Jump to content

2021 draft talk


Recommended Posts

Jamar Chase replaces snaps that would be taken by Auden Tate/Michael Thomas/Alex Erickson.  That seems like a pretty sizable upgrade.  I even like Tate, but he doesn't bring anything close to what Chase would bring, and Tate can still be there in his niche role (if he can stay healthy).

If we take Chase turning down a move down 5-7 spots and  picking up a 2 this year or a 1 next year, then I agree that would be a mistake, but there is no guarantee that offer is out there (assuming Sewell is gone).

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, INbengalfan said:

This is becoming too circular.  So I want to know who you would target with Sewell off the board at 5, but no viable trade back options on the table.  I think the rest of us have put an order to what we each would do, but all I hear from you is we have to go OL.  So what plan would you lay out?  Who do you value as worthy on the OL if Sewell is gone?  Because we all get it, the line needs fixed.  But some of us don't want to reach for need, when the player we really are targeting goes off the board right before we pick.  That's how we ended up reaching with Price, because we were absolutely stunned Detroit traded up over us for Ragnow.

Slater?

Darrisaw?

Cosmi?

Leatherwood?

 

Giving 

Probably Surtain, especially if Alexander or Jackson leave. It would be nice if there were a DE in this draft worthy of a top 5 pick but there isn't. Parsons would be the fallback if Sewell and Surtain are gone. 

 

I think there's a good chance Sewell is on the board at 5. If we don't fix OT in free agency and can't get Sewell at 5 or trade down, then we should trade up from the 2nd round into the first and take one of the lesser OTs. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sparky151 said:

Probably Surtain, especially if Alexander or Jackson leave. It would be nice if there were a DE in this draft worthy of a top 5 pick but there isn't. Parsons would be the fallback if Sewell and Surtain are gone. 

 

I think there's a good chance Sewell is on the board at 5. If we don't fix OT in free agency and can't get Sewell at 5 or trade down, then we should trade up from the 2nd round into the first and take one of the lesser OTs. 

I'm fine with that.  But if we keep Alexander and jackson, and Sewell is gone, thetre is a clear path to Chase is all I'm saying

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, INbengalfan said:

I'm fine with that.  But if we keep Alexander and jackson, and Sewell is gone, there is a clear path to Chase is all I'm saying

And I'm saying that would be a mistake. Even if we re-sign Jackson and Alexander, taking Surtain would let us get out from under the Waynes contract which has a cap number of 16 mil this year and next. Or take Parsons and have a difference maker at the second level of the defense. Sure would be nice to give up fewer long runs wouldn't it? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, sparky151 said:

And I'm saying that would be a mistake. Even if we re-sign Jackson and Alexander, taking Surtain would let us get out from under the Waynes contract which has a cap number of 16 mil this year and next. Or take Parsons and have a difference maker at the second level of the defense. Sure would be nice to give up fewer long runs wouldn't it? 

I value what Chase would do more.  I would absolutely take Parsons over Smith tho

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, sparky151 said:

And I'm saying that would be a mistake.

i’m still confused as to why you think drafting chase at 5 would be a mistake. the opportunity of play time is there. he would 100% have a large role in 2021. even if it’s not chase, i don’t see how a non playmaker (outside of sewell ofc) would be bpa at 5. especially parsons 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BengalsBite said:

i’m still confused as to why you think drafting chase at 5 would be a mistake. the opportunity of play time is there. he would 100% have a large role in 2021. even if it’s not chase, i don’t see how a non playmaker (outside of sewell ofc) would be bpa at 5. especially parsons 

If you think I'm arguing Tate is better than Chase, I'm not. But drafting any receiver at 5 would be a mistake because it is a pretty marginal add to the roster when we have Higgins and Boyd already. Replacing Hart with Sewell or Bynes with Parsons or Phillips with Surtain upgrade the team much more than replacing Tate with Chase (or Smith or Waddle or whomever you think is the best WR). 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Since when is Surtain this prolific prospect?

1 hour ago, sparky151 said:

If you think I'm arguing Tate is better than Chase, I'm not. But drafting any receiver at 5 would be a mistake because it is a pretty marginal add to the roster when we have Higgins and Boyd already. Replacing Hart with Sewell or Bynes with Parsons or Phillips with Surtain upgrade the team much more than replacing Tate with Chase (or Smith or Waddle or whomever you think is the best WR). 

Chase isn’t replace Tate. He’s replacing AJ Green, who played substantial snaps and received substantial targets. 

Also, if you think drafting Chase at 5 is a mistake, you’re wrong.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, sparky151 said:

If you think I'm arguing Tate is better than Chase, I'm not. But drafting any receiver at 5 would be a mistake because it is a pretty marginal add to the roster when we have Higgins and Boyd already. Replacing Hart with Sewell or Bynes with Parsons or Phillips with Surtain upgrade the team much more than replacing Tate with Chase (or Smith or Waddle or whomever you think is the best WR). 

i don’t think you’re arguing that tate is better than chase. i don’t see how you don’t think adding chase would be a massive upgrade to the offense (we should ignore sewell because i think we all agree he’s the best pick). adding parsons would not be an upgrade (for year 1 at least) over bynes. phillips played well elite in a few games. i get how that would be a bigger need than WR if we don’t tag or re-sign wj3. drafting for need is not how you should view the draft. it’s a horrible strategy. chase/smith/pitts are clearly better prospects than surtain is imo. 

i could understand if you thought surtain was a better prospect but that’s not your argument. your argument is solely based on need. 

earlier you said that drafting bpa would mean that we would draft a qb if we had the top pick or something along those lines. i think you’re misunderstanding what we say when we say that we should draft bpa. drafting bpa is drafting the best player available who can come onto our team and have a role. not someone who is the best player but will come in and sit behind someone already established. at 5, you have to take someone who will have a role to start the year and a WR here would easily be taking up a large role from day 1. it is a need, maybe not our biggest need tho, obviously depending on what we do in free agency

Edited by BengalsBite
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...