5 years $46 mil for TE Travis Kelce 1yr ago. Do Bengals pay Tyler Eifert that?

[*ochocincos*]

(03-29-2017, 07:55 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: Howard is an amazing talent, and this is a question the Bengals will absolutely have to be asking themselves. 

Eifert would deserve the next contract if he is able to prove his health this season.  We already know when healthy that he is also an amazing talent.  If he can show he is 100% healthy and contribute all season, I think he will have earned the second contract and be a franchise cornerstone.  

Barnett has fallen out of favor with some here and some national scouts due to his "limited moves", but the thing about Barnett is even when teams knew about him, and game-planned for him, he still "got home".  A guy like that on this front four could be a huge addition.  This defense stubbornly sticks with the front four to generate pressure and rarely blitzes.  Without a significant upgrade at the RDE position, I think we still see a mean game of paddy-cake when the opposition goes maximum protection.

This early in the first round, the best values (if they are rated similarly) are the QBs, WRs, and pass-rushers because they command the most money in free agency.  I guess you can include CBs in that.  The extra year before they hit free agency for a first round pick is a HUGE advantage to the club on those premium-priced positions.

If Barnett is there, I think they take him.  I don't think he, Garrett, Allen, or Thomas will be...then the question becomes (if there is no trade back partner), do they take Davis or Ross at WR or a talent like Howard?  For this offense, I would rather have Ross or Davis.  But that is just this offense.  If I was the Patriots, or any number of teams that run even 3 TE sets?  I would take Howard. 

One thing people need to remember is that the Bengals absolutely value blocking from the TE position, and Howard is one of the only ones in this draft that has been a good blocker. A majority of the drafted TEs nowadays are primarily just receiving threats. Butt has been used as an inline blocker, but isn't quite as good as Howard in that regard. Howard really is a NFL-ready all-around TE that should be able to be a significant contributor from day 1. All the other TE prospects have at least some key area of improvement they need to make before being a complete TE in the NFL.

And I don't think anyone is really arguing that Barnett isn't talented, but how much more talented is he (and how much more potential does he have) over the other DEs outside of the Big 3? He should be a very solid contributor, but his ceiling might not be high enough vs the ceiling of some of the other players still available at 9.

I think it would improve the team more to go with a receiving threat in Round 1 and then a pass rusher in Round 2 and/or Round 3 vs Barnett in Round 1 and a TE after.

[Shake n Blake]

1. Eifert won't make 5 years, $46 million. Injuries matter.
2. If the Bengals draft Howard at 9, it proves (again) that they have no sense of urgency to win with this current core of players.
3. I do think this realistically could happen...I'd say it's likely one of the top options.

[snowy]

Well, if the Bengals want to keep Eifert I expect they'll have to pay him Kelce money or better. That's how it works. Whether or not its a smart move to keep Eifert is another matter altogether. Personally, I wouldn't be too sad if he went elsewhere.

[BengalD]

(03-28-2017, 04:37 PM)depthchart Wrote: I forgot the concussions.
The Offense is much better in the Red Zone when Eifert is playing, so replacing him with OJ Howard who will likely be more durable could help the team.

Bell ringers are a big issue for him and Burfict! Another big concern in my book.

[XenoMorph]

I would start with a 2 year decently paid extenstion to see how his health holds out...

[depthchart]

A real Super Bowl run will require a healthy Tyler Eifert since the Offense is on another level with the Tight End threat down the middle of the field and in the Red Zone.

Drafting OJ Howard would eliminate relying on the health of Eifert and likely make sure that the Great Tight End component that raises the Offense to that other level is PRESENT for a possible Super Bowl run.

Otherwise, we could actually be making that run, only to have Eifert go down again say in week 16 causing the Offense to lose that important Great Tight End which it and Dalton needs to have any real chance at Greatness.

[The D.O.Z.]

