BearFan PHX

Heres my point. When you argue that someone must be right because of their credentials, that is a logical fallacy called "argument from authority" It's very easy to show why it is a logical fallacy. Find two people with similar credentials who disagree - boom, youve just proved that having credentials doesnt make you right, since people with similar credentials disagree. It's like saying "well my lawyer says Im right in my legal case, and that proves it because he is a professional lawyer" well sure, but does the other side have a professional lawyer too? And are they saying the opposite? Then that proves that being a professional lawyer doesn't make you right about the law, since another professional lawyer disagrees. So if the pros disagree, and they cant both be right, then being a pro doesnt make you right. Spielman has had plenty of bust picks. He doesnt have a crystal ball. No one does. That's why your argument of authority is a fallacy.

it's funny that people think it isnt so - obviously the players the professionals believe in most are picked first, and sure they get it wrong sometimes, but its not totally random. And yeah, 1st round OL is usually predictable (cough stan thomas, gabe carimi, chris williams, marc columbo) boy have we been bad at drafting players before Poles got here. And youre right about OL, we've just been terrible at it. The Darnell Wright pick tells me Poles understands OL eval.

and many other professionals who have also been GMs and players and scouts say that OT is very much in play. You can give your opinion, you can even give someone else's opinion, but this error of citing someone's credentials in a business where every year the CURRENT professional GMs make good and bad choices is a mistake. There are no credentials that make someone right about who we will take other than being GM of the Bears.

Of the top 10 WRs in the league (according to Pro Football Network) 4 are first rounders 3 are second rounders 1 is a 4th rounder 2 are 5th rounders Clearly, the better players are more often picked higher, which would actually be really surprising if it wasn't true. Justin Jefferson 22nd overall (1st round) Tyreek Hill 5th round Cee Cee Lamb 17th overall (1st round) Davante Adams 53rd overall (2nd round) Ja'Marr Chase 5th overall (1st round) AJ Brown 51st overall (2nd round) Amon-Ra St Brown 4th round Brandon Aiyuk 25th overall (1st round) Stefon Diggs 5th round Deebo Samuel 36th overall (2nd round) https://www.profootballnetwork.com/best-wide-receivers-nfl-rankings/

I think it's hard to say that a lower picked WR has a better chance of going to a superbowl based on talent, i think it's more likely that the top picking teams just dont have the roster to go to the superbowl?

The Bears did meet with Barton, Guyton, Latham, Powers-Johnson and Zack Frazier. They did not meet with Fashanu. Very Interesting.

I excepted Bowers in the text above saying that because of Kmet's contract we probably wouldnt take him. He is definitely a blue chip player. I also left Turner out because he might not be a scheme fit. I could be wrong on both accounts, but neither one of them was left off for ability, just because I dont see us taking them.

yeah, and it doesnt make it any more (or less!) true. I'm trying to figure out if Fashanu or Thomas are true top 10 type values. I think they might be. I'm less sure of the DEs. Does anyone know what the DE depth looks like for the 2025 draft? edit - looks to be a DE and WR heavy class. Hmmmm.

The more I look, the more I think Fashanu is a solid option at 9 along with WR Thomas. I'm really the foggiest on the talent level of Verse, and the injuries of Latu. If I could bank on them a little more and one more OT, I'd feel more comfortable trading down a little. Im (maybe foolishly) leaving Turner off my list for scheme fit, just as I'm leaving Bowers off my list because of Kmet's contract. As it stands, I think the blue chippers are MHJr Nabers Odunze Alt and the very next tier (are any real pro bowlers?) Fashanu Verse? Thomas? And then it drops off to the 1b tier.

I think this is just writers speculating because the Bears brought him in for a 30 visit. Maybe they really are interested, I dont know, but i dont think these articles have any inside info, just connecting dots we already knew. If the Bears have too much money invested in Kmet right now to take on another TE1, they might well be meeting him because he would be an excellent trade or free agency target in the future, so good to make connections and start the book on him now? No matter what, Odunze and Bowers are both big time talents, and someone will take them each early. And each of them would look great in a Bears uniform.

Last year, Skoronski was the pick at 9, and he is a guard, and not even close in talent to Larry Allen. I do agree with you that Fuaga looks like a monster OG in the making. I also saw that you never said to take him at 9, Id be comfortable with him at a slightly lower position, and I think you would too. That said, there are other players I might take first who are grouped in similar value, but if I could add Fuaga as an OG to this roster, it would be a big win for sure. I feel like Jenkins is on the trading block too, so that might make this more likely to happen.

