Bengals Mock Draft

[Captain Awesome]

This is just my thoughts on what might be a solid draft for the team. I looked at team needs, rankings of the players I thought would be available, and didn't include any draft day trades.


[b]1. Andre Smith, OT, Alabama; 6’4”, 330 lbs., 5.30 40 yd.[/b]
With both of the starting tackles having some serious injury problems, and the under achievement of Stacey Andrews this past year, it is time to draft another offensive tackle who has the skills to step in day one and be a starter. Unfortunately the team doesn't have the depth on the o-line to draft an OT in the later rounds and develop them, and protecting Carson should be the priority, this past year was proof enough how much of a difference he makes when he is out of the offense. Andre Smith could step in at right tackle from day one, and could eventually move into the left side of the line. This would give the Bengals three young linemen (Whitworth, Collins, and now Smith) that would be the foundation of the o-line for years to come. The only other glaring need would be center, which is addressed next.


[b]2. Alex Mack, C, California; 6’4”, 316 lbs., 5.10 40 yd.[/b]
Hopefully the Bengals let Ghauichik walk, he seems to have regressed each year since he took over for Braham. The center is the position that calls out the offensive line formations and if the Bengals do address this need via a free agency they still need a young player they can groom behind a veteran player. Mack could step in and play center with some minor growing pains and still be an upgrade over Guy-Chick. Or if the Bengals decide to go with a center in free agency, like Matt Birk, for a year or two, Mack could learn the ins and outs of the game and also get some time in at guard if he isn't playing center immediately. Either way this would be another pick that would help to re-establish the offensive line as a strength of this team, and give them another solid player for the next few years.


[b]3. Clay Matthews, OLB, USC; 6’3”, 240 lbs., 4.75 40 yd.[/b]
While being a very solid player, Matthews doesn't get the recognition that his fellow USC linebackers have gotten, and I think he will be one of the players that the Bengals will be able to steal in later round because his name isn't out there like his teammates. Matthews has the size and speed that make him tough for linemen to push around, and a head for the game which would make him a headache for offensive coordinators, and has a non-stop motor which would help keep the defense playing tough for all four quarters. Matthews would hopefully be able to make the loss of Pollack a little less noticeable in the linebacking corp.


[b]4. Brannan Southerland, FB, Georgia; 6’0”, 240 lbs., 4.65 40 yd.[/b]
The Bengals are in need of a true fullback. Without one the offense was exposed in both pass protection and run blocking. Southerland should be on the board in the 4th round, and will give the Bengals a powerful fullback who has the size to open holes and the speed to pick up blitzing defenders when put into the blocking scheme.


[b]5. Jasper Brinkley, ILB, South Carolina; 6’2”, 275 lbs., 4.75 40 yd.[/b]
I watch a lot of SEC (and Big Ten) college games remember thinking that this guy was a beast on the field. I was surprised he wasn't rated higher on the draft boards that I've seen, but the main knock on him was that he was JUCO transfer and may not have the experience in a major program needed to justify a higher round selection. Watching Brinkley I was reminded of Takeo Spikes, I don't think that Brinkley has the same talent that Spikes did, but Brinkley plays with a high intensity and knows how to hit and tackle. While I don't think that Brinkley will be a starter he would be best suited for his first few years on special teams, and while learning the defensive system behind Dhani Jones, Brinkley could turn into a valuable back up.

[b]6. Cedric Peerman, RB, Virginia; 5’10”, 208 lbs., 4.55 40 yd.[/b]
Peerman really impressed me at the Senior Bowl, while not being the biggest guy he was still able to run through some guys and consistently moved the chains. I think the Bengals will resign Benson, but may be looking to part ways with the injury prone Chris Perry. Peerman could be a nice compliment to Benson in a backfield that is in need of consistent play.

