defiantgiant

Of that list, I would guess that we either sweep the Packers or split, that we split with the Vikings, and that we beat the Eagles, Seahawks, Niners, and Falcons. I'm not confident at all that we could beat the Ravens, Steelers, or Cards, and I think we'll almost certainly lose one out of two to the Vikings. So I'm thinking it's 7-4, maybe 6-5 if we can't beat the Packers twice. Still, there's no reason in the world that the Bears can't beat the Bengals, Browns, Rams, and the Lions, so that leaves us at either 12-4 or 11-5, depending on the Green Bay games. I'm OK with that.

Yeah, I really like Melton as a developmental guy. He's got great size and a ton of upside, but he won't go too high, since he's still learning the position after switching from running back. He seems like exactly the sort of prospect that Marinelli could get great results from, but without Chicago having to use a high draft pick.

The weirdest thing to me is that Franklin seems to be a really good fit. Chan Gailey seems like he's good about catering his offense to the pieces he's got: the Chiefs went with that weird Pistol offense because it let Thigpen be way more effective than he could be in a conventional drop-back role. If Kansas City's going to cater to Cassel's strengths, then the Chiefs' offense will need to incorporate a lot of shotgun-spread looks, since Cassel is dramatically better out of the shotgun than he is under center. Franklin's offense in college was a spread-based one pretty similar to what New England was running with Cassel. The only thing I can think of is that, since the Chiefs drafted Franklin last year, they've signed Mark Bradley and Bobby Engram. Maybe they're trying to stash Franklin on the practice squad while they go forward with Bowe, Bradley, and Engram.

So this draft is pretty short (no pun intended) on big, physical wide receivers. There's no real "jumbo jet" here - no Calvin Johnson, no Andre Johnson, no Plaxico Burress. The Bears could really use a king-size wideout to complement Devin Hester, but there isn't really one in the group. What do you guys think about drafting Jared Cook from South Carolina and moving him to wide receiver? Cook goes 6'5" 246 pounds, and ran a 4.49 in the 40 at the Combine. Back in 2007, he weighed 235 and could run a 4.37. When he was around that weight he played split end and flanker, but then Spurrier had him bulk up and moved him to tight end. He's a very incomplete TE prospect: not a good blocker at all, hasn't played very much with his hand down, was lined up in college much wider than NFL tight ends. As a possession/red-zone receiver, though, I think he'd be spectacular. He's got good hands and a disgusting vertical (41") for a guy his size. He's not going to lose a jump ball to anybody in the NFL. If he could slim back down to under 240, I think he could be another Brandon Marshall for Jay Cutler to throw to. He's got experience lining up as a receiver, and he's got more than enough long speed/burst to play the position. Plus, the Bears desperately need a wideout who can beat the jam at the line. What corner is going to get a jam on a guy Cook's size? I mean, is what happens when DBs try to lay a hit on the guy. He's lined up a little closer in that video, but he's still in a two-point stance. Check out for a look at what Cook can do when he's lined up more like a split end. What do you guys think?

I haven't seen this mentioned here yet: the Chiefs just put Will Franklin on waivers. Speculation is that he did something to get on the wrong side of the coaching staff, since he's got a fair amount of potential, fits their new offensive scheme well, and is just coming off his rookie season. I really liked Franklin when he was coming out of Missouri last year. He didn't put up eye-popping numbers at Mizzou, largely because of two good tight ends (Martin Rucker and Chase Coffman) and another wideout you may have heard of: he had to compete for catches with Jeremy Maclin, who's easily a top-15 pick this year. Franklin's career numbers are still pretty decent: 143 receptions for 2125 yards (17.7 YPC) and 13 touchdowns. Here's a video of Franklin at Missouri. He's got a fantastic size-speed-athleticism combination: at the Combine, he was 6' and 214 pounds and ran a 4.37 in the 40, plus he had a 40.5" vertical and a 10' 11" broad jump. I'm thinking the Bears should pick him up off waivers and let him compete in camp. He's still a project, but he's only 23 and has way way more potential than Brandon Rideau/Devin Aromashodu/John Broussard, who are our 4-6 receivers right now. Hell, Franklin had 7 catches for 83 yards last season: that's 7 catches and 83 yards more than Earl Bennett. It can't hurt to bring this guy in and see what he can do.

