(01-31-2024, 11:25 AM)Soonerpeace Wrote: For sure. I think the NFL draft picks 1-18 usually nail you a very very very good player. After that it becomes more dicey similar to the NBA picks 1-12.

I’d say it already gets kind of dicey at 18.

https://www.statmuse.com/nfl/ask/18-nfl-overall-draft-picks

(01-31-2024, 11:25 AM)Soonerpeace Wrote: For sure. I think the NFL draft picks 1-18 usually nail you a very very very good player. After that it becomes more dicey similar to the NBA picks 1-12. We need to get a starter with our first pick. No time for development. But they’d better get a DT or RT in FA. They need to not mess around on those 2 spots. They are critical in fixing our issues in 2024. If it were me I’d go with a DT in FA. And go big. As much as I want Reader it’s a precarious spot for the Bengals and him. Tough spot. I sure want him on the team. A lot have commented. Caesar is in tune but probably not realistic about his man ( and I’m the worst in being the pot calling the kettle black). I don’t pretend to be an expert on salary issues but I’d like to see DJ at $10,000 a year for 2 years with bonuses. Nobody thinks that’s even at minimum realistic. He’s not IMO as valuable ( only due to injuries) as many think.
I sure hope he stays I don’t know how soon he can play but that guy is a disrupter

You totally can find solid to great players at #18, looking at the draft last 10 years are some good players , all I believe are still in the league..

(01-31-2024, 12:13 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: I’d say it already gets kind of dicey at 18.

https://www.statmuse.com/nfl/ask/18-nfl-overall-draft-picks

The draft is a dicey proposition, period.

I read an article the other day regarding the draft and it was quite eye opening.  80% of 1st round picks play through their rookie deals and get a second contract someplace.  That sounds great until you consider that guys that don't live up to their status and get "prove it" deals with another team, like John Ross and Cedric Ogbuehi types, are included in that.  Even scarier is the fact that 1 in 5 1st round picks don't even make it through their rookie deals(or get extended before it expires).  And that % drops steeply round after round.  

That's why you draft BPA(within reason) and don't go into the draft "needing" to draft a certain position.  Your chances of drafting a Day 1 quality starter at a specific position is ridiculously low.  

(01-31-2024, 01:26 PM)Whatever Wrote: The draft is a dicey proposition, period.

I read an article the other day regarding the draft and it was quite eye opening.  80% of 1st round picks play through their rookie deals and get a second contract someplace else.  That sounds great until you consider that guys that don't live up to their status and get "prove it" deals with another team, like John Ross and Cedric Ogbuehi types, are included in that.  Even scarier is the fact that 1 in 5 1st round picks don't even make it through their rookie deals(or get extended before it expires).  And that % drops steeply round after round.  

That's why you draft BPA(within reason) and don't go into the draft "needing" to draft a certain position.  Your chances of drafting a Day 1 quality starter at a specific position is ridiculously low.  

I think the biggest mistake many teams do is reaching for QBs in the 1st... or drafting a player in 1st round and maybe moving them out of position from what they played in college

(01-31-2024, 01:05 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: You totally can find solid to great players at #18, looking at the draft last 10 years are some good players , all I believe are still in the league..

Definitely and most assuredly but Pro Bowl level seems 50/50

(01-31-2024, 01:26 PM)Whatever Wrote: The draft is a dicey proposition, period.

I read an article the other day regarding the draft and it was quite eye opening.  80% of 1st round picks play through their rookie deals and get a second contract someplace else.  That sounds great until you consider that guys that don't live up to their status and get "prove it" deals with another team, like John Ross and Cedric Ogbuehi types, are included in that.  Even scarier is the fact that 1 in 5 1st round picks don't even make it through their rookie deals(or get extended before it expires).  And that % drops steeply round after round.  

That's why you draft BPA(within reason) and don't go into the draft "needing" to draft a certain position.  Your chances of drafting a Day 1 quality starter at a specific position is ridiculously low.  

Informative. Thank you.

