The pre-draft hype surrounding Texas A&M defensive end Myles Garrett is out of control.
After ESPN’s Adam Schefter reported Tuesday the Browns were split on whether to draft Garrett or North Carolina quarterback Mitchell Trubisky first overall and conceded a day later a trade down is the team’s third option, the prevailing narrative locally and nationally went something like this:
“What the bleep are they doing? Garrett is so phenomenal that even the Browns can’t screw this up! If they consider anything else, they’re overthinking it. Here we go again.”
Let’s pump the brakes for a moment.
Garrett’s has All-Pro potential, but he’s not perfect.
And even though the Browns don’t deserve the benefit of the doubt after botching so many decisions — from draft picks to regime changes to uniform makeovers — they shouldn’t be killed for due diligence. The front office and coaches, coming off a 1-15 season, need to nail this draft. Well, guess what? Debate is necessary. Everything must be explored.
To be clear, I expect the Browns to pick Garrett at No. 1 on April 27 and would consider anything else an upset. I’m also cautiously optimistic he’ll live up to expectations.
At the same time, I’m not ready to say he’s a lock for the Pro Football Hall of Fame.
I won’t pretend to be a coach, scout or draft analyst or to know nearly as much as them, but this is what I saw when I watched 11 of Garrett’s games (five in 2016, when he played through a high-ankle sprain the second half of the season, and six in 2015):
He’s a freak athlete with the elite speed, length and bend off the edge needed to be a dominant pass rusher. But he could use more polished pass-rush moves, he’s just OK against the run and he doesn’t always hustle relentlessly or consistently swarm to the ball.
I recently bounced those observations off Jake Spavital, the offensive coordinator and quarterbacks coach at West Virginia who held the same title at Texas A&M from 2014-15. His players faced Garrett every day in practice for two seasons.
“He’s just a really calm, collected kid,” Spavital said. “I know where you’re at. Sometimes you just wish that defensive end’s got this dog in him that just rips people’s heads off like the J.J. Watt-type mentality.
“I bet you [the Browns are] having the same conversations right now about it. But I think he’s a great player.”
I also picked the brain of Senior Bowl Executive Director Phil Savage.
“People poked holes in [Houston Texans Pro Bowl edge rusher and 2014 No. 1 pick Jadeveon] Clowney,” said Savage, an ex-Browns general manager. “Clowney was more straight line. Clowney didn’t have great instincts truthfully. But he is a more physical player than Garrett is.
“Garrett is more bendy, more elusive, can bend the corner, but not as physical at the point of attack. I promise you this: When he lines up at right end, there’s going to be a lot of teams that really test him and try to run right at him.”
Of Garrett’s 32.5 sacks in three seasons, 20.5 came against non-Southeastern Conference opponents and 16 came against non-Power Five opponents.
“He does have immense ability,” Savage said. “But at times, he takes advantage of some really poor offensive linemen.”
On the other hand, it wasn’t uncommon for Garrett to encounter double and triple teams.
“Daeshon Hall, the other defensive end, had such amazing games at times because everybody was focused on stopping Myles,” Spavital said. “But if it’s third-and-10 and you’re spread out, good luck to you. That cat’s going to win that battle.”
Which is why draft analysts project Garrett to become a double-digit sack artist in the NFL and have universally labeled him the best player in this class.
What about quarterback?
It’s just the Browns’ luck to have the No. 1 pick in a draft without a consensus top QB.
That’s a huge reason why a trade for New England Patriots backup Jimmy Garoppolo would make so much sense for the Browns, and even though a blockbuster move still can’t be completely ruled out, the Patriots seem intent on keeping him. Cincinnati Bengals backup AJ McCarron would be a logical target, too, though the Bengals have never traded with the Browns and would probably need to be blown away with a ridiculous offer to break with the precedent.
So, for now, let’s focus on the draft.
All signs are pointing to Trubisky being Jackson’s favorite incoming rookie quarterback, so the Browns must at least talk about whether they should pull the trigger on him at No. 1. Despite the Mentor native starting just 13 games in college, there’s a real chance he won’t be available when the Browns are set to go on the clock again at No. 12.
On March 28 at the NFL owners meetings, head of football operations Sashi Brown said the franchise was considering multiple players with the top pick.
Jackson agrees with the notion that a good quarterback is more valuable in today’s NFL than an elite non-quarterback. Garrett would transform the defense if he pans out, but it would still take a long-term solution at QB to turn the team into a perennial contender.
The problem is Jackson, at the owners meetings, made it clear none of the QBs in this class “separates himself from the other as much.” He stressed he wants a “generational” player at No. 1, an obvious reference to Garrett, not a QB who hasn’t pulled away from the pack.
So the Browns would probably be wise to wait until No. 12 for a quarterback or, if compelled, dip into their stockpile of picks to trade up for Trubisky.
There are countless ways this could go. They could even leave the first round without a top-rated QB like Trubisky, Clemson’s Deshaun Watson, Texas Tech’s Patrick Mahomes or Notre Dame’s DeShone Kizer. But they ought to take a calculated shot at the sport’s most important position relatively early.
Dare to deal?
As for possibly trading down from No. 1, several Browns regimes have been burned by sacrificing quality for quantity. The fan base’s scars from those moves are nearly as gruesome as the ones created by watching 26 quarterbacks start since 1999.
Jackson said he “would not like to trade” down from No. 1, but he didn’t rule it out. Brown, who makes the final draft decisions, said he knew the pick would generate interest and he’d listen to offers. He also said he felt good about players under consideration at the top.
The only way the Browns should even be tempted to move down is if they receive a crazy offer to stay in the top five or so, where they could still get a blue-chip prospect they love.
Yet their easiest and most logical option would be to choose a player at No. 1.
And although Garrett has flaws, there’s a lot to love about him, more than just the athletic prowess he used to light up the combine. He plays the game’s second-most important position, he fights through injuries, he’s bright and, by all accounts, he has impeccable character.
New Browns defensive coordinator Gregg Williams loves Garrett, I’ve been told, and Williams would be vital in developing Garrett into a complete player for Cleveland. A self-proclaimed “motor coach,” Williams has vowed to never compromise with his players “on their effort and their toughness.” If Garrett buys in, he should reach his potential.
So even though there are enough questions about his game to prevent him from being a sure thing, he’s still the best bet at No. 1.
“You can’t go wrong with that,” Spavital said. “He’s an extremely talented kid. He’s probably the most athletic kid in the draft. He’ll do everything right.”
Added Savage: “I can’t imagine they would pass on him because they can work with him, his best football’s in front of him, and then depending on what they want to do and the assets they want to utilize, then they can go get the quarterback.”
Nate Ulrich can be reached at nulrich@thebeaconjournal.com. Read the Browns blog at www.ohio.com/browns. Follow him on Twitter at www.twitter.com/NateUlrichABJ and on Facebook www.facebook.com/abj.sports.