Our first pick needs to be a all pro type

[Stinger226]

Who in this draft is going to be a blue chip player from day one and makes us a better team now?

Chubb could be the guy but will not be there.

Barkley could be consider that type of player, but he will not be there in almost any scenario.

Next will be Nelson, a potential instant all pro type. He would give us strength at a key need and push the O in his first year to be better.

Now we are at players we probably have the best shot at .

Fritzpatrick can be used all over the field at any DB spot and be a playmaker we badly need. A prime candidate   if available .

R. Smith would instantly make out defense better. a Luke Kuechly type that improves the players around him.

Ward could be the same type with being a playmaker as Lattimore did last year for NO. NO sucked before they got him and he transcended them to a descent D in one year.

Another player I believe could have instant impact is if we took Vita Vea for the 5T spot. He would make our DL one of best in the league.

Players that would take development past the first year: Edmunds,Ridley, James, Davenport or Landry would be able to do that immediately.

 

I think our pick should be out of Nelson-R. Smith-Fritzpatrick-Ward-Vea in that order.

Whoever is available at 8, trading back gets us a good prospect but not a day one plug and play star.

[BearFan PHX]

I dont think the Bears are superbowl bound this year, so I think you take the player who will be most dominant in 2019 or 2020

[ChileBear]

I  say take the BPA at 8. The Notre Dame kid or the olb ilb? What he crap do I know? Boy, fun time coming up on Thursday!I 'm drinking some good pisco in Chile (Madlith, have you had the REAL PISCO?, I'll bring you some when y house sale goes thru. 

[adam]

Assuming 4 QBs go, it comes down to Barkley, Chubb, Nelson, and I would say Smith. It would be nice to get Nelson or Chubb since they fill bigger needs than LB, but Smith would be a 10-year starter.

Also, like every draft, there is going to be a surprise. If teams shuffle for someone early, it could make for an exciting draft. 

[BearFan PHX]

Id much rather have Edmunds than Smith

[dacoachisdrunk]

While not a sexy pick, I wouldn't be too upset of the Bears went after that Notre Dame offensive lineman.  He's supposed to be a beast and would be able to provide Trubisky protection for the next decade.  I remember when Cutler had a lot of wide receiver weapons one year, but couldn't get the ball to them because their line was atrocious.  Always need studs in the trenches.

[Stinger226]

Edmunds will take a few years to develop but then it is not certain he is a star. He has great measurables  but will be switching to the outside from his normal position.  Smith is a day one starter and impact player. Team leader , I was all on board taken Edmunds but not think R. Smith has more of an impact on the team.

[BearFan PHX]

I dont see where Edmunds will be switching to OLB. I see him as a dominant, once in a lifetime ILB that will redefine the position in a similar way to the way Urlacher did in terms of eating up space, coverage etc

It took Urlacher a couple years too. Truth is it takes pretty much every player a year or two to adjust to the NFL.

[DABEARSDABOMB]

33 minutes ago, dacoachisdrunk said:

While not a sexy pick, I wouldn't be too upset of the Bears went after that Notre Dame offensive lineman.  He's supposed to be a beast and would be able to provide Trubisky protection for the next decade.  I remember when Cutler had a lot of wide receiver weapons one year, but couldn't get the ball to them because their line was atrocious.  Always need studs in the trenches.

Nelson, Long, and Whitehair would be a pretty strong interior oline. Leno isn't that bad on the outside and even Massie is okay (but not great).  I just hope Long can get back to being that pro bowl player (both in performance but also) who can stay on the field. Would be great if he gets the injuries behind him and has a couple strong years! 

[dawhizz]

I'm leaning toward Fitzpatrick (my preference) or James.  My reasoning:

-You hired a new offensive line coach.  Let's see what he can do with what we have (or add someone in later rounds that he thinks he can get a lot out of) before spending a top pick on Nelson.

-On defense, we have (or hope we have) a difference maker on the DL (Hicks) and LB (Floyd), and I like the idea of a difference maker at every level of defense.  Despite what PFF says, I think Amos is our weak link in the secondary.  Fitzpatrick can immediately be your starting FS, but have versatility to line up at CB or even LB with Amos at safety in certain situations.  I think that makes the biggest difference.  I would not be opposed to Ward either if the staff thinks he's a true #1 CB (when's the last time we had one of those), but I don't see it in him personally.

[Stinger226]

I think Fitzpatrick would be an excellent pick but If Nelson is there, they take him. Everything going forward is to build around Tribusky. Protecting him will be a priority. Fritz can play all 5 DBs spots. Also blitzer  and leader of the defense.

He gives us insurance at any of those positions plus play making ability. Fangio would love to play chess with him.

[adam]

If we are ok getting one of Smith, Edmunds, Fitzpatrick, or Ward in the first, then one of them should be there at #12, the Bills pick, who clearly look like they are trying to move up for a QB. 

