BearFan PHX

What if Emery is smarter than you think? First off, he graded McClellin above other DE end options because "He showed us some natural things that the other ends did not show us to as high a level," Emery said. "His ability to bend, his pad level, to get from blocker to ball, to close the gap as quickly as possible … we felt was better than most of the rest of the class." SO straight up we liked this kid better than the others. It was said that GB and New England were looking at him too, so maybe Emery saw something. But there's more. Emery kept praising his versatility. In this article, Dan Pompei hints at it. http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/footb...,6839323.column Pompei says "There is a hidden advantage with McClellin. If the Bears change their defensive scheme, he will adapt." What if Emery isn't really planning on keeping Lovie around forever. What if he wasn't going to find a one gap DT and be stuck with a player that doesn't fit Bill Cowher's (or whomever's) scheme? McClellin is a player, and he can be moved around. He'll be a fine 4-3 DE. But he doesn't paint us into a box if Emery is planning something next year for Lovie, and a new defensive scheme. I think I like this Emery guy.

Kiper had McClellin as the 26th best player overall, just sayin.

Pix, as always the voice of reason.

I agree re: Wolfe, I was just saying, if things went REALLY poorly, he'd be the next DL down. I'm hoping for Cox or Brockers, myself. But if they think that one of the OLT is worthy, I'd be cool with that too.

OK, so we know the Bears are targeting 7 picks, and they pick 19th - that means 12 are out. You gotta feel really strongly that those 12 will be gone way before your pick, so I'm gonna say they identified 12 players that would be gone by pick #15 consensus. So first let's throw out those 12 players. I'm only able to find 11 for sure, so I'll make sure my target list is at least 8. Top QBs and RB are easy, cuz we're not looking for them, and they'll be gone early. 1 QB Andrew Luck 2 QB Robert Griffin 3 RB Trent Richardson 4 QB Ryan Tannehill Then there's 4 more guys we might like to have, but will be long gone. And hey, if we're wrong, and they're still there, it'd be an easy situation to be in. 5 OT Matt Kalil 6 DB Morris Claiborne 7 WR Justin Blackmon 8 DE Melvin Ingram So that's an easy 8 off the list of targets. I identified 3 more that will be gone by pick #15 and who don't fit our needs. 9 OG David DeCastro - we have plenty of interior OL 10 DT Dontari Poe - is a big space eater 2 gap style DT and not suited to our "Cover 2" one gap system 11 LB Courtney Upshaw - is a beast, and it wouldn't suck to have him fall to us, but he won;t and he's not a position of need. that would leave a list of at least 8 players we're targeting for the 19th pick. If any players not on these lists is picked before we do, assuring more than one of these players will be available a few slots lower, we might trade down. 1 OT Riley Reiff - a stud on OL will also be long gone 2 LB Luke Kuechly - Urlacher's replacement? He won't be there, maybe he's the 12th not targeted. If he fell it'd be interesting Here's where our likely picks start 3 DE Quinton Coples 4 WR Michael Floyd 5 S Mark Barron - maybe not a position of need, so he might be the 12th not targeted 6 DT Fletcher Cox 7 DT Michael Brockers 8 DE Whitney Mercilus It looks to me like Coples, Floyd, Cox, Brockers or Mercilus will be our pick so don;'t be surprised if its a DT instead of a DE. Remember Lovie always says it takes a DT to make the "cover 2" work. All this DE talk is possibly a smokescreen for Cox, and if things fall the right way, we could nab Floyd. So the big question is who do the Bears NOT covet and not target, Kuechly or Barron? Nightmare scenario: Tannehill slides, and we can't find a trade and take DT Derek Wolfe or one of the other CBs. Sleepers: OT Jonathan Martin, OT Mike Adams, DT Derek Wolfe

Well, if you had 50 cents, and then you had a dollar, that increase of 50 cents would be a 100% increase right? 50 + another 50. So from 13 to 23 is a 77% increase. If it went to 26, that'd be a 100% increase, cuz it was another 13! The truth is that yes, every 5 slots or so in the first round makes a huge difference in talent available. There are usually about 5 amazing players in each draft and 20 or so more really good ones. Maybe the talent at 15 is similar to the talent at 10, but at 10 you get a wider choice of positions. At 19 we are right on the cusp, so trading up for a specific player might make sense if oyu're one player away or have a glaring need that needs a starter right away. Emery has done a good job of addressing needs, now he can go get best player available, or even trade down. I suspect he will pick a DL or WR at 19 tho.

