Duke Tobin on draft

[*pally*]

They are open to trading #28...hypothetically

and we can be pretty sure they aren't picking a QB in round 1...other than that they are wide open

[*ochocincos*]

(04-20-2023, 02:14 PM)pally Wrote: They are open to trading #28...hypothetically

and we can be pretty sure they aren't picking a QB in round 1...other than that they are wide open

"BuT wHaT iF hE's BpA?!"

[XenoMorph]

(04-20-2023, 02:14 PM)pally Wrote: They are open to trading #28...hypothetically

and we can be pretty sure they aren't picking a QB in round 1...other than that they are wide open

28 is a great spot for trading out of....  As some team will likely pay a decent price to come back up and get a 5th year option on a player.

If there is no one there that we covet at that spot.


Ive seen trade scenarios of us moving up (but id say thats less likely)

[tms]

(04-20-2023, 04:38 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: 28 is a great spot for trading out of....  As some team will likely pay a decent price to come back up and get a 5th year option on a player.

If there is no one there that we covet at that spot.

Here here. I just hope we don't convince ourselves that we do covet someone when it's not true (e.g., Dax Hill). Nothing against Dax but that pick looks hella shaky as of right now. I can't imagine we really wanted him as badly as we claimed.

Either way, 20 - 70 is a puddle this year. If some other team has their eye on a guy and we don't, I hope we can play it to our advantage, move back and get the best of both worlds. 

[Memphis_Bengal]

Some team could trade back up to get Hendon Hooker. They get the 5th year which helps if he's not ready or needs development time.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(04-20-2023, 04:38 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: 28 is a great spot for trading out of....  As some team will likely pay a decent price to come back up and get a 5th year option on a player.

If there is no one there that we covet at that spot.


Ive seen trade scenarios of us moving up (but id say thats less likely)

It is a great spot, if Bijan Robinson or Darnell Wright aren't there I think if we are offered a good trade the best option is to trade
back into the 2nd round. We could still grab the dude there yah never know and add a pick or two.

(04-20-2023, 05:46 PM)tms Wrote: Here here. I just hope we don't convince ourselves that we do covet someone when it's not true (e.g., Dax Hill). Nothing against Dax but that pick looks hella shaky as of right now. I can't imagine we really wanted him as badly as we claimed.

Either way, 20 - 70 is a puddle this year. If some other team has their eye on a guy and we don't, I hope we can play it to our advantage, move back and get the best of both worlds. 

Eh, too little film to make any assumptions on Dax's play last year. I bet he struggles a touch early this season but grows into a 
better player than either Bates or Bell. He is so much more talented in all aspects and is a better tackler than Bates coming out of 
college and is way faster than Bell. 

Agree with your last sentence though, if we can play it to our advantage while picking up a pick or two that is ideal.

[tms]

(04-20-2023, 05:54 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Eh, too little film to make any assumptions on Dax's play last year. I bet he struggles a touch early this season but grows into a 
better player than either Bates or Bell. He is so much more talented in all aspects and is a better tackler than Bates coming out of 
college and is way faster than Bell. 

Agree with your last sentence though, if we can play it to our advantage while picking up a pick or two that is ideal.

Oh don't get me wrong- I agree it's (waaaay) too early to write him off. But can't deny he's had virtually zero impact to date... to the point that I've seen safeties commonly mocked to the Bengals to "play alongside Nick Scott." As far as the league is concerned he almost doesn't exist. 

I get the reasons, and some of them are valid, but I can't imagine that was the plan. We heard a lot about three-safety looks (that never materialized) or how he would displace Hilton/Flowers on TE coverages (never really happened either). He was the fourth most valuable member of the draft class behind Volson, CTB and Carter, and ahead of two Day 3s who either didn't play much (Gunter) or play at all (Tycen). If this is a guy who we really wanted and were thrilled to get in Round 1, he's off to a rocky start.  

[phil413]

(04-20-2023, 05:49 PM)Memphis_Bengal Wrote: Some team could trade back up to get Hendon Hooker. They get the 5th year which helps if he's not ready or needs development time.

Great point, like when we were trying to deal a few slots up with GB to secure Dalton.  Also love that no cards were shown in the comments.

[*ochocincos*]

(04-20-2023, 07:19 PM)tms Wrote: Oh don't get me wrong- I agree it's (waaaay) too early to write him off. But can't deny he's had virtually zero impact to date... to the point that I've seen safeties commonly mocked to the Bengals to "play alongside Nick Scott." As far as the league is concerned he almost doesn't exist. 

I get the reasons, and some of them are valid, but I can't imagine that was the plan. We heard a lot about three-safety looks (that never materialized) or how he would displace Hilton/Flowers on TE coverages (never really happened either). He was the fourth most valuable member of the draft class behind Volson, CTB and Carter, and ahead of two Day 3s who either didn't play much (Gunter) or play at all (Tycen). If this is a guy who we really wanted and were thrilled to get in Round 1, he's off to a rocky start.  

