Grade the Bengals Draft

[schweinhart]

I don't really know how paid analysts factor supplemental draft picks in draft class evaluations but I do know this.....#50 has been on the field this year after being selected with a draft pick this year and has made an impact when he plays, especially when it was urgent for him to do so.

So he's included in how I rate the 2006 draft class and in part because of him I jack the grade from B before the season started to A now that we're going into the last quarter of the season

[TJJackson]

*shrug* it's an alternate approach, i guess, but will you correspondingly downgrade next year's draft because it is lacking a r3 pick it otherwise had?

[schweinhart]

*shrug* it's an alternate approach, i guess, but will you correspondingly downgrade next year's draft because it is lacking a r3 pick it otherwise had?

No, I wouldn't downgrade next year's draft for that reason. I would base it on the players taken. But like I say I really don't know how draft graders factor supplemental draft picks in. They don't happen too often.

All I know is the Bengals done right by enough draft picks in 2006 to meet fairly urgent needs as it turned out, which wasn't what it looked like the overall rookie class would have to do before the season started. They met that contigency fairly well, I'd say.

[TJJackson]

No, I wouldn't downgrade next year's draft for that reason.

so youupgraded the 2006 grade based on the supplemental pick, yet you will not downgrade the grade of the 2007 draft next year based on the lack of r3 pick? This is unsound/unbalanced analysis. If you are going to benefit one draft with a pick not made in that draft, you need to penalize another.

I can understand (albeit not agree with) considering the supplemental pick a part of this year's draft, but I cannot understand upgrading one and yet not consider downgrading the other. It is as if you are saying that if we had used all 7 picks in the supplemental draft, leaving none for 2007, you'd still somehow find a way to grade the 2007 draft without cosiderign the supplemental players taken.

I would base it on the players taken. But like I say I really don't know how draft graders factor supplemental draft picks in. They don't happen too often.

Most draft analysts consider a supplemental pick to be part of the following year's picks, which is what is is, since that's where the pick comes from

[derekshank]

I can understand (albeit not agree with) considering the supplemental pick a part of this year's draft, but I cannot understand upgrading one and yet not consider downgrading the other. It is as if you are saying that if we had used all 7 picks in the supplemental draft, leaving none for 2007, you'd still somehow find a way to grade the 2007 draft without cosiderign the supplemental players taken.

I'm not fully sure I understand your reasoning here. You analyze a draft based on players taken... not what you could have potentially traded for the pick.

Draft graders don't take into consideration the quality of a draft based on what trades were made. Sure, people look at the Chargers trade with the Giants for Eli Manning, and talk about how the Chargers came out pretty good in that trade... but that is the analysis of a trade, not the draft. The Giants were not penalized in this past draft grade for not having whatever pick it was they traded to the Chargers (I think it was a 2nd rounder). However, the Chargers could be penalized for making a bad decision with that pick they received, because it was a draft pick.

The Bengals basically traded an '07 3rd round pick for the rights to Brooks. If you want to call it an '06 draft pick... that would make some sense - because he was in the '06 draft class. If you want to call it an '07 pick, that would make some sense (although less) because he was selected with an '07 pick. but trading a future pick for a current player doesn't downgrade next years draft grade. It merely gives us less margin for error with the picks we do make.