When Dorsey traded for Landry, I didn't like it. Duke Johnson has become a really good slot guy, Coleman has outlandish slot potential, and two tight ends can run those routes.
Landry's sub-10 yards per target are indeed extremely low.
As I posted heading into free agency, I felt the Browns needed tall, dangerous outside receivers, and in fact argued against Landry.
I haven't exactly changed my mind. In fact, I'll say again that I would not have traded for Jarvis Landry.
But a man's got to know his limitations, and one of mine is that I was never an NFL GM.
Landry's contract is not "huge", or "massive". It is sufficient to guarantee that the Steelers will never re-sign Ebineezer Bell, however.
Bell's agent will point at the Landry contract (and his low per-catch stats) to demand more than Landry is getting.
If you don't know this, Bell says that since he so often lines up at wide receiver, and catches so many passes, he should be paid more like a wide receiver than a running back (and receivers make moe munnah!)
Anything that hurts the Steelers is good, and for sure, this was a factor in what Dorsey did with Landry.
Jarvis Landry had a specific role with the Dolphins, and the routes he ran were determined by that scheme. One could even argue that Landry was the core of that scheme, because he averaged over 7 catches and 65 yards per game in 2017.
Randy Gurzi mentioned that Landry getting five yards on third and seven happened "too often" in Miami, but actually he dominated third down conversions.
If we look at the Browns in 2017, third downs were too often a death sentence. I know I know, if Kizer didn't scramble for it, he ate the ball or threw a bad pass, and Crow got stuffed (because Hue wouldn't adapt the blocking scheme to him, and the defense always knew exactly where Hue was sending him but I digress).
I believe that Jarvis Landry's yards per catch will go up a little with the Browns under Todd Haley, and with Njoku and Gordon to "thin out" the coverage, and bleed off some of his targets.
He'll never be a big-play guy, but he might get over 11-12 yards per catch if a safety or linebacker isn't right behind him every time he makes a catch, and he can actually turn upfield with it.
Haley, unlike Hue Palmer, will also do what he said he will do. My favorite thing Haley said was that he wants to be able to "run when they know you're going to run".
He now has Carlos Hyde (and knows how to block for him by the way) and the blockers to make it stick (plus Duke, plus a real stud Dorsey is guaranteed to get out of this draft.)
This would help Landry out a lot. ...I was just about to get into micro-analysis here, and bore you to death, but I'll spare you.
Generally speaking, if an offense can attack every part of the field by air and play smashmouth, slot receivers will be more open, more often.
If we could survey all quarterbacks, they would tell you that they prefer "go-to" guys to "playmaker" receivers. Guys who are always open, and always make the catch.
Go-to guys keep you from getting sacked. Bail you out. Deliver. Jarvis Landry will be loved by Tyrod Taylor and whoever succeeds him, even if nobody outside the team does. He WILL make a difference. You just won't notice it.
I now think that the Browns eventual next left tackle can be found in this draft, but that it probably won't be McGlinchey. Connor Williams, Chukwuma Okorafor, Brian O'Neill, and maybe Kolton Miller all show promise, and Okorafor and Williams could even force their way into the starting lineup in 2018.
I could be wrong, because I can't read every scouting report on every player, and most of them screw up sometimes. I'm "demoting" McGlinchey based on Dane Brugler's critique on him, for example (vs Walter Football...no contest).
Williams and Okorafor are the two most refined, Pro-ready non-McGlincheys in this draft (this I'm sure of). O'Neill and Miller are superior athletes with Joe Thomas-like upsides, but are projects.
John Dorsey should not find it neccessary to trade up from the second round to address left tackle.
Right now, my own mock draft has Dorsey drafting a quarterback of some sort first overall and Bradley or Chubb fourth (...or Barkley...no Chubb for sure maybe!)
Surprises happen in every draft, of course. General Managers are smart people, but they get desperate to save their jobs, and Dorsey really could get an offer he can't turn down.
I hear Waittilnextyear screaming "Nooooo!" as I write this, and Grossi pushing back too, but that's irrational.
