Ed Hochuli 3:16 Posted February 25, 2009 Report Share Posted February 25, 2009 Sign Michael Huff- 1 year, $3 million. Sign JP Losman- 2 years, $8 million. Bears trade 18th pick to NYJ for their 1st round pick next year, their 2nd this year, and their 5th this year. Buh-bye to: Tait, Hillenmeyer, McKie, and Miller. Re-sign Idonije (3 years, 10 million) and St. Clair (3 years, 14 million). 2. Jarius Byrd, CB, Oregon 2. Laurence Sidbury, DE, Richmond 3. Juaquin Iglesias, WR, Oklahoma 3. Jason Williams, OLB, Western Illinois 4. Lydon Murtha, OT, Nebraska 5. Louis Vazquez, OG, Texas Tech 5. Chris Baker, DT, Hampton 6. Tony Fiammetta, FB, Syracuse 7. Kory Sheets, RB, Purdue 7. Andrew Means, WR, Indiana UDFA: Louis West, OL, Henderson State Jon Cooper, C, Oklahoma Cole Popovich, OG, Fresno State Anthony Scirrotto, S, Penn State Orton Losman Hanie Forte Sheets Wolfe Fiammetta Hester Iglesias Bennett Davis Means Olsen Clark Williams St. Clair West? St. Clair Murtha West (PS?) Beekman Vazquez Garza Popovich (PS?) West (PS?) Kreutz Beekman Ogunleye Brown Sidbury Idonije Harris Harrison Idonije Adams Baker Dvoracek (cut?) Urlacher Briggs J. Williams Roach Tillman Vasher (cut?) Byrd Bowman Graham Hamilton McBride (let walk?) Manning Payne Huff Steltz Scirrotto (PS)? McGowan (cut?) Worrell (who knows?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mongo3451 Posted February 25, 2009 Report Share Posted February 25, 2009 Sign Michael Huff- 1 year, $3 million. Sign JP Losman- 2 years, $8 million. Bears trade 18th pick to NYJ for their 1st round pick next year, their 2nd this year, and their 5th this year. Buh-bye to: Tait, Hillenmeyer, McKie, and Miller. Re-sign Idonije (3 years, 10 million) and St. Clair (3 years, 14 million). 2. Jarius Byrd, CB, Oregon 2. Laurence Sidbury, DE, Richmond 3. Juaquin Iglesias, WR, Oklahoma 3. Jason Williams, OLB, Western Illinois 4. Lydon Murtha, OT, Nebraska 5. Louis Vazquez, OG, Texas Tech 5. Chris Baker, DT, Hampton 6. Tony Fiammetta, FB, Syracuse 7. Kory Sheets, RB, Purdue 7. Andrew Means, WR, Indiana UDFA: Louis West, OL, Henderson State Jon Cooper, C, Oklahoma Cole Popovich, OG, Fresno State Anthony Scirrotto, S, Penn State Orton Losman Hanie Forte Sheets Wolfe Fiammetta Hester Iglesias Bennett Davis Means Olsen Clark Williams St. Clair West? St. Clair Murtha West (PS?) Beekman Vazquez Garza Popovich (PS?) West (PS?) Kreutz Beekman Ogunleye Brown Sidbury Idonije Harris Harrison Idonije Adams Baker Dvoracek (cut?) Urlacher Briggs J. Williams Roach Tillman Vasher (cut?) Byrd Bowman Graham Hamilton McBride (let walk?) Manning Payne Huff Steltz Scirrotto (PS)? McGowan (cut?) Worrell (who knows?) You have St. Clair as a starter with no suitable replacement in fold. Plus, there's too much money remaining to spend. I appreciate the effort, but hate it in the same breath. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Hochuli 3:16 Posted February 25, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 25, 2009 Murtha had a solid combine and was a RT at Nebraska. I'm not sure how that isn't suitable? At some point in time, we must start to develop young OL. And- in most offseasons, we've went in and spent most of our cap space, but that's usually on our own guys. With Idonije and St. Clair our only 2 FA's remaining, those 2 guys won't even make up double digits of our cap space. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfoligno Posted February 25, 2009 Report Share Posted February 25, 2009 First, why do you want to trade down SO badly. Every plan of yours seems to begin w/ our trading down. Right now, though we really don't know what will happen on draft day, we have a shot at numerous players who would be great value and fill a position of need w/ our 1st round pick. Second, to be honest, I hate this plan. (a) You do nothing to upgrade our OL. Sure, you talk about re-signing St. Clair, but he was a starter last year. Yea, he moves to the right side, but how great of an upgrade is that? Further, you do nothing to upgrade our interior, and our depth is still awful. ( While I doubt we spend a ton in FA, at the same time, you spend next to nothing. We have too much cap space to do so little. © Why cut Hilly? We do not need the cap space, and he offers, at minimum, depth. Especially if you expect Roach to start, I think we need Hilly for depth, if not competition. If we do so little to improve our prospects at OL and WR, I think we would really regret such a plan. Sign Michael Huff- 1 year, $3 million. Sign JP Losman- 2 years, $8 million. Bears trade 18th pick to NYJ for their 1st round pick next year, their 2nd this year, and their 5th this year. Buh-bye to: Tait, Hillenmeyer, McKie, and Miller. Re-sign Idonije (3 years, 10 million) and St. Clair (3 years, 14 million). 