In this year's case, the Bengals have quite a few positions that could be improved and for which quite a few quality players seem to be available, so I would expect the Bengals will find a solid player at a position of need. There are quite a number of good OL (including a couple of very good RT prospects), some tantalizing edge rushers likely available at 18, a couple of solid DTs, a few TEs, and, of course, WRs. There are bound to be some excellent players available at some of those positions of need. 

The challenge, of course, will be which positions to target for free agency before the draft, and which ones leave to the draft to address. That is the problem when you're picking at 18 and don't know where the run will be. Glad it's not my problem.

(01-31-2024, 01:29 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: I think the biggest mistake many teams do is reaching for QBs in the 1st... or drafting a player in 1st round and maybe moving them out of position from what they played in college

QB in the 1st isn't a huge issue with the rookie cap.  If they don't pan out, you can still keep them as relatively cheap backup and pass on the 5th year option.

A lot of guys move in the pros just because most college coaches are just trying to get their 11 best out there on the field.  Most schools, their best OL is their LT, second best is the C, 3rd best is the RT, regardless of skill sets.  Most schools just don't enough top recruits to be competitive trying to hold guys in specific roles.  

Hugely important, and the Bengals whiffed the last draft by not taking Laporte, who the Lions took just a few picks later.

A common denominator of top end success in last 13 or so years now are hall of fame caliber tight ends with their hof caliber quarterback, ie. Gronk and Brady & Kelce and Mahomes.

(01-30-2024, 08:49 PM)Chezaugie Wrote: All I know is the Bengals went to two Super Bowls in the 1980s using a TE-centric offense. Often times, two TEs. Heck, Dan Ross recorded a Super Bowl record for a TE. Kenny Anderson thrived with two tight ends. What is not to like about a big receiver who can catch, run and deliver a powerful block when needed. IMHO. a great TE can be more valuable than most wide receivers and RBs. The Patriots and Kansas City prove my point.

Yes and if we recall, the pats doubled up on TEs with Aaron Hernandez (even though he turned out to be a trash person) he was another very good other TE to add with Gronk...
Plus it opens up things for WRs and Rbs. You just cant loose with a good threat at TE. 

(01-30-2024, 04:20 PM)schroomytunes Wrote: I think it does get addressed this offseason, but with major holes coming up in FA I think it gets addressed in the draft. I could see this scenario coming up for us:

1) Tanner Hudson- resigned

2) Cade Stover (OSU)-3rd rd or Ben Sinnott (KSU)- 4th rd both fit what we are looking for in a TE, just depends on what rd they want to address certain other needs. (RT, S, DL)

3) Drew Sample -resigned, blocking back.

- I think they will look to add secondary and IOL help in FA, as they will be depth pieces. The draft will always be for skilled players.

This is 100% what I would do unless able to get Schultz, Fant, or Bowers.

(01-30-2024, 10:46 PM)Hammerstripes Wrote: While I agree that we need a TE, those 2 teams do not really prove your point.  They had Brady and Mahomes.

I certainly see your point, but, at the time, Kenny Anderson (hopefully a future HOFer) was considered as great a QB as them.

(01-31-2024, 12:57 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: This year’s class is definitely not as good as last year’s for TE’s. But if Bowers fell all the way to 18 they would run to the podium. Guaranteed.

Can’t guarantee anything if they fail to address RT before they pick 18. They will re sign scrap-heap TEs if they have to.

(01-30-2024, 08:49 PM)Chezaugie Wrote: All I know is the Bengals went to two Super Bowls in the 1980s using a TE-centric offense. Often times, two TEs. Heck, Dan Ross recorded a Super Bowl record for a TE. Kenny Anderson thrived with two tight ends. What is not to like about a big receiver who can catch, run and deliver a powerful block when needed. IMHO. a great TE can be more valuable than most wide receivers and RBs. The Patriots and Kansas City prove my point.

