Barnidge

[*SHRacerX*]

(05-02-2017, 11:27 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Tyler Kroft ran a 4.75 forty. Barnidge ran a 4.61. 

I'm sure you're thinking "but that was a long time ago", and you'd be right.

But my point is that 4.75 is pretty slow. We're not losing speed by replacing Kroft.

From an article regarding Kroft's Pro Day at Rutgers:

"Kroft posted numbers across the board that would have ranked among the top tight ends at the Combine. His 4.67 40-yard dash would have been the third-best time at the Combine and his 10-foot broad jump would have tied for second."


Here is the link to the article:


http://www.nj.com/rutgersfootball/index.ssf/2015/03/rutgers_tight_end_makes_up_for_combine_injury_with.html



I think one of the supposed strengths of Kroft was that he was a really good blocker, but he just hasn't stayed healthy here for whatever reason.  I sure hope that entire TE crop is healthy this year as they are needed in the red zone. 

[fredtoast]

(05-02-2017, 11:27 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Tyler Kroft ran a 4.75 forty. Barnidge ran a 4.61. 

Kroft ran a 4.67 at his Pro Day.  That would have been third fastest among all TEs at the combine in '15.  Here are how his other efforts would have ranked among the TEs at the combine

Short Shuttle..4.20...FIRST
3-cone drill.....7.12...2nd
Broad Jump....10ft....2nd
Long Shuttle...11.78..2nd

Barnidge ran a 4.65 nine years ago,


Barnidge may be a better TE than Kroft, or he could be headed downhill in '17 (he will be 32) while Kroft is still improving. At this point in both of their careers Kroft is better.  Kroft has 21 receptions through 2 seasons.  Barnidge did not get his 21st reception iuntil his FIFTH SEASON.

And that is exactly why people are pointing out that you can't just write off every player after just one or two seasons. You can't replace every guy on a reasonable rookie contract with an old expensive free agent that you will probably have to replace again in just one or two years.  

If we knew Eifert was finished then I might consider it, but that does not look to be the case.

[Shake n Blake]

(05-03-2017, 08:35 AM)fredtoast Wrote: If Eifert is healthy Barnidge would most likely be a waste of money.

If Eifert is not healthy (history says there's a good chance he isn't), then it's not a "waste".

...and how much money are we really talking? I thought you liked cheap insurance with the way you talk about McCarron...?

(05-03-2017, 08:48 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Kroft ran a 4.67 at his Pro Day.  That would have been third fastest among all TEs at the combine in '15.  Here are how his other efforts would have ranked among the TEs at the combine

Short Shuttle..4.20...FIRST
3-cone drill.....7.12...2nd
Broad Jump....10ft....2nd
Long Shuttle...11.78..2nd

Barnidge ran a 4.65 nine years ago,


Barnidge may be a better TE than Kroft, or he could be headed downhill in '17 (he will be 32) while Kroft is still improving. At this point in both of their careers Kroft is better.  Kroft has 21 receptions through 2 seasons.  Barnidge did not get his 21st reception iuntil his FIFTH SEASON.

And that is exactly why people are pointing out that you can't just write off every player after just one or two seasons. You can't replace every guy on a reasonable rookie contract with an old expensive free agent that you will probably have to replace again in just one or two years.  

If we knew Eifert was finished then I might consider it, but that does not look to be the case.

NFL.com says he ran a 4.75 at his pro day and a 4.5 in the 20 yard shuttle: http://www.nfl.com/draft/2015/profiles/tyler-kroft?id=2552586

To the bolded...you seem to be talking out of both sides of your mouth. Kroft is not better than Barnidge right now (you seem to admit that...I think), and right now is what I'm worried about. That premium insurance for 1-2 years (for an oft-injured integral piece of our offense) seems more valuable to me than the upside of Kroft - which doesn't appear to be much, seeing how he's been usurped by Uzomah in the pecking order.

But I get it. Kroft is going to be great some day, even though he's been a total disappointment that's fallen behind a 6th round pick.

[Fan_in_Kettering]

The deciding factor for me would be Tyler Eifert's long term prognosis with respect to health. Gary Barnidge, for what it's worth, is unusually productive on a non-productive offense in Cleveland.

[Bigsmithin]

You guys that are totally against Barnidge are silly. Ask any browns fan and they will tell you that he has been one of the only good things going for them the past couple of years. Guy is better then you are giving him credit for. Would take him in a heartbeat.

