Your Ideal Pick @ 9?

[samhain]

The more things shape up, the more I want an offensive weapon.

My preferences would be Davis, Cook, Howard, or Ross. Not as high on Ross because he seems a bit frail.

I'd be happy with an end, but I really like Taco Charlton. If he's their guy, I'd like to trade back and get something for it. Same goes for other defensive guys I like such as Cunningham and Reddick. I'd be very pleased with trading back and taking any of them in 1.

[Whatever]

(03-18-2017, 04:05 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: I'm not impressed by Solomon at all.

Truthfully, I'm glad he is being projected to go in the top 5 now. Keep us from making the mistake of drafting him.

He's a tweener with no real position/

He tested well, but if we're going with a good testing DE, Barnett was more impressive than him at the combine anyway.

I watched the "dominant" game against UNC and even in that game I felt like he was just good.

I don't know what people see in him.

How was Barnett more impressive at the combine?  Thomas was .19 faster at the 40, .01 faster in the 3 cone, .16 faster in the 20 yard shuttle, had a 4" higher vertical jump,  9" longer broad jump, and put up 30 reps at the bench all while weighing 14 pounds more.  Thomas showed that he's a superior athlete with more upside than Barnett.  

[CJD]

(03-19-2017, 01:02 AM)Whatever Wrote: How was Barnett more impressive at the combine?  Thomas was .19 faster at the 40, .01 faster in the 3 cone, .16 faster in the 20 yard shuttle, had a 4" higher vertical jump,  9" longer broad jump, and put up 30 reps at the bench all while weighing 14 pounds more.  Thomas showed that he's a superior athlete with more upside than Barnett.  

Barnett did it while dehydrated, sick and vomiting. 

[Whatever]

(03-19-2017, 01:11 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: Barnett did it while dehydrated, sick and vomiting. 

Which is a valid excuse for Barnett being outperformed by such a wide margin, but he was not more impressive than Thomas in any way, shape, or form.

[magikod]

The more I think about it, the more I'm thinking Barnett is our guy. I'd love Thomas but I doubt he's available at #9 for us.

[CJD]

(03-19-2017, 01:40 AM)Whatever Wrote: Which is a valid excuse for Barnett being outperformed by such a wide margin, but he was not more impressive than Thomas in any way, shape, or form.

I never said Barnett outperformed him. I just said Barnett was more impressive.

[Fan_in_Kettering]

(03-18-2017, 03:33 AM)Jpoore Wrote: Adams projects as a strong safety in the nfl. If we go safety give me hooker all day.

Oh yes. The combination of Malik Hooker with George Iloka would be amazing.  Better downfield coverage means more sacks up front.  

[*psychdoctor*]

Give me Hooker or LF.

[J24]

(03-19-2017, 02:49 AM)magikod Wrote: The more I think about it, the more I'm thinking Barnett is our guy. I'd love Thomas but I doubt he's available at #9 for us.

I think the media is overrating Thomas draft stock. While is combine workout was impressive he still is small for a DT and doesn't have the length of a DE.

[Whatever]

(03-19-2017, 10:21 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: I never said Barnett outperformed him. I just said Barnett was more impressive.

In what way was he more impressive?  He didn't perform well except for one event.

[CJD]

(03-19-2017, 04:07 PM)Whatever Wrote: In what way was he more impressive?  He didn't perform well except for one event.

The one event that people were most skeptical about him. Leading up to the combine all you heard was how Barnett was not athletic. He had production but can't turn the corner welll, can shrink under OTs etc etc.

Well, the 3 cone drill is the ultimate test of change of direction, agility and maneuverability. And it most closely mimics how a player turns the corner as a defensive end.

Based on scouting reports, he should have done a 7.3 or 7.4 in that test. But he had a sub 7, which is just...incredible for a defensive lineman.

In addition, his 40 was serviceable for a DE his size and you could tell from watching him that he didn't really have the technique down for setting in the 3 point stance. So being able to pull off a 4.88 even without the technique is impressive.

And, like I said, he did all the tests when he was so sick he was being given fluids 24 hours prior to testing.

I don't know how you can see that as not impressive.

