Yesterday, 01:18 PM
(Yesterday, 09:09 AM)higgy100 Wrote: Agree with you especially trading back in round 2. I was 100% convinced they were going to make at least one trade for an extra pick.
Same Higgy, we just don't know if they even had a trade partner to add a pick and get Knight. Sounds like Golden and Hodges really wanted
Knight and were afraid somebody would of picked him if they did trade back, so they just made sure they got their guy.
(Yesterday, 10:00 AM)3wt Wrote: I think that's a good point. If I had merged my original plan with the path the Bengals took I would have wanted to take Fairchild along with Ratlege. The importance of getting two guards in the draft was so important. Ratledge could have stepped into the right guard and fairchild the left. I really wanted Ratledge, but love the two OL picks the Bengals made. I will be intrigued to see what impact of having a very deep linebacker room is going to have on the defense overall...
I would of been fine with adding both Georgia Guards, I just think Golden got the first 2 picks to add to his Defense and Ratledge has his
weaknesses just the same as Fairchild if not more, Fairchild has longer arms and plays lower.
(Yesterday, 10:20 AM)Whatever Wrote: It's been a couple of years since I looked into it, but OL's starting multiple rookies tend to perform pretty badly as a unit. At least according to PFF's year end OL rankings. So drafting two starting G's wouldn't be a very sound strategy.
Personally, I saw Ratledge as a 3rd round talent. His testing was off the charts, but didn't really show up on the film I saw. He's short armed for a G, and I don't like spending premium picks on OL that don't meet minimum arm length thresholds. Plus, he's also tall and has a tendency to play too upright, so that with the short arms indicates some guys will get into his chest and knock him off the LoS with proper leverage.
All very true. I think that all of Mims, Fairchild and Ratledge playing together would of helped though. Oh well, this is a what if thread anyways.
