"What's nice about this draft is that it's deep," Eberflus said. "It's deep just because of the whole COVID thing; guys stayed in [college] another year. We feel that it's a good draft to have where we are: 39, 48, 71. We feel pretty good we're going to pick up three starters there or have potentially three starters based on the development of those players. So, we feel real good about it."

https://thedraftnetwork.com/articles/chicago-bears-matt-eberflus-ryan-poles-2022-nfl-draft-starters

That's exactly where I'm at and any trade back must be met with the same expectation on the end result.  

I think they have:

LT- I think it'd be smart to go with Brown or Fisher here. 

RG- Finding a starting OG in the draft should be feasible. 

3T- The free agent crop sucks unless they bring back Larry O. I'd look to draft one.

#2 CB- A ton still out there in free agency. Rhodes and Desir have experience with Flus.

S- Free agency has a handful. Dane might already be that guy though.

X WR- Draft

OLB- Attouchu? Or however you spell his name might be that guy. 

3T, OG, and WR are the 3 I'd be looking for. 

1 hour ago, scs787 said:

I think they have:

LT- I think it'd be smart to go with Brown or Fisher here. 

RG- Finding a starting OG in the draft should be feasible. 

3T- The free agent crop sucks unless they bring back Larry O. I'd look to draft one.

#2 CB- A ton still out there in free agency. Rhodes and Desir have experience with Flus.

S- Free agency has a handful. Dane might already be that guy though.

X WR- Draft

OLB- Attouchu? Or however you spell his name might be that guy. 

3T, OG, and WR are the 3 I'd be looking for. 

I agree, OG/OT, 3T, and WR have to be the top 3. The only other position I can see is CB or doubling up on OL or WR in the first 3 picks.

The draft should play out where he doesn't have to reach any of those positions in the first 3 picks. It all depends on whether there is a run  on WRs. If 8 go before 39, A Rainman or Winfrey may drop. If Rainman is still there at 39 you may be able to get Tyler Smith at 48. Winfrey- Smith-Pierce. That would work for me.

3 hours ago, Stinger226 said:

The draft should play out where he doesn't have to reach any of those positions in the first 3 picks. It all depends on whether there is a run  on WRs. If 8 go before 39, A Rainman or Winfrey may drop. If Rainman is still there at 39 you may be able to get Tyler Smith at 48. Winfrey- Smith-Pierce. That would work for me.

I agree we should have good options at our first 3 picks for each of the needs with the exception of 3-tech.  I think that is spot you either get at 39 or not at all.    I only see Wyatt and Winfrey as good fits to start there with Leal behind them but he seems a bit more project and there's nothing special about his physical traits.  It's possible Winfrey drops to 48 but players who can rush the passer like he did at the Senior Bowl tend to go higher than lower.  

Looking at Draftek they list 3-tech:  Wyatt 26th, Winfrey 46th, and Leal 47th overall.  After those 3 players they drop to 120 with Haskell Garrett and I don't even think that's an ideal fit for him.  That's not a drop off it's cliff in terms of talent. 

31 minutes ago, AZ54 said:

I agree we should have good options at our first 3 picks for each of the needs with the exception of 3-tech.  I think that is spot you either get at 39 or not at all.    I only see Wyatt and Winfrey as good fits to start there with Leal behind them but he seems a bit more project and there's nothing special about his physical traits.  It's possible Winfrey drops to 48 but players who can rush the passer like he did at the Senior Bowl tend to go higher than lower.  

Looking at Draftek they list 3-tech:  Wyatt 26th, Winfrey 46th, and Leal 47th overall.  After those 3 players they drop to 120 with Haskell Garrett and I don't even think that's an ideal fit for him.  That's not a drop off it's cliff in terms of talent. 

The Bears met with Haskell Garrett at the senior bowl.  I think he might be a 3rd/4th rounder and he is a 3T prospect. 

Logan Hall is listed as a DE, but his profile says he played inside a lot. With 10  lbs added he may succeed as a 3T which is normally ranked in the 70s.

4 hours ago, ASHKUM BEAR said:

The Bears met with Haskell Garrett at the senior bowl.  I think he might be a 3rd/4th rounder and he is a 3T prospect. 

Which puts him around 120 unless someone gets crazy and takes him late 3rd.  I'm not that high on him.  He seems like someone who, at best, can replace Nichols production which is not a bad pick on day 3, but I'd say that's his ceiling.  We might add him late in the draft to help with depth but he won't be someone we build around and he's definitely not someone I'd put into Eberflus' "likely starter" category.  

https://www.nfl.com/prospects/haskell-garrett/32004741-5244-3684-c6f4-4959ba1721da 

"Three-technique with average size and athleticism who needs to play in a one-gapping front where his ability to find the gap can be made useful. Garrett has a good football IQ and is skilled, but he's not able to impose his will across all levels of competition. He can discard the average guard with efficient hand work but he's missing the length to play read-and-react, and the anchor to occupy space against most double teams. He's not explosive but does have the tools to help threaten a pocket as a rusher. Haskell is a scheme-dependent, middle-round prospect with rotational value."