[XenoMorph]

(05-03-2017, 09:44 AM)Bigsmithin Wrote: You guys that are totally against Barnidge are silly.  Ask any browns fan and they will tell you that he has been one of the only good things going for them the past couple of years.  Guy is better then you are giving him credit for.  Would take him in a heartbeat.

Right   Kroft hasn't really developed... Uzomah is inconsistent.   Barnidge is ready to go out of the box.   and is pretty good at that.. not sure what his contract expectations are.

Our FB is the 2nd best TE on the roster Hewitt > Kroft & Uzomah

[Shake n Blake]

(05-03-2017, 10:10 AM)XenoMorph Wrote: Right   Kroft hasn't really developed... Uzomah is inconsistent.   Barnidge is ready to go out of the box.   and is pretty good at that.. not sure what his contract expectations are.

Our FB is the 2nd best TE on the roster  Hewitt > Kroft & Uzomah

Exactly what I'm thinking. Uzomah is the best young TE we have IMO. Keep him and bring in a veteran for competition/insurance.

I'm not sure what Barnidge's contract demands would be, but at 32 and coming off a so-so season, I can't imagine it being much.

[Mike M (the other one)]

Depending on contract, I would not object to bringing in Gary Barnidge. He's currently better than any TE on our roster not named Eifert. And Eifert hasn't exactly shown an ability to stay healthy for a full season yet. Maybe having someone of his caliber would allow us to rest Eifert more often?

At worst, a healthy Barnidge never plays, which only means Eifert remained healthy for the entire season. There is not many negatives to a signing like this.

Some of you seem to be picking on the fact that it took him several years to have a breakout season. Well hello, he's a round 5 draft pick, the fact that he is even able to contribute in the manner that he has is a positive as well.

[XenoMorph]

(05-03-2017, 11:27 AM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Depending on contract, I would not object to bringing in Gary Barnidge. He's currently better than any TE on our roster not named Eifert. And Eifert hasn't exactly shown an ability to stay healthy for a full season yet. Maybe having someone of his caliber would allow us to rest Eifert more often?

At worst, a healthy Barnidge never plays, which only means Eifert remained healthy for the entire season. There is not many negatives to a signing like this.

Some of you seem to be picking on the fact that it took him several years to have a breakout season. Well hello, he's a round 5 draft pick, the fact that he is even able to contribute in the manner that he has is a positive as well.

could give eifert some plays off too which will help keep him healthy

[*ochocincos*]

(05-03-2017, 08:45 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: From an article regarding Kroft's Pro Day at Rutgers:

"Kroft posted numbers across the board that would have ranked among the top tight ends at the Combine. His 4.67 40-yard dash would have been the third-best time at the Combine and his 10-foot broad jump would have tied for second."


Here is the link to the article:


http://www.nj.com/rutgersfootball/index.ssf/2015/03/rutgers_tight_end_makes_up_for_combine_injury_with.html



I think one of the supposed strengths of Kroft was that he was a really good blocker, but he just hasn't stayed healthy here for whatever reason.  I sure hope that entire TE crop is healthy this year as they are needed in the red zone. 

Health seems to be an issue with most TEs in today's NFL.

[samhain]

(05-03-2017, 12:18 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Health seems to be an issue with most TEs in today's NFL.

Nature of the position, unfortunately.  They're big targets that make their living over the middle.  Tough way to get by in the NFL.  

[*ochocincos*]

It might be worth noting that CJ Uzomah was on track to have about the same numbers in 2016 as Gary Barnidge if they played the same number of snaps.
Gary Barnidge - 968 offensive snaps, 612 rec yards, 2 TDs
CJ Uzomah - 411 offensive snaps, 239 rec yards, 1 TD

If Gary Barnidge played about the same number of snaps as Uzomah, he'd have approximately 260 rec yards and 1 TD.

So perhaps CJ Uzomah is actually about as good as Barnidge but he just needs more playing time.

[firstand10]

My reason for asking is we could bring him in,and be there in case Eifert goes down. He cold be  a mentor to the young TE's . Just a thought!

[firstand10]

Besides he could help us in the Clowns scheme of plays!

