Kevin C. Cox - Getty Images
6 months ago: AUBURN, AL - NOVEMBER 26: Trent Richardson #3 of the Alabama Crimson Tide celebrates their 42-14 win over the Auburn Tigers at Jordan-Hare Stadium on November 26, 2011 in Auburn, Alabama. (Photo by Kevin C. Cox/Getty Images)
I know that the draft is still over two months away, but It is time to start playing out potential draft scenarios. With the perceived value of a running back at its lowest point in quite some time, Alabama running back Trent Richardson could easily slide on draft day. With that said, Richardson is likely far too talented to slide to number 17. This will make me unpopular, but the Bengals should make a play to move up and get Richardson. However, they should only do this if a set of certain circumstances occur.
One possibility is that the Seattle Seahawks , picking at either 11 or 12, may be looking to trade out of their pick. It is possible that Pete Carroll will want to trade down to number 17 and select Texas A&M quarterback Ryan Tannehill. If Seattle looks to trade down, the Bengals should call and offer number 17 number 84, and number 116, the teams third and fourth round draft picks. The Seahawks would likely ask for a second round choice, which I would refuse to give. According to Drafttek.com's draft chart, giving up a second would be too much, but giving up a third would not be enough.Therefore, the Bengals should offer their third and a fourth, along with number 17, in order to match the value that Seattle's pick would have.
Trent Richardson is the best running back in the draft and there are few people that will argue that. The Bengals could add the top running back in this years draft after selecting the best receiver in the draft last year. I would not be opposed to waiting until pick 17 and hoping that Stanford's David DeCastro is be available, but that is highly unlikely. Another option is waiting until pick 21 to draft Boise State's Doug Martin or Miami (FL) running back Lamar Miller, or even hoping that Virginia Tech's David Wilson or Washington's Chris Polk last until the second round. I believe that we should go up and grab Richardson if the situation presents itself.
If the Bengals selected Richardson in the first and then used their second first round pick (number 21) on South Carlina cornerback Stephon Gilmore or Alabama safety Mark Barron, most would be happy with that result. The Bengals could then use their second round choice to get a guard like Wisconsin's Kevin Zeitler or Iowa State's Kelechi Osemele. If this happened, it would be well worth dealing the third and the fourth round picks. The Bengals would also still have two fifth round picks, one of the picks from New England in exchange for Chad Ochocinco.
The Bengals are in a position to shake up the draft, as ESPN draft guru Todd McShay recently said. They need to use their position to set themselves up for success. They could use the extra picks to pick up some much needed depth, but trading up for Richardson would be a quality over quantity move. I feel that it is very important to give Andy Dalton as many valuable offensive parts as possible. It is tough to beat the trio of Trent Richardson, A.J. Green, and Jermaine Gresham. I also expect the Bengals to add a Robert Meachem or a Mario Manningham in free agency to help Dalton. I understand that the shelf life for running backs is short, but I am worried about winning now. Plus, Richardson was not even the lead back for the Crimson Tide until this past season. He also has prototypical size for a running back. He weighs in at about 225 pounds, which seems to show that he is big enough to handle the pounding that a lead back takes in this league. Another plus is that Richardson has only lost one fumble in his career. Fumbling was a problem at the end of the season for Cedric Benson. Richardson also seems like he can be a three down back, as he is strong enough to hold his own in pass protection.
I may feel even stronger about trading up for Richardson if the Bengals do a good job in free agency. If the team somehow signs a guard like Carl Nicks and a corner like Tracy Porter, guard and corner would become slightly less important to shore up in the first round. This would give the Bengals even greater initiative to deal for Richardson. Even if the Bengals do not go all out in free agency, we could still get Richardson and have a good team for next year. Trent Richardson, Stephon Gilmore, and Kevin Zeitler in the first two rounds would help the Bengals contend for another divisional championship.
Whether you agree or disagree with my idea, there is no denying that many Bengals fans are more excited for free agency and the draft than ever before. With all of this cap space and draft flexibility that the Bengals have, we have every reason to be pumped!
