All Activity

Bowers will be a problem if he goes to the right situation. (In a good way) He can line up anywhere on the field. Deebo can't even do that. I said it months ago, that I believe he might be the best weapon in the draft.

I agree with that. Lots of people dismiss a great TE but if he's George Kittle, even with Kmet, that is a nightmare for DCs. The physically of TEs is already a challenge, but imagine 3 good catching TEs on the field at one time with DJ as your lone WR

yeah, I just disagree, but I have no more facts than you (or Spielman) does, just my opinion too.

true. but you also have a lesser chance of hitting a home run too with lower picks, so it's like buying insurance against a bust, but you lose on the premiums?

I wouldn't do it just because of the value of the pick. Look at trades the last few years. We got Allen with a 4th. All kinds of examples of high end players going for mid round picks. With a potential generational QB, lesser talented WRs can be great.

No too rich for me. Also the drop off to the 3rd or even 4th/5th best WRs isn't that great this year. We also have Bowers out there as a really good receiving option, and with the right supporting cast he might pose more of a problem to defenses than Harrison.

Depends on how you define "risk". If you simply look at it as a numbers game then yes there are more failures in later rounds. If you look at it in terms of investment, not just money but also opportunity cost then the miss on a top ten pick is really bad.

I have never disagreed with those beliefs but a good drafting GM can find gems more frequently in later rounds. Bagent and Sanborn are examples of finding players later. Of course odds of stardom are against you but not everyone on your roster can be first round picks

I actually don't disagree with that statement, it's just my opinion, their not going to do that. If they literally took 4 offensive line man, I would understand it.

Gabriel and Speilman outlined how boards are made up and both said that need is figured in the equation. They go vertical and horizontal. For example if you have the third WR rated close to the same value as a OT, you may take the WR instead of the first OT off the board. They also said that they first do a valuation of their roster to know may be biggest needs and second as far as projected starters or quality backups.

Thank you for saying that. Listen i dont think that Spielman said it makes it WRONG either, it's just another opinion for sure. I just think the Bears are considering OT with their second pick. And DL and WR too.

The jest of your statement I interpreted was just because Speilman was a GM doesn't mean he's smart. Of course it's not that black and white. I listened to him and likes the way he framed his opinions. He said he doesn't think their taking a OT, nothing about they aren't considering it. Did you watch any of his videos? That is the best way to understand his opinions. When we read or watch videos, some we like and some we don't. It's usually ones we agree with. There is value in listening to people that have a different opinion, because sometimes we change our mind. As much as I don't agree with a lot of things you say, there has been a few times I changed my opinion and you contributed to that.

Ok I can agree with that, a 5th round pick, you dont expect greatness so if you find it its a bonus. BUt if your plan is to build a roster, then youre picking higher because thats where the more likely successes are? So trading down doesnt necessarily make it better. When it comes to a 3rd rounder, year, 2 4ths are probably better, but if you have a certain guy targeted who fell, then thats better. But either way, this is our last top pick for a while, so you want to get a blue chip player if you can, and not just give away your upside for insurance?

I think the ideal situation would be to get your franchise QB next year in the Fourth year of rebuilding. One more year of rebuilding would set up the QB for success. Poles get the chance to do it now, so he has to take it but we still can't fill all the needs with this year of the draft.

If I draft a DE in the first round and he fails, big deal . If a 5 th round pick fails, not that big a deal. That's what I'm talking about with higher risk. I'm not saying higher risk of failure in earlier rounds.

I would not. The value of a first round pick is huge when you consider the 5th year option. So any trade that takes away a 1st rounder would be a no-go for me. There are enough metrics and analysts out there who don't have MHJ as WR1. That alone would make me hesitate on something like that.

I would have traded back and picked MHJ but not the other way around. And gotten all the extra picks, etc. Fields is gone and that ship has sailed. Take a blue chipper at 9 and be done with it.

if a 3T is the best DL available, we could definitely use them.

Give me Williams and Murphy with nine or a slight trade down and we have the draft I thought we had with Fields and Jenkins.

no, it's not a higher risk. more busts come out of each later round than in the first round. What I think you've discovered is that more unexpected players are able to break out of the mold at lower rounds at WR than OL. But lower round picks are still much more likely to bust?

Even with a great Caleb year, you have to remember this is suddenly a tough division - two playoff teams above us plus Minnesota will be getting a rookie QB but gets to throw to Addison and Jefferson which is pretty great.

I mostly agree. I think you can add Fashanu and possibly Thomas to the "take at 9" list which would lessen the trade down likelihood to only stupid rich trade offers. Or to just moving down to 11 or something.

totally, and we were there for a LONG time. You keep the roster decent, especially maybe on defense, and you dont lose enough games to get that really good QB. Trapped in the middle. This is why the idea of building a roster around a lesser QB is a bad idea. You dont win superbowls, but you dont fail enough to get a winner at QB.

I am just talking about any player in general. There seems to be a group of teams that are in the dead zone, and who don't look like they are getting out of it any time soon. Here are some teams and the last time they made the playoffs, a team like the Broncos is nearing a decade without a playoff appearance. The Panthers are right behind them. Other teams seem to be trending into the hole. Unless they nail their QB pick, these teams will more than likely stay right here for the foreseeable future. Broncos - 2015 Panthers - 2017 Commanders - 2020 Saints - 2020 Cardinals - 2021 Raiders - 2021 Patriots - 2021 Titans - 2021

https://atozsports.com/chicago/bears-draft-targets-2024-nfl-draft-trade-down/