#10 Mock Draft Selection

[AZ54]

1 hour ago, BearFan PHX said:

OK so here's some awesome draft BS...

Former Jets GM Mike Tannenbaum, who wasnt especially good at being a GM, predicts that if Colorado QB Shadeur Sanders slides out of the top 5, he'd be targeted as a trade up to pick 10.

In a recent mock, he has the Steelers trading up with us like this:

Chicago gives
1st round Pick (10) [369 Hill pts]
5th round pick (148) [10 Hill pts]

Pittsburgh gives
1st round pick (21) [261 Hill pts]
3rd round pick (83) [52 Hill pts]
4th round pick (123) [23 Hill pts]
2026 1st round pick [100 ish pts]

In this draft especially, I'd do that in a heartbeat. 2 firsts next year?! I doubt Pittsburgh would pay that much. Like I said its a bunch of BS, be we have nothing better to talk about, and the trade chart says: Chicago 379 for Pittsburgh 433 or a difference of 54 pts which = a mid round 3rd

Maybe the value works out if youre getting a good QB, but who here wouldnt take that deal in a second? Probably why it would never happen.

But if it did, that'd be amazing.

 

Yes awesome draft BS is the correct statement.  Which team drafting behind us is going to take Sanders ahead of the Steelers?

11. SF Purdy

12. Dal  Prescott  

13.  Miami  Tua? Doubtful   I wouldn't say Sanders is an upgrade but if health issues are a concern they could pull the trigger.  That's doubtful as their most likely playoff scenario near term rides on Tua's arm not a rookie.  Playoffs save jobs.  

14.  Indy.  Richardson nobody gives up on that talent for Sanders

15.  ATL.  Just put themselves in QB contract hell but have their future on the roster

16.  AZ.   Murray isn't going anywhere

17.  Cin.  

18.  SEA.   Just invested in Darnold as "the man" even though he looked like crap in the playoff game (I was there  )

19.  Tampa   Very happy with Baker

20.  Den.   Year 2 with Bo

21.   PITT.    If Sanders hits 10 he's theirs at 21.  I would laugh if they end up with Sanders because I think that just continues their QB misfortune for many more years.  In reality their fall-back option if they don't sign Rodgers is Kirk Cousins who wants a trade after the draft.   Steelers are hanging onto $33mil in cap space for a reason.  But I'd say that also indicates they don't want to draft a QB because regardless of trading up or staying put.  They could put most of that money $15-20mil to good use elsewhere on the roster.  

22 and beyond are all playoff teams set with QBs.  

IMO this was just click bait for Bears fans and media pundits with no logical basis whatsoever.  

[Stinger226]

1 hour ago, AZ54 said:

Yes awesome draft BS is the correct statement.  Which team drafting behind us is going to take Sanders ahead of the Steelers?

11. SF Purdy

12. Dal  Prescott  

13.  Miami  Tua? Doubtful   I wouldn't say Sanders is an upgrade but if health issues are a concern they could pull the trigger.  That's doubtful as their most likely playoff scenario near term rides on Tua's arm not a rookie.  Playoffs save jobs.  

14.  Indy.  Richardson nobody gives up on that talent for Sanders

15.  ATL.  Just put themselves in QB contract hell but have their future on the roster

16.  AZ.   Murray isn't going anywhere

17.  Cin.  

18.  SEA.   Just invested in Darnold as "the man" even though he looked like crap in the playoff game (I was there  )

19.  Tampa   Very happy with Baker

20.  Den.   Year 2 with Bo

21.   PITT.    If Sanders hits 10 he's theirs at 21.  I would laugh if they end up with Sanders because I think that just continues their QB misfortune for many more years.  In reality their fall-back option if they don't sign Rodgers is Kirk Cousins who wants a trade after the draft.   Steelers are hanging onto $33mil in cap space for a reason.  But I'd say that also indicates they don't want to draft a QB because regardless of trading up or staying put.  They could put most of that money $15-20mil to good use elsewhere on the roster.  