0 recs | 83 comments
I disagree. Look at the last couple of years and how our picks have valued in favor for us. Especially RD 1- 3. We can add depth and starting caliber players in week 1 through draft. No reason to trade picks. We also cn make a splash in free agency. I just believe we don’t need to take any risks like trading up right now. Look at the players we have gotten I rds 1-3 in the past couple of years! Just to valuable to take a chance in giving up another good draft for 1 player. Especially a Rb.
Bengalsredsvictim - February 12, 2012 via mobile
i agree
i’d rather see them get a veteran like lynch or green ellis the take a big chance on a rookie. i know dalton and green turned out better than expected but that doesnt happen often.
NYBengalsfan1 - February 12, 2012
id rather sign Bush away from the raiders.-
We’ll take Bush and ur first and second round draft picks. We will give yiu pick 6 palmer and butterfingers benson.
OBlock85 - February 13, 2012 via mobile
Disagree w article 100%
Bdub14 - February 12, 2012 via mobile
+1
ephram - February 13, 2012
You'll need to provide a little support to disagree 100%
Pardon_My_French - February 13, 2012
Bad idea.
Shoot 50+% of mocks have Trent falling to 17 anyways. If anything the Bengals should be looking to trade down.
Cry - February 12, 2012
With 20 free agents this year
and another boatload next year,most of them are role player’s and backups
I think having the extra picks will not only be a advantage now,but in the longterm also
Whats the chance of getting Barron in the second?
keithp - February 12, 2012
I don't think we should trade down
if he falls to us then take him, if he doesn’t fall to us then oh well…I think we should sign a FA Guard, & draft Dre Kirkpatrick, & Mark Barron, and in the 2nd draft DT Brandon Thompson. and pick up a FA RB…But if Richardson does fall to us..we should take him and draft Kirkpatrick, & see if Barron falls to the 2nd..if not we take Thompson.
Bengal4ever - February 12, 2012
i disagee
Need to upgrade offense line first otherwise no matter what RB drafted won’t help . Draft 2 OG and CB in first two round. I know fans will disagree, but should resign Benson for 1 year deal. He was ranked 12th in nfl rushing (could of been 9th if not suspended). This give them a year to find a running back.
ghostrider153 - February 12, 2012
Fu** Benson...he's not a team player
he also had 7 games of 50 yards or less….we could draft Decastro or Glenn…draft Kirkpatrick…and in the 2nd round pick up Barron if he’s there or Brandon Thompson & then in the 3rd round take Amini Silatolu
Bengal4ever - February 12, 2012
That wouldnt be all bad
Its more Benson’s attitude if your looking at it from that angle,if Benson were more the team player type fans may tolerate a move like that.
But i’d say its more like 90%,of Fans,Player’s,and coach’s dont want to see him back next year
keithp - February 12, 2012
People need to stop making this argument.
Adrian Peterson was running behind one of the worst O-Lines in the NFL last year and he averaged 4.7 ypc with 12 TDs. Just sayin’.
Animal_Like_Football - February 12, 2012
Pass blocking and run blocking are different.
Bengals had desertion pass blocking for most part but horrible run blocking.
Bengalsredsvictim - February 12, 2012 via mobile
Good pass blocking for most part is what I meant
Bengalsredsvictim - February 12, 2012 via mobile
And the Vikings are drafting with what pick?
Evil Monkey - February 12, 2012
+1
and will probably address the OL in FA .
AMAS85 - February 13, 2012
No one is arguing that we shouldn't upgrade the oline...
We ARE going to upgrade the oline. Probably will sign a FA AND draft a guard in the first 3 rounds. Don’t forget we also have Boling. Saying that we have to take a guard in the draft BEFORE taking a RB no matter what is just stupid. What happens if Richardson is still on the board and DeCastro is gone. OMG WE CAN’T TAKE HIM BECAUSE WE HAVEN’T UPGRADED OLINE YET!! This draft is stacked with guards. There will be a starting caliber guard available to us in the 2nd and maybe even the third.
Luke - February 12, 2012
I like Richardson, but honestly, I'd much rather have DeCastro.
sexsalad - February 12, 2012
^ I'd be happier if they traded up for DeCastro.
There’s quality backs like Miller or Martin later in the draft to be had.
