Cleveland Browns

Cleveland Browns: The QB questions continue with the 2017 NFL Draft

Updated Mar. 4, 2020 2:13 p.m. ET

Fansided, Joel W. Cade/FanSided via Dawg Pound Daily

The Cleveland Browns have done it again. They have earned the first overall pick in the NFL Draft during a year where there is no consensus top quarterback.

The Cleveland Browns are in a draft conundrum. Do they pick a quarterback with the first overall selection in the 2017 NFL Draft even though it may be a reach? Or do they draft the best value at the top pick and potentially miss out on their quarterback of the future?

In typical Browns fashion, they earned the first overall pick in a year where there is no consensus top quarterback. To make matters worse, if there were a consensus top quarterback most draft experts agree he would not be worth the No. 1 overall pick.

The Browns are in “year 2” of a massive tear down and rebuild project. This past season saw the elimination of what Joe Thomas called the “middle class” of the roster. In its place were 13 draft picks and many undrafted free agents. The result was a 1-15 record that put the Browns in position this draft season to infuse the roster with more young talent.

One of the biggest holes on the roster is quarterback. There are many schools of thought on how to build a roster. One model advocates picking the quarterback early then drafting a team around him. The other model mandates building a team first then drafting the quarterback second.

With the first overall pick, the Browns are in the crosshairs between drafting to fill out the team and being primed for picking the quarterback of the future. Fans, analysts and the media are split on which direction the Browns should take.

Let us examine each argument for and against taking a quarterback first overall. Only then will we be in position to lay out a path that makes sense for the Browns.

The team-building question merges into the question of how to most effectively use the first overall pick. Do the Browns take the best overall player, thereby conforming to the “build the team first” model? Or do they take a quarterback in accord with the “build the team around a quarterback” model?

The importance of the quarterback position cannot be overstated. To win in the NFL today, a team must have an average-to-elite quarterback, and the more elite the quarterback the better. Yet, an average quarterback can take a well-built team to the Super Bowl.

Because of the correlation between having a franchise quarterback and wins, NFL teams put a premium on the quarterback position during player acquisition periods like free agency and the draft. The rule of supply and demand dictates the value.

The demand for franchise quarterbacks in the NFL is high. However, given the proliferation of non-pro-style offenses in the college football ranks, the supply is low. The skills necessary to compete at the NFL level are not taught in many college programs.

Quarterbacks regularly enter the draft having very little experience with NFL quarterback skill sets. They often have spent very little time under center, and often lack sufficient pocket awareness. Some lack the skills to call plays in a huddle or set a pass-protection. In many ways, NFL teams are starting at ground zero when developing a franchise quarterback out of college.

With the supply low and the demand high, is it any wonder NFL teams often pay a premium price (or overpay, reach, etc.) for a not-so-ready quarterback? These players may have all the physical abilities to be an NFL quarterback, but very few of those skills have been developed to the point where they can be successful.

In fact, it is safe to conclude that the NFL quarterback market is inflated. An inflated market increases the value of quarterbacks coming out of college. In terms of the draft, the reality is an NFL team must pay a premium (overpay/reach) for a developmental quarterback in relation to the value of the pick in which they are taken.

There are rare exceptions to the rule. In these cases, the exception proves the rule. The reality of today’s NFL is that any team wanting a quarterback in the draft must overpay or reach to get him.

This leaves us with the question of how should the Browns proceed with first overall pick.

The first model dictates that an NFL-caliber quarterback is extremely valuable. It is so valuable that any cost to obtain an elite quarterback is more than worth any price. These people are looking for a quarterback hero to lead their team into the promised land.

As a special part of these sections, I am providing appropriate music to accompany the analysis. First up, “Holding out for a Hero,” by Bonnie Tyler.

In Browns land, the quarterback hero school is typified by the Browns media at large. Key proponents include Tony Grossi, Pat McManamon and Mary Kay Cabot. This idea is not simply limited to the media, as Browns’ employee Nathan Zegura is a proponent of a variation of this model as well.

In general, this model advocates using the first overall pick on a quarterback. If he turns out to be a franchise quarterback it was worth it. If not, the pick was a bust.

