I talk a lot about how draft picks, even in the first round, dont often pan out as great successes, and since we dont hawkeye every teams rsoter and draft it just feels like we aare the only team with underwhelming draft picks.

and it continues to not be true.

Below is the chart for 5th year option guys from the 2023 draft. 13 of 31 picks arent even eligible for minimum playing time 5th year options.. thats 42% didnt even play enough.

the 13mil price tag on Murphy is probably one you go ahead and jump on.

17 hours ago, GoBengals said:

I talk a lot about how draft picks, even in the first round, dont often pan out as great successes, and since we dont hawkeye every teams rsoter and draft it just feels like we aare the only team with underwhelming draft picks.

and it continues to not be true.

Below is the chart for 5th year option guys from the 2023 draft. 13 of 31 picks arent even eligible for minimum playing time 5th year options.. thats 42% didnt even play enough.

the 13mil price tag on Murphy is probably one you go ahead and jump on.

Interesting stuff. Some of those picks that don’t even qualify based on playing time are pretty high picks.

Thanks for posting.

Every team wins on Draft Day.

On 12/26/2025 at 11:12 AM, Le Tigre said:

Every team wins on Draft Day.

Ummm..

On 12/26/2025 at 9:12 AM, Le Tigre said:

Every team wins on Draft Day.

draft day the movie is one of my fav sports movies. just edge to edge manufactured drama, this is offtopic.

also im in the movie (somewhere) i was at the draft i sat in that green room, stood at that podium(we got a tour the day prior) , high fived geno smith when he got picked in the 2nd round.

im somewhere in the crowd in the second deck when they show the crowd they show my area, for the love of god i cannot find myself.. wearing a go-bengals.com t shirt.

some foreigners came by and asked why we were all lined up outside radio city music hall, we said it was the nfl draft, nfl teams are drafting players to their teams.. she asked if we were all players hoping to get drafted...

in my peak physical form i could not be confused for a professional athelete, so it was funny.. they seemed confused that we would all line up to WATCH players getting drafted...

what, like there is something better to do in NYC?

2 hours ago, claptonrocks said:

Ummm..

either you win with a good player, or you win with good drafting position for next year...

win/win 🙃

5 hours ago, GoBengals said:

either you win with a good player, or you win with good drafting position for next year...

win/win 🙃

Not if you don’t know what to do with the good draft position.

5 hours ago, GoBengals said:

draft day the movie is one of my fav sports movies. just edge to edge manufactured drama, this is offtopic.

also im in the movie (somewhere) i was at the draft i sat in that green room, stood at that podium(we got a tour the day prior) , high fived geno smith when he got picked in the 2nd round.

im somewhere in the crowd in the second deck when they show the crowd they show my area, for the love of god i cannot find myself.. wearing a go-bengals.com t shirt.

some foreigners came by and asked why we were all lined up outside radio city music hall, we said it was the nfl draft, nfl teams are drafting players to their teams.. she asked if we were all players hoping to get drafted...

in my peak physical form i could not be confused for a professional athelete, so it was funny.. they seemed confused that we would all line up to WATCH players getting drafted...

what, like there is something better to do in NYC?

Very cool story.

We were at the draft the year they picked Ki-Jana Carter. It’s a cool experience, but I’m not so sure I’m a big fan of the whole NFL experience that they’ve turned it into.

9 hours ago, claptonrocks said:

Ummm..

I seem to recall a draft year with ML where he strongly hinted that the player they wanted in most rounds was selected just before them. If true, I am sure that happens from time to time and that team would not feel they won the draft.

I don't why, but I went back and looked at the 1989 draft from after the Superbowl and I could not believe that it looked to be the worst draft in the History of drafts for this team. Not one player did shiat in the NFL, not one and they drafted 12 players and like idiots gave away their first pick to select two bums. Lol just briefly looking over the 90s draft selections was a horrible decade of drafting. I don't think you want to put those players on a chart. Lol

I seem to recall a draft year with ML where he strongly hinted that the player they wanted in most rounds was selected just before them. If true, I am sure that happens from time to time and that team would not feel they won the draft.

Steven Jackson vs Chris Perry? Bengals traded down a few spots in round 1 and it cost them Jackson.

