Not to discredit our drafting team

[CJD]

And I will say that this is a bit of a devil's advocate position, because I love the way our team drafts, but I find it funny that we get "holy shit" reviews from the rest of the NFL for drafting players that those same commentators (Mel Kiper, Todd McShay, etc) had high on their boards.

For example, I was watching the draft on ESPN (don't have NFL Network or I would not be watching it on ESPN) and it seemed like, for each of our picks, we selected one of the top 5 guys in Mel Kiper's "Best Available players" that kept scrolling on the bottom.

It happened for Tyler Boyd, Andrew Billings, Christian Westerman and maybe even William Jackson III.

Hell, Andrew Billings was on Mel's best available board for like 2 and a half rounds by that point.

I loved the draft and I look forward to seeing how the other picks, such as Nick Vigil and Cody Core, work out. But if our best picks were just us picking what the media pundits had coined as the best players at the time of our pick.....couldn't you or I theoretically draft just as well as the Bengals?

[Bengalsrob]

I don't think it's that at all. Kiper likes to act like he knows everything, so we could have selected a guy who was more likely going to have been an undrafted free agent in the first, and he would have been on Kiper's radar. Hey, we are much better than we once were, remember when we used to select guys like Jerome Simpson early and the whole announcing crew would literally have to scramble to give you info on who the hell we just picked?

[Bengalbug]

(05-04-2016, 08:39 AM)Bengalsrob Wrote: I don't think it's that at all. Kiper likes to act like he knows everything, so we could have selected a guy who was more likely going to have been an undrafted free agent in the first, and he would have been on Kiper's radar. Hey, we are much better than we once were, remember when we used to select guys like Jerome Simpson early and the whole announcing crew would literally have to scramble to give you info on who the hell we just picked?

Jerome Simpson.... Haha always coulda been desean Jackson.

With that said was he really that bad of a pick? Considering he is still employed and going on his 9th season... There have been a lot worse 2nd round picks. Again i would have rather had desean but it doesn't look like the reach now that it was then.

[*ochocincos*]

(05-04-2016, 09:21 AM)Bengalbug Wrote: Jerome Simpson.... Haha always coulda been desean Jackson.

With that said was he really that bad of a pick?  Considering he is still employed and going on his 9th season... There have been a lot worse 2nd round picks.  Again i would have rather had desean but it doesn't look like the reach now that it was then.

He has two seasons of ~725 yards and two more of ~270 yards. A total of 2058 yards in 6 seasons.
IMO as a 2nd-round pick, the expectation should be a consistent, solid starter getting 500+ yards per season. So yes, it was a bad pick.

Looking at Andre Caldwell from that same draft class taken in the 3rd round, he's also still playing, but only has reached 1508 yards in 8 seasons.
Also not good.

[Camdaddy08]

(05-04-2016, 08:31 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: And I will say that this is a bit of a devil's advocate position, because I love the way our team drafts, but I find it funny that we get "holy shit" reviews from the rest of the NFL for drafting players that those same commentators (Mel Kiper, Todd McShay, etc) had high on their boards.

For example, I was watching the draft on ESPN (don't have NFL Network or I would not be watching it on ESPN) and it seemed like, for each of our picks, we selected one of the top 5 guys in Mel Kiper's "Best Available players" that kept scrolling on the bottom.

It happened for Tyler Boyd, Andrew Billings, Christian Westerman and maybe even William Jackson III.

Hell, Andrew Billings was on Mel's best available board for like 2 and a half rounds by that point.

I loved the draft and I look forward to seeing how the other picks, such as Nick Vigil and Cody Core, work out. But if our best picks were just us picking what the media pundits had coined as the best players at the time of our pick.....couldn't you or I theoretically draft just as well as the Bengals?

The answer overall is no. I understand what you are saying. If you played the media board you could get a good draft, name wise, no doubt, but more than likely you miss out somewhere.

