BearFan PHX

yeah, it's going to be a lot of fun. I will be glued to the TV.

Good point - youre talking about his floor, which I agree is pretty stable. Of course we all hope he exceeds his base abilities and becomes great, but the risk of him being a total bust seems very low based on what he has already put on film.

well said. It really does feel different. It is all fitting together, the timing of the rest of the roster etc. Poles obviously had a plan and stuck to it with discipline. and I think we are all expecting DL, OL or WR, but I suppose Brock Bowers is in there somewhere too as a wild card. Cant wait to see who it is - and while I dont have any clue who it will be, the guy at pick 75 could be exciting too.

Let's start a fight about whether Caleb is better than Luckman! LOL Seriously, this is an amazing time for us, our future is ascending, and that direction should continue to increase for several years. It's a good time to be a Bears fan!

We've never had one. This is about to be a very good era for us and the Bears!

of WR, DL and OL - best player available.

I think the idea is you want to give Caleb his signature guy to develop ESP with - that kind of communication because you grew up in the offense together, and you already know what the other guy is thinking. In the 70s and 80s there was always that stud receiver paired with the star QB for multiple seasons. If Poles is looking long term, then he loves Keenan Allen for giving Caleb a jump start, but he looks at that position as a hole long term. So this is our last top ten draft draft for a while. You want to use it on an impact position, which is QB (already done), Pass Rusher (including 3T), OT or WR. So you ask yourself not just what does the roster need this year, but who are my pillars for the next 10 years. If you think one of the WRs is a game changer, you take them regardless of Allen being on the roster. If you think there is a pass rusher who will take over games, you take him. If you think there is a left tackle that will keep Caleb clean for the next 12 years, you take him. So rather than looking at position and this years roster, ask instead, of the D linemen, WRs and OTs, which player is truly a difference maker. If you think Jared Verse is an edge rusher that can take over games and make Montez Sweat DE2, then you grab him. But if he isnt that, but some OT is, then you gotta go with the most talented game changer regardless of position. Maybe thats an argument for Bowers, or for trading up. Or maybe someone thinks Fashanu or Turner or whoever is that guy. But that's the point - whos the best impact player you can get, not what fills a roster hole in 2024 a little better?

Caleb green flag! LOL Apparently he's been meeting with the team on zoom calls every week having "frank" discussions - one assumes about ball security - and that speaks to being open to coaching. Awesome.

I guess the question is how you evaluate Fashanu. He is the only OT (after Alt) I think is worthy of the #9 pick. If we trade down, there are all kinds of OL options a little later, but they arent going to be blue chip Left OTs. Maybe Poles will get one of the big RTs a little later and move Wright to LT. Im not a big fan of moving guys who are dominating at their position, but maybe that's a smart move? Also, who is the Edge rusher? Im not sold on Latus injuries, or Turners scheme fit (I could be way off on that tho!) and Im not sure Verse jumps out as a difference maker the way Alt, Nabers, MHJ and Odunze do? This is our last top ten pick for a while, we need a difference maker, and to me, after Alt and the 3 WRs, thats probably Fashanu or Thomas. I probably need to go watch some film on Turner to be sure where I am on him. If he's that good, or Verse is, the DE is definitely a difference making position. I mean, the whole reason Im looking at OT is because they block the Edges lol

If Alt is there at 9 we will take him, but he wont make it to 7.

yeah, I just disagree, but I have no more facts than you (or Spielman) does, just my opinion too.

true. but you also have a lesser chance of hitting a home run too with lower picks, so it's like buying insurance against a bust, but you lose on the premiums?

Thank you for saying that. Listen i dont think that Spielman said it makes it WRONG either, it's just another opinion for sure. I just think the Bears are considering OT with their second pick. And DL and WR too.

Ok I can agree with that, a 5th round pick, you dont expect greatness so if you find it its a bonus. BUt if your plan is to build a roster, then youre picking higher because thats where the more likely successes are? So trading down doesnt necessarily make it better. When it comes to a 3rd rounder, year, 2 4ths are probably better, but if you have a certain guy targeted who fell, then thats better. But either way, this is our last top pick for a while, so you want to get a blue chip player if you can, and not just give away your upside for insurance?

if a 3T is the best DL available, we could definitely use them.

no, it's not a higher risk. more busts come out of each later round than in the first round. What I think you've discovered is that more unexpected players are able to break out of the mold at lower rounds at WR than OL. But lower round picks are still much more likely to bust?

