Trading Down To Get A Leg Up
If Charley Casserly is even remotely correct in his assessment that this year's draft is the best since 1983, then a quality team with limited immediate needs like the Cincinnati Bengals may want to trade down and gain even more picks from such a stockpile of treasure.
Take a look at the 1983 draft. The list includes six Hall-of-Famers and 40 Pro Bowlers, such as: John Elway, Dan Marino, Eric Dickerson, Tim Krumrie (10th Round), and punter Reggie Roby (Reggie's name is historically glossed over in that draft, but he was a three-time Pro-Bowler and one of my very first football cards so he makes this list. It's also worth mentioning that he was drafted by the Cincinnati Reds as a pitcher when he came out of high school).
The idea that any draft can live up to that kind of stardom is an unfair expectation, but that isn't to say that this year’s is not a doozie. What makes it so formidable, experts say, is its depth at so many positions. Watching the NFL Combine on television, I heard the phrase "can find a good one in the middle rounds" countless times. Many positions are loaded to the gills with starter-caliber talent. That means teams choosing later in the first round don't need to feel pressured to move up to cover that one worrisome position. In fact, with talent pouring out from every orifice, the third-best player at a certain position may only be marginally ahead of the top-rated player, which really takes the pressure off of the front office to make that crucial pick.
The most urgent area of improvement for the Bengals is their passing game—no secret there. It is widely believed that if the twenty-first pick rolls around and Dez Bryant remains on the board, Cincinnati will choose him and make him the newest member of a revamped wide-receiving corps. The pick makes sense—Bryant could very well turn out to become an electrifying play-maker with his impressive size and speed—but what about the other receivers rated closely behind him? If all the really coveted prospects are gone by the time the Bengals pick, including Bryant, I like the idea of trading if possible to move back and get another middle-round pick.
Signing Antonio Bryant sheds some of the need to draft a receiver with the first pick. Tight end Jermaine Gresham could both help the passing game and also become a starter right away, but with Reggie Kelly apparently on the mend, the insistence of Bob Bratkowski to ignore the tight end in the first place, and Marvin Lewis' concerns of the heath of this year's tight-end crop, it all leads me to believe that the team is not that worried about radically improving the position.
Any rookie receiver the Bengals might draft would become the third-receiver at best when they begin their career. Identifying starting receivers in the NFL can be tricky as teams often use multiple wide-receiver sets, but Dez Bryant, Golden Tate, or anyone else would likely not be too involved in the majority of snaps. Seems to me that if they aren't going to compete for a starting job, they aren't worth a first-round pick in such a rich draft. An early second-round receiver could provide a similar short-term impact to the offense and passing game, and that is what this draft should be about: winning now.
Cincinnati already has nine picks thanks to the third and fourth-round compensatory picks for losing Stacy Andrews and T.J. Houshmandzadeh in free-agency last offseason. Since the defense is exactly the same as last year's top-five unit, and the successful running game only lost Larry Johnson, the Bengals can inject huge doses of top-notch depth to a bruising, physical team and focus on the limited roster concerns that currently exist. I say that if the first-round wish-list is depleted once the Bengals are on the clock, Mike Brown, Marvin Lewis, or whoever else is in charge at the time, should get on the phone and make a deal that gets them another pick or two later on.
With the unknown future of the league, coupled with Mike Brown's curious football operation decisions, the best plan of action for the Bengals is to stock the shelves behind the starters with some worthwhile product. That way, once other teams start buying Cincinnati's players once they become high-priced free-agents, a nice replacement awaits to undergo the same process. The Bengals might not ever go 14-2 that way, but at least they can consistently be somewhere near nine wins a season and be considered a perennial winning team. After 2010, I'm afraid we may slip back into the darkness of losing if Cincinnati cannot compete financially. Playing it smart, trading down for more picks and adding more depth in this bumper-crop draft could help the Bengals make a run next year while simultaneously buying them a couple more seasons of fielding a competitive team in the future.
Mojokong—April is the cruelest month.
50 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I am all for trading down
I also think our most likely move is to move down. The last time we were close to having this few needs, we traded down. While the pick was Chris Perry, I still think it was the right move, as it aslo netted Stacy Andrews and Robert Geathers.
What trading back could do is allow us to move up in other rounds, to get better quality depth.
