Personally, I can't take any more of it...and I am going to call it out every time in the future.

Here it is...Player A, could have been gotten later...in the next round...etc...
Variation:  FO got played trading up, Player A would have been there at their spot..

Suitable analogies;
Why is car A going into the pit now? He has enough gas to hit the finish line.
Why doesn't fighter A just hit the other guy?
He saw the defender there!
I can hit a major league curveball...

WTF?
What kind of twisted brain can speak or type such absolute BS?
You have five million to fifty million $ of salaries in these war rooms, dozens of assistants, phones ringing like the floor on NASDAQ....
And some beer drinking fool, that changes tires for a living, knows dang well, the FO got snookered, because they know dang well every other of the 31 teams wasn't interested in the same player...Mike Mayok and a feild of assistants working ten thousand hours over months studying players and team needs..
Dont know sheet..

Why not just post "My Dads Car is faster than your Dads car" at least the odds are 50-50...and the IQ to say that is the same...
Whatever...

OBTW, Weeden was a reach, he would have been there at 37....My cousins, hairdressers, gardeners brother knows someone in the NFL that assured it was so, Heckert is dumbass...
Carry on

actually some of my best freinds are tire changers..

The tipper for me this year was the article on the newswire from NBC sports..
Heckert got snooked on the Vikes Trade, and Weeden was a reach..

I suppose he had Cousins going to the Skins.
And who had Claiborne going to Dallas ?

I got an answer for both...No f'n body.... thats who had those on their mocks...
But man o man on Monday, they KNOW what was going down...

It would be less comical for the same crowd to tell me that Romanian Model in the Fiat Abarth ads actually has a mole on her Cucci....and just as believable comming from them....

"The tipper for me this year was the article on the newswire from NBC sports..
Heckert got snooked on the Vikes Trade, and Weeden was a reach.."

-- Always easy to say anything at a desk behind a keypad. You take no chances and that's how you keep a job.

If the Browns had lost out on Richardson and Weeden, someone would be writing that they should have traded down and then "reached" at 22.

The draft is hard. College kids who might be good NFL people and other teams who don't care about your plans or evaluations.

BPA and team need have always gone hand in hand and acted on FO decisions when the draft begins.

I at least like which positions got theoretically filled. Now, we'll see.

"The tipper for me this year was the article on the newswire from NBC sports..
Heckert got snooked on the Vikes Trade, and Weeden was a reach.."

KEO:

Always easy to say anything at a desk behind a keypad. You take no chances and that's how you keep a job.

AA:

Kinda like what you and I are doing now.

KEO:

If the Browns had lost out on Richardson and Weeden, someone would be writing that they should have traded down and then "reached" at 22.

AA:

Well, I think people can understand the difference between a good move, a questionable move and an awful move, and each has to be scrutinized on its own merits.

Richardson?  Necessary move for the one player most everyone has said will make the biggest impact soonest..

Weeden & Schwartz?  Would have loved it at 37 & 68.  Not so much at 22 & 37.

Hughes?   in the early third round?  Seriously?

Benjamin, Johnson, Miller, Acho.  Fine.  Each fits a need and went in their proper zip code.

Winn, Wade?  Good values.

Smelley?  What's the worst that can happen?  Oh, he steps on Weeden's bare foot in the locker room with his cleats.

No universal "Praise Jesus, the Brownies have been delivered!"   

No universal "Fire Heckert & Holmgren!"

Just 10 picks that warranted five different reactions.

KEO:

The draft is hard. College kids who might be good NFL people and other teams who don't care about your plans or evaluations.

AA:

Don't expect them to.  It's just disconcerting when those players often get snapped up by the good teams.

If Courtney Upshaw or Nick Perry were tabbed at 22, I would have been fine with it since this club was in dire need of an impact rusher to top off the defense.  But maybe 22 was a reach for CU.  No matter, Ozzie took him.
Perry?  Can you imagine a rush with him on one side and Matthews on the other?  Yikes! 

KEO:

BPA and team need have always gone hand in hand and acted on FO decisions when the draft begins.

I at least like which positions got theoretically filled. Now, we'll see.

AA:

Yes, but in turn, who are you to tell us about BPA and team need? 

