AZ54

I just posted Rapoport's Tweet about teams inquiring on Quinn. This is the first I've heard of Montgomery but combining that news with this quote and I can see where he'd prefer to avoid either the new contract for Montgomery or letting him walk but then hoping for a comp pick. The downside is that if he can see that depth so can everyone else. In that case just like Quinn, Montgomery likely only has value to a team competing deep in the playoffs who wants to use their early picks to fill other holes on the roster. https://www.chicagobears.com/news/5-things-we-learned-ryan-poles-pre-draft-presser-picks-trade-deepest-positions (3) When asked about the deepest positions on the second and third days of the draft, Poles named four different spots. "I would say the O-line depth is pretty good," he said. "There's some good depth with the DBs. There's a couple defensive linemen. The running back class may not be top-heavy, but there's a ton. It's crazy how many running backs there are. "I think a lot of it has to do with the COVID year [when all college players were given an additional year of eligibility]. A lot of those guys are kicking back, so the middle-to-bottom, definitely into free agency, there's a massive amount of players. That's why it took so much time to get the board set, not only at the top but at the bottom. There are a lot of players on this board."

The fat lady hasn't sung yet. It appears Poles has let people know he's available for the right price or by now we wouldn't be seeing rumors like this. He's quietly standing firm on his asking price or at least he's not acting desperate enough to take anything. Of course we don't know how serious teams are with this. Some might still be hoping to get a great deal from a young GM desperate for more draft picks. OTOH if there are several teams inquiring he might be getting a little bit of a sellers market. It's enough to keep me tuned in to the first night of the draft, which I'd be watching anyway.

I think you can toss in Zach Tom, Max Mitchell, or a few other names; or you can switch around the positions (i.e. WR @ 39) and still get a winning combination in this draft to fix the IOL in 2022. Or even get the future LT we need. Right now the Bears have the highest cap space in 2023 at $97mil. Setup this year with the right interior players to cut Whitehair next year and you can make that $110mil. Plus, when it comes to building a championship caliber roster there is no bigger question to answer than if Fields is the right QB. I like him but that's just the reality of a young QB in the NFL. With that kind of cap space and a full boat of draft picks Poles should want to know the answer to that question before we draft in 2023. Fixing the Oline as best as is reasonably possible, and a decent WR, gives him the best chance to evaluate Fields. Just do it.

Rankings are all over the place, seemingly more than usual. 39 Kenyon Green 48 Christian Watson 71 Cole Strange

I'd gladly take an OT and C (Jurgens) to develop.

I'd say we are ok at OT, LG, C, but RG is big concern for me. I don't see a whole lot available in FA. https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/free-agents/all/guard/all/

I don't think we have an option when it comes to addressing Oline early. We're not in a position to draft someone who needs a year, or more, to develop. We need a starter at RG. As badly as we need a 3-tech to help the D, Fields can be the future of this team. By the way I'm very thankful we're not looking for a QB this year. If Fields were in this draft he'd be gone top 5, if not #2 to Detroit.

Great video and analysis. He's got some names I haven't even heard of that are high and others that are way lower than expected.

Great video and analysis. He's got some names I haven't even heard of that are high and others that are way lower than expected.

I had forgotten about that but I still think it's worth looking into. I highly doubt he'd want to play in Chicago as he'd likely prefer to go to a playoff team if he has that opportunity.

I'm not sure. I assume Baltimore would have first crack at signing him but they usually have a good defense so I doubt they'd be interested. How many teams have as many holes as we do with as few picks as we have?

Given our situation where we really need help and leadership in the defensive backfield I'm all in on Poles kicking the tires here. As long as he is healthy and in shape I'm in...sign him. Considering the style of defense we're moving toward which is much more see-it-and-react is what Thomas excelled at we should be ok with him on the field. I'm not expecting him to be great but unless we draft a S in Rd 2, which is unlikely, his leadership and experience is going to be a plus over any other option we have. Earl was the heart beat of the Seahawks great defense. A 1yr rental to help us right the ship will help us if for no other reason than teaching the young players to be successful. He is also the type of player and vocal leader, one of very few, who might be able to get Eddie Jackson's head on straight and return him to his true potential. https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10033486-earl-thomas-ready-for-nfl-return-won-super-bowl-48-with-seahawks

More sleepers. https://thedraftnetwork.com/articles/2DARON BLAND22-nfl-draft-sleepers-prospects-weston-bland-dykes I took a quick look at some highlights of the players on that list. Beyond a couple DBs who might be practice squad candidates I have to say that, along with WRs like Danny Grey, Isaiah Weston absolutely should be on our radar on day 3. He's 6'3" 214lbs with 40" vert, 135" broad jump. While you have to carefully watch for it he's got some decent lateral movement but I don't see much in terms of route running and timing passes. In the highlights it's clear he just ran past everyone at the FCS level and usually had to wait on the ball to arrive. If it's upside you want as a day 3 prospect he's got it but he'll need time, good coaching, and a good work ethic. If we want to, there are plenty of good options to fully stock the WR room in this draft. https://www.nfl.com/prospects/isaiah-weston/32005745-5373-3679-5418-3d4dbbc6013e

That had to be the easiest decision you ever made.

