McGlinchey getting worked over tonight...he'll probably be our pick

[*ochocincos*]

(11-14-2017, 10:35 AM)THE PISTONS Wrote: No one would trade up to 9. But there were trades at 10, 12, and 14.

I find it hard to believe that the Chiefs didn't call us about 9 if they traded for 10.

The trade up to 10 costed this: Buffalo traded their first-round selection (10th) to Kansas City in exchange for Kansas City's first- and third-round selections (27th and 91st), as well as their first-round selection in 2018.[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_NFL_Draft#cite_note-2017TradeTracker-8][/url]

Rueben Foster went at 31...so we could have taken him at 27. Ryan Ramczyk a Tackle from Wisconsin went at 32. Cam Robinson at 34. Forrest Lamp a G went at 38. All of those guys could have been in play at 27.

Ramczyk grades out at 80.1 right now...or as the #12 tackle in football.

Three things:
1) We don't know if the Bengals would have accepted KC's first and third round selections and first-rounder in 2018. We also don't know if KC thought the price to trade to 9 was too steep compared to trading up to 10. You're making the assumption that the Bengals would have just accepted such a trade and that a team thought the Bengals would accept such a trade. Regardless of the reason, it didn't happen.

2) Ramczyk is playing RT for the Saints and they also have a pretty good LT already in Terron Armstead. The Bengals brought back Andre Smith to theoretically start at RG but we all knew he'd end up playing OT. He's a solid RT. The Bengals needed a LT prospect more than a RT, especially because Fisher showed SOME promise at RT late last year. Unfortunately it didn't end up that way. But for what it's worth, I did like Ramczyk as a RT prospect, much like I liked Cam Robinson as a RT prospect. Clearly what the Bengals SHOULD have done was do whatever to retain Whitworth (really should have tagged him) and drafted Ramczyk or Robinson to compete for RT snaps. That would have put pressure on Ogbuehi and Fisher to earn their starter roles but also provided insurance in case they underperformed. Instead, Marvin and Brown put faith in Alexander to get Ogbuehi and Fisher to reach their potential and it ended up backfiring pretty hard.

3) You and some others are being extremely impatient with Ross and I think it's because you don't (or didn't) want to accept that this would be a rebuilding year. You wanted to win now. It's a valid sentiment but wasn't realistic. Let's revisit the Ross selection and other first round selections after their third year (2019) and see just how good/bad they are before we label players as good or a bust.

[THE PISTONS]

(11-14-2017, 10:51 AM)ochocincos Wrote: Three things:
1) We don't know if the Bengals would have accepted KC's first and third round selections and first-rounder in 2018. We also don't know if KC thought the price to trade to 9 was too steep compared to trading up to 10. You're making the assumption that the Bengals would have just accepted such a trade and that a team thought the Bengals would accept such a trade. Regardless of the reason, it didn't happen.

2) Ramczyk is playing RT for the Saints and they also have a pretty good LT already in Terron Armstead. The Bengals brought back Andre Smith to theoretically start at RG but we all knew he'd end up playing OT. He's a solid RT. The Bengals needed a LT prospect more than a RT, especially because Fisher showed SOME promise at RT late last year. Unfortunately it didn't end up that way. But for what it's worth, I did like Ramczyk as a RT prospect, much like I liked Cam Robinson as a RT prospect. Clearly what the Bengals SHOULD have done was do whatever to retain Whitworth (really should have tagged him) and drafted Ramczyk or Robinson to compete for RT snaps. That would have put pressure on Ogbuehi and Fisher to earn their starter roles but also provided insurance in case they underperformed. Instead, Marvin and Brown put faith in Alexander to get Ogbuehi and Fisher to reach their potential and it ended up backfiring pretty hard.

3) You and some others are being extremely impatient with Ross and I think it's because you don't (or didn't) want to accept that this would be a rebuilding year. You wanted to win now. It's a valid sentiment but wasn't realistic. Let's revisit the Ross selection and other first round selections after their third year (2019) and see just how good/bad they are before we label players as good or a bust.