And guess what?  Those college kids and good NFL people don't give a bucket of warm spit whether YOUR positions got filled-- theoretically or otherwise.

See, this is what I was talking about with science fiction. 

We're all here to evaluate and give our opinions, and we're not experts (though the experts aren't exactly rocket scientists either.  No one goes to school for three years and is Board certified to quality for this work).   If you accept that premise coming in the door, that saves everyone some grief.

But that imperious tone is employed when an opinion is expressed that the poster doesn't like.  So it goes from  scrutiny of a particular move to the usual low rent "who are you to question our fearless leaders?"  attack.    

In turn, I don't mind if people claim the Browns were somehow fleeced in trading up to 3.  It' a legit issue to scrutinize, and I'm convinced now the move WAS necessary.  Some will forever believe otherwise and remain unswayed, but that's their problem.

Aardvark wrote: "The tipper for me this year was the article on the newswire from NBC sports..
Heckert got snooked on the Vikes Trade, and Weeden was a reach.."

KEO:

Always easy to say anything at a desk behind a keypad. You take no chances and that's how you keep a job.

AA:

Kinda like what you and I are doing now.

KEO:

If the Browns had lost out on Richardson and Weeden, someone would be writing that they should have traded down and then "reached" at 22.

AA:

Well, I think people can understand the difference between a good move, a questionable move and an awful move, and each has to be scrutinized on its own merits.

Richardson?  Necessary move for the one player most everyone has said will make the biggest impact soonest..

Weeden & Schwartz?  Would have loved it at 37 & 68.  Not so much at 22 & 37.

Hughes?   in the early third round?  Seriously?

Benjamin, Johnson, Miller, Acho.  Fine.  Each fits a need and went in their proper zip code.

Winn, Wade?  Good values.

Smelley?  What's the worst that can happen?  Oh, he steps on Weeden's bare foot in the locker room with his cleats.

No universal "Praise Jesus, the Brownies have been delivered!"   

No universal "Fire Heckert & Holmgren!"

Just 10 picks that warranted five different reactions.

KEO:

The draft is hard. College kids who might be good NFL people and other teams who don't care about your plans or evaluations.

AA:

Don't expect them to.  It's just disconcerting when those players often get snapped up by the good teams.

If Courtney Upshaw or Nick Perry were tabbed at 22, I would have been fine with it since this club was in dire need of an impact rusher to top off the defense.  But maybe 22 was a reach for CU.  No matter, Ozzie took him.
Perry?  Can you imagine a rush with him on one side and Matthews on the other?  Yikes! 

KEO:

BPA and team need have always gone hand in hand and acted on FO decisions when the draft begins.

I at least like which positions got theoretically filled. Now, we'll see.

AA:

Yes, but in turn, who are you to tell us about BPA and team need? 

And guess what?  Those college kids and good NFL people don't give a bucket of warm spit whether YOUR positions got filled-- theoretically or otherwise.

See, this is what I was talking about with science fiction. 

We're all here to evaluate and give our opinions, and we're not experts (though the experts aren't exactly rocket scientists either.  No one goes to school for three years and is Board certified to quality for this work).   If you accept that premise coming in the door, that saves everyone some grief.

But that imperious tone is employed when an opinion is expressed that the poster doesn't like.  So it goes from  scrutiny of a particular move to the usual low rent "who are you to question our fearless leaders?"  attack.    

In turn, I don't mind if people claim the Browns were somehow fleeced in trading up to 3.  It' a legit issue to scrutinize, and I'm convinced now the move WAS necessary.  Some will forever believe otherwise and remain unswayed, but that's their problem.

Cheese,
Nope, just plain NO.
You can have an opinion about a player, you can have an opinion about a players value, and based on the quickly becoming antiquated Jimmy Johnson point system, you can have an opinion regarding reach or value..That much I agree with..

But to say, player A, would have been there at position B...is pure, unadulterated trash. not opinion...
You can't have an opinion about whether or not Ernhardt Jrs, car has enogh gas to go 20 more laps, and therefore he didn't need to pit....Not unless you are on the pit crew, the radio, or have a dang Gas Gauge Cam App on your I phone...

You can't have an opinion regarding whether or not, Sophia Loren has a mole on her Cucci...Cause you aint never been there.