22 and beyond are all playoff teams set with QBs.  

IMO this was just click bait for Bears fans and media pundits with no logical basis whatsoever.  

Everything you said makes perfect sense but football BS is fun. I'm a dreamer, as ridiculous as some things are, I dream about stuff like that. 

Instead of trading up for Sanders, an OL? Tyler Warren, he would help any QB be better. In that trade scenario, I don't see a #1 added into it. 

[DABEARSDABOMB]

3 hours ago, BearFan PHX said:

OK so here's some awesome draft BS...

Former Jets GM Mike Tannenbaum, who wasnt especially good at being a GM, predicts that if Colorado QB Shadeur Sanders slides out of the top 5, he'd be targeted as a trade up to pick 10.

In a recent mock, he has the Steelers trading up with us like this:

Chicago gives
1st round Pick (10) [369 Hill pts]
5th round pick (148) [10 Hill pts]

Pittsburgh gives
1st round pick (21) [261 Hill pts]
3rd round pick (83) [52 Hill pts]
4th round pick (123) [23 Hill pts]
2026 1st round pick [100 ish pts]

In this draft especially, I'd do that in a heartbeat. 2 firsts next year?! I doubt Pittsburgh would pay that much. Like I said its a bunch of BS, be we have nothing better to talk about, and the trade chart says: Chicago 379 for Pittsburgh 433 or a difference of 54 pts which = a mid round 3rd

Maybe the value works out if youre getting a good QB, but who here wouldnt take that deal in a second? Probably why it would never happen.

But if it did, that'd be amazing.

 

This would be incredible. 

[Stinger226]

I think the NT having Billings on the last year of his contract and no legitimate prospect behind him , Kenneth Grant makes the most sense if we stay at 10. Plus Billings is coming off an injlike one of our rostered players a lot.ury.

We have Jarrett and Dexter at 3 T. 

I guess you could use that same logic at DE, Sweat, Dayo and Booker, we need another one unless they l

 

[dawhizz]

I had to double check this because it didn't seem like it could be true when I was thinking about it, but the Bears haven't spent a pick in the first four rounds on an edge player (either at DE or LB) since Leonard Floyd nine years ago.  

[Mongo3451]

39 minutes ago, dawhizz said:

I had to double check this because it didn't seem like it could be true when I was thinking about it, but the Bears haven't spent a pick in the first four rounds on an edge player (either at DE or LB) since Leonard Floyd nine years ago.  

I believe it's same with DT.  Pathetic

[dawhizz]

23 minutes ago, Mongo3451 said:

I believe it's same with DT.  Pathetic

It was until they took Dexter and Pickens in rounds 2/3 in 2023. Before that it was Jonathan Bullard in the same draft as Floyd. 

[Mongo3451]

24 minutes ago, dawhizz said:

It was until they took Dexter and Pickens in rounds 2/3 in 2023. Before that it was Jonathan Bullard in the same draft as Floyd. 

Ahhh!  I misread.  Thought it was first round...

[adam]

After running a bunch of mocks, if Sanders goes in the top 9, these are more than likely the available players at #10. I listed the next 23 players to get to pick 32. Some of these guys will slide into the 2nd, but for me, if one of the top 9 don't drop, I would rather take anything to move back because I don't see much difference from Green to Scourton or Membou to Zabel, etc. Thoughts?

Barron - CB
Starks - S
Campbell - LB
Membou - OL
Green - ED
Johnson - CB
Burden - WR
Pearce - ED
Ezeiruaku - ED
Grant - DL
Simmons - OL
Egbuka - WR
Banks - OL
Golden - WR
Nolen - DL
Hampton - RB
Loveland - TE
Williams - ED
Steward - ED
Walker - ED
Zabel - OL
Scourton - ED
Harmon - DL
 

[Stinger226]

I think they try to trade back unless Mason Graham drops. I don't see any of the other big names make it to 10.