Great work, and interesting numbers. for the record 23 is a 77% improvement over 13.

I think we need a safety too.

I think we will see DL in the first round. Unless a special player falls at OT, S, LB or WR. I expect a DE in the first round but it could be a DT. The second round will certainly be DL if the first isn't, and even if it is, DL is not out of the question on both rounds. That said, I expect DE in the 1st and WR in the 2nd. But don't overlook S, OL, DT and LB help too.

You gotta wonder if Forte's injury is gonna cost him playing time next year. Not that he will still be inured, but it may bring home to him the danger of playing without long term money. Maybe it brings him to the table to get something done, and maybe it drives him away. Either way I gotta wonder if he feels less indestructable now, and will bargain accordingly.

Grizz I couldn't disagree more. The members of this board are extremely active, but we meet on practice fields, in small groups, informally, to chat now and keep our timing tight for when the dispute is finally resolved. One side note, the defensive posters are not participating in offseason discussions. I'd better get out before they arrest me for trespassing here

i think you guys are missing a possibility here. I don't think Cutler took himself out of the game. I think they YANKED him, and the knee was just a coverup. Now its a strange call, but so is the idea of Cutler sitting down by his own choice. The only other option is he was really hurt, and he sure didn't seem really hurt. I think Martz and Lovie pulled him.

I think I was pretty clear. The argument goes like this: When Angelo takes more than one player at a position, he isn't assuming BOTH will start obviously. He is FACTORING IN the uncertainty and risk that is obvious in the draft. It's like saying having household or health insurance is dumb because in 2010, your house didn't get destroyed, and you didn't get really sick. By your approach, he should take only ONE pick at a position, and feel super secure that every pick will pan out. Problem is, when you're wrong (and they are ALL wrong at times) then you are screwed. ALSO, you want to get ahead of the game, this means taking some projects, and some players with higher risk/reward ratio. If he does that four times, and produces a stud out of one of them, thats better than four average players who can't get on the field. I think you need to understand what the purpose of the draft is, and rate Angelo's performance accordingly - i.e. by the team he fields.

I think you might be doing the math backwards. It isn't Angelo's goal to get great picks with every pick, he KNOWS the draft is hit or miss, it's his goal to keep every position stocked with players that fit the scheme. So when you see him picking Gilbert and Melton, for example, he may not be thinking "each of these guys is a blue chipper" he's probably thinking "I need to increase COMPETITION on the defensive line, and each of these guys has an upside, but also has some risk. If I take two, I better my odds of having at least one of them come out, and that helps my DL issue." Just as a good financial portfolio (or offensive gameplan) includes some conservative plays and some high risk high reward choices, so does Jerry also take some swings on players that have a VERY high upside, but also have glaring issues that have caused them to fall in the draft. There's nothing wrong with taking a flier on some physical specimen and seeing if you can coach him up a little. For example, when we need help at a position, it's not uncommon to see Jerry take several players in kind of a shotgun mode. Your aim can be off, but if you put enough pellets in the right direction, you're going to hit something. if he does that, spends say 3 picks on a position, and develops a good starter there from one of them, does it matter that the other two 9which were at the same position) didn't pan out? Would you rather he put all his eggs in one basket and take only ONE player and just get it right all the time? Angelo is factoring in the uncertainty in the draft into his moves, and you aren't measuring that at all in your analysis. Let's say he's looking for a CB. Say he takes one in the 2nd round, and a long shot again int he 4th. Hopefully the 2nd rounder is surer, and certainly he was rated higher, but there are players that dont pan out. If Jerry hits on the 4th, you're going to criticize him for the 2nd being a flop - but HIS approach was to find A PLAYER, and he committed TWO picks of value to that ONE goal. The way you score it, he'd lose points, when in fact he should GAIN them for good insurance move. Jerry's doing it right, and your analysis of him is based on a premise that isn't true - he doesnt play to hit each pick, he USES picks as a tool to stock his team. The way to judge him is to point to the team, and whether he addresses needs etc. You want to say he missed on the OL this year? That's fair. But overall, especially on defense, he seems to do a good job of identifying what we need and doing things to fix them, without spending too much. And in the cases of Cutler and peppers, knowing when and how to win the bidding. To simply look at each pick, out of context to the other picks, and free agents etc, isn't really the right way to value the draft. Look at the team they field, the final product, and if there are weaknesses then hold him accountable for that. Personally I think he's doing a GREAT job, and it's just a very inexact science, and he's playing the game well.