What always makes me laugh is the "The draft pick hasn't shown anything yet!" from some people who want to turn around and go invest yet another super early round draft pick at the exact same position a year or two later.
Like dude, you know only one of them gonna get the spot, right? Now you just essentially forced one of the high draft picks to ride the bench, possibly their whole rookie contract.
Rd 1-2 picks should not be used on long-term backup or rotational players. There should be a plan within a couple years for that draft pick to claim a starter role at that position. If not, you're investing too high of a draft pick.

FWIW, I've not seen hardly any draft expert mocking a safety.

[tms]

(04-20-2023, 07:28 PM)ochocincos Wrote: What always makes me laugh is the "The draft pick hasn't shown anything yet!" from some people who want to turn around and go invest yet another super early round draft pick at the exact same position a year or two later.
Like dude, you know only one of them gonna get the spot, right? Now you just essentially forced one of the high draft picks to ride the bench, possibly their whole rookie contract.

Lol are you talking to me? Or... putting words in my mouth and talking to that person? If you really wanna know, that's what makes me laugh.

Quote:Rd 1-2 picks should not be used on long-term backup or rotational players. There should be a plan within a couple years for that draft pick to claim a starter role at that position. If not, you're investing too high of a draft pick.

You're preaching to the choir on that one. It's one of the main reasons I say Dax is off to a rocky start, even if this was the "plan" (whatever that means). We're not a team that necessarily re-ups our safeties (see: Bates, Jessie), so one year of his rookie deal has already been lost. That's a steep price. 

Quote:FWIW, I've not seen hardly any draft expert mocking a safety.

That's you. I have. I probably pay more attention to it than you- and that's my problem!- but I've seen it quite often. To the point that I bothered even mentioning it here: Branch, AJ, both Browns, Jammie, Chris Smith... not all necessarily Round 1s, but all to the Bengals. It doesn't necessarily mean anything- it's draft season, you see a lot. But if you tell a common draft pundit to look at the depth chart in view of the FA period that just passed, I don't blame them for prescribing a safety to address a hole.

[*ochocincos*]

(04-20-2023, 07:53 PM)tms Wrote: Lol are you talking to me? Or... putting words in my mouth and talking to that person? Lol. If you really wanna know, that's what makes me laugh.



You're preaching to the choir on that one. It's one of the main reasons I say Dax is off to a rocky start, even if this was the "plan" (whatever that means0. We're not a team that necessarily re-ups our safeties (see: Bates, Jessie), so one year of his rookie deal has already been lost. That's a steep price. 



That's you. I have. I probably pay more attention to it than you- and that's my problem!- but I've seen it quite often. To the point that I bothered even mentioning it here: Branch, AJ, both Browns, Jammie, Chris Smith... not all necessarily Round 1s, but all to the Bengals. It doesn't necessarily mean anything- it's draft season, you see a lot. But if you tell a common draft pundit to look at the depth chart in view of the FA period that just passed, I don't blame them for prescribing a safety to address a hole.

No, I was not talking about you. Just some people do that. Your comment made me think of it.

I don't mind that Hill acted as a backup for his rookie year, but I would expect him to start his 2nd year.
I expect a 2nd rounder to be pushing for a starting spot his 3rd season.

As for seeing safeties mocked, I don't try to look over too many different sites to see mocks anymore. I pretty much stick to NFL.com, TDN, and maybe one or two other places nowadays. I feel I can make a more realistic pick than some of those other guys lol.

[Soonerpeace]

(04-20-2023, 07:28 PM)ochocincos Wrote: What always makes me laugh is the "The draft pick hasn't shown anything yet!" from some people who want to turn around and go invest yet another super early round draft pick at the exact same position a year or two later.
Like dude, you know only one of them gonna get the spot, right? Now you just essentially forced one of the high draft picks to ride the bench, possibly their whole rookie contract.
Rd 1-2 picks should not be used on long-term backup or rotational players. There should be a plan within a couple years for that draft pick to claim a starter role at that position. If not, you're investing too high of a draft pick.

FWIW, I've not seen hardly any draft expert mocking a safety.

Dax was ranked 21 best player by Daniel Jeremiah and 24 by ESPN.

[Bengal Dude]

Pretty much everything you'd expect from Duke. I don't doubt he'd like to trade down. There seems to be a feeling that the type of player you can get late in the first is the same type of player you can get in the mid third. I'm sure Duke would love to grab an extra 2nd or 3rd this year. 

[OSUfan]

(04-20-2023, 05:46 PM)tms Wrote: Here here. I just hope we don't convince ourselves that we do covet someone when it's not true (e.g., Dax Hill). Nothing against Dax but that pick looks hella shaky as of right now. I can't imagine we really wanted him as badly as we claimed.