I've alluded to these being reasons the Bengals may draft OJH in another thread..he'd be my pick before even concidering one of the top WRs. If the pass rusher they want isn't there, I'd much prefer OJH than any of these projected first-round recievers. He has all the traits you want in a TE..good hands, good speed, strong, willing blocker...which one of those WR can do all that? A playmaker that can also help your Oline..one we all know needs all the help it can get at this point.

Look..I like Eifert...I think he's a hell of a talent but he just can't stay on the field. No way am I offering a contract with those big numbers to a guy who's lucky to play 12 games a year! Sure...OJH isn't a "tried-and-true" NFL player at this point..but he'd be one hell of a playmaker at a position that provides a safety blanket for many facets of our offense AND an insurance policy if and when Eifert gets hurt or leaves in FA.

[*SHRacerX*]

(03-29-2017, 11:41 AM)ochocincos Wrote: I think it would improve the team more to go with a receiving threat in Round 1 and then a pass rusher in Round 2 and/or Round 3 vs Barnett in Round 1 and a TE after.

This is the bottom line and it really does make you think the team would probably be more improved with a guy like Ross, Davis, or Howard and a DE like Walker from FSU or Willis from KState in the 2nd than getting a guy like Barnett and an also-ran at WR or TE in Rd 2.  

[XenoMorph]

(03-29-2017, 02:49 PM)depthchart Wrote: A real Super Bowl run will require a healthy Tyler Eifert since the Offense is on another level with the Tight End threat down the middle of the field and in the Red Zone.

Drafting OJ Howard would eliminate relying on the health of Eifert and likely make sure that the Great Tight End component that raises the Offense to that other level is PRESENT for a possible Super Bowl run.

Otherwise, we could actually be making that run, only to have Eifert go down again say in week 16 causing the Offense to lose that important Great Tight End which it and Dalton needs to have any real chance at Greatness.

Uz was starting to look good last year if my memory isn't deceiving me.

[depthchart]

(03-29-2017, 04:45 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: Uz was starting to look good last year if my memory isn't deceiving me.

Uzomah is a decent guy to have for depth but OJ Howard is drawing comparisons to Tony Gonzalez.
A once in a decade tight end that could have multiple 1,000 yard & double digit TD seasons

[depthchart]

(03-29-2017, 04:15 PM)SHRacerX Wrote: This is the bottom line and it really does make you think the team would probably be more improved with a guy like Ross, Davis, or Howard and a DE like Walker from FSU or Willis from KState in the 2nd than getting a guy like Barnett and an also-ran at WR or TE in Rd 2.  

Plus a WR or TE will be a 3 down player for sure.
There is a chance a guy like Derek Barnett gets into a rotation as more of a Pass rush specialist which we do need but they may want to use a Top 10 pick on a for sure 3 down player. Maybe Barnett develops into a 3 down guy or maybe not.

[Hammerstripes]

(03-29-2017, 12:01 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: 1. Eifert won't make 5 years, $46 million. Injuries matter.
2. If the Bengals draft Howard at 9, it proves (again) that they have no sense of urgency to win with this current core of players.
3. I do think this realistically could happen...I'd say it's likely one of the top options.

Well, in free agency everybody gets a lot more than they deserve.

If we are concerned about injury we need to tag him.  There is no way you can let him leave.

[BURROWorBUST]

(03-29-2017, 12:49 PM)BengalD Wrote: Bell ringers are a big issue for him and Burfict! Another big concern in my book.

Another reason to consider Foster. At this point, I think Howard might be the best offensive player available at 9, and Foster might be the best defensive player. If Malik Hooker is there at 9, he might be the second best. I'd draft any of those three in a heartbeat, and, between the 3 of them, I think I'd opt for Howard. If you haven't seen tape on him, you need to. 

[Hammerstripes]

(03-29-2017, 05:18 PM)depthchart Wrote: Plus a WR or TE will be a 3 down player for sure.
There is a chance a guy like Derek Barnett gets into a rotation as more of a Pass rush specialist which we do need but they may want to use a Top 10 pick on a for sure 3 down player. Maybe Barnett develops into a 3 down guy or maybe not.

I think pretty much everyone that comes in this year is going to be some rotational guy.