IMHO - I don't think the problem is so much that our draft picks don't pan out - it's been beaten to death that it's 50/50 all over the league.

The problem is that we waste more draft picks - tip that "house edge" a bit - but taking fliers on guys who have recently been shot, raped someone, one year wonders and workout warriors. We tend to bet more on guys with high ceiling/low floor profiles. In addition, we tend to draft a guy and then not have a backup plan like other teams will and do.

Given enough hands of Blackjack, the house will not only always win, but win bigly. An advantage of 2-3% in the odds means you have to be a moron to bankrupt a casino. Those little side bets on long shots add up over the years. Hitting on 48% of draft picks instead of 51% over the life of an organization has a larger effect than it might appear on paper because humans suck at statistics.

Using that analogy, the house usually has a 2-3% odds advantage over an experienced blackjack player. A good strategy can shift the player's odds by (only) .5%! And it's significant! If the casino has a 98% payout rate, you just decreased the house advantage by 25%.

Pointing out that the Rec player and the Pro player both lost a hand - It's useless without understanding their greater strategy. The decision making that went into losing that hand. Because the Pro player is going to do much better than the Rec player over a group of hands. Go ahead and convince yourself otherwise. It doesn't change the math that allows casinos to exist and be wildly profitable even giving you $500 - $1000 to start with. That little 2% advantage and your unwillingness to believe in math is all it takes.

I'll also say that we are coming out of some of the strangest draft years... Covid and it's downstream effects have made the last few drafts more challenging than required.

If a few extra scouts mean we win just one more draft pick in every other draft for the next 10 years - that's significant.

2 hours ago, LostInDaJungle said:

IMHO - I don't think the problem is so much that our draft picks don't pan out - it's been beaten to death that it's 50/50 all over the league.

The problem is that we waste more draft picks - tip that "house edge" a bit - but taking fliers on guys who have recently been shot, raped someone, one year wonders and workout warriors. We tend to bet more on guys with high ceiling/low floor profiles. In addition, we tend to draft a guy and then not have a backup plan like other teams will and do.

Given enough hands of Blackjack, the house will not only always win, but win bigly. An advantage of 2-3% in the odds means you have to be a moron to bankrupt a casino. Those little side bets on long shots add up over the years. Hitting on 48% of draft picks instead of 51% over the life of an organization has a larger effect than it might appear on paper because humans suck at statistics.

Using that analogy, the house usually has a 2-3% odds advantage over an experienced blackjack player. A good strategy can shift the player's odds by (only) .5%! And it's significant! If the casino has a 98% payout rate, you just decreased the house advantage by 25%.

Pointing out that the Rec player and the Pro player both lost a hand - It's useless without understanding their greater strategy. The decision making that went into losing that hand. Because the Pro player is going to do much better than the Rec player over a group of hands. Go ahead and convince yourself otherwise. It doesn't change the math that allows casinos to exist and be wildly profitable even giving you $500 - $1000 to start with. That little 2% advantage and your unwillingness to believe in math is all it takes.

I'll also say that we are coming out of some of the strangest draft years... Covid and it's downstream effects have made the last few drafts more challenging than required.

If a few extra scouts mean we win just one more draft pick in every other draft for the next 10 years - that's significant.

Having 1 better player in the draft per year is actually HUGE. And I would add that this team also has a tendency to let good players walk and replace them with unproven picks which sets the team back year after year. If you tweaked those two things we could actually build a consistent winner.

Funny thing is - how cheap a few scouts are compared to the cost of wasted picks - would you rather have severtal more scouts or more Cartman picks? The answer is obvious to everyone but the Brown's.

13 hours ago, Shebengal said:

Not if you don’t know what to do with the good draft position.

no one does.... so many drafts tat clearly dont have a single viable QB option and youll see 4 go in the first round and 2 in the second round..... like if youre the raiders.. draft Reese, have Crosby and reese out there, you may never score, but hell the other teams isnt going to either... dont take a QB from fucking indiana just cause you need one.. take some pro style qb from some chump university... end up with a Flacco or dalton or cousins type guy... like the movie, every owner wants hype and to "make a splash" in the draft instead of just worrying about getting better...