Somebody needs to get on the wayback machine because I think Davenport was in some pre-draft discussions here years ago as an OT option on Day 3 or UDFA. Unless something has changed he's got really slow feet. At best he's competing for a backup OT role but that's ok. If he has improved his technique with his length he can be a viable backup. https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2706642-julien-davenport-nfl-draft-2017-scouting-report-for-houston-texans-pick "A two-time team captain and four-year starter at left tackle, Julie'n Davenport has two things you can't coach—size and length. At 6'7" and 318 pounds, he has 36 ½-inch arms and massive 10 ½-inch hands. He's the first guy you want coming off the bus. Davenport has an excellent reach, and his best asset is his punch. He has a quick strike and can get to defenders much earlier than his peers. At the Senior Bowl, we saw him knocking back pass-rushers with nice timing and power on the limbs he calls arms. Davenport is a great fit in a zone-blocking scheme, where his length and his movement skills would allow him to cut off defenders in the running game. From a size and strength perspective, Davenport is prototypical." David Moore is absolutely in the mix and will push Dazz to earn a roster spot. Plus it's a small world and he's got some family tradition to live up to.... https://www.chicagobears.com/news/roster-moves-bears-sign-wr-moore-cb-stroman Moore is ultra-excited to follow in the footsteps of his second cousin, James Allen, a Bears running back from 1998-2001 who rushed for 1,978 yards and four touchdowns on 515 carries while appearing in 50 games with 27 starts.

That rookie deal only logic makes sense to me. After that the teams are on the same competitive ground to wheel and deal as they choose.

Depending on who is on the board at 39 I could take the Dallas proposal. But if it's Watson I'm taking him.

I'm ok with the late round developmental strategy at LT versus reaching for one. In Rd 2 it's very likely we can draft a good starting OG, and maybe even Linderbaum falls to 39. If he doesn't, it just makes it more likely one of the OGs does. The only thing Poles has to watch for is that after losing out on a couple upgrades the entire league knows he wants Oline players and that makes us an obvious target to trade ahead of should someone drop. You can say we need/want WRs too but the fact remains Poles was more willing to commit cap space to fix the Oline than he was for WR. I think that priority carries forward into the draft.

A few sleepers at OT: https://thedraftnetwork.com/articles/2022-nfl-draft-offensive-tackle-day-2-3-prospects

I don't think either Raimann or Smith are ready to start at LT as a rookie. For Raimann we have to keep this in mind and that's based on a lot of NFL history or data points if you prefer. I'm not saying he'll never develop into that technician like Slater but there is nothing I've read about his game that says he has those skills today. https://trenchwarfare.substack.com/p/ol-scouting-notebook-2022-nfl-combine?s=r Central Michigan T Bernhard Raimann - Raimann’s arm length came in at 33 inches at the Senior Bowl and 32 7/8 at the Combine. Left tackle Rashawn Slater measured in at 33 inches at the Combine last year and was a Second Team All-Pro as a rookie in 2021, but Slater is also an exceptional case and an absolute technician. The reality is that having 33 inch arms and under at tackle is a rarity and an obstacle to overcome rather than an asset for Raimann. Smith has poor technique and simply being the bully on the field can work against lesser competition like he faced at Tulsa but it will get him beat often in the NFL. He at least has the physical tools to develop into a LT but IMO he's best served starting out on the interior until he gets his technique down, or he's going to ride the bench for a year while he learns. We have too many holes to fill to park one of our top 3 players on the bench for a year. If we don't feel they can play inside then I'd pick someone for any other position with a higher floor. IMO if the team feels either can play well inside then go ahead and draft them, we need help inside. We can survive with Borom and Jenkins as our OTs and there is still the option of a FA LT as a stopgap. If they develop into LT then we take it off our list next year. I just don't think I'm prepared to bank on that in 2022.

Watson is 1, then I'm between Pickens and Pierce. Since I have to choose I'll stay with the healthier and stronger/faster player in Pierce 2, Pickens 3. I agree with the thought to have one taller receiver in the mix especially for redzone options. Some recent feedback I've seen: TDN on Pickens - he's limited in ways he can win and separate. Great at adjusting to the ball, great hands, but is he going to handle press coverage and still get into his route on time? In his defense he's had the injuries and less time to develop those route running skills. https://thedraftnetwork.com/articles/george-pickens-nfl-draft-player-breakdown Moore - quite a few analysts have high praise for his game even as a late 1st Rd pick. I like him but I'm a bit less enamored than that, plus he's a slot WR and I still prefer we find an X especially one who can get open deep to take advantage of Fields' skillset. https://www.nfl.com/news/2022-nfl-draft-which-prospect-might-not-be-a-first-round-pick-but-should-be

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"

That's probably all we need at TE for the season. Kmet, Griffin, O'Shaughnessy, Hosted. We won't commit early picks to TE and we won't find anyone on day 3 ready to contribute more than these guys. I expect we'll focus on other priorities in the draft.

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."

Matt Waletzko is a good target for that role on day 3.