And you certainly can't have an opinion of what was transpiring in the Rams and Bucs war rooms on draft day...

Words to that affect don't rate as opinions any more than having an opinion about what Spiderman is 'truly' thinking when he swings from the Empire State Building...

I.E. it is the stuff, third grade arguments are made of,
And no Aardvark, those non-opinion opinions, are not valid.

And yes, my dads car, is faster than your dads car...

H&E:

But to say, player A, would have been there at position B...is pure, unadulterated trash. not opinion...

AA:

Nope, it's not even adulterated trash.  And I prefer mine that way.  It's even trashier.

It's an opinion as well, even couched without the requisite "IMO."  But you'd have to take that up with the person who claimed it.   Just because you disagree with it more vehemently doesn't turn an opinion into a tuba or a 3/8" socket wrench.  Less valid, maybe.  But it's still an opinion.

To speculate that Weeden would be there at 37 is just that, just as it is speculation that IF the Browns let him come to them, Weeden would have been snatched up just slots ahead by another team. 

This was taken to a more comical extreme with John Hughes.  Omigod, if the Browns didn't get him, he would have gone just picks later to another team!   To which I'd say, "Yea, and...?"

H&E:

And you certainly can't have an opinion of what was transpiring in the Rams and Bucs war rooms on draft day...

AA:

Sure you can, but you better bring something to support that opinion beyond "my cousin's best friend works for... and he was in there emptying wastebaskets when HE heard..."

We weren't there to see dinosaurs walk the earth.  We have anthropologists to paint us a picture. 

We weren't there to see the murder.  We have the forensics people to piece together the clues.   Doesn't make them infallible.  It just gives their opinions more weight. 

War room post-mortems may provide evidence of what one suspected, so their opinion then carries more weight.

I think enough evidence has been presented to warrant the Browns moving up to get TR.

We don't know what grade or value the Browns put on their picks, and whether they stepped out of that range to make a pick because of various factors (like Wright being taken).  There's speculation that HAD Wright been available at 22, they would have taken him, THEN made efforts to move up SOMEWHERE between 23 and 36 to grab Weeden. 

And if you buy that, then that is putting one wide value on the qb. 

And the Atlantic Ocean IS better than the Pacific.

"And no Aardvark, those non-opinion opinions, are not valid."

-- Why bother with all of this?  People will write what they want to write.

After a draft- after people are done really doing things- then "analysis" can begin and people with great credentials can explain how teams screwed up or could at least have done better. Or they can pat a team on the back and explain what a great job they did.

Which isn't really knowable for awhile. But what the heck?

As said, it's easy to be a hero behind a keypad. If you're lucky, you might even sound convincing for awhile.

why can't we look at the angle that the Browns scouts uncovered a DT that noone else saw? Why is it that
our scouts and Fo are always looked as stupid? These aren't the guys that drafted from 99-08.....I'm excited to see the guy play....

BK Dog wrote: why can't we look at the angle that the Browns scouts uncovered a DT that noone else saw? Why is it that
our scouts and Fo are always looked as stupid? These aren't the guys that drafted from 99-08.....I'm excited to see the guy play....

Sd:

Marecic and Jordan , and not one value pick in anything after the second round in two drafts will kinda sully the chance you get the benefit of the doubt.

"I'm excited to see the guy play...."

-- There it is. Let's see guys play. The draft is done, some holes are filled. Let's move forward.

Here's the thing (IMhO): Fans, of all teams, expect WAY too much from a class of draft picks.  If Trent Richardson is a stud RB and Brandon Weeden is a "decent" QB for 6-7 years, this draft will be fine even if every other player washes out in year 2. 

- When the Steelers took Ben R. in 2004, pretty much the rest of their draft was crap (Max Starks is "okay," but nothing special).

- When the Steelers took Troy P. a year earlier, the rest of their draft class was terrible. 

Nobody remembers those things amid the "Steelers ALWAYS draft well" stuff because, well, they got their offensive AND defensive cornerstones in back-to-back drafts. 

I'm sure someone can, and might, give an example of a team that hit on 4 or 5 stud starters in a single draft, but it would be the exception, not the rule.  And, yes, that DOES make it difficult to just "build through the draft," but the truth is (again, IMO) that expecting more than one true "stud player" and a couple other "decent" players is asking too much from a single draft class.

