Mock Drafts

[scs787]

Just read an article that said the Packers used a 4 WR set just 22 times in the last 3 years. Idk if that's something we're gonna see a lot of with Getsy here. Especially with Kmet emerging.  

[ASHKUM BEAR]

1 hour ago, Stinger226 said:

I could be way off base with this thought, but Poles said he needed playmakers and a better OL for Fields to get better. Patrick is an upgrade over Mustifer and Pringle will be a good player but he's not close to working that out. I think he will load up on OL and WRs in the draft , maybe a TE. He may get lucky and find a Mooney in the 5th but the first 3 picks will be offense. Yes we need CBs, Ss, DL and LBers but his main pickups in FA  have been on defense. I think he will fill spots with FAs on defense and top heavy on offense. I don't think he will risk later round picks to improve the offense. The first 3 will be offense, not sure why people keep thinking he's going to address the defense early. 

I can see him getting a Rainman/OT if he makes it to our pick or a Tyler Smith with the first pick, then probably 2 WRs with 48 and 71. He will try to move back with one or two of those picks so he can get extra picks to then add defensive players. I can see 2 WRs and 2 OL being drafted and maybe a TE. 

I see Poles getting good players year 1 despite needs.  Not saying needs wont be the first target but he is not passing up a top rated 3T/DB for the 7th rated WR especially if they are higher on the overall board. If they are tied, then maybe go WR. 

Bears will be a bottom 5-10 team unless Fields takes a huge leap. That is hard to see right now. 

Bears 5 WRs - X = St Brown. Y=Mooney Z=Pringle 

Newsome=  Y/Z

Coulter=X/Y.

I can only see them drafting high 1 WR to compete at the X.  The can almost use a TE #2 before adding a 2nd WR in the draft. 

Oline - depends since they missed out on Bates, but could use 1 OT/1 OG.

 

 

[scs787]

Man, it's crazy looking at the packers stats the past few years. Adams just absolutely dominated their passing game. Their #2WR hasn't caught more than 35 balls the last 3 years. 

 

They use their RBs more than their #2 guys. 

 

Mooney will never be Adams so I don't think they can get by like the packers have but man. 

[Stinger226]

8 hours ago, ASHKUM BEAR said:

I see Poles getting good players year 1 despite needs.  Not saying needs wont be the first target but he is not passing up a top rated 3T/DB for the 7th rated WR especially if they are higher on the overall board. If they are tied, then maybe go WR. 

Bears will be a bottom 5-10 team unless Fields takes a huge leap. That is hard to see right now. 

Bears 5 WRs - X = St Brown. Y=Mooney Z=Pringle 

Newsome=  Y/Z

Coulter=X/Y.

I can only see them drafting high 1 WR to compete at the X.  The can almost use a TE #2 before adding a 2nd WR in the draft. 

Oline - depends since they missed out on Bates, but could use 1 OT/1 OG.

 

 

There are many WRs valued in the 30 to 50 range of the draft. So grabbing one there would not necessarily be a reach if they took one or two. Not that I'm saying all of these big boards by so called experts are accurate but it's a guide to estimate value. Some players may be good day1 and some need time to develop. If we grab two WRs  We have a better chance of one being good right away. Several WRs played well last yr as rookies.

[ASHKUM BEAR]

1 minute ago, Stinger226 said:

There are many WRs valued in the 30 to 50 range of the draft. So grabbing one there would not necessarily be a reach if they took one or two. Not that I'm saying all of these big boards by so called experts are accurate but it's a guide to estimate value. Some players may be good day1 and some need time to develop. If we grab two WRs  We have a better chance of one being good right away. Several WRs played well last yr as rookies.

They need to improve fast because of now, they look like they are finishing last in the division.  Maybe that is the idea to rebuild by getting a high slot next year with a full deck of cards.  That can put them in position to trade down to gain future high picks.