Ogletree's not bad at all. He has good-but-not-great size at 6'1" 196. He doesn't play as fast in a straight line as his timed speed (4.36) would indicate, but he's still pretty fast and he's got great acceleration and change-of-direction ability. Look at his short shuttle time: he ran it in a 6.67, faster than almost every other wideout. As a reference point, Mike Thomas ran a 6.65, and he's got legitimately elite quickness in a short area. Ogletree runs nice routes and has pretty good hands. He'd probably be a 2nd-to-3rd round pick if he were coming from a different school. To give you an idea of how bad Virginia's passing game is, there are two UVa quarterbacks in the NFL right now: Aaron Brooks and Matt Schaub. Ogletree is only the second receiver in UVa history to have two 50-catch seasons. If he were a Texas Tech or Missouri wideout, we'd probably be looking at him very differently. All that said, the one thing to worry about with Ogletree is injuries. He had to have surgery on his wrist in 2006, and then he tore his ACL in 2007 and needed surgery again. If he clears medically, he could be a steal in the 4th round, or even with our compensatory 3rd.

I couldn't agree with you more on Thomas. If the Bears want to give Bennett a legitimate shot at the flanker spot, they could upgrade the passing game significantly by drafting Thomas to play the slot. Even as a rookie, he'd be a massive upgrade over Rashied Davis, and would give us some insurance in case Bennett can't step up. His size doesn't worry me so much, since he's got a ridiculous vertical (over 40", if I'm remembering right) so he should still be able to compete for jump balls with much taller DBs. I'm with you on Barden, too: he just hasn't had to do the things that you need an NFL wideout to do. He reminds me a lot of Jerome Simpson from last year: big guy, won a lot of jump balls against lower-tier DBs, but has never had to run NFL routes or get any separation, since he could always come up with the ball one-on-one. Let's see him do that when it's Ed Reed in coverage. I have to say, I'm not a fan of Bruton's. Poor angles and bad instincts in coverage are a bad, bad thing for a free safety, and a lot of guys can't be coached out of them. Look at Danieal Manning: he's faster and more athletic than Bruton, but he got burned constantly at FS. He was always taking himself out of the play with a poor angle or a bad read. I'd much rather have a slower, less elite athlete back there with impeccable ball skills/play reading. A guy like Louis Delmas, Rashad Johnson, or even Jairus Byrd (who I think is a natural FS, and actually played there before he got moved to corner) would be better than Bruton. All three of those guys aren't quite NFL-ready from a physical standpoint, but you have to look at the success rate for physical projects versus developmental ones. The NFL is full of safeties who got bigger and stronger after college; the number of guys who got smarter is a lot smaller. All in all, if the draft breaks down like Kiper thinks it will, I'd WAY rather have: 2.49) Louis Delmas/Jairus Byrd/Rashad Johnson/Darcel McBath/Sherrod Martin, FS 3.99) Mike Thomas/Brandon Tate, WR 4.119) Gerald Cadogan, OT ...than Massaquoi, Clemons, and Chris Owens.

I might even be more optimistic than that. The one year where Bennett and Cutler were on the same team, Bennett was a true freshman on a fairly lousy Vanderbilt team, going up against SEC defensive backs. He had 9 touchdowns and almost 900 yards receiving. If you want to see why, check out Bennett's running a slant, is double-covered, and hardly gets any separation. Cutler puts it absolutely on a rope between the two guys and right on Bennett's numbers. Touchdown. I think Bennett could pretty easily top 750 yards with Cutler throwing to him again.

