What Would Your Draft Have Been?

[Luvnit2]

(05-16-2025, 02:29 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Looking back, i was hoping for a S and G in rds 1 and 2. My next option would have been LB. One thing i did NOT want was a DT and i wasn't too thrilled at DE either. Jalon Walker was a guy i liked but he was taken 2 picks before the Bengals. 

With who was picked, i'd say my preference would be for Starks or Emmanwori, though E seemes like a boom or bust kind of guy so...

With that said, i'll choose Starks. 

TY for choosing 1 pick. Some like to hedge their options to more than 1.

[Luvnit2]

(05-16-2025, 03:59 PM)Isaac Curtis: The Real #85 Wrote: I hated the pick. And still do. All the DEs had risk/flags and there was excellent DE depth in this draft. I'd have gone another direction in round 1 and gotten my DE later.

1. Zabel, OG/OL
2. Jackson, OG/OT
3. Campbell, LB
4. Harmon, DT
5. Emmanwori, S
6. Starks, S
7. Barron, CB
8. Trade down

I'd have taken all of the above before Stewart. And more. Too risky when we needed to be risk averse. And too raw when we need help ASAP. And a poor read of the position group strengths in the draft.

I hated/hate the Knight pick as well. For many of the same reasons. Plus it was a reach/wasted trade down opportunity and we ran to the podium. And we already have Wilson & Burks here. And Pratt.

Having said all that. Stewart has massive upside. If he can actually figure out how to tackle someone/play football, it will look brilliant. But I am not optimistic, especially in Year 1. 

Additionally  this smacks of Burton/Higgins. Swinging big on a potential replacement for a stud vet we should be locking up. 

Lastly, we make a lot of picks that smack of coaching arrogance. Trying to prove we are the smartest guys in the room. We can fix this guy. Switch his position. It rarely works out. So, we think we can fix Stewart, but not Murphy? 

Can you pick 1 guy, we don't get 7 choices with one pick?

[WeezyBengal]

(05-16-2025, 02:48 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Dylan Fairchild has longer arms and plays lower than Ratledge. He is starting with the 1's already.

We very well may have added the better Georgia Guard.

Not many draft analysts would tell you that. He's playing with the ones because well, who else would be? 

I hope you are right. 

[Luvnit2]

(05-16-2025, 04:06 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: Not many draft analysts would tell you that. He's playing with the ones because well, who else would be? 

I hope you are right. 

We could ask Kiper who had Sanders at his first overall pick. 

[Truck_1_0_1_]

(05-16-2025, 12:39 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: I have more of an issue with the second round pick.

They reached on a LB when Ratleridge was sitting there for the taking.

I've seen Ratledge (the correct way), Rutlidge, Rutledge, Ruttidge, Rattedge, but never Ratleridge lol, that's a good one!  

[*bfine32*]

I like Stew and would have taken him myself, but if I'm told I can't I pick James Pearce or Shadue Sanders just so Kiper would STFU the next 3 days

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(05-16-2025, 04:06 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: Not many draft analysts would tell you that. He's playing with the ones because well, who else would be? 

I hope you are right. 

Well, Fairchild was a 3rd rounder by most analysts and taken right where he should be. He didn't blow up the combine like Ratledge did.

But as we know, football isn't played at the combine. Staying low is key to good OL play and having longer arms helps as well. 

Fairchild has him on both of these things.

[puddycat]

Zabel, Starks, or Pearce. They all seem more plug and play. In fact, all are already listed as starters on Ourlads whereas Stewart and all of our picks are backups.
Harmon would have fallen into the mix of DT3s and had tackling issues, so he was partially a development player.
And then there was always trading down for another pick and not leaving day 2 without a safety.

[007BengalsFan]

I would have drafted Harmon to provide a pass rush in the middle of the defensive line then signed free agent Za'darius Smith to provide a pass rusher opposite Hendrickson. Our pass rush would have been much better this year if the Bengals had done this. Since we didnt do this, all we can hope for is Stewart is able to do something against Pro level players that he couldnt accomplish againt college guys, get sacks.

[NUGDUKWE]

(05-16-2025, 12:39 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: I have more of an issue with the second round pick.

They reached on a LB when Ratleridge was sitting there for the taking.