Meanwhile, Solomon Thomas every one knew was an athlete. He was expected to be a combine athlete and he met his expectations. That is how he made up for his average college production.

Barnett greatly exceeded the expectations placed upon him. He is a production machine who was supposed to be "exposed" at the combine.


We'll see how he does on the 31st at his pro day. I'd expect that he cleans up that 40 time with better technique and, once he's healthy, he'll jump just fine.

[McC]

My ideal pick is at least the ninth best player in the draft and we will see THIS year just how good he is.

[Whatever]

(03-19-2017, 07:01 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: The one event that people were most skeptical about him. Leading up to the combine all you heard was how Barnett was not athletic. He had production but can't turn the corner welll, can shrink under OTs etc etc.

Well, the 3 cone drill is the ultimate test of change of direction, agility and maneuverability. And it most closely mimics how a player turns the corner as a defensive end.

Based on scouting reports, he should have done a 7.3 or 7.4 in that test. But he had a sub 7, which is just...incredible for a defensive lineman.

In addition, his 40 was serviceable for a DE his size and you could tell from watching him that he didn't really have the technique down for setting in the 3 point stance. So being able to pull off a 4.88 even without the technique is impressive.

And, like I said, he did all the tests when he was so sick he was being given fluids 24 hours prior to testing.

I don't know how you can see that as not impressive.

Meanwhile, Solomon Thomas every one knew was an athlete. He was expected to be a combine athlete and he met his expectations. That is how he made up for his average college production.

Barnett greatly exceeded the expectations placed upon him. He is a production machine who was supposed to be "exposed" at the combine.


We'll see how he does on the 31st at his pro day. I'd expect that he cleans up that 40 time with better technique and, once he's healthy, he'll jump just fine.

The bigger concerns I've seen with Barnett have been his lack of size, power, and lack of an inside move.  Anybody can see on film he can turn the corner.

Dude, his 3 Cone was very good, but 6 of 56 DL did the three cone in 7.00 flat or less.  It's not like it's the DL equivalent of running a sub-4.3 40.

He was 27th out of 51 DL who ran the 40, and there were only two guys smaller than him that performed worse.  He got beat by guys like Malik McDowell and Montravious Adams.  By comparison, Dunlap ran a 4.71 and MJ ran a 4.75.  

Except he didn't do all the tests.  He didn't do the bench, and he skipped the 60 yard shuttle along with most of the rest of the DL.  He also didn't do drills. I mean, c'mon, man, I don't have a problem with you spinning the facts for your guy, but they need to actually be facts.

These are two soon to be professional athletes of approximately equal age and size that play the same position.  It's not like it's a situation of "Hey, they were pretty impressive for a 40 year old soccer mom."  There's no reason to go into it with lower standards for one or the other.

[Storer50]

Thomas, Davis, Ross, Barnett

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

[CJD]

(03-19-2017, 10:04 PM)Whatever Wrote: The bigger concerns I've seen with Barnett have been his lack of size, power, and lack of an inside move.  Anybody can see on film he can turn the corner.

Dude, his 3 Cone was very good, but 6 of 56 DL did the three cone in 7.00 flat or less.  It's not like it's the DL equivalent of running a sub-4.3 40.

He was 27th out of 51 DL who ran the 40, and there were only two guys smaller than him that performed worse.  He got beat by guys like Malik McDowell and Montravious Adams.  By comparison, Dunlap ran a 4.71 and MJ ran a 4.75.  

Except he didn't do all the tests.  He didn't do the bench, and he skipped the 60 yard shuttle along with most of the rest of the DL.  He also didn't do drills. I mean, c'mon, man, I don't have a problem with you spinning the facts for your guy, but they need to actually be facts.

These are two soon to be professional athletes of approximately equal age and size that play the same position.  It's not like it's a situation of "Hey, they were pretty impressive for a 40 year old soccer mom."  There's no reason to go into it with lower standards for one or the other.

That's where we disagree, and it's clear.

You went in with the same expectations for every player. I went in with the expectations put on each player individually.

Barnett is a production player. Thomas is a workout warrior. 

I have different expectations for these types of players.

