Issues with Bengals Draft Strategy

[Wraith]

I have looked back on the last 5 years the consistent issue I have with the Bengals' drafts is the lack of aggressiveness when it comes to moving around to secure the players that we are targeting.

In 2005 Marvin had targeted (at Carson's suggestion) Lofa Tatupa in the second round and he was available and he was available until pick #45 when it would have taken a very reasonable pick (5th or 6th round) to trade up but instead we watched Seattle take him instead and we had to settle for a very talented but troubled player in Odell Thurman.

In 2006 Marvin was very public about his desire for Manny Lawson to be his next Peter Boulware, San Francisco took him two selections ahead of us. Now this draft worked in our favor but regardless it is another example of the Bengals being passive and letting a player who you believe would fit your team go for the want of holding onto a 4th round selection.

While I love Leon Hall, in 2007 I have heard from a fairly reputable source that the top player on the Bengals draft board was Darrel Revis and he was taken 4 selections ahead of the Bengals. The same person told me that David Harris was targeted in the second round and we let the same team, The Jets, leap frog us by two selections to take him away, we used that pick to select Kenny Irons. Those two players have become the cornerstones of the best defense in the NFL, imagine how good the Bengals would have been for the want of not selecting Marvin White and Jeff Rowe?

In 2008, we took Jerome Simpson but Eddie Royal was available with a much higher grade just 4 selections higher in the second round.

In 2009 we got lucky with Maualuga falling into our laps but how many people had their hearts in their throats when St Louis selected and chose Laurenitis instead or when Denver traded up just in front of us to select Alphonso Smith, I was certain Denver was going to take him.

In 2010, What would it have taken to trade up 6 selection in the second round to take Taylor Mays?

My point is that other teams like the Patriots move up and down based upon how the draft falls out to make sure they get the best value for their selections, we can too. I have little arguement about the players we selected that were available, but we have targeted the right people consistently only to lose out to teams that were well within target range of a trade.

[BengalPimp]

While I love Leon Hall, in 2007 I have heard from a fairly reputable source that the top player on the Bengals draft board was Darrel Revis and he was taken 4 selections ahead of the Bengals.

I think we all get frustrated by the Bengals not trading up to land players they really want, but this is one pick I WOULD NOT CHANGE.

Revis might be one of the top 2 or 3 CB's in the league, but Hall is not that far off IMO. Also, Hall is here right now, getting ready, and apparently content with his current contract, knowing something will get worked out in the future. Revis on the other hand has threatened a holdout, and is demanding close to $20 million a year....If he were a Bengal, NO WAY would he EVER get that, so we would basically be without a CB....Not to mention, if the Bengals do extend both JJoe and Hall, they can sign them BOTH for far less than $20 million per.

[jjakq27]

I agree to a point. I find their lack of creativity to be very aggravating. However, for all the draft pub a team like Baltimore gets, I would say that over those five years, we have been quite competitive with them.

I think the club has the mindset that "someone will fall to us" and Mikey won't mortgage the future even if they are 4th, 5th or 6th rounders. If they didn't trade their pick in 1999 when Ditka offered them all their picks, I can see the Bengals passing on an unknown no matter how high they have guys ranked.

[jonahdsage]

Zimmer said they tried to trade up for mays several times, FWIW.

[jjakq27]

Zimmer said they tried to trade up for mays several times, FWIW.

I wonder what they offered. Part of my frustration is that teams seem to basically give guys away anymore but we are unable to pull of any kind of trade.

I think the last time we did anything creative was when we traded down a couple of times to get Chris Perry and maybe the trade with Denver for Deltha O'Neill. Nothing more recent comes to mind.

However, I must say that there seems to be more stability and fewer reaches in their last few drafts. Other than Simpson a couple of years back, there don't seem to be the kinda drafts like some of first ones of Marvin's tenure.