I heard an interesting take on the 2nd pick. That not only is it a value issue as far as taking a player earlier than his consensus slot. But also a value issue that linebacker is one of the cheaper position groups. So day 2 you want to get a more premium position as you can help your team save money if you can get a solid safety, corner, DL or OL. I could see an argument that a linebacker could be more easily signed to a 2nd contract but he most likely won't be extended due to age.

[NUGDUKWE]

(05-16-2025, 03:59 PM)Isaac Curtis: The Real #85 Wrote: I hated the pick. And still do. All the DEs had risk/flags and there was excellent DE depth in this draft. I'd have gone another direction in round 1 and gotten my DE later.

1. Zabel, OG/OL
2. Jackson, OG/OT
3. Campbell, LB
4. Harmon, DT
5. Emmanwori, S
6. Starks, S
7. Barron, CB
8. Trade down

I'd have taken all of the above before Stewart. And more. Too risky when we needed to be risk averse. And too raw when we need help ASAP. And a poor read of the position group strengths in the draft.

I hated/hate the Knight pick as well. For many of the same reasons. Plus it was a reach/wasted trade down opportunity and we ran to the podium. And we already have Wilson & Burks here. And Pratt.

Having said all that. Stewart has massive upside. If he can actually figure out how to tackle someone/play football, it will look brilliant. But I am not optimistic, especially in Year 1. 

Additionally  this smacks of Burton/Higgins. Swinging big on a potential replacement for a stud vet we should be locking up. 

Lastly, we make a lot of picks that smack of coaching arrogance. Trying to prove we are the smartest guys in the room. We can fix this guy. Switch his position. It rarely works out. So, we think we can fix Stewart, but not Murphy? 

I agree. Taking a player in rd 1 with that bad of production and hoping he can produce at the next level is extremely risky in rd 1. Right now on paper Fairchild stands to have the most snaps of any rookie. That's probably why I would've personally have gone oline in rd 1. Would've had the chance for the most immediate impact from the start. 

[NUGDUKWE]

(05-16-2025, 05:56 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Well, Fairchild was a 3rd rounder by most analysts and taken right where he should be. He didn't blow up the combine like Ratledge did.

But as we know, football isn't played at the combine. Staying low is key to good OL play and having longer arms helps as well. 

Fairchild has him on both of these things.

Yes football isn't played at the combine. But something like 70% of offensive line probowlers scored a 7.5 RAS score or higher. So athletic testing is very important in evaluating risk of a draft pick. Also according to some evautors Ratledge's 2023 tape pre ankle surgery was 1st rd worthy. Plus reports had him higher on the Bengals board as he was the next guy on they're board in the 2nd rd. 

[*jason*]

Jihaad Campbell was the right pick.

[Whatever]

(05-16-2025, 04:06 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: Not many draft analysts would tell you that. He's playing with the ones because well, who else would be? 

I hope you are right. 

Eh, typically teams want rookies to at least appear to "earn" their starting jobs, especially a 3rd rounder.  I mean, I think Volson is terrible, but he is the incumbent with 3 years of starting experience.  It is a moderate surprise that Fairchild is with the first team already.  Now,  whether that's because they are legitimately that impressed or just trying to make a show of addressing the OL is another story.

FWIW, I do remember reading that the folks at Georgia were surprised when Fairchild declared and thoughr he would be a 1st round pick next year if he stayed in school.  He was thought of ad one of the most athletic G's in this class, but a calf injury hampered his testing.

Personally, I had a 3rd round grade on Ratledge, and he was 61 on the Consensus Big Board, making him a late 2nd/early 3rd by consensus.  He would also be a reach in the 2nd, though not as big of a reach as Knight.  

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(05-16-2025, 02:48 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Dylan Fairchild has longer arms and plays lower than Ratledge. He is starting with the 1's already.

We very well may have added the better Georgia Guard.

Isn't that more of a consideration for tackles?

Cordell Volson, Cody Ford, Michael Jordan, Quinton Spain, Hakeem Adeniji (who played G in 2021), Alex Redmond, Xavier Sua'-Filo, and John Miller all in the Taylor era for the Bengals have longer arms than Dylan Fairchild. (There's probably a guy or two I am missing who started a couple games for us, but those are the big ones.)

Alex Cappa and Lucas Patrick have shorter arms than Fairchild.

[Nepa]

(05-16-2025, 12:39 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: I have more of an issue with the second round pick.

