Rumor: Ryan Mallet to Browns for 6th overall pick

[Off The Grid]

The Draftniks posting here always seem to think some obscure pick from Okeefinokee U as a 7th rounder, can immediately replace a starter in his prime, who was originally a First Rounder.

Meanwhile they create bizarre notions, while imagining impossibilities.

Yeah, I never heard of Tom Brady, either!!

Some Disturbing Yet Fascinating Truths, my friend:

1 ~ Tom Brady ~ 6th Rounder.

2 ~ Joe Montana ~ 3rd Rounder.

3 ~ Johny Unitas ~ 9th Rounder (4th Rounder in 2013 Dollars)

4 ~ Bart Starr ~ arguably the best'f'm all!! ~ 17th Rounder ~ 7th Rounder, today.

Sorry if the facts shatter your "Argument".

To be fair, it depends on what claim one's trying to make.

There's quite a difference between these three statements:

• "If the next QB for the Pats is a great one, it's likely he'll be picked late."
• "A late-round QB has a good chance of replacing Tom Brady."
• "A late-round QB gives the Patriots the best chance at QB after Tom Brady leaves."

Evidence for one claim is not evidence for all of 'em.

Guess what? Nobody was making any of those claims.

If you'd simply taken a look and seen that my comment was a direct response to Zona's rambling, stumbling tirade ~ which I had directly quoted ~ then you would've realized that he was the only one making anything even faintly resembling a "claim"...though it was more of a slimy slur than anything resembling a cohesive or intelligent Point...and that I obliterated his fumbling foolishness with these things we call "facts".

***

History clearly shows that some of the greatest QuarterBacks of the Modern Era ~ 4 out of the 5 greatest QuarterBacks of the Modern Era, in my subjective opinion ~ were drafted in the 3rd Round or later.

***

But that doesn't mean that I'm suggesting we ignore QuarterBacks before the 3rd Round or later, and if anyone foolishly inferred that, then that's on them. :snob:

It only means that presuming that a great QuarterBack has to be a 1st Rounder...is childishly foolish.

 

[everlong]

I still don't buy into any of this Mallet for the #6 pick but there's also a large contingency that thinks they should let Welker walk due to cap concerns. As an alternate scenario tag Welker and send both to Cleveland as a package for #6. Welker becomes Mallet's security blanket for the transition and you get some value out of Welker vs releasing him.

Again not saying any of this fantasy football happens but what the hell it's the off season.

 

[dryheat44]

I still don't buy into any of this Mallet for the #6 pick but there's also a large contingency that thinks they should let Welker walk due to cap concerns. As an alternate scenario tag Welker and send both to Cleveland as a package for #6. Welker becomes Mallet's security blanket for the transition and you get some value out of Welker vs releasing him.

Again not saying any of this fantasy football happens but what the hell it's the off season.

That's actually not a bad idea, although I'd be happier if we can get Colt McCoy coming back.

 

[Snake Eyes]

Zero chance. doubt they would give a 3rd

For a 3rd BB would be better off keeping him for another 2yrs, and Cleveland can go back to have garbage for QB.

 

[everlong]

That's actually not a bad idea, although I'd be happier if we can get Colt McCoy coming back.

I like McCoy but he doesn't fit the Pats prototype of 6'4"-6" at only 6'1". Weeden is 6'4" but I don't think there would be interest in him.

 

[I.M. Fletcher]

I still don't buy into any of this Mallet for the #6 pick but there's also a large contingency that thinks they should let Welker walk due to cap concerns. As an alternate scenario tag Welker and send both to Cleveland as a package for #6. Welker becomes Mallet's security blanket for the transition and you get some value out of Welker vs releasing him.

Again not saying any of this fantasy football happens but what the hell it's the off season.

It's something that has been talked about, and it needs a lot of moving pieces to fall into place, but value wise I don't see the disparity that some do.

 

[VJCPatriot]

I still don't buy into any of this Mallet for the #6 pick but there's also a large contingency that thinks they should let Welker walk due to cap concerns. As an alternate scenario tag Welker and send both to Cleveland as a package for #6. Welker becomes Mallet's security blanket for the transition and you get some value out of Welker vs releasing him.

Again not saying any of this fantasy football happens but what the hell it's the off season.

Actually Welker and Mallet for the #6 sounds reasonable. Welker is a top 5 WR in terms of production and Mallet would be their QB of the future. It would cost them money to sign Welker but aren't they in pretty good cap shape and in need of WR talent anyways?

 

[BrickPat]

How does Mallett's draft stock go down when he's been an understudy to potentially the greatest QB of all time, has untapped potential and this Quarterback class looks to be pathetic?

Astute and valid point. How is this a bad move for the Browns if they have Mallett ranked higher, so to speak, than this year's draft crop of QBs?

It would be crazy to use a first round pick to get Mallett via the Pats instead of a college QB? There are no Lucks or RGIII's in this year's draft class. If the Browns truly believe Mallett is their best option it only makes sense for them to use the pick via a trade to get him.

 

[manxman2601]

Astute and valid point. How is this a bad move for the Browns if they have Mallett ranked higher, so to speak, than this year's draft crop of QBs?

It would be crazy to use a first round pick to get Mallett via the Pats instead of a college QB? There are no Lucks or RGIII's in this year's draft class. If the Browns truly believe Mallett is their best option it only makes sense for them to use the pick via a trade to get him.