[b]7. Brooks Foster, WR, North Carolina; 6’3”, 205 lbs., 4.45 40 yd.[/b]
Mainly it is Foster's size and speed that caught my eye, and the Bengals may be able to stash him on the practice squad for a year and develop him after that on the regular roster. With the uncertainty at WR right now, I think it would be a good idea to stock pile guys, create competition among the back-ups so no one feels 100% comfortable, and when the team needs guys to step up they won't have to worry about rookies being able to fill in for the veterans.

[Jason]

I'm not sure Clay Matthews will last that long, I think Brinkley is better suited to a 3-4 defense (he hasn't been the same since his injury) and I would rather have Huber than Peerman or Foster.

But I do like the draft, especially if Matthews does last that long.

[Squirrlnutz]

1st round- uneccessary
2nd round- spot on
3rd round- he's way gone by then

I don't care/know enough to go beyond round 3.

[|Tigers Johnson|]

[quote name='Squirrlnutz' post='743941' date='Feb 2 2009, 04:57 PM']1st round- uneccessary
2nd round- spot on
3rd round- he's way gone by then

I don't care/know enough to go beyond round 3.[/quote]

How is an OT unnecessary?

[Jason]

[quote name='Tigers Johnson' post='743943' date='Feb 2 2009, 04:22 PM']How is an OT unnecessary?[/quote]

That's what I was thinking.

[bengaled]

[quote name='Tigers Johnson' post='743943' date='Feb 2 2009, 04:22 PM']How is an OT unnecessary?[/quote]

surely that's a misprint. it should have read MOST NECESSARY. we've only lost our top 3 OTs in the last year by my count.

[JC]

I don't think Mack makes it past the Steelers at #32. And the guy from UNC is pretty good. I think that would be a steal in the 7th.

[Bengals1181]

[quote name='bengaled' post='743968' date='Feb 2 2009, 06:59 PM']surely that's a misprint. it should have read MOST NECESSARY. we've only lost our top 3 OTs in the last year by my count.[/quote]


it depends on what you think of Collins, who Marvin was pretty glowing about last week. I don't fully agree with SquirrelNutz, but I see where he's coming from. The draft would be just as successful if we took defense round 1, and then took a great RT in round 2. I wouldn't say OT isn't a necessity, but taking one in round 1 isn't necessarly one.

[Squirrlnutz]

[quote name='Tigers Johnson' post='743943' date='Feb 2 2009, 05:22 PM']How is an OT unnecessary?[/quote]


[quote name='Jason' post='743944' date='Feb 2 2009, 05:26 PM']That's what I was thinking.[/quote]


[quote name='bengaled' post='743968' date='Feb 2 2009, 07:59 PM']surely that's a misprint. it should have read MOST NECESSARY. we've only lost our top 3 OTs in the last year by my count.[/quote]

Adding a new RT is very neccessary. Adding a #6 draft pick RT is very Un-neccessary.

We can add one in free agency or in round 3.

The only way we should take an OT in round one is if we get an extra round one pick from trading someone, otherwise the DEF needs the pick.

We have an LT, Collins, and Levi is still going to get a shot at the job whether or not we like it. Getting new solid C will do more for protecting Palmer than adding an all-pro OT. There will be a number of mid-level free agent (read: the Bengal's market) OTs available this offseason where as there are only 2-3 LBs who are really worth pursuing and they are not in the "the bengals market." Adding one of these OTs to play the right side and drafting a 3rd rounder to groom behind him (and compete for the job) IMO is the most productive way to play the draft (don't forget you must always look to improve both sides of the ball) while being fiscally responsible (not giving a rookie OT $60 million in garantees).

I just think that the people who are star-struck by adding a new OT are gonna be upset when A. The offense, while looking a lot better than 08, is still struggling in the same fasion they were since week 15 in 06 and B. The DEF can't help out because D. Jones and Brandon Johnson aren't making enough plays to get Big Jen and Peyton Manning off the field.

Where as if we don't take a Tackle at #6 and instead take the best LB or move down to take the best LB then we'll see the offense looking quite similar to my first example (as in both cases (stud OT or not) next season it becomes painfully clear to even the staunchest Brat apologists that he needs to be replaced) but the DEF stepping up and making a difference because we now have enough playmakers to really make shit happen.