Animal_Like_Football - February 12, 2012
There are but do we to give up 2nd pick and take one in first round?
messjunk - February 12, 2012
My plan
trade our 17 & 21 for 11 & 44 and their 5th
11 DeCastro
44 Gilmore – use 2 aquired 5ths to move up if needed
53 Doug Martin
messjunk - February 12, 2012
This would make me sooooo happy!!!
biggie22 - February 12, 2012
+1
ephram - February 13, 2012
There's quality G in the 2nd as well
Just sayin. And if they plan on using 21 on a RB then why noy just trade down in the mid 2nd where their projected to go and get another pick instead of reaching so far. IMO we have 1st rnd picks so make it 1st rnd talent.
Bigcatdaddy - February 12, 2012 via Android app
Trading down isn't a bad idea
But I’m sure it would be a lot more difficult to trade down into the mid second than it would be to trade up 5 or 6 spots into the first.
Also, I think that having elite prospects like Richardson or DeCastro would have a bigger impact than grabbing good prospects like Martin or Osemele. This team has plenty of good players, but not a ton of elite playmakers.
Animal_Like_Football - February 12, 2012
Exactly
That’s my thinking. They are obviously going to take a RB so why not try and get the best one. If Richardson doesn’t fall we will be stuck with either taking one at 21 which would be a reach for the next RB prospect or wait till the 2nd and hope one falls or settle for what’s left. I don’t want to wait or settle, if we can get the best with a decent deal lets do it.
Bigcatdaddy - February 12, 2012 via Android app
Obviously,
whether or not we pick up a starting OG in FA has a lot to do with how hard we go for DeCastro.
Pardon_My_French - February 13, 2012
would people go as far to say...
we could trade up to get DeCastro (if TR was off the board fairly quicky)?
A lot of the teams below us have a lot of holes to fill, so would you wait for either Decastro and TR to fall? or at least trade up to secure one of them? I think a lot of the teams that might consider drafting TR have a ton of other positions to fill anyway, since bad teams draft down there anyway.
Brian O - February 12, 2012
RBs are too risky
especially, one from a powerhouse school….. Alabama’s O-line is massive….jus sayin
ticalcaldwell - February 12, 2012
I agree that RBs are pretty risky.
The Vikings had their entire franchise centered around AP, and one hit shredded his knee and put his career in jeopardy. Anyone can get hurt, sure, but RBs are much more likely to. And even when they stay healthy, the wheels will often fall off after four or five good years.
That said, I draft Richardson if he’s there at 17 and DeCastro isn’t. I wouldn’t trade up for him though.
sexsalad - February 12, 2012
If hes there at 17....take him
I would not trade up though…..You have to give away the farm to move up a few spots in the first round…its never worth it…and I agree…take him if DeCastro is not there
ticalcaldwell - February 13, 2012
no way to predict how he ages either
some guys can’t handle the nfl beatings and fall off quickly. cadillac williams had a great rookie season, never able to carry the ball that much again in an nfl season either. doesn’t have a body able to take the abuse.
richardson appears to be a stud, would suck to waste 2 first round picks only to discover, he’s not durable enough for a starter’s role in the nfl.
palewook - February 13, 2012
Huge point of debate here
I think this should go without saying. Richardson is top 5 talent in the draft. The positional value will make him drop, but for one of the most talented backs to come out in years along with a huge need, there should be no question. The shelf life of RBs makes it that much more important to draft one.
RBs were at one point considerably much more valuable than guards. Times have changed, but I think people are getting carried away with the direction of these reversing trends. Placing a higher value on a guard ranked as the 7th best player coming out over a RB ranked the 3rd best player coming out seems like people are getting ahead of themselves.
I guess we’ll have to wait and see what transpires during free agency. The Bengals can end some of these debates depending on the directions they go there. And with so much loot to spend, they have to start making some decisions rather than waiting and letting others make the decisions for them.
einman77 - February 12, 2012
While I'm not opposed to the idea of drafting Richardson, he's not the player I'd trade up to get.
That’d be DeCastro, and DeCastro only. Richardson’s good but I don’t really see the value in moving up five spots to get him when I could move up five spots, screw Dallas out of the guy they want, and improve my team at the same time.