Huh?
Chris Perry/Stacy Andrews/Robert Geathers = 0 Pro Bowls
Steven Jackson = 2 Pro Bowls
Glad someone liked that move.
Stacy Andrews+4th round pick this year
Robert Geathers+ 31 starts in 2 AFC North championships
Deltha ONeal+ 1 AFC North Championship, 1 Pro Bowl
Chris Pery contributed to one AFC North Championship
Steven Jackson= 2 Pro Bowls, 0 NFC championships, 1st overall pick 2010, 2nd overal pick 2009, 2008.
To me Steven Jackson = Corey DiIlon
Dillon had 4 probowls for us, but the team didn’t win.
I will take the wins.
That should say 0 NFC west championships
by the way that NFC west they can’t win may have been the worst division in football over that time period.
Robert Geathers played well enough in one season to get a big contract. Now we’re paying him a lot of money to be horrible. Double whammy. Stacy Andrews, mediocre player at best. How’s he doing in Philly? Chris Perry, showed some potential, but ultimately, not worth a 4rd round pick, let alone a 1st. I’ll give you O’Neal. He was pretty good for a couple of years.
So let’s get this straight: You’re the only person on Earth who actually liked taking Chris Perry, and….Steven Jackson and Corey Dillon are at fault for their teams not winning….not the shitty players and coaches that surrounded them?
Must be lonely out there.
The teams didn’t win with Jackson or Dillon. That is a fact.
I do not like what happened with Chris Perry. Stacy Andrews is null because we used a 4th round pick on him and got one back in compesation for the way he left in free agency. His contribution will be decided by how we use that pick.
Deltha O’neal was also involed in the trading down, do you think that Keiwan Ratliff would have had 10 ints? Robert Geathers has only had on good sack year, but he has started all but 1 game in the two seasons we won the AFC North, and he is not that highly paid when you consider he plays the second highest paid position in the league.
So let’s get this straight: You would prefer 2 pro-bowls and the chance to over pay 3 straight top 2 draft picks to winning the division twice?
I’ll take the loneliness.
I'm going to have to go with bodacio on this.
Your argument is flawed. Pro Bowl selection speaks to the quality of the player, while division championships speak to the quality of the team. I understand the assertion that the players we got were instrumental to those wins, but I don’t agree with the assumption that a Pro Bowl quality player like Jackson wouldn’t contribute just as much.
I don’t see us winning the division in 2005 without the trades. We would have had a massive gap a CB, and who would have started at DE that is an improvement over Geathers? Whereas Rudi had highest career yards in 2005, so Jackson isn’t a vast improvement over him.
I think we win in 2009 with or without the trade. I still argue the trade was the right thing to do.
Further, Bodacio’s arguement is flawed in that he has produce no evidence that we would have selected Steven Jackson and not Chris Perry at the 24 spot. The ink was still drying on Rudi Johnson’s 5 year 30 million extension, and he was coming off a season in which he led the AFC in rushing. There is no indication that we were looking to draft a franchise back, but rather a third down back that could play from the back field or from the slot. As I see it, the choices were Perry at 24 or Perry at 26 and Stacy Andrews.
Why would you use a 1st round pick on a 3rd down back?
Chris Perry was supposed to be the next franchise back after Rudi. They even used him as the franchise back and gave him the opportunity to do so after letting Rudi go. He sucked it up. I too supported Perry and kept saying that he wasn’t a bust, but he was/is.
Again, those teams not winning had nothing to do with Jackson or Dillon. Not sure what point you’re trying to make.
Whether or not we would’ve taken Stephen Jackson doesn’t erase the fact that Perry was the wrong choice. Considering Rudi began to drop off significantly after ‘05, would’ve been much better off with one of the top 5 running backs in the league, Stephen Jackson. Rudi’s not here. Perry’s hanging in the UFL. Jackson’s still a very productive player rotting on a bad team.
Robert Geathers not overpaid? 6 years, 33 million. Hasn’t hit 4 sacks since. Are you serious?
i would take the trade and give up 2 spots in round 1 to gain the extra pick
Although you have to be smarter than the Bengals and take somebody better than Chris Perry.
But they did make up for that back pick by taking Kenny Irons. Oh wait…i guess that was a dumb pick too…..never mind!!!
