repeatedly, in various different ways now, that money is one of many factors in the decision.

When it comes to the best player at one of the most important positions on the field.... Money is still and always will be an issue in a hard capped league.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
duke2056


Joined: 21 Feb 2005
Posts: 8231
Location: Cleveland area
PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 8:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Entropy, like I said before, we disagree about one major thing.

You think the front 7 carries the same importance as the secondary.

I disagree. I think a really good front 7 with an average secondary is a LOT better than a really good secondary with an average front 7. So, I think the front 7 is more important than the secondary. I real good front 7 will mask any other deficiencies much more than a good secondary will IMO.

You say a real good front 7 will still allow the QB to throw over half the time. Well, an average front 7 will allow them to get off a clean throw almost ALL the time. Not to mention, even a GREAT secondary can only cover for so long, so that works both ways.

You get a sack or stop a RB for a loss of 2 or 3, and chances are that drive is stalling.
_________________
2014 draft prediction:

Zero chance the Browns draft a QB at pick 4, or trade up for a QB.

And Matt Ryan is so great he has one playoff win.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Entropy


Joined: 16 Jul 2012
Posts: 2736
PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 9:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

duke2056 wrote:
Entropy, like I said before, we disagree about one major thing.

You think the front 7 carries the same importance as the secondary.

I disagree. I think a really good front 7 with an average secondary is a LOT better than a really good secondary with an average front 7. So, I think the front 7 is more important than the secondary. I real good front 7 will mask any other deficiencies much more than a good secondary will IMO.



Yes, we disagree on that. Can you explain how a good front 7 consitently prevents a QB from passing for a 1st down without consitently good play from the secondary?

Quote:

You say a real good front 7 will still allow the QB to throw over half the time. Well, an average front 7 will allow them to get off a clean throw almost ALL the time. Not to mention, even a GREAT secondary can only cover for so long, so that works both ways.



An average front 7 still let's the QB get a clean throw off over half the time. That's the point. There are no defensive front 7s in the NFL that allows a QB to get a clean throw off anywhere near all the time, not even the worst in the NFL. The difference between the best and the worst will probably only be a few dozen plays or so.

Quote:

You get a sack or stop a RB for a loss of 2 or 3, and chances are that drive is stalling.


Sure, if you have a good secondary that can take advantage of a hurry by the front 7 or just cover the receivers for 3+ seconds. Otherwise, the outcome may be one of literally hundreds of 20+ yard completions.

Weeden had 48 all by himself (13th in the NFL) and you know as well as I do that some of them came after runs for losses or sacks.

No QB was sacked more than Aaron Rodgers (51 times) and he had 54 plays of 20+ yards. His team also has an exceptional front 7. They still gave up 2 passing TDs and 2 rushing TDs to the QB in a playoff game. Maybe look at what their secondary did (or didn't do) in that game.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Winslow80


Joined: 25 Mar 2006
Posts: 318
Location: Texas A&M
PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 1:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If we dont get a starting CB in Free Agency what do you guys think about the Honey Badger in the 4th?
_________________


"I don't mean to be brash, but I think my 90 percent is still better than every tight end out there."- K2
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Dawgpoun8017


Joined: 14 Jan 2009
Posts: 12133
Location: Waterloo,NY
PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 1:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Winslow80 wrote:
If we dont get a starting CB in Free Agency what do you guys think about the Honey Badger in the 4th?


Possible better fit at FS, IMO not skilled enough to play outside in the nfl
_________________
2013 Joe Blackburn HOF Award Recipient

Adopt a Brownie

TJ "Trauma" Ward

TKL- 75, INT- 2, Sack- 1.5,PDF-7, TD-2

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
fsubrowns9510


Joined: 20 Feb 2008
Posts: 13176
Location: Rochester, NY
PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 1:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Winslow80 wrote:
If we dont get a starting CB in Free Agency what do you guys think about the Honey Badger in the 4th?


Drafting a project DB in the 4th Round or later should not be tied in with whether we get a starting cb in free agency or not
_________________


Browns Forum HOF Member Class of 2011


Last edited by fsubrowns9510 on Sat Jan 26, 2013 1:32 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
Dropkick_pride


Joined: 18 Jan 2009
Posts: 10805
Location: C-bus
PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 1:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dawgpoun8017 wrote:
Winslow80 wrote:
If we dont get a starting CB in Free Agency what do you guys think about the Honey Badger in the 4th?


Possible better fit at FS, IMO not skilled enough to play outside in the nfl



IMO, its not worth the wasted draft pick. He has zero between the ears, and that does not go well in the NFL today.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
fsubrowns9510


Joined: 20 Feb 2008
Posts: 13176
Location: Rochester, NY
PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 1:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dropkick_pride wrote:
Dawgpoun8017 wrote:
Winslow80 wrote:
If we dont get a starting CB in Free Agency what do you guys think about the Honey Badger in the 4th?


Possible better fit at FS, IMO not skilled enough to play outside in the nfl



IMO, its not worth the wasted draft pick. He has zero between the ears, and that does not go well in the NFL today.


Not to mention if it wasn't for his kick returning most people would completely write him off
_________________


Browns Forum HOF Member Class of 2011
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Cleveland Browns All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 5 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group