Something like our #8 and #115 (our 2nd 4th rounder) for Buffalo's #12 and #65 (1st pick in 3rd round). That would give us 3 picks in the top 65 (and get our 3rd round pick back for the Trubisky trade). This is only assuming the guys we want are gone at #8.

[AZ54]

23 hours ago, Stinger226 said:

Edmunds will take a few years to develop but then it is not certain he is a star. He has great measurables  but will be switching to the outside from his normal position.  Smith is a day one starter and impact player. Team leader , I was all on board taken Edmunds but not think R. Smith has more of an impact on the team.

Roquan Smith is terrific at see ball get ball.  He'd make a perfect fit in the role Lance Briggs played for us in the Lovie 2.  Today he'd be a perfect replacement for Trevathan.  Keep in mind that 4-3 WLB perfect fit because teams that run that D might be willing to trade up for him.   If we bring him in and then in a year or two he replaces Trevathan that'd be fine.  I'm not so sure how well he'll do handling the strong side responsibilities.  

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2015/05/28/durkins-playbook-inside-look-at-the-mike-jack-linebackers/

Edmunds on the other hand can play at every LB position in Fangio's D, both inside roles, and at OLB.  

Either player helps this defense take a step forward but the potential and versatility Edmunds has makes him my choice.  We're paying Fangio a lot of money to hone the skills of elite talents like Edmunds.  Unless based on their interviews or background checks they don't think he'll put the time in to study and learn his craft.   Those are the things I just don't know.  

 

[dacoachisdrunk]

On 4/21/2018 at 6:18 PM, DABEARSDABOMB said:

Nelson, Long, and Whitehair would be a pretty strong interior oline. Leno isn't that bad on the outside and even Massie is okay (but not great).  I just hope Long can get back to being that pro bowl player (both in performance but also) who can stay on the field. Would be great if he gets the injuries behind him and has a couple strong years! 

I have to agree with your assessment.  A strong line makes everyone look better.. Just like a strong pash rush makes average DB's look like all pros.  Give Trubisky time to make plays, and he will make Robinson, Gabriel, Cohen, Jordan look like a potent offense.

[ASHKUM BEAR]

1 hour ago, AZ54 said:

Roquan Smith is terrific at see ball get ball.  He'd make a perfect fit in the role Lance Briggs played for us in the Lovie 2.  Today he'd be a perfect replacement for Trevathan.  Keep in mind that 4-3 WLB perfect fit because teams that run that D might be willing to trade up for him.   If we bring him in and then in a year or two he replaces Trevathan that'd be fine.  I'm not so sure how well he'll do handling the strong side responsibilities.  

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2015/05/28/durkins-playbook-inside-look-at-the-mike-jack-linebackers/

Edmunds on the other hand can play at every LB position in Fangio's D, both inside roles, and at OLB.  

Either player helps this defense take a step forward but the potential and versatility Edmunds has makes him my choice.  We're paying Fangio a lot of money to hone the skills of elite talents like Edmunds.  Unless based on their interviews or background checks they don't think he'll put the time in to study and learn his craft.   Those are the things I just don't know.  

 

Great assessment, I agree Smith would be great in the Lovie era. Not a great 3-4 choice though, he could find success because he is a great lb but would be happier in a D made for him.

Edmund's may take tutoring, but they can find ways to use him as he learns. He is a rare specimen that would be fun to see Fangio work with. Inside and outside, he would move along the line and always be in the QBs face. Linemen would be worried when he steps into there gap.

[BearFan PHX]

11 minutes ago, ASHKUM BEAR said:

Great assessment, I agree Smith would be great in the Lovie era. Not a great 3-4 choice though, he could find success because he is a great lb but would be happier in a D made for him.

Edmund's may take tutoring, but they can find ways to use him as he learns. He is a rare specimen that would be fun to see Fangio work with. Inside and outside, he would move along the line and always be in the QBs face. Linemen would be worried when he steps into there gap.

not to mention that he will eat up the middle of the field on 3rd down.

It'd be like having the best Lovie cover 2 when we went to that look, but we wouldnt be predictably in it all the time.

I think Edmunds is a real chess piece.

[Stinger226]

Edmonds can play any LB position but Smith is limited to a specific role? Read the player profiles? He is a stud with versatility.  I would have no problem with either choice,  I think Smith will have an  instant contribution and Edmonds will take time. Edmonds has great potential but Smith has leadership characteristics,  cover ability,  and passrush skills. He will have more pro bowls over his career than Edmonds. 

[madlithuanian]

On 4/21/2018 at 3:44 PM, Stinger226 said:

Edmunds will take a few years to develop but then it is not certain he is a star. He has great measurables  but will be switching to the outside from his normal position.  Smith is a day one starter and impact player. Team leader , I was all on board taken Edmunds but not think R. Smith has more of an impact on the team.

Yeah, From what I've consistently read, Smith can be the defensive leader for years to come. I'd welcome that.

[AZ54]

2 hours ago, Stinger226 said:

Edmonds can play any LB position but Smith is limited to a specific role? Read the player profiles? He is a stud with versatility.  I would have no problem with either choice,  I think Smith will have an  instant contribution and Edmonds will take time. Edmonds has great potential but Smith has leadership characteristics,  cover ability,  and passrush skills. He will have more pro bowls over his career than Edmonds. 

