(03-13-2016, 11:29 AM)fredtoast Wrote: No way we spend a first round pick on a #2 WR.

Plus, i think we will still sign a cheap veteran.  We signed Denarious Moore last year when we were much deeper at WR.

Why not?

Know how many snaps a #2 receiver gets? 

Name another spot currently that we have that many snaps available.

Also name another spot where we have to fill.

People are stuck on the "#2" part, but those are quality snaps.  Other than a replacement for Bodine (you tell me how likely that is), or a DT replacement at nose (i'd love that, by the way) what else are you spending that pick on?

The higher the pick, the more likely the immediate impact.  If we're not getting a vet, what receiver(s) are on the roster that you're comfortable trotting out there in September.  Better yet, what if AJ misses time? Do you think any of Wright, Tate, Alford, Kumerow is able to fill in...and please say that with a straight face out loud, I dare you.

DRAFTED ROOKIE WIDE RECEIVERS UNDER MARVIN LEWIS

A.J. Green (2011 first round) 65 catches-1,057 yards 16.3 avg. 7 TDs

Jordan Shipley (2010 third round) 52-600 11.5 3

Chris Henry (2005 third round) 31-422 13.6 6

Kelley Washington (2003 third round) 22-299 13.6 4

Marvin Jones (2012 fifth round) 18-201 11.2 1

Mohamed Sanu (2012 third round) 16-154 9.6 4

Andre Caldwell (2008 third round) 11-78 7.1 0

James Wright (2014 seventh round) 5-91 18.2 0

Ryan Whalen (2011 sixth round) 4-27 6.8 0

Tab Perry (2005 sixth round) 4-21

Mario Alford (2015 seventh round) 1-15 15.0 0

Jerome Simpson (2008 second round) 1-2 2.0 0

Maurice Mann (2004 fifth round) 0-0

Reggie McNeal (2006 sixth round) 0-0

Bennie Brazell (2006 seventh round) 0-0

Mario Urrutia (2008 seventh round) 0-0

Dezmon Briscoe (2010 sixth round)

Cobi Hamilton (2013 sixth round) 0-0


But yeah...lets rely on a rookie to replace all that production in 2016.

^ so draft a receiver in the first round? That looks like the answer. Thanks for the assist, Shake.

Do not spend a 1st round pick on a WR! You dont draft a WR in the first round to be your #2....you draft a first rounder to be a #1. The Bengals should take BPA in the first. A decent #2 WR can be found anywhere from the 2nd to the 5th rounds.

(03-13-2016, 01:18 PM)Beaker Wrote: Do not spend a 1st round pick on a WR! You dont draft a WR in the first round to be your #2....you draft a first rounder to be a #1. The Bengals should take BPA in the first. A decent #2 WR can be found anywhere from the 2nd to the 5th rounds.

What if BPA is a wide reciever? You wouldn't draft him? 


Yet you would spend a first on a cb that isn't your number one?

tired of this lame argument, in this day and age you almost need two number ones.  Certain qbs (Brady) and schemes (Seahawks) can work without elite receivers.   Unfortunately we have niether at this point

Maybe our new slot receiver is on the team already?

Mario Alford anyone?

I’m concerned about our WR position I don’t see another survivable receiver on our roster besides Green. We all know what Tate is, special teams returner who doesn’t contribute on offense, Alford is a 5’8 seventh round pick who didn’t play at all last year not saying he cant be ok but 7th round guys usually get drafted in the 7th round for a reason and rarely work out. I like Wright but Bengals fans hype him up he only had a few catches as a WR and will likely start the season on the PUP list. The cut list for vet wide receivers doesn’t look good and a Rookie WR tends to struggle. We also have to think about the injury factor if Green or Eifert goes down were in even bigger trouble. I think the Bengals should sign a vet WR for cheap just for insurance and draft a WR high in the draft and hope either one could contribute. Last year we were not able to run the ball effectively hopefully we can this year so we can use play action pass effectively.

(03-13-2016, 01:18 PM)Beaker Wrote: Do not spend a 1st round pick on a WR! You dont draft a WR in the first round to be your #2....you draft a first rounder to be a #1. The Bengals should take BPA in the first. A decent #2 WR can be found anywhere from the 2nd to the 5th rounds.

Among other things, there's a world of difference between pick #4 (AJ) and pick #24.  I don't think anyone this year is a reliable #1 in the draft class (at least yet), but there could be some quality talent at #24 if it falls right.  To be fair, I think only 1 or two guys at 24 would be worth it.

