BearFan PHX

I'm a little confused by this. I personally agree with you and don't think we will take Jeanty at 10, but how is a player taken at 10 a "load back," but if you take them at 12, then they can share carries with another player? Aren't 10 and 12 pretty much the same thing?

It is interest for sure, even if the scenario I described is what's happening. There have been years where the Bears drafted a player they didn't visit with, even as they visited other big names at the same position. We agree that they meet with players to gain information on them as possible picks. Thats for sure. They dont just waste the visits on nothing, we are agreed. But it doesnt follow that the pick is more likely to come from the list of visits? They may have their eye on a big name player they hope to get in the first round, and if things fall another way, the player is gone, or some amazing talent drops that cant be overlooked, then they want to know their options in later rounds, and these visits help that a lot. Also, they can be looking at depth pieces. So yes, a 30 visit absolutely shows interest, but not visiting with someone doesnt imply no interest, and if they are taken at pick 10, then the same position is much less likely to go in the 2nd round, rendering the visit moot. So the value of the visit is to scout guys you might take, but not necessarily will take. And of course, in a few years when they become free agents, if they were guys you liked for a reason, they might still be on your list and the extra info from the visit comes into play again too.

This is a really good question for going forward. Obviously a lot of players with high RAS scores do end up as high picks, even from teams that dont care about RAS scores but do care about productivity, since there is overlap there. But guys like Velus Jones in the 3rd round is a pure RAS or speed move. It will be interesting to see how the new staff, and prior experience, affect whether Poles stays as connected to RAS scores as he has. Great post.

Yeah i think all the Warren talk is to shine him up so we have possible trade down options.

same here if they pick Campbell with Banks still on the board. This is precisely what has led me to believe we are taking Banks or an OT - that position drops off faster than HB or DT in this draft to my eye. Taken alone, there could be lots of good options at pick 10. DE, DT, HB, TE, WR - all have players that could help us, and look good. But there is a barren wasteland at OT if youre not SURE Ersery will drop to pick 39. That's a huge part of why Ive been on the OT at 10 train. Its not that OT Banks can help us so much more than HB Jeanty, but that HB Kaleb Johnson for example or HB TreVeyon Henderson can help us more than OT Charles Grant?

Or it means they know they want an OL, and they wanna know scenarios in case their guy is gone in the first, trade down offers occur etc. And they could be looking at depth pieces too. Its hard to tell what they are actually up to this year more than most i think.

You know I want OT at 10, but its not because Jeanty isnt a stud, he is one. I just think finishing the OL does more for us. But Jeanty IS awesome.

I definitely think that Warren nixed Harbaugh. And the thing is, as much as I love Harbaugh, I get it. He is a meathead. And I like meatheads. I like Vrabel and I like Dan Campbell too. At first i was worried that Johnson was too much of an egghead, but now i see more of his leadership. He's still got some genius boy in him, but he has some Jon Gruden to him too, so I trust him more now. The interesting question, which no one will ever know the answer to, is whether we could have had Johnson last year. And if we could why we didnt. Loyalty to Flus? McCaskeys saying they wont fire a coach with that many years left on their deal? Maybe Johnson wanted to finish in Detriot. Maybe a combination. But however the twisted road got here, we have a QB, and we have a coaching staff. I still think Poles has some issues, but they arent part of his job description any more, so, cool.

Yeah, I never believe anything he says anymore, unless it's a direct quote, usually from a tweet or interview, or a picture. Objective things that I dont need to trust him about? I certainly don't listen to him, or form any opinions from him, I mostly just read the headlines and then go from there. Anything not in quotes, I pretty much skip over. I use him more like a news filter than a source. If there's no link, then it's some stupid rumor he made up.

In the part where Poles is talking to Thuney, I felt Poles is a little introverted and uncomfortable. Same in press conferences, especially the last one he had with Warren. But with the new staff in the building, he doesn't really have to be a leader, he can just focus on being GM, and i think you're right he's learning and with the help of the staff we have now in evaluations, I think he'll do fine. He manages the cap very well and has a really good sustainable overall plan and doesn't step over those boundaries. He's been suspect I think in some player choices he's made, but I think he had no coaching staff that could tell him "please dont give us Velus Jones" I think Johnson has more juice in the building now than Poles, and I think both of them are comfortable with that. Poles feels to me like a team player who wants to make decisions to make everyone happy, give them what they need, while being disciplined with contracts and picks. On some teams the GM has a strong leader personality, and shapes the team. On others the owner has most input, and on some teams the coach is the leader and has a lot to say about which players are Bear players. This is a great structure. It plays to Poles' strengths.