This line of thought can be used to justify trading entire drafts for a franchise quarterback. The argument goes along the lines of the end justifies the means. The end, a quarterback, is so value that any means of obtaining that quarterback (regardless of cost or reason) is justified.

For this group, if there is a quarterback that the Browns believe can be a franchise quarterback on the board, he must be taken first overall. He must be taken even if the quality of the quarterback does not correlate to the quality of player a team could acquire at number one otherwise.

The end, the franchise quarterback, justifies the means and cost.

Dec 18, 2016; Orchard Park, NY, USA; Cleveland Browns quarterback Robert Griffin III (10) drops to pass during the first half against the Buffalo Bills at New Era Field. Mandatory Credit: Kevin Hoffman-USA TODAY Sports

The model of effective drafting seeks to correlate the value of the pick to value of the player chosen. In this school of thought, the first overall pick should be used only on a player worthy of the first overall pick.

In short, proponents of this idea want a “Paradise City” in which everything correlates and is harmonious.

In Browns land, this model is typified by the draft analysis community. Key figures in this model are Mel Kiper Jr., Todd McShay and Dane Brugler. These figures provide draft analysis and scouting reports to rank every player coming out of college. The point is to determine the value of players to correlate them to their overall draft value. In Paradise City, every team would use their draft capital (overall worth of each pick) on a player worthy of that pick.

However, sometimes reality gets in the way. A team may have a need at a certain draft slot, say the 14th selection in the first round, but none of the players on the board in the position of need fits the value of that pick. Often, teams will draft for that need instead of the perceived correlation between the value of player to pick. In this model, the draft is broken.

When teams reach, (draft players whose perceived value is less than the value of the pick), the inherent order of the draft is disrupted. Based on non-correlation of pick to player, grades are handed out to each team. A team who gets less player value than pick value gets a worse grade than a team who can exceed pick value with player value.

In this model, the first overall pick should be used on a player whose value is worthy of the first overall pick. In this draft, Texas A&M defensive end Myles Garrett is currently that player.

In this model, the value of a quarterback is relegated to the value of pick and player.

But if the quarterback is the most important player on the team, can the value of the quarterback be accurately calculated? Can a team afford to wait on a quarterback whose perceived value is less than the pick value?

Jan 13, 2016; Berea, OH, USA; Cleveland Browns new head coach Hue Jackson (left) and Vice President of Football Operations Sashi Brown talk during a press conference at the Cleveland Browns training facility. Mandatory Credit: Ken Blaze-USA TODAY Sports

The Gambler model seeks to play the draft market. The draft market is full of inefficiencies. An inefficiency occurs when the market places a greater value upon an item than an efficient market would.

If the draft evaluators place a second-round value on a quarterback, but a team picks him in the first round, then the quarterback draft market is inefficient. The quarterback market in the NFL current operates in these conditions.

The Gambler model seeks to exploit market inefficiency to increase overall value. A team may have a high pick. Another team may have a lower pick but want a quarterback. That quarterback may be valued by draft evaluators to land in the second team’s draft slot. However, due to the quarterback market inefficiency, the quarterback may be taken before his efficient pick slot.

The Gambler would then seek to leverage his higher pick against the other team’s pick and desire for a quarterback in an inefficient market to increase his overall draft capital.

In Browns land, the key proponents of this model are front office executives Paul DePodesta and Sashi Brown. For an example one need look no further than the 2016 NFL Draft. The Browns front office used the quarterback market inefficiency to increase its draft capital in the 2017 and 2018 drafts. Thus, the Browns own more draft capital than the original pick they traded held.

The Browns executed the Gambler to perfection last year.

There is one more detour to be taken before returning to the Browns conundrum.

A new type of Gambler has arrived at the draft game. The New England Patriots and head coach Bill Belichick have a new scheme to take advantage of the quarterback market inefficiency. It takes the form of quarterback Jimmy Garoppolo, who represents a Jack in Belichick’s hand.

