2026 NFL Draft Grade: Cincinnati Bengals -- B+

The Cincinnati Bengals entered the 2026 draft with a clear mandate: protect Joe Burrow and rebuild a defense that hemorrhaged pass catchers and quarterbacks alike. General manager Duke Tobin and head coach Zac Taylor identified cornerback and offensive tackle as critical needs, with edge rusher, linebacker, tight end, and guard also carrying high-priority tags. Losing Trey Hendrickson in free agency created a glaring hole on the edge opposite Boye Mafe, while the secondary needed an infusion of talent whether or not Cam Taylor-Britt returned.

What the Bengals produced over seven selections was a class that feels like two separate drafts stitched together. The hits are enormous -- including one of the best value picks in the entire fourth round. The misses, however, came at premium positions where the cost of being wrong is steep. The result is a sturdy B+ haul that could look like an A- if a couple of the high-risk picks pan out.

Pick 41 (Round 2) -- Cashius Howell, EDGE, Texas A&M
Grade: A+ (96.0)

If there was a single pick that defined the Bengals' approach to value hunting, this is it. Cashius Howell was widely considered a top-33 prospect by most draft analysts, and Cincinnati landed him eight spots later at No. 41 overall. This is the kind of edge defender Al Golden's scheme craves: a long, athletic rusher who can win one-on-one and set the edge against the run. With Boye Mafe as the only proven pass rusher on the roster after Hendrickson's departure, Howell steps into a starting role immediately. The grade here is deservedly elite -- the Bengals filled a glaring opening at the position with a player whose predraft evaluations placed him well inside the top 40.

Pick 72 (Round 3) -- Tacario Davis, CB, Washington
Grade: C (56.0)

This is where the draft gets complicated. Cornerback was a critical need, and the Bengals went hunting for a boundary presence opposite whoever starts across from DJ Turner II or Dax Hill. But Tacario Davis was generally ranked outside the top 140 by the predraft community, making this a significant reach at pick 72. The board shows that cornerbacks like Jermod McCoy (who went later to the Raiders at pick 101) and Avieon Terrell (Falcons at pick 48) were still available and carried stronger evaluations from most draft media outlets. Davis has the length and press-man tools that Golden looks for, but the gap between where he was selected and where evaluators had him ranked is substantial. The need was real, but the value calculus did not align.

Pick 128 (Round 4) -- Connor Lew, C, Auburn
Acquired via HOU via DET and NYJ
Grade: A+ (98.0)

This is the kind of pick that makes general managers look like geniuses. Connor Lew was considered a top-50 prospect by most draft analysts -- a polished, zone-scheme center with the agility to climb to the second level and the anchor to hold at the point of attack. The Bengals orchestrated a trade path that landed him at pick 128, a full 85 slots after his predraft ranking would have suggested. Ted Karras is still on the roster, but the 33-year-old is entering the final phase of his career, and Lew represents a clear succession plan at a critical position. This is an A+ in every sense: the need was urgent, the value was extraordinary, and the scheme fit is seamless for Zac Taylor's shotgun-based offense.

Pick 140 (Round 4) -- Colbie Young, WR, Georgia
Acquired via NYJ (Compensatory Pick)
Grade: B- (68.0)

Wide receiver was not a pressing need for Cincinnati, not with Ja'Marr Chase and Tee Higgins forming arguably the best duo in the NFL. But the depth behind them -- Andrei Iosivas, Charlie Jones, Jordan Moore -- lacks a true possession body who can win on intermediate routes. Young comes from Georgia with a reputation for contested catches and red-zone reliability, and evaluators had him ranked roughly in this range, so there is no value complaint. The grade reflects the positional priority more than the player: this is a solid add to a room that was already set, not a pick that moves the needle for 2026.

Pick 189 (Round 6) -- Brian Parker II, C, Duke
Grade: A+ (98.0)

Another center, and another phenomenal value. Brian Parker II was ranked by most draft services as a top-165 prospect, and the Bengals landed him at pick 189 -- a 28-slot discount. Parker is a different style of interior lineman compared to Connor Lew: more of a power-based blocker with experience in both gap and zone schemes. The Bengals now have two young centers on rookie deals, which gives them flexibility to either groom a long-term starter or create trade capital down the road. With Ted Karras and Jacob Bayer on the roster, the interior line suddenly has a depth chart that looks much stronger than it did a week ago.

Pick 221 (Round 7) -- Jack Endries, TE, Texas
Acquired via NYG via DAL
Grade: A+ (98.0)

Tight end was a high-priority need for the Bengals, who have been cycling through role-players at the position since the departure of their last impact threat. Mike Gesicki and Drew Sample are on the roster, but neither has shown the ability to be a difference-maker in the passing game. Endries was a top-180 player on most predraft boards, making this a strong value at pick 221. He is a flex tight end with the route-running chops to create separation underneath and the athletic profile to threaten the seam. In an offense built around play-action and intermediate throws, Endries has a real path to contributing as a rookie.

Pick 226 (Round 7) -- Landon Robinson, DT, Navy
Grade: D (40.0)

Every draft class has a swing that misses, and this is Cincinnati's. Landon Robinson was not on most evaluators' boards inside the top 300, and the Bengals reached 97 slots ahead of where he was typically ranked. Defensive tackle is a moderate need -- Dexter Lawrence and B.J. Hill are established starters, and Jonathan Allen adds veteran depth -- but the value here simply does not match the slot. Robinson is a high-effort player with Navy's typical discipline, but the athletic profile and production history did not warrant this draft capital. At pick 226 in the seventh round, the risk is minimal, but the grade reflects a clear disconnect between selection and evaluation.

Overall Grade: B+ (79.1)

Pick-by-Pick Summary