True but the most recent Bengals SB team was a WR focused offense all the way. I think with Chase and Higgins a TE is going to continue to be a 3rd or 4th option. I think re-signing Hudson and/or getting a decent FA TE is the way to go. Not too much $ and Hudson looked pretty good last year. He will have another year to play with Burrow and I think he can be good.
They need to get the O line to be top-tier (not just OK - really good) and then you will see improvements to the entire offense. The run game will be much better which will open up the passing game for WRs and TEs.

(01-30-2024, 10:46 PM)Hammerstripes Wrote: While I agree that we need a TE, those 2 teams do not really prove your point.  They had Brady and Mahomes.

To be fair, Brady played on a cheating team & had 10 seconds to throw every time he dropped back. Give Mahomes or Burrow that time & look out.

I was surprised to learn 2023 Bengals TE 88 catches Ravens 82

(02-02-2024, 02:29 PM)Soonerpeace Wrote: I was surprised to learn 2023 Bengals TE 88 catches Ravens 82

If we were to sum up the Bengals TEs:
115 targets
88 receptions
686 yards
4 TDs

If that was a single player, we'd be ecstatic for that production at TE.

They had a TEBC, although I would have preferred more of a RBBC and singular TE rather than singular RB and TEBC lol.

How important is a TE? Remember all those games we lost this year where we said if we just had an elite TE we would have won this game? Me neither. I do remember hearing if we had a better offensive line, we could have won or if we had a better defensive line or secondary we could have won. The Bengals should spend the resources in the areas that need improved that will actually matter most in wins and loses. Signing 414 yard, 0 TD, Noah Fant to a 9 million dollar per year contract doesnt help much. Signing 14 sack Justin Madubuike to a 22 million dollar per year contract does. BJ Hill is the only above average DT we have on the roster right now and he is on the last year of his contract. DT should be #1 priority followed by the RT position then maybe WR#2 or TE.

(02-02-2024, 10:27 PM)007BengalsFan Wrote: How important is a TE?  Remember all those games we lost this year where we said if we just had an elite TE we would have won this game?  Me neither.  I do remember hearing if we had a better offensive line, we could have won or if we had a better defensive line or secondary we could have won.  The Bengals should spend the resources in the areas that need improved that will actually matter most in wins and loses.  Signing 414 yard, 0 TD, Noah Fant to a 9 million dollar per year contract doesnt help much.  Signing 14 sack Justin Madubuike to a 22 million dollar per year contract does.  BJ Hill is the only above average DT we have on the roster right now and he is one the last year of his contract.  DT should be #1 priority followed by the RT position then maybe WR#2 or TE.

Many complained all year about the offense being too predictable.  Part of that was a bad TE group.  We had Sample, who can block, but isn't a good receiving threat.  We had Hudson, who was an ok receiving threat, but couldn't block.  We had Irv Smith Jr who could...well...I don't really know that he could do anything.  A good 2 way TE can create mismatches and keep the defense guessing.  

We're discussing adding a B tier FA to solidify the position group when we're talking about a guy like Fant.  I don't think anyone is talking about extreme measures like trading up for Bowers or trading #18 for George Kittle.

(01-31-2024, 01:26 PM)Whatever Wrote: I read an article the other day regarding the draft and it was quite eye opening.  80% of 1st round picks play through their rookie deals and get a second contract someplace.

I would like that source if you can remember it and find it.

There was only 3 guys out of football without at least 5 years on an NFL roster (with at least 1 of the 5 not being on their rookie contract, so 4 + 1) from the 2017 and 2018 draft's 1st rounds. Josh Rosen, Gareon Conley, and Reuben Foster.

That's 95.3%.

Am I misunderstanding the qualifiers?

You know what those 80's teams had besides a TE-centric offense? A running game. But that was back in the days of 2WR proset offense with a RB and FB. Those days were long gone.. or are they? The Niners have started both their playoff games in the pro-set with Kyle Juszczyk at FB. We are seeing a resurgance of the running game because it shortens the game, protects the QB, and when used with RPO provides more flexibility than a 3 WR set. 3 WRs are great if the defense doesn't have the DBs or you need to outscore the other team because of your own defense, but it relies heavily on the QB and is a hit or miss offense, as we've seen when the Bengals can't seem to sustain drives.