Dangle the first pick?

[Fullrock]

Assuming Bengals end up with the first pick in the draft, would you dangle the 1st pick to teams drafting in the top 5? Of the teams expected to draft in the top 5 other than the Bengals (Redskins, Giants, Dolphins, Jets) only the Dolphins may be in play to draft a QB. If the Bengals plan is to draft Burrow, they could move down a few spots and still get him while selling the 1st pick to the highest bidder of those teams that want to move up to grab Chase Young. Any additional draft pick(s) they would get in this year's draft would come towards the top of the corresponding round, and maybe they could get a current starting caliber OL or LB as part of a deal.

Interesting scenario: Would you do this? Trade the top pick to Redskins, moving down to the No. 2 spot, and get Trent Williams as part of the deal. You still draft Burrow, but now you have Jonah Williams and Trent Williams as your tackles. Draft the best guard at the top of round 2 and you suddenly have upgraded your offensive line BIG TIME.

Just throwing around some ideas. I think if Burrow is the guy, we can trade down and still get him while trying to either fill a hole on the O-Line or at LB, and/or picking up additional picks, including maybe a 2021 1st round pick.

[Whatever]

(11-22-2019, 02:43 PM)Fullrock Wrote: Assuming Bengals end up with the first pick in the draft, would you dangle the 1st pick to teams drafting in the top 5? Of the teams expected to draft in the top 5 other than the Bengals (Redskins, Giants, Dolphins, Jets) only the Dolphins may be in play to draft a QB. If the Bengals plan is to draft Burrow, they could move down a few spots and still get him while selling the 1st pick to the highest bidder of those teams that want to move up to grab Chase Young. Any additional draft pick(s) they would get in this year's draft would come towards the top of the corresponding round, and maybe they could get a current starting caliber OL or LB as part of a deal.

Interesting scenario: Would you do this? Trade the top pick to Redskins, moving down to the No. 2 spot, and get Trent Williams as part of the deal. You still draft Burrow, but now you have Jonah Williams and Trent Williams as your tackles. Draft the best guard at the top of round 2 and you suddenly have upgraded your offensive line BIG TIME.

Just throwing around some ideas. I think if Burrow is the guy, we can trade down and still get him while trying to either fill a hole on the O-Line or at LB, and/or picking up additional picks, including maybe a 2021 1st round pick.

I would not touch Trent Williams with a 10' pole after the issues with Glenn and Green this year.  He was already on the decline, anyways.

I would not put it past Washington to do what the Cards did with Josh Rosen if Haskins doesn't show some major improvement the rest of the year and they have a crack at Burrow..

Point being, I wouldn't trade down unless I was sold on Herbert and got at least another 1st this year.

[Au165]

First off, there is no guarantee when you go back someone else won't come up in front of you. When you move back you have to make the assumption that "the guy" won't be there so when you move back you need to have a proportionate number of guys you'd be willing to take to the number of positions you are moving back.

As to the idea of moving back from 1, everyone loves to think there is always an opportunity to get a haul for the 1st pick, but that isn't the case. There are occasions where people are willing to mortgage the farm to come up for one guy but that way of thinking is actually on the down swing because of analytics. I remember an interview a few years ago with someone who was the #1 pick and who had been #1 pick a decade or so before and they basically said teams aren't willing to give up the insane haul for the #1 pick anymore because analytics say that quantity is better than quality because of the bust rates.

Now this doesn't mean we couldn't possibly trade out of 1, but just because we have 1 doesn't mean there is someone willing to give away the farm to get it as much as you will hear that narrative thrown out leading to the draft.

[Fullrock]

(11-22-2019, 03:13 PM)Whatever Wrote: I would not touch Trent Williams with a 10' pole after the issues with Glenn and Green this year.  He was already on the decline, anyways.

I would not put it past Washington to do what the Cards did with Josh Rosen if Haskins doesn't show some major improvement the rest of the year and they have a crack at Burrow..

Point being, I wouldn't trade down unless I was sold on Herbert and got at least another 1st this year.

Fair point in regards to Haskins, but the reason you rarely see it happen (Rosen being the exception) is the dead cap money it creates when dumping a guy that early in his contract. Haskins dead cap number looks like it would be 12 million next year. Rosen's was 8 million for the Cards this year so it was a little more managable. I'd be shocked if the Redskins wanted to eat 12 million next year on a guy that will have only started 8 games. Stranger things have happened I suppose.