"Here's the thing (IMhO): Fans, or all teams, expect WAY too much from a class of draft picks."

-- There is something to that. Drafts happen and they are on TV and there's a Green Room and the Commish and all those stupid I mean great fans that go to it and a panel full of experts who wax lyrically or not about each pick.

So it lends itself to expectations.

I think in many cases the FO and the coaches and how guys are handled matters as much as talent. But certain guys get media attention and are talked about and make a good show. And- by some sort of osmosis- how they came into the league may get some credit that may not be totally deserved.

The draft is a crap-shoot and is a multi-team extravaganza that will have some good and some bad in it. FOs do the best they can as they deal with each other, then coaches come in and try to make a team. Then players play the game.

And once again the record is the thing that really matters.

Aard:  Hughes:  This early in the 3rd Round?

Where else?  A mere 3 picks later and New Orleans takes him instead of the kid from Regina.

Fact is, we knew something most of the league didn't know.  See, what people are failing to realize is that our Scouts did their home work on this one, did what everyone whines and complains and wishes scouts would do... and they found a talented kid.  So did New Orleans scouts.

We traded down 20 Slots.  Probably were looking for a WR.  This kid was top of our board.  Guess the WRs we had higher were gone.  Not a bad prize.

I was shocked and stunned at the pick too.  Instead of rage, it got me curious as to what happened.  So I did my research.  He wasn't making it to the 90th Pick.  It was take him at #86 or not get him.  Taking a kid at #86 when a team WILL take him at #89 and your next pick is #100... that's not a reach.  That's taking him dead in the slotted area.

So while the rest of the NFL didn't do their home work the Browns and the Saints did and knew this kid was money.  Some other teams may have as well, and figured he was a well kept secret that would slide.  They lost that bet.

Oh, wait... need a source.  Will Burge reports, he doesn't cite his source but I'm citing Will Burge.
http://www.waitingfornextyear.com/2012/04/espn-cle veland-john-hughes-was-in-demand/

New Orleans had Hughes at #89.  We took him at #86.  We got that #86 by trading down from #66 and netting an extra pick.

SO, not only did we trade down to acquire an extra pick, we also took the kid right in the range where another team had him targeted.

We didn't reach.  We did our home work and didn't let him get away.

Aardvark wrote: H&E:

But to say, player A, would have been there at position B...is pure, unadulterated trash. not opinion...

AA:

Nope, it's not even adulterated trash.  And I prefer mine that way.  It's even trashier.

It's an opinion as well, even couched without the requisite "IMO."  But you'd have to take that up with the person who claimed it.   Just because you disagree with it more vehemently doesn't turn an opinion into a tuba or a 3/8" socket wrench.  Less valid, maybe.  But it's still an opinion.

To speculate that Weeden would be there at 37 is just that, just as it is speculation that IF the Browns let him come to them, Weeden would have been snatched up just slots ahead by another team. 

This was taken to a more comical extreme with John Hughes.  Omigod, if the Browns didn't get him, he would have gone just picks later to another team!   To which I'd say, "Yea, and...?"

H&E:

And you certainly can't have an opinion of what was transpiring in the Rams and Bucs war rooms on draft day...

AA:

Sure you can, but you better bring something to support that opinion beyond "my cousin's best friend works for... and he was in there emptying wastebaskets when HE heard..."

We weren't there to see dinosaurs walk the earth.  We have anthropologists to paint us a picture. 

We weren't there to see the murder.  We have the forensics people to piece together the clues.   Doesn't make them infallible.  It just gives their opinions more weight. 

War room post-mortems may provide evidence of what one suspected, so their opinion then carries more weight.

I think enough evidence has been presented to warrant the Browns moving up to get TR.

We don't know what grade or value the Browns put on their picks, and whether they stepped out of that range to make a pick because of various factors (like Wright being taken).  There's speculation that HAD Wright been available at 22, they would have taken him, THEN made efforts to move up SOMEWHERE between 23 and 36 to grab Weeden. 

And if you buy that, then that is putting one wide value on the qb. 

And the Atlantic Ocean IS better than the Pacific.