If we go OT its because Curry is gone and they just don't grade the LBs out as high and in the long run it will be nice to lock up one side of the line. But IMO the team won't ever really have a chance until the DEF gets more playmakers...so why wait? We all know with a healthy Palmer the offense isn't nearly as bad as last year? With Benson running the way he did the last 3 games the run game will atleast be a little better. A new C in round 2 and it should be a lot better.

There was a clear shift in the balance of power on this team last season, they need to take that and finish it. Put the finishing touches on what could be a great D, the average age of the DEF is retartedly young, adding another playmaking LB is just what the doctor orderd at just the right time.

Let Palmer work with the "starting wrs" all offseason, let Benson and Collins and a new C and free agent RT work on pounding the ball and the offense will drag itself back into the top 20. Is that ideal? No. But we are clearly in a better position to make the DEF great than make the OFF great so to take the next step I think we have to go DEF first.

[Jason]

If Curry is there, he is the guy I want. If not, I would be happy with Monroe, Oher or either Smith. And I am not convinced Andre Smith is strictly an NFL RT.

Curry is the ONLY LB I would take at 6. And while I would also not be opposed to Orakpo or Brown at 6, I don't believe that the Bengals will want to take another high DE considering what they are paying Geathers and Odom. The only other defensive player worth taking at 6 is Malcom Jenkins and CB is not that big a need.

If Curry is gone and Andre Smith is there, it's not a bad pick at all.

[TheLightWithin]

[quote name='Squirrlnutz' post='744103' date='Feb 3 2009, 12:30 PM']Adding a new RT is very neccessary. Adding a #6 draft pick RT is very Un-neccessary.

We can add one in free agency or in round 3.

The only way we should take an OT in round one is if we get an extra round one pick from trading someone, otherwise the DEF needs the pick.

We have an LT, Collins, and Levi is still going to get a shot at the job whether or not we like it. Getting new solid C will do more for protecting Palmer than adding an all-pro OT. There will be a number of mid-level free agent (read: the Bengal's market) OTs available this offseason where as there are only 2-3 LBs who are really worth pursuing and they are not in the "the bengals market." Adding one of these OTs to play the right side and drafting a 3rd rounder to groom behind him (and compete for the job) IMO is the most productive way to play the draft (don't forget you must always look to improve both sides of the ball) while being fiscally responsible (not giving a rookie OT $60 million in garantees).

I just think that the people who are star-struck by adding a new OT are gonna be upset when A. The offense, while looking a lot better than 08, is still struggling in the same fasion they were since week 15 in 06 and B. The DEF can't help out because D. Jones and Brandon Johnson aren't making enough plays to get Big Jen and Peyton Manning off the field.

Where as if we don't take a Tackle at #6 and instead take the best LB or move down to take the best LB then we'll see the offense looking quite similar to my first example (as in both cases (stud OT or not) next season it becomes painfully clear to even the staunchest Brat apologists that he needs to be replaced) but the DEF stepping up and making a difference because we now have enough playmakers to really make shit happen.

If we go OT its because Curry is gone and they just don't grade the LBs out as high and in the long run it will be nice to lock up one side of the line. But IMO the team won't ever really have a chance until the DEF gets more playmakers...so why wait? We all know with a healthy Palmer the offense isn't nearly as bad as last year? With Benson running the way he did the last 3 games the run game will atleast be a little better. A new C in round 2 and it should be a lot better.

There was a clear shift in the balance of power on this team last season, they need to take that and finish it. Put the finishing touches on what could be a great D, the average age of the DEF is retartedly young, adding another playmaking LB is just what the doctor orderd at just the right time.

Let Palmer work with the "starting wrs" all offseason, let Benson and Collins and a new C and free agent RT work on pounding the ball and the offense will drag itself back into the top 20. Is that ideal? No. But we are clearly in a better position to make the DEF great than make the OFF great so to take the next step I think we have to go DEF first.[/quote]

Good post.

