jason Posted February 25, 2008 Report Share Posted February 25, 2008 Let's say that the Bears do the smart thing and get an OL in the first round. Otherwise 99% of us would go crazy (like I did when they drafted Benson). With this year's WR class, it seems there is a great possibility to draft a stud in several of the first few rounds. There is a distinct possibility of having a good one in the fourth round. Desean Jackson will be gone when the Bears 2nd comes up. After that, it's almost a toss up among many there. Mario Manningham (had a bad 40 time, could slip) Early Doucet Malcolm Kelly Limas Sweed (will probably be gone after his good 40 time) James Hardy Devin Thomas Andre Caldwell Earl Bennett Adarius Bowman Lavell Hawkins So, what I'm asking is, would you be happy with is the prospect of drafting two WRs. I say OL, then WR, then fill needs with the two third rounders, but there is a very good chance a stud WR is there in the fourth. Maybe one of the ones listed, or maybe someone like Maurice Purify or one of the Hawaii WRs will be there. 1. OL 2. WR 3. OL 3b. QB 4. WR Would you be happy with that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted February 25, 2008 Report Share Posted February 25, 2008 It all really depends on if those guys can pan out! But in all honesty, on paper, I wouldn't be happy with it. I really feel like we need a RB and LB in the mix earlier than the 5th. Much would depend on how FA still has yet to pan out though... Let's say that the Bears do the smart thing and get an OL in the first round. Otherwise 99% of us would go crazy (like I did when they drafted Benson). With this year's WR class, it seems there is a great possibility to draft a stud in several of the first few rounds. There is a distinct possibility of having a good one in the fourth round. Desean Jackson will be gone when the Bears 2nd comes up. After that, it's almost a toss up among many there. Mario Manningham (had a bad 40 time, could slip) Early Doucet Malcolm Kelly Limas Sweed (will probably be gone after his good 40 time) James Hardy Devin Thomas Andre Caldwell Earl Bennett Adarius Bowman Lavell Hawkins So, what I'm asking is, would you be happy with is the prospect of drafting two WRs. I say OL, then WR, then fill needs with the two third rounders, but there is a very good chance a stud WR is there in the fourth. Maybe one of the ones listed, or maybe someone like Maurice Purify or one of the Hawaii WRs will be there. 1. OL 2. WR 3. OL 3b. QB 4. WR Would you be happy with that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfoligno Posted February 25, 2008 Report Share Posted February 25, 2008 I really feel like we need a RB and LB in the mix earlier than the 5th. Much would depend on how FA still has yet to pan out though... But we just spent a 3rd on a RB last year. We also have spent a high 4th and late 3rd on a pair of LBs in the last two drafts. So while we have drafted one first day RB, and a pair of LBs (one first day, one early 2nd) we have taken a grand total of ZERO WRs. Not just day one, but zero WRs for the entire draft for the last two years. Some might try to argue Hester, but we drafted him to be a DB/return man, and while we have moved him to WR, that was not the original intent. At WR, we currently have Bradley, Hester, Davis and Hass. Sorry, but that if freaking pathetic. At LB, we have Urlacher, Hunter, Williams and Okwo. We need one of the youngsters to step up, but that player will be playing next to a stud. At RB, we have Benson, AP and Wolfe. While I am not going to pretend this group is proven or great, I think our chances of (at minimum) getting by is far greater than w/ the WR group. It isn't that I have an issue drafting a RB. I am all for it. At the same time, our need at WR is as great, if not greater. Personally, I would argue FAR greater. I would argue that you can upgrade the RB outlook by upgrading the OL (which is planned), while upgrading the WR by upgrading the QB (which is not). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfoligno Posted February 25, 2008 Report Share Posted February 25, 2008 I have no problem drafting two WRs. Hell, I would have no problem drafting three if we liked them enough. Hester is a project. While there is great potential, he regardless is a total project. Bradley has shown so little in his time w/ the bears it is sad. Davis is a "nice" receiver, but nothing more. Hass? Who knows. I look at the group of WRs we have on our roster, and struggle to come up w/ a signle team they could start for. Sure, we can probably think of a few, but not many, and it would be far more an indictment on those teams than positive evidence for our guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted February 25, 2008 Report Share Posted February 25, 2008 Yep, we've don all that, and yes, I still want those positions. I do not think Wolfe was a good pick at the spot he was picked, and I think Benson is a bum. We need a RB. If we don't get one in FA, I want one drafted by the 4th. As with LB...Okwo and Williams have had injury issues, Briggs will probably be gone, Hunter's getting older and slower and Urlacher's not getting any less banged up and younger. It could be just me, I like LB's and think this staff can find one. Hey, if it's Dizon or something similar in the 5th or 6th, I'd be OK with that too! I just want one drafted in all honesty... I didn't say don't draft a WR high! I just didn't want 2 of them that high up! But we just