Mike Ditka once traded away all his draft picks for Ricky Williams. Butch Davis once traded his second round pick to move up one slot (to draft Kellen Winslow III over Calvin Johnson---I think...I might be wrong about who Detroit "had to settle for" one slot lower). The Herschel Walker trade built a Dallas Cowboys dynasty.
Never say never. Most likely, Dorsey will take his quarterback first overall. That's THE only critical issue here. Number four is negotiable.
My bet would be that quarterbacks go 1-2-3, and Dorsey will need a phone bank (or an auctioneer) to handle the bidding for that fourth quarterback (who Elway might draft at five).
Actually, GMs work these "contingency" plans out in avance on an "if/then" basis. That's why trades are so often announced within seconds of previous picks, along with the new current pick.
Unlike Sashi Brown, John Dorsey is heavily "connected" with the other GMs. They're not out to screw eachother, as all socialists and many of you think.
They seek value for value, and want to deal with eachother in the future. A GM who backs out of deals, or otherwise demonstrates bad faith finds himself ostracized by his contemporaries (not to mention agents).
But I digress: I want Chubb (or Barkley) as much as you guys do, but I got a bunch of "settle for" players (who would instantly start and be upgrades), along with guys like Williams, Okorafora, etc.
Tony Grossi says "we've done the quantity over quality stuff, and now have a lot of young talent. It's time to get some playmakers" (not an exact quote but you get it):
"Quantity over quality" is a huge generalization, because guys like Schobert, Njoku, Ogunjobi, Brantley, etc are quality players.
At 12th overall (the Bills pick), Barkley or Chubb are longshots, but the consensus-best wide receiver or cornerback in this draft are not.
Trades often include future draft picks (in 2019 or 2020, and always 1-2 rounds higher--ask Bill Belichick!) You can "condense" draft picks by trading up, or defer them by accepting higher 2019 picks for them.
Tony doesn't have a head for business.
I could force myself to settle for Dorsey's top Quarterback and "quantity" like the top wide receiver or cornerback, the second-best running back, the (acually/in reality) best left tackle, AND probably an extra first or second round pick in 2019 (deep in the weeds here too many variables)
I know I know, Barkley and Chubb are awesome, but you can't get star-struck over them, and only Chubb outclasses everybody else at his position.
At least Tony recognizes the young, emerging talent on this roster (which is rare).
In principle, he's right: You can't be drafting players you'll have to cut; in general, if you're releasing above-average players which other teams jump on like pihrannas, you're innefficient.
But read the several paragraphs preceding that.
Chubb at 4th overall is the most obvious and least complicated solution to this problem, but not neccessarily the best.
John Dorsey just got hired. He has elbow room (most likely at least three years). He EXPECTS to draft near the middle of the draft in 2019, and near the bottom in 2020.
So
Despite his extremly ignorant and stupid "no football players here" statement (an amateurish attempt to defend Hue Fisher), John knows that he inherits significant young and emerging talent here.
Dorsey no doubt read my Blog, as he sees that the AFC North is generally headed in the opposite direction. This is why he said his goal in 2018 is to win the AFC North.
This probably won't happen, but drafting in the middle or late in each round probably will, and (if he has his way), he'll be drafting at the bottom in 2019 and beyond.
If he succeeds, and wins playoff games and Superbowls, he'll lose a bunch of talent in free agency.
Tony Grossi might not understand this, but maybe you can: additional high draft picks in 2019 and 2020 (and maybe a real left tackle, and the best WR or CB in this draft, vs Barkley or Chubb) might be best for Dorsey/the Browns in the long run, see?
But I discuss this only as a possibility:
John Dorsey almost certainly has Chubb (substitute Bradley if you want) pencilled in at 4th overall, and won't take less than a king's ransom to give him/them up.
But a lot will happen between now and then. More pre-draft trades. Teams moving up and down.
Don't count out Dorsey moving down and still getting Chubb, Barkley, or Fitzpatrick.
Really, the more important thing here is, will Dorsey listen to everybody else, or will he draft the best quarterback in this draft?
No comments:
Post a Comment