(04-17-2017, 10:32 PM)OrlandoBengal Wrote: It's not silly at all.  A top ten pick should be someone that comes in and contributes day one.  The reason you're drafting in the top ten is because you need help now, not down the road.

All top 10 picks should attempt to be someone who is great eventually. The entire draft is about long term investment and nothing else. Don't worry about an immediate improvement if there is someone you feel can give you better performance later

(04-18-2017, 12:20 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Cool, but he still got most his sacks against lesser competition than Barnett did.

That's great. He also has higher SPARQ scores, athleticism, and is still better in a lot of ways 

(04-18-2017, 09:36 AM)Striped4war Wrote: You don't draft for depth in the top 10 you draft for guys we need starting now.

No..  You take the best player.

When you start drafting players based on short term immediate results instead of taking the best player your team will suffer.

(04-13-2017, 02:25 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: How long has it been since we used a 1st round pick on a defensive player that wasn't a CB? Seems we're due.

Keith Rivers I believe...at pick #9.

(04-18-2017, 11:24 PM)CINwillWIN Wrote: Foster visited with the Ravens today.

If the shoulder is an issue, it needs/will be addressed. Is Foster a contribute 1st day? IMHO: No, he leads with his head and one of these times it will be a brick wall. I think the risk is too high, and I don't want another D. Pollack on our hands...

If O.J. Howard is there at pick #9, Bengals need to take it. I think he can contribute day 1, and the size of this target with Eifert hurt/training camp sitting another year is more than enough reason to grab this kid. Just imagine if he turns out to be a good blocking TE as well!

I completely agree CWW.

Barnett is the guy most are thinking we take but he is not a 3 down End with his problems with the run.

Fournette most likely won't be there.

OJ Howard is the player i think would contribute the most immediately at 9 and he was the top rated run
blocking TE in college last year by PFF. I don't put much stock in PFF but hey, it has to mean something.

Hard to have any faith in Eifert being ready opening day after last year. Howard would be competing with
Uzomah and Kroft, i think he would win out the starting job opening day and once Eifert came back we
would have some hella weapons for Dalton to work with.

(04-19-2017, 02:50 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: I completely agree CWW.

Barnett is the guy most are thinking we take but he is not a 3 down End with his problems with the run.

Fournette most likely won't be there.

OJ Howard is the player i think would contribute the most immediately at 9 and he was the top rated run
blocking TE in college last year by PFF. I don't put much stock in PFF but hey, it has to mean something.

Hard to have any faith in Eifert being ready opening day after last year. Howard would be competing with
Uzomah and Kroft, i think he would win out the starting job opening day and once Eifert came back we
would have some hella weapons for Dalton to work with.

I still take Barnett over Howard.. need to greater at DE with a speed rusher.. also TE are not 3 down players either anymore... we have depth at TE more than we do DE... I love what Barnett can bring to this team with his pass rush ability... something we have been missing. 

(04-19-2017, 03:03 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: I still take Barnett over Howard.. need to greater at DE with a speed rusher.. also TE are not 3 down players either anymore... we have depth at TE more than we do DE... I love what Barnett can bring to this team with his pass rush ability... something we have been missing. 

I understand that. Cannot disagree with anything you say here either.

But Barnett will probably or even should not be starting on running downs. But i love his pass rushing abilities.

All for picking Barnett if that is the choice, just saying OJ Howard makes a lot of sense too and getting that pass
rusher in the 2nd. Lots of good pass rushers this draft too, i just don't want us to reach for Taco at 9 cause he is
big and fits.

(04-19-2017, 05:08 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: I understand that. Cannot disagree with anything you say here either.

But Barnett will probably or even should not be starting on running downs. But i love his pass rushing abilities.

All for picking Barnett if that is the choice, just saying OJ Howard makes a lot of sense too and getting that pass
rusher in the 2nd. Lots of good pass rushers this draft too, i just don't want us to reach for Taco at 9 cause he is
big and fits.

To be fair he will have Burffict behind him to help with stopping the run so I am sure we can minimize the exposure to the run to get maximum value out of him.

Barring someone dropping I see this as a 3 horse race. I expect it to be between Foster, Barnett and Howard. Who knows what the Bengals think. I would be happy with their decision but I would probably lean the most to Howard. Today anyway.

(04-19-2017, 05:08 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: I understand that. Cannot disagree with anything you say here either.

But Barnett will probably or even should not be starting on running downs. But i love his pass rushing abilities.

All for picking Barnett if that is the choice, just saying OJ Howard makes a lot of sense too and getting that pass
rusher in the 2nd. Lots of good pass rushers this draft too, i just don't want us to reach for Taco at 9 cause he is
big and fits.

question.. i do think the need at line especially guard , do you think we are looking at any lineman at pick 9

(04-19-2017, 09:04 AM)fredtoast Wrote: No..  You take the best player.

When you start drafting players based on short term immediate results instead of taking the best player your team will suffer.

Which pretty much is what I said drafting in the top 10.There top 10 picks for a reason.

(04-19-2017, 05:09 PM)Au165 Wrote: To be fair he will have Burffict behind him to help with stopping the run so I am sure we can minimize the exposure to the run to get maximum value out of him.

That is true.

