adam

So I wanted to see who was more correct, the consensus on players (big boards) or where teams selected them. I have more work to do with this, but here is a quick snapshot. I looked at 2023 and 2024, just rounds 1-3, and identified the 3 lowest producing players based on their draft slot, the busts. Then I compared that to where the big board had them. In 11 out of 18 the team drafted the player higher than the consensus, making bad picks into busts. The consensus only had 5 players higher than they were drafted that turned out to be busts. So the consensus is over 2x more accurate than the teams own evaluations. Meaning that if all these teams stuck to the big board, they would've had 2x better odds at hitting on a player. 2023 Van Ness @ 13 (27th) - TEAM REALLY WRONG Anudike-Uzomah @ 32 (32nd) - BOTH WRONG Murphy @ 28 (17th) - CONSENSUS REALLY WRONG 2nd Round Ojulari @ 41 (57th) - TEAM REALLY WRONG Cam Smith @ 51 (41st) - CONSENSUS REALLY WRONG Foskey @ 40 (73rd) - TEAM REALLY WRONG 3rd Round Hooker @ 68 (47th) - CONSENSUS REALLY WRONG Stromberg @ 97 (N/A) - TEAM REALLY WRONG Ika @ 98 (88th) - CONSENSUS REALLY WRONG 2024 McCarthy @ 10 (28th) - TEAM REALLY WRONG Chop Robinson @ 21 (40th) - TEAM REALLY WRONG Darius Robinson @ 27 (61st) - TEAM REALLY WRONG Polk @ 37 (48th) - TEAM REALLY WRONG Sinnot @ 53 (105th) - TEAM REALLY WRONG Rakestraw @ 61 (46th) - CONSENSUS REALLY WRONG Trice @74 (98th) - TEAM REALLY WRONG Reiman @82 (202nd) - HOLY SHIT TEAM REALLY WRONG Lloyd @88 (84th) - BOTH WRONG

My hope and theory is the Bears have something in place to address an upgrade at Edge, but it won't come until after June 1st, whether that is with a free agent or thru a trade. That is my only hope, otherwise this feels like a very weak offseason where they side-graded because of the losses at C and S. So the additions of Bradury and Jones are a wash with Dalman. Bryant and Thieneman are an upgrade at Safety, but if the DLine can't stop the run or rush the passer, how effective will the secondary even be? Then on offense, you traded your WR1 in hopes that your other guys will elevate, but ultimately all the other moves were rotational or backup in nature. So technically, the offense is worse on paper going into 2026 and you still have questions at LT.

The way they talked about him, he would be almost exclusively a STer with some gadget plays mixed in. They also signed Raymond, so this again feels like a luxury. I hope he proves me wrong, but I would've rather had competition at Edge and DT earlier in the draft with more accomplished guys than what feels like filling niche roles on the roster.

Look at the list of the top 25 fastest WRs in the NFL, the list is basically 90% garbage, like 2-3 guys actually became decent, but for the most part, none of them could actually do their primary job, run routes and catch balls, they could just run the 40 really fast in shorts. I would rather have tangible production and experience. QB is the same way. Traits guys are cool, but rarely do guys with very low volume ever amount to anything in the NFL. I know the team has to use some metric to evaluate, but when it is strictly athleticism, that doesn't always translate.

I hope I am wrong, but this draft felt too cute. Too much I am smarter than everyone else vibes. I could be wrong, but it just feels that way. A lot of the players were mocked to the Bears, but almost all were a round or even two rounds later. What that means is you are only getting 1-2 starters out of this group when you really need 3-4, especially when you had an extra 2nd rounder. DJ Moore was basically traded for Sam Roush.

This trade was so bad that the Bears could've gotten a 6th rounder from TEN and the Bears still would've lost the trade.

Saying you were just playing the board is basically deflecting potential future criticism. It wasn't my fault, it was how the board fell. That just feels like a cop out to me. The only pick that may have been "BPA" from the 2nd on was Muhammad, and they had to trade up to get him. Van den Berg is a project, which is what the later rounds are for, so I am fine with that pick too. I just didn't like the sequence from 57 - 169. How do you lose value moving back? That is still a head scratcher to me. The Bears paid more to move 5 picks in the late 4th (-4) than TEN did to move up 9 (-21). In the Bears two trades, they lost of the exact value of Pick #166. That is a lot to lose in draft capital in two moves.

Moss was Caleb's backup at USC.

Unfortunately this is Poles evaluation criteria. This is why Velus Jones was drafted, why Claypool was traded for. Not actual on the field production. All the events are not even realistic without gear on. A 250 lbs dude can carry more weight with less impact than a 180 lbs dude. It's not like the equipment worn is lighter or smaller for the lighter guys.

I am honestly ok with the picks, but when you consider they came into the draft with 2x 2nd rounders, then traded back and lost value, then traded back up and lost more value. That sequence was not ideal. The other teams got Hill Jr, at 60, Sam Hecht, C at 144, and Will Lee III, CB at 129 for Roush, TE, Muhammad, CB, and Elliott, LB.

Yeah, I think B- or C+ is what it is for 2026.

The Bears lost way too much draft capital in this draft. From my count, they lost a round with Jones, lost a half a round with the trade back, another round selecting Roush, and then at least 2 more rounds with Thomas. That is 4.5 rounds in lost draft capital. That is not nothing. In 2 years, if Jones is the only starter out of Jones, Roush, and Thomas, it will be a bad draft.

It almost doesn't matter because the Bears are picking their guys not the consensus guys.

Having 4 picks in the top 89 and not getting Edge or DT should be a fireable offense for Poles and the scouting staff. Unacceptable.

Gadget player at 89. What is going on?