Saturday, February 18, 2017

Garrett, Trubisky, Bad Analysis, and the Cleveland Browns

This article by Jonathan Goehring made me re-examine this whole Myles Garrett video business.

As Jon points put, Garrett did mention Cleveland specificly.  It's fine for the kid to want to play for his home town team, but when he mentions the Browns, he is saying that he doesn't want to play here.

Myles is like way too many politicians.  They say one thing today.  Then, after they see poll numbers going against them, they do a 180: I was kidding.  Out of context.  Are you going to hold something I said four whole months ago against me?

Maybe, if the Browns draft him, and during his contract they finally become really good, he'll want to stay.  Or maybe Jonathan is right, and Garrett might be determined to become a Cowboy no matter what.

The Browns can hold onto him for six years, using the first round tender I mentioned in my last post.  Or maybe after three years he holds out and demands a new contract or a trade.

Like most politicians, Myles listened to his focus group, and said all the right things about wanting to play anywhere and being a team guy, but I can't trust that.  First, you say whatever they want to hear to get their votes.  Then, you do whatever you need to do to get money and stay in power, regardless of what you said.

Jonathan Allen (or Mitch Trubisky) are far less likely to become a pain in the butt down the road.  The writer makes a lot of sense here, and I'd be nervous about drafting Garrett.

In other news, Mary K Cabbot is sticking to her Trubisky first overall theory, which I concur with---I mean if Hue is willing to place his head on that chopping block.  (MKC, YOU, or I are not qualified to make this pick).

She is right about there being no such thing as a franchise quarterback tree, and the criticality of getting this thing right, and about Trubisky being the consensus top option here.

Listen: Cody Kessler in the third round was called a "reach".  Based on his early returns, he absolutely was NOT.  Hue gained some credibility with this gutsy, contrarian pick.

Dak Prescott is not relevant here.  Everybody else missed him too, and Dallas is loaded.  Stick to the issue: Kessler was a "hit".

That's why Mary K et al are probably wrong about a veteran quarterback being a priority in the second year of this rebuild.  Some rookie(s) will be drafted, and will not start.  Cody Kessler should start.  RG3 was adequate and doesn't cost much.  Now they need to pay Tyrod or some other journeyman 14-plus mil to keep Kessler on the bench why?  

"Browns Freak", a demented Chicken Little Browns caller on NFL Radio, has declared that Kessler lacks the arm to hit the out routes and is a career backup.  This guy makes us all look like idiots.  Talk about shit-colored glasses.

No, Jackson did what he could to play to Kessler's strengths, and that was crosses and slants, but when he needed a hard one to the outside, he generally got it there on time.  Check out late in his comeback games, when he needed to kill the clock (and the defenses knew it).

Browns Freakin Idjut dammit...

But I regress: Consensus declares Trubisky the best, and almost universally mock drafts him in the top four.  So what is this?  Are Chicago and San Francisco run by idiots?  Sorry to be redundant again ("again" get it?...nevermind), but why would it be dumb to draft our home-boy first overall, but smart to draft him second overall?

You think the ANALYTICS guys are too fixated on numbers?

Yeah I get it: Garrett is all that (Mary Kay doesn't think so, but I do), and could be that unstoppable force and all that.  Mitch Trubisky has thirteen starts, just like Marc Sanchez, and could flop!  What if Garrett tears up the NFL, and Trubisky sputters and dies?  You don't even want to think about it, do you?

Here's another ray of hope:  Takeo Spikes is now a co-host on NFL Radio, and a color man for college games. (Remember former Bengals and Bills stud inside and middle linebacker?).

Anyway, Spikes has covered both Watson and Trubisky.  His co-host asked him to pick a favorite between them.

Takeo ultimately gave Deshaun Watson the nod, based on his performances in two National Championship games, and the fact that he carried his team to the National championship in his last one.

But it was close, and he said great things about our homie:

He never got rattled.  He'd get sacked on second down, and come right back for a 6-14 yard clutch completion for a first down, over and over again.  He was pressure-proof; rock-steady.  He saw the whole field.  He made the right throws, at the right time.

Spikes feels that both these quarterbacks can be (not will but CAN) franchise quarterbacks in time (not right now DO YOU UNDERSTAND?).

Now, I've been saving this, because it's not every day I get to blow Mike Mayock and Gil Brandt out of the water:  Gil and Mike want to know why, if Trubisky is that good, he couldn't take over for his predecessor sooner.

That's a legitimate question, but thanks to Terry Pluto, I've got this:

Why didn't you ask Carson Wentz the same question?

Wentz didn't start until his junior season either.  Mike?  Gil?  You've been served!

The difference here is that Mitch is coming out early, after only one year as a starter.  Stay with me here, this is not over:

If Wentz had entered the draft after his own junior season (no Senior Bowl btw), where would he have been drafted?

The answer is: "Carson who?"

Still with me? Meanwhile, our homie, after his junior season, is the consensus-best quarterback in an admittedly weak draft class.  