[Alaskan Grizzly]

12 minutes ago, Stinger226 said:

I think they try to trade back unless Mason Graham drops. I don't see any of the other big names make it to 10.

Hey Stinger.  Saw the news about the earthquake in Myanmar and Thailand … thought ‘do I know anyone over there’?  I see you posted a little bit ago and glad to assume you’re good.  We went through a 7 pointer a few years back and MAN what a ride . 

[Stinger226]

9 minutes ago, Alaskan Grizzly said:

Hey Stinger.  Saw the news about the earthquake in Myanmar and Thailand … thought ‘do I know anyone over there’?  I see you posted a little bit ago and glad to assume you’re good.  We went through a 7 pointer a few years back and MAN what a ride . 

Thanks for asking, I'm 2 hours away from the shockwaves, nothing felt here. They said 7.7, I think that's a strong one?

[ChileBear]

1 hour ago, Stinger226 said:

Thanks for asking, I'm 2 hours away from the shockwaves, nothing felt here. They said 7.7, I think that's a strong one?

7.7 is strong enough.  I was in the 8.8 and the 8.3 in Chile and it is scarry. Glad you weren't in it.

[BearFan PHX]

15 hours ago, AZ54 said:

Yes awesome draft BS is the correct statement.  Which team drafting behind us is going to take Sanders ahead of the Steelers?

11. SF Purdy

12. Dal  Prescott  

13.  Miami  Tua? Doubtful   I wouldn't say Sanders is an upgrade but if health issues are a concern they could pull the trigger.  That's doubtful as their most likely playoff scenario near term rides on Tua's arm not a rookie.  Playoffs save jobs.  

14.  Indy.  Richardson nobody gives up on that talent for Sanders

15.  ATL.  Just put themselves in QB contract hell but have their future on the roster

16.  AZ.   Murray isn't going anywhere

17.  Cin.  

18.  SEA.   Just invested in Darnold as "the man" even though he looked like crap in the playoff game (I was there  )

19.  Tampa   Very happy with Baker

20.  Den.   Year 2 with Bo

21.   PITT.    If Sanders hits 10 he's theirs at 21.  I would laugh if they end up with Sanders because I think that just continues their QB misfortune for many more years.  In reality their fall-back option if they don't sign Rodgers is Kirk Cousins who wants a trade after the draft.   Steelers are hanging onto $33mil in cap space for a reason.  But I'd say that also indicates they don't want to draft a QB because regardless of trading up or staying put.  They could put most of that money $15-20mil to good use elsewhere on the roster.  

22 and beyond are all playoff teams set with QBs.  

IMO this was just click bait for Bears fans and media pundits with no logical basis whatsoever.  

Good points about QB needs. The only thing is that it wasnt specifically meant for Bears fans because it was part of Tennenbaum's mock. But we can agree that he wasnt a very good GM then or now.

[Alaskan Grizzly]

2 hours ago, Stinger226 said:

Thanks for asking, I'm 2 hours away from the shockwaves, nothing felt here. They said 7.7, I think that's a strong one?

Good to know. Magnitude is variable for a lot of reasons.  Depth of quake, surrounding 'terra-ferma' (marshy vs granite rock) and of course the building materials and concentration of people in immediate area.  A 7.1 (like we had in 2018) here would be a lot different in LA.  And like Chile said, generally anything above a 7.0 is considered significant....let alone 8.3 and 8.8 (wow!).  Glad to hear you're good.  

[AZ54]

3 hours ago, adam said:

After running a bunch of mocks, if Sanders goes in the top 9, these are more than likely the available players at #10. I listed the next 23 players to get to pick 32. Some of these guys will slide into the 2nd, but for me, if one of the top 9 don't drop, I would rather take anything to move back because I don't see much difference from Green to Scourton or Membou to Zabel, etc. Thoughts?