spent a 3rd on a RB last year. We also have spent a high 4th and late 3rd on a pair of LBs in the last two drafts. So while we have drafted one first day RB, and a pair of LBs (one first day, one early 2nd) we have taken a grand total of ZERO WRs. Not just day one, but zero WRs for the entire draft for the last two years. Some might try to argue Hester, but we drafted him to be a DB/return man, and while we have moved him to WR, that was not the original intent. At WR, we currently have Bradley, Hester, Davis and Hass. Sorry, but that if freaking pathetic. At LB, we have Urlacher, Hunter, Williams and Okwo. We need one of the youngsters to step up, but that player will be playing next to a stud. At RB, we have Benson, AP and Wolfe. While I am not going to pretend this group is proven or great, I think our chances of (at minimum) getting by is far greater than w/ the WR group. It isn't that I have an issue drafting a RB. I am all for it. At the same time, our need at WR is as great, if not greater. Personally, I would argue FAR greater. I would argue that you can upgrade the RB outlook by upgrading the OL (which is planned), while upgrading the WR by upgrading the QB (which is not). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChileBear Posted February 25, 2008 Report Share Posted February 25, 2008 Let's say that the Bears do the smart thing and get an OL in the first round. Otherwise 99% of us would go crazy (like I did when they drafted Benson). With this year's WR class, it seems there is a great possibility to draft a stud in several of the first few rounds. There is a distinct possibility of having a good one in the fourth round. Desean Jackson will be gone when the Bears 2nd comes up. After that, it's almost a toss up among many there. Mario Manningham (had a bad 40 time, could slip) Early Doucet Malcolm Kelly Limas Sweed (will probably be gone after his good 40 time) James Hardy Devin Thomas Andre Caldwell Earl Bennett Adarius Bowman Lavell Hawkins So, what I'm asking is, would you be happy with is the prospect of drafting two WRs. I say OL, then WR, then fill needs with the two third rounders, but there is a very good chance a stud WR is there in the fourth. Maybe one of the ones listed, or maybe someone like Maurice Purify or one of the Hawaii WRs will be there. 1. OL 2. WR 3. OL 3b. QB 4. WR Would you be happy with that? Yes, indeed! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfoligno Posted February 25, 2008 Report Share Posted February 25, 2008 I think the point of his post though was this. You do not argue the idea of taking a WR in the 2nd, correct? The point of his post was not to continue in the draft after that, targetting another WR, but would you be open to taking another WR if a guy you really liked slipped some? His rationale is that it is a deep WR classm, and that if we take a WR in the 2nd, it is possible a WR we graded high slips some and is there for us in the 4th. Would you be upset if we took a second WR in the 4th in that scenario. I would not go into the draft looking for two WRs in the top 4 rounds. However, I would not avoid a 2nd player I ranked high either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted February 25, 2008 Report Share Posted February 25, 2008 I think logic basically dictates that if a guy is clearly worth taking, you take him. But in general, once we've got our WR, I'd rather address other needs... I think the point of his post though was this. You do not argue the idea of taking a WR in the 2nd, correct? The point of his post was not to continue in the draft after that, targetting another WR, but would you be open to taking another WR if a guy you really liked slipped some? His rationale is that it is a deep WR classm, and that if we take a WR in the 2nd, it is possible a WR we graded high slips some and is there for us in the 4th. Would you be upset if we took a second WR in the 4th in that scenario. I would not go into the draft looking for two WRs in the top 4 rounds. However, I would not avoid a 2nd player I ranked high either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfoligno Posted February 25, 2008 Report Share Posted February 25, 2008 Now that I agree w/. I do not "want" to draft two WRs, but I leave the option open if a WR we really likes falls to us. I would add that the logic used for a WR falling to us plays to the RB as well. The argument is it is a deep and solid WR class, and thus a solid prospect could fall to us. But it is also a solid and deep RB class, and thus a solid prospect there could fall to us as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted February 25, 2008 Report Share Posted February 25, 2008 Agreed! Now that I agree w/. I do not "want" to draft two WRs, but I leave the option open if a WR we really likes falls to us. I would add that the logic used for a WR falling to us plays to the RB as well. The argument is it is a deep and solid WR class, and thus a solid prospect could fall to us. But it is also a solid and deep RB class, and thus a solid prospect there could fall to us as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McGowan Posted February 25, 2008 Report Share Posted February 25, 2008 What I would prefer, is that we could adress OT through FA, and take either Kelly or Sweed in the first. However, with only Starks as a viable option for OT, We'll have to look to the 2nd round for a WR. I really don't know who would be worth taking there, 4 or 5 guys will be gone by