Cheese,
There are really only two ways to go here,
Either you truly are IGNORANT enough to believe the drivel you posted, and completley fail to get the point that one cannot have a valid opinion about something they have NO knowledge of.

Or

You are a genious, and just f with everyone and everything with  less than strawman arguments to prove nonsense points...for some sick pleasure.

Personally I think it is the former, Dinosaurs and Anthropologists, and you can't get the point..

And what is more evident after 12 years of reading over your drivel, in your twisted mind you are always right...never a concession on any point, eval, opine, etc.
You just type, total non-sense like in the captioned box above, and think it makes sense.
The prose in the box above is just..

Pathetic..just plain and simply pathetic...

Aard:  Hughes:  This early in the 3rd Round?

BRX:

Where else?  A mere 3 picks later and New Orleans takes him instead of the kid from Regina.

AA:

And again I ask.... "So?"  

Or as a very perturbed Heckert's mother told him, "Now if the Saints said they were going to jump off a bridge, would you try to beat them to the punch?" 

Other teams shouldn't be dictating value the Browns place on players.  If all these teams were out there claiming they would have taken Hughes in the third, then it must have come as a shock to them that Heckert was even willing to nab this guy even higher!

General Manager Tom Heckert said that the Browns were ready to select Hughes at #67, but opted to trade back to #87 and acquire another 4^th round pick to replace the one they traded to Minnesota to move up and select Trent Richardson. The Browns had to wait a whole hour to find out if their gamble paid off.

http://espncleveland.com/common/more.php?m=49& post_id=1019

I mean at what point do the defenders begin to acknowledge that a king with no clothes AND an elephant happen to be in the room? 

BRX:

Fact is, we knew something most of the league didn't know.

AA:

Wasn't that a Butch Davis quote about Chaun Thompson?  Terrific.

Every team has its pet picks, the guys they believe their competitors don't know, or-- at the very least-- fill a unique fit in their schemes.  But still an appropriate value has to be placed on them.  If, for example, they think someone truly qualifies as a mid-fifth round pick, they don't then decide to take him in the fourth because they heard somebody else might grab him late in the fourth. 

BRX: 

See, what people are failing to realize is that our Scouts did their home work on this one, did what everyone whines and complains and wishes scouts would do... and they found a talented kid.  So did New Orleans scouts.

AA:

But we don't know what value the scouts and the organization placed on Hughes, and whether he was picked within that value range.  Hell, we had scouts who did their homework and their consensus was to draft Richard Seymour.  But then the guy pulling the trigger went with his gut and drafted a player with a big gut:  Gerard Warren.

BRX:

We traded down 20 Slots.  Probably were looking for a WR.  This kid was top of our board.  Guess the WRs we had higher were gone.  Not a bad prize.

AA:

Not a bad prize?  The best expected of Hughes is that he'll be a capable, two-down backup.  Hey, I'm all for dt depth, though I was hoping more for a one gap guy to fill in on obvious passing downs, and the Browns eventually filled that bill.

And if Winn and Hughes switched places in this draft, no one would have batted an eye. 

Instead, the reverse happens, and folks are plenty happy the late pickup in Winn, but then go into hyperdrive with rationalizations as to why Hughes justified an early third round pick.

BRX:

I was shocked and stunned at the pick too.  Instead of rage, it got me curious as to what happened.  So I did my research.  He wasn't making it to the 90th Pick.  It was take him at #86 or not get him.  Taking a kid at #86 when a team WILL take him at #89 and your next pick is #100... that's not a reach. 

AA:

Apparently it is since the Browns were ready to take him at #67!

WAGS:

I'm sure someone can, and might, give an example of a team that hit on 4 or 5 stud starters in a single draft, but it would be the exception, not the rule.  And, yes, that DOES make it difficult to just "build through the draft," but the truth is (again, IMO) that expecting more than one true "stud player" and a couple other "decent" players is asking too much from a single draft class.

AA:

So true.  Even after year 1, one can survey and see that maybe 1-2 players really contributed per team, if that.  Others do nothing, or get put on IR when it's clear they'll need lots of time to develop, so let's turn that hangnail into our advantage and fill the roster spot with a veteran who at least knows what they're doing.