[Squirrlnutz]

[quote name='Jason' post='744108' date='Feb 3 2009, 01:59 PM']If Curry is there, he is the guy I want. If not, I would be happy with Monroe, Oher or either Smith. And I am not convinced Andre Smith is strictly an NFL RT.

Curry is the ONLY LB I would take at 6. And while I would also not be opposed to Orakpo or Brown at 6, I don't believe that the Bengals will want to take another high DE considering what they are paying Geathers and Odom. The only other defensive player worth taking at 6 is Malcom Jenkins and CB is not that big a need.

If Curry is gone and Andre Smith is there, it's not a bad pick at all.[/quote]
Brown is the FSU DE?

Are there any DEs in the draft that might fair better at SLB in the pros? Its clear with Pollack and Jeanty that ML has had a history of having DEs make the switch, perhaps we target one for that spot?

[Jason]

[quote name='Squirrlnutz' post='744111' date='Feb 3 2009, 01:03 PM'][b]Brown is the FSU DE?[/b]

Are there any DEs in the draft that might fair better at SLB in the pros? Its clear with Pollack and Jeanty that ML has had a history of having DEs make the switch, perhaps we target one for that spot?[/quote]

Yes.

The only DE to SLB I can think of that would have remotely been worth taking at 6 (other than Orakpo or Brown who some feel could be 3-4 OLBs) is Selvie, and he stayed in school.

[bengaled]

[quote name='Jason' post='744114' date='Feb 3 2009, 01:07 PM']Yes.

The only DE to SLB I can think of that would have remotely been worth taking at 6 (other than Orakpo or Brown who some feel could be 3-4 OLBs) is Selvie, and he stayed in school.[/quote]

i don't think brown has any chance at all as a SLB. he's a DE... one who needs to add some weight/muscle.

[bengaled]

[quote name='Bengals1181' post='744000' date='Feb 2 2009, 10:07 PM']it depends on what you think of Collins, who Marvin was pretty glowing about last week. I don't fully agree with SquirrelNutz, but I see where he's coming from. The draft would be just as successful if we took defense round 1, and then took a great RT in round 2. I wouldn't say OT isn't a necessity, but taking one in round 1 isn't necessarly one.[/quote]
i don't think enough of him to make him the full time starter at LT. not when there are much better options sitting where we draft at. curry's the only LB close to being worth that high of a contract and as i've stated before, i'm not of the belief he'll be there when we pick. TBH, i'd be nervous as hell relying on a combination of collins/jones protecting palmer's blindside.

[Bengals1181]

[quote name='bengaled' post='744153' date='Feb 3 2009, 03:06 PM']i don't think enough of him to make him the full time starter at LT. not when [b]there are much better options sitting where we draft at.[/b] curry's the only LB close to being worth that high of a contract and as i've stated before, i'm not of the belief he'll be there when we pick. TBH, i'd be nervous as hell relying on a combination of collins/jones protecting palmer's blindside.[/quote]



not necessarily. The draft is very much a crapshoot. Any of those LT's could just as soon come in and suck balls as they could come in and be great.

[bengaled]

[quote name='Bengals1181' post='744240' date='Feb 3 2009, 07:14 PM']not necessarily. The draft is very much a crapshoot. Any of those LT's could just as soon come in and suck balls as they could come in and be great.[/quote]


sure, as could any of them. but you can't look at it that way, it's not realistic. you have to assess them a value based off of all the information you've acquired and assume it's accurate. that information SHOULD tell you that a top 5 LT is going to eventually grade out much higher than an anthony collins or a broken down levi jones.

[fredtoast]

[quote name='Squirrlnutz' post='744103' date='Feb 3 2009, 12:30 PM']Adding a new RT is very neccessary. Adding a #6 draft pick RT is very Un-neccessary.

We can add one in free agency or in round 3.

The only way we should take an OT in round one is if we get an extra round one pick from trading someone, otherwise the DEF needs the pick.