0 to QB in 3 seconds

Well if it helps I think a ton of what he writes is absolute horseshit. Every day he has another scoop that we are drafting someone else. it's a lot of clickbait. I certainly dont trust him, or listen to him or his opinions as a source. The one thing that's good about his site is there is a ton of content, and on the rare occasions that there is actual news, he usually has it pretty fast. So from him i get lots of news fast, most of which is crap! But I saw the pic, and just as when he quotes other people, I am able to deal with what they said, and just that Lambert is repeating it doesnt trouble me as long as it is a picture or a quote. But yes, we totally agree, when he says unnamed sources say etc, I dont consider it true at all.

so snippy LOL "sources matter" OK Mr. Authority the pic is the pic.

totally agree, when hes healthy, he's a good player.

same time last year...

I dunno what it means. Maybe the picture was taken from a weird angle, but he definitely looks lighter. Ill post it below. Allen likes his ends heavier so maybe it makes sense. Maybe they think Grady Jarrett and Billings are the starters? I didnt think Jarrett had that many snaps in him though? Whatever it means, you gotta admit, the roster is full enough now that is hard to know WHAT theyre up to. Maybe this is how coordinators are going to feel in game week before playing us LOL Here is Dexter arriving to voluntary workouts.

New pictures of Dexter show a slimmer player, closer to 280ish than last years 312. I wonder if Allen is going to switch him to DE, and that increases our need for a DT in the draft. Interesting.

agree, and some people think he isn't even the 2nd best RB. Some like Henderson better, and some like Kaleb Johnson better. Some people love Hampton, and others are not so high on him. People I respect say to avoid him, but i need to watch more film before I have any real opinion on that.

for sure - guys "failing" to the inside makes sense, but once someone is good somewhere, moving them is a bad idea. and yes, i think our guys are smarter than that too. I was just throwing it out there as a possibility since ive been looking for a LT, dont like Jones there, and worry that Banks could be gone by 10. But I agree with you and AZ54 not to do that. I also hope that isnt the plan.

no I agree with you. I was wondering if thats what they might be thinking. I wouldnt like that at all either

LOL dude, Im just saying talk about the player, not what some site has him ranked. Your opinion about him is what matters, telling us we are only fans and cant possibly know anything isnt an argument. A good argument would be "his footwork is bad" or "he plays too high" or "hes bad at handfighting" or something about him as a player. Not just numbers of sacks and pressures. Stuff you see with your eye watching film. Like to me Banks looks really smooth, while Campbell looks a lot less graceful. And then maybe you dont see it that way. So cool. Thats a discussion though. If theres something wrong with Banks, Im all ears. Or maybe instead you want to say why Jeanty or Warren or a DT would be a better choice. Those are all good arguments too. But all Im hearing is that some site has him ranked 3rd or to go after pick 15. Those are narratives, and right or wrong, they arent player evaluation. Also i dont think I watch film better than anyone else. I just watch it. And like a lot of people, if you look, its not so hard to see. Its just football. Weve all been watching it a LONG time. All of our opinions are valid if we just look and say what we see.

Cool, so then stop telling us that yours is the only opinion that matters because the rest of us are just fans, but youre not just a fan because some expert says whatever. You have every right to your opinion. You can say what you dont like about Banks. You can say why you prefer another player. You can say anything you want except that our opinion doesnt count because of some expert youre quoting. The idea here isnt to win, its to discuss what we see, positive and negative so we can go back and look at film and test those theories, that way we all learn more and hone our opinions together, agreeing or disagreeing the same. If you've watched all this film (and yes I have too) then say what you saw that you liked or didnt like. Thats all Im talking about. You dont have to agree with me at all. That's all fine. Just say something about the player instead of making the argument of authority all the time. Because its not actually an argument, and it dismisses all the rest of us from having any views worth anything. In other words, forget who says an idea, just debate the idea itself, not the credentials of the person who said it.

Yeah, I would rather they kept Wright where he is and let him break out this year. Arm length is only one part of the equation. some really great ones have shorter arms. Longer is better, but it isnt everything. If they get to the 2nd round without an OT, and Ersery and Conerly are gone, I agree Grant could be the next name up. He is probably a 3rd round grade, but if there is a run on OTs, who knows.

Stinger said something before, I really agree with, we could go into the season with what we have right now. We dont have any glaring holes. I mean LT yada... but other than that, we could go with Swift, but we hope for better, we could use depth and future players at almost every position, but this draft is about building to the future. It could go in any direction. And I will argue that this is the signal that Poles' "rebuild" is done. This team needs to start winning now. We arent playing for tomorrow any more. And adding 3 or 4 starting caliber players to the current roster will help a lot!

Funny thing is, if the combine numbers are to be trusted, Banks has short arms too and so does basically the whole OT class? But you're right that Poles has talked about wingspan before. I think he talked about it after he didn't pick Skoronski and took Wright instead? Who knows what the GMs really mean when they say these things. But you're doubly right that he wouldnt take a OG with #10. I saw a mock draft where we took OG Booker at 10. I mean, Im no expert, but that seems really far fetched, and to your point, ditto on any OT to convert to OG. If he takes an OT at 10 it'll be to play OT. Not predicting it, but what if they plan to move Wright to LT, and plug someone in at RT? That's kind of halfway between LT and OG. Maybe a guy like Booker could play RT?