Am I Unrealistically Excited?!

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(06-12-2024, 12:12 PM)ochocincos Wrote: From CB perspective, I lean toward DJ Turner.
Some people had unrealistic expectations for a rookie to come in and be great immediately. That was unfair to Turner.

While Turner didn't have any INTs last year, he did have 7 PDs and 50 tackles in 829 defensive snaps.
Maybe surprising to some, that's right about what Eli Apple (who many wanted back as insurance last year) did each of his 2 years as a Bengal:
2021 - 10 PDs, 49 tackles in 979 defensive snaps
2022 - 8 PDs, 49 tackles in 908 snaps

Given Apple was a former Top 10 pick, was an experienced veteran, and was right in the prime of his career those 2 years, I think Turner's floor is Apple and his ceiling is even higher.

Some might say, "Well, you're talking stats...what about the mishaps in the games that aren't reflected in stats?!"
And while true there were some mishaps that people remember, people should expect a rookie to have some gaffes. At least that's my opinion.
Leon Hall got whooped a pretty good amount as a rookie (I'll always remember Braylon Edwards beating him over and over in that CLE game in 2007), but turned into a really damn good CB within a couple years after. Gotta give players some time.

I think Hill will act as a versatile piece this year before taking over for Hilton next year.
While I thought the team gave up too quickly on him at FS, I hope he finds a spot by next year so it's not a bust of a pick.

Newton I think will be a CB4 kinda guy who plays across multiple spots and spot starts.

Turner's mishaps ARE reflected in stats. PFR has him as allowing a 111.6 QB Rating in his coverage. 

Eli Apple who you brought into the comparison...
2021: 86.6
2022: 96.9

To Turner's credit he IS a notably better tackler than Apple. Turner had a missed tackle % of 7.4% which I think is pretty good for a CB, Apple had 19.7% in 2021 and 12.5% in 2022 which is pretty atrocious. If Turner was a less sure tackler that 111.6 would have somehow exploded even further.