Either way, 20 - 70 is a puddle this year. If some other team has their eye on a guy and we don't, I hope we can play it to our advantage, move back and get the best of both worlds. 

How does the pick look shakey? And not sure he was coveted as much as he was BPA at the time of the selection and that was pretty much a league wide consensus. When Hill was permitted to play just safety, while Bates was sitting on his ass at home, he looked just as advertised. When he was playing a different position every fifteen minutes yeah there were some rough outings. That should be expected and not referred to as shakey.

[OSUfan]

(04-20-2023, 07:19 PM)tms Wrote: Oh don't get me wrong- I agree it's (waaaay) too early to write him off. But can't deny he's had virtually zero impact to date... to the point that I've seen safeties commonly mocked to the Bengals to "play alongside Nick Scott." As far as the league is concerned he almost doesn't exist. 

I get the reasons, and some of them are valid, but I can't imagine that was the plan. We heard a lot about three-safety looks (that never materialized) or how he would displace Hilton/Flowers on TE coverages (never really happened either). He was the fourth most valuable member of the draft class behind Volson, CTB and Carter, and ahead of two Day 3s who either didn't play much (Gunter) or play at all (Tycen). If this is a guy who we really wanted and were thrilled to get in Round 1, he's off to a rocky start.  

I would stay away from them mocks then because them folks must not be very smart and I cannot recall a single really credible source mocking a safety to the Bengals at 28 in this draft.

[samhain]

(04-20-2023, 05:49 PM)Memphis_Bengal Wrote: Some team could trade back up to get Hendon Hooker. They get the 5th year which helps if he's not ready or needs development time.

Bingo.  

I'd be mildly surprised if Hooker doesn't get drafted in the first.  

[casear2727]

(04-20-2023, 07:19 PM)tms Wrote: Oh don't get me wrong- I agree it's (waaaay) too early to write him off. But can't deny he's had virtually zero impact to date... to the point that I've seen safeties commonly mocked to the Bengals to "play alongside Nick Scott." As far as the league is concerned he almost doesn't exist. 

(04-20-2023, 07:53 PM)tms Wrote: You're preaching to the choir on that one. It's one of the main reasons I say Dax is off to a rocky start, even if this was the "plan" (whatever that means). We're not a team that necessarily re-ups our safeties (see: Bates, Jessie), so one year of his rookie deal has already been lost. That's a steep price. 


That's you. I have. I probably pay more attention to it than you- and that's my problem!- but I've seen it quite often. To the point that I bothered even mentioning it here: Branch, AJ, both Browns, Jammie, Chris Smith... not all necessarily Round 1s, but all to the Bengals. It doesn't necessarily mean anything- it's draft season, you see a lot. But if you tell a common draft pundit to look at the depth chart in view of the FA period that just passed, I don't blame them for prescribing a safety to address a hole.

This is insanity.  Had to be a fan that said this nonsense, there is no way a real analyst makes this comment about Nick Scott.  There is a reason Dax had zero impact and it's not on Dax, it is Lou.

Dax is not off to a rocky start.   Lou does NOT sub defensive backs.  Dax will be fine.

I subscribe to multiple services and I have not seen any of the safety mocks in quite some time. I think much of this was simply panic immediately after Bates signed with Atlanta.   We may draft another safety if the value is there.  Likely wont be Branch with his slow times....  Martin, Robinson, Hickman could all be potentials if the value is right.

[XenoMorph]

(04-21-2023, 03:40 AM)casear2727 Wrote: This is insanity.  Had to be a fan that said this nonsense, there is no way a real analyst makes this comment about Nick Scott.  There is a reason Dax had zero impact and it's not on Dax, it is Lou.

Dax is not off to a rocky start.   Lou does NOT sub defensive backs.  Dax will be fine.

I subscribe to multiple services and I have not seen any of the safety mocks in quite some time. I think much of this was simply panic immediately after Bates signed with Atlanta.   We may draft another safety if the value is there.  Likely wont be Branch with his slow times....  Martin, Robinson, Hickman could all be potentials if the value is right.

most Mock drafts ive seen are a TE or CB in 1

[Bengalbug]

(04-21-2023, 08:18 AM)XenoMorph Wrote: most Mock drafts ive seen are a TE or CB in 1

Ditto. I’m laying money on CB. Too much depth at TE this year and it isn’t near as valued as secondary.

[Garrus]

(04-21-2023, 08:21 AM)Bengalbug Wrote: Ditto. I’m laying money on CB.  Too much depth at TE this year and it isn’t near as valued as secondary.

If Banks or Forbes are there at 28 we will take one of them imo. Unless someone crazy falls like Wright.