Yeah, even if the rumor that he failed his Combine drug test turns out to be false, Cushing's clearly been juicing for a while. There are pictures of him in practice at USC and it's obvious he's got pretty severe gynecomastia, which is a red flag. If we were going to get one of the USC 'backers, the only one I'd want would be Clay Matthews. He's faster than Cushing or Maualuga, way better in coverage than either of them, and hits just as hard. He's got enough power that they used to put him in a three-point stance at USC, but he's still mobile enough to play in a 4-3.

EDIT: double post

This is the only reason I wouldn't be outright mad if we traded for Cutler, especially if we gave up Orton to do so. Every player other than Bennett would have to re-learn their timing and chemistry with a new QB, but if it had enough positive impact on Bennett to turn him into a legit #2 wideout, maybe it'd be worth it. I'm still against trading for Cutler, mainly because of what we'd have to give up, but it would give us a pretty solid group of skill position players. I'll say this: if we're going to trade away what people have been talking about (let's say Orton, a first this year and a first next year) to get Cutler, we might as well give up our 2nd-rounder this year and sign Lance Moore away from New Orleans. Cutler's got to have someone established to throw to, or he's going to be a waste of money and draft picks. That'd give us a pretty solid, very young skill-position group on offense, too: QB - Cutler WR - Hester, Bennett, Moore RB - Forte TE - Olsen That's not a bad group at all, and Hester would be the oldest of the bunch at 26. Moore and Cutler are 25, Olsen's 24, Forte's 23, and Bennett's 22. They'd be the core of our offense for 4 or 5 years at least. That said, putting that group together would cost us our established starter at QB and three picks that we could use elsewhere. It'd put a lot of pressure on Angelo to find us a free safety, a pass rush, and a starting o-lineman, all on day 2. I'm not saying he couldn't do it (he seems to have much better luck in the 3rd and 4th rounds than in the 1st) but he'd really have to hit on every pick. I think it's asking a lot of your GM (no matter who he is) to put him in a position where a mid-third, a late-third, and a mid-fourth all need to be starting-caliber players.

As weird as it sounds, the Giants might move up to have fewer picks. They've got a huge number of veterans returning, and they have very little room on the roster: they're returning everyone but Toomer and Ward, they added Chris Canty, and they have exactly one restricted FA. Of the guys who are returning, there's really nobody who ought to lose his job. New York could make better use of a single high pick (probably a WR to step in for Plaxico if they don't think Manningham can do it) than several lower picks, not all of whom would make it onto the roster. Right now, they've got a first, two seconds, two thirds, a fourth, two fifths, a sixth, and a seventh. They don't have room to add 5 contributors and five guys for depth, so it makes sense to trade, either up in round 1 or for picks next year. As for picking a running back, I'm not sold on either Wolfe or Jones, since neither of them produced at all last season. I know that in the real world, they'll be handed another opportunity to contribute, but in my mocks I've got them competing for their spots with a draft pick, either Scott or Peerman. If the incumbents win, great. If not, either of those two should be able to contribute in a committee. I think a solid change of pace back is a more pressing need than people realize: we can't risk putting the entire offense on Forte's shoulders for two seasons in a row. He's too good a back for Lovie and Turner to run him into the ground in his first two seasons. Jones and Wolfe both have potential, but you can't say that either of them did anything last year that makes them a sure thing to step up and spell Forte.