The Patriots have possibly the greatest quarterback of all-time in Tom Brady. However, they have begun drafting quarterbacks high, increasing their value over the life of their rookie contract, then sell them off for more draft capital than was used to acquire the asset originally.

Garoppolo was drafted with the No. 62 overall pick in the 2014 NFL Draft. In other terms, he was taken with the 30th pick of the second round. Over the past two years, the Patriots have been teaching him to play quarterback at the NFL level under Brady. Thus, Garoppolo’s overall value has theoretically increased.

The Patriots are now looking to trade Garoppolo to a team looking for a quarterback. The current asking price is reportedly a first and fourth-round pick. That is a huge return on the 62nd overall pick used to acquire him.

The new Gambler is trying to insert himself into the inefficient quarterback market. If successful, this new form of market manipulation will bring significant value to any team able to pull it off.

Jason Lisk of theBigLead.com has recently argued that acquisitions like Garoppolo have outperformed first-round picks in the past. Someone, maybe even the Browns, will bite on Garoppolo. When that happens, the new Gambler may have taken the table out from under the draft.

Sep 3, 2016; Atlanta, GA, USA; North Carolina Tar Heels quarterback Mitch Trubisky (10) throws as Georgia Bulldogs linebacker Davin Bellamy (17) is upended behind him during the fourth quarter of the 2016 Chick-Fil-A Kickoff game at Georgia Dome. Georgia won 33-24. Mandatory Credit: Brett Davis-USA TODAY Sports

We finally circle back to the original problem facing the Browns. How can they effectively build their team using the No. 1 overall pick? Should they take a quarterback? Should they trade out? Should they take a player whose value correlates to the pick? How should the Browns negotiate this conundrum?

Here is how I would handle the situation if I were running the Browns front office.

The NFL is a quarterback league, but the end does not justify the means. The point of building a team is to create a winner and winning at an elite level will not happen without a quarterback. Yet, one cannot recklessly give away draft capital to obtain the quarterback. The gambler must prevail in draft matters.

The first overall pick is an extremely valuable commodity. Wise usage of the pick means getting the most value out of it as possible. This can be done in several ways, including trading the pick for future draft capital. A wise usage also could mean taking a quarterback and absorbing the overpay in the pick value itself instead of the loss of future picks.

Due to an inflated quarterback market, every team must overpay to get a franchise quarterback. Most teams overpay by trading draft capital (i.e. future picks) to get a high enough pick to reach on a quarterback prospect. The Browns are already sitting with the first overall pick, placing them in position to overpay for a quarterback by simply reaching for a prospect. By using the first overall pick on a reach, they do not lose anything other draft value (i.e. they do not lose future picks), they simply lose draft value vis-à-vis the value of the player taken.

If the Browns determine there is not a quarterback in the draft they want, they need to begin the process of exploiting the market. The Browns will eventually like a quarterback and, when that time comes, they will need excess draft capital to get in position to take him. Said excess draft capital can be gained by trading out of the first overall pick. Since consistent winning in Cleveland will not happen until a franchise quarterback is found all draft efforts must have this final goal in mind.

At this time, the Browns should take North Carolina quarterback Mitch Trubisky first overall. The reasons for this require a separate article and I reserve the right to change my mind in the future. Because I am not sold on Garrett or Alabama’s Jonathan Allen, if the Browns don’t take Trubisky they need to trade out and acquire draft capital for a quarterback in the 2018 NFL Draft.

Finally, the Browns should run, not walk, as far away from Garoppolo as possible. Garoppolo could end up being the next Brady, but he also could end up being the next Ryan Mallet. Who was the last backup quarterback to come out of New England and be successful? (If you are thinking Brian Hoyer, you need to look again).

Further, the draft capital sought for Garoppolo is insane compared to his value. He was the No. 62 overall pick in 2014 and has played very little, although when he did play it looked promising. He is under team control for one more year before a team must pay mega-bucks to keep him. Is one year really enough time to evaluate him as a player?

If the Browns believe one season is enough time to evaluate a quarterback, then they should simply select Trubisky first overall. He would be under team control for five years plus the Browns do not have to mortgage the future to acquire him.