+- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (https://thebengalsboard.com)
+-- Forum: Cincinnati Bengals / NFL (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-3.html)
+--- Forum: JUNGLE NOISE (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-2.html)
+--- Thread: Using context to judge this draft (/thread-32154.html)
RE: Using context to judge this draft - bengals1969 - 05-02-2022
(05-02-2022, 12:07 PM)fredtoast Wrote: This is a perfect example of the "context" I was talking about.
What player could we have taken at #31 who would have seen more snaps than Hill will this year?
Dax Hill wasn’t a reach, it’s where he belonged. The Bengals put 3 WRs, RB & TE in spread formations and other teams would like to copy that, it’s what teams do in the NFL, copy the champions. With so many WR’s taken at the top of the draft the Bengals need more depth in the backfield.
RE: Using context to judge this draft - Clark W Griswold - 05-02-2022
Hill is a good pick because he will get experience this year and take over for Bates next year. This was a good job by the Bengals setting themselves up for this year (tagging Bates) and the future (not paying too much $ for a safety by getting his replacement). No one knows how any of these guys will pan out but the Bengals obviously had a plan.
I don’t think they were looking O line for the first few rounds. They filled holes in FA and they still believe in the young guys they took last year.
Baltimore had a good draft but still are weak at WR. In a passing league the Bengals are loaded at the WR position while the rest of the AFCN teams look pretty weak at WR. I think that is a very good thing for the Bengals to have that big of an advantage at a key position.
RE: Using context to judge this draft - Mike M (the other one) - 05-02-2022
(05-02-2022, 12:34 PM)CardCounterChris Wrote: 100% good teams have less rookies see the field. I was just hoping to see one player that could break out, and who knows, maybe its Dax Hill.
Should be. Considering how much Ricardo was a part of the Defense.
Hill's Floor looks to be higher than Ricardo's ceiling... So we should see some playmaking coming from him as well.
For those that have been complaining about Eli, well, he's got some competition now. If CTB replaces him this year, or next, then it's an improvement right??
RE: Using context to judge this draft - Tony - 05-02-2022
Fred is 100% right here..
I guess I got use to being able to hope for top 10 talents every year... I don't think a lot of us have seen us pick in the bottom 5 before...
RE: Using context to judge this draft - Mike M (the other one) - 05-02-2022
(05-02-2022, 12:21 PM)AtomicBlaze Wrote: I don't think they could have done much better based on where they picked at #31, they could have made a big splash and traded up for Linderbaum and solidified our OL which would help us more to make a run at the SB this year. That probably would have cost a 3rd rounder, so we would have still got our CB in the second round which we need for depth. Of course that would have left us thin at DT.
Not sure the Bengals were interested in Linderbaum as much as the Media and draft guru's were pushing it. They replaced 3 guys on the OL with very solid players, and Carman will get his shot to be a starter at LG.
So do you have insider info that the Bengals were actually interested in Tyler?
RE: Using context to judge this draft - bengalfan74 - 05-02-2022
(05-02-2022, 12:05 PM)CardCounterChris Wrote: I like the players. I think we got some really talented guys. I also realize where we drafted. However, I did wonder about a few things during the draft. Did we need to give up our 6th to move up in the 5th for another safety? We could have grabbed another OL, TE, or WR with that. Did we overdraft Safety? Will Dax Hill see enough of the field in year 1?
I'm not saying things are failing apart or terrible. I don't want to take the shine from the players and their moment either. However, I think its still fine to discuss things that stood out as maybe not great?
That's the one thing that bugs me a little bit about this draft. Would have liked to see another Oline or WR.
RE: Using context to judge this draft - Stewy - 05-02-2022
(05-02-2022, 12:12 PM)CardCounterChris Wrote: I'm not sure there was to be honest. However that doesn't make the pick correct as there were other options.
1.) Could have traded up for Linderbaum. To be fair, I didn't see BAL snagging him and thought after the DAL pick, he'd fall to us. CIN showed they were willing to go after there guy.
2.) Trade back. There was still depth on the perimeter at DB and still other good players that could have been had in the mid 2nd. This allows more flexibility by adding depth throughout more positions.
For me either of those is fine, and I'm not anti Dax. I get the arguments with Bates and/or Bell being potentially out the door. I also understand we do utilize 3 safety sets and he can play the slot. With the first round picks, I just want to see them on the field, especially when making a Super Bowl push. I just wonder if there was a better way to go about approaching the draft as a whole.
Unfortunately with Hindsight and could haves we'll never know. I'm not overly excited by this draft, but they did get talent.
(05-02-2022, 12:21 PM)AtomicBlaze Wrote: I don't think they could have done much better based on where they picked at #31, they could have made a big splash and traded up for Linderbaum and solidified our OL which would help us more to make a run at the SB this year. That probably would have cost a 3rd rounder, so we would have still got our CB in the second round which we need for depth. Of course that would have left us thin at DT.
How do you know the team wanted Linderbaum?
RE: Using context to judge this draft - CardCounterChris - 05-02-2022
(05-02-2022, 01:55 PM)Stewy Wrote: How do you know the team wanted Linderbaum?
None of us know what the team wanted. I was asked for alternatives and I gave them.
RE: Using context to judge this draft - Mike M (the other one) - 05-02-2022
(05-02-2022, 01:48 PM)bengalfan74 Wrote: That's the one thing that bugs me a little bit about this draft. Would have liked to see another Oline or WR.
So you wanted guys that would likely see the field even less than our first 2 picks?
