YOU CAN’T GRADE THE DRAFT NOW

By STEVE KING

When I was covering the Browns for all those years for the Medina County Gazette and its sister paper, the Elyria Chronicle-Telegram, my boss, sports editor Betty Szudlo, would ask me to grade the team’s performance in the NFL Draft as soon as the event was over.

 “I can’t do that,” I would say.

“Why?”

“Because I don’t know how all of their picks are going to pan out.”

“But you have to grade it nonetheless.”

“Wait a minute. If you sent me out to do a movie review or a restaurant review, you would allow me to watch the film or eat my meal before I did my story, right? After all, it’s called a review and not a preview for a reason.”

“Well, yes.”

“Then the same thinking has to apply here. Just as I wouldn’t say how I liked — or didn’t like — the movie or the food until I had had a chance to sample it, I can’t grade the draft until I watch these picks play. The movie may look like it will be a good one, but it doesn’t turn out that way. The food may look tasty, but it doesn’t turn out that way. These players may look like they’re going to be good, but perhaps it won’t work out that way.”

“Hmmm. Those are valid points, even great ones.”

“So, I don’t have to grade the draft?”

“No, you still have to do the story.”

“Ugh.”

I then figured out that the only way I could grade the draft was by looking at the Browns’ intent? Did their thinking make sense? Did they select players who, when all the experts’ evaluations were combined together, got high marks? Did their plan of attack in the draft have a good chance of working?

OK, then, considering all that then, I would give the Browns a C for their performance over the weekend. I hated — absolutely, positively hated — that they traded out of their first pick, in the second round at No. 44 overall, and fell all the way back to the third round at No. 68, but I like the fact that they selected players at areas of need.

So, there’s your grade, Betty.

More on that grade in my next post.