Simple question, would you draft Ezekiel Elliott if he falls to our pick? Haven't seen many if any mocks that have him available when we pick, but did run a simulation that had him available when our pick came around. He'd be BPA in this scenario, but we have Hill under contract for two more seasons. Hill regressed last season, but I don't think running him out of the shotgun (and the weak play of our interior oline at times) helped. 

I wouldn't, BPA is not good strategy IMO in the first 3 rounds. You have to address current and future needs. With Gio and Hill we have a good young RB corp, not to mention sexy-rexy> I would not be opposed to taking a straigh scat-back with return skills later in the draft, someone like a Tyler Ervin

I just don't believe in drafting a RB in the first round anymore.

He'd arguably be best pick available at that point, so sure. RBC play has been spotty lately, contracts close to expiring.

Ideally, trade down or pick a more dire position, but I wouldn't hate it.

Probably not. There are always a lot of good backs in the draft. I like Zeke, but i am comfortable rotating.

(02-16-2016, 10:24 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I wouldn't, BPA is not good strategy IMO  in the first 3 rounds. You have to address current and future needs. With Gio and Hill we have a good young RB corp, not to mention sexy-rexy> I would not be opposed to taking a straigh scat-back with return skills later in the draft, someone like a Tyler Ervin

BPA is how the Bengals assembled one of the best rosters in the league.  You pretty much always go BPA, unless its a QB, K, P or another position where there is only one on the field at a time.

(02-17-2016, 02:19 PM)Hammerstripes Wrote: BPA is how the Bengals assembled one of the best rosters in the league.  You pretty much always go BPA, unless its a QB, K, P or another position where there is only one on the field at a time.

So you would take Ronnie Stanley at 24? 

I love Zeke, and I think he is a first round talent, but we are pretty good at RB right now. Zeke might provide an up grade, but I think we could make a bigger upgrade at another position.

I'd love him.  But I think Hill rebounds this year and we have good back ups. 

We have pressing needs on defense to take us to the next level

Wouldn't hate it. Hard to hate it when the guy is gonna touch the ball 10-15 times a game. Running back devaluation has been a trend but the last 2 years running backs have proved huge in the game again.

That said it's still hard to take them in the 1st when you can get something similar later. Gonna be some good ones coming out next year too. Dalvin Cook being my favorite

At the very least we have a top 5 RB group so I would say no.

It would depend on who else is available at 24, but we definitely have more pressing needs than RB.

Id rather draft a top notch center or guard, especially if they are a bull at run blocking. Maybe Bengals fans dont see it, but our run blocking this last year, especially between the tackles wasn't good, and imo one of the bigger reasons why we lost the playoff game since we couldnt do anything running the ball that first half in the rain (when they absolutely needed to in those conditions regardless who the qb was).

That said with them taking two o-lineman last year first two picks, they are probably content with what they have sadly since they wont upgrade the interior from free agency, and will take another position.

I think Elliott is one helluva back, but our position group there is good, and I think Hill will find himself in his third year.

The first two rounds for us will depend on what happens in free agency. If we keep Marvin Jones, I think we need a linebacker, and defensive tackle and a center. If we lose him, then WR has to come in there, I think, in the first round. Two really good centers this year at Alabama and Notre Dame. We need to get one of them somehow.

First off, he won't be there at 24. NFL.com has him as their 4th overall prospect, and though some teams and the media devalues the position it only takes one team. The Rams took a RB coming off an injury much higher than 24, and a healthy Elliott doesn't have a glaring weakness at this point he's that good. Though I'd like to see them address many other positions, you don't pass on a talent like that in the fantasy that he slides that far. You take him and start shopping your other backs for the right deal. That would enable you to control a 3 down back for years to come and only have to sign one of the backs if the deal were right. I know we're happy with Gio, I know we're looking for Hill to bounce back and his stock may have slipped a bit, but take the talent and look at trade options. Worst case scenario you're stacked.

I'd give Hill at least one more year before I spend an early draft pick on a RB.

(02-17-2016, 02:32 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: So you would take Ronnie Stanley at 24? 

Absolutely - if you were convinced he would be a starting left tackle in the league.

There's no guarantee that Ced and Fisher can cut it at tackle - plus, it gives you options for moving other guys around.

(02-18-2016, 12:28 AM)Hammerstripes Wrote: Absolutely - if you were convinced he would be a starting left tackle in the league.

There's no guarantee that Ced and Fisher can cut it at tackle - plus, it gives you options for moving other guys around.

There's no guarantee that Stanley will make it either. We have Ced, Fisher (which we were convinced would be starting OTs in the NFL) and Whit. Who are you going to move where?

You take the BPA on your board and your board is based on current and future needs. I've always found humor in BPA. They would have a team of 23 WRs and not much else.

Three rules to follow on Draft Day.

1. Always....Always......ALWAYS draft an OL within the first three rounds.

2. The only thing dumber than drafting an RB in the first round is drafting a kicker in the first round.

3. Combine current and to an extent future needs with BPA.   

Absolutely not.