You really see Roquan at 6'1" 235lbs playing OLB in our scheme?  

[lemonej]

1 hour ago, AZ54 said:

You really see Roquan at 6'1" 235lbs playing OLB in our scheme?  

Ding Ding ! The very reason Trevathan can't stay healthy is his size playing in the middle of this defensive scheme. Smith is the same approx. size and attacks ball carriers the same as Trevathan but this isn't the SEC and he will have a blocker or two to deal with on that second level unless the front 3 are wrecking the opponents o-line.

I look at Edmunds and think Patrick Willis with more range and Julian Pederson who was like a Swiss Army knife for the 49er defense.

[Stinger226]

He will start on inside. He does not have ideal size for the OLB but since the Bears are in the nickel package 60 to 70% of the time, he is a LB left on the field. He has pass rush ability, coverage ability.He can slide out there is specific packages. Edmunds has idea size for OLB, but my whole point is if drafting Smith, you have a plug and play LB in the Patrick Willis mode and Fangio would put him in a position to contribute on the field.

Last year he had 5.5 sacks and 13 QB hurries. Not the primary pass rusher but could easily get 4 to 6 each year from an inside rush.

 

Linebackers are asked to do a lot in today’s NFL in coverage and being good at any one of those things isn’t enough. Smith is good at all of them. He can cover man to man, shut down plays in front of him in zone, and – critically – make an impact on deeper zones and routes that develop behind him.

This last aspect of coverage may be the hardest to master but, move the needle the most at the next level. Luke Kuechly is one of the best linebackers in the game because he is more of a factor on those plays than anybody else, able to squeeze passing windows like few other players.

 

 

Sam Monson

 

✔@PFF_Sam

 

 

Roquan Smith has rare coverage skills for a linebacker. That's never been more important in the NFL. TV angle doesn't do this play justice, but it's elite-level coverage:

3:49 PM - Mar 25, 2018

•  
  502
•  
  188 people are talking about this

Twitter Ads info and privacy

 

 

 

A perfect example of this kind of playmaking from Roquan Smith came against Auburn this past season. On 3rd and 16, he was able to read the route combination quickly, spot the crosser and stay with it to the back corner of the end zone and deflect the pass away. This is elite level coverage and while it came early in this game when it was still a one-score encounter, this is the type of play that Jones was making last season to end games in victories for Atlanta.

Obviously, Smith isn’t perfect, and you can find plays on tape where he gets beat, just as you can for any other player. The key question is how many are there and how often do they come? Smith’s bad plays are few and far between, and the number of good in between them is what makes him such an excellent prospect. Also, the fact that the negatives don’t appear to present any kind of specific pattern of weaknesses, rather simply represent the bad reps that every player has in his game somewhere.

Edmunds and Vander Esch may both top 250-pounds and stand at least 6-foot-4. They each have multiple inches on Smith when it comes to wingspan and all of those measurables have many people salivating over the potential that each player possesses. Both have graded well at PFF during their college playing time, but not in the same ballpark as Smith has. Some may have Smith below those players on their draft boards because of the potential that each player possesses, but the bottom line is that they would need to realize most of that potential to overcome the gap in production to Smith.

If they’re lucky, both Edmunds and Vander Esch each have the potential to become as good as Smith, but if I was drafting I’d take the guy who already is Roquan Smith, and may quickly become one of the game’s best coverage linebackers and a true mismatch weapon on defense.

2018 NFL DRAFT

 

[adam]

After watching some film, I would say Smith is a close third for me behind Chubb and Nelson. Chubb and Floyd would be a havoc pairing, Nelson would help anchor the interior line for the next 6-8 years with Long and Whitehair, and Smith would be an immediate starter and add to the long lineage of star LB's in the franchise. Ward and Fitz would round out my top 5 (less QBs + Barkley).

[Stinger226]

I am pushing for R. Smith to be our first pick. I listen to some podcasts today and have now the opinion if Nelson is gone, our choice will be between Nelson , Fritzpatrick, or Edmunds. Because of Paces love of high upside physical studs, it will probably be Edumunds. Nelson is the pick if he is there, but Fitzpatrick comes in the picture as a defensive play maker that could be played at 5 spots on the defense. I still would not mind seeing R. Smith, but do not think Paces has him in his top 4 or 5.

[DABEARSDABOMB]

I'm saying we trade down and draft Landry.  

[BearFan PHX]

Edmunds has more upside than Smith, and since this si the first year of a new staff, and we have a new QB developing, the win now / sign peaking free agents model doesnt fit.

We are building a team for a window that probably opens next year. We will be competitive this year, and maybe even go 9-7. But we've lived through too many decades of the quick fix 9-7 team that ages before it gets 10 wins to do this again. Pace has the discipline and the time to draft for ceilings, and Edmunds looks like he could be a transformative player.