I'm for it if Thomas and Wilson aren't there
In that case, I’d be open to trading down and taking Pouncey, Tate, or Nate Allen.
What about trading up?
The way I see it, yes the passing attack needs help. But wouldn’t the safety position be classified as nearly as big a need. I think Thomas would be a sweet upgrade, and being the amount of talent that is out there at wide-out, there should be plenty of options. Would you give up your first 3rd rounder to move up and take Thomas if he falls into the teens? Or would there be another safety out there that brings as much to the table?
About yout point of having one domiant team vs having several quality seasons, trust me, as an Eagles fan I know it’s nice to have a winning team. If your team is always really good but never great, you have less time in pain (the 4 plus months of the year) but the next 6 still suck just as much. I would take one super bowl over the other 4 championship games we went to any day of the week. Not to say that trading up or down will do it, but taking a shot while you have it is worth the price.
Safety is not pressing enough to trade up for and here is why.
The defense was really, really strong last season with the safeties we already have. Yes, Crocker is getting older, was beaten for big plays on occasion, and couldn’t stay healthy the entire season, and there is no one to back him up as of this time, but he still isn’t that bad. Yes, Roy Williams has a bionic forearm that keeps breaking and is as renown for his blown coverage as he is for his big hitting, but he too isn’t that bad. A lot of people in the Bengal universe are especially hard on Ndukwe, and to me, he is a solid starter that doesn’t worry me too much at all—-someday soon he could wind up in the Pro Bowl; the guy has a nose for the ball and makes big plays, but also gives up one here and there.
All in all, the safety spot does need attention, especially a bawl-hawking uber-athlete like Earl Thomas to compete with Crocker, but if on opening day, we have the same starting safeties as last season, I rest easy. That being said, I would rather have both of our third-round picks instead of only one with a higher first-round choice.
Good points on the Eagles comparison to the Bengals current and future situation. Thing is, we haven’t even tasted a playoff win in ions, much less a Championship Game. I understand not winning the Super Bowl ultimately is a failure of a season, but just to make the playoffs as much as Philly has in the past decade or so is nearly unfathomable around these parts.
Thanks a lot for stopping by, reading and commenting.
B. Clifton Burke
Sure thing
I kind of adopted the Bengals as my 2nd team this off season. I called this team to be the turn around team of the year last season, and pick up some loot for it. I kind of got hooked, as the Eagles and the Bengals never had any problems. Also, anyone who hates the Steelers as much as I do has at least something in common with me.
As far as the playoff bit goes, I can certainly understand your point. When the team was up and coming, I certainly didn’t see it as a waste of a season. However, looking back at the Dawkins-McNabb era, it kind of looks like a waste of a championship window. Maybe I should count my blessings, but no matter what happens I would very much like to see an Eagles super bowl before I die. Hopefully I still have a long way to go there, but not sure how many good opportunities I will see between now and then.
Here's where I disagree with you Mojo
Correct me if I’m wrong, but your argument is basically this: 1. This is a deep draft and 2. The Bengals don’t have any glaring needs. Therefore your conclusion is we should trade down and pick up as much talent and picks as possible.
I agree with points 1 and 2, but I don’t really agree with your conclusion. In fact, because the Bengals don’t have any glaring needs, I think that this makes it a perfect chance to move up and pick up a player that will be can step right in next year and be a difference maker. Here’s my logic:
1. Last year, the Bengals proved that they have a lot of guys capable of starting. Because of this, that means that there are simply not that many roster spots that will be available come game day. Therefore, the more players that we draft (especially once we get into the later rounds), the more it seems that that we’ll have to cut, or send to the practice squad.
2. Because of the renowned depth in the draft this year, there are a lot of teams that are willing to trade down, which will make it easier and possibly cheaper to do so.
3. I thought the Bengals were just one or two players away last year from being dominant on defense and just one or two players from being decent on offense (recall that the offense was decent until we lost Chris Henry). The higher we draft, the more likely it is that we can find impact players in the draft. And because we already have capable starters we are capable of taking on more risk that comes with high draft picks.
That said, I wouldn’t actually be upset if we traded down, I just think that we’re in a position where trading up could also make sense. Great read Mojo!
This is our year!