13 hours ago, Shebengal said:

Very cool story.

We were at the draft the year they picked Ki-Jana Carter. It’s a cool experience, but I’m not so sure I’m a big fan of the whole NFL experience that they’ve turned it into.

theyve overblown it for sure... money always wins... its a bummer it intensifies the fan culture of hating draft picks that arent mega stars from the jump, with the mdiea social media and everyone calling guys busts and bums and wasted picks... these young guys are solft mentally these days, i cant help but think some guys just cant handle the pressure change, even from major universities.

i pic from i THINK that draft.. i went to 2-3 in a row there... the things around our necks are radios with 2 stations, espn and nfl networsk draft coverage you could listen to. 100% free event.. good times.

10 hours ago, TigerJ@w said:

I don't why, but I went back and looked at the 1989 draft from after the Superbowl and I could not believe that it looked to be the worst draft in the History of drafts for this team. Not one player did shiat in the NFL, not one and they drafted 12 players and like idiots gave away their first pick to select two bums. Lol just briefly looking over the 90s draft selections was a horrible decade of drafting. I don't think you want to put those players on a chart. Lol

id bet there is a LOT of that back in the day... a different world back then for everyone...

10 hours ago, sparky151 said:

Steven Jackson vs Chris Perry? Bengals traded down a few spots in round 1 and it cost them Jackson.

wait until you hear about tom brady.... igues if all things are even then stephen jackson tears his ACL his rookie year and is never the same? a pretty tough comparison one guy injured and never the same, one guy not injured and never the same...

wasnt chase brown a 5th round pick?

10 hours ago, LostInDaJungle said:

IMHO - I don't think the problem is so much that our draft picks don't pan out - it's been beaten to death that it's 50/50 all over the league.

The problem is that we waste more draft picks - tip that "house edge" a bit - but taking fliers on guys who have recently been shot, raped someone, one year wonders and workout warriors. We tend to bet more on guys with high ceiling/low floor profiles. In addition, we tend to draft a guy and then not have a backup plan like other teams will and do.

Given enough hands of Blackjack, the house will not only always win, but win bigly. An advantage of 2-3% in the odds means you have to be a moron to bankrupt a casino. Those little side bets on long shots add up over the years. Hitting on 48% of draft picks instead of 51% over the life of an organization has a larger effect than it might appear on paper because humans suck at statistics.

Using that analogy, the house usually has a 2-3% odds advantage over an experienced blackjack player. A good strategy can shift the player's odds by (only) .5%! And it's significant! If the casino has a 98% payout rate, you just decreased the house advantage by 25%.

Pointing out that the Rec player and the Pro player both lost a hand - It's useless without understanding their greater strategy. The decision making that went into losing that hand. Because the Pro player is going to do much better than the Rec player over a group of hands. Go ahead and convince yourself otherwise. It doesn't change the math that allows casinos to exist and be wildly profitable even giving you $500 - $1000 to start with. That little 2% advantage and your unwillingness to believe in math is all it takes.

I'll also say that we are coming out of some of the strangest draft years... Covid and it's downstream effects have made the last few drafts more challenging than required.

If a few extra scouts mean we win just one more draft pick in every other draft for the next 10 years - that's significant.

50/50 is a bit high... first two rouns is a 32% success rate...

hell almost none of the bottom 10 picks in the first round even got enough playing time for a non-minimum 5th year option...

50/50 would be tremendous success.

everyone takes flyers, everyone takes risk on guys.. everyone..

this is the SAME EXACT ARGUMENT that you tried to gloss over with the 50/50 comment... everyone does.. everyone takes projects, everyone...

name a single fucking pick the bengals took that wasnt projected to go roughly where they took them in the first two rounds... drew sample maybe?

Murphy was a top pick projection, stewert was projected exactly where he was taken, billy price was projected in the first, you cant pretend the results are the same across the league but the PROCESS is whats broken....

the process cant be broken if the pick outcome is the same as the league average... its pure unadulterated making shit up to have a reason to complain...

no facts, no data, no truth... just fan fiction complaint fantasy... there is no set rule why guys dont pan out.. can be health, mental issues, motivation, hype, anything..