Barron - CB
Starks - S
Campbell - LB
Membou - OL
Green - ED
Johnson - CB
Burden - WR
Pearce - ED
Ezeiruaku - ED
Grant - DL
Simmons - OL
Egbuka - WR
Banks - OL
Golden - WR
Nolen - DL
Hampton - RB
Loveland - TE
Williams - ED
Steward - ED
Walker - ED
Zabel - OL
Scourton - ED
Harmon - DL
 

There is a clear difference from the top 3 DTs and the next tier. It shows up very clearly in the advanced analytics.  Adam Mason did a good job highlighting this on his YouTube channel.  When I can get to my computer I’ll provide screenshots and a link if anyone is interested.  For now I’ll just say when looking at things like pass rush pressure rate. Tackle depth etc. Mason Graham and Kenneth Grant are 1 and 3.   Walter Nolen is 2nd. But they are all very close.  The next best DT  has a significant drop in every category but again there are several DTs clustered together in that similar performance group.  
 

 Mason Graham is still the best DT but the fact he benefited from being next to Grant and Vice versa makes me think Nolen might be closer to him than initially thought.  

[Stinger226]

I look at his stuff all the time and like the content. He does the numbers so I don't have to. 

It's always hard to analyze how much one player has talent when his whole team is great. I guess it's just the film that best decides that.  I would take any of those 3 and the 2 will be available at 10. I think Grant ends up coming off quicker than most people projected. He's my first choice because he would share the NT spot with Billings although you could line him up at either spot.

[Stinger226]

This is a wish draft with several trade backs. Mainly the first 4 picks seem realistic to me.

[Stinger226]

https://youtu.be/zfZKKkPSxyI?si=fXrMHnYwUQ5k4gf5

[ASHKUM BEAR]

3 hours ago, Stinger226 said:

https://youtu.be/zfZKKkPSxyI?si=fXrMHnYwUQ5k4gf5

 

3 hours ago, Stinger226 said:

https://youtu.be/zfZKKkPSxyI?si=fXrMHnYwUQ5k4gf5

I've been on the Kenneth Grant wagon.  My opinion is Poles might see a Chris Jones in Nolen or Grant and Chris Jones is one of the reasons KC has been a consistent winner besides mahomes of course. I don't think 10 is too high, but maybe he can wiggle down a little and still get one.

[DABEARSDABOMB]

My opinion is there are about 5-7 picks worthy of being selected in the top 15 in this draft. - but that there are probably 30-40 guys who would be 20-40 round picks…

Bottom line there might not be a guy in this draft on the oline who would be in the top 15 in a good year. I’d probably say same for dline outside of Carter. 
 

But at oline and dline I think the difference between the 2nd guy and the 6th guy is minimal and all would be back end first rounders. 
 

This is the reason why if at 10 you have Warren or Jeanty there and you think they are blue chip talent in a draft with 5-6 blue chip guys you take them and call it a day. Now if you can trade down great - but you need a buyer so unless someone is jumping for a qb I don’t see anyone paying much to Move up 5-10 spots with the Bears. I could see someone moving from say 10 to 5 if it allows them to get one of the few consensus blue chippers. 

[BearFan PHX]

22 minutes ago, DABEARSDABOMB said:

My opinion is there are about 5-7 picks worthy of being selected in the top 15 in this draft. - but that there are probably 30-40 guys who would be 20-40 round picks…

Bottom line there might not be a guy in this draft on the oline who would be in the top 15 in a good year. I’d probably say same for dline outside of Carter. 
 

But at oline and dline I think the difference between the 2nd guy and the 6th guy is minimal and all would be back end first rounders. 
 

This is the reason why if at 10 you have Warren or Jeanty there and you think they are blue chip talent in a draft with 5-6 blue chip guys you take them and call it a day. Now if you can trade down great - but you need a buyer so unless someone is jumping for a qb I don’t see anyone paying much to Move up 5-10 spots with the Bears. I could see someone moving from say 10 to 5 if it allows them to get one of the few consensus blue chippers. 