(04-19-2017, 09:14 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: question.. i do think the need at line especially guard , do you think we are looking at any lineman at pick 9

In my opinion, i highly doubt it unless we trade back and get Cam Robinson, Lamp or Bolles.

Would be a reach at 9 for either of these guys from everything i have heard.

Doubt we start picking up O-lineman till the 2nd. Hoping for Center myself, Elflein or another top rated Center.

We have our Guards this year it seems with Boling/Andre/Westerman/TJ Johnson etc.

#Bama LB Reuben Foster tells me he had a diluted urine sample during his Combine Drug test. My story: https://t.co/XjwPMMsqju

— Ian Rapoport (@RapSheet) April 20, 2017

(04-20-2017, 05:17 PM)Au165 Wrote:

#Bama LB Reuben Foster tells me he had a diluted urine sample during his Combine Drug test. My story: https://t.co/XjwPMMsqju

— Ian Rapoport (@RapSheet) April 20, 2017

Welp...maybe we can get him in a later round.

(04-13-2017, 04:11 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Nice post Brad, plus Foster is not a game changing LB or anything either.

To me it would be a wasted pick on a small Linebacker that lowers his head far to often when tackling that cannot
cause turnovers or rush the passer. If we go LB in the first, give me Hassan Reddick who can rush the passer and
cover TE's.

Completely agree on OJ Howard, and if we do draft him it will be a sign that we are going to use our TE's more in
two TE sets which would be less predictable and would help the running game.

DE is deep, should be lots of good ones around in the 2nd.

I'm not sure how much you watched Foster or what you read on him, but from someone that has family that is huge Alabama fans, and having to watch the games with them every weekend, you're dead wrong about pretty much everything you said about foster. The kid is at most times the most dominate player on the field. He might be small but you can't teach instincts and the want to run through someone. He wasn't asked to rush the passer because of the front 4 being so good. Watch some highlights when he does blitz though, he is usually always untouched and its in a blink of an eye. I'd suggest watching a little more on this guy. 

Well I guess we can stop the debate on whether or not to take Foster at 9 thanks to his failed drug test.

With the 30th pick in the 2017 NFL Draft the Steelers select R.Foster

(04-20-2017, 05:50 PM)dr1441 Wrote: I'm not sure how much you watched Foster or what you read on him, but from someone that has family that is huge Alabama fans, and having to watch the games with them every weekend, you're dead wrong about pretty much everything you said about foster. The kid is at most times the most dominate player on the field. He might be small but you can't teach instincts and the want to run through someone. He wasn't asked to rush the passer because of the front 4 being so good. Watch some highlights when he does blitz though, he is usually always untouched and its in a blink of an eye. I'd suggest watching a little more on this guy. 

Yeah, for the 2nd or 3rd round i might if we take him.

Watched lots of Bama games and he just stood out as a hard hitter that liked to lower his head a lot.

This is not good technique for an NFL Linebacker as we all saw with Burfict.

Not to mention he looked much better cause the front 4 was that good.

Would of rather had Johnathan Allen before Foster failing a drug test.

Now i might take Tim Williams ahead of Foster in the 2nd.

(04-20-2017, 09:05 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Yeah, for the 2nd or 3rd round i might if we take him.

Watched lots of Bama games and he just stood out as a hard hitter that liked to lower his head a lot.

This is not good technique for an NFL Linebacker as we all saw with Burfict.

Not to mention he looked much better cause the front 4 was that good.

Would of rather had Johnathan Allen before Foster failing a drug test.

Now i might take Tim Williams ahead of Foster in the 2nd.

I don't care for Tim Williams at all. Doesn't he have some off the field issues too. I know I'm going to catch hell for this but I'm really hoping Allen is gone before we pick. I just don't think he's going to be that good of a NFL player. That's just my own hunch, I have nothing to back it up. Might just be a Alabama thing. It's hard to judge their defensive players cause they are so good as a team. But I would take OJ if he's there.

(04-17-2017, 10:32 PM)OrlandoBengal Wrote: It's not silly at all.  A top ten pick should be someone that comes in and contributes day one.  The reason you're drafting in the top ten is because you need help now, not down the road.


Do you have any idea how teams assign value to draft picks?  The number one pick in the draft is worth a ransom.  Moving up two or three spots, to number one overall, normally involves multiple picks in the future (at least some of which are first rounders).  So maybe the Bengals trade McCarron and this entire draft.  Perhaps McCarron, the nine this year, a second, and a first next year.  It would take A LOT to get the Browns to move out of the number one spot.

Yes.  My scenario has a hidden value in the fact that the Browns still get to utilize the #9 and #12 picks in the draft on positions other than QB, while still getting the QB prospect they want.  Basically my scenario has them getting 340 points for AJM (value of late in the second round) PLUS the 1200 points of the 12 pick, as they now get to use it however they wish.

Remember the chart is a guide, not something carved in stone.  Additionally the rookie wage scale has further skewed it.

If Hue really believes in AJM, then he would jump on my proposal.  He gets his QB, and can still get 2 impact players at picks 9 and 12, as well as moving up to pick 9 in the second round.  If he did so and landed Mike Williams and 2 solid defenders with his first three picks, people would be calling him brilliant.