If Richardson falls to seventeen, which is a lot more likely than DeCastro falling to seventeen, then I’d take him. But only then. Definitely not sooner.
Doc Scratch - February 13, 2012
only way i could see trading up. swapping our 21st pick to the jets or chargers
having the 16 or 18 th pick to go with our 17th pick could make the draft interesting. and the cost of swapping our 21 st pick (800 pts) for the 16th pick (1000 pts) with the difference of 200 pts leaning towards a 3rd round pick (200 ish).
so we might be able to work a deal like our 21 st pick + our 2nd round 2013 pick for the 16th or 18th pick and a 3rd round 2013 pick. which could allow us to land 2 guys we really covet. like getting decastro and richardson for downgrading next years 2nd round pick for a 3rd rounder? hell yeah. i’d do it in a minute.
palewook - February 13, 2012
No trade up, please.
Specially for a RB. We can get some valuable RB at 2nd round. Use the first picks for OG and CB (we need youthfulness at these positions).
Antoniomagon - February 13, 2012
Sit Pat
No need to trade up for a RB our history with 1st round RB’s is not very impressive,we can get a RB in FA or there should be a good one in the second and third rounds.
oosterling - February 13, 2012
nothing worse than gambling your whole draft on 1 player
only to have him get injured in his 1st preseason game and to never again be the player you drafted..
palewook - February 13, 2012
would sooner grab a couple of starters in this draft
than trade up and gamble this whole draft on 1 starter
palewook - February 13, 2012
Agree with this point......
where we are in the draft in the first and second rounds, we can get potential starters at our main positions of need without having to sacrifice any picks. Plus, either DeCastro or Richardson may end up falling to us anyways. I don’t mind being aggressive, but I wouldn’t do it for a RB.
The Van Buren Boys - February 13, 2012
Ki-Jana Carter
::shudder::
knowing that half of the players taken in the 1st round of the 95 draft ended up being perennial pro-bowlers only made the wound worse too.
palewook - February 13, 2012
I don't even speak that name unless I absolutely have too.......
for a left tackle I would maybe trade up, but having the luxury of two first round picks doesn’t mean we have to trade or give them away. It just means we can pick up two starters instead of just one.
The Van Buren Boys - February 13, 2012
Marvin's experience with drafting RBs high
Chris Perry (they passed on Vince Wilfork) and Irons I believe makes him gunshy as he should be. Build the lines with the high picks get the RBs in the lower rounds, free agent and discards. Consider Benson he might be average but it was the Bears that spent a top five pick on him. The other problem when you get a star RB it increases the odds you get a diva and they want to rework their contract, more $$$ for one player,etc.
redberkey - February 13, 2012
Good example in Benson.......
Bears wasted a very high pick on, he needed more time to develop before he was ready. Same could be said about a lot of positions, but I think if you take a look at many of the successful playoff teams, they had committees more than a bell cow back. Patriots and Giants both come to mind with guys splitting carries….we can pickup a guy later or via free agency (not saying Bush, could get another guy to share carries with Scott/Leonard).
The Van Buren Boys - February 13, 2012
leonard still needs more carries and passes targeted
would be much happier with a committee situation in cincy than force feeding the ball to just 1 guy.
palewook - February 13, 2012
+1
njbengalstat - February 13, 2012
Absolutely, plug and play instead of mortgaging much on a 30 carry RB.
Would rather focus our picks on O line/CB. Wouldn’t mind Martin in the second, but haven’t gotten excited enough about Miller or Wilson to see spending high picks on them.
The Van Buren Boys - February 13, 2012
we shouldnt reach...
the Bengals have a good base now. please continue to build through the draft. why waste our draft picks for one player. their will be above average RBs in the 2nd (martin).
bengal4life68 - February 13, 2012
The Bengals should NOT look at trading up until...
both DeCatro & Kirkpatrick are off the board.
the general consensus is that DeCastro, Kirkpatrick & Richardson are the 3 most elite guys who are mostly likely to fall near where Cincy is drafting, and match a need for the Bengals.
