Eagles just moved up to #2...

[jason]

The draft grade on the DE / OLB and even CB just don't even compare. Ezekiel is head and shoulders above everyone else. By the way, it is likely a moot point as it seem highly probable that either the current Browns team or the former Browns (Ravens) team drafts Ezekiel.

 

OLB...I agree. I'm worried the Bears might actually reach for someone to be Von Miller in Chicago.

DE? I don't agree. Elliott is highly rated at RB, but Buckner and Bosa are absolute studs.

[DABEARSDABOMB]

OLB...I agree. I'm worried the Bears might actually reach for someone to be Von Miller in Chicago.

DE? I don't agree. Elliott is highly rated at RB, but Buckner and Bosa are absolute studs.

Oh I fully agree, if Buckner and Bosa are on the board and we picked Elliot, I would be absolutely upset. That said, I find it highly unlikely that either Buckner / Bosa will be available when we pick. A week ago, I'd have put the odds at .1% that we'd have a shot at them at 11, now I would say maybe we have a 5% shot one of them falls.

 

But if Bucker and Bosa are off the board and Elliot is there, to be frank, he is in a different class vs. whomever else I project to be available @ 11. None of the LT's grade out as stud LT's...both have issue and Stanley has fallen a lot recently. I'm a huge fan of OT so I'm still fine with it, especially if none of Buckner / Bosa / Elliot are there (which is by far the most likely scenario, imo) and instead we are looking at one of the LT's or reaching for a LB (unless of course Myles Jack falls to us) or reaching a bit for a CB (but hey, its a need so I'm okay with it).

 

Reality is the talent in this draft falls pretty significantly after the 8th or so player and we are picking 3 spots down from that.

[Chitownhustla]

The 50/50 argument applies to all players all positions. But that's why it's smarter to include a healthier dosage of need in there. You miss, and you still have a body at the other position and Langford at RB. You miss with a position you don't need and you now have a body behind Langford, and a gap elsewhere.

 

 

Higher rated player has a better chance of performing well in the NFL, would you agree?

 

 

[ASHKUM BEAR]

Hard to say who will be available, but we will find out in 144 hours, 48 minutes!

 

I think all 3 QB's will go top 10. Cleveland sold the farm and will buy a new calf to start over with Lynch. Give him a year to grow.

 

Someone really wants Vernon Hargreaves to drop, does Jerry Jones think the league will fall for this after he got Collins last year?

 

Who can name the correct top 10?

 

1.Goff 2.Wentz 3.Buckner 4.Ramsey 5. Jack 6. Tunsil 7.Bosa 8. Lynch 9.Lawson 10.Elliott?

 

 

[bradjock]

Oh I fully agree, if Buckner and Bosa are on the board and we picked Elliot, I would be absolutely upset. That said, I find it highly unlikely that either Buckner / Bosa will be available when we pick. A week ago, I'd have put the odds at .1% that we'd have a shot at them at 11, now I would say maybe we have a 5% shot one of them falls.

 

But if Bucker and Bosa are off the board and Elliot is there, to be frank, he is in a different class vs. whomever else I project to be available @ 11. None of the LT's grade out as stud LT's...both have issue and Stanley has fallen a lot recently. I'm a huge fan of OT so I'm still fine with it, especially if none of Buckner / Bosa / Elliot are there (which is by far the most likely scenario, imo) and instead we are looking at one of the LT's or reaching for a LB (unless of course Myles Jack falls to us) or reaching a bit for a CB (but hey, its a need so I'm okay with it).

 

Reality is the talent in this draft falls pretty significantly after the 8th or so player and we are picking 3 spots down from that.

 

Agreed 100%

[bradjock]

Oh I fully agree, if Buckner and Bosa are on the board and we picked Elliot, I would be absolutely upset. That said, I find it highly unlikely that either Buckner / Bosa will be available when we pick. A week ago, I'd have put the odds at .1% that we'd have a shot at them at 11, now I would say maybe we have a 5% shot one of them falls.