You're not right. He's had his hits and misses, he has areas of strength and areas of weakness. ANyone you would replace him with would have the same. Yes there are things to complain about, but he is not a Jackass. LOL thats so ignorant. He's done a good job of staying the course and executing the plan. He's done pretty well in my book, and hes a smart guy that gets it.

Riiiight. Lovie needs to go because he wont tell us anything, and Angelo needs to go because he does. Jerry Angelo has done a really good job for us. Yes every draft pick doesn't pan out - show me a GM for whom that doesn't happen. Jerry has been wise with the cap, he has shown a willingness to aggressively pursue trades and Free Agents when it was necessary, and a wise ability to sit it out when it wasn't. Cutler and Peppers are BIG reasons we are going to the Playoffs this year. Thank you Jerry.

Bears4Ever says with 5 games to play, here's how they'll finish on the current pace (current stat x 16/11) Matt Forte - 992 rushing yards (6 TD) 512 receiving yards (4 TD) Jay Cutler - 3351 passing yards 23 TD and 14 INT (274 rushing yards 0 TD) Greg Olsen - 42 catches 480 yards 7 TD Devin Hester - 45 catches 537 yards 3 TD also Johnny Knox - 58 catches 1073 yards 3 TD Earl Bennett - 46 catches 512 yards 4 TD Devin Aromashodu - 12 catches 174 yards 0 TD Chester Taylor - 309 rushing yards (1 TD) 145 receiving yards (0 TD) I realize that your prediction was for last year, but it seems to be coming true. Martz is spreading the ball around more tho and Knox was a surprise from 2009 so some of the yards are coming from Forte, Olsen and Hester and going instead to Taylor, Knox and Bennett.

With the developing rift between Jeff Fisher and Vince Young heating up in Tennessee, things are starting to look like they both can't return next year. if that's true, given the guarantee'd $ that Young is due, and recent statements from the owner of the Titans supporting Vince Young, you gotta wonder if Jeff Fisher will be looking for a new home. He might be a natural fit for Chicago. He's proven, steady, defensive oriented, not too volatile, a winner who isn't available due to having lost or not having experience. And of course, hes a member of the 1985 Chicago Bears defense. Peppers will fit any scheme, and it's time to retool the DTs anyway, so starting a new defensive system isn't such a big deal. He also has experience with mobile QBs int he offensive gameplan. I'm not sure I wouldn't like to see this current group keep going with a couple more OL next year tho, so I'm not saying I like this idea or not - but given the situation, and the 85 connection, its a natural question isn't it? Thoughts?

So wait Jason, lemme see if I understand what you're saying. You're saying that a good OL makes mediocre players better? Interesting idea. You should have mentioned it before.

Yes i agree. Keeping Martz as OC would be best, but my hypothetical was if martz get attention from around the league as a heard coach do you let him go, or give him lovie's job?

+1 - I wonder if we do well, and Martz gets interest around the league, can we fire Lovie and elevate Martz to HC?

