(03-21-2019, 10:59 PM)GreenCornBengal Wrote: The problem is, our sucky may actually be worse than the sucky we are bringing in. Which makes bringing in the sucky a good thing.

Meh, sucky is sucky.  But, the sucky you know how to work with is better than the sucky that you have to learn how to use.

(03-21-2019, 11:03 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Meh, sucky is sucky.  But, the sucky you know how to work with is better than the sucky that you have to learn how to use.

I just wish the Bengals would occasionally look at some not-so-sucky players in free agency.

That way the sucky players would be easier to stomach when we do sign them. 

I don't think players like these would bother anyone if it they weren't the norm for almost every free agency.

Man I wish I could look at a free agent with a PFF grade in the 50s and see the positive in it.

I remember when they picked Bobby Hart up and people called him training camp fodder. Then he ended up starting.

(03-21-2019, 10:42 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: And depth guys end up starting after injuries as we saw with Nickerson. Why not just draft guys as backups who would have more of a chance of improving.

Adding sucky players to your roster is never a good thing.

Well, Nickerson was a young player who supposedly had more of a chance of improving, and he was pitiful.

You also only have so many draft picks and most rookie 5-7th round picks are not able to step in and contribute in any real meaningful capacity.  

Anarumu may also be looking to light a fire under some of the guys on the back end of the roster.  If the current guys see him bringing in some of his boys, they're likely to start feeling the heat.  Honestly, when you look at how bad we've been in the 4th quarter of the last couple of preseasons, it's pretty clear that a lot of the bubble guys either aren't being pushed or just aren't that good.

(03-21-2019, 11:27 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Man I wish I could look at a free agent with a PFF grade in the 50s and see the positive in it.

I remember when they picked Bobby Hart up and people called him training camp fodder. Then he ended up starting.

Complains at length in the "Dennard is back" thread about the lack of interceptions from our secondary.

Bengals bring in a S with 4 picks last year for a visit.

S is deemed trash due to PFF rankings.

I would take the word of the guy's position coach who actually knows what the defense is supposed to be doing over rankings from PFF doled out by guys guessing at what the defense is supposed to be doing.

I find PFF rankings hard to take seriously - just too many times where their ratings and what I see with my eyes disagree.

(03-21-2019, 09:02 PM)Joelist Wrote: Riley seems like a good add if he is signed.

Why they keep inviting DEs and so far no LBs is weird, seeing as THE weakness in the defense last years was the LB unit.

It's just like last year where the Bengals basically painted themselves into a corner with the draft. We made no attempt at improving our weakness so you can basically predict our first pick. 

(03-22-2019, 01:14 AM)Bengal Dude Wrote: It's just like last year where the Bengals basically painted themselves into a corner with the draft. We made no attempt at improving our weakness so you can basically predict our first pick. 

Yep. And we're not picking high enough to be assured of getting what is needed. 

I think the team is looking for depth guys right now. We are pretty set at end Wynn is a 5th DE with some experience. Same thing with Riley, he would be the 4th safety possibly. It's okay to find veterans for the backside of the roster for depth.

(03-21-2019, 11:27 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Man I wish I could look at a free agent with a PFF grade in the 50s and see the positive in it.

I remember when they picked Bobby Hart up and people called him training camp fodder. Then he ended up starting.

I certainly think identifying good players is more nuanced than just going off the PFF grade. One example- I think it was you the other day who brought up John Miller's pass blocking grades being below Redmond's last year as a reason why he wasn't a good signing. I'd imagine his grades are skewed due to blocking for Josh Allen. 

I listened to the Bengals Booth Podcast yesterday and Dave Lapham brought up what I think is a good point. Both Pittsburgh and Baltimore have lost some very good players in free agency/trades. This offseason, we haven't gone backwards at any positions (ie- losing a Whitworth, Marvin Jones, etc). This free agency, we've either improved the position (Miller, CB depth) or stayed the same (Hart, TE). Almost by default, we should see an improvement to the team. 

(03-21-2019, 07:32 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Lol the Raiders did the same thing, with similar results. By results, I'm also talking about AIDS.

Last year the Raiders had LaFell, McCarron, Reggie Nelson, Leon Hall, Frostee Rucker, Emmanuel Lamur, Clinton McDonald and Mike Nugent. 

Holy crap, frostee is still playing? Do they let him take his walker to the line?

(03-21-2019, 07:18 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Stats for anyone interested:

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/W/WynnKe00.htm
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/R/RileCu00.htm

Wynn

28 years old
5 seasons
63 games (15 starts)
131 tackles
4.5 sacks
8 QB hits

Riley

26 years old
3 seasons
27 games (16 starts)
86 tackles
5 INT's

Wynn's numbers are very weak for as much as he's played. Riley started all 16 games for the Giants last year, posting 75 tackles, 4 INT's and 5 passes defensed. It'd be interesting to see how PFF graded his performance. Fwiw, the Giants were 23rd in pass defense last year, but held opponents to a 89.8 passer rating, which was 10th best among defenses.

