The year of NFL draft analysis is almost over, so the Mel Kipers and Todd McShays of the world will go back to irrelevance as of Sunday.
Of course, both of those guys and others like them will start their analysis of the 2013 draft almost immediately.
It is funny how the “draftniks” decide who should be picked and where.
Everyone seems to have a reason as to why a particular player should not be picked instead of the current analysis, which would be picking the best player on a given team’s draft board.
And they bring up odd data to support their reasoning. That’s the beauty of all this misinformation.
For example, the Browns should not take Alabama RB Trent Richardson because the 4th overall pick is too high to take a running back.
Look at the NFL’s leading rushers. Maurice Jones-Drew led the league in yards gained on the ground, and he was a 2nd round pick. So, was Ray Rice of the Ravens, who finished second in the NFL in rushing.
Therefore, no team should draft a running back in the first round, right?
Heck, Houston’s Arian Foster (5th in 2011) wasn’t even drafted.
However, there are many productive backs in the league today who were picked in the first round, such as Marshawn Lynch, Steven Jackson, Ryan Mathews, and Willis McGahee.
If the Browns have Richardson as the best player available at #4, they should pick him.
Then, you have Oklahoma State WR Justin Blackmon, regarded as the best receiver in the draft this year.
The draft pundits will say that Blackmon is not as good as last year’s fourth overall pick, Cincinnati’s A.J. Green, so he shouldn’t be picked there.
Once again, if the GM Tom Heckert thinks he’s the best player when Cleveland in on the clock, they should take him.
The critics will say the Browns can’t take Texas A & M QB Ryan Tannehill because he’s the third best passer available in the draft. Forget that Ben Roethlisberger was rated the third quarterback in the 2006 draft behind Eli Manning and Philip Rivers.
That’s worked out pretty well for Pittsburgh, hasn’t it?
And certainly Heckert shouldn’t take LSU CB Morris Claiborne because they need help so badly on offense. Why shouldn’t the Browns take him and team him with Joe Haden to have possibly the best pair of cornerbacks in the NFL.
The last time Cleveland has a pair of shut down CB’s was in the late 1980’s when they had Hanford Dixon and Frank Minnifield. It is a coincidence that was the last time the Browns were a power in the league?
The way the so-called experts talk about why players shouldn’t be taken by the Browns, it’s no wonder that the talk of trading down for more picks is out there.
The purpose of the draft is so the teams who didn’t have a good record in the previous year can get better, and the way to do that is to take the most talented players.
It’s really very simple.
With the fourth pick in the draft, Heckert needs to take the best player on his board, and position shouldn’t really matter. The only caveat would be T Matt Kalil, who plays the same position as Joe Thomas, the Browns’ best player.
If Cleveland thinks Trent Richardson is that guy, and a few scouts have said he’s the best running back prospect to enter the league since Adrian Peterson, then the Browns should take him.
Of course, the “draft gurus” will tell you that’s a mistake. Then again, they aren’t picking anyone.