All I'm trying to say to the crowd that says it shouldn't be done...is we have a huge dearth of WR talent after AJ that can't be ignored.  How is that not a priority?  These platitudes of "that shalt never use a 1st round pick on a #2 receiver" etc. are a bit to fire and brimstone for me. 

The team is stacked, and because of this, every single choice at 24 will fall into one of two categories:

1) A player will be picked at a premium position, and will likely not see quality snaps until later (or at all) in their first contract.  Or

2) A player chosen that will fill a void in a position deemed "not high value," but could fill in immediately.

Seriously, guys.  Wright.  Alford.  Kumerow.  Tate.  How can you not consider a WR at 24 (if that's BPA) when you're looking at those stellar options?

(03-13-2016, 01:23 PM)Bengalbug Wrote: What if BPA is a wide reciever? You wouldn't draft him? 


Yet you would spend a first on a cb that isn't your number one?

tired of this lame argument, in this day and age you almost need two number ones.  Certain qbs (Brady) and schemes (Seahawks) can work without elite receivers.   Unfortunately we have niether at this point

BPA is BPA.

You don't take a WR 1st round to replace complimentary players due to a perceived "need". But if it lines up that WR at 24 is BPA and he's better by a good margin than players available at other positions then you take him. And you don't need two #1s. All that will cause is discontent. You only need someone good enough to be a threat on the opposite side of AJ to prevent double coverage on him.

Why not draft a guy like Michael Thomas in the 2nd or 3rd round? At 6'3" and 212 lbs....can you imagine him on one side at 6'3" and Green on the other at 6'4" in the red zone with Eifert?

(03-13-2016, 01:50 PM)TGISunday Wrote: Among other things, there's a world of difference between pick #4 (AJ) and pick #24.  I don't think anyone this year is a reliable #1 in the draft class (at least yet), but there could be some quality talent at #24 if it falls right.  To be fair, I think only 1 or two guys at 24 would be worth it.

All I'm trying to say to the crowd that says it shouldn't be done...is we have a huge dearth of WR talent after AJ that can't be ignored.  How is that not a priority?  These platitudes of "that shalt never use a 1st round pick on a #2 receiver" etc. are a bit to fire and brimstone for me. 

The team is stacked, and because of this, every single choice at 24 will fall into one of two categories:

1) A player will be picked at a premium position, and will likely not see quality snaps until later (or at all) in their first contract.  Or

2) A player chosen that will fill a void in a position deemed "not high value," but could fill in immediately.

Seriously, guys.  Wright.  Alford.  Kumerow.  Tate.  How can you not consider a WR at 24 (if that's BPA) when you're looking at those stellar options?

Exactly.

You might get a player head and shoulders above Marvin Jones play that garnered big money in FA.

How could you scoff at that?

A valuable player at the fraction of the cost.

You gotta take BPA no matter what position.  If it's WR then so be it.

Same goes for CB.  If you can get a player who is cheaper than DreK at $7.5 mill and is going to be a free agent next season.

Why not explore it as well?

I would not be upset if DT, WR, LB or CB is chosen in the first if they are BPA.

Of course we need an upgrade to Center but I just don't see it happening.

(03-13-2016, 01:15 PM)TGISunday Wrote: ^ so draft a receiver in the first round?  That looks like the answer.  Thanks for the assist, Shake.

If I thought this team would burn a 1st round pick on a WR2, I'd agree with you.

I'd bet that they probably won't.

(03-13-2016, 02:06 PM)Beaker Wrote: BPA is BPA.

You don't take a WR 1st round to replace complimentary players due to a perceived "need". But if it lines up that WR at 24 is BPA and he's better by a good margin than players available at other positions then you take him. And you don't need two #1s. All that will cause is discontent. You only need someone good enough to be a threat on the opposite side of AJ to prevent double coverage on him.

Why not draft a guy like Michael Thomas in the 2nd or 3rd round? At 6'3" and 212 lbs....can you imagine him on one side at 6'3" and Green on the other at 6'4" in the red zone with Eifert?

Drafting a reciever in the first does not make him a number one necessarily.  Let's also keep that in mind

(03-13-2016, 11:29 AM)fredtoast Wrote: No way we spend a first round pick on a #2 WR.

Plus, i think we will still sign a cheap veteran.  We signed Denarious Moore last year when we were much deeper at WR.

Theres still a few guys out there who could help. I don't see us kicking any tires though.