2 hours ago, AZ54 said:

Which puts him around 120 unless someone gets crazy and takes him late 3rd.  I'm not that high on him.  He seems like someone who, at best, can replace Nichols production which is not a bad pick on day 3, but I'd say that's his ceiling.  We might add him late in the draft to help with depth but he won't be someone we build around and he's definitely not someone I'd put into Eberflus' "likely starter" category.  

https://www.nfl.com/prospects/haskell-garrett/32004741-5244-3684-c6f4-4959ba1721da 

"Three-technique with average size and athleticism who needs to play in a one-gapping front where his ability to find the gap can be made useful. Garrett has a good football IQ and is skilled, but he's not able to impose his will across all levels of competition. He can discard the average guard with efficient hand work but he's missing the length to play read-and-react, and the anchor to occupy space against most double teams. He's not explosive but does have the tools to help threaten a pocket as a rusher. Haskell is a scheme-dependent, middle-round prospect with rotational value."

They had Larry Ogunjobi in their early offseason sights, so meeting with Haskell was for rotational depth, not starter thoughts most likely.  Now that Jones is slated to start there, maybe the invest a higher pick.

In a Flus interview, his defense is fly to the ball mentality. He said the starters will get 60% of the snaps but normally rotates players to keep them fresh. So won't be much different between starter and backup. So look for competition with backup types. They will all play.

Another thing I noticed was there are a lot of older draftees this year. Rainman and Cole Strange are 24. T. Smith and D Green are 21. I would say that might come in to play with some of these picks. If its a pro bowl type talent, it won't matter but if its someone that take a year or two, to develop, who would you rather have?

7 hours ago, Stinger226 said:

In a Flus interview, his defense is fly to the ball mentality. He said the starters will get 60% of the snaps but normally rotates players to keep them fresh. So won't be much different between starter and backup. So look for competition with backup types. They will all play.

Another thing I noticed was there are a lot of older draftees this year. Rainman and Cole Strange are 24. T. Smith and D Green are 21. I would say that might come in to play with some of these picks. If its a pro bowl type talent, it won't matter but if its someone that take a year or two, to develop, who would you rather have?

Yeah, you definitely need about 2-3 rotational guys on the DL, at least an extra backer (in 4-3), and 2-3 extra DBs that will get a decent amount of snaps. So they need 16-18 quality players who will see a bulk of the snaps. 

Depending on who you count right now: 
DL: Blackson, Edwards, Gipson, Jones, Muhammad, Tonga, Quinn, Attaochu
LB: Smith, Morrow, Adams, Jones, Snowden, Thomas
DB: Johnson, Graham, Jackson, Cruikshank, DHC, Joseph, Shelley, Vildor

From these names, it looks like we still could use a 3T, another LB (Sam), and CB and SS. I would say DE (in both base and sub) is probably our strongest position. Edwards, Gipson, Muhammad, Quinn, and Attacochu can all play there. 

Since Eberflus stated that this draft is very deep, I traded out of the second round and concentrated a bounty picks in the sweet spot.  I ended up with eight picks from 64 to 132.  All needs met with BPA.  

 

 

 

Edited April 18, 20223 yr by Mongo3451

Mack is trying out for SAM spot, he's still on the roster.

2 minutes ago, Mongo3451 said:

Since Eberflus stated that this draft is very deep, I traded out of the second round and concentrated a bounty picks in the sweet spot.

 

I always use PFN mock draft simulator. I am easily getting Linderbaum at 39. There are constantly updating there big board, I wonder if there is actual merit for him dropping?

2 minutes ago, Stinger226 said:

I always use PFN mock draft simulator. I am easily getting Linderbaum at 39. There are constantly updating there big board, I wonder if there is actual merit for him dropping?

Not many teams need a center.  The teams that do might have other needs that have a higher priority.

2 minutes ago, Stinger226 said:

I always use PFN mock draft simulator. I am easily getting Linderbaum at 39. There are constantly updating there big board, I wonder if there is actual merit for him dropping?

They say he has short arms and only weighs 290.  Experts say that huge DT's will exploit him 20% of the time, but also say that he'll be very good 80% of the time.  He has great feet and leverage, so he should be great in zone.

Hers how that draft went.

So if Linderbaum drops do we take him?   Last year Matt Slater was drafted by Chargers and he has short arms, played great (LT)

6 minutes ago, Stinger226 said:

So if Linderbaum drops do we take him?   Last year Matt Slater was drafted by Chargers and he has short arms, played great (LT)

Yes.  I finally finished listening to Eberflus interview with Chris Collinsworth.  The two lines below are exactly what he said our offense is going to be.  

https://thedraftnetwork.com/prospect-rankings 

"Linderbaum is still best projected to the Shanahan systems but I have enough belief in his tools that I wouldn’t consider him a scheme-exclusive candidate;"

"Scheme tendencies: Wide zone, play-action pass-heavy, screen-heavy" 

4 hours ago, Stinger226 said:

So if Linderbaum drops do we take him?   Last year Matt Slater was drafted by Chargers and he has short arms, played great (LT)

In a heartbeat...

4 hours ago, Stinger226 said:

So if Linderbaum drops do we take him?   Last year Matt Slater was drafted by Chargers and he has short arms, played great (LT)

Absolutely. 

Peace