I was heavily prioritizing four needs in rounds 1-3: WR, RT, FS, and DE. Starting with our compensatory 3rd, I went to a mix of need and BPA. By the time I got to pick 84 in the first mock, Malcolm Jenkins, Sean Smith, Byrd, Louis Delmas, Rashad Johnson, McBath and William Moore were all off the board. I'm not really sold on David Bruton or Sherrod Martin. Bruton reminds me too much of Danieal Manning - great athlete, doesn't have the instincts or awareness to play FS. Martin, I think, is a corner playing safety. He's fast, but he takes bad angles and is a poor tackler, from what I've seen. His frame worries me, too. Basically, once I'd missed on the few top-tier safeties, I didn't see a significant dropoff between the remaining guys and prospects like Clemons or Cook. I have SS in both mocks because I'd like to see a draft pick at each safety spot, and then open competition for both starting safety jobs. Kevin Payne has serious problems in coverage and slides off tackles; Steltz could be good, but he hasn't shown enough to be handed a starting job. Also, Cook reminds me of Bob Sanders. He was a guy like Kruger, where I just couldn't pass on him. The OLBs were kind of a new idea. Neither Roach nor Hillenmeyer are studs at strongside LB, and I was thinking Chicago could spend a high second-day pick there, get an immediate boost to the defense, and also get a guy who could eventually slide to the middle and replace Urlacher. I think both Williams and McKenzie project pretty well to 4-3 Mike backer, especially if they started off with a couple of years at Sam to get up to speed. Anyway, that was my rationale.

I don't know that he could - he plays physical enough for a corner, but he's not Sheldon Brown or anything. I will say this for Lucas - he's durable. He only missed 1 game in 4 years at Carolina: even if we just sign him for depth, the Bears could use a guy who's relatively injury-free, given how much Vasher and Tillman have been hurt. Lucas is kind of streaky to be a starter, but he'd be a good rotational guy to split time with Vasher or with Graham if the coaching staff decides Vasher's not going to cut it.

So I've taken enough potshots at other people's mocks (all constructive criticism, I promise) - I figured it was time to let you guys tee off on two of mine. As a caveat, I used Draft Tek's big board as a reference. Their mocks are suspect sometimes, but their big board is usually pretty good. Each one of my choices is a guy who Draft Tek has projected to be available somewhere around that pick. The first scenario I've got has Chicago standing pat with all their current picks: 1.18) Hakeem Nicks, WR, UNC 2.49) Phil Loadholt, OT, Oklahoma 3.84) Paul Kruger, DE, Utah 3.99) Jason Williams, OLB, Western Illinois 4.119) Nate Davis, QB, Ball State 5.154) Emanuel Cook, SS, South Carolina 6.190) Chris Clemons, FS, Clemson 7.246) Bernard Scott, RB, Abilene Christian 7.251) Roger Allen III, OG, Missouri Western UDFA) Frank Summers, FB, UNLV UDFA) Brennan Marion, WR, Tulsa Kruger in the mid-third is slightly wishful thinking, but I think he could fall there, depending on what happens with Ayers, Gilbert, et al. Here's the other scenario, which involves the Bears trading with the Giants: 1.29) Eben Britton, OT, Arizona 2.49) Brian Robiskie, WR, Ohio State 2.60) Jairus Byrd, CB/FS, Oregon 3.91) Tyrone McKenzie, OLB, South Florida 3.99) Stephen McGee, QB, Texas A&M 4.119) Cedric Peerman, RB, Virginia 5.154) Mike Wallace, WR, Mississippi 6.190) Sammie Lee Hill, DT, Stillman 7.246) Will Davis, DE, Illinois 7.251) Marcus Mailei, FB, Weber State UDFA) Ian Hoskins, DE, Marshall UDFA) Al Afalava, SS, Oregon State I've got the Bears sending their first, third, and a sixth in 2010 for the Giants' first, second, and third this year. Effectively, the Giants move up in round 1 and round 3, the Bears move down in rounds 1 and 3 but pick up an extra 2nd. The draft pick value chart says #18 and #84 are worth 1070 points combined, whereas #29, #60, and #91 are worth 1076. The six-point difference is worth a 7th-rounder this year, but the Bears' 7ths are both compensatory and can't be traded, hence the 6th-rounder in 2010. Let me know what you guys think...

My money would be on Fenuki Tupou. He'd definitely be a boost to the run game. Lang might end up a guard, but it's possible that he could stay at tackle. He'd be a good pickup either way: I think he'll be really good in the pros.