For those saying we shouldn't consider a 1st-round pick on a WR because we have Green and Eifert.....
1) The depth behind Green is abysmal. Unless a quality veteran is brought in before the draft, a WR needs to be picked with no later than the 2nd round pick.
2) What happens if Green and/or Eifert get hurt? Seems that they are always out for at least some time every year. It's way too risky to count on both being healthy for a full season.

Yes, this class isn't as good as 2014 was that had Watkins, Evans, OBJ, Cooks, and Benjamin all as first rounders. But there are probably three WRs worth a first round pick (Treadwell, Coleman, Doctson). A few WRs are worth a second round pick (Fuller, Boyd, Thomas, Shepard). Fuller is the one that will teeter on late first and early second.

(03-13-2016, 01:18 PM)Beaker Wrote: Do not spend a 1st round pick on a WR! You dont draft a WR in the first round to be your #2....you draft a first rounder to be a #1. The Bengals should take BPA in the first. A decent #2 WR can be found anywhere from the 2nd to the 5th rounds.

Worked out pretty well for the Falcons when they drafted their #2 WR in the first round named Julio Jones.

People forget that when Julio was drafted in 2011, White was coming off a 115 / 1,389 / 10, 1st team All-Pro season in 2010. It took Julio 4 years (and White being 32) to get more yards in a season than White, so he was most certainly the #2.

(Of course I'm not saying they HAVE to take a WR in the 1st, but if a good one is there when they are picking? Why not?)

(03-13-2016, 01:26 PM)GreenDragon Wrote: Maybe our new slot receiver is on the team already?

Mario Alford anyone?

No one.

People are going back forth, but I think we can agree on two things.

1. We are not in terrible shape overall at WR because we have one of the best in the games in Green.

2. We have NOTHING but hopes and prayers behind Green. No matter how much you may like Alford, Wright, Kumerow, Burkehead, or anyone else on the roster the fact is they are a lot of nothing.

So we definitely need to draft a WR, and I predict we will draft at least two. But even with that we still need to sign a vet WR.

The only real question is how high of a pick we use on a WR. I predict we won't use a first on a WR, but it certainly would not be a shock if we did.

So am I reading this correctly? People are saying use a first round pick to replace a guy we found in round 5? Talent at WR can be found in every round of the draft and the Bengals don't need a superstar guy, they have that in Green. Eifert will take heat off of Green, all they need to look for is a guy who has speed to be the deep threat. Why spend a 1st round pick to replace a 5th rounder??

I want more than a speed guy. I want a guy who will win contested catches with regularity.

(03-15-2016, 12:02 AM)Murdock2420 Wrote: So am I reading this correctly? People are saying use a first round pick to replace a guy we found in round 5? Talent at WR can be found in every round of the draft and the Bengals don't need a superstar guy, they have that in Green. Eifert will take heat off of Green, all they need to look for is a guy who has speed to be the deep threat. Why spend a 1st round pick to replace a 5th rounder??

Well for starters 1st rounders are there for a reason, that's like saying why would you want Marvin jones when you can pay that money for a different position and grab Brandon Tate cheap. The talent is just different. When the draft rolls around you should expect to get more out of your high draft picks than your later ones.

Also we need a WR who is ready to contribute right away. You won't find a 5th rounder who fits that need unless he has serious baggage. 

And the whole argument about being able to find a certain position late in the draft is ridiculous. You can find gems at EVERY position late in the draft. Doesn't mean you should count on it. Marvin was a 5th, tom Brady a 6th, burfict undrafted, geno 4th, Richard Sherman a 5th, I could go on and on. Does that mean we should trade our 1st rounders for 10 picks in the 4-7th rounds because good players can be found there?

Also if you want a speed WR this draft had the slowest group of WR's I've ever seen at the combine so while Marvin jones went in the 5th in that draft I'd bet he'd be taken a round or two earlier in this one just based on the talent available.

(03-14-2016, 12:39 PM)fredtoast Wrote: People are going back forth, but I think we can agree on two things.

1.  We are not in terrible shape overall at WR because we have one of the best in the games in Green.

2.  We have NOTHING but hopes and prayers behind Green.  No matter how much you may like Alford, Wright, Kumerow,  Burkehead, or anyone else on the roster the fact is they are a lot of nothing.  

So we definitely need to draft a WR, and I predict we will draft at least two.  But even with that we still need to sign a vet WR.

The only real question is how high of a pick we use on a WR.  I predict we won't use a first on a WR, but it certainly would not be a shock if we did.

Not in terrible shape, but could use some depth. Let's face it Tate isn't helping us in the area.