The only thing I'd add is that one downside for the Browns is that they'd only have Mallett for two years before having to re-sign him or lose him to FA. Take Joe Flacco, it's taken him 3-4 years where he can be realistically evaluated as a franchise QB. Mallett has had less experience than that.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

The only thing I'd add is that one downside for the Browns is that they'd only have Mallett for two years before having to re-sign him or lose him to FA. Take Joe Flacco, it's taken him 3-4 years where he can be realistically evaluated as a franchise QB. Mallett has had less experience than that.

On the flip side, they have him for two years at a total cost of about $1 million*, as opposed to the $16 million, likely fully guaranteed, the #6 pick will cost over four years.

*Under the new CBA, Mallett can't even reach the escalator that would take his year four salary up to the RFA level (unless CLE sets a new NFL record for offensive snaps).

 

[manxman2601]

On the flip side, they have him for two years at a total cost of about $1 million*, as opposed to the $16 million, likely fully guaranteed, the #6 pick will cost over four years.

*Under the new CBA, Mallett can't even reach the escalator that would take his year four salary up to the RFA level (unless CLE sets a new NFL record for offensive snaps).

Assuming they would have drafted a pass rusher at #6, they'd still have to find him from somewhere. That 16m could actually be a cheaper option. But I take your point.

 

[dryheat44]

Astute and valid point. How is this a bad move for the Browns if they have Mallett ranked higher, so to speak, than this year's draft crop of QBs?

It would be crazy to use a first round pick to get Mallett via the Pats instead of a college QB? There are no Lucks or RGIII's in this year's draft class. If the Browns truly believe Mallett is their best option it only makes sense for them to use the pick via a trade to get him.

I think this is part of the disconnect. Just because no QB in the draft is worth the #6 doesn't mean Mallett is. Nobody seems to be arguing that Smith, Barkley, et al are better than Mallett.

When you figure Alex Smith could probably be had for a third and willing to re-do his contract to facilitate a trade, why would a team want to invest a high first rounder in Mallett?

 

[jsull87]

I think this is part of the disconnect. Just because no QB in the draft is worth the #6 doesn't mean Mallett is. Nobody seems to be arguing that Smith, Barkley, et al are better than Mallett.

When you figure Alex Smith could probably be had for a third and willing to re-do his contract to facilitate a trade, why would a team want to invest a high first rounder in Mallett?

Well the answer would obviously be because they think Mallett is better than Smith.

Look this is all speculation at this point so no one is right or wrong. The Mallett and Welker for #6 is interesting as much as i don't want to see Welker go this could be one of those year (or 2) to early rather than a year too late type scenarios.

 

[Sciz]

I see cuts are being made. Does that mean there can be trades now? If so, Mallett watch has officially started.

 

[manxman2601]

I see cuts are being made. Does that mean there can be trades now? If so, Mallett watch has officially started.

I'm pretty sure trades can't be made until the new NFL year starts in March. Looking back to last year, the first trade made was March 13th so that sounds about right.

The Combine comes first. We'll have to follow reports from there about how closely the Cleveland scouts and FO are looking at the QB's.

 

[Off The Grid]

I see cuts are being made.

Does that mean there can be trades now?

If so, Mallett watch has officially started.

Don't I wish!!

I'm afraid not, Bro: Trading and Free Agency start at the same moment: 1600 on March 12th.

 

[patsfaninpa]

I think this is part of the disconnect. Just because no QB in the draft is worth the #6 doesn't mean Mallett is. Nobody seems to be arguing that Smith, Barkley, et al are better than Mallett.

When you figure Alex Smith could probably be had for a third and willing to re-do his contract to facilitate a trade, why would a team want to invest a high first rounder in Mallett?

One thing that's changed dramatically the last 10-15 years is that teams only give coaches 3-4 years to win. Or less!! Why draft a qb and take time to develop him? Your employer won't give you a check for that. They will can your arse for not winning. Lombardi might feel that Haslam wants to win right away and he's got a better chance to do it with Mallett than a rookie. Also, if you're playing in that division. I want a big qb with a strong arm. Not saying he's worth the 6th. Just giving some reasoning for Lombardi wanting him.

 

[everlong]

When you figure Alex Smith could probably be had for a third and willing to re-do his contract to facilitate a trade, why would a team want to invest a high first rounder in Mallett?

Smith is due something like a 10M option on March 1st so there's very little upside to a team trading for him at all.

 

[dryheat44]

Smith is due something like a 10M option on March 1st so there's very little upside to a team trading for him at all.

7.5 million guaranteed on 4/1. For a proven NFL quarterback, it doesn't seem to be an onerous salary. But it seems likely that he would tear up his contract (set to expire after 2014, when his salary is 7.5 million) in order to facilitate a trade to a team that could give him an opportunity to start, especially to the Browns, where Norv Turner is your new OC.

 

[reflexblue]

Its hard to believe that this thread has gone on for over 170 replys. If i'm the GM of cleveland why would i send the number Six (6) Overall pick to NE for Mallet. He had a very good college career, but so haven't a lot of QBs only to crash and burn in the NFL. Mallet is an unknown quantity, hes only played a handful of downs in regular games. So again why would Cleveland spend such a high pick on him when they could trade it for multiple picks, giving one to SF for Smith. The whole idea never made sense from the beginning. Its like one of those fantasy trades i see once in a while.... Ex.Lets trade some old over the hill player ex Dion Branch to Arizona for A. Johnson, its never going to happen.