Bengals 3 best, 3 worst draft picks of the past 5 years |

Bengals 3 best, 3 worst draft picks of the past 5 years

Chris Adamski

Editor’s note: While much of the Trib’s coverage leading up to the April 25 start of the NFL draft will focus on the Steelers, we’ll also look at the league at large. Particularly, the Steelers’ divisional rivals. Between April 18-20, we’ll examine each of the three best – and three worst – picks by AFC North teams over the past five years.

Though the Cincinnati Bengals are still without a playoff victory for almost three decades, the organization – believe it or not – was one of the best in the NFL at talent acquisition during the mid-to-late 2000’s. At one point just a few years ago, more than a few league observers declared the Bengals roster as one of the NFL’s most talented.

But with the Bengals looking, well, more Bengals-like over the past three seasons (19-28-1 in that time), it’s obvious that their more recent drafts aren’t panning out the way they probably envisioned.

That timeframe coincides with our examination of recent Cincinnati draft picks:

***Bengals’ three best picks from 2014-18***

1. Jesse Bates, S, 2018, 54th overall

This pick might especially sting the Steelers for years to come – not only because Bates has the look of a quality longtime starter for a division rival. But the Steelers took the third safety off the board (Terrell Edmunds) with their first-round pick; Bates was the fourth safety off the board 26 picks later.

2. Andrew Billings, DT, 2016, 122nd overall

This pick has taken a while to blossom, but finally in 2018 it did. Billings had a shocking slide in the draft three years ago – the Steelers were rumored to be considering him with their first-round pick – and he spent his rookie season on injured reserve. But Billings broke out last season and looked like the player many expected, even if as a nose tackle that’s a non-premium position these days.

3. Joe Mixon, RB, 2017, 48th overall

There are some that would consider this one of the worst draft pick in NFL history, because of Mixon’s past with regards to being caught on camera striking a woman. But in purely on-field football evaluations, Mixon was an upper-half-of-the-first-round talent. He’s shown it so far – when healthy.

***Bengals’ three worst picks from 2014-18***

1. John Ross, WR, 2017, 9th overall

Ross is a cautionary tale in becoming too enamored with combine standouts. The 5-10 product of the University of Washington zoomed up draft boards when he ran the 40-yard dash in a blistering 4.22 seconds. The Bengals couldn’t resist taking him with a top-10 pick – and his 21 catches over two seasons are less than one-eighth of what the receiver who was taken 53 picks later has (JuJu Smith-Schuster).

2. Cedric Ogbuehi, OT, 2015, 21st overall

A first-round pick who only started 25 games over his first three seasons and has moved on to Jacksonville, Ogbuehi was a Sunday inactive most of last season after the Bengals declined his fifth-year option.

3. Jake Fisher, OT, 2015, 53rd overall

The Bengals were hoping they’d locked down their tackle positions for the foreseeable future when they spent their first two picks of 2015 there. Instead, they ended up with a backup in Ogbuehi – and a tight end. Surely when the Bengals drafted Fisher they did not envision that by 2019 he would be a Buffalo Bills pass-catcher.

Hey, Steelers Nation, get the latest news about the Pittsburgh Steelers here.

Chris Adamski is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Chris by email at [email protected] or via Twitter .

Categories: Sports | Steelers
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.