+- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (https://thebengalsboard.com)
+-- Forum: Cincinnati Bengals / NFL (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-3.html)
+--- Forum: Draft Central (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-9.html)
+--- Thread: Are the Bengals in No Man's Land? (/thread-10683.html)
Are the Bengals in No Man's Land? - PikesPeakUC - 04-02-2017
It feels like the Bengals are in a draft situation where there might not be a talent worthy of the number nine pick, but also a lack of suitors who are willing to trade up to the ninth spot. Most of the names floated out there for who the Bengals would be interested in would also be available a little later on, or at least there would be worthy alternatives. I think of any draft in recent history, this is the one to trade down in unless something breaks weirdly up front. The problem is, I don't know if anyone will be willing to come up.
It'll be interesting to see how things play out when the draft gets here.
RE: Are the Bengals in No Man's Land? - t3r3e3 - 04-02-2017
(04-02-2017, 06:56 PM)PikesPeakUC Wrote: It feels like the Bengals are in a draft situation where there might not be a talent worthy of the number nine pick, but also a lack of suitors who are willing to trade up to the ninth spot. Most of the names floated out there for who the Bengals would be interested in would also be available a little later on, or at least there would be worthy alternatives. I think of any draft in recent history, this is the one to trade down in unless something breaks weirdly up front. The problem is, I don't know if anyone will be willing to come up.
It'll be interesting to see how things play out when the draft gets here.
At 9 , the Bengals should have a shot at Foster, Reddick, Davis, Ross, Williams, Charlton, possibly one of the safeties, Howard, and possibly Fournette. Those are all good gets. None would be considered reaches. I'm not sold on Barnett. He's undersized, and lacks quick twitch explosion.
RE: Are the Bengals in No Man's Land? - magikod - 04-02-2017
(04-02-2017, 07:17 PM)t3r3e3 Wrote: At 9 , the Bengals should have a shot at Foster, Reddick, Davis, Ross, Williams, Charlton, possibly one of the safeties, Howard, and possibly Fournette. Those are all good gets. None would be considered reaches. I'm not sold on Barnett. He's undersized, and lacks quick twitch explosion.
I agree about Barnett. I would love it if one of the safeties fell to us maybe. Taco I don't want at number 9, Howard maybe if we plan on letting Eifert go after this year.
RE: Are the Bengals in No Man's Land? - Yojimbo - 04-03-2017
Well there's plenty of talent worthy of a top 10 pick, just not at a need position. I think the team is going to end up with somebody that won't play much this year. Get ready everybody that hates first rounders riding the bench as a rookie.
RE: Are the Bengals in No Man's Land? - ochocincos - 04-03-2017
(04-02-2017, 06:56 PM)PikesPeakUC Wrote: It feels like the Bengals are in a draft situation where there might not be a talent worthy of the number nine pick, but also a lack of suitors who are willing to trade up to the ninth spot. Most of the names floated out there for who the Bengals would be interested in would also be available a little later on, or at least there would be worthy alternatives. I think of any draft in recent history, this is the one to trade down in unless something breaks weirdly up front. The problem is, I don't know if anyone will be willing to come up.
It'll be interesting to see how things play out when the draft gets here.
The problem is there is no clear cut winner at #9 unless Solomon Thomas falls. Part of that is because the OT pool is not very good this year, and the other part is that the Bengals have filled many of their voids with veterans (albeit not with star veterans). So everyone can easily make a valid scenario for Howard, Foster, a RB, WR, DB, or even Barnett.
Personally, I want a good player with elite potential, not a player with a low ceiling. I wouldn't be opposed to a player like Barnett or Mike Williams, but I'd prefer someone different.
RE: Are the Bengals in No Man's Land? - Au165 - 04-03-2017
Worth the #9 pick is an interesting view. No draft has ever gone chalk in that the players drafted in 1-32 order were the best 1-32 players in that order. We say a player is or isn't worth the 9th pick but the reality is they are if they perform to that level. People get caught up with draft guides and rankings, but the reality is if you think a guy "rated" as the 50th best guy in the draft is the #1 guy in the draft then you take him the first chance you can because gambling on not getting him if he is the best guy is not worth it.
I think we have options which is a good thing.
RE: Are the Bengals in No Man's Land? - Goalpost - 04-03-2017
I still like Williams. I think he is undervalued on this site by many. My preference is Solomon Thomas, unlikely to fall.
But I'm like Lap on this one. If they don't like a DE, they will go WR
Barnett's workouts have cast a bit of worry in me. I will say his production is good though
RE: Are the Bengals in No Man's Land? - 09ItsOurTime - 04-03-2017
I think players 2-14 are on the same level. I don't think there is anyone that will be there at 2 that absolutely wont be there at 9. I think Thomas and Fournette are gone, but even they arent sure things.
RE: Are the Bengals in No Man's Land? - PikesPeakUC - 04-03-2017
I guess I'm just kind of in the boat that if you're able to trade down, you'll still get the same level of player at 14,15, etc. But honestly, who knows what the draft board looks like
RE: Are the Bengals in No Man's Land? - Jpoore - 04-03-2017
(04-03-2017, 12:17 PM)Goalpost Wrote: I still like Williams. I think he is undervalued on this site by many. My preference is Solomon Thomas, unlikely to fall.there was also an article by lap that said he thinks they will double down at wr like go wr 1 and 4.
But I'm like Lap on this one. If they don't like a DE, they will go WR
Barnett's workouts have cast a bit of worry in me. I will say his production is good though