[DC_Bengals_Fan]

I think we all get frustrated by the Bengals not trading up to land players they really want, but this is one pick I WOULD NOT CHANGE.

Revis might be one of the top 2 or 3 CB's in the league, but Hall is not that far off IMO. Also, Hall is here right now, getting ready, and apparently content with his current contract, knowing something will get worked out in the future. Revis on the other hand has threatened a holdout, and is demanding close to $20 million a year....If he were a Bengal, NO WAY would he EVER get that, so we would basically be without a CB....Not to mention, if the Bengals do extend both JJoe and Hall, they can sign them BOTH for far less than $20 million per.

If Leon Hall was as good as Revis he'd hold out too.

The sad fact of that logic is that it distills like this: "I'm glad we drafted the lesser player because that way we don't have to pay him".

For what it's worth, I think the numbers that Revis is tossing out are posturing. He's quoting unrestricted free agent numbers, which he ain't. Or he's an idiot, because he's not getting that money. It'll be interesting how the Jets play it - they have a history of stringing players along promising them things that never get done, but it's not gonna work this time.

[Kazkal]

If Leon Hall was as good as Revis he'd hold out too.

I dunno Maybe last year of his contract but when he has 2-3 years left? hard to judge if he would or not...Revis is much more of a diva then hall is

[Wraith]

I heard that about Mays too, but here is my point, other teams manage to make deals, trade up trade down ect. Is it because we never offer enough value, or is it a respect thing and we don't have the right contacts to get a deal done.

[HairOnFire]

Why don't the Bengals make more draft day trades?

Probably because the team values having multiple picks/contracts more than they covet the talent of any individual player. Or as Mike Brown is fond of saying......

"Many are wanted, but few are needed." --- Paul Brown

[ArmyBengal]

How many times during the pre-draft build up has it been said that "You have to have a willing partner" in order for a trade to happen ??

There is a ton of variables that go into that happening and would take to long to list. However, one thing I have noticed is, once a team has had success (winning a Super Bowl) they seem to be more active in making trades. Granted there are other teams that don't fall into that category, but it got me thinking how much easier it would be for a team to give up more picks in order to trade up to get the player they are targeting when they have less holes to fill.

When you take that into consideration and couple it with organizations that have stellar scouting departments, it would have to make it considerably less of a risk to make those types of moves, or at least would one think. If that is a line of thought, it really doesn't surprise me the Bengals seem happy to stand pat and wait to see who exactly falls to them.

Sure they have made attempts to move up, but they certainly aren't barnstormers in the matter either.

[BengalPimp]

I heard that about Mays too, but here is my point, other teams manage to make deals, trade up trade down ect. Is it because we never offer enough value, or is it a respect thing and we don't have the right contacts to get a deal done.

You want to know why trades don't get done?

Who do you think orchestrates those trades? THE GM.....and we don't have one...errr we have Mikey. As much authority as Mikey has given Marvin, he still doesn't have the power of a GM.

[PhunkE1]

Why don't the Bengals make more draft day trades?

Probably because the team values having multiple picks/contracts more than they covet the talent of any individual player. Or as Mike Brown is fond of saying......

"Many are wanted, but few are needed." --- Paul Brown

If that were the case you would think you would see us move down more often to acquire more picks, much like the Pats always do. The bottom line is that while things have improved as far as the draft is concerned since Marvin's arrival, we are still hamstrung by the cheap and conservative Mike Brown.

[Kazkal]

Are Patriots really a team to compare to now? Look at how they been doing since they've been trading around so much in the draft...Been getting worse and worse and its not like they have perfect drafts.

[HairOnFire]

If that were the case you would think you would see us move down more often to acquire more picks, much like the Pats always do.

I understand the point you're making, but does any team move down as often as New England? In fact, outside of a few teams like New England, Dallas, Philly, and Baltimore the Bengals willingness to move around in the draft doesn't look much different than you see from other front offices. As for the Bengals themselves, due to the manner Mike Brown has managed free agency the Bengals often begin a draft having already pocketed additional draft picks.

