04-13-2025, 11:51 PM
(04-13-2025, 09:08 PM)TJHoushmandzadeh Wrote: OT will include a lot of players who’d kick inside to G. It’s like baseball when nearly every infielder was a shortstop in High School as that’s where you play your best players.My problem with that is, you are trusting a rookie that is switching positions to protect the fastest route to Burrow.
But an OL who kicks inside for two years and then replaces Orlando Brown on the outside makes a ton of sense. Think of it as the Whitworth development plan. They start this year so they contribute immediately, it means you don’t have a rookie protecting Burrow’s blindside in 2 years’ time and it saves you a ton of cash to have a LT on a rookie contract in 2027.
It makes even more sense if you think they can trade down and still get a Grey Zabel, Josh Conerly or Josh Simmons type in the 20s. Year one contributor, plus save money down the line and get an extra pick? That screams Bengals.
Maybe the stars don’t align - maybe no one wants to move up - but I’d be intrigued by the list of players they wouldn’t move back if they were there at 17. Maybe Kelvin Banks, although he’s another OT they’d likely look to play inside for 2 years and then move him back to Tackle. Otherwise maybe it’s just the LB Campbell or maybe someone like Walter Nolan if they really love him?
Of course if you move back you may lose out on your R1 OL targets but that then pushes down a Starks, Emmanawori, Ezeiruaka type player and there are other OL options who may still be available at 49 such as Ersery, Savaiianaea, Donovan Jackson.
The OT/G in R1/2, plus LB (Campbell R1) or S (Emmanawori/Starks R1 or Watts R2) would seem to play to the strengths of this class as there should be some good DL in R3 and even 4. If you get an extra pick by trading down in first you hope you can then upgrade both S and LB in the first two days. Then a RB2 on day 3.
Obviously there are a lot of variables but this looks to me the most likely path. Not long until we find out though.
