Some people saw the pick of Kroft in the 3rd as a reach, given that most experts and other teams had him ranked as an late fourth-early fourth round pick, but CincyJungle explains how Marvin had him as the top ranked TE, and how that probably was correct since Rutgers threw the ball a lot less than they did in 2013 and gave Kroft less opportunities:

Quote:You also have to understand Kroft's situation to see why a team like the Bengals thought he was worthy of a top-85 pick when most had him ranked far outside that range. He was expected to be a bigger prospect heading into the 2014 season after leading his team in receiving yards (573) and receptions (43) to go with four scores in 2013.

However, Kroft was part of an offense that finished 99th in total passing attempts last year (357) and respectively, he was asked to be more of a blocker and less of a receiving threat. If you compare his sophomore numbers to that of Maxx Williams' in 2015, the first tight end taken in this year's draft, there isn't much of a difference.

Williams led Minnesota in receptions (36), yards (569) and receiving touchdowns (eight) this past season. Kroft had seven more catches for four more yards and four fewer scores.

So taking him a bit early wasn't a reach at all, but rather just making sure that we got our top prospect at a position of need in a spot even later than where he SHOULD have been ranked, as opposed to where he was ranked.

Looks like another great drafting move by this organization, so let's hope that it pans out and that we use them properly up the seams to keep the safeties in the middle of the field and off of AJ! We'll DOMINATE defenses!

(05-31-2015, 04:56 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Some people saw the pick of Kroft in the 3rd as a reach, given that most experts and other teams had him ranked as an late fourth-early fourth round pick, but CincyJungle explains how Marvin had him as the top ranked TE, and how that probably was correct since Rutgers threw the ball a lot less than they did in 2013 and gave Kroft less opportunities:


So taking him a bit early wasn't a reach at all, but rather just making sure that we got our top prospect at a position of need in a spot even later than where he SHOULD have been ranked, as opposed to where he was ranked.

Looks like another great drafting move by this organization, so let's hope that it pans out and that we use them properly up the seams to keep the safeties in the middle of the field and off of AJ!  We'll DOMINATE defenses!

You forgot to say how pumped you are.

(05-31-2015, 04:56 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Some people saw the pick of Kroft in the 3rd as a reach

Hey, ya never know.  A lot of people said Gronkowski and Graham were reaches in their respective drafts, and they've both proven to be worthy of top 5 picks.  I hope he works out, I just can't find all that much video of him.

Oh whatever. They said the same thing about Bodine last year.

(05-31-2015, 05:49 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Oh whatever. They said the same thing about Bodine last year.  

Eifert was supposed to be the best thing since sliced bread too...

I'm just old and tired of the same old BS lip service every year about how good this guy is going to be and how hard it's going to be to stop that guy. When these turds* get out on the field and perform at a pro bowl level and actually win a game that matters, i'll be happy. 

Libraries full of BS lip service has jaded me towards all the empty pre-season talk. 

(*turds is obviously an over-the-top term that doesn't accurately reflect their talents. But it's the term i wanted to use. )

(05-31-2015, 05:59 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Eifert was supposed to be the best thing since sliced bread too...

I'm just old and tired of the same old BS lip service every year about how good this guy is going to be and how hard it's going to be to stop that guy. When these turds* get out on the field and perform at a pro bowl level and actually win a game that matters, i'll be happy. 

Libraries full of BS lip service has jaded me towards all the empty pre-season talk. 

(*turds is obviously an over-the-top term that doesn't accurately reflect their talents. But it's the term i wanted to use. )

Yea, it was clearly his fault he dislocated his elbow in the first half of the first game of the year. 

(05-31-2015, 05:59 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Eifert was supposed to be the best thing since sliced bread too...

Yup. Remember when the coaches said Binns was like Boldin and it was getting hard to keep him off the field?

What about when Marv compared Nate Webster to Ray Lewis?

The Bengals hype a few players every year.

(05-31-2015, 05:59 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Eifert was supposed to be the best thing since sliced bread too...

I'm just old and tired of the same old BS lip service every year about how good this guy is going to be and how hard it's going to be to stop that guy. When these turds* get out on the field and perform at a pro bowl level and actually win a game that matters, i'll be happy. 

Libraries full of BS lip service has jaded me towards all the empty pre-season talk. 