There is logic to that analysis, in terms of maximizing value. But if you think a guy is worth pick 15, and you think he will help your team, it's Ok to pick him at 10. You dont want to reach too far, and especially not to the point where you couldve gotten him a round later, but it's OK to take a player you believe in a few picks early.

I guess another way to say this, is the Bears may have different valuations on a player than we do? For example I see Kelvin Banks mocking as early as pick 4, and as late as 17 or 20 area. If you love him, you grab him at 10?

But similarly, and to your point, if you love Jeanty, and think 10 is a little early, it's OK to take him too!

[ASHKUM BEAR]

42 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said:

There is logic to that analysis, in terms of maximizing value. But if you think a guy is worth pick 15, and you think he will help your team, it's Ok to pick him at 10. You dont want to reach too far, and especially not to the point where you couldve gotten him a round later, but it's OK to take a player you believe in a few picks early.

I guess another way to say this, is the Bears may have different valuations on a player than we do? For example I see Kelvin Banks mocking as early as pick 4, and as late as 17 or 20 area. If you love him, you grab him at 10?

But similarly, and to your point, if you love Jeanty, and think 10 is a little early, it's OK to take him too!

The best is to move down 5-9 and gain a 2nd or 3rd. Then get a defensive difference maker or LT.  I've been taking James Pierce lately with a move down. Little light but he can be a disrupter.  Then take Grant or Nolen next.  The defensive front would be set.  Ersery if avaliable for LT and RB next.  TE/WR after that.  The rest of the draft get a LB, S.

[BearFan PHX]

1 hour ago, ASHKUM BEAR said:

The best is to move down 5-9 and gain a 2nd or 3rd. Then get a defensive difference maker or LT.  I've been taking James Pierce lately with a move down. Little light but he can be a disrupter.  Then take Grant or Nolen next.  The defensive front would be set.  Ersery if avaliable for LT and RB next.  TE/WR after that.  The rest of the draft get a LB, S.

The way the talent is allotted in this draft makes a trade down a very good option.

Then again, by your own argument, if you believe there is a difference maker, at LT, at HB, at DT whatever, then you can take them, even if it's a few picks early, or too high for a position.

I think youre right about the talent vs draft value curve here, but each player is an individual too, and if Johnson and the staff like a guy, if I'm Poles, rather than trading down and getting credit for a GM move, Id just grab the guy.

Especially with 2 high 2nd rounders to play with.

I guess another way to say this is that I can see a ton of different smart options for us, and the team is in a great spot in terms of being able to do pretty much anything they want. So your point is right, and a trade down is a win. The point about Jeanty is right, and could be amazing. Adding a DT or LT even if its a little early makes sense. If Johnson likes a skill player, a surprise WR ot TE or even an edge! it ALL makes sense, as long as the player evaluations are right.

In short - I have no freakin idea!! We are in a very flexible position. Well played, Poles.

[adam]

I have seen people talking about CLE potentially wanting to move back into the 1st to take Sanders, especially if they take Hunter at #2 and Sanders is still there at #10, after NO at #9.  

The potential trade would be #10 for #33, #67, and a 2026 1st.

Why would CLE do it? They need a QB on a rookie deal, can't pass up on a generational talent like Hunter, and they just signed Garrett to a huge deal. They are essentially getting their 2026 1st rounder a year early, and the premium for that is #33 and #67.

Why would CHI do it? They would only od it if a blue-chipper doesn't fall to them at #10. The hope is they won't be in the top 10 anymore anytime soon. They would then have #33, #39, #41, #67, and #72 in the 2025 draft AND 2x 1st rounders in 2026. I would assume they could also trade back into the first if they wanted to OR even trade back from #33 because those first few picks always seems to be traded on Day 2.