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

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?

Next: 2016 roster analysis: The QBs

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.