[jason]

On 4/11/2022 at 9:06 AM, Mongo3451 said:

Agreed.  I would even add RB late.

Why? Monty has shown he's got talent if he is ever given a chance to get out of the backfield. It just happened so infrequently because the OL took turns deciding who would suck and let a defender come flying through unmolested. In my eyes, drafting a RB is a waste for this team.

[jason]

10 hours ago, ASHKUM BEAR said:

I see Poles getting good players year 1 despite needs.  Not saying needs wont be the first target but he is not passing up a top rated 3T/DB for the 7th rated WR especially if they are higher on the overall board. If they are tied, then maybe go WR. 

Bears will be a bottom 5-10 team unless Fields takes a huge leap. That is hard to see right now. 

Bears 5 WRs - X = St Brown. Y=Mooney Z=Pringle 

Newsome=  Y/Z

Coulter=X/Y.

I can only see them drafting high 1 WR to compete at the X.  The can almost use a TE #2 before adding a 2nd WR in the draft. 

Oline - depends since they missed out on Bates, but could use 1 OT/1 OG.

Those WR assumptions are only true if Poles accepts those guys as starters. Lord knows the Bears have wasted FA moves and money on guys who had no chance of being the main man on the team. We saw it with the Mike Glennon getting a 3yr deal just before the Trubisky draft fiasco. Or maybe you remember Adam Shaheen getting laughably over-drafted and then battling for the 3rd TE spot with the likes of Brown and Braunecker behind Sims and Miller. Then he got injured, came back, and the Bears signed Trey Burton anyway.

If Poles were to draft two WRs like the ones we've been discussing, then St. Brown and Pringle could potentially sit the bench, and Newsome/Coulter fight for a roster spot or get cut. I'm fine with that idea. Hoping dudes like EqStBrown and Pringle suddenly emerge is a riskier proposition than rolling the dice on one or two of the young studs.

[Stinger226]

17 minutes ago, jason said:

Those WR assumptions are only true if Poles accepts those guys as starters. Lord knows the Bears have wasted FA moves and money on guys who had no chance of being the main man on the team. We saw it with the Mike Glennon getting a 3yr deal just before the Trubisky draft fiasco. Or maybe you remember Adam Shaheen getting laughably over-drafted and then battling for the 3rd TE spot with the likes of Brown and Braunecker behind Sims and Miller. Then he got injured, came back, and the Bears signed Trey Burton anyway.

If Poles were to draft two WRs like the ones we've been discussing, then St. Brown and Pringle could potentially sit the bench, and Newsome/Coulter fight for a roster spot or get cut. I'm fine with that idea. Hoping dudes like EqStBrown and Pringle suddenly emerge is a riskier proposition than rolling the dice on one or two of the young studs.

I would love if everyone they picked up played well. Most are one or two yr  deals so adding 2 potential starters that may only play 40 or 50% of the time  now  could be starters in 2 yrs. Injuries happen so we are looking at this like everyone stays healthy, we know it won't work out that way. So as you improve the roster it improves the depth which will come into play. Poles will draft 1 or 2 OLs this year. Right now we have a RG spot open but that may change. I think they still bring in a few more FAs  in so they don't have to have to count on the rookies. If those players are better that just improves the depth. Best 5 play. I think Jenkins becomes a stud where ever he plays , im  not sure what Borom is. We seem to be in the same thought process.

[ASHKUM BEAR]

29 minutes ago, jason said:

Those WR assumptions are only true if Poles accepts those guys as starters. Lord knows the Bears have wasted FA moves and money on guys who had no chance of being the main man on the team. We saw it with the Mike Glennon getting a 3yr deal just before the Trubisky draft fiasco. Or maybe you remember Adam Shaheen getting laughably over-drafted and then battling for the 3rd TE spot with the likes of Brown and Braunecker behind Sims and Miller. Then he got injured, came back, and the Bears signed Trey Burton anyway.