LOL not at nine, but maybe at 18?

yeah I agree - i just dont think the DEs are the right fit for us. Verse is probably the best one for us (I worry about Latu's injuries), but no one is mocking him to go in the top 6, so hes not a sure fire blue chipper. And if we pick at 9 we need one,l otherwise, you trade down because there are a bunch of good 1b guys.

and pay Moore too! Of course the same logic works to have a rookie DE across from Sweat. In important positions, a top ranked vet paired with a high picked player on a rookie deal is the way to go. But you need to be sure youre getting a real stud and not just drafting a position?

If Nabers is there, Poles will actually move faster than the speed of light to pick him. I think the mock machines arent really as cutthroat as the real teams are. I dont see him falling to 9, but that would be great. Im more worried that only 3 QBs go before we pick. I see the 1b list, but I think Williams, at least 2 WRs and Alt are the only sure fire pro bowlers, the rest are 1b, worthy of a first half of the first round pick, but not a top 5. For example, if any od the DEs were that clear cut, wed be seeing them go in the top 4. In this draft many times the first defensive player off the board is at 9, so there are blue chippers, and then there are blue chippers.

its true if you only look this year, but if you look for the next 2-3 years, WR is going to matter too, and if you think you have a shot at one of a certain quality that you wont get a chance at again, except in free agency, and youre about to pay Moore too. I think WR is definitely a need, even if not this year? But I also agree with the idea that we need a C, we need at least one young G and we probably need a new LT, and we need another pass rusher and maybe a 3T as well. I think it's gonna matter more on the quality of the players available this year, and predictions on what will be deep or not next year. For example - who will have the better NFL career, Fashanu or Verse? Are either or both of them going to be pro bowl blue chippers? Im personally not sure at all. Trenches are extremely important. I just want to be sure the guy Im getting is a true blue chipper at #9, and other than Odunze, I'm not sure there's a clear answer for us as a for sure blue chip player. I think all of a sudden theres a group of about 8 tier 1b guys who would all help us, but none of which is a clear cut pro bowler. I like the idea of staying at #9 and grabbing an impact player, but when it theyre all off the board? Im not looking to trade down for the extra value, but I feel like the blue chippers are possibly gone by 9. Unless you move to interior offensive linemen like Fuaga at guard or Powers-Johnson at C. And you know what? This could also be a good argument for trading up to get MHJr, Alt or Nabers at 5 or 6 if they're available too.

and you dont want to have to trust them going forward. Its rich at #9, but a monster guard is a good thing to add to this OL. At some point we are going to need to replace Jenkins and Davis both. Getting a stud and making them compete for playing time is a great idea. If we could trade down a bit and still get him, that wouldnt suck. But Im not sure we dont need our future WR, OT or DE more.

I see Fuaga as a road grading guard in the NFL - another Jenkins type.

you can ask by position, but then you also have to ask if any of the DEs or available OTs or WRs are true studs. If you figure we finish the rebuild next year, then you gotta look for BPA at need, and that factors in with positional importance too, and I suppose who is available next year - is 2025 deep in WR, DE or OT?

well if theyd do it for that, then sure. I just think it's a way one sided deal in our favor. I agree about giving up the first rounder too, although it should be like pick #20 or something, and wed be getting a high 2nd rounder this year back. I was just trying to figure out what it would realistically take. Like you, I'm in no hurry to lose that first rounder.

Allen is short term though. If he was 27, Id agree with you. If the Bears are all in on creating a modern offense for Caleb, Moore is gonna need a long term partner, best on a rookie deal. Also it gives the rookie a year to learn under Allen before the burden falls on him. OL and DL are very important too, so it may well go to one of those positions too, I think WR is definitely on the table. If you only look to this coming year, WR doesn't look like such a need, but if you look long term, I think having a shot at this kind of talent demands considering it.

nah, you're making sense. Im just saying that higher round is generally early for a punter unless they are a phenom. But I dont really disagree with what youve said here at all.

Ive heard that Odunze may have off field issues partying too hard issues. Then again, to my own point, Randy Moss fell to like 20 or something because he smoked marijuana. LOL Same with Warren Sapp. Thomas looks like a good fit for us, I agree. To me the nightmare scenario is if only three QBs go before us. Then we'd probably be looking at Thomas at #9 instead of a trade down. Also, given how excellent our draft position is, "nightmare scenario" is pretty funny. Call it worst case outcome. It's still pretty damned good.

for sure if our scouts are telling Poles that, and that's what he's seeing, then for sure. No reason to trade up. But *IF* you think he's the next coming, and head and shoulders above the others, if you think you've got Randy Moss here, I think you do it. Personally, I haven't seen enough film on them to know either way. I know they are all good.

I think the question would be, who else would take him first, and where. If you had a very good feeling his first other suitor would be in round 6, then you can wait until 5 to take him?