I doubt a WR will start in front of LaFell and I doubt that Barnett or any other DE would start in front of MJ.

The only player that would make and immediate 3 down impact is if we somehow drafted a center that would come in and take over immediately.  Everybody else (including Howard) would be a rotational piece year one. Although Fournette would be close to being a 3 down guy.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(03-29-2017, 05:43 PM)Shady Wrote: Another reason to consider Foster. At this point, I think Howard might be the best offensive player available at 9, and Foster might be the best defensive player. If Malik Hooker is there at 9, he might be the second best. I'd draft any of those three in a heartbeat, and, between the 3 of them, I think I'd opt for Howard. If you haven't seen tape on him, you need to. 

Another reason to NOT consider Foster. Foster has concussion issues of his own. (Not to mention he's recovering from torn rotator cuff surgery.) What's the number one thing a linebacker has to do? Tackle. What does tackling often include? An impact to your shoulder, and often incidentally your head.

Foster's medial worries me too much for the 9th overall pick. You need to take a much safer bet at that pick, is my opinion.

[BURROWorBUST]

(03-29-2017, 06:18 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Another reason to NOT consider Foster. Foster has concussion issues of his own. (Not to mention he's recovering from torn rotator cuff surgery.) What's the number one thing a linebacker has to do? Tackle. What does tackling often include? An impact to your shoulder, and often incidentally your head.

Foster's medial worries me too much for the 9th overall pick. You need to take a much safer bet at that pick, is my opinion.

Good point. Pass on Foster. Unless they surprise me, I'd predict they take Barnett, though I think I would grab Hooker as the top D player if he's there. 

What's your opinion on Barnett? He doesn't really move me.

[Joelist]

All you need to do is look at the offense with Eifert versus without Eifert. Sorry but letting him go to bet on a draft pick, especially one where there are real questions about intensity, passion and desire is foolhardy.

[Shake n Blake]

(03-29-2017, 05:34 PM)Hammerstripes Wrote: Well, in free agency everybody gets a lot more than they deserve.

If we are concerned about injury we need to tag him.  There is no way you can let him leave.

Not really. You may have 5-6 guys that get "overpaid" each year, then you have a bunch of dudes like Minter, LaFell etc that get normal contracts. Anyone who thinks Eifert can miss another 8 games this year and still get a multi-year contract approaching $10 million per is fooling themselves.

Eifert desperately needs a healthy season and production if he wants Kelce money. Agree on the tag though. They can't just let a talent like that walk for a worthless compensatory pick.

[Derrick]

(03-28-2017, 04:37 PM)depthchart Wrote: I forgot the concussions.
The Offense is much better in the Red Zone when Eifert is playing, so replacing him with OJ Howard who will likely be more durable could help the team.

Over the past several years the Bengals seem to have "missed" 4 out of 5 times when drafting a TE. If you count games missed due to injury it is closer to 5 out of 5. So they may indeed roll the dice once again on Howard.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(03-29-2017, 07:14 PM)Shady Wrote: Good point. Pass on Foster. Unless they surprise me, I'd predict they take Barnett, though I think I would grab Hooker as the top D player if he's there. 

What's your opinion on Barnett? He doesn't really move me.

I don't know. I feel like he's probably the safe choice. He's "only" 6'3, 259lbs, so he's not a proper giant like the Bengals seem to enjoy at DE. He's also only 20 right now and doesn't turn 21 until the end of June, so he's actually really young for an NFL prospect. Might mean he needs a year to grow into it. Hard to argue with that production, though.

Taco Charlton is probably more a Bengals-type guy at DE. 6'6, 277lbs, might need someone to keep him going full effort. (The knock on both MJ and Dunlap out of the draft.) He is two years older than Barnett, though.

Honestly, this is the first draft in awhile I didn't have a terribly strong opinion on who I wanted them to take. I would be fine with Barnett, Charlton, Mike Williams, or OJ Howard. One of the four should certainly be there when the Bengals pick. I just don't want a RB in the first (pointless with this OL) or Foster (due to medical).