[Bigsmithin]

(05-03-2017, 12:25 PM)ochocincos Wrote: It might be worth noting that CJ Uzomah was on track to have about the same numbers in 2016 as Gary Barnidge if they played the same number of snaps.
Gary Barnidge - 968 offensive snaps, 612 rec yards, 2 TDs
CJ Uzomah - 411 offensive snaps, 239 rec yards, 1 TD

If Gary Barnidge played about the same number of snaps as Uzomah, he'd have approximately 260 rec yards and 1 TD.

So perhaps CJ Uzomah is actually about as good as Barnidge but he just needs more playing time.

Based off numbers alone you are correct.  But in this offense I would take Big Play Gary Barnidge every day over CJ Uzomah.  Well at least for the next 3 years and it looks to me like we are in win now mode.  I think this would be the pick up to put us over the top.
[video=youtube][/video]

[*ochocincos*]

(05-03-2017, 02:13 PM)Bigsmithin Wrote: Based off numbers alone you are correct.  But in this offense I would take Big Play Gary Barnidge every day over CJ Uzomah.  Well at least for the next 3 years and it looks to me like we are in win now mode.  I think this would be the pick up to put us over the top.
[video=youtube][/video]

I wouldn't take Gary Barnidge for three years. Maybe just this year. He'll be 32 years old in September and has only had one really good year.
Besides, when have the Bengals ever been in true "win now" mode? They've never gone all in to try and win it all. We've been saying they need to go in true Win Now mode for years now and it's not happened.

And if Barnidge were picked up, which player gets cut? The Bengals don't like to give up on players before their rookie deal is up.

[Shake n Blake]

(05-03-2017, 12:23 PM)samhain Wrote: Nature of the position, unfortunately.  They're big targets that make their living over the middle.  Tough way to get by in the NFL.  

Yup. Not to mention they are asked to block guys much larger than them on a regular basis.

(05-03-2017, 02:13 PM)Bigsmithin Wrote: Based off numbers alone you are correct.  But in this offense I would take Big Play Gary Barnidge every day over CJ Uzomah.  Well at least for the next 3 years and it looks to me like we are in win now mode.  I think this would be the pick up to put us over the top.

I wouldn't go that far, but it could help keep the offense from falling apart if Eifert goes down.

At the very least, he'd bring good competition and a veteran presence to the younger guys.

[Bigsmithin]

(05-03-2017, 02:21 PM)ochocincos Wrote: I wouldn't take Gary Barnidge for three years. Maybe just this year. He'll be 32 years old in September and has only had one really good year.
Besides, when have the Bengals ever been in true "win now" mode? They've never gone all in to try and win it all. We've been saying they need to go in true Win Now mode for years now and it's not happened.

And if Barnidge were picked up, which player gets cut? The Bengals don't like to give up on players before their rookie deal is up.

Indeed this is true,  However I am still riding high from this past draft, and it was different.  We seem to have targeted players that can help us now instead of 3 years from now. 

I would say whomever is not performing in practice and preseason games would be the player that gets cut.  There is no way I could sit here and tell you who would get cut when I have no idea what any of these players have been up to since December of last year.  You don't build a team on paper,  You build a team on performance in practice.  

(05-03-2017, 02:25 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Yup. Not to mention they are asked to block guys much larger than them on a regular basis.


I wouldn't go that far, but it could help keep the offense from falling apart if Eifert goes down.

At the very least, he'd bring good competition and a veteran presence to the younger guys.

My point exactly.  I love Eifert but know he will never make it though a season without a competent backup to take some reps from him.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(05-03-2017, 12:25 PM)ochocincos Wrote: It might be worth noting that CJ Uzomah was on track to have about the same numbers in 2016 as Gary Barnidge if they played the same number of snaps.
Gary Barnidge - 968 offensive snaps, 612 rec yards, 2 TDs
CJ Uzomah - 411 offensive snaps, 239 rec yards, 1 TD

If Gary Barnidge played about the same number of snaps as Uzomah, he'd have approximately 260 rec yards and 1 TD.

So perhaps CJ Uzomah is actually about as good as Barnidge but he just needs more playing time.

Need to mention that was Barnidge with random Cleveland QBs. Compared to Uzomah with Dalton

[*ochocincos*]

(05-03-2017, 02:41 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Need to mention that was Barnidge with random Cleveland QBs. Compared to Uzomah with Dalton

Need to mention Barnidge was a top option in Cleveland, Uzomah was not.