Other O-Line options in round 1

[JWW1971]

As I've mentioned before I don't get to see a lot of College games over here so I don't know a lot of guys going into the draft and only really hear about other prospect from reports and on here.

I listened to the Bengals booth podcast where guest Pete Prisco mentions that Darrishaw is the real deal, is there any chance we pass on Sewell if he is there and trade back a few spots for an extra pick somewhere and take Darrishaw?
Also I read that both Sewell and the other top tackle Slater sat out this season. Would this effect there draft positions and possibly see them falling in the draft.
Also is Wyatt Davis as good as some reports state and could he fall to the 2nd round where we could get him there

[Nicomo Cosca]

The only problem with trading back is there’s never any guarantee the guy you have your eye on will be there. We will be regretting missing out on Frank Ragnow for years to come for example.

[pulses]

(02-22-2021, 01:21 AM)JWW1971 Wrote: As I've mentioned before I don't get to see a lot of College games over here so I don't know a lot of guys going into the draft and only really hear about other prospect from reports and on here.

I listened to the Bengals booth podcast where guest Pete Prisco mentions that Darrishaw is the real deal, is there any chance we pass on Sewell if he is there and trade back a few spots for an extra pick somewhere and take Darrishaw?
Also I read that both Sewell and the other top tackle Slater sat out this season. Would this effect there draft positions and possibly see them falling in the draft.
Also is Wyatt Davis as good as some reports state and could he fall to the 2nd round where we could get him there

Gonna be better options than Wyatt Davis in the 2nd IMO.

[Murdock2420]

As Nico said, trading back is certainly a risk, but at 5 if Sewell is gone, I think you take Darrisaw or you move back to 8 where Carolina will want a QB and then you have to expect that Darrisaw makes it there and you still get an extra pick that is really needed.

[Essex Johnson]

(02-22-2021, 01:26 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: The only problem with trading back is there’s never any guarantee the guy you have your eye on will be there. We will be regretting missing out on Frank Ragnow for years to come for example.

I don;t see that as a best example because we actually picked up a quality tackle though with some risk with injury (which at the time tackle was a higher need and still is sadly was the bigger hole than center)  in Glenn (that did not work out) and we still got considered the 2nd and to some 1 center in Price so in that case  we actually got 2 for 1 and was praised for the move.. no one expected Glenn and Price not to be productive players.  

What I would agree with is, I would probably worry about trading back if you only have 1 Lineman on the board you feel good about in the trade back but if you have 2-3 lineman you are comfortable with then you look to trade back. I should add i only look to trade back if Sewell is gone... to me it is like Burrow last year.. you ignore trade offers and make the pick

[Essex Johnson]

(02-22-2021, 01:21 AM)JWW1971 Wrote: As I've mentioned before I don't get to see a lot of College games over here so I don't know a lot of guys going into the draft and only really hear about other prospect from reports and on here.

I listened to the Bengals booth podcast where guest Pete Prisco mentions that Darrishaw is the real deal, is there any chance we pass on Sewell if he is there and trade back a few spots for an extra pick somewhere and take Darrishaw?
Also I read that both Sewell and the other top tackle Slater sat out this season. Would this effect there draft positions and possibly see them falling in the draft.
Also is Wyatt Davis as good as some reports state and could he fall to the 2nd round where we could get him there

I would not pass on Sewell to me he is like Burrow, pass on trade offers and make the pick also I might worry trade back if you only have one lineman in the mix on the board but it the offer is so great and you see more picks as the greater asset than do it

[JWW1971]

Cheers for the reply's

[Nicomo Cosca]

(02-22-2021, 10:43 AM)Essex Johnson Wrote: I don;t see that as a best example because we actually picked up a quality tackle though with some risk with injury (which at the time tackle was a higher need and still is sadly was the bigger hole than center)  in Glenn (that did not work out) and we still got considered the 2nd and to some 1 center in Price so in that case  we actually got 2 for 1 and was praised for the move.. no one expected Glenn and Price not to be productive players.  

What I would agree with is, I would probably worry about trading back if you only have 1 Lineman on the board you feel good about in the trade back but if you have 2-3 lineman you are comfortable with then you look to trade back. I should add i only look to trade back if Sewell is gone... to me it is like Burrow last year.. you ignore trade offers and make the pick

Great, so we might end up with the 3rd best olineman in a year we had a top 5 pick. That sounds like an absolute disaster to me.

