PFF on Mo Clayborne

[BucBalla85]

We still could of had at least one of them.  Probably not both though.  Ie, we could've used our 3rd to trade up.

We did trade our third. For David. We didnt have a 4th without the trade down for Barron. We used that 4th and second rounder to get Martin and then used the swapped 4th and 3rd rounder to get David. 

[Hate]

i'll take Barron/Martin over Claiborne

. We all are saying that now but if this guy becomes Revis those two better be pretty damn good or we lost on draft day once again.

While you're correct, i'll go on record now as being on board with the move.....unlike the Clayton, Carnell and Gaines selections which I "Hated" the moment they were made!!

[Skull and Bones]

No.  The only addition player we really got was David.  So compare Barron/David vs Clayborne if you want to play that game.

[BucBalla85]

Without the 4th none of those trade ups were possible. Or at least to get what we got.

[Hate]

i'll take Barron/Martin over Claiborne

Would you take Claiborne/Martin or Barron/Martin?  Because trading down for Barron wasn't the only way to acquire Martin.

Ok..... well i'd take the Barron/Martin/David combo over Claiborne/Martin.

[Skull and Bones]

We still could of had at least one of them.  Probably not both though.  Ie, we could've used our 3rd to trade up.

We did trade our third. For David. We didnt have a 4th without the trade down for Barron. We used that 4th and second rounder to get Martin and then used the swapped 4th and 3rd rounder to get David.

. You're not following me.  We could have drafted Mo at 5 and then traded our 2nd and 3rd to trade up for Martin.  So the only player we would have lost out on is David.  Or we could have not traded up for Martin and taken David in the 2nd and someone else in the 3rd. 

[BucBalla85]

We still could of had at least one of them.  Probably not both though.  Ie, we could've used our 3rd to trade up.

We did trade our third. For David. We didnt have a 4th without the trade down for Barron. We used that 4th and second rounder to get Martin and then used the swapped 4th and 3rd rounder to get David.

. You're not following me.  We could have drafted Mo at 5 and then traded our 2nd and 3rd to trade up for Martin.  So the only player we would have lost out on is David.  Or we could have not traded up for Martin and taken David in the 2nd and someone else in the 3rd.

Ok yea in that scenario your right. Wonder what it was that made us want Barron over Claiborne. Cooper his DB coach may have had some info. Maybe Safety is that important to Schiano.

[Tampa-Two]

Yeah, Im with Hate on this one. I like Barron/Martin/David a heck of a lot more than I like Claiborne/Martin.

And I was on the Claiborne bandwagon.

[Feel Real Good]

i'll take Barron/Martin over Claiborne

. We all are saying that now but if this guy becomes Revis those two better be pretty damn good or we lost on draft day once again.

If Claiborne is a star at one of the most difficult positions in football, it's going to be really, really, really hard to get equal value out of Barron and whichever other player you most attribute with the trade down.

[Skull and Bones]

Yep.  And that's my biggest fear about this move.  We are basically banking on Clayborne being a disappointment.

[BucBalla85]

Yep.  And that's my biggest fear about this move.  We are basically banking on Clayborne being a disappointment.

Depends on how you look at it I think. I mean if Barron becomes a pro bowler and Claiborne becomes a pro bowler but the better player. I wont be the guy complaining about it, Im sure there will be plenty of people who will do that for me though.

[Biggs3535]

Without the 4th none of those trade ups were possible. Or at least to get what we got.

Again, this simply isn't true.  Teams trade future draft picks to move up to grab a player they want every year. 

The Buccaneers could have ended up with both Martin and David without trading down in the first.

[Feel Real Good]

Maybe Safety is that important to Schiano.

It doesn't really matter how important safety may be to the coach. All that matters is talent. You don't build a team around average players. You build a team around star players. If Barron is only an average player and we try and build around him just because Schiano likes safeties, we're going to be a bad team.

[Booker Reese]

I was a big fan of drafting Morris Claiborne, for some of the reasons stated in the PFF article, but...

I'm not really sure why we are pulling our hair out over this one. Even the guy from PFF notes that this (analyzing rookies) isn't what they do - their entire program is based around the fact that they do one thing exhaustively - watch pro football games.

I think FRG is mostly right - if Claiborne truly becomes elite, it's going to take something quite special out of Barron (or the David-Barron combo if you prefer) for passing on him to make sense. However - I've maintained from pretty early on that while Morris Claiborne has some elite abilities, he may simply have been a square peg for Schiano's scheme. To the extent that is true, I think any blame for passing on Claiborne should be shared between Schiano and Dom.

[Beatles123]

If Barron is a good/great safety as well as David contributing...i could care less if Claiborne has a HOF carrer. We'll have a good player in our own right.