Yeah, most of the mocks I've been seeing here I really didn't agree with, but I can get down with this one. Britton could kick inside to guard if he doesn't work out at tackle, and having Shaffer on board gives Chicago the flexibility to find out where he really belongs. My feeling is that he's probably a good right tackle, but some evaluators have him shifting inside. The Kruger pick I love. I've been pretty vocal about DE being a lesser need than receiver and free safety, and on paper I would be mad if the Bears went with an end before getting any help at those two spots. But there's something about Kruger that just makes me want him on my team. Psychologically, he's a tough guy in the mold of Mike Brown. How many times have the Bears whiffed on a guy because he didn't really love the game? Kruger got stabbed multiple times and very nearly died - he didn't even miss offseason practice. You have to love football to do that, and you have to be tough as hell. I agree that he's not an explosive DE, but he reminds me of Aaron Kampman: he's a guy who's just going to keep working an OT over all game until he finally breaks down. Honestly, I'd be pretty happy with that draft. My only worry with the whole thing is that it would put a lot of pressure on Earl Bennett to step up as the #2 receiver. Brandon Gibson's best fit is in the slot, and I think he could be good there, plus that would give us an excuse to relegate Rashied Davis to special teams, where he belongs. Bennett would need to be able to lock down the #2 spot, though, or we'd end up spending a pick on Julio Jones down the road. I might take Patrick Turner over Marko Mitchell if both are available. They both have suspect long speed, but Turner's the better red-zone receiver, and he's bigger and stronger to throw blocks downfield.

I have to make a point here. What Angelo said doesn't apply to Shaffer's situation. He was talking about impending free agents who were allowed to walk by their teams, rather than being offered a new deal. Shaffer was under contract for 2009 before the Browns cut him. I think it's already been said in this thread, but Cleveland cut Shaffer because he had a $6 million cap figure for 2009, was about to make a $1.5 million roster bonus, and refused to renegotiate. Shaffer's agent said that the Browns wanted to keep him, but they couldn't afford to if he wouldn't agree to a smaller deal. It wasn't that the Browns thought Shaffer wasn't good enough and St. Clair would be better - they thought Shaffer wasn't cheap enough and St. Clair would be cheaper. Shaffer's roster bonus alone was bigger than all the guaranteed money in St. Clair's 3-year contract.

Yeah, Byrd could play corner in a cover-2, but that doesn't mean he has to. Honestly, the guy's more of a safety than a corner anyway. He played safety in high school, then played rover/free safety when he first came to Oregon, before they moved him to corner. He's built more like Mike Brown than Nate Vasher - he's listed by Oregon at 5'11" 205, and can power clean 330 pounds. Plus, he's got the ball skills (17 picks in 3 seasons) for FS, he hits hard, and he's said in interviews that he feels like safety is his natural position. So yes, he could play a cover-2 corner if you wanted him to. But for the Bears, I think it'd be a waste not to use him as a safety.

Yeah, you couldn't have said that better. Both Nicks and Bennett have good hands, neither have great timed speed, and they're similar sizes and builds, but that doesn't make them similar talents. Nicks' YPC reflects how good he is after the catch. If you watch the UNC-WVU game, you'll see what he can do once he's got the ball in his hands. Bennett is a very natural receiver and a good route-runner, but he's not the threat after the catch that Nicks is. Nicks could be a nice safety valve for Orton, since Orton's way more accurate on short throws and Nicks can turn short passes into pretty good gains. The thing that worries me about both guys is their breaks. Neither of them is exceedingly sudden in a small area, and I think both of them could end up having corners draped all over them in the NFL. Still, both guys produced consistently in college, and both of them did so on less-than-stellar teams against serious competition. I'll take production over potential 90% of the time. If the Bears aren't going to sign or trade for a vet (read: if our receiver corps is in full-on rebuilding mode) then I'd be OK with letting Nicks and Bennett duke it out for the #2 spot.