Once any 2 of them are gone, then they can trade up to get the 3rd one from that group. But definately not before then (becuase one of them could fall to Cincy anyway).
ephram - February 13, 2012
why not wait until 1 of them is gone
and then evaluate the cost to trade up with hopes of securing both of them. trading up to 14-16 is much cheaper than trying to trade up in the top 10.
palewook - February 13, 2012
Since everyone seems to feel that way bout TR, what about this scenario...
We pick a guard and DB in the first and hold off for a running back in the second but it looks like martin is gonna get taken mid second, should we trade up then and pick him up?
ARoo - February 13, 2012
id love to trade up in the second and grab wilson
Wouldn’t take near as much.
JCompton41 - February 13, 2012 via mobile
my fears about round 2
vikings get a tackle in the 1st and then attack the cb position at the top of the 2nd round, which could affect us if we still need to take our cb. so i hope your scenario plays out. will mean we took a CB/G in the 1st and are dealing with the RB in the 2nd.
i’m expecting the vikings to hit on minnifeld or gilmore early in the 2nd.
palewook - February 13, 2012
i think we could even have to wait till a 3rd to get a guard
Say we get one of the 3 we want. Least likely one is decastro, so we get either cb or rb, and no guard is worth 21 in the bengals.eyes. we get someone like upshaw, or Barron, or even a wide out, who has the most value at that spot. So we walk away round 1 with kirkpatrick and a lb, then get Martin in the second, and silaltiu in the 3rd.
JCompton41 - February 13, 2012 via mobile
I'm of 2 minds on this
And a lot of it depends on how we do with FA. On one hand, I firmly believe in having elite players at skill positions. That is one of the major things that has held this team back IMO. we’ve gone as far as we can go with journeymen cast-off types (i.e. Benson). However, I also am adamant that the path to long term success is through the draft. We have a lot of holes to address, and everyone who is only focused with who we get in Round 1 & 2 has a very myopic view of the process. We have approx a dozen significant contributors from last year’s team that are free agents, and not all of them will be re-signed. We have other holes in our team where we need upgrades. Selling the farm to get one player is not in the best interest of our team’s long term success.
EarthwormJim - February 13, 2012
I was oppossed of trading up for TR until I found out we would only have to give way our first (17th) and a 2nd round to trade up around the 10 the pick
To me that is the well worth it. We would have essentially traded Palmer for TR. To get the a top 5 talent around the 10th pick would be a steal in its self and we would get the best running back to fit our system. I just don’t think we can pass this opportunity up.
AMAS85 - February 13, 2012
10th pick*
AMAS85 - February 13, 2012
Alot of people are looking at it like we are giving away one of our 1st rnd picks and we’re not. We’re just swapping one, we’re still getting two 1st rnd picks only loosing a 3rd and possibly 4th. In the scenario above anyway.
Bigcatdaddy - February 13, 2012 via Android app
i want 3 starters from 17,21,and 53
not 2.
palewook - February 13, 2012
And that's what you'd have
We are just swapping 17 for 12. Still picking at 21 and 53. How do you get 2 out of that?
Bigcatdaddy - February 13, 2012 via Android app
realistically no team is going to give away their 1st round pick
this idea that were going to trade away a low round pick and keep all of our higher round picks, is wishful thinking at best.
palewook - February 13, 2012
I'm just going by the scenario above
It just has us swapping one 1st rnd pick only giving up a 3rd & 4th which I think is fair for the best RB to come out since AP. We don’t have alot of luck from the 3rd down anyway (I know Dunlap & Atkins).
Bigcatdaddy - February 13, 2012 via Android app
Yea I am aware its just swapping the the first round pick and not actually giving it up out right
and thats why I think its well worth it for TR. And we will still be able to get the CB in the first with our other first round pick
AMAS85 - February 13, 2012
I think if DeCastro is there at 12, then we trade up to get him there.
That way we move in front of the Cards and the Cowboys who are both looking for interior O-line help.
With Richardson, I’m sort of waffling on whether or not I think we should trade up to get him. Miller or Martin would be a pretty sweet consolation prize.
Animal_Like_Football - February 13, 2012
Im With You 100%
TR is a building block for the future.
Some Scouts rate TR the best prospect since A Peterson
Chili Dog - February 13, 2012
obove in in reply to AMA
Chili Dog - February 13, 2012
We should wait for the combine and player invites before we make rash decisions.
jimbasa - February 13, 2012
true
how bad would he have to be in the combine for Richardson to fall to us?
