(02-10-2016, 03:58 PM)CINwillWIN Wrote: This would be a good movie idea.... (Kevin Costner would have to play the lead though...)

...extremely boring lead about an over the hill hipster who wouldn't dream of standing up to his girlfriend because girls are always right, but by golly he would look like a gm who cares sooooo much about everyone's feelings and never about the things that really matter..

Did I mention that Kosner isn't my favorite actor? It's not because he comes over as wimpish.. It's because he doesn't beat his wife and kids on Teevee√.. Darn him anyway!

√ I am not and never have advocated that anyone should beat their wives and children. Only Kevin Kosner should simply because he's the ultimate weenie and needs to be demonized for something other than being a lousy actor..

Ok, I'm out of this thread. I think I've stepped in it enough already..

By the way my wife and kids approve of this post and I have never beaten them even on teevee!

Edit: I just realized that I misspelled Costner on multiple occasions. Dammit anyway!

(02-11-2016, 04:00 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: I looked at the info provided and turns out they are 5 teams who have been to the SB in the last 10 years... and the Bengals.

Someone having four 7th round picks or three 6th round picks doesn't make them inherently better. You need to do something with it other than drafting Kirkpatricks, Hunts, Clarks, and Stils for having more draft picks to matter.

Does not change the fact that the original Op stated the three with the most and three with the least. All 3 of the ones with the most were in playoffs and all but Bengals have won SB. Only one of the least made playoffs. Albeit they played in SB.
Were all the examples given by you extra picks ? 
Know Kirkpatrick was and notice Marvin Jones and Gio were not mentioned and know they were both extra picks that Bengals would not have if not.sorry for format, at work and not much time. 

Think there is way more variables that I do not have time to debate presently. Think each case is its own entity and has to be weighed as such.

Also Tom Brady was brought up earlier and NE was mentioned as a team with the most picks. Maybe if they did not go this way they may not have gambled on him in the 6th round. Or maybe it was an extra pick even.

(02-11-2016, 05:16 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If you don't have as many picks that means to may have traded some for players, or else you signed more free agents than you lost.  So the teams that don't have as many picks should have more players from other sources.

Get that and suggest this to be done every year almost since Bengals have been good. Always say quality over quantity but you always disagree and say we need the picks.

In the last 10 drafts (not counting supplemental drafts, mostly because that would be a pain in the ass for me) but counting undrafted players, there have been 272 Pro Bowl players brought into the NFL. Here is the breakdown of how they were brought in.

1st Round: 119 (43.75%)
2nd Round: 49 (18.01%)
3rd Round: 20 (7.35%)
4th Round: 23 (8.46%)
5th Round: 13 (4.78%)
6th Round: 14 (5.15%)
7th Round: 5 (1.84%)

Undrafted: 29 (10.66%)


So if you're looking to get Pro Bowlers...
It's actually statistically better to have one 1st Round pick rather than two 2nd Round picks.
It's also better to have one 2nd Round pick rather than two 3rd Round picks.
3rd and 4th Round picks are roughly equal in value.
5th and 6th Round picks are also roughly equal in value.
7th round picks are basically useless.
There is a better chance of you getting a Pro Bowler from the undrafted pool than any other round after the 2nd.

So trading your 1st Round pick for a 2nd Round and 3rd Round pick, actually nets you a loss of a 18.39% chance to draft a Pro Bowler. You would need one 2nd, THREE 3rds, and one 5th just to come out ahead a mere 1.09%. Of course you would probably get more okayish players.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

DISCLAIMER: Obviously not all Pro Bowlers are equal. Teddy Bridgewater (1st) and Russell Wilson (3rd) aren't the same. Just like Andrew Luck (1st) and Tyrod Taylor (6th) aren't the same. Not commenting on the quality of player (maybe would be better with All-Pros, but that's more of a pain). It also doesn't break down the rounds into first half and second half or anything. This is just an informative straight number thing to do with as you please.

(02-11-2016, 05:24 PM)fredtoast Wrote: My theory is that once you get past the top 10 to 20 players there is not going to be a lot of difference between any specific player and one taken one round (32-40 picks) later.

That is precisely why the Pats trade out of the first so regularly.  The difference between the later picks and round one versus rounds two and three are minimal.

Most NFL draft boards do not have 32 players with a first round grade.

(02-15-2016, 09:29 PM)jfkbengals Wrote: That is precisely why the Pats trade out of the first so regularly.  The difference between the later picks and round one versus rounds two and three are minimal.

Most NFL draft boards do not have 32 players with a first round grade.

Teams like to trade up into the bottom of the 1st round so they get that 5th year option as part of the rookie contract.

(02-15-2016, 09:29 PM)jfkbengals Wrote: That is precisely why the Pats trade out of the first so regularly.  The difference between the later picks and round one versus rounds two and three are minimal.

Most NFL draft boards do not have 32 players with a first round grade.

The Seahawks are the most recent example of this. They felt that there was only 15 legit 1st rounders last year. So they opted to trade their 1st for Jimmy Graham.

(02-15-2016, 10:41 PM)BengalChris Wrote: Teams like to trade up into the bottom of the 1st round so they get that 5th year option as part of the rookie contract.

That is exactly the ploy for the Vikings selecting Bridgewater. They wanted him under the 5th year option.