Perspective on the value of a top 5 pick.

[THE PISTONS]

Is he? Greg Rousseau has 3 sacks against Pitt and 4 against FSU. Despite 4 less starts, his stats are right there with Young.

[phil413]

(11-03-2019, 07:42 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: If they trade the #1OA I’m officially done with this team.

This is theoretical, but a swap from 1 to 3 (if it's CIN then NYJ then MIA) could become the right move.  Young/Tua/Burrow may grade similarly and the Miami package to jump the Jets could land the first picks in the 2nd and 3rd rounds.  I'm factoring in signing a B grade LB and OG in free agency.

You could end up with: 

1.   QB Burrow or Tua 
2a. LB Kenneth Murray Oklahoma
2b. OT Alex Leatherwood Bama
3a. DE Nick Coe Auburn
3b. DB Shaun Wade Ohio State
4.   DT Jaylen Twyman Pitt

[I_C_DeadPeople]

(11-03-2019, 08:48 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Firing coaches midseason, moving on from guys like Burfict, benching Dalton, etc.  All things that even a handful of years ago would seem like they would never happen under Mike Brown.

I also don’t think the cheapness is quite as bad as it used to be. Used jock straps, players paying for Gatorade/towels etc. We now have a top notch weight room, MRI inside PBS, etc.

Don’t get me wrong, we’re still one of the worst run franchises in the league, but it’s a bit better than it was is the 90’s/00’s.

I think ML dragged the Tree Sloth kicking and screaming into some changes. But moving up 3 steps when other teams move up 5 does not mean much. The changes made over the ML tenure should have all been made in year 1 of the tenure. 

And the cheapness still permeates through the lack of scouts and GM. 

[THE PISTONS]

(11-04-2019, 12:18 AM)I_C_DeadPeople Wrote: I think ML dragged the Tree Sloth kicking and screaming into some changes. But moving up 3 steps when other teams move up 5 does not mean much. The changes made over the ML tenure should have all been made in year 1 of the tenure. 

And the cheapness still permeates through the lack of scouts and GM. 

Over time too, complacency adds up. Take for instance scouting and signing free agents. IF teams get 1 more good player than you...over 1 offseason it's not a big deal. Over 5 years it is.

We lost A LOT of talent in Whitworth, Zeitler, Jones, Sanu, Hall, Joseph, Nelson, Peko, and several other guys. We didn't replace those guys with adequate replacements in most cases.

THAT'S a HUGE decline.

Oh...and Bates has a horrible PFF rating. 

[I_C_DeadPeople]

(11-04-2019, 12:21 AM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Over time too, complacency adds up. Take for instance scouting and signing free agents. IF teams get 1 more good player than you...over 1 offseason it's not a big deal. Over 5 years it is.

We lost A LOT of talent in Whitworth, Zeitler, Jones, Sanu, Hall, Joseph, Nelson, Peko, and several other guys. We didn't replace those guys with adequate replacements in most cases.

THAT'S a HUGE decline.

Oh...and Bates has a horrible PFF rating. 

We got those good players through a few really good drafts we had in a row. But it appears that was the outlier not the norm and it could not be sustained. We have to have 5 or good starters from each draft to build a competitive roster. Can't be done realistically. Another failure of Mikey's model he is too blind to see. 

[Bilbo Saggins]

The data is skewed because the most poorly managed franchises tend to be the ones with the top picks in the draft.  The more poorly run teams are more likely to be inept at both talent evaluation and coaching up QBs.  The Pats took Garoppolo at 62.  The Eagles took Foles at 88.  Both QBs are very good.  Does that mean that the Pats or Eagles wouldn't have picked a good QB with a higher pick?  Or are the best teams just better at choosing and training QBs?

QB is still the most important position in the game.  Would you rather have the best QB in the league or the best player at any other position?  The potential reward of nailing the draft pick is just higher with QBs than other positions.  I see no logical reason as to why there should be a bias against taking a QB with a top pick, unless you don't trust:
A.  The locus of players available; or
B.  The process used to pick the player

[samhain]

(11-04-2019, 12:25 AM)I_C_DeadPeople Wrote: We got those good players through a few really good drafts we had in a row. But it appears that was the outlier not the norm and it could not be sustained. We have to have 5 or good starters from each draft to build a competitive roster. Can't be done realistically. Another failure of Mikey's model he is too blind to see. 

