jason

We all know the inherent flaws to this concept, but it's an interesting test nonetheless. I ran three what-if mocks (two of which are previous threads) through the process. Fanspeak draft where Leonard Williams falls 1(7)-LEONARD WILLIAMS, DT, 3 = +4 2(39)-BENARDRICK MCKINNEY, ILB, 51 = -12, total -8 3(71)-DERRON SMITH, S, 103 = -32, total -40 4(106)-ROB HAVENSTEIN, T, 115 = -9, total -49 5(142)-IFO EXPRE-OLOMU, CB, 99 = +43, total -6 6(182)-SEAN MANNION, QB, 140 = +42, total +36 So we gain a 5th rounder. Talksbears attempt to agree mock 1(20)- MALCOLM BROWN, DT, 22 = -2 2(39)- DEVIN SMITH, WR, Ohio State, 47 = -8, total -10 2(52)- LAKEN TOMLINSON, OG, Duke, 48 = +4, total -6 3(71)-DAVID COBB, RB, Minnesota, 107 = -36, total -42 4(106)-KURTIS DRUMMOND, FS, Mich. St., 141 = -35, total - 77 5(142)-ZA'DARIUS SMITH, OLB, Kentucky, 102 = +40, total -37 6(182)-CODY FAJARDO, QB, Nevada, 239 = -57, total -94 So we lose a 4th rounder. My final mock, where Williams falls (I really think this will happen) 1(7)-LEONARD WILLIAMS, DT, 3 = +4 (Starts at DE immediately. ) 2(39)- , WR, 32 = +7, total +11 (Feels like another Moss to me) 3(71)-HRONISS GRASU, C, 60 = +11, total +22 (Leader of the OL, great mobility, starts for a decade) 4(106)- , T, 115 = -9, total +13 (Monster. Locks down RT and lets Long stay inside for multiple pro-bowls, fits with the new run-first philosophy) 5(142)-JACOBY GLENN, CB, 169 = -27, total -14 (Great hands, good anticipation, great drive on the ball) 6(182)- , ILB, 195 = -17, total -31 (Tackling machine. Good gap discipline. Leader. Great motor.) So we lose a 5th rounder, and I couldn't care less. That would be an outstanding draft. I'd like a FS, but none really seem to fall where the Bears pick & I don't want to reach.

Two I really like: Landon Collins, S, Alabama - I think he's taken a hit lately, but he's by far the best S in the class. I also think he could play FS or SS. Dorial Green-Beckham, WR, Mizzou - I just feel like he's the same type of player as Randy Moss, who I wanted badly back in the day. He's a monster at 6'6", running a 4.4, and high-points the ball.

Agreed. I think you could take just about any mock, realistic anyway, and you'd find that there would be a built-in loss.

Interesting comparison. But, wow, their draft was stupid. No way in hell 7 WRs go in the 1st round. No way in hell. AND they had both Vic Beasley and Landon Collins falling into the second round. That would be insane. But let's say that did happen. Holy hell, I would faint if the Bears started off with Amari Cooper and Landon Collins. That would be amazing.

Interesting concept. I hadn't thought of it that way. Of course, the one huge flaw is what we're discussing in regards to the concept of BPA, need-based drafting, and value-based drafting. If there is a glaring hole somewhere, it's likely there will be a "reach" pick according to the big board, and your metrics will yield a negative. Still, interesting thought.

How exactly are you doing this?

That's pretty much how I see it, which is why it's not really BPA. Need is much more important than true BPA unless you're starting a franchise from scratch. Since that's not true, it has to be a balance of need, value, and BPA. But if you factor in need and value, BPA is pretty much a given because it's the BPA for your team.

Touche. But Mariota would still be a horrible pick for the Bears.

At this point, every time you post negativity it makes me crack up. You'd be mad if the Bears gave you season tickets in a skybox that had a fully stocked bar, all you can eat wings, and a Hooter's girl server who gives BJs at half time.

We simply disagree. I think you have it confused. BPA is not the opposite of drafting for need. Nobody does that. Nobody drafts purely BPA. I pointed out the stupidity of this concept in a previous thread when I mentioned a QB falling to the Colts. BPA says they draft the QB. No way in hell they do that. If they did it wouldn't be called a War Room. The owner, coach, and GM would hand an intern their big board and take the day off, telling the intern to call if someone proposes a trade. What most people mean when they say BPA is "BPA according to team needs as compared to the next most talented player at the same position, versus the most talented player at another position, unless some ridiculously talented player falls to us and meets a secondary or tertiary need." It virtually never means "BPA regardless of position." I've never been in a war room, but I guarantee the discussion goes something like this: A - "Player A is the top rated guy on the board." B - "Yeah, but we don't really need a (insert position). Can you guarantee he'll be a Hall of Famer? (laughs)" A - "No, I can't. True about his position. Well, Players B and C are the next two guys on the board. And we could probably use position XX." B - "Agreed. But Player H is the 8th guy on the board and he'd start immediately at position XY, filling a huge hole on the team. The next best player at XY is 30th on the list." A - "Yes, he would. And the next best players after B & C at XX are 18th and 19th. There is definitely more value grabbing H now, and hoping R or S falls to us." B - "Agreed. Send in the pick."