7 hours ago, I_C_Deadpeople said:

Having 1 better player in the draft per year is actually HUGE. And I would add that this team also has a tendency to let good players walk and replace them with unproven picks which sets the team back year after year. If you tweaked those two things we could actually build a consistent winner.

Funny thing is - how cheap a few scouts are compared to the cost of wasted picks - would you rather have severtal more scouts or more Cartman picks? The answer is obvious to everyone but the Brown's.

how did dj reader do in detroit? injured and fucking sucked? shoulda kept him... how pratt doing in indy? 50th ranked coverage LB? really really good.

david gaither? 40 coverage grade 50 overall?

fans tend to romanticise guys... everyone in here thinks we couldhave kept reader.. i LOVED reader.. but he was old, injured and a risk... they were right to walk away...

with this info out its easy to say "well not reader" but its EXACTLY who this fan base jumps to, ive seen it 20+ times over the last two seasons they they should have kept reader..

its fan fiction... fans remember a palyer was good, who replaced him didnt pan out, and that in their head equals CLEARLY KEEPING READER WOULD BE A WIN, except reader, on a far better defene, was total dogshit.

all teams must move on from guys, from cost, to age, to health, to fit, ... its a necessity..

11 hours ago, sparky151 said:

Steven Jackson vs Chris Perry? Bengals traded down a few spots in round 1 and it cost them Jackson.

Meh, you could probably play this game with any draft. Sam Bowie VS Michael Jordan? John Ross vs Patrick Mahomes? Billy Price vs Everyone

56 minutes ago, GoBengals said:

no one does.... so many drafts tat clearly dont have a single viable QB option and youll see 4 go in the first round and 2 in the second round..... like if youre the raiders.. draft Reese, have Crosby and reese out there, you may never score, but hell the other teams isnt going to either... dont take a QB from fucking indiana just cause you need one.. take some pro style qb from some chump university... end up with a Flacco or dalton or cousins type guy... like the movie, every owner wants hype and to "make a splash" in the draft instead of just worrying about getting better...

theyve overblown it for sure... money always wins... its a bummer it intensifies the fan culture of hating draft picks that arent mega stars from the jump, with the mdiea social media and everyone calling guys busts and bums and wasted picks... these young guys are solft mentally these days, i cant help but think some guys just cant handle the pressure change, even from major universities.

i pic from i THINK that draft.. i went to 2-3 in a row there... the things around our necks are radios with 2 stations, espn and nfl networsk draft coverage you could listen to. 100% free event.. good times.

id bet there is a LOT of that back in the day... a different world back then for everyone...

wait until you hear about tom brady.... igues if all things are even then stephen jackson tears his ACL his rookie year and is never the same? a pretty tough comparison one guy injured and never the same, one guy not injured and never the same...

wasnt chase brown a 5th round pick?

50/50 is a bit high... first two rouns is a 32% success rate...

hell almost none of the bottom 10 picks in the first round even got enough playing time for a non-minimum 5th year option...

50/50 would be tremendous success.

everyone takes flyers, everyone takes risk on guys.. everyone..

this is the SAME EXACT ARGUMENT that you tried to gloss over with the 50/50 comment... everyone does.. everyone takes projects, everyone...

name a single fucking pick the bengals took that wasnt projected to go roughly where they took them in the first two rounds... drew sample maybe?

Murphy was a top pick projection, stewert was projected exactly where he was taken, billy price was projected in the first, you cant pretend the results are the same across the league but the PROCESS is whats broken....

the process cant be broken if the pick outcome is the same as the league average... its pure unadulterated making shit up to have a reason to complain...

no facts, no data, no truth... just fan fiction complaint fantasy... there is no set rule why guys dont pan out.. can be health, mental issues, motivation, hype, anything..

how did dj reader do in detroit? injured and fucking sucked? shoulda kept him... how pratt doing in indy? 50th ranked coverage LB? really really good.

david gaither? 40 coverage grade 50 overall?

fans tend to romanticise guys... everyone in here thinks we couldhave kept reader.. i LOVED reader.. but he was old, injured and a risk... they were right to walk away...

with this info out its easy to say "well not reader" but its EXACTLY who this fan base jumps to, ive seen it 20+ times over the last two seasons they they should have kept reader..

its fan fiction... fans remember a palyer was good, who replaced him didnt pan out, and that in their head equals CLEARLY KEEPING READER WOULD BE A WIN, except reader, on a far better defene, was total dogshit.

all teams must move on from guys, from cost, to age, to health, to fit, ... its a necessity..