Let's take this draft. The Bengals needed a WR and we're going to take one in round 1 if he was there. They all got took right before them. Instead of reading for a player that had a lower grade to fill a bigger need they went with what was on their board and took WJ3. Had they played the media board Billings would have been the pick, filling a need also but because of depth of DT, WJ3 was the better pick because depth of CB was not as good. This is the same with the next two rounds. Billings was higher on the media board than who they picked but the Bengals played their board and position depth chart to get to them the better overall value at the time for their team. Had we played the media board one of WJ3, Boyd, or Vigil would not be a Bengal. We would still have Billings but it looks better when you can get all the players high on your list than just one.

As we heard from the podcast the Bengals did not like a WR in round 3. We would have waited until round 4 to get one, only if one was there they liked. Imagine these boards and even pundits reaction if no WR was picked until 5 or 6. It would be madness. The media board doesn't as lays fit your need either. It might not be your type of player. That is why you play your board and not other peoples.

[CoCoNuT]

(05-04-2016, 08:31 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: And I will say that this is a bit of a devil's advocate position, because I love the way our team drafts, but I find it funny that we get "holy shit" reviews from the rest of the NFL for drafting players that those same commentators (Mel Kiper, Todd McShay, etc) had high on their boards.

For example, I was watching the draft on ESPN (don't have NFL Network or I would not be watching it on ESPN) and it seemed like, for each of our picks, we selected one of the top 5 guys in Mel Kiper's "Best Available players" that kept scrolling on the bottom.

It happened for Tyler Boyd, Andrew Billings, Christian Westerman and maybe even William Jackson III.

Hell, Andrew Billings was on Mel's best available board for like 2 and a half rounds by that point.

I loved the draft and I look forward to seeing how the other picks, such as Nick Vigil and Cody Core, work out. But if our best picks were just us picking what the media pundits had coined as the best players at the time of our pick.....couldn't you or I theoretically draft just as well as the Bengals?

I have had a similar suspicion for a couple of years now.
The idea that the media has been giving us high marks based on their standards is troubling.
At the same time, it's awesome to hear so much hype from the media because of it. 

[ItsOdellThurman]

This is a "duh" premise. Of course, someone has to be "best available." The Bengals are known for being great at drafting NOT because of the hype they get right after the draft, but how they've built their roster and how the players have turned out years down the line.

[Benton]

Kiper threw a fit on one of the post draft "who won the draft" shows because somebody said we had a better draft than the ravens. Who, according to kiper, have had the best draft every year since Ozzie Newsome came. Despite having a really, really crap team last year.

[GreenCornBengal]

(05-04-2016, 11:21 AM)Benton Wrote: Kiper threw a fit on one of the post draft "who won the draft" shows because somebody said we had a better draft than the ravens. Who, according to kiper, have had the best draft every year since Ozzie Newsome came. Despite having a really, really crap team last year.

I love the "in Ozzie we trust" mantra. Under Ozzy they have had maybe... 1 or 2 successful runs and the rest of the time a bunch of crap teams. They aren't good at drafting, and they resign all the wrong players. They let good players like Osemele walk. I'm trustin in Ozzie more and more each day.

[Bengalsrob]

(05-04-2016, 11:21 AM)Benton Wrote: Kiper threw a fit on one of the post draft "who won the draft" shows because somebody said we had a better draft than the ravens. Who, according to kiper, have had the best draft every year since Ozzie Newsome came. Despite having a really, really crap team last year.

Ah yes the great and powerful Ozzie, sick of hearing about his awesome picks. They should have chosen well this year with their high draft picks from sucking so bad last year. And....they signed Trent Richardson...awesome!

[*ochocincos*]

(05-04-2016, 11:24 AM)GreenCornBengal Wrote: I love the "in Ozzie we trust" mantra. Under Ozzy they have had maybe... 1 or 2 successful runs and the rest of the time a bunch of crap teams. They aren't good at drafting, and they resign all the wrong players. They let good players like Osemele walk. I'm trustin in Ozzie more and more each day.