I was expecting a good performance from Thomas and got it.

I was expecting a bad performance from Barnett and got a good performance in addition to the fact that he was sick all weekend. 

You may still be more impressed by the raw numbers of the work out warrior, but workout numbers do not make a great player.

I was more impressed by the guy who actually produced at an elite level in college and, in addition, had a good performance. You're right that it wasn't great but, like I said, he was sick and he obviously didn't have the best technique in the 40.

You can only attribute so much to workout numbers and, in my opinion, I saw what I needed from Barnett to still be confident that he's worth the #9 pick.

Hence, impressed.

[*SHRacerX*]

(03-19-2017, 01:02 AM)Whatever Wrote: How was Barnett more impressive at the combine?  Thomas was .19 faster at the 40, .01 faster in the 3 cone, .16 faster in the 20 yard shuttle, had a 4" higher vertical jump,  9" longer broad jump, and put up 30 reps at the bench all while weighing 14 pounds more.  Thomas showed that he's a superior athlete with more upside than Barnett.  

To be fair, Barnett was very sick at the combine.  I love Thomas, though, and the Bengals historically won't go with a 250 LB speed guy at RDE.  They are dead-set on the bigger guy that can play all three downs and not be a liability in the running game.  I really like Tak McKinley (not at 9) but I don't think the Bengals would go for a guy like him.  I think Thomas and Barnett are perfect fits and they could be an instant upgrade.  

Between the two, I prefer Thomas because he has a bit more fast-twitch but Barnett is a bit more flexible on his bends around the edge.  I would love either one at 9, but I am almost certain they will be gone.  

I posted on a different thread about trying to trade back and take Cam Robinson to compete with Ced at LT, and if he can't win the position, I think he could be an all-pro RG.  This made sense to me to push Ced and to have a plan at RG beyond Smith's one year deal.  

It isn't sexy, but LT is still the biggest worry on the team and at the very least, we get a RG that is a mammoth of a man to help the running game.  

[Whatever]

(03-20-2017, 08:32 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: That's where we disagree, and it's clear.

You went in with the same expectations for every player. I went in with the expectations put on each player individually.

Barnett is a production player. Thomas is a workout warrior. 

I have different expectations for these types of players.

I was expecting a good performance from Thomas and got it.

I was expecting a bad performance from Barnett and got a good performance in addition to the fact that he was sick all weekend. 

You may still be more impressed by the raw numbers of the work out warrior, but workout numbers do not make a great player.

I was more impressed by the guy who actually produced at an elite level in college and, in addition, had a good performance. You're right that it wasn't great but, like I said, he was sick and he obviously didn't have the best technique in the 40.

You can only attribute so much to workout numbers and, in my opinion, I saw what I needed from Barnett to still be confident that he's worth the #9 pick.

Hence, impressed.

Barnett did not have a "good" performance, however.  Mediocre would be a better description.  He was in the middle of the pack in everything he competed in except one, and a lot of the guys he did beat in those various drills were DT's.  He was below average if you just compare him to other DE's.  

I hate the poor technique excuse for bad 40 times.  These guys all had 2+ months to prepare for the combine.  If a guy has poor technique, it's because he didn't invest the time to learn proper technique, he doesn't take coaching well, or he has a lingering injury that prevents him from using proper technique.  None of those is a good thing.

Thomas can be dubiously labeled as a workout warrior despite the fact that he had good, but not elite, production his senior season.  Plenty of workout warriors turn out to be busts.  Similarly, there are a lot of guys with great production and mediocre physical traits that bust, too.  It depends.  Do you prefer the one year wonder with great physical traits you can develop or the guy with great production over several years with mediocre physical traits that couldn't even learn how to run a 40 properly in 2 months?

[milksheikh]

Myles Garrett says he wants to join the Bengals and Bengals get him in a miraculous scenario.



I can dream right?

[BengalHawk62]

1. Adams
2. Barnett
3. Ross
4. Thomas
5.  Davis

[TGISunday]

Barnett has very similar stats as compared to T sizzle. I'd take that all day.

Thomas might turn out, too, but Barnett is a right end, and that is exactly what we need.