This is what really worries me.  The Bengals have been living off of those drafts for a long time.  They're going to meet their expiration date soon, and they've not been replicated.  Not remotely.  

I don't think this organization has it in them to rectify those failed drafts.  That means that fans will be left to wait until they finally manage to be the blind squirrel finding the nut 2 or 3 times in a row.  That's not likely to happen without a change in people and process.  Change in people and process is probably less likely to happen.

This organization may have died on the night of the infamous playoff game in January 2016.  That level of talent was a pinnacle that they show no signs of being able to replace.  

[fredtoast]

(11-03-2019, 05:40 PM)BengalChris Wrote: The sad part is that the Bengals will not competently fill needs in free agency. Say Chase Young is there and the best guy (not saying that he is or will even be there with the 2nd pick) and the Bengals take him. They will not find a good RT is free agency. They will not find a good LB in free agency. Instead, they'll take a OT in the second, a LBer in the 3rd, a WR to replace AJ Green (who I believe is all but gone) in the 4th and 5th or something like that.

Next season, nothing will be fixed and ineptitude of Mike Brown ball will continue.

This is just not true.

In 2011 when we drafted Green and Dalton for the offense we also fixed our defense (from 24th in scoring to 9th) by signing three new starters in free agency (Nate Clements, Manny Lawson, Thomas Howard).

[fredtoast]

(11-03-2019, 09:06 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: Top 5 picks aren't a sure thing. No pick is. But elite QBs are often taken at the top of the draft. Scott Wright's Draftcountdown.com used to have a tally for 2nd round QBs and their success and it was basically a dead zone. Drew Brees was, at the time of the article, one of the very few exceptions, with Dalton being another. But, generally speaking, if a QB isn't worth taking in the first round, their statistical success rate plummets.

This is correct.

I have posted a list of 2nd round QBs before and it isn't pretty.

But when you look at the list of big draft trades the team giving up the top pick still gets a decent first round pick.  In many cases still in the top 10.

[fredtoast]

(11-04-2019, 01:11 AM)Bilbo Saggins Wrote:  I see no logical reason as to why there should be a bias against taking a QB with a top pick, unless you don't trust:
A.  The locus of players available; or
B.  The process used to pick the player

I am not opposed to taking ba QB with the first pick if all you need is a QB.  I realize that there are top 5 picks at other positions that also flop.  The only reason I suggest trading down is that we need A LOT more than just a QB.

The QB who does not need talented teammates because he can just "elevate the players around him" is a myth.  

[fredtoast]

It will be interesting to see how the players are valued come draft time. It is amazing how much the rankings change after the college season is over. Right now I don't see any of the college QBs being so "hot" that they would bring a boatload of picks in return for the #1 pick, but that can all change drastically by draft day. Also one of the top prospects right now could easily drop to the middle of the first round.

Anyone remember how highly rated Teddy Bridgwater was at the ned of his final college season. Then he look bad in one drill throwing against air and suddenly his hands were too small for himto be a good NFL QB. He ended up being the last pick of the first round. On the other hand guys like Josh Allen and Carson Wentz shot up from decent prospects to top 10 picks after the season ended.

[*Synric*]

Drafting a QB is always a shot in the dark but you have to do your homework and get your guy no matter what cuz hes the man you're going to build your team around.

I remember Ozzie Newsome in an interview he said when building you have to ask yourself do I have a Left Tackle? and Do I have a QB?

[BengalChris]

(11-04-2019, 10:20 AM)fredtoast Wrote: This is just not true.

In 2011 when we drafted Green and Dalton for the offense we also fixed our defense (from 24th in scoring to 9th) by signing three new starters in free agency (Nate Clements, Manny Lawson, Thomas Howard).

Marvin isn't with the Bengals anymore. Come to the present.

 

[I_C_DeadPeople]

(11-04-2019, 01:16 AM)samhain Wrote: This is what really worries me.  The Bengals have been living off of those drafts for a long time.  They're going to meet their expiration date soon, and they've not been replicated.  Not remotely.  

