(03-22-2019, 02:17 PM)jj22 Wrote: You guys are so late. I've long moved on.

If you had moved on you would not be reading our comments and making posts in this thread.

(03-22-2019, 02:33 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: He's 35 and started all 15 games he played in for the Raiders last year. 

0 sacks. Currently a free agent if we want him. 

It would enhance our drafted players currently on the roster stat...

This is the 3rd defensive end the Bengals have brought in...They obviously aren't satisfied with their depth. Reminds me how they looked for a safety last year.

(03-22-2019, 02:33 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: So our strategy is: Trying to keep the roster as similar to last year as we can. Wait for the Steelers to get worse. Then play a last place schedule to improve. But, have no chance at beating a good team in the playoffs.

YOU GOT IT! 

(03-22-2019, 02:36 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If you had moved on you would not be reading our comments and making posts in this thread.

Was just checking to see if we signed any of them. Am def over the "talent" level of these "interests".

But to your delayed response. If they were productive I'd be okay with them. But bums from bad defenses don't impress me.

(03-22-2019, 12:06 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: So by keeping a 6-10 team the same.

(03-22-2019, 02:33 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: So our strategy is: Trying to keep the roster as similar to last year as we can.

Not sure what you mean by "keeping the roster the same".  We did not have the "same" roster all year.  For example we had a winning record when Green played.  Are you suggesting that the Bengals plan to only play Green half of the season like they did last year?

Dalton, Eifert, Brown, Boyd, Lawson, Kirkpatrick, and Green all ended the season on IR.  So are you saying that the Bengals plan to hold them out of games in order to have the same roster that we did last season?

Since that has become your mantra that you repeat at least 20 times a day, could you please explain exactly what you mean by it?

(03-22-2019, 12:05 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You can not judge CBs based on ints.

Yes you can. It’s a PART of what you look for in a good CB. Doesn’t mean they’re completely terrible, just means it’s an area they need to improve their game.

(03-23-2019, 01:55 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Yes you can. It’s a PART of what you look for in a good CB. Doesn’t mean they’re completely terrible, just means it’s an area they need to improve their game.

INTs are just one factor to consider.  I'll give you a good hypothetical example.  CB #1 is a gambler, he loves to go after the ball and make the big turnover.  During the course of a season he had 8 INTs, but also gambled and lost plenty of times, getting burned while going for the ball, resulting in giving up just as many long TDs as his INT count.  CB #2 Likes to play it safer, stay tight with his man, and go for the PD.  He finishes the year with 0 INTs, but lands 12 PDs, and only gives up 2 long TDs.

Who's better, and why?

(03-23-2019, 10:50 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: INTs are just one factor to consider.  I'll give you a good hypothetical example.  CB #1 is a gambler, he loves to go after the ball and make the big turnover.  During the course of a season he had 8 INTs, but also gambled and lost plenty of times, getting burned while going for the ball, resulting in giving up just as many long TDs as his INT count.  CB #2 Likes to play it safer, stay tight with his man, and go for the PD.  He finishes the year with 0 INTs, but lands 12 PDs, and only gives up 2 long TDs.

Who's better, and why?

Exactly why I said it was PART of what you look at to judge a CB. I thought it was pretty clear when I had it in caps...

Anyway, we were a historically bad defense last season, and our CB’s dropping like 37 balls were a factor in that. Only team in the league without 1 single int from any starting CB. I don’t see why it’s controversial to criticize that.

(03-23-2019, 11:37 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Exactly why I said it was PART of what you look at to judge a CB. I thought it was pretty clear when I had it in caps...

Anyway, we were a historically bad defense last season, and our CB’s dropping like 37 balls were a factor in that. Only team in the league without 1 single int from any starting CB. I don’t see why it’s controversial to criticize that.

I guess that is kind of comical, when you consider that one of Terryl Austin's points of emphasis was on the defense going for turnovers.   

But, to be truthful, I don't even consider INTs when looking at CB candidates.  Safeties?  Now, that's a completely different story..

(03-23-2019, 11:44 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: I guess that is kind of comical, when you consider that one of Terryl Austin's points of emphasis was on the defense going for turnovers.   

But, to be truthful, I don't even consider INTs when looking at CB candidates.  Safeties?  Now, that's a completely different story..

Not saying they all need to have half a dozen each, but a few would be nice. Stephen Gilmore was probably the best CB in the league last season and he only had 2. Two is a lot better than 0 though...

(03-23-2019, 11:51 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Not saying they all need to have half a dozen each, but a few would be nice. Stephen Gilmore was probably the best CB in the league last season and he only had 2.  Two is a lot better than 0 though...

There are many things to consider, but INT's are definitely one of them for me. I know people think it's smart to ignore INT's (just as people think it's "smart" to ignore sack totals...but that's for another thread), yet when we talk about underrated Bengals players, we always bring up Ken Riley and his 65 INT's. Funny, eh?