The Ravens have won two Super Bowls under Ozzy. Even though they were over a decade apart. That's all the media cares about. Get 1-2 Super Bowl wins and the media completely looks at a franchise in a different light.

[Shake n Blake]

(05-04-2016, 11:24 AM)GreenCornBengal Wrote: I love the "in Ozzie we trust" mantra. Under Ozzy they have had maybe... 1 or 2 successful runs and the rest of the time a bunch of crap teams. They aren't good at drafting, and they resign all the wrong players. They let good players like Osemele walk. I'm trustin in Ozzie more and more each day.

Idk. The Ravens have an all-time winning % (.542) that's the same as Marvin's win % (.543). Before last year, they hadn't had a losing season since 2007. They've won 15 playoff games, which is 3 times as many as the Bengals have won in 48 seasons. In addition to their 2 championships, they have 9 other winning seasons and 8 more playoff appearances. 

So basically I think it's a bit much to say they've had crap teams outside of their championships. I don't think the Bengals have reached the point where we can thumb our noses at the Ravens or Ozzie. I'd trade our success for theirs without thinking twice, even after they had one bad season.

Now if we're talking about 2015 and odds of success in 2016, I like our team better than the Ravens...right now.

[Luvnit2]

(05-04-2016, 08:31 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: And I will say that this is a bit of a devil's advocate position, because I love the way our team drafts, but I find it funny that we get "holy shit" reviews from the rest of the NFL for drafting players that those same commentators (Mel Kiper, Todd McShay, etc) had high on their boards.

For example, I was watching the draft on ESPN (don't have NFL Network or I would not be watching it on ESPN) and it seemed like, for each of our picks, we selected one of the top 5 guys in Mel Kiper's "Best Available players" that kept scrolling on the bottom.

It happened for Tyler Boyd, Andrew Billings, Christian Westerman and maybe even William Jackson III.

Hell, Andrew Billings was on Mel's best available board for like 2 and a half rounds by that point.

I loved the draft and I look forward to seeing how the other picks, such as Nick Vigil and Cody Core, work out. But if our best picks were just us picking what the media pundits had coined as the best players at the time of our pick.....couldn't you or I theoretically draft just as well as the Bengals?

No and sorry it is silly to even suggest it. We as fans are blinded and we are not informed. Picks are made:
1. Bengals do their own player evaluation
2. Bengals take into account position needs, but also have to look at the financial aspect where we don't. For example, the most expensive positions for 2nd contracts (rookie contracts are locked in now) are WR, CB, QB, DE. The Bengals did not need a QB, they needed a WR, but the top 4 were gone. They could have used either a DE (back up) as MJ and Dunlap under contract for couple of years. At CB, we have Dre only signed through 2016, we have Dennard coming off shoulder surgery and we have Jones @ 35 years old. It is expensive to go free agent 1st rate CB in FA, so we grabbed what many considered the best long term CB in the 2016 draft.
3. Many times the Bengals come across 4 or 5 guys to pick on their turn, but they can only choose 1. The 1 they choose determines long and short term good or back pick. Recent history has shown, they are picking the right guys

[BengalChris]

(05-04-2016, 08:31 AM)Crazyjdaw Wrote: I loved the draft and I look forward to seeing how the other picks, such as Nick Vigil and Cody Core, work out. But if our best picks were just us picking what the media pundits had coined as the best players at the time of our pick.....couldn't you or I theoretically draft just as well as the Bengals?

No, look at how the team drafted in the 90s and 2000s, an occasional hit with lots and lots of misses.

I've long believed that the Browns used media boards to draft their players and look at them. This year I think the Browns changed things. No 1st round head cases.

