If you haven't heard the news yet, then I would like to inform you that Trent Richardson of the Cleveland Browns has been traded to the Indianapolis Colts for a first round draft pick. Richardson, the number three overall pick in 2012 from Alabama, rushed for 950 yards and 11 TDs his rookie year in 15 games. It's not so much the trade that surprised me, but just that there were no rumblings about this going on before the trade was made. Usually you'll hear about guys who are on the block or teams that are looking for help, but this one threw me off guard. Yes the Colts just lost Vick Ballard for the year, but wasn't he supposed to be the number two back anyways behind Ahmad Bradshaw? The timing was also strange as we are just two games into the NFL season. I've already seen reactions supporting and lamenting this trade, so I will take a look from both sides and dig deeper into this trade.
Indianapolis Colts
If I'm the Colts, as of right now, I am ecstatic about this trade. You give up a first round pick next year which, given how well the Colts are projected to do this year, would have been somewhere in the range of the mid to late 20s, for the third overall draft pick from two drafts ago. Yes, please! The Colts now have a franchise QB (Andrew Luck), a veteran play maker at WR (Reggie Wayne), and a quality RB (Richardson). Even though they have all these weapons on offense, I still think they need to shore up their defense before thinking Super Bowl, but getting Richardson for their first rounder is a steal in my opinion.
The only thing that confuses me a bit about this deal is, as I mentioned before, the fact that they brought in Ahmad Bradshaw in the offseason to be the featured back. Obviously Bradshaw does not have the best of all injury histories, but if they wanted to, they could have held onto their pick next year and picked up a veteran free agent to fill the void left by Vick Ballard. Clearly though, the Colts feel they are set for the future and are willing to bypass said draft pick next year.
Cleveland Browns
From the Colts perspective, it was a pretty simple deal. From the Browns perspective, there's a whole lot of stuff to analyze. Let's start with the current state of their team. Now that Richardson is gone, that leaves Chris Ogbonnaya and Bobby Rainey as the two RBs on the roster. As of this writing Willis McGahee is not on the roster, though there are many rumors suggesting he will be. Regardless, a significant downgrade at that position. With starting QB Bradon Weeden now out as well, it looks like the Browns are chasing after the number one overall pick next year.
Another stat that it looks like they could be chasing is the dreaded 0-16. They still have to face teams like the Patriots, Packers, and Bears. The only games left on their slate that I could see them winning would be Week 13 vs Jacksonville (which could decide who gets the number one overall pick), and Week 16 at the Jets. The Jets game is a bit of a reach given how good the Jets defense is and how awful the Browns offense is now, but you never know. Just trying to give them some hope. They've pretty much given up on 2013 and are looking towards the future. The question is, by giving up Richardson, did they truly make the best choice for the future of this franchise? Let's investigate.
Although the Browns won't outright say it, this trade makes it clear that they do not trust Brandon Weeden and are looking to obtain a high draft pick to select a QB in the 2014 draft. Some of the more talked about QB names are Teddy Bridgewater, Tahj Boyd, and Johnny Manziel. So what they are banking on is that they can find a RB later in the draft to replace Richardson (No. 3 overall), but they need this top pick to get a quality QB. Well Cleveland, I ran some numbers for you and here's what I found:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0Ahl64bit0mEodHdQT0hRNVEzX01JQm91MjVPbjJvTkE&output=html
There you will find all 32 teams with their starting QB and RB and the pick that they were selected at. I also made columns for if I felt they were an established starter or not. I didn't really set exact parameters so you may disagree with some of the choices, but for the most part, I feel it is accurate (also, those a's in the column were supposed to be check marks, but didn't transfer correctly from Excel to Google Spreadsheet). Also, some teams currently do not have a clear cut RB starter (Saints, Steelers) so I just went with what their team website depth chart said. So what does this data tell us?
Well, on the surface, it would appear that the Browns made the right move. Romo and Pryor were the only QBs not selected in the actual NFL draft (remember Pryor had to be selected in the supplemental draft due to an NCAA investigation), while four running backs went undrafted. The average pick for a starting QB in the NFL is about 37, or the beginning of the second round, whereas the average pick for a starting RB in the NFL is about 83, or the middle of the third round. This implies that you have to get your QB early, but you can find a RB late. Digging deeper, however, reveals this discrepancy to not be so large.
The Browns are clearly looking for a QB they can ride for the future and to postseason success, not just one to have around. If you calculate the average pick of QBs that I feel are established starters in the league, the number stays about the same at 36.86. If I do the same thing for RBs, however, the difference between QBs and RBs becomes much smaller as the average pick of RBs that I feel are established starters in the league goes down to 62. This would sneak them into the second round along with the QBs. Now, I realize there are tons of other factors involved and, again, the established starters metric is subjective, but this tells me that your chances of getting a quality RB early in the draft is about the same as getting a quality QB in the draft.
Now, let's take a look at Cleveland's draft history. The hype that is building in Cleveland is that now for the 2014 draft, they will have two first round picks and seven in the first four rounds. That's nice, if you know what to do with them. Let's go year by year and see how the Browns have done recently in the first four rounds. I'll start with 2007 to give them the benefit of the doubt because they selected Joe Thomas in the first round, one of the best offensive linemen in the game right now. Also drafted that year, however, was Brady Quinn (22) and Eric Wright (53), neither of which are still on the team.
The Browns had zero picks in 2008 in the first three rounds and used their two fourth rounders on Beau Bell (104) and Martin Rucker (111). They had a grand total of one start for the Browns between them. 2009 brought more picks, but the same disappointing results. Alex Mack (21) worked out, but Brian Robiskie (36), Mohamed Massaquoi (50), David Veikune (52), and Kaluka Maiava (104) are no longer on the team. 2010 brought in Joe Haden (7), but also Montario Hardesty (59) and Colt McCoy (85). 2011 may have been their best draft selecting Phil Taylor (21), Greg Little (59), and Jordan Cameron (102) who is turning out to be an elite TE in this league. Then 2012 came and Richardson (3) and Weeden (22) were united to supposedly be the future for the Browns. Well, Richardson is now off the team and it looks like Weeden is about to be replaced in the next year or two. So should there really be all this hype in Cleveland about how these draft picks will translate to the future?
Personally, I think it was a mistake to get rid of Richardson. I think he'll be a solid player in this league for years to come. Is Weeden old? Yep. Does he need to be replaced? Probably. But I still think you have about as good odds of finding a quality QB late in the draft as you do of finding a quality RB late. With Richardson, you know that you have a quality player. Can we be certain that Teddy Bridgewater will be the next great QB? I'm sure Mel Kiper will tell you so, but we can't be 100% certain until we see him at the NFL level. We've seen Richardson excel at this level on a bad team. I understand needing to rebuild, but giving up a second year RB for the possibility of drafting a QB who might be good is risky to say the least.
Maybe I'm underestimating the Browns' ability to draft. Maybe they know something about Richardson that I don't know. Perhaps he was bad for team chemistry or had private off the field issues. All I know is he was a quality back in a day and age where good RBs seem to be a dying breed. I just think that rebuilding around Richardson would have been better than rebuilding around whoever they draft next year.
Matty O