They reached on a LB when Ratleridge was sitting there for the taking.

I don't have a problem with the pick of Knight if Golden felt he was essential for his defensive. But like you, I see this (and most analysts seem to see it) as a reach. I'd be very curious whether they tried to make a trade to move down somewhat. The team one spot in front of the Bengals moved down 10 spots and gained a late 3rd round pick. The odds of a 25-year-old, reach of a LB still be there 10 picks later was very high and the potential gain (a late 3rd rounder) very big. A few spots down from the Bengals, another team made a trade to move down.

Did the Bengals try to move down and gain more picks? If they didn't, why didn't they? They rushed to the podium to make their pick, without even seem to field offers. Did anyone in the draft room try to convince Golden of the great benefit/risk ratio if the Bengals traded down and picked up another 3rd or even 4th?

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(05-16-2025, 08:38 PM)NUGDUKWE Wrote: Yes football isn't played at the combine. But something like 70% of offensive line probowlers scored a 7.5 RAS score or higher. So athletic testing is very important in evaluating risk of a draft pick. Also according to some evautors Ratledge's 2023 tape pre ankle surgery was 1st rd worthy. Plus reports had him higher on the Bengals board as he was the next guy on they're board in the 2nd rd. 

Hey, I had Ratledge higher than Fairchild as well. Doesn't mean a thing till they play NFL football. Not like Fairchild is an Orlando Brown either.

He can get around and is a very good pass protector, I think he will be an upgrade over Volson immediately.

(05-17-2025, 03:46 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Isn't that more of a consideration for tackles?

Cordell Volson, Cody Ford, Michael Jordan, Quinton Spain, Hakeem Adeniji (who played G in 2021), Alex Redmond, Xavier Sua'-Filo, and John Miller all in the Taylor era for the Bengals have longer arms than Dylan Fairchild. (There's probably a guy or two I am missing who started a couple games for us, but those are the big ones.)

Alex Cappa and Lucas Patrick have shorter arms than Fairchild.

True, this is why Fairchild is strictly a Guard and not a Tackle like Rivers can be for us. Rivers has long arms and play LT.

Still, having longer arms does help OL just the way it is. Ratledge might struggle in the NFL as he has pretty short arms, we will see.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(05-17-2025, 03:03 PM)Whatever Wrote: Eh, typically teams want rookies to at least appear to "earn" their starting jobs, especially a 3rd rounder.  I mean, I think Volson is terrible, but he is the incumbent with 3 years of starting experience.  It is a moderate surprise that Fairchild is with the first team already.  Now,  whether that's because they are legitimately that impressed or just trying to make a show of addressing the OL is another story.

FWIW, I do remember reading that the folks at Georgia were surprised when Fairchild declared and thoughr he would be a 1st round pick next year if he stayed in school.  He was thought of ad one of the most athletic G's in this class, but a calf injury hampered his testing.

Personally, I had a 3rd round grade on Ratledge, and he was 61 on the Consensus Big Board, making him a late 2nd/early 3rd by consensus.  He would also be a reach in the 2nd, though not as big of a reach as Knight.  

Good stuff Whatever, didn't know all of that.

[*rfaulk34*]

(05-17-2025, 04:49 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Hey, I had Ratledge higher than Fairchild as well. Doesn't mean a thing till they play NFL football. Not like Fairchild is an Orlando Brown either.

He can get around and is a very good pass protector, I think he will be an upgrade over Volson immediately.


True, this is why Fairchild is strictly a Guard and not a Tackle like Rivers can be for us. Rivers has long arms and play LT.

Still, having longer arms does help OL just the way it is. Ratledge might struggle in the NFL as he has pretty short arms, we will see.

I wonder if that would have been the case if the Bengals had drafted him? 

[samhain]

I'd have taken Starks. He has the traits of a ready made pro that would surpass anything we have at that spot right now. After Nick E and Starks, the safety quality dropped off a lot. The draft had a good bit of depth at edge. Stewart might turn out to be a fine player, but I doubt he would contribute as much as soon as a plug and play safety.

At the end of the day I feel like all of the questions we had before the draft are still there. This would not be the case with Starks. To and even larger extent if they followed with Ratledge in 2, but that's playing with fire. Ignoring D line for 2 rounds in a draft this good at the position.