DesperateDerelict Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 Wow! I think I'm going to give up!For the last several years, I have advocated that the Bengals best chance to maximize their draft picks was to trade down in the early rounds and trade up in the latter rounds. This practice would help overcome their inadequate scouting department, giving them more picks in to 25 - 150 range. It would also allow them to fill more needs while hedging against the inevitable trade busts that every team must suffer.Instead, idiot-Mikey and family have steadfastly held on to their given picks, as if they were hard won prizes at the bingo parlor. Some might argue that - perhaps - no fair trades were offered to enable them to make a move. However, based on the CNN / SI stats compiled over the last 5 years, EVERY OTHER team has moved more than the Bengals.The stats:Team ………….. Traded Up / Traded Down / Total TradesDallas ……….. 6 / 12 / 18Green Bay …….. 5 / 12 / 17Philadelphia .. 7 / 7 / 14Jacksonville … 7 / 6 / 13Cleveland …… 9 / 3 / 12Detroit ……… 9 / 3 / 12Baltimore …….. 6 / 5 / 11Minnesota ……. 6 / 5 / 11New England …. 3 / 8 / 11N.Y. Jets ……… 5 / 4 / 9New Orleans …. 4 / 5 / 9San Fran. ……… 4 / 5 / 9Oakland ……… 6 / 1 / 7St. Louis ……… 5 / 2 / 7Atlanta ………. 4 / 2 / 6Indianapolis … 3 / 3 / 6Miami …………. 3 / 3 / 6Washington ….. 2 / 4 / 6Tampa Bay ……. 1 / 5 / 6Carolina ……… 3 / 2 / 5Pittsburgh ……. 3 / 2 / 5Seattle ………. 3 / 2 / 5Houston …….. 1 / 4 / 5Tennessee ….. 1 / 4 / 5Denver ……… 3 / 1 / 4N.Y. Giants ….. 3 / 1 / 4San Diego ….. 2 / 2 / 4Kansas City … 1 / 3 / 4Buffalo ……… 3 / 0 / 3Chicago ……… 0 / 3 / 3Arizona ……… 1 / 0 / 1Cincinnati …… 0 / 1 / 1Based on these numbers, a very strong argument could be made that idiot-Mikey cares more about not looking like a fool than improving his team. Or, to put it another way, he just doesn't give a sh!t.As the cowboy said in Blazing Saddles, I am depressed! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArmyBengal Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 Didn't they move down twice in the first round when they took Chris Perry ?? Once through the trade that brought us Deltha and then again to move with St. Louis when they took Steven Jackson ?? I could be wrong and our numbers still suck.I said I wasn't going to do a mock draft before the actual draft because I was just to confused with who the Bengals may choose and the muddle of talent after the 3rd round is to much of a challenge to figure out besides us taking a Fullback. I did however relook it again this morning and was thinking the same thing about trading back up into the 3rd round. Then looking at the trade value chart found that giving up our 4th and 5th would only get us into the bottom portion of the 3rd. Add our 6th to it and we still are in the bottom half of the 3rd.If we are going to trade up anywhere, it would only be in the bottom rounds where we can give up maybe our 6th and 7th to get back into the top of the 5th. That would be a pretty big move and with a comp pick in the 6th and two in the 7th, it wouldn't really hurt to give up two picks for one that would be MUCH higher. The question still remains about who would be there to target and would you even have a trade partner to begin with.13 of those teams have 5 or less moves according to that chart and include the two Super Bowl teams from last year, the Super Bowl champs from the year before and a few other very good teams, so that isn't so much the d*mning example of why we lose in my opinion. How we use our picks is another story all together. Who we draft at those positions as determined by our stellar scouting staff makes me wonder at times... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derekshank Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 I'm of the opinion that trading up is often better than trading down. If you are trading up, it is because you have zeroed in on a player to address and need and are willing to be aggressive to get him. Trading down means that there isn't anyone at the pick you love, and are hoping to get better value with a player that falls to you.When Dallas traded Walker for a kings ransom, they then packaged many of those picks and traded up multiple times... including to get back in the 1st round to draft Emmitt Smith. Just saying... sometimes quality is better than quantity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DesperateDerelict Posted April 21, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 I'm of the opinion that trading up is often better than trading down. If you are trading up, it is because you have zeroed in on a player to address and need and are willing to be aggressive to get him. Trading down means that there isn't anyone at the pick you love, and are hoping to get better value with a player that falls to you.When Dallas traded Walker for a kings ransom, they then packaged many of those picks and traded up multiple times... including to get back in the 1st round to draft Emmitt Smith. Just saying... sometimes quality is better than quantity.Good post...from your lips to Mikey's ears. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengalByTheBay Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 Pittsburgh ……. 3 / 2 / 5Seattle ………. 3 / 2 / 5Houston …….. 1 / 4 / 5Tennessee ….. 1 / 4 / 5Denver ……… 3 / 1 / 4N.Y. Giants ….. 3 / 1 / 4San Diego ….. 2 / 2 / 4Kansas City … 1 / 3 / 4Buffalo ……… 3 / 0 / 3Chicago ……… 0 / 3 / 3Arizona ……… 1 / 0 / 1Cincinnati …… 0 / 1 / 1Remind me again who was in the Superbowl this year. From your numbers I would suggest that trading up and down has little, if any, effect on the success of a team. Go ahead and bash me as a Mike Brown lover (which is, of course, completely inaccurate), but I think that trading up suggests you are desperate to fill one position and trading down is probably not worth the effort more times than not. Plus, the genius trade down that brought us Chris Perry didn't do a whole lot for me. Obviously, it is more about what you do with the pick rather than how much movement goes on.[EDIT: props to Army, didn't see he made the same point in his last paragraph until re-reading the thread. Army, you continue to be a God-like being placed among us for inspiration (or something like that).] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HAPPYJAQ Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 I'm of the opinion that trading up is often better than trading down. If you are trading up, it is because you have zeroed in on a player to address and need and are willing to be aggressive to get him. Trading down means that there isn't anyone at the pick you love, and are hoping to get better value with a player that falls to you.When Dallas traded Walker for a kings ransom, they then packaged many of those picks and traded up multiple times... including to get back in the 1st round to draft Emmitt Smith. Just saying... sometimes quality is better than quantity.Good post...from your lips to Mikey's ears.x2If you're trading up, it likely means that a player is sitting there that you had higher on your draft board that where he would be slotted to go with the upcoming pick. It also means the value of the player that's traded up for is greater than the value of the player that could possibly be had with the traded pick(s). With all the late round picks, I'd like to see the Bengals move up for a player they've targeted and get what they think is the sure thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArmyBengal Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 [EDIT: Army, you continue to be a God-like being placed among us for inspiration (or something like that).]If by "Or something like that" you mean "Not at all", gotcha !!!Usually it goes something along the lines of this at work:Sergeant, you continue to be a pain in my ass and wish you could figure out how not to be such a prick.To tell you the truth, I'm good with that... Thanks though !!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wraith Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 Mike Brown has no creativity, no imagination, he thinks like an accountant everything is black or white, good or bad, he is the single sole reason we do not conduct our business like the other sports franchises and thus we lose! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.