I mostly agree. I think you can add Fashanu and possibly Thomas to the "take at 9" list which would lessen the trade down likelihood to only stupid rich trade offers. Or to just moving down to 11 or something.

totally, and we were there for a LONG time. You keep the roster decent, especially maybe on defense, and you dont lose enough games to get that really good QB. Trapped in the middle. This is why the idea of building a roster around a lesser QB is a bad idea. You dont win superbowls, but you dont fail enough to get a winner at QB.

I agree with all of this! Leno was a nightmare. PFF told us he was gold. LOL That's when I really soured on PFF. Like all of us, we watched the games, and saw how absolutely awful he was, and they were praising him as a top LT. It was probably the beginning of needing to see my own film. I also agree that having a QB like Williams who moves in the pocket in ways to help the OL will make things better, but I also know how a top 10 OL helps you win games, and close them out. If you can make first downs on the ground, there is no need to punt and play prevent defense. Imagine having Caleb as a top QB, and being able to still lean heavily on the run? That's how you win playoff games.

Possibly we will get that DE in a trade or free agency as rosters develop, and maybe mid season like Sweat at the trade deadline. Not bad to take a minute to get a look at younger players who need reps. But will we be adding a DE to this roster before the draft next year? 100% you guys are right.

Yeah you gotta KNOW this guy is gonna be the best WR in the league, or I'm not trading up either. Maybe if I did more work, I'd be convicted on it, who knows what Poles thinks, he's certainly seen all sides of this question.

I havent watched enough film on them to say. Right now, I think that MHJr, Nabers and Odunze are kind of grouped together. But that's just because of stuff I've read. Some people say MHJr is the next coming, and others say he is one of three exceptional talents this year. So I'll answer this way: *IF* my scouts and my film study are telling me that MHJr is the best WR in 10 years, then yes, I would look at trading up for him. I dont think next years 2nd would do it. I think wed have to give next years first and get back a teams 2nd this year. So our #9 and next years first for #4 or #5 to get MHJr and their this years 2nd. If I thought he was going to be Randy Moss, yes I would do that. But anything less, and no, I'll wait for #9, and if my guys arent there, possibly even trade back a little, maybe to #11 and get Thomas, maybe as far down as #18 and take an OL or DL

actually what he said was "I value people that did the job before more than so called media experts. I guarantee you percentage wise, they are right more than media experts and fans." he guarantees us, on a percentage basis, they are right more. and the reason hes is right so often is "He was a GM, been long time NFL employee. CBS hired him for input" So Im saying, other GMs, long time NFL employees and TV commentators think that OT is on the table for the Bears this year. Most people do. So can I guarantee that percentage wise they are right more, and therefore Spielman is wrong? Of course i cant. Neither side can. And that is ALL Im saying. Opinions abound all over the place, and Spielman's in this case isn't any more likely to be right, because we can all see the Bears are doing a lot to look at OTs, and we are debating them a lot, and pretty much everyone thinks OT is in the mix for the Bears this year. It doesnt seem very controversial at all.

I didnt say any of the things youre saying I said. I didnt say your opinion is wrong because it is shared by Spielman, I just said its still just an opinion. That's all I said. I do think the Bears are looking to draft an OT this year. They are also looking hard at WR and DL. If Spielman says they arent considering an OT, then I think he is wrong. I dont know why you think Im saying you dont have a right to your opinions. Im only saying you dont have a right to say I dont have a right to mine just because Spielman says so.

I definitely have people I listen to too of course. I hear what they say, and then I evaluate whether I agree. The ones I like to listen to are naturally the ones I agree with most. I think we are all like that. I don't know that I have ever agreed 100% or 0% with anyone about everything. My point was just the idea when two people are debating, one cant say "well Mr _____ agrees with me, and he has a pedigree of _______, so my point of view has more weight than yours." thats the fallacy of argument of authority. It's a well known logic error. It's been known for thousands of years, it has a latin name too. "An argument from authority, also called an appeal to authority, or argumentum ad verecundiam, is a form of argument in which the opinion of an influential figure is used as evidence to support an argument. The argument from authority is a logical fallacy, and obtaining knowledge in this way is fallible." - from Wiki And that is easy to understand because I also have people I listen to who disagree, and I cant say "Well my guy disagrees, and he has pedigree Z so I must be right" either. Whenever you're listing someone's pedigree in an argument to lend more weight to their opinion, youre committing the logical fallacy of "the argument from authority" and it's simple to understand, because experts disagree, so being an expert doesnt mean you are more right, if another expert says the opposite. But in all of this, I wasnt fighting, and I dont think Stinger was either. I havent read the last few responses yet, but i was just saying "you assert A, and your evidence is a logical fallacy so all thats left is just an opinion same as mine or anyones"