If Poles were to draft two WRs like the ones we've been discussing, then St. Brown and Pringle could potentially sit the bench, and Newsome/Coulter fight for a roster spot or get cut. I'm fine with that idea. Hoping dudes like EqStBrown and Pringle suddenly emerge is a riskier proposition than rolling the dice on one or two of the young studs.

We will see.  I don't think they avoid the defense completely when CB and 3T are huge needs too.  They might even take a S or LB. Now if they do take two WRs, that is great because we only have Mooney and the unknowns. All I am saying is I don't think the Bears invest everything on offense.  I see them spending one 2nd or 3rd rounder spent on D and also a 5th.  

[Mongo3451]

45 minutes ago, jason said:

Why? Monty has shown he's got talent if he is ever given a chance to get out of the backfield. It just happened so infrequently because the OL took turns deciding who would suck and let a defender come flying through unmolested. In my eyes, drafting a RB is a waste for this team.

I like Monty and Herbert, but also like pounding the rock.  If we find a gem, Monty becomes tradable and we don't have a big contract for him.  RB is a disposable position lately.  When our offense is relevant, how old will Monty be?

[Stinger226]

2 hours ago, ASHKUM BEAR said:

We will see.  I don't think they avoid the defense completely when CB and 3T are huge needs too.  They might even take a S or LB. Now if they do take two WRs, that is great because we only have Mooney and the unknowns. All I am saying is I don't think the Bears invest everything on offense.  I see them spending one 2nd or 3rd rounder spent on D and also a 5th.  

Something like this

[scs787]

Man, PFN seems to be incredibly unrealistic. I would love if the draft shakes out like that. I'd pick Salyer in the 3rd. Maybe even the 2nd. I think he becomes the best guard in this class.

 

The Moore and Rainmann picks are out there too. 

[Mongo3451]

7 hours ago, Stinger226 said:

Something like this

$$$$???

[Stinger226]

3 hours ago, scs787 said:

Man, PFN seems to be incredibly unrealistic. I would love if the draft shakes out like that. I'd pick Salyer in the 3rd. Maybe even the 2nd. I think he becomes the best guard in this class.

 

The Moore and Rainmann picks are out there too. 

Most mock draft simulators aren't realistic. Rainman probably wouldn't be there at39 let alone 55. Pierce is about right but Moore will be picked before Pierce.. Slayer has been drafted in the 3rd many times never drip that much. 

[adam]

I am really hoping for at least one trade back and the ability to pick up at least a 4th or potentially another 3rd. The sweet spot of this draft seems to be between 30 and 80. 

Our 39th pick is super interesting. Seattle has the next two picks, so there is a good chance they will pick someone that is #1 on the board for a few other teams. I could see teams wanting to leapfrog them to ensure they get their guy. 

So hypothetically, would you select Jalen Pitre, CB from Baylor at #39 or would you trade back with someone like ATL (has 2x 2nds and 2x 3rds), CLE (has 2x 3rds) or PHI (has 2x 3rds, 3x 5ths) for their 2nd and a 3rd or 4th?

To me, unless a top WR or OL falls, I am looking to trade back.

[Connorbear]

Trade back a couple times during the draft and get us to 8 picks total. Trade Foles if possible and eat part of his salary to get a 6th rounder for next year. Do the same for Quinn and try to get a couple of picks for him (a 3rd rounder this year and a day 3 pick next year). 

Get as many picks as possible. That should be the goal. 

Peace

[scs787]

1 hour ago, adam said:

I am really hoping for at least one trade back and the ability to pick up at least a 4th or potentially another 3rd. The sweet spot of this draft seems to be between 30 and 80. 

Our 39th pick is super interesting. Seattle has the next two picks, so there is a good chance they will pick someone that is #1 on the board for a few other teams. I could see teams wanting to leapfrog them to ensure they get their guy. 