I don't think this organization has it in them to rectify those failed drafts.  That means that fans will be left to wait until they finally manage to be the blind squirrel finding the nut 2 or 3 times in a row.  That's not likely to happen without a change in people and process.  Change in people and process is probably less likely to happen.

This organization may have died on the night of the infamous playoff game in January 2016.  That level of talent was a pinnacle that they show no signs of being able to replace.  

And don't forget the blind squirrel finding the nuts for several years in a row also has to align with having good coaches on staff at that exact time period. 

[fredtoast]

(11-04-2019, 01:44 PM)BengalChris Wrote: Marvin isn't with the Bengals anymore. Come to the present.

Not sure what you mean.

Neither of us mentioned Marvin.  We were talking about Mike Brown.

[BengalChris]

(11-04-2019, 03:02 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Not sure what you mean.

Neither of us mentioned Marvin.  We were talking about Mike Brown.

You honestly didn't get what I was saying?

You brought up a time when it was MB+Marvin. That was in the past. This is the present and it's no longer MB+Marvin. I guess I had to spell that out.

 

[fredtoast]

(11-04-2019, 08:23 PM)BengalChris Wrote: You honestly didn't get what I was saying?

You brought up a time when it was MB+Marvin. That was in the past. This is the present and it's no longer MB+Marvin. I guess I had to spell that out. 

Oh I get it now.  You are talking about stuff you made up in your head and stated as fact.

There is no reason to believe that Marvin ever controlled Mike Brown.

[TJHoushmandzadeh's Shiny Shoes]

(11-03-2019, 02:35 PM)fredtoast Wrote: In my opinion we are looking at a top 2 pick in the next draft.  If this happens then the big debate will be what should we do with that pick.  Some will say we need to use it on a QB because we may not have the chance to draft that high again.  Others will say we need to fix other parts of the team before we look for a QB.

I suppose the biggest question will be how good are the top QBs in this year's draft.  That is almost impossible to tell at this point.  The really in-depth draft analysis does not begin until after the college season is over.  It is not uncommon for the QB draft rankings to change between the end of the season and the draft.  But in connection with this we also need to look at how accurate these rankings have been for QBs taken in the top 5.  Here is a look at the QBs taken in the top 5 of previous drafts and the top QB taken in those drafts


'00... No top 5 QB.  (Chad Pennington first QB at #18)  Best.. Brady in 6th round but such extreme outlier that doesn't really count.
'01... Mike Vick (#1).  Best.. Brees (#32)
'02... David Carr (#1) Joey harrington (#3).  Best.. David Garrard (#108)
'03... Palmer (#1) also best.
'04... Eli Manning (#1) Phillip Rivers (#4).  Hard to say who was the best QB in that draft, but Roethlisberger went #11
'05... Alex Smith (#1).  Best.. Aaron Rodgers (#25)
'06... Vince Young (#3).  Best.. Young actually played very well (2 Pro Bowls, .620 win percentage), but Jay Cutler (#11) had better career.
'07... JaMarcus Russell (#1).  Best..  Kevin Kolb (#36)?
'08... Matt Ryan (#3) also best
'09... Matt Stafford (#1) Mark Sanchez (#5).  Best.. Stafford
'10... Sam Bradford (#1) also best
'11... Cam Newton (#1).  Best.. Amdy Dalton (#35)     
'12... Andrew Luck (#1) Robert Griffen (#2).  Best.. Russell Wilson (#75) but this draft was also an extreme outlier with guys like Brandon Weeden (#22) and Brock Osweiler (#57) going in the 1st and 2nd rounds while Willson, Nick Foles (#88) and Kirk Cousins (#102) lasted to the 3rd and 4th.
'13... No top 5 QB and really no good QB at all.  And this just one year after 3 good starters lasted until the third round.
'14... Blake Bortles (#3).  Best.. Derek Carr (#36) or Jimmy Garoppolo (#62).  Teddy Bridgewater also went #32.
'15... Jameis Winstead (#1), Marcus Mariota (#2).  Best..  No other good QBs.
'16... Jared Goff (#1) Carson Wentz (#2).  Best.. Goff and Wentz are both good, but Dak Prescott went #135.
'17... Mitchell Trubisky (#2).  Best..Patrick Mahomes (#10) Deshaun Watson (#12).
'18... Baker Mayfield (#1) Sam Darnold (#3).  Best..  Really too early to tell (see: Vince Young) but Lamar Jackson went #32.


