First Mock try.

[Tomcat]

Traded #17 for #29, #65 and #125, then traded #65, #154 and #195 for #66, #125 and #134. Got Nolen with the first and Grant was still on the board, so i couldn't pass him up. Wanted and OL earlier, but not crazy with what was left, so went Henderson and some DL.


29.

Walter Nolen
DT Ole Miss

49.

Kenneth Grant
DT Michigan
66.

TreVeyon Henderson
RB Ohio State

81.

David Walker
EDGE Central Arkansas
118.

Bradyn Swinson
EDGE LSU
125.

Charles Grant
OT William & Mary

134.

Malachi Moore
S Alabama

[*bfine32*]

I hate to see mocks with 0 feedback so:

Like many of these draft simulators there's a lot of quality late.

I get DT could use some help but not a fan of going DT 1 and 2 one-year after we did it 2 and 3, Also I like Grant over Nolen.

[Tomcat]

(02-11-2025, 01:45 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I hate to see mocks with 0 feedback so:

Like many of these draft simulators there's a lot of quality late.

I get DT could use some help but not a fan of going DT 1 and 2 one-year after we did it 2 and 3, Also I like Grant over Nolen.

I would've taken Donovan Jackson in the 2nd, but Grant was sitting there and i couldn't pass him up. Grant, Nolen, Jackson and Jenkins, i would think we could get some solid play from at least 3 of the 4. Pairing Henderson with Brown in the backfield has the potential to be very special!

[Clark W Griswold]

I get the value of Grant in the 2nd round and I like them getting Nolen but they have to draft a guard somewhat early this year. They need to replace both of them and I would be shocked if they signed 2 in FA.

I don’t think they can afford to use that many early round picks on DTs for 2 straight drafts. What G were available in the 2nd round?

[Tomcat]

(02-11-2025, 04:12 PM)Clark W Griswold Wrote: I get the value of Grant in the 2nd round and I like them getting Nolen but they have to draft a guard somewhat early this year.  They need to replace both of them and I would be shocked if they signed 2 in FA.

I don’t think they can afford to use that many early round picks on DTs for 2 straight drafts. What G were available in the 2nd round?

I agree with a Guard in 2 and i would love to have Donovan Jackson. TBH I couldn't tell you what guard was there because i saw Grant there and jumped on that pick. I think the FO will make guard their first signing in FA just like they did with Cappa, and hopefully Jackson or Ratledge will be there in the 2nd.

[sandwedge]

(02-11-2025, 05:09 PM)Tomcat Wrote: I agree with a Guard in 2 and i would love to have Donovan Jackson. TBH I couldn't tell you what guard was there because i saw Grant there and jumped on that pick. I think the FO will make guard their first signing in FA just like they did with Cappa, and hopefully Jackson or Ratledge will be there in the 2nd.

I think Grant is a 1st rder and don't see him slipping. I like the thought of Ratledge in 2 or Fairchild in the 3rd.

[*ochocincos*]

(02-11-2025, 01:45 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I hate to see mocks with 0 feedback so:

Like many of these draft simulators there's a lot of quality late.

I get DT could use some help but not a fan of going DT 1 and 2 one-year after we did it 2 and 3, Also I like Grant over Nolen.

Personally, I don't care for draft simulators, as you see some guys taken way earlier than they seem listed for in prospect rankings, but you aren't given the context for why.
Is it because the simulator is going off a list of positional needs for a given team and the sim just takes the highest guy at a position of need for said team?
Or if the sim supports trades, why is Team A trading up or down? I would assume it's going based off some trade value chart points value, but hard to tell without the transparency.

When I do my mocks, I prefer to just pick guys who are close prospect ranking number wise to the pick the Bengals make.

[Whatever]

(02-12-2025, 01:20 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Personally, I don't care for draft simulators, as you see some guys taken way earlier than they seem listed for in prospect rankings, but you aren't given the context for why.
Is it because the simulator is going off a list of positional needs for a given team and the sim just takes the highest guy at a position of need for said team?
Or if the sim supports trades, why is Team A trading up or down? I would assume it's going based off some trade value chart points value, but hard to tell without the transparency.

When I do my mocks, I prefer to just pick guys who are close prospect ranking number wise to the pick the Bengals make.

There's no real perfect way to predict.  

Generally speaking, for a sim, each team will be programmed with a priority list for needs.  There will be a certain range of "reach" assigned per round per priority.  And, so you don't get the same results over and over, there's likely a bit of a random element, like the reach potentially varying or a team taking a lower rated player at the same position (to simulate individual team big boards).  I would suggest looking at Drafttek, as it's an early sim that explains the methodology pretty well, but it's never been one where you can do your own mocks.

Players often slide due to depth of a class as relative to team needs.  For example, it's a loaded DT class, so you'll usually find value there late as teams address that need earlier.  That's something that a sim factors in relatively well, where a mock strictly based off prospect rankings won't.  Vice versa holds as well.  A prospect may be ranked lower, but gets reached for due to lack of talent at the position in front of them.

Trades are kinda meh, either way, and I don't typically like to use them for "serious" mocks.  A sim may offer a great trade seemingly randomly while a a mock not using a sim may find the user "rationalizing" a trade down that they really want regardless of how realistic it really is.

Both have merits.  Both have flaws.  You do you.

[*ochocincos*]

(02-12-2025, 02:56 PM)Whatever Wrote: There's no real perfect way to predict.  

Generally speaking, for a sim, each team will be programmed with a priority list for needs.  There will be a certain range of "reach" assigned per round per priority.  And, so you don't get the same results over and over, there's likely a bit of a random element, like the reach potentially varying or a team taking a lower rated player at the same position (to simulate individual team big boards).  I would suggest looking at Drafttek, as it's an early sim that explains the methodology pretty well, but it's never been one where you can do your own mocks.

Players often slide due to depth of a class as relative to team needs.  For example, it's a loaded DT class, so you'll usually find value there late as teams address that need earlier.  That's something that a sim factors in relatively well, where a mock strictly based off prospect rankings won't.  Vice versa holds as well.  A prospect may be ranked lower, but gets reached for due to lack of talent at the position in front of them.

Trades are kinda meh, either way, and I don't typically like to use them for "serious" mocks.  A sim may offer a great trade seemingly randomly while a a mock not using a sim may find the user "rationalizing" a trade down that they really want regardless of how realistic it really is.

Both have merits.  Both have flaws.  You do you.

I don't go to DraftTek ever since getting a security alert on that site once a few years ago.

[Tomcat]

I tried PFN and let them pick all the picks and they ended up picking 3 TE for the BENGALS.

[EatonFan]

(02-11-2025, 01:45 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I hate to see mocks with 0 feedback so:

Like many of these draft simulators there's a lot of quality late.

I get DT could use some help but not a fan of going DT 1 and 2 one-year after we did it 2 and 3, Also I like Grant over Nolen.

I hear what you're saying, but in order to stop Baltimore and the Eagles you have to have a stout run D and decent LBs.  Just playing devil's advocate.  A good rotation on the DL would not be a bad thing (as we used to have).