We have an LT, Collins, and Levi is still going to get a shot at the job whether or not we like it. Getting new solid C will do more for protecting Palmer than adding an all-pro OT. There will be a number of mid-level free agent (read: the Bengal's market) OTs available this offseason where as there are only 2-3 LBs who are really worth pursuing and they are not in the "the bengals market." Adding one of these OTs to play the right side and drafting a 3rd rounder to groom behind him (and compete for the job) IMO is the most productive way to play the draft (don't forget you must always look to improve both sides of the ball) while being fiscally responsible (not giving a rookie OT $60 million in garantees).

I just think that the people who are star-struck by adding a new OT are gonna be upset when A. The offense, while looking a lot better than 08, is still struggling in the same fasion they were since week 15 in 06 and B. The DEF can't help out because D. Jones and Brandon Johnson aren't making enough plays to get Big Jen and Peyton Manning off the field.

Where as if we don't take a Tackle at #6 and instead take the best LB or move down to take the best LB then we'll see the offense looking quite similar to my first example (as in both cases (stud OT or not) next season it becomes painfully clear to even the staunchest Brat apologists that he needs to be replaced) but the DEF stepping up and making a difference because we now have enough playmakers to really make shit happen.

If we go OT its because Curry is gone and they just don't grade the LBs out as high and in the long run it will be nice to lock up one side of the line. But IMO the team won't ever really have a chance until the DEF gets more playmakers...so why wait? We all know with a healthy Palmer the offense isn't nearly as bad as last year? With Benson running the way he did the last 3 games the run game will atleast be a little better. A new C in round 2 and it should be a lot better.

There was a clear shift in the balance of power on this team last season, they need to take that and finish it. Put the finishing touches on what could be a great D, the average age of the DEF is retartedly young, adding another playmaking LB is just what the doctor orderd at just the right time.

Let Palmer work with the "starting wrs" all offseason, let Benson and Collins and a new C and free agent RT work on pounding the ball and the offense will drag itself back into the top 20. Is that ideal? No. But we are clearly in a better position to make the DEF great than make the OFF great so to take the next step I think we have to go DEF first.[/quote]

You can't just look at one side of the ball. A good defense is no good without a good offense, just like a good offense is no good withoput a good defense. You have to look at the team as a whole. If you do that then OT is clearly the biggest need. We don't have a bunch of Pro Bowlers at LB but they are much better than our current OTs.

The other big disgreement I have with your theory is that any old third-rounder can play well at RT as a rookie. I think we would be much better off with a 1st round pick in there. One of the best first round picks in Bengal history was a RT (Willie) and he was a top 10 pick.

[Squirrlnutz]

[quote name='fredtoast' post='744479' date='Feb 4 2009, 04:18 PM']You can't just look at one side of the ball. A good defense is no good without a good offense, just like a good offense is no good withoput a good defense. You have to look at the team as a whole. If you do that then OT is clearly the biggest need. [b]We don't have a bunch of Pro Bowlers at LB but they are much better than our current OTs[/b].[/quote]
See I disagree there. I would rather have Collins or a healthy Levi at LT than D. Jones or Jeanty at their respective positions.



[quote name='fredtoast' post='744479' date='Feb 4 2009, 04:18 PM']The other big disgreement I have with your theory is that [b]any old third-rounder can play well at RT as a rookie[/b]. I think we would be much better off with a 1st round pick in there. One of the best first round picks in Bengal history was a RT (Willie) and he was a top 10 pick.[/quote]
I don't neccessarily think we can pencil in a 3rd round RT as the starter as I do feel we need to bring in a vet OT to compete with said drafted OT for the spot, but I think most people would be in agreement that you are FAR more likely to find a starting RT in the 3rd round than a starting LT. Plus I also think we have a proven tackle in Whitworth who could make the switch to the right side and allow us to take a guard in the 3rd.