[*bfine32*]

(02-22-2021, 04:10 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Great, so we might end up with the 3rd best olineman in a year we had a top 5 pick. That sounds like an absolute disaster to me.

I find Essex's point to be fair. He clearly states that he'd only entertain trade back if Sewell is gone. I'm not sure I disagree with the idea. If Sewell is gone the value is there are QB or WR and we really don't need either. 

[Essex Johnson]

(02-22-2021, 04:10 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Great, so we might end up with the 3rd best olineman in a year we had a top 5 pick. That sounds like an absolute disaster to me.

 we actually get something more for top 5 pick (if Sewell is gone).. like adding picks like moving back a couple spots for a player you have rated high anyway and  that rating and value overcomes taking more of a luxury pick at WR especially when more high end depth at WR than Tackles in 2nd round  trading back to get Slater or Darrisaw and adding picks for a team in need across the board is a good thing  

There is much value out there in each position,  need to think bigger 

[Nicomo Cosca]

(02-22-2021, 04:17 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I find Essex's point to be fair. He clearly states that he'd only entertain trade back if Sewell is gone. I'm not sure I disagree with the idea. If Sewell is gone the value is there are QB or WR and we really don't need either. 

We absolutely do need a WR though. Whatever has posted the numbers several times now as far as where Burrow ranked in having to throw to covered WR’s, and it ain’t pretty. I don’t know why folks are choosing to ignore that when it’s being laid out for them to see in black and white. It’s not as simple as just saying “we already have 2 good WR’s.” Fact is they just don’t get open though. Aren’t you guys sick of watching our opponents constantly have guys running wide open, and our receivers have to fight for every inch and every ball? I am.

[Nicomo Cosca]

(02-22-2021, 04:48 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote:  we actually get something more for top 5 pick (if Sewell is gone).. like adding picks like moving back a couple spots for a player you have rated high anyway and  that rating and value overcomes taking more of a luxury pick at WR especially when more high end depth at WR than Tackles in 2nd round  trading back to get Slater or Darrisaw and adding picks for a team in need across the board is a good thing  

There is much value out there in each position,  need to think bigger 

This is not really true, imo. There’s likely going to be some very good options for OT in the 2nd (Eichenberg, Leatherwood, Cosmi, etc). It is not the end of the world if we don’t go OL in the 1st. Especially if we do the right thing and take care of business in FA.

Also, your last sentence is pretty funny to me, when you are the one locked into doing something a certain way no matter what. I’m personally down to go OT, WR, TE, and maybe even CB in the 1st. It’s not OT or bust for me. So I think I am “thinking big picture.”

[*bfine32*]

(02-22-2021, 05:08 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: We absolutely do need a WR though. Whatever has posted the numbers several times now as far as where Burrow ranked in having to throw to covered WR’s, and it ain’t pretty. I don’t know why folks are choosing to ignore that when it’s being laid out for them to see in black and white. It’s not as simple as just saying “we already have 2 good WR’s.” Fact is they just don’t get open though. Aren’t you guys sick of watching our opponents constantly have guys running wide open, and our receivers have to fight for every inch and every ball? I am.

There's really a difference between need and want. Of course we'd want to have 3 elite WRs on the squad, but Boyd caught for over 1000 yards each of the last 2 Dalton season and was on pace for over 1100 with JB at the helm. Higgins was on pace for over 1100 yards.

No matter how many times folks say it: I don't consider WR a need for a 2-11 team that already has 2 1100+ yard WRs and spending the 5th overall pick on one in the draft would be a luxury. I personally hope if Penei is gone we see who's wanting to move up and we pick up a extra early pick.  

[Essex Johnson]

(02-22-2021, 05:16 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: This is not really true, imo. There’s likely going to be some very good options for OT in the 2nd (Eichenberg, Leatherwood, Cosmi, etc). It is not the end of the world if we don’t go OL in the 1st. Especially if we do the right thing and take care of business in FA.

Also, your last sentence is pretty funny to me, when you are the one locked into doing something a certain way no matter what. I’m personally down to go OT, WR, TE, and maybe even CB in the 1st. It’s not OT or bust for me. So I think I am “thinking big picture.”

Not when.you are locked in to #5 or bust or the continued BPA only thinking..or no trading back adding picks.. that is not thinking bigger

[SunsetBengal]

(02-22-2021, 05:16 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: This is not really true, imo. There’s likely going to be some very good options for OT in the 2nd (Eichenberg, Leatherwood, Cosmi, etc). It is not the end of the world if we don’t go OL in the 1st. Especially if we do the right thing and take care of business in FA.