Yeah, it'd be nice to have a guy like Weaver, who's a good blocker and a legit threat with the ball, but I'd definitely be happy with a strictly blocking fullback, as long as he was good at it. Isn't Lorenzo Neal a free agent? There's a dude who can throw a block.

Obviously it would be awesome to get a legit, established #1 wideout. The Cards don't have a reason to trade him unless they're cleaning up in the deal, though. He's under contract (relatively cheaply) through 2010. It's true that he's been vocal about wanting out, but he's made it clear that he'll still produce on the field even when he's unhappy about his contract. It sucks that being a professional is kind of working against him, but the fact is that Arizona doesn't have any incentive to trade him unless they're getting huge value in return.

Weaver's contract might be larger than you think, I bet. Per Rotoworld, Weaver's agent wants him to be paid like a tailback, not a fullback. It's a fair thing to ask for: he's a very good receiver and a legitimate running threat. Early on in his career, he was basically a jumbo HB, and the knock on him was his blocking. He's gotten a lot better as a lead blocker now, though, and he's still really good running the ball. Weaver would be an awesome pickup, but I haven't heard anything about the Bears being interested. It'd be nice to take some of the short-yardage workload off Forte, though, and Ron Turner's FB dive would actually be a usable play.

As poorly as Angelo has tended to do with his first overall pick, this is really a pretty solid track record. I count one legitimate bad pick: Williams in '02. I'm not crazy about 40 times, but you don't draft a corner who runs a 4.63. Two of the other picks, Bradley and Bazuin, were pretty big gambles, neither of which panned out. They both had a lot of potential, but Angelo seemed like he was betting that they'd get over their knee injuries. Neither one did, but I think a GM has to make those kinds of gambles once in a while (though maybe not as often as Angelo tends to.) The other 4 are all solid picks. Tank Johnson, character issues aside, is a good 4-3 nose tackle. If you're wondering how important that is, check out how much worse the Bears' line got when we cut him and started Dvoracek. Tillman is our best corner, and he's been solid ever since we drafted him. Hester and Forte are awesome, enough said. If either Bradley or Bazuin had been able to recover from injuries, we'd be talking about 5 starting-caliber players out of 7 picks in the 2nd and 3rd round. Even as it is, 4 out of 7 is pretty good. Look at Ozzie Newsome's second picks over the same period: 2002 - DE Anthony Weaver - steady, but very unspectacular player. He's a product of the Ravens' system, but wasn't even that remarkable in their system. Certainly not as good as Alex Brown, who Angelo took in the 4th round of the same draft. 2003 - RB Musa Smith (Kyle Boller was actually the second overall, but he was a first-round pick, so I'm excluding him a la Rex.) - injury-prone change of pace back. Tons of physical ability, but his best season was 2007, where he still only averaged 16.5 yards a game. 2004 - WR Devard Darling (third-rounder, Ravens didn't have a first that year) - hasn't contributed anything to speak of. Last season he got run down from behind by Deltha O'Neal. That's bad. 2005 - DE Dan Cody - Played two games in three seasons, was injured the rest of his time with the Ravens. Released after 2007. 2006 - C Chris Chester - Undersized swingman. He backs up the guard and center positions, and they put him in as a blocking tight end in some packages. He's very athletic, and could still develop into a starting lineman. 2007 - WR Yamon Figurs - backup wideout and kick returner. He's stupid fast, but frequently injured and has a fumbling problem. 2008 - RB Ray Rice - looked really good as a change of pace to McGahee and McClain. Should be in for a good year in 2009. Newsome's generally considered a good GM, but I don't think you could argue that he's done better than Angelo with his second picks.

Man, I'm glad he's gone. He's been a dead roster spot for the past couple of seasons. Josh Beekman was a major upgrade over Metcalf, and the staff apparently thinks Omiyale will be an upgrade over Beekman, so I can't imagine why they'd bring him back. Hopefully letting Metcalf go means that the Bears pick up more than one lineman in the draft.