Well this team need to be better at reading talent overall - be it college or pros and realizing when it is time to walk away from an older one but in order to do that you have to be drfating well so the next guy up is actaully good. Viscious circle. Drfat better and evaluate the pros better - that means more and better scouts. Period.

4 minutes ago, I_C_Deadpeople said:

Well this team need to be better at reading talent overall - be it college or pros and realizing when it is time to walk away from an older one but in order to do that you have to be drfating well so the next guy up is actaully good. Viscious circle. Drfat better and evaluate the pros better - that means more and better scouts. Period.

Or, or, bite the bullet and fix it in FA, even though they'll probably "overpay" for average players. It's that or pretend the bad picks aren't really bad, which is a much bigger organizational problem than making some bad draft picks. "Everyone sucks at drafting" ok, fine, and then what do they do? That's what separates one franchise from another.

1 minute ago, T-Dub said:

Or, or, bite the bullet and fix it in FA, even though they'll probably "overpay" for average players. It's that or pretend the bad picks aren't really bad, which is a much bigger organizational problem than making some bad draft picks. "Everyone does that" ok, fine, and then what do they do? That's what separates one franchise from another.

Overpay you say? Hmmm, that sound troublesome for the front office lol.

I think we all know they refuse to admit they are sub-standard in the area of scouting (let alone coaching and cap management).

Just now, I_C_Deadpeople said:

Overpay you say? Hmmm, that sound troublesome for the front office lol.

I think we all know they refuse to admit they are sub-standard in the area of scouting (let alone coaching and cap management).

IDK, there are a couple in line to make a whole lot more than I think they'd cost to replace, if not upgrade. They're due to pay Hill & Slaton a combined $20M. Other than that they'll have a crazy amount of cap space that has to go somewhere. Think the problem is more that they'll do the easiest thing to get to that minimum required.

They have to spend the money, but they don't have to do any extra work. This is how they'd end up extending Stone or Ossai, kick the can down the road with the DTs, and so on.. Complacent.

51 minutes ago, I_C_Deadpeople said:

Well this team need to be better at reading talent overall - be it college or pros and realizing when it is time to walk away from an older one but in order to do that you have to be drfating well so the next guy up is actaully good. Viscious circle. Drfat better and evaluate the pros better - that means more and better scouts. Period.

Your right I,C.

How many yrs do we say this??

I see the 26 offense as a machine

Defense...

Pass rusher?

How are Murphy and Sanders looking of late?

Oline?

Draft a RT..move Mims to LT..

Cut Brown..save money

Backer..

Sonny Styles could be a heat seeking missile

Safties..

Only 1...

Caleb Downs..

He'll go top ten ..

2 hours ago, GoBengals said:

no facts, no data, no truth... just fan fiction complaint fantasy...

As if it wasn't obvious what dead horse you were beating with this post. Asked and answered.

8 hours ago, T-Dub said:

Or, or, bite the bullet and fix it in FA, even though they'll probably "overpay" for average players.

This happens in MLB routinely. Even supposedly “poor” teams pluck FA’s from other teams farm systems.

Cutting OBJ is definitely an option if saving real money with a minimal cap hit is your objective. I just don’t see the reason to get rid of anyone who can play that position at even a mediocre level. It’s a 1 year deal at this point rather cheap. And rookie tackles usually take a year to figure it out.

If Sunday didn't change anything, we have pick 10.

6 hours ago, SF2 said:

Cutting OBJ is definitely an option if saving real money with a minimal cap hit is your objective. I just don’t see the reason to get rid of anyone who can play that position at even a mediocre level. It’s a 1 year deal at this point rather cheap. And rookie tackles usually take a year to figure it out.

It's the same mentality that has people cheering cutting Pratt and Wilson only to roll out the two worst Rookie LB's in the league.