What abou this
We trade down in the first to somewhere between 25-30, take Mays or Price or Iupati, or Roger Saffold, or Benn, then Trade up in the second, using the picks we got to trade down and take another of those same players? then we have picked two impact players instead of 1?
I like this
The Bengals have more draft picks than open roster spots going into the 2010 season so it makes sense to work the picks in the top couple rounds and try to get as much quality as possible. A couple of immediate starters and situational players who will contribute would be great additions.
by Cedric Benson Boat Party on Apr 13, 2010 2:23 PM EDT up reply actions
safety depth
Although you can sleep at night w our current lineup of safeties now, mojo, remember a couple of things.. How long do you think those two can play well enough to be starters in the league. The aging safeties can be succeptible to injuries and can have their level of play can drop. This position needs young talent immediately! give Zim his guy. As far as draft picks go, its not quantity its quality. The Simpson and Perry picks make me cringe when I see who we passed on for those guys. Well do better this year I’m sure.
by quickslant on Apr 13, 2010 3:05 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Trading Back
i believe it is a good idea to move down so long as someone who just cant be missed is there (thomas). As far as receiver goes, more often than not rookie receivers dont come into the league and blow people away, they usually take a year or so and with the signing of Bryant they will be a #3 at best as stated by Mojokong. TE we dont use enough to warrant a 1st rounder and G is something we can pick up in the other rounds (Asamoah, Ducasse). I believe if we can trade down and maybe get a extra 2nd or 3rd & 4th, that would help build depth. Now onto the point of losing our high price talent, i know Brown is about as cheap as they come but losing any of our big players would ruin the defense we currently have. I have been waiting for a defense like this well for awhile. If we had last years defense with 05’s offense, i cant even imagin what we could have done. we can not, can not let Hall and Joseph go, they are arguably the best corner duo in the league. (sorry for the long post)
I'm interested in people's opinions of the opposite
It has been mentioned on this site in a couple other posts that this is unusual for the Bengals to go into the draft without a clear need in the first round. It’s also been said by Zim that they are looking for more depth instead of starters. So without any glaring needs standing above one else, what would people think about trading up and getting one of the potential stars in, say, Eric Berry?
It seems as though the consensus is that the top needs are WR, G, pass rush, TE, and S. Since there are questions about Dez, it isn’t clear if Demaryius Thomas has the potential to run the route tree, Golden Tate may not be the deep threat we need, Jermaine Gresham has issues, etc., what about trying to get a potential Ed Reed in Eric Berry (and also potentially keeping him away from the Browns at 7)? Or moving up for someone else to fill a different need. It seems like Berry would be the best bet though at filling one of the needs and getting a potential superstar.
I haven’t seen a lot of discussion on this site of the potential of moving up, but maybe I’ve missed it. Just wondering what others might think of it. I know it is unlucky given the money necessary in the high pick signings but you never know.
I really like Berry...
but so does everyone else. I think the Bengals would have to give up a lot to move up that high to get him. Also, see my above comment on why I wouldn’t trade up for any safety.
Good points.
B. Clifton Burke
I'd buy it
but what little discussion there has been has generally taken the stance that (a) that’s not the way Mike Brown would ordinarily do things to begin with, and (b) since he is very reluctant to part with anything close to top dollar (ask Andre Smith), he won’t be inclined to move from the relatively “inexpensive” neighborhood of #21 to the high-rent district where Eric Berry will be found (~#5).
I’m not convinced about the principle in (a): he was the guy who traded up from #5 to #1 to get Ki-Jana Carter, after all. However, (b) sounds like the measure of the man. Sigh…
I would even like to see us trade our two in the 3rd
to grab a mid-to-high level pick in the 2nd. We need two or three PLAYMAKERS—the term “solid starter” makes my stomach turn.
I think it’s not really talked about here because we all know who owns this team and it’ll never happen.
by Bengals NFL Champs on Apr 13, 2010 10:26 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
can't trade comp picks
But we could trade down a few spots then move up in the second and get 2 impact players and still have the picks to get depth.
Oh yeah...I had forgotten about that
I love this blog…it’s like a giant throbbing brain of football knowledge
by Bengals NFL Champs on Apr 13, 2010 11:42 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
no way they trade up to get Berry
That would cost way to much $ for Mikey to pay a safety.
I just don’t seem them paying that much for a safety.