So over the last 20 years over two-thirds of the time the best QB was not taken in the top 5 picks.  Some will argue that this may also apply to all other positions as well.  I think teams "reach" for a QB more than any other position and this is why so many questionable QBs are taken in the top 5 picks.


Next we have to look at the value of a top 5 pick.  Many people have been complaining about the Bengals not trading players for picks, but any player we trade to get any sort of decent pick would just create another hole in our roster.  It is a zero net sum gain.  We would probably gain some cap space by replacing solid starters with cheaper rookies, but not all picks turn into solid starters.  So we may just be creating more holes to fill.  The best way to gain a lot of picks is to trade away a top 2 pick.  Here are some examples of what a top 2 pick can be worth.  Of course this varies from year to year based on how high the top 2 college players are rated, but we won't know that until after the season is over.

In 2016 the Titans gave up the #1 pick (plus a 4th and 6th round pick) in exchange for the #15 pick, two 2nd round picks (#43 and #45) and a 3rd (#76) that year in addition to a 1st round and 3rd round pick in 2017.

In 2011 the Browns gave up the #6 pick in exchange for a 1st (#27), 2nd (#54) and 4th (#124) that year plus a 1st and 4th the next year.

In 1998 the Cardinals dropped just one spot in the draft (from #2 to #3) and also received the Cards '98 second round pick (#33) and '99 first round pick (#8) plus 2 players.  

In 2012 the Rams gave up the #2 pick in the draft for the #6 pick and #39 pick that year plus first round picks in '13 (#22) and '14 (#2).

In 1977 the Seahawks gave up the #2 pick in exchange for the #14 pick plus 3 second round picks (#30, #41, #54)

In '01 the Chargers gave up the #1 pick for the #5 pick plus a 3rd round pick (#67) and a 2nd round pick the next year (#48)

In '99 the Redskins gave up the #5 pick in exchange for the #12 pick plus 5 other picks that year (3rd through 7th round) and a first (#5) and third (#64) the next year.  The only thing crazier than the amount the Saints gave up was the fact that FOUR teams passed on the deal.



If the Bengals could get anything close to any of those offers I think we have to jump on it.  QBs taken in the top 5 are nothing close to a sure thing.  The draft is more of a crap shoot than many people want to admit.  the best way to increase your chances of getting good players is to increase your number of chances.  Plus we have multiple holes to fill.

I'm open to trading down if we can get a king's ransom but looking at the best QB in the draft is the wrong criteria to judge it by as not all QB classes are equal. Picking the second best QB in 2017 or 2004 is better than picking the best QB of 2015 or 2007. The way to look at it is probably the draft position of difference makers.

How far we trade down is also important - you don't want to trade down past that tier 1 bluechip prospects. How many bluechip prospects are there in that first tier this year? If it's 2 QBs, a DE and a LT then trading down to anywhere in the top 4 is an attractive proposition (Jeudy's probably a 5th bluechip prospect but not sure WR makes sense with all the other holes on the Bengals' roster).

Also, if Trevor Lawrence is still a can't miss prospect for 2021, picking up extra 2021 picks now whilst repairing the O-line could be a great strategy.

[fredtoast]

(11-05-2019, 10:20 AM)TJHoushmandzadeh Wrote: Also, if Trevor Lawrence is still a can't miss prospect for 2021, picking up extra 2021 picks now whilst repairing the O-line could be a great strategy.

Lawrence has looked very human this year.  Still a good looking prospect, but nothing like he appeared to be last year.

You can never tell with college QBs.  I remember that before his final college season Jake Locker was the consensus #1 over all pick.

[Socal Bengals fan]

Draft Chase Young. With the money you save on Dalton sign a big time free agent Linemen!! Suck for another year draft Trevor Lawrence who’s not killing it this year but should still be the top pick in 2021 assuming he keeps improving. That off season sign a big time linebacker. Boom. We Can’t did this shit show in one offseason.