They also picked off 16 passes, which ranked 7th. Obviously Riley played a role in that with his 4 picks.

Wynn's really not bad; a solid run-game guy, but doesn't offer much as a pass rusher; a Geathers/Copeland/MJ type as a BACKUP only, wouldn't be a bad thing. Curry was like that too, but an even better pass rusher (more like a Dingleberry-type).

And to be fair, he saw VERY few snaps; only a couple of hundred a year, 300+ tops. If he was starting all 16 games with those numbers, then that is just awful; NTs in a 3-4 put up better numbers.

(03-22-2019, 09:43 AM)Benton Wrote: Holy crap, frostee is still playing? Do they let him take his walker to the line?

(03-22-2019, 12:39 AM)Joelist Wrote: I find PFF rankings hard to take seriously - just too many times where their ratings and what I see with my eyes disagree.

Again, since they made the switch to their stupid new grading system, that is completely subjective and doesn't tell you anything, other than, "we think this guy is better than that guy," their grades and grading have just been so poor and not worth it.

Not to mention, in the old days, they had actual football enthusiasts doing the grading and the watching, not to mention that the game would have to be viewed twice before grades and the other numbers, were to be posted.

Now they have a bunch of guys that were brought in by NBC or whomever owns it and injected money into it, who are NOT football enthusiasts and have cheapened everything, while jacking up the price.

I repeat; saying someone has a grade off 55 is, "bad," means absolutely nothing; are they starting from 0? Are they starting from 50? What is the qualitative aspect of that 55? So there are 40 guys better than the guy with 55, but why is that? If their numbers don't mesh, does that mean they were worse in what way?

The old grading and stats system, had qualitative aspects to it, that made it VERY easy to understand and the grades actually made sense, ending off with a cumulative total at the end of the game/season/etc., that made it loud and clear, who was good and why they were ranked that way.

I hate when people, "fix," something that isn't broken...

(03-22-2019, 09:43 AM)Benton Wrote: Holy crap, frostee is still playing? Do they let him take his walker to the line?

Same class as Peko, Whitworth, Joseph. That was a good draft for us.

(03-22-2019, 12:34 AM)Whatever Wrote: Complains at length in the "Dennard is back" thread about the lack of interceptions from our secondary.

Bengals bring in a S with 4 picks last year for a visit.

S is deemed trash due to PFF rankings.

I would take the word of the guy's position coach who actually knows what the defense is supposed to be doing over rankings from PFF doled out by guys guessing at what the defense is supposed to be doing.

Our safeties are not the problem wrt ints (hell Williams had a bunch). It’s our CB’s. 0 ints last year from any of them. That’s horrendous.

(03-22-2019, 10:30 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Our safeties are not the problem wrt ints (hell Williams had a bunch). It’s our CB’s. 0 ints last year from any of them. That’s horrendous.

While I agree, that ONE of them should've had at least 1, we need to keep in mind that:

1. Dennard had a CLEAR INT against the Stoolers, that was ripped from his hands AFTER the players were down by contact. Goddamn refs.
2. Dre dropped I think, 4 or 5 picks.
3. WJax dropped a further 3 or 4.

Even if half of those get caught cleanly, that would've 4-7 picks for the CBs. Not stellar at all, but it would've been something.

Last year was a very weird season.

Good lord, why?

I’ve seen just about every Giants game these past few years. I’ll admit I don’t know much about Wynn but Riley was/is frustratingly awful. The man couldn’t take a proper angle if his life depended on it

I guess the silver lining is that he’ll only be a depth signing...

(03-22-2019, 10:38 AM)Pat5775 Wrote: Good lord, why?

I’ve seen just about every Giants game these past few years. I’ll admit I don’t know much about Wynn but Riley was/is frustratingly awful. The man couldn’t take a proper angle if his life depended on it

I guess the silver lining is that he’ll only be a depth signing...

Right, it's for depth and you don't sign star to be depth guys. I said it early these guys are probably Safety #4 or DE #5 on the roster. People want everyone on the 53 to be stars but most fans overestimate what level of player the backside of rosters hold. 

Is he better than Clayton Fedjelem? And he has experience with both our DC and as a starter? Since the answer to both questions as "yes", then it's a positive signing.

I love how the guy who constantly trashes the Bengals draft record has a response that's basically "they can just draft a guy who is way better". Would you just pick a side already? You constantly want to have it both ways just for the sake of being unhappy with everything.

(03-21-2019, 10:13 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Riley graded 58.0 which was the #78 ranked safety on PFF. (You won't win in the NFL if you play guys ranked in the 50's.)

PFF is a joke.  In 2015 had the #3 pass defense in the league with a CB ranked 112th by PFF playing 97% of the snaps.