To their credit, I believe the Browns led the league last year in number of starts from their rookie class.  But we know much of that was under extraordinary circumstances (or what I call "Chiaverini Syndrome").   Taylor and Sheard were all but handed their positions.  They performed decently under the circumstances, but it wasn't like they had to work their way past veterans to earn their jobs. 

Little didn't start right away, but again, not like any serious competition in front of him.  And Pinkston was a dire emergency fill-in.   Marecic was even handed a starting job and managed to play his way out of it.

To me, a successful draft is a first rounder who becomes a quality starter and maybe a Pro Bowler, a second rounder who becomes a decent to quality starter.  If anyone else can become even an average starter, or quality depth, it's been a good draft.

I'll chime in on one point here.  You compare this to Chaun Thompson.  No one else in the Drafted wanted Chaun Thompson.

In this incidence a team that does well picking Interior DL wanted the kid right above where we took him.

Heckert said he would have been happy taking him at #67.  He took a gamble that his scouts knew something about 20 other scouts didn't, which is that this kid could play.  He won that bet.  He got his kid, who he felt was worth a #67, for the #86 and got paid an extra pick to do it.

Heckert DID set the value for this kid.  Not the Saints.  Heckert set it at #67... then rolled the dice.  The Saints set the value at #89.  So we set the value higher, but in the same round.  Then we went and got him at a bargain from our assigned value and right in range of theirs.

I'm not justifying Hughes as the pick, I'm saying if Heckert wanted Hughes it had to be BEFORE #89.  I can also see why he wanted him.  Position of Need, The Kid can Play. 

As for Winn, we take a gamble.  The injury news got out, teams wouldn't touch him.  He added some weight, didn't look as good.  Injuries can do that to you.  Big risk... we may get the big reward.  We take Winn in the 3rd we look great... Draft Day.  Today we look like Draft Losers because all the news comes out and we bought Damaged Goods.  So yes, Draft Day you could have switched them and no one bats an eye.  Today, it makes much more sense why they went where they went.

And lastly, having a guy you rate #67 fall to #87, not a Reach.  Now, having a guy rated #87 and taking him #67, that's a Reach.  Rating him #67 and taking him #87... that's called a Moderate Value Pick, adding another Pick for him is called Adding Value to the Moderate Value Pick.

Point blank, this was a good move.

"Point blank, this was a good move."

-- It may be or it may not be. The people who are really set up to know are the people actually doing the draft. So, we'll see.

Saying that other teams don't set your value is avoiding the fact that there are 32 teams in the draft, that the draft is flexible, that the draft is timed and that you sometimes have to take certain factors in to "analysis" when deciding how to trade or parcel out your picks. You set a value perhaps, but what other teams may do is a fact you have to consider among many others. A value- like many things- has to be flexible and married to all other factors.

A pre-set value of a player is one thing, but a decision to take or not take a guy at a certain time is dependent on many factors. Vaue is one of those, but not the only one. Unless you're doing everything as a distant, ephemeral theory rather than trying to build a team with real people in real time.

None of which leaves a FO free from criticism or other "analysis". Just a reality check of how things actually get done.

I agree with how you put things here.

These are the things I know. 

The film shows a kid that looks like he'll be a good DT in the NFL. 
The Browns need a kid that can play DT well to go into a Rotation to improve the Defense. 
The Saints feel this kid can play DT and were willing to spend the #89 on him.
The Browns report they would have been content spending the #68 on him, gambled to add another pick.

The conclusion I draw from these things is this:  The Browns made a good trade down.  It was good because they still got the guy they wanted right in an area where other teams were interested in him (maximized the value of the pick) while netting another pick.  So the actual trade down was a success.

Not only did they add another pick, they gained almost (I guess #88 would have been maxed) maximum value for their player.  This is usually impossible to confirm because we only know 'teams had interest', not which teams or that they would have used a specific pick.  Here, we know Hughes was gone by the #89 so we can affix an actual value.  While this was luck, as the Saints could easily have traded up (they were hand-cuffed by losing picks earlier and such so it was more difficult for them than other teams) a few slots to achieve this, it now seems apparent that they did not have us pegged to go DT at #86... most had us going WR to include us fans.  They probably thought Hughes was safe and would be there for him, so while there was a chance some team would move up over our new position or some team we dropped below on the deal might take him... we won the bet. 

