What Are Your Priorities In This Draft?!

[Whatever]

(04-16-2025, 01:58 PM)ochocincos Wrote: But most 2-down NTs typically have lower RAS.
DJ Reader, for example, had a 2.98 RAS.

Would people think Reader should have been a 5th rounder looking back?

While TJ Slaton, the new Bengals NT, had a 7.96 cumulative RAS, his agility drills were not good (2.34 RAS for shuttle, 3.20 RAS for 3-cone).
Slaton also went in 5th round.

It's possible Bengals looked up typical athleticism for NTs and figured it's not as big of a deal, and they liked his tape, and as such could have had him projected closer to Top 100.

I guess the point I'm making is Bengals wanted who they believed would be a good NT, they had a 3rd comp pick as "extra" to use, and didn't want to risk waiting until 115 (or 149) to get a NT. We won't really know where they had Jackson slotted, but if it really was a 4th rounder, I don't see it being crazy terrible if they took him half a round early.
Most NTs get undervalued anyway on draft day, and they fall to 5th round. Maybe Jackson would have done the same, but I wouldn't have risked waiting to 149 to get him. I would have pulled the trigger at 115 if he was still there.

Reader doesn't have a lot to do with it.  He was signed as a FA.  It was known going in that he could start in the NFL and play at a high level.

A high RAS is not a guarantee that a player will pan out.  A low RAS is not a guarantee that they won't.  But players with a higher RAS have better odds of panning out, and conversely, players with a lower RAS have worse odds of panning out.  Players will slide because of poor RAS, because their odds of success are less, just as they will due to injury or character concerns.