then, leaving us with the second tier guys to choose from, and we're only in the second round, however, if we don't choose an OT in the first, we'll be left in the same predicament in that position. That leaves us with a second option: Trade up with our 2nd and high 3rd into round one. We could potentially get both Sweed/Kelly/Hardy and Otah/Williams/Cherilus/Baker if we do that. It leaves us with less picks, but a huge WR and OT for our future. This would be the route that I would go at this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Hochuli 3:16 Posted February 25, 2008 Report Share Posted February 25, 2008 If Flacco doesn't show JA or Lovie what they want to see, then yes, I'd be fine with it. Bowman, Hawkins, Caldwell, Bennett, and MAYBE Thomas will be there when we pick for the 2nd time, so I wouldn't mind it, although, I'd rather see us go with WR in the 3rd and 7th, like a Caldwell, then a guy like Devone Bess from Hawaii or Maurice Purify from Nebraska Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZ54 Posted February 26, 2008 Report Share Posted February 26, 2008 The Hawaii WRs seem to be nothing more than just a replacement for Davis, same type of player. And since we already have that guy on the roster who knows the plays why make the pick? I agree with those guys being picked in the 7th Rd but I just don't see it as much of an upgrade. If he's there I'd rather pick Dennis Dixon with the plan to just put him on IR. We will be drafting another QB much earlier than that but we also have Rex to experiment with for one more year and Orton for two more years. If neither Rex nor Orton show enough to warrant being our starter in 2009 then we can cut ties with Rex, let the high draft pick take the reigns in '09 with Orton as the #2 and Dixon as the #3. We have a year to evaluate Dixon and if he doesn't look like he's got a future in the NFL then we can draft a #3 or find one in FA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Hochuli 3:16 Posted February 26, 2008 Report Share Posted February 26, 2008 The Hawaii WRs seem to be nothing more than just a replacement for Davis, same type of player. And since we already have that guy on the roster who knows the plays why make the pick? I agree with those guys being picked in the 7th Rd but I just don't see it as much of an upgrade. If he's there I'd rather pick Dennis Dixon with the plan to just put him on IR. We will be drafting another QB much earlier than that but we also have Rex to experiment with for one more year and Orton for two more years. If neither Rex nor Orton show enough to warrant being our starter in 2009 then we can cut ties with Rex, let the high draft pick take the reigns in '09 with Orton as the #2 and Dixon as the #3. We have a year to evaluate Dixon and if he doesn't look like he's got a future in the NFL then we can draft a #3 or find one in FA. Except Rashied is a FA, I believe, so we may not have him much longer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flea Posted February 26, 2008 Report Share Posted February 26, 2008 hes an RFA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chwtom Posted February 26, 2008 Report Share Posted February 26, 2008 " At WR, we currently have Bradley, Hester, Davis and Hass. Sorry, but that if freaking pathetic." I would argue that the Bears are pathetic at QB, RB, WR, OT, and OG. Depending on what they do (or don't do) in free agency, and who is available at 14, I would not have an objection to drafting any of those positions. The Bears could have a historically bad offense unless they are major players in free agency and do very well in the draft, so I don't necessarily think they should get locked into taking a OT with the first pick. They can get some players in free agency at the guard or tackle position who could make an instant, huge impact on the team--such as Faneca and Flozelle Adams. There is no Mendenhall, Jonathan Stewart or Limas Sweed available in free agency (and please don't say Michael Turner, because he looked very ordinary when LT went down and he had to carry the load. AP averaged over 5 ypc when he was a 3rd down back too). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearSox Posted February 27, 2008 Report Share Posted February 27, 2008 the only WR I would really want from this class would be Devin Thomas. No one else really excites me. Personally, since Devin Thomas will be a 1st round pick, I'd be content with someone like Jordy Nelson in the 4th. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted February 27, 2008 Report Share Posted February 27, 2008 I too like Nelson... the only WR I would really want from this class would be Devin Thomas. No one else really excites me. Personally, since Devin Thomas will be a 1st round pick, I'd be content with someone like Jordy Nelson in the 4th. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Hochuli 3:16 Posted February 27, 2008 Report Share Posted February 27, 2008 the only WR I would really want from this class would be Devin Thomas. No one else really excites me. Personally, since Devin Thomas will be a 1st round pick, I'd be content with someone like Jordy Nelson in the 4th. Hardy, Doucet, and Manningham are the only ones who have the chance to be a 1st. Devin Thomas is likely to go early to mid 2nd. I like Nelson as well, however, I'd probably rather have Jerome Simpson out of Coastal Carolina or Andre Caldwell out of Florida. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.