I don't want to ignore the offense, as a matter of fact if I had the draft my way the 1st pick would be DEF and the next 3 would be OFF. I just think we can get better value out of our picks if we go DEF, OFF, OFF. I see C, LB, and RT as our 3 critically glaring needs. More often than not Cs and RTs are not taken in the first round so I think we can add a playmaker LB at #6 while still getting excellent value at the other spots with later picks, where as I think we'd neglect adding a playmaking LB if we waited till the 3rd and took an OT first.

[|kennethmw|]

[quote name='Squirrlnutz' post='744484' date='Feb 4 2009, 05:01 PM']See I disagree there. I would rather have Collins or a healthy Levi at LT than D. Jones or Jeanty at their respective positions.




I don't neccessarily think we can pencil in a 3rd round RT as the starter as I do feel we need to bring in a vet OT to compete with said drafted OT for the spot, but I think most people would be in agreement that you are FAR more likely to find a starting RT in the 3rd round than a starting LT. Plus I also think we have a proven tackle in Whitworth who could make the switch to the right side and allow us to take a guard in the 3rd.

I don't want to ignore the offense, as a matter of fact if I had the draft my way the 1st pick would be DEF and the next 3 would be OFF. I just think we can get better value out of our picks if we go DEF, OFF, OFF. I see C, LB, and RT as our 3 critically glaring needs. More often than not Cs and RTs are not taken in the first round so I think we can add a playmaker LB at #6 while still getting excellent value at the other spots with later picks, where as I think we'd neglect adding a playmaking LB if we waited till the 3rd and took an OT first.[/quote]

Squirrl, good posts. I don't agree with you totally, but you are very logical in your thought process. As long as we get another LB, OT, C and RB in the draft or free agency I'll be happy.

[scharm]

I think a DE could sneak in as a bengals pick in the 1st or 2nd.

Post draft always covers the guys that are actually picked, but there has been slight suggestions that the Bengals would have had a hard time deciding if Leon Hall and Jarvis Moss were on the board and then there was the Jaguars (?) feeling they needed to get in front of the bengals to grab Harvey.

[Bengals1181]

[quote name='scharm' post='744523' date='Feb 4 2009, 07:31 PM']I think a DE could sneak in as a bengals pick in the 1st or 2nd.

Post draft always covers the guys that are actually picked, but there has been slight suggestions that the Bengals would have had a hard time deciding if Leon Hall and Jarvis Moss were on the board and then there was the Jaguars (?) feeling they needed to get in front of the bengals to grab Harvey.[/quote]


I definately think the Bengals take a DE at some point (in the first 4 rounds) but can't see it happening in round 1 unless they fall in love with someone or trade down to get extra picks. I hope not at least. I'd love to grab an Orakpo, but I don't think its a pressing need and I'm also not ready to give up on Geathers, or Odom before we ever even get to see him healthy. I think you use a 2nd-4th pick to use as a rotational guy with them.

[Squirrlnutz]

[quote name='kennethmw' post='744499' date='Feb 4 2009, 06:20 PM']Squirrl, good posts. I don't agree with you totally, but you are very logical in your thought process. As long as we get another LB, OT, C and RB in the draft or free agency I'll be happy.[/quote]
I appreciate the kind words. I try to be clear with why I think the way I do so that people who know better can identify misconceptions and educate me. I certainly don't know enough, I never even played football (ok one season in 5th grade) I was always a hockey guy.

And I agree with that last line. The coaches know better than us so whatever order they decide to address those spots in is ok with me...as long as they address THOSE spots!

[Squirrlnutz]

[quote name='Bengals1181' post='744530' date='Feb 4 2009, 08:47 PM']I definately think the Bengals take a DE at some point (in the first 4 rounds) but can't see it happening in round 1 unless they fall in love with someone or trade down to get extra picks. I hope not at least. I'd love to grab an Orakpo, but I don't think its a pressing need and I'm also not ready to give up on Geathers, or Odom before we ever even get to see him healthy. I think you use a 2nd-4th pick to use as a rotational guy with them.[/quote]
x2

Especially if we can grab an OT and DB in free agency and retain Benson...then we'd have a lot of wiggle room to take a DE.