Nope. With our O line probs thats the last position group they should think about trading a guy from. Besides that, D line is probably our strongest position group. If you trade, you do so to strengthen a weak spot, not weaken a weak spot and overstock an already strong one.
Interesting. I kinda like it, but I don't see that ever going down.
Who comes up with this stuff? Between Willis and Lawson Dunlap MJ and Hubbard we are set at DE. You know where we aren't? Guard.
I wouldn't trade him. I think he really was set back by his illness. The guy still has potential and provides quality depth.
(09-05-2018, 06:32 PM)Brimey Wrote: [ -> ]Who comes up with this stuff? Between Willis and Lawson Dunlap MJ and Hubbard we are set at DE. You know where we aren't? Guard.
Truth. Especially with that position in question. Odd choice. Then again, it IS BR.
Westerman should be starting. If the Bengals trade him for Lawson, a guy that will be thrown into an already THICK defensive line with Dunlap, Lawson, Hubbard, Willis, and Johnson, then they deserve to be criticized for a terrible move.
While I like Lawson, the Bengals already have arguably a top 5 defensive line in the NFL.
While they also have arguably a bottom 5 offensive line.
We could trade for Bodine and move Price to RT? You know, it's really not out of the realm of possibilities with this team.
I can't imagine the Bengals would consider this for more than one second before saying no.
We need MORE OL depth, not LESS.
We are too unsettled on the line to trade someone like Westerman.
In a world where one or two of your guards may be able to play tackle at a higher level than your backup tackles, I don't think that you go around trading your backup guards. Especially not for d-ends who may not be any better than who you already have. The added 6th rounder that this guy throws in in his hypothetical scenario is just the icing on the stupidity cake.
(09-05-2018, 06:32 PM)Brimey Wrote: [ -> ]Who comes up with this stuff? Between Willis and Lawson Dunlap MJ and Hubbard we are set at DE. You know where we aren't? Guard.
No feces, am I right?
Are folks really saying "no" to a Westerman for Shaq Lawson trade?
Say yes in about 1 second, cut MJ, promote Lundblake
(09-05-2018, 10:54 PM)bfine32 Wrote: [ -> ]Are folks really saying "no" to a Westerman for Shaq Lawson trade?
Say yes in about 1 second, cut MJ, promote Lundblake
MJ had more sacks than Shaq last year.
(09-05-2018, 10:54 PM)bfine32 Wrote: [ -> ]Are folks really saying "no" to a Westerman for Shaq Lawson trade?
Say yes in about 1 second, cut MJ, promote Lundblake
Lawson has been a bust.
(09-05-2018, 08:04 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: [ -> ]We need MORE OL depth, not LESS.
This x100
Like I said I don't put much stock in these kinds of speculative articles ,especially this one..
I just happened to run across it and thought, WTF was the writer thinking ?
If they were to trade him at all it wouldn't be for DE.. A offensive tackle perhaps, but not a DE..
Put the crack pipe down....