So hypothetically, would you select Jalen Pitre, CB from Baylor at #39 or would you trade back with someone like ATL (has 2x 2nds and 2x 3rds), CLE (has 2x 3rds) or PHI (has 2x 3rds, 3x 5ths) for their 2nd and a 3rd or 4th?

To me, unless a top WR or OL falls, I am looking to trade back.

This is a no brainer if they can find the match. Soooo many different  picks that make sense in the 2nd. 

[McGowan]

I don't think Watson or Pickens will be on the board at 39. I think they're both going late 1st. 

[adam]

38 minutes ago, McGowan said:

I don't think Watson or Pickens will be on the board at 39. I think they're both going late 1st. 

If that is the case, there will be a top OL or CB available at 39.

I still think that is a prime spot one slot ahead of Seattle with 2 straight picks. Someone will want to jump in front of them.

[Stinger226]

He definitely will trade back , it depends on how his board falls. If he only drops back a fee spots , he could still end up with who he wanted. I think Watson never makes it to 39, one of the top 6_ could fall or Pickers and Pierce should be there. They have taken visits or met with , WRs that would be later picks. Thornton, Grey, Shakir, , Dixon, Nailor. .So one of the second round picks will be a WR , the other a OL. Last year KC got starting OL in the 2 nd and 6 th rounds.I suspect something similar this year. As he aquires other picks , he will address CB, SS, and DL. Maybe another LB or TE. He's not done in FAgency. He has to get a #1 WR and another starter on the OL , odds are good that's early.

[scs787]

Just remember that it takes 2 to tango. I absolutely think he will look to trade down, but if it doesn't happen I'm not gonna be mad. 

[AZ54]

6 hours ago, Stinger226 said:

Most mock draft simulators aren't realistic. Rainman probably wouldn't be there at39 let alone 55. Pierce is about right but Moore will be picked before Pierce.. Slayer has been drafted in the 3rd many times never drip that much. 

It all depends on the player rankings and sometimes in these systems you don't even know what list or lists they are using.   Plus it seems clear sites are using some random generator for some of the picks likely based on their pre-defined needs list.  If you want people to keep coming back to your site you have to show them something different.  Nonetheless, every year NFL teams still manage to surprise everyone with their picks even in the 1st round which is why I find it to be must-see TV.  

[AZ54]

6 minutes ago, scs787 said:

Just remember that it takes 2 to tango. I absolutely think he will look to trade down, but if it doesn't happen I'm not gonna be mad. 

He has to get good value too.  Other teams know he wants more picks so he'll get some low-ball offers.  Just say no.  I'm less concerned about getting more picks than I am with getting at least 2 and potentially 3 good core starters.  I not convinced trading back for 4 picks in the top 100 makes that more likely than having 3 in the top 75.   It is easy to fill out depth via FA any given year.   

[scs787]

25 minutes ago, AZ54 said:

He has to get good value too.  Other teams know he wants more picks so he'll get some low-ball offers.  Just say no.  I'm less concerned about getting more picks than I am with getting at least 2 and potentially 3 good core starters.  I not convinced trading back for 4 picks in the top 100 makes that more likely than having 3 in the top 75.   It is easy to fill out depth via FA any given year.   

Like Adam said, there is a sweet spot in the 30-50 range and I think thats gonna make trading down enticing. If we're talking moving down 5ish spots for another top 100, I think you do it. 

[Stinger226]

Someone always drops in the draft , 39 is a perfect spot to find a possible trade back. The fact many teams (13) having multi picks in middle rounds enhances that . The trick is to move back and still get the guy you wanted.  I think a couple years ago Ourlads had 26 out of the top 32 picks. Not to correct team but were in the first round.  We need out of this draft a starting OG, A future OT prospect than can be our swing T. A  rotational DT, CB and SS that contribute. A starting WR and another WR to add depth. The first 5 picks need to be starters or potential starters in year 2. Core players. Last year KC got 3 starters out of 6 picks with no first rounder. Creed Humphrey, Nick Bolton and Trey Smith.