Trent Williams certainly didn't have his best year in 2018 but still had a 74.0 rating by PFF which would be by far the best on the Bengals O-line. The drop was mostly due to penalties as he had the most in his career, but he still allowed only 1 sack. You would get him in a contract year, and if the plan is to draft a QB he would be an instant HUGE upgrade at LT and could significantly help a young O-Line with his experience.

[Fullrock]

(11-22-2019, 03:50 PM)Au165 Wrote: First off, there is no guarantee when you go back someone else won't come up in front of you. When you move back you have to make the assumption that "the guy" won't be there so when you move back you need to have a proportionate number of guys you'd be willing to take to the number of positions you are moving back.

As to the idea of moving back from 1, everyone loves to think there is always an opportunity to get a haul for the 1st pick, but that isn't the case. There are occasions where people are willing to mortgage the farm to come up for one guy but that way of thinking is actually on the down swing because of analytics. I remember an interview a few years ago with someone who was the #1 pick and who had been #1 pick a decade or so before and they basically said teams aren't willing to give up the insane haul for the #1 pick anymore because analytics say that quantity is better than quality because of the bust rates.

Now this doesn't mean we couldn't possibly trade out of 1, but just because we have 1 doesn't mean there is someone willing to give away the farm to get it as much as you will hear that narrative thrown out leading to the draft.

Agree with most of what you say, BUT you have teams that will be near the top of the draft that won't be looking QB that may give up quite a bit to get the draft's consensus best player in Young who has been described as a generational pass rusher.

All I'm saying is if the plan is to draft Burrow, and you could trade down a spot or two and still get him while getting either proven OL or LB help or extra draft picks, then I think it would have to be strongly considered. Of course, nothing is guaranteed, and you would have to be confident if Burrow is the guy you want that you wouldn't jeopardize it.

[*bengalfan74*]

If I had any confidence in the Bengals actually having a plan and being able to work it i wouldn't mind trading down and back up and whatever. But things being as they are if we have #1 pick I hope they keep it.

I'll be the first one to go ahead and say it, I highly doubt MB would trade out of the #1 pick anyways.

[J24]

Everything should be on the table for this team this off season. It's not like this team is one player away.

[J24]

(11-22-2019, 03:50 PM)Au165 Wrote: First off, there is no guarantee when you go back someone else won't come up in front of you. When you move back you have to make the assumption that "the guy" won't be there so when you move back you need to have a proportionate number of guys you'd be willing to take to the number of positions you are moving back.

As to the idea of moving back from 1, everyone loves to think there is always an opportunity to get a haul for the 1st pick, but that isn't the case. There are occasions where people are willing to mortgage the farm to come up for one guy but that way of thinking is actually on the down swing because of analytics. I remember an interview a few years ago with someone who was the #1 pick and who had been #1 pick a decade or so before and they basically said teams aren't willing to give up the insane haul for the #1 pick anymore because analytics say that quantity is better than quality because of the bust rates.

Now this doesn't mean we couldn't possibly trade out of 1, but just because we have 1 doesn't mean there is someone willing to give away the farm to get it as much as you will hear that narrative thrown out leading to the draft.

Also depends on the what position the other team is drafting from. If a team that feels like there one player away from being a championship team there probably going to be drafting in the late teens to early 20s. Do the Bengals want to move that far down just for more picks while losing a chance at getting a franchise peace?

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(11-22-2019, 03:13 PM)Whatever Wrote: I would not touch Trent Williams with a 10' pole after the issues with Glenn and Green this year.  He was already on the decline, anyways.

This is a really bad take.

Trent Williams and Cordy Glenn can't even be in the same sentence, unless that sentence is... "Trent Williams and Cordy Glenn's situations in 2019 are nothing alike."

Trent Williams was told by his team's medical staff to ignore a growing lump on his head for YEARS and it turned out to be cancer. Cancer in his head. That is a 100% legitimate beef to no longer want to play for an organization when their incompetence makes your life be threatened.

"Already on the decline" for a guy who was in the Pro Bowl last year (and every other year since 2012) sounds an awful lot like the type of line that the Bengals used when they lowballed Whitworth and he went to the Rams.

[Whatever]

(11-22-2019, 09:21 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: This is a really bad take.

Trent Williams and Cordy Glenn can't even be in the same sentence, unless that sentence is... "Trent Williams and Cordy Glenn's situations in 2019 are nothing alike."