Also, your last sentence is pretty funny to me, when you are the one locked into doing something a certain way no matter what. I’m personally down to go OT, WR, TE, and maybe even CB in the 1st. It’s not OT or bust for me. So I think I am “thinking big picture.”

Here's the thing.  The team needs both talent at WR and talent on OL.  However, the 3rd WR spot can be filled by a two tool role player with a little speed.  Pretty easy to find in mid rounds.  The OL, needs a superstar in the worst kind of way.  That OL room needs a cream of the crop player in the worst way, whereas the WR room needs a role player and a couple of good developmental candidates.

[Nicomo Cosca]

(02-22-2021, 05:48 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: Not when.you are locked in to #5 or bust or the continued BPA only thinking..or no trading back adding picks.. that is not thinking bigger

I never said I’m adamantly against trading back. It can be risky though. Just because you add more lottery tickets doesn’t mean you’re automatically going to hit on them. I’m open to moving back a couple spots. Just not all the way back into the teens though. Which is where you should be taking a guy like Darrisaw.

This is hopefully the last time we’re picking in the top 5 for a long time, and I want another franchise changing player out of it (like AJ Green).

[*bfine32*]

(02-22-2021, 05:56 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: I never said I’m adamantly against trading back. It can be risky though. Just because you add more lottery tickets doesn’t mean you’re automatically going to hit on them. I’m open to moving back a couple spots. Just not all the way back into the teens though. Which is where you should be taking a guy like Darrisaw.

This is hopefully the last time we’re picking in the top 5 for a long time, and I want another franchise changing player out of it (like AJ Green).

Well, you did say it would be an "absolute disaster". 

[Nicomo Cosca]

(02-22-2021, 05:54 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Here's the thing.  The team needs both talent at WR and talent on OL.  However, the 3rd WR spot can be filled by a two tool role player with a little speed. Pretty easy to find in mid rounds. The OL, needs a superstar in the worst kind of way.  That OL room needs a cream of the crop player in the worst way, whereas the WR room needs a role player and a couple of good developmental candidates.

If good WR’s are so easy to find in the mid rounds why have we been trying to replace Marvin Jones’ speed for 5 years now? I’ve seen enough Josh Malone, Cody Core types at this point.

If Taylor wants to run 11 personnel and continue to sling it all over the field we need way more than a role player as a starter. Now if he’s going to balance the offense out more (and not rely solely on Burrow) by getting Mixon a ton of touches then that’s a different story. But that just doesn’t seem like Taylor’s M.O.

As for needing a star on the OL? I think the one thing almost all of us can agree on is taking Sewell if he’s there. It’s a no brainer. What we do if he’s not is where we seem to have diverging opinions. I personally want an elite guy like Chase or Pitts in that scenario. Others want to trade back and hope the 2nd or 3rd best OT’s are there. I’d rather have Chase/Pitts + Eichenberg/Leatherwood than Slater/Darrisaw + whoever.

It just seems like many Bengals fans have become conditioned to viewing the draft as the only way to fill holes. But most other teams don’t operate like that. I want another free agency like we just saw last year, but geared towards the OL this time instead of the defense.

[Nicomo Cosca]

(02-22-2021, 06:00 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Well, you did say it would be an "absolute disaster". 

I specifically said ending up with the 3rd best player at his position in a year we had a top 5 pick would be a disaster. I’d be fine with trading back a couple spots and still taking a guy like Pitts.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(02-22-2021, 01:21 AM)JWW1971 Wrote: As I've mentioned before I don't get to see a lot of College games over here so I don't know a lot of guys going into the draft and only really hear about other prospect from reports and on here.

I listened to the Bengals booth podcast where guest Pete Prisco mentions that Darrishaw is the real deal, is there any chance we pass on Sewell if he is there and trade back a few spots for an extra pick somewhere and take Darrishaw?
Also I read that both Sewell and the other top tackle Slater sat out this season. Would this effect there draft positions and possibly see them falling in the draft.
Also is Wyatt Davis as good as some reports state and could he fall to the 2nd round where we could get him there

If Sewell is there, you take him. If not, then we should entertain trading back if we don't like Pitts or Chase enough IMO.

Darrisaw is a really good OT though, so I am not against trading back and getting him or one of the other OT's either.

I just think if Sewell is gone Pitts is the best player at his position in the Draft. I would take Pitts or Chase at 5.

I like Jackson Carman in the 2nd round better than Davis if he falls to us, badazz mauling Guard.