So, riddle me this, Batman:

1: Where would Trubisky rank, if he was coming out in the last draft class?  My guess is that he might be a shade behind Paxton Lynch, the third quarterback drafted (in the first round).  And actually, he might have been ahead of Lynch.

2: If Trubisky had stayed in school, and waited for the 2018 draft, what would have happened?  Well, we have just seen Kizer regress, and that is certainly possible...which might well leave him as the third or fourth quarterback drafted anyway.

But it's far more likely that he would have been better than he was in 2016, with a decent shot at being the consensus-best pro prospect...again, even in an stronger draft class.

3: Is starting 12-13 games in a shotgun spread college offense better than collecting splinters and running scout teams in the NFL (and playing eight preseason games etc)? (Answer: NO).

Try to stay with me here!  You're learning how to think with your brains!  This is important!

Now, Gil Brandt asked another good question: Mitch Trubisky was Mister Ohio stud quarterback, so why does he go to North Carolina instead of Michigan or Ohio State?

Well, this is irrelevant, unless it indicates that he takes the easy way out to avoid stiff competition, or something.  If the Big Ten local colleges didn't think that much of him, it doesn't matter, since they would obviously have been wrong.

Mike says he'd be scared to death.  Gil says "Buyer Beware".  But niether has (as yet) found any real issues with how he plays on the field.

Now here, I do really need to repeat myself, since nobody else gets this yet:

The Cleveland Browns are not like other teams (except maybe the Niners).  It is NOT important that any quarterback they draft plays at all in his rookie season.  All these real experts, including Mike and Gil, are downgrading Trubisky not on talent, but on lack of starting experience.

Mary Kay has one top talent evaluator who thinks that Trubisky has more upside than Carson Wentz, and I'm pretty sure I know why:

He's more accurate, anticipates better, and has icewater in his veins.  He was not surrounded by talent, having inherited a small-pond powerhouse.  Instead, he played in a bigger pond, and carried more on his shoulders.

Trubisky is a little shorter and smaller...

Speaking of which, I have some names for Andre Knott: Brian Sipe, Doug Flutie, Fank Ryan, Bill Nelson, Jeff Blake, Jim McMahon, and guys I can't remember now: You don't have to be big or have a cannon to succeed in bad conditions, or in a brutal division (this goes for you too, Tony!)

Also, for that matter, Deshaun Watson is not like RG3.  Watson has a normal metabolism and will get bigger.  Griffin has a high metabolism, and it's hard for him to pump up.  Deshaun is also more a football player than a track star, and is much more durable as-is but I digress yet again:

For the moment, I agree with Mary Kay: There is a reasonable chance that HUE JACKSON will lift his middle digit to the rest of the planet and draft Mitch Trubisky first overall, and I am already filling bags with sand and building claymores as I prepare to defend him (HIM not Sashi Brown) for not drafting Garrett instead, see?

I can't get off Mary Kay though: Hue Jackson never asked for a General Manager in particular or more "football guys" in general.  There never was any significant conflict, and Jimmy Haslam has not recently reluctantly given Hue Jackson more influence over personnel decisions.

She is projecting all this stuff.  There really is nothing to see here, and you really should move along.

Technically, Sashi Brown controls personnel.  Hue Jackson signed off on that, because he's been there/done that and is glad to dump that on somebody else so he can just coach.  He did so after having met Sashi and Paul and the Senior scouts (read: "football people").

Sashi Brown is not a powermad dictator, do you understand?  He's where he is now more because of his intersocial skills and ability to negotiate and compromise than for his brains.  He's not Benito Mussolini, and he knows what he doesn't know.

Hue isn't just pretending to be happy with the arrangement, and isn't lying about it.  I hate to sound massogistic here, but I think Mary Kay watches too many Soaps.  She's also overrating testosterone.

This is the real deal: Jackson and his assistants, along with Berry and the scouts, actually talk to eachother, and disagree, and argue, about players.  Sometimes Sashi Brown is part of it, but more often not.

Where Sashi gets more involved is where he tells these guys what DePodesta said, and explains the business side of things to the many, many "football" people.

If we keep this guy, we can't keep that guy.  If we sign this guy, we'll need to cut one of these three, or two of these five.  I know this guy is good, but this other younger guy is cheaper, and we think he'll be better next season, so what do you think?

That's what's going on here.  No secret power struggles.  No bad movies, or Soap Operas.  What you see is what you get.  Honest!  

We're over-cynicized in general, I guess, so we expect lies and duplicity in everything we hear.  It's depressing, and irrational. 

Anyhow, for the moment, at least, I HOPE the Browns don't screw around, and just draft our homie Mitch Trubisky first overall.  

This is more heart than brains.  I'm not qualified to make this decision, and am not risking my career on it.

But re-read this from the start if neccessary: I'm no expert on talent, but I've got the critical thinking and logic parts nailed.  I give Mitch Trubisky a 50/50 shot at first overall.

If they draft Trubisky and elude the lynch mob for one season, dreams might come true.

...or not I dunno.


No comments: