(03-02-2021, 05:03 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: Actually it does.. there is no for sure pick.. so you draft for need if they are high are your board.. the point I made was.. we don;t all agree on top talent.. Okuda seemed like a top CB.. but he did not perform well... if im the Bengals and they have a 2nd tackle in the range of other position players.. i draft the tackle

Good teams put people in place that do enough work to mitigate a bad pick. Everyone knows there's no such thing as a sure thing, that's why the good teams find the people that know what to look for. They don't just say, "well, no one knows if he's going to be good or bad so let's just cross our fingers". 

You don't just elevate guys because of your need, to the top of the draft. You draft the most athletic, potential/production guys because athleticism--or for QBs, brains--are what wins you football games. You don't take guys projected as mid-rounders and just elevate them to the top of the draft because you have a need...unless you want to have a perennially bad team. 

Whether or not people agree on top talent is irrelevant. Jeff Okudah was a consenus top of the draft player. The 2nd and 3rd tackles in this draft are not. 

(03-02-2021, 06:23 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Good teams put people in place that do enough work to mitigate a bad pick. Everyone knows there's no such thing as a sure thing, that's why the good teams find the people that know what to look for. They don't just say, "well, no one knows if he's going to be good or bad so let's just cross our fingers". 

You don't just elevate guys because of your need, to the top of the draft. You draft the most athletic, potential/production guys because athleticism--or for QBs, brains--are what wins you football games. You don't take guys projected as mid-rounders and just elevate them to the top of the draft because you have a need...unless you want to have a perennially bad team. 

Whether or not people agree on top talent is irrelevant. Jeff Okudah was a consenus top of the draft player. The 2nd and 3rd tackles in this draft are not. 

I would disagree... Slater and Darrisaw are pretty much consensus in who is 2/3 tackle behind Sewell.. and if a team ie Bengals put a value of #5 on that tackle when they look at all their variables on their board... I don;t know why they would pass on them.. or if they decide the value of moving back and getting the 2/3 tackle plus extra picks out weighs say taking a WR, or a CB I can see the Bengals doing it. 

As for need that is part of your evaluation.. you don;t also just evaluate only BPA .... neither is a zero sum.. it is a balance... that is why teams have different players on their top end of their boards...

(03-02-2021, 06:51 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: I would disagree... Slater and Darrisaw are pretty much consensus in who is 2/3 tackle behind Sewell.. and if a team ie Bengals put a value of #5 on that tackle when they look at all their variables on their board... I don;t know why they would pass on them.. or if they decide the value of moving back and getting the 2/3 tackle plus extra picks out weighs say taking a WR, or a CB I can see the Bengals doing it. 

As for need that is part of your evaluation.. you don;t also just evaluate only BPA .... neither is a zero sum.. it is a balance... that is why teams have different players on their top end of their boards...

Slater nor Darrisaw is worth a top 5 pick no matter how you wanna try and twist it.

(03-02-2021, 08:42 PM)pulses Wrote: Slater nor Darrisaw is worth a top 5 pick no matter how you wanna try and twist it.

U can’t make that assessment. Each scout and team is subjective based on what they want and look for. Now if slater or darrisaw is who u want I’m in the group that says trade back but if the bengals are extremely high on either of the two and they take one at 5 and 5 years later we have an all pro can u still make the assessment that they weren’t worthy of a top 5 pick. No u can’t.

(03-02-2021, 08:42 PM)pulses Wrote: Slater nor Darrisaw is worth a top 5 pick no matter how you wanna try and twist it.

That is your opinion  and no other way to twist it.. 
Some mocks dont agree with your opinion.. here is a couple recent mocks with Slater at #5
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nfl.com/_amp/cynthia-frelund-2021-nfl-mock-draft-1-0-who-teams-should-draft-to-win-now

https://www.google.com/amp/s/nflmocks.com/2021/02/13/cincinnati-bengals-three-round-2021-nfl-mock-draft-recap/amp/

(03-02-2021, 10:29 PM)SadFaceBengal15 Wrote: U can’t make that assessment. Each scout and team is subjective based on what they want and look for. Now if slater or darrisaw is who u want I’m in the group that says trade back but if the bengals are extremely high on either of the two and they take one at 5 and 5 years later we have an all pro can u still make the assessment that they weren’t worthy of a top 5 pick. No u can’t.

If the Bengal scouts really feel that Darrisaw is a top 5 selection they need to get new scouts.

(03-03-2021, 03:15 PM)Gdale_Bengal Wrote: If the Bengal scouts really feel that Darrisaw is a top 5 selection they need to get new scouts.

Correct.

Sometimes it's better to know your asshole from the hole below your nose.

(03-02-2021, 06:51 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: I would disagree... Slater and Darrisaw are pretty much consensus in who is 2/3 tackle behind Sewell.. and if a team ie Bengals put a value of #5 on that tackle when they look at all their variables on their board... I don;t know why they would pass on them..

The Bengals are not going to put a OA5 value on Slater or Darrisaw...unless they're really, really stupid. And with all the other talent that would be available, i'm not just talking random, every day stupid. I'm talking bottom of the barrel, borderline vegetable stupid. 

(03-03-2021, 03:35 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: The Bengals are not going to put a OA5 value on Slater or Darrisaw...unless they're really, really stupid. And with all the other talent that would be available, i'm not just talking random, every day stupid. I'm talking bottom of the barrel, borderline vegetable stupid. 

Does not have to be QA5 if they have  tackle at 8 range why not take them at 5 , if bengals think would be better to not protect Burrow over few spots that is borderline stupid..

(03-03-2021, 06:24 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: Does not have to be QA5 if they have  tackle at 8 range why not take them at 5 , if bengals think would be better to not protect Burrow over few spots that is borderline stupid..

You just don't get it.

(03-03-2021, 03:35 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: The Bengals are not going to put a OA5 value on Slater or Darrisaw...unless they're really, really stupid. And with all the other talent that would be available, i'm not just talking random, every day stupid. I'm talking bottom of the barrel, borderline vegetable stupid. 

I do agree with you that it would be stupid to take Slater or Darrisaw that high when we could add high talent guys, and I've been preaching fix the line first for a while now.

We just need to hope to get lucky in later rounds and/or free agency, but that's a reason why I hate not having a GM because, yes, we do have people that perform the roles, but a GM would have a grand plan like "if we don't land Sewell, we'll be sure to get (this player in this round) or (we'll make a call to this team to trade for this tackle) or (now this team will release this guy for sure and we'll be able to make a play for him).

I just think a GM would be thinking ten steps ahead and would have contingency plans.

(03-03-2021, 09:05 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: You just don't get it.

So you are good with having a weak line?? If so u dont get it

(03-03-2021, 09:36 PM)BFritz21 Wrote:




I do agree with you that it would be stupid to take Slater or Darrisaw that high when we could add high talent guys, and I've been preaching fix the line first for a while now.

We just need to hope to get lucky in later rounds and/or free agency, but that's a reason why I hate not having a GM because, yes, we do have people that perform the roles, but a GM would have a grand plan like "if we don't land Sewell, we'll be sure to get (this player in this round) or (we'll make a call to this team to trade for this tackle) or (now this team will release this guy for sure and we'll be able to make a play for him).

I just think a GM would be thinking ten steps ahead and would have contingency plans.

Love your idea that hope to fix the line later in draft.

So you prefer not to fixing the line early in draft..?

(03-03-2021, 11:51 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: Love your idea that hope to fix the line later in draft.

So you prefer not to fixing the line early in draft..?

I meant later after the first round if Sewell isn't there but I want Sewell.

(03-04-2021, 12:56 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: I meant later after the first round if Sewell isn't there but I want Sewell.

Not me... the Oline is way more important to Burrow than adding Chase or Pitts... so start fixing the line with picks in 1st round and I say another by 3/4 round

(03-04-2021, 05:40 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: Not me... the Oline is way more important to Burrow than adding Chase or Pitts... so start fixing the line with picks in 1st round and I say another by 3/4 round

This also depends on FA though. Cannot just rule out Chase or Pitts if the O-line is shored up in FA.

(03-04-2021, 05:40 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: Not me... the Oline is way more important to Burrow than adding Chase or Pitts... so start fixing the line with picks in 1st round and I say another by 3/4 round

The Bengals need to add offensive line there isn't an arguement anyone can make saying other wise.

... but that doesn't mean you reach for a player all the way into the top 5 because you NEED a position. Reaching for need into the top 10 is a poor way to draft. Ja'Marr Chase and Kyle Pitts are a couple of the best players in the draft class. 

(03-04-2021, 05:50 PM)Synric Wrote: The Bengals need to add offensive line there isn't an arguement anyone can make saying other wise.

... but that doesn't mean you reach for a player all the way into the top 5 because you NEED a position. Reaching for need into the top 10 is a poor way to draft. Ja'Marr Chase and Kyle Pitts are a couple of the best players in the draft class. 

(03-04-2021, 05:40 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: Not me... the Oline is way more important to Burrow than adding Chase or Pitts... so start fixing the line with picks in 1st round and I say another by 3/4 round

This is a false proposition.  It's not an either/ or scenario.      At number 5 you take the best prospect and there is a strong argument that is J Chase over Sewell.  WR is a more important position and harder to fill with a generational talent.  

(03-04-2021, 06:06 PM)yang Wrote: This is a false proposition.  It's not an either/ or scenario.      At number 5 you take the best prospect and there is a strong argument that is J Chase over Sewell.  WR is a more important position and harder to fill with a generational talent.  

I wouldn't go that far, we just saw in the Super Bowl that having great weapons doesn't win it all.

The Chiefs got beat cause they couldn't block the Buc's pass rushers. Same reason we lose.

And you can find great WR's in the mid rounds like the Chiefs did with Tyreek Hill.

Sewell is thought to be the best OT to come out since our own Jonah Williams. Some say better than Jonah.

Sewell is also thought to be the best OT hands down in this Draft while some argue if Chase is the best WR.