Using context to judge this draft

[fredtoast]

We have all seen Bengal fans who are not thrilled with this draft.  I pushed one kind of hard in one thread and what he said helped me to understand what might be going on.

1.  In most past years we had gaping holes in our roster and were absolutely counting on high draft picks filling these holes.  This year we were basically drafting for depth.  Since it did not appear that we possibly drafted one (or two) immediate starters some people did not feel like we accomplished as much.  It was not really about the quality of the players selected.  It was about their apparent lack of immediate impact.

2.  In many past years we had top ten selections.  This year we were picking at #31 so many people felt like we were not getting any of the top players.  But after the first round it really doesn't matter.  Just look at the players we have taken after pick #31 in the past.  Tee Higgins, Logan Wilson, Jesse bates, Sam Hubbard, Joe Mixon, Carl Lawson, Tyler Boyd, C.J. Uzomah, Giovanni Bernard, Mohammed Sanu, Marvin Jones.

There will always be guys who had a certain player or two they fell in love with who will be mad that we did not take exactly who they wanted.  But if you look at our needs and the players we took I think we did pretty well.  I was surprised not to see at least one WR, but that is pretty minor.  Especially since I did not want a WR until round 4 or later.  I feel like we should draft a WR every year.

[WeezyBengal]

I think this team is changing it's draft philosophy before our eyes.

They are drafting guys on defense that are "athletic freaks". Dax and Cam Taylor Britt are just that - their measurements are completely off the chart.

I'm personally all for it. They both have experience in the spot they will be playing (secondary) and were some of the most athletic guys in the draft. Plug them in and use them to how the team and Lou sees fit. They've earned that benefit of the doubt.

I love this philosophy on defense, especially with defensive back. WR and other skill positions are a little trickier because they are just that, skill positions. Most athletic (Jon Ross) doesn't always work out.

This is how baseball has become. Draft the best player available and just play them anywhere - positional flexibility is huge.

[QueenCity]

I think Bengals fans would of been pleased with this draft if they wasn't ogling what the Ravens did.

Ravens got some nice players but really didn't get better on offense. In the modern NFL you have to be able to put up points...

As long as the Bengals have Burrow and Chase... they will be a force.

[CardCounterChris]

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?

[jj22]

I think the number of picks hurt the perception too. When is the last time we've only had 6 selections?

It's hard to "win" a draft with only 6 selections on top of selecting 31st in each round.

[fredtoast]

(05-02-2022, 12:05 PM)CardCounterChris Wrote:  Will Dax Hill see enough of the field in year 1?

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?

[WeezyBengal]

(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?

I think with the schemes that Lou is cooking up, the resounding answer is...yes. 

With the raw ability that he now has in the DB room, this defense is about to be transformed/takent to the next level. 

There was a reason they targeted DB in the draft. They needed guys to do exactly what they wanted on defense. 

[CardCounterChris]

(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?

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.

[fredtoast]

(05-02-2022, 12:06 PM)jj22 Wrote: It's hard to "win" a draft with only 6 selections on top of selecting 31st in each round.

Not really.  The success rate is so low one or two players can make all the difference.  If you get two solid career starters out of a draft that is not bad.  No team ever plans on getting many starters in rounds 6-7.  If we hit on our top 3-4 picks it will be a great draft.

[fredtoast]

(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. 

How do you know?  

What team was willing to move back and what were the demanding in return?

The reason picks usually take so long in the first round is that teams are on the phone trying to see if there are any good deals to move up or down.  But 95% of the time there is not trade.  It takes TWO teams for a trade and often times there just is not a partner out there wanting to take what you offer.

[Nepa]

(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?

The safety that was selected in the 5th (Tycen Anderson) has a lot of positional flexibility. He can play box safety, he can play CB, and, according to the nfl.com analysist when the selection was made, he also can be the Will Linebacker. In fact, the NFL.com analyst stated unequivocally that he will be a Will linebacker. Regardless, he has a lot of flexibility, which is what the Bengals coaches crave. They felt strong enough that they moved up. If nothing else, he provides a solid backup at three positions (safety, CB, Will linebacker). 

I feel very good about the defense heading into the season. There are quality starters at all positions and now quality backups in case of injury. 

[AtomicBlaze]

(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?

 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.

[CardCounterChris]

(05-02-2022, 12:16 PM)fredtoast Wrote: How do you know?  

What team was willing to move back and what were the demanding in return?

The reason picks usually take so long in the first round is that teams are on the phone trying to see if there are any good deals to move up or down.  But 95% of the time there is not trade.  It takes TWO teams for a trade and often times there just is not a partner out there wanting to take what you offer.

