(Yesterday, 06:48 PM)samhain Wrote: Who is Ward?

Beaver's dad

(Yesterday, 01:12 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: I give it a B but the coaches could know a lot more than us, so it could be an A+.

Stop it, Brad.

(Yesterday, 01:23 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Too soon to tell, check back in 3 years. Hey there's an idea, let's review the 2022 class and compare how they have developed versus our view of it immediately after the draft?

I already did that but no one would play!!!!

We see it every year the players we want and need going off the board 1 or 2 or 3 picks before we pick every year throughout the first 3 rounds.

I watched podcasters lose their minds when Nolan went off the board the pick before we drafted in the first this year.

Now they are saying we reached in the draft a round early on some players. I see it more as a half a round reach because of how far back in the round we drafted.

If we would not have reached to take these guys a little early, we most likely would have watched our targets picked a few slots before we had a chance to pick.

If we did not fill our needs at LB and Guard this year we would be in real trouble and scrambling to find another target.

Our front office played the hand they were dealt just fine.

Seemed to hit some areas of need but are the best players they could’ve gotten and do they fit the intended scheme? Who knows right now?
Lots of B’s floating around that I’ve seen.

(Yesterday, 02:36 PM)BoomerFan Wrote: 180 is pretty surprising. I like Goodberry and think he is very knowledgeable/intelligent but I've noticed a lot of players he was excited about in past drafts ended up as busts. Predicting NFL success might just be something that he isn't good at. Of course there is a lot of randomness anyways. And a ton is determined after the pick has been made. Can the team develop the player? Will the player make good choices? How is the chemistry with the rest of the team?

I think I've heard him mention that he's tweaked his eval formula recently due to his number of busts.  He IIRC puts more weight into RAS than he once did because he believes it's a legit predictor of success.  Said something about highly successful college players with poor RAS having a higher bust rate.  He weighted college production more heavily in the past, but I think he's leery of it without athleticism.

Despite this, he still wasn't high on Stewart regardless of his near perfect RAS.

C+ to B- for me (and I round up always), so B- is where I'd put it.

But I'd need to revisit after at minimum, 2 years, as this is too early to call anything.

(Yesterday, 11:37 AM)NUGDUKWE Wrote: I went with C-
I saw PFF gave us a C which put us in they're bottom 3.
Stewart- Not a fan he was the one player i did not want. To throw another 1st rd pick at a position that we just failed to hit on a couple years ago on another player that had extremely low production that you barely met with is dumb.

Knight- I like the player not the spot. Just his age alone (which i think he's 24 turning 25 right before camp) says that he's most likely maxed out as a player although may increase is start immediately upside. It limits his future. The ultimate goal is to find very good starters that you can extend on your team that is extremely tough outside of the top 2 rounds. Knight is all but guaranteed not to be extended at the time of drafting. To pass up a starting caliber guard or the chance to trade down is dumb as well.

Fairchild - i like the player and think he may have been undervalued so his draft position seems good. Still a bigger risk than I want to take waiting until the 3rd rd to select a guard when you don't have a starting guard on your roster. Should've been a top priority heading into this off-season.

I'm fine with the rest of the draft.

The Bengals are stuck in they're ways and it's severely hampering our chances at the ultimate goal. We draft players based on need which this draft has made extremely obvious. Taking an DE in rd 1 to replace a player on his final year yet again going back to a mold that has worked out horribly for us. We signed Higgins and Chase but yet again unnecessarily front load the contracts to limit our ability to maximize our free agent haul to limit the need of the draft as much as possible. If we had saved some money this year we could've resigned Trey and probably a starting caliber guard. Allowing us to go best player available like Harmon, Jihad or Zabel all better prospects than Stewart.

I'm sorry, I'm normally not a grammar Nazi or anything, but man, can you PLEASE learn the proper usage of their, there and they're? I'm begging you.

(Yesterday, 01:39 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Or you could just sign a 20-year-old that hits. Like I said/ I'm not overly concerned with what happens at the end of the 2029 NFL Season. I'm focused on 2025, and DK was the 2nd ranked LB in the draft. 

The only 20 year old free agents are UDFA.

But I will agree that 2025 is mot important than 2029. But it doesn’t seem to be all the important to the Bengals by not attacking FA, drafting a project for round 1, a LB for round 2, settling for Fairchild to compete against Volson and the other back up we signed from the saints (who had a bad line), not replacing Stone, not resigning Trey, adding zero corners when every single one of our corners last year got burned over and over again.

But hey we gave Tee and Chase big contracts. All is well. 9-8 here we come.

Anything over a C+ is far too generous.

This was a D+. Tops. Massive reaches made by a team that desperately needed as close to “sure things” as possible given the state of the roster and the failings in free agency.

The defense and the offensive line needed major influxes of talent - talent that can contribute right away. They didn’t get it.

It’s maddening and exasperating, but we’re bengals fans. Those emotions fit us like a speedo.

(9 hours ago)RunKijanaRun Wrote: Anything over a C+ is far too generous.

This was a D+. Tops. Massive reaches made by a team that desperately needed as close to “sure things” as possible given the state of the roster and the failings in free agency.

The defense and the offensive line needed major influxes of talent - talent that can contribute right away. They didn’t get it.

It’s maddening and exasperating, but we’re bengals fans. Those emotions fit us like a speedo.

We got a DE that can also disrupt from inside..
We got a solid guard that will start from day 1. 
Not sure how that isn't addressing the needs of both lines.

We need to remember when getting upset about Free Agency that this was a weak free agency class; the weakest in years. And yes this was a strange draft class where the top tier was smaller than usual but the lower tiers were also smaller than usual. It was a deep group of players who all project as solid starters. As such things like the linebackers and OL going higher than projected were surprises.

What all this is leading to is I think the usual under/over valuing arguments about where to take players appeared to be less relevant this year.

(7 hours ago)Joelist Wrote: We need to remember when getting upset about Free Agency that this was a weak free agency class; the weakest in years. And yes this was a strange draft class where the top tier was smaller than usual but the lower tiers were also smaller than usual. It was a deep group of players who all project as solid starters. As such things like the linebackers and OL going higher than projected were surprises.

What all this is leading to is I think the usual under/over valuing arguments about where to take players appeared to be less relevant this year.

I think other thing is we had only 6 picks, 2 were guards and 2 were LB's.

Guards and LB's don't often scream excitement. But, we definitely needed guards/OL and at a mimimum if we cut/trade Pratt, we needed at least 1 and according to Golden more if he wants to tinker with scheme.

The age old question is are we better tha the 9-8 2024 team? I say yes, but won't know until they get on the field and prove it.