I have been thinking lately about the concept of BPA, and how it applies to team needs. Related to that is the concept of value by position. In other words, if the second and third best Safeties are there in the third, then it makes sense to pass on the safety position until then. Having said that... 1st - NT or OLB/DE - if the Bears want/need DT, it needs to happen here. The first three appear to be gone in most recent mocks, which I still can't believe, in the first. Same goes for the elite edge rushers. 2nd - ILB, there just seems to be a ton of talent at this spot, and they disappear by the third. 3rd - FS, After Collins, most mocks have safeties falling to the third. Great spot for us. 4th - OG/OT appears to have great value here. Agree?

Two thoughts: 1. Do we need... A] SS to play now B] FS for the future c] Both Id rather see a FS or both get drafted over just a SS. But if Only SS is drafted, i hope it is Collins on a trade back. Pairing him with Rolle would be nasty. 2. I still don't like the a RB being picked. Otherwise I love the first three rounds.

Sometimes it sure does seem like these experts do little else than check the message boards and ride the wave of opinion.

I still think that Charles Martin play irrevocably changed the course of the Bears franchise. One of the dirtiest plays I can remember ever seeing. It was borderline illegal, and should have drawn one of the biggest fines in NFL history. If I saw Charles Martin driving, and knew for certain it was him, I'd follow him and flatten his tires.

Make no mistake, I don't think the pieces the Bears have on the DL are great fits. But I just don't see how the Bears can invest high draft picks, or any draft picks, until they're certain what their roster can do in a 3-4. Maybe it turns out Allen and/or Young possess rush moves that are so unorthodox and effective that they just work in a 3-4? Maybe the Bears have enough hybrid DE/OLB types that they plan on moving them back and forth? Maybe the Bears plan on assisting the would-be DEs with consistent OLB pressure since the DEs might be lighter than normal? Realistically, this is what we know about the defensive starters: DE - NT - McDonald OLB - Foster - ILB - McPhee Jennings - SS - Rolle - Fuller That's a lot of uncertainty. Based on what the staff has said, it's likely Rat/Ego share time at NT. Beyond that, we really don't know what they are doing. And if they don't plan on using some of those names at DE, it would be crazy because they'd essentially be throwing multiple guys away without seeing if they can fill the role. That's like being a little hungry and buying a fancy dinner without seeing whether or not the sandwich you have can satisfy you.

It's the DE/OLB dilemma. I think Allen and/or Houston at 3-4 OLB won't/can't work, and there are already a ton of OLBs, which means they are thrown into the DE mix. That at least four guys rotating.

The 49ers select Josh Shaw, CB, Southern California. They would have liked ILB and it hurt to see a prime target go just before their pick. They obviously need CB help, regardless of their signings. I think he's the best CB on the board since I don't trust players from tiny schools over big school performers.

Leonard Williams falling to 7 is the only way I see a DE being selected. Otherwise I don't think it makes sense with all the talent.

Damn. That screwed the Niners. He is exactly the fit for them.

Again, BPA doesn't mean true BPA. It is also based on need. I just don't believe DE is as big of a need given all the names, regardless of who you or I think will eventually play there. I just don't see the Bears throwing so many players away instead of exploiting their abilities. No way I will believe Allen also doesn't get into that mix. So at the least you have McDonald, Jenkins, Allen, and, as you mentioned, Houston. I'll be shocked if the draft DE in the first three rounds.

Agree with this thought. Someone posted something a while back, maybe it's been posted multiple times, about the success rate by position by round. I seem to remember QB, OL, and one other position being the position most suited for a first round selection.

You're right. I hate PFF's ratings. I think they're BS. During Fangio's tenure at SF, the following were starting CBs: 1) Chris Culliver - 6'0" - 3rd rd - Drafted for return skills and upside - Questionable in coverage & injuries 2) Tarell Brown - 5'11" - 5th rd - Troubled, injured, returner, drafted for upside 3) Perrish Cox - 5'11" - 5th rd (Broncos) - Troubled, returner, drafted for upside 4) Carlos Rogers - 6'0" - 1st rd (Redskins) - No doubt he was a stud Other than Rogers and his 1st rd talent, the other guys were average, mid-rd picks. And none are huge. The difference between 5'9" and 5'11" is negligible. I don't really think the 2 inch difference will make that big of a deal. And given the links between Culliver, Brown, and Cox (i.e. issues + upside), and I'd say IEO is precisely the type of player Fangio would go after in the third round.