Trent Williams was told by his team's medical staff to ignore a growing lump on his head for YEARS and it turned out to be cancer. Cancer in his head. That is a 100% legitimate beef to no longer want to play for an organization when their incompetence makes your life be threatened.

"Already on the decline" for a guy who was in the Pro Bowl last year (and every other year since 2012) sounds an awful lot like the type of line that the Bengals used when they lowballed Whitworth and he went to the Rams.

Trent Williams asked the Redskins for a new contract with more guaranteed money.  So he said he'd never play for them again while trying to get more money at the same time.  

Williams has also balked at a joint investigation into the incident between the NFL and the NFLPA and has asked the NFLPA not to look into his medical records.  There are also reports that the Redskins medical staff told him years ago that he should have the growth tested and he put it off.  At the end of the day, we'll have to wait and see what the NFL's investigation finds, but he's not being paid while he's sitting on the NFI list and racked up over $1.2 million in fines, lost 50% of his signing bonus proration, and is losing $638k per game in game checks.  If a misdiagnosis cost me millions of dollars, I would personally want the union to investigate and help me get my money back.

Williams hasn't played a full season since '13 and had a 72 PFF grade last year.  It's well known that players tend to make the Pro Bowl as they start declining due to name recognition.  He will also be a year removed from football next year.

[Bilbo Saggins]

I see a trade down from one as being acceptable if and only if they manage to:

A.  Secure a future first round pick from a team that may be horrible.  Lawrence is an interesting prospect for sure(wandering in QB pergatory until 2021 would suck).  Eason may wind up being really good.  Maybe there are other good QB prospects waiting in the wings. ; or

B.  Manage to secure a great haul of picks AND take Chase Young.  He could be a blue chip game wrecker who elevates the other 10 guys on the field.  Landing him plus more picks to round out the roster would certainly not be a bad thing. ; or

C. Trade down a pick in a 3 way trade and take Burrow(if Young is taken 1st).

I believe in hunting big game with such a high pick.  I've seen enough to believe that Burrow could do some damage in the league with enough help, but would understand if a trade offer was just too good to pass up. Is it sad that we're already expecting the first pick as if it's inevitable?

[Catmandude123]

(11-22-2019, 08:15 PM)J24 Wrote: Also depends on the what position the other team is drafting from. If a team that feels like there one player away from being a championship team there probably going to be drafting in the late teens to early 20s. Do the Bengals want to move that far down just for more picks while losing a chance at getting a franchise peace?

Would you trade Burrows for a healthy Tua and a starting lineman or LBer? As we get closer to the draft teams will start to show their cards. Burrows behind our line is only going to take us so far. There are at least six QB desperate teams so there will definitely be bids for the first pick. While some like to discount Miami I think they have learned that Rosen isn't the answer. They have a bunch of draft picks and while they would only move up one or two spots they would be stupid to pass on Barrows.

[SunsetBengal]

(11-22-2019, 08:15 PM)J24 Wrote: Also depends on the what position the other team is drafting from. If a team that feels like there one player away from being a championship team there probably going to be drafting in the late teens to early 20s. Do the Bengals want to move that far down just for more picks while losing a chance at getting a franchise peace?

If a team from back in the middle of the 1st round wanted the Bengals #1 pick, it would likely be a deal that involved said teams current 1st round pick, at least two other of their current picks and their 1st round pick from next year.  (see Dolphins/Saints trade 2018 draft)

Heck, just to move up from 12 to 7, Buffalo gave up their #12 and two 2nd round picks to the Buccaneers.

[*rfaulk34*]

(11-22-2019, 09:21 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: This is a really bad take.

Trent Williams and Cordy Glenn can't even be in the same sentence, unless that sentence is... "Trent Williams and Cordy Glenn's situations in 2019 are nothing alike."

Trent Williams was told by his team's medical staff to ignore a growing lump on his head for YEARS and it turned out to be cancer. Cancer in his head. That is a 100% legitimate beef to no longer want to play for an organization when their incompetence makes your life be threatened.

"Already on the decline" for a guy who was in the Pro Bowl last year (and every other year since 2012) sounds an awful lot like the type of line that the Bengals used when they lowballed Whitworth and he went to the Rams.

I will say this, Trent Williams is doing the exact same thing Glenn was doing with Buffalo. They were both really good for years, then as soon as Glenn had a "down" year, the Bengals took him and he's continued to slowly decline. 

Williams is the same. Several really good years, then in '18 he started creeping closer to average on a game by game basis.