Stinger226

If your trading and want a guy, you talk to the next team up. Why would a team call us when they got a descent trade in front of us.They didnt call us and say if we cant get TB to trade we will get back to you.

TB took the trade so we didn't get to choose, they weren't going to call us first.

We now have the next great LB for the Bears, he will be a all pro by his second year. Makes everybody around him better.

they go as low as they can go, to grab a QB

He keeps getting compared to Ray Lewis, Patrick Willis and Derrick Brooks, good company.

Well we just drafted Patrick Willis, cool

R Smith, good choice

other than Chubb, we have the best D players left to draft, I think its Fritz and or Smith

Its a bogus rankings when they have Minkah Fitzpatrick is the the 16th best player. Also Taven Bryan is a joke,. he is athletic but has 0 production in college. His last year he had 17 ts, 3 TFL and one sack.

All of this interest and attention then it will end up like a bad first date.

I would be happy with either, I would like Patrick Willis of which Smith is.

I'd have no problem with several but we need to draft a potential all pro type. Plug and play Nelson R.Smith Fritzpatrik Pass rusher, after Chubb will be a reach Davenport or Landry Pace reach: Edmunds, potential but not ready for prime time

Just listened to Tom Thayer on the SCORE. The great ND player, suggests we take R. Smith even if Q. Nelson is there. He stated that out of the 24 OGs that started in the playoffs last year, 2 was first round picks, 8 were UDFA. He thinks you can find a OG later in the draft and let HH develop him. I trust his opinion.

Do you think Edmunds starts from day one and makes an impact? I highly doubt it. This is Paces type of guy, physical freak with upside, but there are all pros sitting there while we take a developmental player, not very smart. The best thing to do is watch tape, I am not very smart, but when 50 experts think R. Smith turns into Ray Lewis, or Pat Willis, I am not going to argue and try to find tape to prove me right. We need a plug and play, impact player now. not a 2 year developmental player with high upside. When a player plays with a better team, your stats are always down because you have more talent around you.

My guy: Nelson , Nelson , Nelson , the BP in the draft and fits a need. second choice: R. Smith/ILB he has been compared to Pat Willis and Ray Lewis, same size as both. A plug and play, several pro bowls. 3rd choice: Fitzpatrick/DB plays everywhere and is play maker. Makes everybody around him better. Plug and play 4th choice: Edmunds, a developmental player with huge upside. He will take 2 years to develop , my other choices will be making pro bowls. 5th choice: H. Landry, I think he is the second best pass rusher in draft, probably on a trade back for value.

we dont need to complicate things. no brainier: Chubb/OLB or Q. Nelson/OG next in line: Fitzpatrick-R. Smith-D. Ward Pace probability: Emdmunds or trade down grabbing for need: Davenport or Landry Total surprise: Barkley, Vea/5T or J. Jackson/CB We need a plug and play not a developmental player.

it is just someones opinion. The problem is there is no expert that evaluates the players the same way. Then each team has a board not listed the same. It is just a crap shoot.

He could be in play at 8 but Pace said he had a list of 8 and I would suspect he is 5 or 6 on that list.

I just read that Ereck Flowers the LT that Solder will take over for is available for trade. He is 24 but graded out bad his first three years as a LT. I read his draft profile and he was looked at for both OG and OT positions. I wonder if they would take a 4th pick in a trade for a player they are moving on from. Plug in into LG position and let HH work with him. He was a #9 draft pick in the year he was drafted.

We do not know what Pace will do but that makes the drafts interesting. Edmunds will be used both on inside and outside, they will move him around to take best advantage of his traits.

It is hard to know what teams really think of players. All of the draft gurus guess at values. When a player is moving up draft boards, that just means draft gurus are just finding out what teams truly value a player. Its all a crap shoot.

Edmunds would not be a liability but will take a few years to develop and we do not know what he will turn out to be. We can always say he will be good because he is a physical freak, Floyd is going into his third year and has yet to prove what he is and had higher expectations than Edmunds. I think the top 10 pick needs to be a plug and play not a developing player. Fitzpatrick , Ward, Nelson, R. Smith.

Forget the needs , we have to draft the BPA at 8. If we add a Fitzpatrick, he upgrades Amos with a play maker. If we draft Ward. he upgrades Prince at CB. If we draft Edmunds, he takes Lynches place. The point is , you need to draft play makers no matter what position, it makes the D or O better. Amos or Kwiat are starter quality players in the NFL but they are not difference makers, we need to upgrade any position that makes us better.

For me, as the post title stated, drafting in the top 10 needs us to grab a player than can start in year one and become a all pro type. Barkley-Nelson-Chubb-Fritzpatrick-Ward- R. Smith all fit that type. Next you have James-Edmunds-Vea-Davenport-Landry may become those players. There is no guarantee for any but usually the best players have less risk. So do we draft on potential or draft a less risk player? We all project what we want someone to be because of needs the team have. I think we need to take the BPA even if its not a fill a need. Chubb is a no brainer, will not be there. Nelson is a no brainer , probably will not be there. Barkley is not a need but if there, puts us in a better position to trade back. Fritz and Ward or R. Smith should be available for us, so we should just grab the BPA at that spot. We all have different opinions but if you look at all information available, the top 6 non QB player have been consistently listed through out the process. Edmunds has moved up since the beginning of the process because he is a physical freak, but is he really a top 10 player type. So many times players look good at the combine and everybody values them more, I want the best football player, not the top physical stud..

If we move back Mike McG could definitely be a target. He plays RT this year and can eventually move to LT. Another thought is drafting Connor William and play him at left guard and switch to RT next year. Let Morgan develop for one more year and take over the LG spot. I like the first 5 and Nall as a RB