From what I have seen he is a gym rat and the combine is something he is going to excel at. So I can only see his stock going up at the combine.
AMAS85 - February 13, 2012
i really want to see how many times he puts 225 up
I wouldn’t be shocked if he puts it up more than half the dline.
JCompton41 - February 13, 2012 via mobile
lol, what's the fun of that?
Animal_Like_Football - February 13, 2012
I hear you but...
a lot can change in a couple of weeks time.
jimbasa - February 13, 2012
I agree
The combine and pro days will make some players rise and some players fall. None of us should know if a player will be a steal or a reach, until their athletic abilities go on display.
EPK1979 - February 13, 2012 via mobile
I know not a lot of backs have gone round 1 in recent drafts
But I wouldnt be surprised if both Lamar Miller and Doug Martin perform well enough at the combine to be the 2nd and 3rd running backs taken in round 1. Between the Bengals pick at 17 to the end of the round. There will be some teams looking to upgrade RB
EPK1979 - February 13, 2012 via mobile
Only one.
DeCastro if he falls to outside the top 10 but it would be nice to keep the pick at 17 and trade the 24th to move up to get him.
Loaded24 - February 13, 2012
AND
Richardson has hands like a receiver. One player I compare him to his LT. Richardson in right system is gonna be a beast. He want make it pass #8 so we would gave to pay a huge price to get him… A combination of drafting Pead/James and Gannaway would be the best move to me.
pray4gm11 - February 13, 2012 via mobile
NO
not with the line being #30 ranked up the middle.
occams_tiger_teeth - February 13, 2012
With two first round picks
the Bengals should be listening to any offers that come their way, particularly from teams lacking a first round pick. Perhaps Oakland would like to have another round with Mike Brown and perhaps give up their first, second and third from next year’s draft plus a second from the 2014 draft for Cincy’s #17? I would do that trade but the new Oakland Raiders unfortunately wont.
The fact is the new CBA makes draft picks more valuable than before. They are the cheapest labor an owner can find. Owners are no different than the companies that off shored our jobs to India or China in the search for cheap labor. These teams won’t want to part with picks unless the need is dire. Oakland for CP9 proves that. New England for Chad is another case….they had no deep threat.
Trading up? Won’t happen IMHO.
BENGALS69 - February 13, 2012
if kirkpatrick, richardson, or decastro are on the board at 17, we have to draft them.
regardless of what another team offers to give up for that pick. at 21 if none of those 3 players are left and a team is willing to overpay us for the 21st pick (worth 1000 pts), we’d be fools not to trade down.
palewook - February 13, 2012
100% agree
The draft is deepest in our areas of greatest need
http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/What-are-the-deepest-positions-in-the-NFL-draft.html
If the elite players are available to us, great. If not, trade down, accumulate more picks in rounds 2-3, and stock up on more players that can still make an impact.
EarthwormJim - February 13, 2012
Feel the same way, especially about our #21 pick.
Wouldn’t mind grabbing an extra pick somewhere and getting someone’s lower 2nd rounder. We could then snag Martin or Gilmore (or whoever was a possible 1st rounder but still sitting there) and add a pick. We’re in a good spot, we don’t want to reach for anyone, if it’s not there then look at other options.
The Van Buren Boys - February 13, 2012
Completely agree.
As I said, the new CBA makes drafts picks more valuable than before so why give one up?
Only if you get a really great deal in return. That is why I don’t think a trade up will happen.
Trading down, now that is desirable with this new CBA, but the logic means someone else must trade up. Only happen in cases of dire need and I doubt we’ll see much of that.
I fully expect the Bengals to stand pat with #17 and #21. Even if TR, Kirkpatrick and DeCastro are gone, there will be excellent value to be had.
BENGALS69 - February 13, 2012
Agreed, as late in first round as we are.......
would be tough trying to find a good trading partner and the guys who will most likely drop to our spot we will want to pick anyways (DeCastro, Richardson, Kirkpatick). Which is fine if we just got one of those guys then BPA with #21.
The Van Buren Boys - February 13, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Cincy Jungle to post a comment.