[Bengalbug]

(05-04-2016, 12:17 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: No and sorry it is silly to even suggest it. We as fans are blinded and we are not informed. Picks are made:
1. Bengals do their own player evaluation
2. Bengals take into account position needs, but also have to look at the financial aspect where we don't. For example, the most expensive positions for 2nd contracts (rookie contracts are locked in now) are WR, CB, QB, DE. The Bengals did not need a QB, they needed a WR, but the top 4 were gone. They could have used either a DE (back up) as MJ and Dunlap under contract for couple of years. At CB, we have Dre only signed through 2016, we have Dennard coming off shoulder surgery and we have Jones @ 35 years old. It is expensive to go free agent 1st rate CB in FA, so we grabbed what many considered the best long term CB in the 2016 draft.
3. Many times the Bengals come across 4 or 5 guys to pick on their turn, but they can only choose 1. The 1 they choose determines long and short term good or back pick. Recent history has shown, they are picking the right guys

Adam jones is not 35, he would be 35 if he plays out the life of the contract but as of 5/3/16 @ 1:37pm he is 32 years old.


Not exactly young but not the age you are trying to portray.

[Luvnit2]

(05-04-2016, 02:38 PM)Bengalbug Wrote: Adam jones is not 35, he would be 35 if he plays out the life of the contract but as of 5/3/16 @ 1:37pm he is 32 years old.


Not exactly young but not the age you are trying to portray.

My bad, I thought I read he was 35. TY for the clarification

[fredtoast]

(05-04-2016, 08:31 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: Hell, Andrew Billings was on Mel's best available board for like 2 and a half rounds by that point.

You just answered your own question.

Most people here would have been like Kiper and wasted a higher round pick on Billings.  Bengals were smart enough to get him in the fourth.

[grampahol]

At 57 myself I just have problems saying anyone 32 years old, or hell, 35 is old.
I'd let someone hammer my left nut flat to be 35 again, but not my right nut. That one's sacred.
Actually I'm just fine being 57 because it sure beats the alternative of flies laying eggs all over me and rotting away in the gutter somewhere.
35 might be old for preschool, but not for much else.

[jfkbengals]

(05-04-2016, 08:31 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: it seemed like, for each of our picks, we selected one of the top 5 guys in Mel Kiper's "Best Available players" that kept scrolling on the bottom.

It happened for Tyler Boyd, Andrew Billings, Christian Westerman

Yes, we eventually took those players.

But we didn't take them where the pundits said they should go.

If one of them says a guy should go in round one, but is still available in the fourth and is not on the top 5 available list, then the pundit has a lot of explaining to do.

And Kiper will never say we did well, as he is still pissed we took Levi Jones to fill our need before he felt he should go and embarassed himself by making a public rant chastising us for doing so only to have the guy step in a stymie Joey Porter from the get go.

P.S. Don't forget Kiper is a liar who isn't supposed to be on the air at all.  He publicly declared "Todd McShay is an idiot" for saying Jimmy Clausen would not be a top 10 selection and would retire if Clausen wasn't selected that high.  Yet he is still working...

[CJD]

(05-04-2016, 04:31 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You just answered your own question.

Most people here would have been like Kiper and wasted a higher round pick on Billings.  Bengals were smart enough to get him in the fourth.

I think the vast majority of people here would have taken him in the third. But I personally wouldn't have taken him in the first or the second, as better players were available, especially for our needs.

Taking a DT in the first round would have been odd, considering the depth in this draft and Boyd was the last of the Mohicans at WR in the second.

Now, it was extraordinarily lucky that Billings was still there in the 4th (some would even think other teams forgot he was even still available), but taking him in the third still would have been a very good choice.

I'm only asking because this isn't a one year thing. The Bengals always seem to snatch up the dropping players.

Last year, everyone would have drafted Paul Dawson, Josh Shaw, Marcus Hardison, Derron Smith and Mario Alford if they dropped to them.  They were all very highly rated players.

The year before, Darqueze, AJ McCarron.

In 2012, Devon Still, Mohamed Sanu, Orsen Charles, Marvin Jones and George Illoka all were inexplicably falling.

etc.

We always seem to draft just...the best well known player if a highly rated Kiper player is falling for no discernible reason.