I hate Stewart pick...in round 1 and my pick would have been

[Luvnit2]

(Yesterday, 04:06 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: Not many draft analysts would tell you that. He's playing with the ones because well, who else would be? 

I hope you are right. 

We could ask Kiper who had Sanders at his first overall pick. 

[Truck_1_0_1_]

(Yesterday, 12:39 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: I have more of an issue with the second round pick.

They reached on a LB when Ratleridge was sitting there for the taking.

I've seen Ratledge (the correct way), Rutlidge, Rutledge, Ruttidge, Rattedge, but never Ratleridge lol, that's a good one!  

[*bfine32*]

I like Stew and would have taken him myself, but if I'm told I can't I pick James Pearce or Shadue Sanders just so Kiper would STFU the next 3 days

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(Yesterday, 04:06 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: Not many draft analysts would tell you that. He's playing with the ones because well, who else would be? 

I hope you are right. 

Well, Fairchild was a 3rd rounder by most analysts and taken right where he should be. He didn't blow up the combine like Ratledge did.

But as we know, football isn't played at the combine. Staying low is key to good OL play and having longer arms helps as well. 

Fairchild has him on both of these things.

[puddycat]

Zabel, Starks, or Pearce. They all seem more plug and play. In fact, all are already listed as starters on Ourlads whereas Stewart and all of our picks are backups.
Harmon would have fallen into the mix of DT3s and had tackling issues, so he was partially a development player.
And then there was always trading down for another pick and not leaving day 2 without a safety.

[007BengalsFan]

I would have drafted Harmon to provide a pass rush in the middle of the defensive line then signed free agent Za'darius Smith to provide a pass rusher opposite Hendrickson. Our pass rush would have been much better this year if the Bengals had done this. Since we didnt do this, all we can hope for is Stewart is able to do something against Pro level players that he couldnt accomplish againt college guys, get sacks.

[NUGDUKWE]

(Yesterday, 12:39 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: I have more of an issue with the second round pick.

They reached on a LB when Ratleridge was sitting there for the taking.

I heard an interesting take on the 2nd pick. That not only is it a value issue as far as taking a player earlier than his consensus slot. But also a value issue that linebacker is one of the cheaper position groups. So day 2 you want to get a more premium position as you can help your team save money if you can get a solid safety, corner, DL or OL. I could see an argument that a linebacker could be more easily signed to a 2nd contract but he most likely won't be extended due to age.

[NUGDUKWE]

(Yesterday, 03:59 PM)Isaac Curtis: The Real #85 Wrote: I hated the pick. And still do. All the DEs had risk/flags and there was excellent DE depth in this draft. I'd have gone another direction in round 1 and gotten my DE later.

1. Zabel, OG/OL
2. Jackson, OG/OT
3. Campbell, LB
4. Harmon, DT
5. Emmanwori, S
6. Starks, S
7. Barron, CB
8. Trade down

I'd have taken all of the above before Stewart. And more. Too risky when we needed to be risk averse. And too raw when we need help ASAP. And a poor read of the position group strengths in the draft.

I hated/hate the Knight pick as well. For many of the same reasons. Plus it was a reach/wasted trade down opportunity and we ran to the podium. And we already have Wilson & Burks here. And Pratt.

Having said all that. Stewart has massive upside. If he can actually figure out how to tackle someone/play football, it will look brilliant. But I am not optimistic, especially in Year 1. 

Additionally  this smacks of Burton/Higgins. Swinging big on a potential replacement for a stud vet we should be locking up. 

Lastly, we make a lot of picks that smack of coaching arrogance. Trying to prove we are the smartest guys in the room. We can fix this guy. Switch his position. It rarely works out. So, we think we can fix Stewart, but not Murphy? 

I agree. Taking a player in rd 1 with that bad of production and hoping he can produce at the next level is extremely risky in rd 1. Right now on paper Fairchild stands to have the most snaps of any rookie. That's probably why I would've personally have gone oline in rd 1. Would've had the chance for the most immediate impact from the start. 

[NUGDUKWE]

(Yesterday, 05:56 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Well, Fairchild was a 3rd rounder by most analysts and taken right where he should be. He didn't blow up the combine like Ratledge did.

But as we know, football isn't played at the combine. Staying low is key to good OL play and having longer arms helps as well. 

Fairchild has him on both of these things.

Yes football isn't played at the combine. But something like 70% of offensive line probowlers scored a 7.5 RAS score or higher. So athletic testing is very important in evaluating risk of a draft pick. Also according to some evautors Ratledge's 2023 tape pre ankle surgery was 1st rd worthy. Plus reports had him higher on the Bengals board as he was the next guy on they're board in the 2nd rd.