(*turds is obviously an over-the-top term that doesn't accurately reflect their talents. But it's the term i wanted to use. )

Eifert hasn't had much of a chance to put it all on the field yet, and I see Kroft as a better compliment to him than Gresham was because Kroft seems more physical and just more reliable.  

Kroft will find the free areas in the seams, get open, and make the sure catch.  He'll just make the defense account for so much more of the field, as will a healthy Eifert.

(05-31-2015, 06:03 PM)Steeler Eater Wrote: Yea, it was clearly his fault he dislocated his elbow in the first half of the first game of the year. 

Completely his fault 

We still put up a 10-5-1 record, so think about how good we'll be with Eifert and Kroft running up the seams all year and just giving defenses nightmares trying to decide how to cover them.  

You want to keep your safeties in the middle of the field?  OK, we'll go up top to AJ 

(05-31-2015, 06:27 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: You want to keep your safeties in the middle of the field?  OK, we'll go up top to MJ 

Let's hope this is the case.

(05-31-2015, 06:27 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Kroft seems more physical and just more reliable.  

Reliable, sure, that's not saying much, but I think you have to give physicality to Gresham. Again, not consistently, but Kroft does not have an NFL body yet and Gresham is a physical specimin if nothing else. He could run NFL guys over when he was into it.

(05-31-2015, 04:56 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: So taking him a bit early wasn't a reach at all, but rather just making sure that we got our top prospect at a position of need in a spot even later than where he SHOULD have been ranked, as opposed to where he was ranked.

This explanation suggest the Bengals are the only team that figured this out. This is a very basic part of evaluating a player, and not something that would be missed by the rest of the league. The only thing I'm wondering is why anyone would feel the need to justify this pick with such a goofy explanation.

(05-31-2015, 07:39 PM)franchise18 Wrote: Reliable, sure, that's not saying much, but I think you have to give physicality to Gresham. Again, not consistently, but Kroft does not have an NFL body yet and Gresham is a physical specimin if nothing else. He could run NFL guys over when he was into it.

Gresham might be a physical specimen, but he was never really overly physical (nothing ever stands out in my mind).

(05-31-2015, 08:13 PM)Utts Wrote: This explanation suggest the Bengals are the only team that figured this out. This is a very basic part of evaluating a player, and not something that would be missed by the rest of the league. The only thing I'm wondering is why anyone would feel the need to justify this pick with such a goofy explanation.

Don't really see that as a goofy explanation, but rather a pretty good one.  He likely wouldn't have been there for our next pick, so sounds like we just saw the value as too much to pass on.

And I'm sure every other team knew about his value, but the fact that he hadn't put it on the field in a year didn't make him stand out to teams.  Maybe they knew that he'd be taken immediately after the Bengals took him.  Every other team knew how good he was and maybe the rest of the league was just playing chicken with each other to see how late they could take him, and we got the best value by taking him where we did.

Wish I could find a highlight tape on this guy

Doesn't matter what TE we have if we can't actually develop them.

(05-31-2015, 10:08 PM)treee Wrote: Doesn't matter what TE we have if we can't actually develop them.

Can't we just run a FB out there or better yet...  Peko?  LMAO

(05-31-2015, 10:13 PM)BengalsRocker Wrote: Can't we just run a FB out there or better yet...  Peko?  LMAO

Mike Brown is probably pushing to get M Johnson out there at TE as we speak.

I'm probably in the minority but I'd really like Gresham back too. 3rd and short he was IMPOSSIBLE to tackle with one guy.

(05-31-2015, 10:08 PM)treee Wrote: Doesn't matter what TE we have if we can't actually develop them.

Don't need to develop them much, if at all.

We just need to put them out there and put them in positions to succeed.

This isn't the old days where rookies are just scrubs that need great coaching to succeed.

Sure, good coaching is great and does help players develop, but the world is so advanced that a player can turn on a YouTube video and watch professional instruction.  It's not as good as live teaching, but a player can get help on his own in the offseason if he's not happy with his development.

(05-31-2015, 10:35 PM)Housh Wrote: I'm probably in the minority but I'd really like Gresham back too. 3rd and short he was IMPOSSIBLE to tackle with one guy.

Kroft is pretty big too.  Maybe he'll also be tough to tackle.

(05-31-2015, 10:35 PM)Housh Wrote: I'm probably in the minority but I'd really like Gresham back too. 3rd and short he was IMPOSSIBLE to tackle with one guy.

Defenders knew to keep him up, easy strip !