 

But if Bucker and Bosa are off the board and Elliot is there, to be frank, he is in a different class vs. whomever else I project to be available @ 11. None of the LT's grade out as stud LT's...both have issue and Stanley has fallen a lot recently. I'm a huge fan of OT so I'm still fine with it, especially if none of Buckner / Bosa / Elliot are there (which is by far the most likely scenario, imo) and instead we are looking at one of the LT's or reaching for a LB (unless of course Myles Jack falls to us) or reaching a bit for a CB (but hey, its a need so I'm okay with it).

 

Reality is the talent in this draft falls pretty significantly after the 8th or so player and we are picking 3 spots down from that.

 

Agreed 100%

[jason]

Higher rated player has a better chance of performing well in the NFL, would you agree?

 

That's a tricky question. In general, if you are putting people in groups, then I agree. We've seen numerous statistical breakdowns where 1st rounders perform better overall than 2nd, 2nd over 3rd, and so on. But I don't know that I've seen something that compares a team's actual draft board with their drafted players' success. And we certainly haven't seen something like that as it compares to one player over another when only a few picks divide them.

 

As such, it depends on who is doing the rating. The the argument that has been made on this board - and other boards - for years, is that the guys running the team knew better. Yet the Bears draft board and people doing the drafting have both underperformed for years. One of the worst drafting teams in the past decade or so, at least. One of the lowest number of homegrown talent on team. So, if we're talking about those ratings, then no, I don't agree, because facts prove otherwise. Unless, of course, they are not drafting by a draft board with ratings...which is virtually impossible.

[Stinger226]

Oh I fully agree, if Buckner and Bosa are on the board and we picked Elliot, I would be absolutely upset. That said, I find it highly unlikely that either Buckner / Bosa will be available when we pick. A week ago, I'd have put the odds at .1% that we'd have a shot at them at 11, now I would say maybe we have a 5% shot one of them falls.

 

But if Bucker and Bosa are off the board and Elliot is there, to be frank, he is in a different class vs. whomever else I project to be available @ 11. None of the LT's grade out as stud LT's...both have issue and Stanley has fallen a lot recently. I'm a huge fan of OT so I'm still fine with it, especially if none of Buckner / Bosa / Elliot are there (which is by far the most likely scenario, imo) and instead we are looking at one of the LT's or reaching for a LB (unless of course Myles Jack falls to us) or reaching a bit for a CB (but hey, its a need so I'm okay with it).

 

Reality is the talent in this draft falls pretty significantly after the 8th or so player and we are picking 3 spots down from that.

There is relatively spoken that 8 to 12 players are special depending on who you read. With 3 QBs that probably dont belong in the top 10 get drafted, somebody with fall. I think one of Bosa or Buckner is the drop player, jump on it and high five.

[Chitownhustla]

That's a tricky question. In general, if you are putting people in groups, then I agree. We've seen numerous statistical breakdowns where 1st rounders perform better overall than 2nd, 2nd over 3rd, and so on. But I don't know that I've seen something that compares a team's actual draft board with their drafted players' success. And we certainly haven't seen something like that as it compares to one player over another when only a few picks divide them.

 

As such, it depends on who is doing the rating. The the argument that has been made on this board - and other boards - for years, is that the guys running the team knew better. Yet the Bears draft board and people doing the drafting have both underperformed for years. One of the worst drafting teams in the past decade or so, at least. One of the lowest number of homegrown talent on team. So, if we're talking about those ratings, then no, I don't agree, because facts prove otherwise. Unless, of course, they are not drafting by a draft board with ratings...which is virtually impossible.

 

 

You dont want to answer the question and I understand why. But lets use Bill Polians (hall of fame) ratings. Everyone can agree that he knows what hes doing. Would you agree that his higher rated players have a higher odds of beating the 50/50?

 

 

If we are talking about the Bears of the past, rating system I would bet we could come up with a better draft board. So far I like Pace and think he has drafted well so far.

[jason]

You dont want to answer the question and I understand why. But lets use Bill Polians (hall of fame) ratings. Everyone can agree that he knows what hes doing. Would you agree that his higher rated players have a higher odds of beating the 50/50?

 

If we are talking about the Bears of the past, rating system I would bet we could come up with a better draft board. So far I like Pace and think he has drafted well so far.

 

You asked a question. I answered it.