I think the bottom line is the Bengals didn't think they had a need at LT/RT and therefore didn't entertain adding one. They wanted to see what Fisher and Ced did.

It's not about being impatient with Ross. It's about having a terrible offensive line and saying...yeah we could have addressed it. Plus, Ross has 0 catches in 9 games. That's going to lend itself to 2nd guessing.

I started a thread about how we were rebuilding. I saw the roster was in shambles.

Can we really call this rebuilding though? What young players have significantly improved other than Jackson? Sure guys have a good game here and there...but overall the young guys have been Poor.

[RoyleRedlegs]

(11-14-2017, 10:29 AM)ochocincos Wrote: If we are to believe Marvin's comments from the John Ross article I posted last week, there wasn't anyone interested in trading up to 9 last year.
The same could happen in 2018. You cannot guarantee a trade partner.
If you can't find a willing trade partner (or you sit back and wait for someone to call you to trade like the Bengals probably did), you take who you consider your top player at that slot regardless if some people consider it a "reach" or not.

But he left out it's because Mike Brown is notoriously difficult to work with on trades...

[*ochocincos*]

(11-14-2017, 11:24 AM)THE PISTONS Wrote: I think the bottom line is the Bengals didn't think they had a need at LT/RT and therefore didn't entertain adding one. They wanted to see what Fisher and Ced did.

It's not about being impatient with Ross. It's about having a terrible offensive line and saying...yeah we could have addressed it. Plus, Ross has 0 catches in 9 games. That's going to lend itself to 2nd guessing.

I started a thread about how we were rebuilding. I saw the roster was in shambles.

Can we really call this rebuilding though? What young players have significantly improved other than Jackson? Sure guys have a good game here and there...but overall the young guys have been Poor.

It's an attempted rebuild at least. The goal was to groom Ogbuehi, Fisher, Hopkins, Vigil, the young DL, and the young DBs.
I think Dennard and WJ3 have made strides as well as Fej. Billings looked good last game and he needs more playing time through the rest of the year to get where needed for next year.

I think the big failure was on the offensive side. The line is obvious. None of the young OL have made big enough strides to be relied upon as a starter for next year. Boyd and Core seem to have regressed but it's hard to tell when there's so small of a window to try to get separation.

IMO the Bengals made a mistake keeping Dre Kirkpatrick. They seemed to have panicked when Whitworth left in FA and wanted to retain one of their Big 3. But since DK was kept, I hope Adam Jones's option is not picked up and that cap can be put towards OL.

When all is said and done, I hope the Bengals FO learned a valuable lesson this year, which should be not to put so much faith in a position coach getting a couple young players where they need to be without solid insurance behind them given those young players didn't exactly have good resumés leading up to this year.

[*ochocincos*]

(11-14-2017, 11:27 AM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: But he left out it's because Mike Brown is notoriously difficult to work with on trades...

Could be. We know Brown overvalues certain players when considering trades. It could have been a mix of no team wanted the headache of working out a trade with Mike Brown and therefore no other team expressed interest. And from the way Marvin was quoted, it didn't sound like the Bengals actively sought to trade back either. Moreso that they were waiting for teams to come to them.

[RoyleRedlegs]

(11-14-2017, 11:36 AM)ochocincos Wrote: Could be. We know Brown overvalues certain players when considering trades. It could have been a mix of no team wanted the headache of working out a trade with Mike Brown and therefore no other team expressed interest. And from the way Marvin was quoted, it didn't sound like the Bengals actively sought to trade back either. Moreso that they were waiting for teams to come to them.

I mean, I find it hard to believe 10, 12 and 14 traded but not a single team would trade to 9. Just seems far-fetched that there was NO interest. This team has been steadfastly asking for a first+ for AJ MCCARRON. The same compensation they got for CARSON PALMER. 

Just saying, which seems more likely....no one wanted 9 or no one wanted to deal with Brown being insane....