The best corners can often wind up with lower INT totals because QB's are avoiding them, but I'd say there's usually only 2-3 CB's in the league who are THAT great...and even Deion (considered the best cover corner of all-time) had 53 INT's for his career. 

Ultimately, 99% of corners get thrown at quite a bit, and INT's are often signs of (a) you stuck tight to your man and (b) you have good timing and hands. These are skills. If the CB is gambles too much and gets burned, people usually know about it. You can't blindly look at INT totals and say "that guy gambles" or "QB's are avoiding that guy because he had 0 INT's". 

Consider that we have some CB's with iffy PFF grades AND 0 INT's. That's a problem. That means they're getting burned AND not getting turnovers. 

(03-23-2019, 11:44 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: I guess that is kind of comical, when you consider that one of Terryl Austin's points of emphasis was on the defense going for turnovers.   

But, to be truthful, I don't even consider INTs when looking at CB candidates.  Safeties?  Now, that's a completely different story..

Passes defensed should be a pretty big factor unless the guy is Revis or Deion Sanders, etc. and nobody even throws at them.

(03-22-2019, 05:22 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Not sure what you mean by "keeping the roster the same".  We did not have the "same" roster all year.  For example we had a winning record when Green played.  Are you suggesting that the Bengals plan to only play Green half of the season like they did last year?

Dalton, Eifert, Brown, Boyd, Lawson, Kirkpatrick, and Green all ended the season on IR.  So are you saying that the Bengals plan to hold them out of games in order to have the same roster that we did last season?

Since that has become your mantra that you repeat at least 20 times a day, could you please explain exactly what you mean by it?

Injuries aside, you don't think we're bringing back essentially the same roster? So far? 

We've resigned almost all of our players and made only a few minor additions. Maybe what Pistons says is annoying to you, but I'd say it's pretty accurate as of right now, and free agency is all but done. Btw, haven't you complained about this free agency yourself? I honestly think you agree with Pistons. 

(03-23-2019, 01:55 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Yes you can. It’s a PART of what you look for in a good CB. Doesn’t mean they’re completely terrible, just means it’s an area they need to improve their game.

Not how the forum works. Int's are a TERRIBLE stat for evaluating our CB's...

BUT, Preston Brown had an Int in Game 1 last year so he's GREAT in Pass Coverage!!! Get it? Int's equal great pass coverage for a LB!!!

(03-23-2019, 01:10 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: There are many things to consider, but INT's are definitely one of them for me. I know people think it's smart to ignore INT's (just as people think it's "smart" to ignore sack totals...but that's for another thread), yet when we talk about underrated Bengals players, we always bring up Ken Riley and his 65 INT's. Funny, eh?

The best corners can often wind up with lower INT totals because QB's are avoiding them, but I'd say there's usually only 2-3 CB's in the league who are THAT great...and even Deion (considered the best cover corner of all-time) had 53 INT's for his career. 

Ultimately, 99% of corners get thrown at quite a bit, and INT's are often signs of (a) you stuck tight to your man and (b) you have good timing and hands. These are skills. If the CB is gambles too much and gets burned, people usually know about it. You can't blindly look at INT totals and say "that guy gambles" or "QB's are avoiding that guy because he had 0 INT's". 

Consider that we have some CB's with iffy PFF grades AND 0 INT's. That's a problem. That means they're getting burned AND not getting turnovers. 

Well the low int's from our CB's aren't a 1 year thing either. It's a career thing for all 3 of them.

(03-21-2019, 10:39 PM)NKURyan Wrote: They wouldn't be bringing either guy in to start, so who cares? They'd be depth signings, just like Webb.

hahaha shhhh You just making the nay-sayers mad cause they expect ever FA to be an All Pro. If signed, they are just decent rotational players and might not make it thru camp to the regular 53 man roster.

I heard we signed Wynn which i am fine with, i liked Riley better though and he has a good name for a Bengal.

Paul Dehner Jr.
@pauldehnerjr
Digging through
@PFF
, an interesting nugget about Kerry Wynn from last year. Among all DL, he ranked 9th out of 232 qualifiers in run stop % at 12.1.

Top Bengals DL in '18:

Tupou: 7.7
Billings: 6.9
Dunlap: 6.7
Atkins: 6.6
Johnson: 5.7
Willis: 5.2
Hubbard: 4.5
12:03 PM · Mar 27, 2019 · TweetDeck

(03-27-2019, 09:28 PM)LebanonFan Wrote: Paul Dehner Jr.
@pauldehnerjr
Digging through
@PFF
, an interesting nugget about Kerry Wynn from last year. Among all DL, he ranked 9th out of 232 qualifiers in run stop % at 12.1.

Top Bengals DL in '18:

Tupou: 7.7
Billings: 6.9
Dunlap: 6.7
Atkins: 6.6
Johnson: 5.7
Willis: 5.2
Hubbard: 4.5
12:03 PM · Mar 27, 2019 · TweetDeck

Great stuff LF, definately helps upgrading us in stopping the run. Liking the pickup more now.

Sounds like a definite upgrade over the walking tree. Maybe this guy has a little bend to him.