That prevent at the end was fantastic too. I mean, I get that Lovie isn't a defensive minded coach... I am usually one to argue the benefit of the doubt. i assume in drafting etc that there are things we don't know etc. Going for it on 4th down down one late int eh 4th is just wrong. And its amateur, for someone who is supposed to be NFL caliber, that crap would't fly for HS. Why Lovie, you thought they were moving the ball well and you'd need more points? They weren't, and you had a 2nd string QB in there. They didn't move it much at all until you -- yeah your big zone. I want Lovie gone. At BEST hes an administrator now, keeping a team of super assistants coordinated. And its not even that is it? Lovie sucks.

Um? The PASSING game on offense?

I realize that it won't mean much if we can't run the ball or pass protect, but still I'm surprised there hasn't been much discussion here about Martz's passing scheme. I watched the preseason game, and I replayed every passing down the Bears had. The scheme is GREAT. EVERY down had multiple receivers open, sometimes WIDE open. You know how when we play certain teams, you feel so frustrated at our coverage, like "how are THEY always open, and we NEVER are??" I think we're about to be one of those other teams. I'm used to seeing receivers used to clear space and then hitting the guy underneath. I saw similar shapes, but it seemed that in a lot of the plays, the underneath guy was getting open first, and pulling the defense to him, and then the intermediary guy flashed open second, and made the play. This is really interesting. The underneath guy was open in a lot of cases which is what pulled the defense to him, and yet the QB didn't throw and threw on the second beat to the downfield receiver. I wonder if this is what they mean when they say the QB doesn't read in the traditional sense in the Martz offense. Maybe he read the safety or some spacing in the defense at and just after the snap, and so he didn't dump off to the first guy, but KNEW the play would develop into a good matchup for the intermediary guy. Urlacher said in an interview recently of facing the Martz scheme in practice ""It's frustrating going against them because you think you've got a guy covered and there's a guy behind you every time." http://www.chicagobears.com/news/NewsStory.asp?STORY_ID=6961 I'm starting to see what he meant. There were also plays where receivers went long and then running backs looped underneath. On one, the Bears had trips left, and sent them all into long patters, then Chester Taylor looped underneath for a big gain to pick up the first down. Int hat play, rather than Taylor looping into the left flat, as you would normally see, he had run thru the hole behind the RIGHT SIDE guard, and given a shoulder to the linebacker on THAT side of the field. It was a very clever way to get him into the void and not draw attention, since he came fro "the other side" even though it was only about a foot across the line of symmetry. It was enough to void the space by the defense's rules tho. Martz is clearly excellent exploiting defensive holes in coverage. I love that an simple I formation or double tight end set becomes the run and shoot after a beat. When they add in motion, it's gonna be pretty amazing. I only saw one play where four receivers (3 and a TE) went deep on all fly patterns, it turned out to be a delayed middle running back screen to Wolfe - GOOD IDEA! I also noticed some plays where familiar route combinations that complement each other (like a go and an out) happened in non traditional areas of the field. We're all used to see the smash route, where the outside receiver goes deep and the slot or TE runs a 7 yard out. It's obvious why that works, it can beat man or zone, but it's vanilla, and well understood by NFL defenses. Martz had a play where guys were running from strange angles and then arrived at that shape 15 yards downfield. THIS is creative application of basic ideas. I can see why the QB needs to hold the ball longer with Martz. I can see hpw if you give this guy a smart QB, speedy receivers and an extra second of pass protection, you're going to score a LOT of points. I still want to see us run the damned ball and pass protect, but as an OC, I think we're going to be pretty happy with Martz. I was very impressed at my first look at his passing system.

Maybe he doesn't mean they are elite in the league, but elite on HIS SQUAD, in other words, they are the only two who are assured positions? I mean, Tice is trying to coach them up, he wants to give Kreutz the buy-in on his leadership, and Williams confidence, and he wants to motivate the others with competition. It's been awhile, but this is what good coaching looks like. These guys don't give straight answers to the media, they use them as a tool to get what they want.