 

Polian's rating? I honestly don't know what his hit/miss percentages were, but he's generally thought of as one of the best in the business. Of course, it helps when you have one of the best QBs of all time for a decade. So I took a quick look at his drafts with Indy...he's below 50% overall, and just barely above 50% on his 1st rounders. He just happened to be on fire his first 7 years, absolutely killing it 6 out of 7 years.

 

His 1st rounders (bold is a hit, italic is questionable):

 

98-Manning

99-Edge

00-Rob Morris

01-Reggie Wayne

02-Dwight Freeney

03-Dallas Clark

04-Bob Sanders

05-Marlin Jackson

06-Joseph Addai

07-Anthony Gonzalez

08-Mike Pollak

09-Donald Brown

10-Jerry Hughes

11-Anthony Costanzo

 

 

[Chitownhustla]

You asked a question. I answered it.

 

Polian's rating? I honestly don't know what his hit/miss percentages were, but he's generally thought of as one of the best in the business. Of course, it helps when you have one of the best QBs of all time for a decade. So I took a quick look at his drafts with Indy...he's below 50% overall, and just barely above 50% on his 1st rounders. He just happened to be on fire his first 7 years, absolutely killing it 6 out of 7 years.

 

His 1st rounders (bold is a hit, italic is questionable):

 

98-Manning

99-Edge

00-Rob Morris

01-Reggie Wayne

02-Dwight Freeney

03-Dallas Clark

04-Bob Sanders

05-Marlin Jackson

06-Joseph Addai

07-Anthony Gonzalez

08-Mike Pollak

09-Donald Brown

10-Jerry Hughes

11-Anthony Costanzo

 

Manning #1

Edge #4

Morris #28

Wayne #30

Freeny #11

Clark #24

Sanders #44 (2nd round)

Jackson #29

Addai #30

 

Only 3 were in the top 11. The rest were all late first round picks, almost 2nd round picks. So Polian was 100% on guys picked in the top 11. I would say he did pretty well. Ill take 100% when drafting in the top 11.

 

 

 

 

['TD']

Manning #1

Edge #4

Morris #28

Wayne #30

Freeny #11

Clark #24

Sanders #44 (2nd round)

Jackson #29

Addai #30

 

Only 3 were in the top 11. The rest were all late first round picks, almost 2nd round picks. So Polian was 100% on guys picked in the top 11. I would say he did pretty well. Ill take 100% when drafting in the top 11.

First thing I thought was with all their success, they weren't drafting early often. I wonder what it would be with the Bills and Panthers thrown in. My memory is too rusty to judge all the picks from back then.

[jason]

Manning #1

Edge #4

Morris #28

Wayne #30

Freeny #11

Clark #24

Sanders #44 (2nd round)

Jackson #29

Addai #30

 

Only 3 were in the top 11. The rest were all late first round picks, almost 2nd round picks. So Polian was 100% on guys picked in the top 11. I would say he did pretty well. Ill take 100% when drafting in the top 11.

 

So a whole three picks? And one was Peyton Freaking Manning? That's a great sample size.

[Chitownhustla]

So a whole three picks? And one was Peyton Freaking Manning? That's a great sample size.

 

 

Kind of similar to not wanting to agree with "The best rated player gives you the best chance to beat the odds". It's simple the best rated players are the best rated players for a reason 1. There game film proves they are great at football 2. Their combine results confirm they are great athletes. If they have the mental side of it down they will be ranked very high.

 

 

 

I understand why you dont want the Bears to draft EZ. I am actually hoping one of the big LT's drops to us. I would rather the Bears finally draft a LT that can hold down that side of the line for the next 10 years. All Im saying is if both of the LT's are gone and the top D players have been drafted I would be good with EZ. It looks like Bill Polian the hall of fame football guru agrees with me that this kid will be great.

 

commenting on the Peyton manning = if you remember there were a lot of people saying Leaf had a higher ceiling and would be better than Manning in the NFL. Polian clearly made the right choice. Polian is in the hall of fame, how many other GM or front office guys are in the Hall of Fame??? He put together the Bills and got the Panthers to the SB in year 2 of their franchise......Think about that, in year two of being created they went to the SB with the team Polian drafted and signed. Is there a guy with a better resume???