2. Jarius Byrd, CB, Oregon 2. Laurence Sidbury, DE, Richmond 3. Juaquin Iglesias, WR, Oklahoma 3. Jason Williams, OLB, Western Illinois 4. Lydon Murtha, OT, Nebraska 5. Louis Vazquez, OG, Texas Tech 5. Chris Baker, DT, Hampton 6. Tony Fiammetta, FB, Syracuse 7. Kory Sheets, RB, Purdue 7. Andrew Means, WR, Indiana UDFA: Louis West, OL, Henderson State Jon Cooper, C, Oklahoma Cole Popovich, OG, Fresno State Anthony Scirrotto, S, Penn State Orton Losman Hanie Forte Sheets Wolfe Fiammetta Hester Iglesias Bennett Davis Means Olsen Clark Williams St. Clair West? St. Clair Murtha West (PS?) Beekman Vazquez Garza Popovich (PS?) West (PS?) Kreutz Beekman Ogunleye Brown Sidbury Idonije Harris Harrison Idonije Adams Baker Dvoracek (cut?) Urlacher Briggs J. Williams Roach Tillman Vasher (cut?) Byrd Bowman Graham Hamilton McBride (let walk?) Manning Payne Huff Steltz Scirrotto (PS)? McGowan (cut?) Worrell (who knows?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted February 25, 2009 Report Share Posted February 25, 2009 First, why do you want to trade down SO badly. Every plan of yours seems to begin w/ our trading down. Right now, though we really don't know what will happen on draft day, we have a shot at numerous players who would be great value and fill a position of need w/ our 1st round pick. Second, to be honest, I hate this plan. (a) You do nothing to upgrade our OL. Sure, you talk about re-signing St. Clair, but he was a starter last year. Yea, he moves to the right side, but how great of an upgrade is that? Further, you do nothing to upgrade our interior, and our depth is still awful. ( While I doubt we spend a ton in FA, at the same time, you spend next to nothing. We have too much cap space to do so little. © Why cut Hilly? We do not need the cap space, and he offers, at minimum, depth. Especially if you expect Roach to start, I think we need Hilly for depth, if not competition. If we do so little to improve our prospects at OL and WR, I think we would really regret such a plan. As much as I like the effort you put into this, I dont see the motive for trading our #1 pick let alone why the Jets would make the trade? Having said that I like your draft. Who would you take with your first pick being no trade happens? I also think we need to do more in free agency, I think we have enough money to get several 2nd tier players to add to several upgrades on the team. How about get Boley/lb from Atlanta to upgrade the sam position? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
defiantgiant Posted February 25, 2009 Report Share Posted February 25, 2009 As much as I like the effort you put into this, I dont see the motive for trading our #1 pick let alone why the Jets would make the trade? Having said that I like your draft. Who would you take with your first pick being no trade happens? I also think we need to do more in free agency, I think we have enough money to get several 2nd tier players to add to several upgrades on the team. How about get Boley/lb from Atlanta to upgrade the sam position? Boley's good at what he does (blitzing) but he's a poor fit for the Bears, unless he's going to be strictly a third-down LB. He was bad enough against the run in Atlanta that they replaced him on 1st and 2nd down with a safety-LB tweener from the special teams unit, and got better production on running downs. Atlanta was just using Boley as a nickel by the end of the season, so with Manning (hopefully) staying in that spot, we wouldn't have a good use for him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dawhizz Posted February 25, 2009 Report Share Posted February 25, 2009 Does this plan upgrade us anywhere? QB is about the same. RB is about the same, except if Forte gets hurt, we have no legitimate back-up for him. WR is demonstrably worse, which is saying something. I didn't love Booker and Lloyd, but I certainly have more confidence in them at this point than a 2nd year player who didn't catch a pass, a couple rookies, and Rashied Davis. OL is the same or worse, depending on how Williams does in his first real season. DL is essentially the same, except Sidbury has apparently killed Mark Anderson. LB is about the same with Williams instead of Hillenmeyer. CB may be a bit of an upgrade if you LOVE Byrd. S is OK, as long as you feel comfortable replacing the leader of the defense who just couldn't move as well as he used to with a guy who can fly but is a bust so far. Unless you're planning on tanking, this plan doesn't make much sense to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