RE: Using context to judge this draft - CardCounterChris - 05-02-2022
(05-02-2022, 02:05 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: So you wanted guys that would likely see the field even less than our first 2 picks?
He was referring to the trade up in the 5th. That's a separate issue from the first two picks. Come on, its okay to disagree but this is borderline disingenuous.
RE: Using context to judge this draft - Stewy - 05-02-2022
(05-02-2022, 01:48 PM)bengalfan74 Wrote: That's the one thing that bugs me a little bit about this draft. Would have liked to see another Oline or WR.
My guess is that the plan all along was the "Post Draft Low Cost Vet" route for both if UDFA's don't shine in a big way.
RE: Using context to judge this draft - CardCounterChris - 05-02-2022
(05-02-2022, 02:08 PM)Stewy Wrote: My guess is that the plan all along was the "Post Draft Low Cost Vet" route for both if UDFA's don't shine in a big way.
Honestly, I think its just the way this regime drafts. We went super heavy on LBs 2 years ago, last year was heavy ol and dl, this year was very heavy secondary. I think they prefer to draft a lot of a position hoping to get a couple that stick.
RE: Using context to judge this draft - fredtoast - 05-02-2022
(05-02-2022, 02:08 PM)Stewy Wrote: My guess is that the plan all along was the "Post Draft Low Cost Vet" route for both if UDFA's don't shine in a big way.
It does not have to be absolute dirt cheap. We have $17 million in cap space and we are honestly in the middle of a prime window to win a championship.
I would not be surprised to see us sign a couple of guys in the $3-$4 million dollar range. Probably a veteran WR and O-lineman that could play multiple positions.
RE: Using context to judge this draft - Mike M (the other one) - 05-02-2022
(05-02-2022, 02:07 PM)CardCounterChris Wrote: He was referring to the trade up in the 5th. That's a separate issue from the first two picks. Come on, its okay to disagree but this is borderline disingenuous.
Actually he said..
Make a splash and give up 3rd rounder to move up and draft Linderbaum.
RE: Using context to judge this draft - CardCounterChris - 05-02-2022
(05-02-2022, 02:18 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Actually he said..
Make a splash and give up 3rd rounder to move up and draft Linderbaum.
So the next question, would that 3rd rounder, or our current 3rd see more play than Linderbaum? Its still a really poor argument.
If you like what the Bengals did, that's fine. If you like Dax that's cool. But the argument presented still isn't good.
RE: Using context to judge this draft - Stewy - 05-02-2022
(05-02-2022, 02:11 PM)fredtoast Wrote: It does not have to be absolute dirt cheap. We have $17 million in cap space and we are honestly in the middle of a prime window to win a championship.
I would not be surprised to see us sign a couple of guys in the $3-$4 million dollar range. Probably a veteran WR and O-lineman that could play multiple positions.
Well I didn't say minimum.....just low cost.
RE: Using context to judge this draft - The D.O.Z. - 05-02-2022
I feel like this draft is going to take a couple years to say if it was a good one or a so-so one. We say that every year but the past few years we have been picking early, getting more immediate impact guys. Building the team. THIS draft, picking late, was more for an eye toward the future, getting Lou some guys to add more wrinkles in our defensive schemes and diverse packages. I like it!
These “solid but not WOW” drafts are what loaded rosters go through unless they trade future assets to move up for that “big splash” type.
RE: Using context to judge this draft - ochocincos - 05-02-2022
(05-02-2022, 12:07 PM)fredtoast Wrote: This is a perfect example of the "context" I was talking about.
What player could we have taken at #31 who would have seen more snaps than Hill will this year?
About the only player would have been possibly an outside CB (who the Bengals got in Rd 2), a rotational DT (who the Bengals got in Rd 3), or an OL (who the Bengals got in Rd 4).
I think people really wanted someone taken to push Carman out of a starting spot.
But no true starting-quality IOL fell to Pick 31.
Zion Johnson, Tyler Linderbaum, and Kenyon Green were all off the board by then.
Would anyone have really felt that comfortable with any other OL starting Day 1 from who was available at 31 or later? I'm not sure I would have.
I think people also really wanted Winfrey instead of Carter since he was still available.
And while I think Winfrey already has the better size than Carter for DT, Carter had more proven production and versatility than Winfrey.
Let's see what Bengals do with FA now that the draft is over to upgrade the rest of the depth.
Hopefully they at least add another WR and maybe another OL.
RE: Using context to judge this draft - Mike M (the other one) - 05-02-2022
(05-02-2022, 02:21 PM)CardCounterChris Wrote: So the next question, would that 3rd rounder, or our current 3rd see more play than Linderbaum? Its still a really poor argument.
If you like what the Bengals did, that's fine. If you like Dax that's cool. But the argument presented still isn't good.
You mean Hlll and Carter vs Linderbaum.
No idea, but Hill should see the field as he's replacing a vet, not sure if Linderbaum could beat out Karras for the C spot.
RE: Using context to judge this draft - CardCounterChris - 05-02-2022
(05-02-2022, 02:33 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: You mean Hlll and Carter vs Linderbaum.
No idea, but Hill should see the field as he's replacing a vet, not sure if Linderbaum could beat out Karras for the C spot.
If we got Linderbaum, I think Karras would have moved to LG. Hill is a good long term safe move. He may see a decent share of snaps this year due to packages and 3 safety sets, but a starting lineman for sure would see more snaps. I don't know what to expect from Carter. He'll be rotational or depth I'd guess, with Reader and BJ taking the bulk of the snaps. I wonder if we'll bring anyone else back to compete in that spot such as Mike Daniels.