The bottom line is that while things have improved as far as the draft is concerned since Marvin's arrival, we are still hamstrung by the cheap and conservative Mike Brown.

Perhaps, but during that period they have moved down in the first round....only to see the player they targeted, Chris Perry, bust into a thousand glass shards. Furthermore, as this time of year reminds us, the always conservative Mike Brown can hardly be accused of inactivity when he used a 3rd Round Pick to acquire Ahmad Brooks in the Supplemental Draft. And like the Perry trade previously mentioned...the results from that move weren't exactly rewarding, ehh?

[BengalByTheBay]

Are Patriots really a team to compare to now? Look at how they been doing since they've been trading around so much in the draft...Been getting worse and worse and its not like they have perfect drafts.

I agree with this. The Pats are always lauded for draft day activity, but it seems to me it's mainly because it gives the analysts something to talk about. At a certain point, it actually becomes kinda ridiculous to me. They trade down, and then back up and get somebody that ends up being just okay. In a perfect world, I would like to see the Bengals start packaging 5th and 6th rounders, and maybe even a 4th or so, in order to move up in the first or second because it seems to me like they're getting to the point that they have fewer spots to fill and don't really need 7 or 9 guys to try to fill them. Like most, I would've liked to see that to get Mays this year. That said, I get the sense that whoever is making the decisions likes the idea of taking fliers on late round guys to try to come up with another TJ... I think that certain teams like the Pats do too much with too little return, while the Bengals can be accused of doing too little at times.

[ArmyBengal]

You guys are missing my point about the Patriots.

It's not that they are so active and the Bengals should be like that. It's that they had a string of Super Bowl wins and when looking at their draft board, they had (at that point in time) fewer holes to fill. They were able to give up picks in order to stack them in future drafts (something I think is a great idea) and target less players of greater talent by trading away picks.

Them having success with their picks is not my point, it's the basis for them doing what they did. Or if you prefer, they would rather take the risk of giving up picks that will simply end of on the practice squad and go after someone of higher quality. Teams that have fewer holes to fill can do that easier than teams that many needs.

Outside of that, I could care less about how the Patriots go about their business or the success the achieve. F*ck them !!!

[PhunkE1]

You guys are missing my point about the Patriots.

It's not that they are so active and the Bengals should be like that. It's that they had a string of Super Bowl wins and when looking at their draft board, they had (at that point in time) fewer holes to fill. They were able to give up picks in order to stack them in future drafts (something I think is a great idea) and target less players of greater talent by trading away picks.

Them having success with their picks is not my point, it's the basis for them doing what they did. Or if you prefer, they would rather take the risk of giving up picks that will simply end of on the practice squad and go after someone of higher quality. Teams that have fewer holes to fill can do that easier than teams that many needs.

Outside of that, I could care less about how the Patriots go about their business or the success the achieve. F*ck them !!!

Exactly the point I was trying to make with my Pats comment too. The moves they make don't always end up working out, but at least they are aggressive about sticking with their board and convictions. The draft is an imperfact science. All you really have to go on is your scouting reports and personal judgement about a player. What happens from their is in the hands of the players and coaches. All the moves the Pats have made over the last few years will give them I believe 5 picks in the first 3 rounds next year. 2 in the first round, in a year where we might actually have a rookie salary cap in place. Sounds pretty nice to me.

[Horsemen]

In 2008, we took Jerome Simpson but Eddie Royal was available with a much higher grade just 4 selections higher in the second round.

That doesn't bother me, what bothers me and bothered me at that time was I wanted DeSean Jackson, who was available yet we reach for a 3rd/4th round projected project WR that went bust.... As Jackson went to the Probowl. What's worse is the excuse fellow fans gave me was he was "too short" yet which was whatever, except we offered a fat contract to the older, shorter Coles last year.