That seems a bit semantic doesn't it? Everyone has a price, maybe it was too high. Maybe it wasn't. Maybe it was a judgement call that he'd be somewhere that he wasn't.  Trading back was also an option.  And on top of this, trades were at an all time high.

Its okay to question whats going on or not agree. Its also okay while questioning to admit that the guys we got are VERY athletic.

The thing I don't like about your argument is at the end of the day, none of us have the info that the Bengals do. None of us are being paid to sit in and make decisions or have back room info, its all best guess.  It doesn't mean we can't question, nor does it mean that we think the world is falling.

[fredtoast]

(05-02-2022, 12:21 PM)CardCounterChris Wrote:   It doesn't mean we can't question, nor does it mean that we think the world is falling.

I get that.  That is exactly why I made this thread.  It seems to me that the complaints that you have like "not seeing the field enough" have nothing to do with the picks we made and more to do with the fact that we are a winning team with a better roster. 

So if you want to "question" the picks don't base your judgement on how much they will play as rookies.  Bad teams will usually have more rookie starters than good teams.  That does not mean the good teams are worse at drafting.  It just means they are drafting for the future because they have a solid starting line up.

[CardCounterChris]

(05-02-2022, 12:31 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I get that.  That is exactly why I made this thread.  It seems to me that the complaints that you have like "not seeing the field enough" have nothing to do with the picks we made and more to do with the fact that we are a winning team with a better roster. 

So if you want to "question" the picks don't base your judgement on how much they will play as rookies.  Bad teams will usually have more rookie starters than good teams.  That does not mean the good teams are worse at drafting.  It just means they are drafting for the future because they have a solid starting line up.

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.

[Whatever]

(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.

I've brought it up a few times, but it's very likely that Bates misses TC and possibly some games before signing the FT.  This past year, there was also the issue of his poor play during the regular season, which the Bengals were powerless to do anything about due to their lack of depth at the position.  Hill not only provides holdout insurance, but he also applies pressure on Bates to show up in shape and not play not to get hurt.  If he does, he could very well lose his starting job and his chances at a big payday.  FWIW, the Bengals said they didn't think Dax would still be on the board, so he was likely seen as the BPA and too good to pass on.  It was known before the Ravens were high on Linderbaum.  I personally think he was a guy the fans were in love with, but the Bengals didn't really care for.  

Most sites I saw had a 4th round grade on Anderson, so I didn't see it as a big deal to move up for him in the 5th.  

I think you will likely see even more 3 S,/Big Nickel looks this year, as putting in an extra S as a QB spy is a good way to shut down mobile QB's like Jackson and Watson.  

[CardCounterChris]

(05-02-2022, 12:46 PM)Whatever Wrote: I've brought it up a few times, but it's very likely that Bates misses TC and possibly some games before signing the FT.  This past year, there was also the issue of his poor play during the regular season, which the Bengals were powerless to do anything about due to their lack of depth at the position.  Hill not only provides holdout insurance, but he also applies pressure on Bates to show up in shape and not play not to get hurt.  If he does, he could very well lose his starting job and his chances at a big payday.  FWIW, the Bengals said they didn't think Dax would still be on the board, so he was likely seen as the BPA and too good to pass on.  It was known before the Ravens were high on Linderbaum.  I personally think he was a guy the fans were in love with, but the Bengals didn't really care for.  

Most sites I saw had a 4th round grade on Anderson, so I didn't see it as a big deal to move up for him in the 5th.  

I think you will likely see even more 3 S,/Big Nickel looks this year, as putting in an extra S as a QB spy is a good way to shut down mobile QB's like Jackson and Watson.  

I hope it works out and I'm not pessimistic.  Dax has crazy measurables. I liked Anderson trade up less because we did draft Dax. At the end of the day though, CIN did a lot of work through FA.

[jj22]

(05-02-2022, 12:14 PM)fredtoast Wrote:  If we hit on our top 3-4 picks it will be a great draft.

 Definitely. We would have hit on over 50% which theoretically as you stated, isn't likely in a draft.

[Bengalbug]

(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.

I bet Dax hill plays around 50% of the defense snaps.

[fredtoast]

(05-02-2022, 12:50 PM)jj22 Wrote:  Definitely. We would have hit on over 50% which theoretically as you stated, isn't likely in a draft.

Sorry, but I did not make myself clear.  The success rate of 6th and 7th round picks is so low that it doesn't have that big of an effect on your chances of getting 3-4 good players in one draft.  You are way more likely to get those good players in the first five rounds.