The big thing for me is the thing that takes this away from being Chaun Thompson, or any number of Al Davis picks.  Usually the rest of the NFL and Draftnits are confused.  Here, a legit team with a good track record at finding guys that are good at this position also had their eye on this kid.  Had this report not leaked and they took the Regina kid... I might be wondering why we didn't take the Regina kid instead and studying tape on him.  The fact that they still took DT is what I like, it means they were certain they wanted a DT as long as a reasonably level of talent was still there.  I don't know how closely they grade the Regina kid to Hughes, but I do know this means they went really hard with the DT Scouting and probably know as much if not more about the DT crop this year than any NFL team.  So if they wanted Hughes MORE... I'm glad we got him.

If we were whistling in the wind here and no other team had confirmed they thought this kid could play, I'd be worried.  CT2.  The Tennessee film and the New Orleans commitment (along with calls from Pittsburgh and others, as reported from Hughes himself) goes a long way to telling me that while not only did we fill a strategic need... that we may have got the BPA at this pick without 26+ NFL teams knowing it.

Now, if I'm viewing this right (and I know there are some variables out there) then that makes this one hell of a great pick.  That's War Room at it's best.  And huge credit needs to go to (1) the Scouts that found this kid and fought for his placement on the board and (2) Heckert for not only Drafting him but getting the Trade Down to work.  Only Hughes production on the field, and the impact that has on Taylor and Rubin as well, will determine if this was a good pick or not.  I maintain that Rotational DT (if he pulls his Weight and hits the field like a solid Rotational should) is equally important to certain starters, because of how the Defense regresses when a Starting DT is off the field if your Depth is lacking.

Now I could be wrong, and I admit that.  Fact is, the people on the other side of this argument could be wrong too.  Most of them aren't being nearly as intelligent about it as you, they are using the 'Who is this kid' argument or the 'Should have been a Position X' argument.  While you mention these at some level it is because you bring an entire argument.

I have painted an argument for, and really do see, a very strategic and smart move that happened to work for the Browns.

If Hughes had went to the Saints, or heaven help had we not picked him at #86 and suddenly Pittsburgh traded up and grabbed him at #87... and he went on to be a Pro Bowl DT over the next 3 years, we would all be complaining about how we are always unlucky in the Drafts and other teams like (especially) the Stellers are finding these gems in the mid to low rounds.  Now we go and do just that and people are furious about it.

How many no-names has Baltimore and Pittsburgh turned into really good if not Pro Bowl level Defenders?  Sure, they've been hitting on those 1's and 2's as well, but we know for sure (especially at OL, DL and Blitz LB) that they get guys later and make them work in the system.  We got Rubin in the 6th, we just added Hughes in the 3rd... we may find that he is as good if not better than Taylor.  Taylor was a 1st.  We'll have a 6th and 3rd that BOTH could be better than our 1st at the same position.  Go figure.  (To be fair, Rubin was rated Mid-3rd before some weird drop occurred, bad Shrine game or something). 

See, we start Drafting effectively, we start Drafting the way the guys that have been beating the crap out of us have been doing it... and suddenly fans don't like that. 

Smart, calculated moves all over this Draft.  Moves with meaning and purpose.  They probably all won't work, most Drafts don't have any team where all their moves in a Draft work, that's just insane.  But we are looking really good on paper right name (namely due to a large number of holes, some weak talent at the lower levels at the positions we picked, and some quality picking overall). 

We will see how this works out.  I just refuse to call a pick a reach when other teams had interest and we wouldn't have had another chance to take him.  We got him right where value dictated.

"We will see how this works out. I just refuse to call a pick a reach when other teams had interest and we wouldn't have had another chance to take him. We got him right where value dictated."

-- You might be a good person to have in a "war" room during a draft. (As if I knew...)

 Doing evaluations well is one thing. Reacting well to a situation and keeping your head when the clock is ticking is another. Putting the 2 things together and coming out with a good answer is perhaps the goal.

I'm sure I would curl up in a fetal position under a desk and kick anyone who came near.

You might actually perform a useful service to someone.

Gold star for you. I'm sure it means alot...