Bengals trends and The Beast

[TJHoushmandzadeh's Shiny Shoes]

(04-13-2025, 11:23 AM)Isaac Curtis: The Real #85 Wrote: We are meeting with a ton of Day 1/2 OTs but almost no guards.

At first I thought picking an OT wasn't crazy. Especially if we TCB on FA, or wanted a long term OBJ replacement. I mean, if Simmons was really gonna be OT1 if not injured, when is the next time we'd get a crack at OT1?

And then I thought, well, they are looking at guys who can olay G, too. Zabel, Conerly. But Ersery is an OT. Simmons, too.

But we did not TCB in FA. We retained well, but othercthan getting a starting NT, a fringe starting G, and LB/RB depth, we added nothing. No pass rush help (DE, DT, OLB). No surefire guard starter. No safety help. And although itcwas not out there there is still a gaping hole at TE1.

With all those holes, and more (CB). Are we really gonna take an OT or RB early? With only 6 picks?

OT will include a lot of players who’d kick inside to G. It’s like baseball when nearly every infielder was a shortstop in High School as that’s where you play your best players.

But an OL who kicks inside for two years and then replaces Orlando Brown on the outside makes a ton of sense. Think of it as the Whitworth development plan. They start this year so they contribute immediately, it means you don’t have a rookie protecting Burrow’s blindside in 2 years’ time and it saves you a ton of cash to have a LT on a rookie contract in 2027.

It makes even more sense if you think they can trade down and still get a Grey Zabel, Josh Conerly or Josh Simmons type in the 20s. Year one contributor, plus save money down the line and get an extra pick? That screams Bengals.

Maybe the stars don’t align - maybe no one wants to move up - but I’d be intrigued by the list of players they wouldn’t move back if they were there at 17. Maybe Kelvin Banks, although he’s another OT they’d likely look to play inside for 2 years and then move him back to Tackle. Otherwise maybe it’s just the LB Campbell or maybe someone like Walter Nolan if they really love him?

Of course if you move back you may lose out on your R1 OL targets but that then pushes down a Starks, Emmanawori, Ezeiruaka type player and there are other OL options who may still be available at 49 such as Ersery, Savaiianaea, Donovan Jackson.

The OT/G in R1/2, plus LB (Campbell R1) or S (Emmanawori/Starks R1 or Watts R2) would seem to play to the strengths of this class as there should be some good DL in R3 and even 4. If you get an extra pick by trading down in first you hope you can then upgrade both S and LB in the first two days. Then a RB2 on day 3.

Obviously there are a lot of variables but this looks to me the most likely path. Not long until we find out though.

[sandwedge]

(04-13-2025, 09:08 PM)TJHoushmandzadeh Wrote: OT will include a lot of players who’d kick inside to G. It’s like baseball when nearly every infielder was a shortstop in High School as that’s where you play your best players.

But an OL who kicks inside for two years and then replaces Orlando Brown on the outside makes a ton of sense. Think of it as the Whitworth development plan. They start this year so they contribute immediately, it means you don’t have a rookie protecting Burrow’s blindside in 2 years’ time and it saves you a ton of cash to have a LT on a rookie contract in 2027.

It makes even more sense if you think they can trade down and still get a Grey Zabel, Josh Conerly or Josh Simmons type in the 20s. Year one contributor, plus save money down the line and get an extra pick? That screams Bengals.

Maybe the stars don’t align - maybe no one wants to move up - but I’d be intrigued by the list of players they wouldn’t move back if they were there at 17.  Maybe Kelvin Banks, although he’s another OT they’d likely look to play inside for 2 years and then move him back to Tackle. Otherwise maybe it’s just the LB Campbell or maybe someone like Walter Nolan if they really love him?

Of course if you move back you may lose out on your R1 OL targets but that then pushes down a Starks, Emmanawori, Ezeiruaka type player and there are other OL options who may still be available at 49 such as Ersery, Savaiianaea, Donovan Jackson.

The OT/G in R1/2, plus LB (Campbell R1) or S (Emmanawori/Starks R1 or Watts R2) would seem to play to the strengths of this class as there should be some good DL in R3 and even 4. If you get an extra pick by trading down in first you hope you can then upgrade both S and LB in the first two days. Then a RB2 on day 3.

Obviously there are a lot of variables but this looks to me the most likely path. Not long until we find out though.

My problem with that is, you are trusting a rookie that is switching positions to protect the fastest route to Burrow.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(04-13-2025, 11:51 PM)sandwedge Wrote: My problem with that is, you are trusting a rookie that is switching positions to protect the fastest route to Burrow.

Sadly, it might be better than Volson.

[*ochocincos*]

(04-13-2025, 11:51 PM)sandwedge Wrote: My problem with that is, you are trusting a rookie that is switching positions to protect the fastest route to Burrow.

(Yesterday, 03:35 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Sadly, it might be better than Volson.

It's worth noting Volson had been playing primary RT in college (31 of his 41 starts). He did have some starts at LT and RG.
But he was moved to LG for the NFL and got playing time immediately.

I agree, if Volson did it, I can't imagine another rookie (especially if picked in first round or two) not being able to do the same and possibly playing better than Volson has.