Anyway, when was the last time they traded UP (Big Daddy?)
I'ts just who will want to trade up?
Cowboys? St louis? I just have a good feeling that a great player will slip to us at 21, so I say we stay unless their is nobody there that is worth being a 1st rounder. It’s just a feeling I have about this draft thats says it will not go as mocked by most people and alot of trades will happen(by other teams). Will we make a trade? Doubtful…..very very doubtful, when was the last time we traded in the draft period? Not just up or down in any round, we just dont do all that much trading (I wish we would, I like trading draft picks. Just look at how New England does there picks, always have a bunch of picks early). This has the potential to be an awesome draft for us with some very sexy picks, but with Marvin you just never know, you may end up saying “who the hell is that” (remember a fellow named Jerome Simpson? We said WHO?!?! when Desean Jackson was sitting there and could’ve got Jerome in the 4th or 5th round…..Sad every time I think of it)
CB85......Collaros for Heisman
Oh just another thing about Desean Jackson
What if we did draft him? Would he have played? Would he have made an impact in our system? Thats a good question
CB85......Collaros for Heisman
by TennBengalfan on Apr 13, 2010 12:29 AM EDT up reply actions
He probably would have sat like Simpson did and
would you have a different outlook on Simpson if he has a phenomenal year as the #3 wr. I’m calling it. You heard it from me first. Look at Sidney Rice.. He had a phenomenal year last year. His third year of play.
With the Ocho, Bryant, Caldwell, Cosby, Purify, and Simpson being our WRs, Coffman being another passing threat, You are going to see a lot of 4 or 5 WR sets. More than in the past. This can set up the running game, which we all know that is what Marvin wants.
I’d love to see it, but although Rice wasn’t nearly the same receiver his first two years, he was on the field honing his craft. Simpson has virtually zero experience in game situations. I think it’s entirely possible he earns some PT, but it seems like a stretch he becomes a big part of the offense. At best he’s our #5 and has a long way to climb to see the field consistently.
Additional draft picks = more guys we cut in late August
This team doesn’t need more picks. We already have 48 guys under contract that should make the opening day roster. That leaves 5 more players and we already have 8 draft picks (plus UDFA’s that we can sign for camp depth). Trading down to get more picks only makes sense to me if these are future draft picks (2011, 2012). That’s been the key to success for the Pats and Iggles: draft flexibility. But I’d much rather see us stay put and draft our guys (just no major reaches like Simpson!).
agreed
the only caveat is to trade back in round one and package one or some of the later picks gained to move up in the second or third rounds.
by Cedric Benson Boat Party on Apr 13, 2010 2:29 PM EDT up reply actions
depends on who you draft
if we get a bunch of 6’s and 7’s, then yeah….they get cut.
but if Mikey can turn into a Jerry Jones, and figure out how to trade down from #21 to like #25 or so, while improving to a better spot in rounds 2 and 3, then you get 2 impact starters in the top 35 and maybe 3 in the top 55?
i agree w/your idea of trading down
None of the guys we’re talking about are perfect.
T Mays can’t cover, just looks ‘bad’ at times.
Gresham was hurt all last year. Can’t block that well.
Iupati is questionable in pass blocking.
Dez hasn’t played for a year, and didn’t look impressive in his proday. Seems to have “character” issues.
Etc…, Etc…
Actually, i’d be happy to see us make a trade where we get a #1 next year. Usually late in round 1 or early round 2, a team desparate to grab a guy who is stiil remaining will make an unsound trade to get their man (like SF taking J Staley or CLE taking B Quinn). So at #21 the Bengals would have a good chance to get something like a #2 this year and a #1 next year for their 21 overall if the right person falls, and the right team is desparate enough for him.
Iupati
I haven’t seen anything that has questioned Iupati’s pass blocking ability. Can you point me to it so I can read up?
From Mocking the Draft
Pass blocking: Picks up stunts against quick ends well. Good help blocker, especially against ends who work to the inside. Has a strong hand punch to jolt defensive linemen.
This is our year!
I, You, Patty
geesh…i don’t remember. i’ve been on a bunch of different mock draft sites. From what i recall the concensus was he is an absolute beast in run blocking, but the pass blocking isn’t spectacular, and needed improved. i’ll look…

by 






