['TD']

That's what gives me hesitation. Next year you're looking at a draft with Fournette, Chubb, Cook, and McCaffery, at the least. Fournette is better than Elliott and I would argue Chubb, Cook, and McCaffery are all better than Henry. With RB generally devalued around the league no matter where we pick in the 1st round I have to think we would have a chance at one of those guys if Langford doesn't show us something this year.

This is an argument I always hated.

 

Last year I was making a huge argument for Marcus Mariotta that could have fell. He was someone I really bought into, and I think he will have a great future if the Titans can some how find away to change the culture of losing and draft better. I heard all of these arguments of all these great QB's that were going to be better there this year. I asked where they were, and ppl were like well... you know.... not really there.

 

Instead Tennessee unexpectedly stuck with a pick, and we got a fast WR with a shattered leg that we hope can recover from it.

 

You can't plan your draft on next years draft. Talent doesn't turn out, you have unexpected turnover on your team and people can't replicate their previous success each year.

 

To break off that point I wanted to make, and to address the thread in general. In the first round, I think you look at the players there. How much they can improve your team over what you have, and go with it. We will value prospects, current players, and the value of the position differently. That's why you can't expect fans of a team that benefited from Forte for many years to hold a low value on the position, expect more from a rookie that struggled at time to achieve near that level(I know the Oline changed a lot), and maybe see more talent in someone than others do.

 

A 10 year LT sounds amazing when you say it. However, people may not see Stanley as that guy and you can draft on hope. In actuality, they both likely won't be there when the Bears draft.

[Stinger226]

Kind of similar to not wanting to agree with "The best rated player gives you the best chance to beat the odds". It's simple the best rated players are the best rated players for a reason 1. There game film proves they are great at football 2. Their combine results confirm they are great athletes. If they have the mental side of it down they will be ranked very high.

 

 

 

I understand why you dont want the Bears to draft EZ. I am actually hoping one of the big LT's drops to us. I would rather the Bears finally draft a LT that can hold down that side of the line for the next 10 years. All Im saying is if both of the LT's are gone and the top D players have been drafted I would be good with EZ. It looks like Bill Polian the hall of fame football guru agrees with me that this kid will be great.

 

commenting on the Peyton manning = if you remember there were a lot of people saying Leaf had a higher ceiling and would be better than Manning in the NFL. Polian clearly made the right choice. Polian is in the hall of fame, how many other GM or front office guys are in the Hall of Fame??? He put together the Bills and got the Panthers to the SB in year 2 of their franchise......Think about that, in year two of being created they went to the SB with the team Polian drafted and signed. Is there a guy with a better resume???

The truth be told all good GMs make some mistakes, what they do is hit on more the than rest. The trick is to find a few gems that turn out like the Brady's.

[Mongo3451]

Manning #1

Edge #4

Morris #28

Wayne #30

Freeny #11

Clark #24

Sanders #44 (2nd round)

Jackson #29

Addai #30

 

Only 3 were in the top 11. The rest were all late first round picks, almost 2nd round picks. So Polian was 100% on guys picked in the top 11. I would say he did pretty well. Ill take 100% when drafting in the top 11.

Costanzo would start for us. He needs to be upgraded on both of your lists.

[DABEARSDABOMB]

Marlin Jackson clinched them playing in the superbowl and was a solid starter for them for a number of years before getting injured. He than signed with the Eagles as a FA and tore his achilles. I honestly don't understand what some of you expect, but look at even the great teams and they miss at a pretty high percentage.

[jason]

Marlin Jackson clinched them playing in the superbowl and was a solid starter for them for a number of years before getting injured. He than signed with the Eagles as a FA and tore his achilles. I honestly don't understand what some of you expect, but look at even the great teams and they miss at a pretty high percentage.

 

That's kind of my point. Just about every GM misses at roughly 50%. So hinging your 1st rounder on a potential miss is not as good a strategy when you don't need that position. That's my whole point. If you're going to take that same chance, it may as well be on a position of need. Saying, "Yeah, I think this guy is the different one though" is not good enough because it doesn't overcome the proven odds of the draft.

 

Polian's probably as sure as they come, maybe the best (Newsome?), but he's still around .500.

 

I guess I'm just more into the percentages of it all since the truly great guys can't be predicted.