Aside from that, as well as my disdain for the overrated Mays, I somewhat agree. I certainly wish we were more active on draft day. It'd be awesome if we swung trades to grab this player or that player and I hold out eternal hope that is soon the case. In general I can understand sitting back waiting for players to come to you, however when there is a talent close by with a small bust factor you should at least attempt to make the moves.

The thing I dislike the most, and it ties into the whole Patriots deal, is we don't do tag & trades or get any value out of older players when the opportunity arises. One thing the Pats do that I admire is trading top tier guys such as Seymour right as soon as they start going on the downside. We just let players walk then collect later round comp picks. Such as Stacy Andrews. We all knew he wasn't anything special, BUT the Iggles were in love with the kid. In their minds Stacy was the missing key to their O.L. and the key to getting his lazy ass brother to put in some effort. We easily could have swung a deal for multiple picks, one of them potentially a 2nd/3rd. Ditto Bustin Smith, ditto with T.J.... s**t, ditto with Chad. If sources are to be trusted the 'Skins could have been talked into giving up multiple 1sts for his punk ass.

Sometimes I kinda wish we'd trade in the opposite direction as well. Mainly 2009. The top OT in the draft was off the board, Cleveland was HEAVILY rumored to be interested in Sanchez, the Jets had a raging hardon for Sanchez, Bitchtitties Smith was falling in the draft. Despite that there were two other OT's that were better and would be available, thus worth the risk of trading with the Jets for an extra 2nd and likely an extra 3rd.

Also, those and this Mike Brown/Marvin Lewis penchant for drafting character risks/boom or bust players(Keith Rivers, Andre Smith, Jerome Simpson, Maualuga, Thurman, Dunlap, ect) way too often, especially in the first few rounds. While yes, some of them have worked out others haven't and IMO, it is asking for trouble in the long run. Hell, we already seen it come around and bite us in the ass in 2006, i'm worried it is possible yet again.

The USC fetish this F.O. has is a bit annoying as well.

[Kazkal]

That doesn't bother me, what bothers me and bothered me at that time was I wanted DeSean Jackson, who was available yet we reach for a 3rd/4th round projected project WR that went bust.... As Jackson went to the Probowl. What's worse is the excuse fellow fans gave me was he was "too short" yet which was whatever, except we offered a fat contract to the older, shorter Coles last year.

Problem wasn't he was short it was he was light weighed around 170 lbs most Eagle Fans hated the picdk because they thought it was the return of Freddie Mitchell.

[ArmyBengal]

The other thing with trades, both during the draft and with players on the roster is, you have to have a willing partner. It has been reported NUMEROUS times how often the Bengals tried to trade both up and down to get players and/or picks if there guy wasn't there. Since it doesn't happen as much with the Bengals as it does with other teams, it simply appears that we don't even try. I think that's an incorrect assumption.

Trading players ?? Yeah, I can get on board with that much easier, but once again, you have to have a willing partner. Washington would have done the Chad deal, but Mike Brown didn't want to pull the trigger. Why ?? I'm sure he had his reasons, good or bad, and for as much as I'm looking forward to the day Chad isn't a Bengal any longer, I won't automatically say that NOT trading Chad was the incorrect decision.

You also can't account for what grade any team places on a player coming into the draft. While I will say you can fault the Bengals for slacking on their scouting staff, unless someone has first hand knowledge of how they do business, we are left to spitball.

I would also like to see more pick/player movement, but that doesn't mean they aren't trying...

[jjakq27]

Well said.

Call up nfl.com and review any draft and you will see the first few rounds littered with guys we all barely remember or even heard of for all teams. While we may have missed on guys like Jackson a couple of years ago, we've done much better during most of the Marvin era.

If there is a flaw it's that we have this "coach-em-up" mentality sometimes. The thought that we can make perfume out of anything. But I expect that kind of confidence in the coaching staff as long as they get results.