defiantgiant Posted February 25, 2009 Report Share Posted February 25, 2009 Bears trade 18th pick to NYJ for their 1st round pick next year, their 2nd this year, and their 5th this year. I don't have a problem with trading down, per se, but this seems to be missing the point. We have holes in at least three starting positions; we need first-day picks this year, not next. If we're going to trade out of the first this year, I'd like to see us trade with Miami and get their two seconds. Check this out: Bears trade their first-round pick, 18th overall. Dolphins trade their second-round pick, 56th overall, as well as Washington's second-round pick (Jason Taylor trade,) 45th overall, and their fourth-round pick, 122nd overall. By the value chart, Miami actually comes out ahead by the value of a mid-fourth pick, not to mention the fact that they're a rebuilding team that would have two picks in the first 25. Meanwhile, the Bears could do this: Resign Nick Roach and John St. Clair. Give Idonije a new contract. Sign Jim Leonhard and Brandon Moore, plus Torry Holt if the Rams cut him. 2.45) Brian Robiskie, WR, Ohio St. 2.49) Jairus Byrd, CB/FS, Oregon 2.56) Connor Barwin, DE, Cincinnati 3.84) Shonn Greene, RB, Iowa or Rashad Jennings, RB, Liberty 3.97) Fenuki Tupou, OT, Oregon 4.116) Johnny Knox, WR, Abilene Christian 4.123) Stephen McGee, QB, Texas A&M 5.147) David Bruton, FS, Notre Dame 6.178) Joel Bell, OT, Furman 7.203) Glover Quin, CB, New Mexico UDFA) Daniel Holtzclaw, LB, Eastern Michigan; Willie Williams, LB, Union; Frank Summers, FB, UNLV That'd give us Leonhard-Byrd-Bruton at FS and Payne-Steltz-Leonhard at SS. Jim Leonhard's probably the closest thing to a free safety on the market right now: it seems like every single free-agent safety is a strong safety. I wouldn't mind the Bears making a play for Anthony Smith, either. A receiver corps of Hester, Holt, Bennett, Robiskie, Knox, and Rideau/Davis would be pretty raw and youth-heavy, but could turn out well. Our line depth would be OK, with Williams-Beekman-Kreutz-Moore-St. Clair as the starters and Tupou, Bell, Balogh, Garza, and Buenning for depth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bowlingtwig Posted February 25, 2009 Report Share Posted February 25, 2009 I no way do I trade the 1st round pick. We need Oline help or a pass rushing DE with that first pick. If we trade out of the 1st I will be extremely disappointed. I don't have a problem with trading down, per se, but this seems to be missing the point. We have holes in at least three starting positions; we need first-day picks this year, not next. If we're going to trade out of the first this year, I'd like to see us trade with Miami and get their two seconds. Check this out: Bears trade their first-round pick, 18th overall. Dolphins trade their second-round pick, 56th overall, as well as Washington's second-round pick (Jason Taylor trade,) 45th overall, and their fourth-round pick, 122nd overall. By the value chart, Miami actually comes out ahead by the value of a mid-fourth pick, not to mention the fact that they're a rebuilding team that would have two picks in the first 25. Meanwhile, the Bears could do this: Resign Nick Roach and John St. Clair. Give Idonije a new contract. Sign Jim Leonhard and Brandon Moore, plus Torry Holt if the Rams cut him. 2.45) Brian Robiskie, WR, Ohio St. 2.49) Jairus Byrd, CB/FS, Oregon 2.56) Connor Barwin, DE, Cincinnati 3.84) Shonn Greene, RB, Iowa or Rashad Jennings, RB, Liberty 3.97) Fenuki Tupou, OT, Oregon 4.116) Johnny Knox, WR, Abilene Christian 4.123) Stephen McGee, QB, Texas A&M 5.147) David Bruton, FS, Notre Dame 6.178) Joel Bell, OT, Furman 7.203) Glover Quin, CB, New Mexico UDFA) Daniel Holtzclaw, LB, Eastern Michigan; Willie Williams, LB, Union; Frank Summers, FB, UNLV That'd give us Leonhard-Byrd-Bruton at FS and Payne-Steltz-Leonhard at SS. Jim Leonhard's probably the closest thing to a free safety on the market right now: it seems like every single free-agent safety is a strong safety. I wouldn't mind the Bears making a play for Anthony Smith, either. A receiver corps of Hester, Holt, Bennett, Robiskie, Knox, and Rideau/Davis would be pretty raw and youth-heavy, but could turn out well. Our line depth would be OK, with Williams-Beekman-Kreutz-Moore-St. Clair as the starters and Tupou, Bell, Balogh, Garza, and Buenning for depth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted February 25, 2009 Report Share Posted February 25, 2009 Not to mention grabbing an OL in the late 3rd is just not a good idea... I no way do I trade the 1st round pick. We need Oline help or a pass rushing DE with that first pick. If we trade out of the 1st I will be extremely disappointed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chwtom Posted February 25, 2009 Report Share Posted February 25, 2009 I no way do I trade the 1st round pick. We need Oline help or a pass rushing DE with that first pick. If we trade out of the 1st I will be extremely disappointed. I am hoping the O line help comes before the draft. I think there is a pretty decent chance that anyone we'd think about taking at 18 could theoretically be available late first. I also like the value of the second round picks in this year's draft better than some of the mid first ones. I can't say with any certainty that Maclin or DHB will be any better as a pro than Nicks, Britt, Iglesias or Robiskie, so I'd rather take the latter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
defiantgiant Posted February 26, 2009 Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 I no way do I trade the 1st round pick. We need Oline help or a pass rushing DE with that first pick. If we trade out of the 1st I will be extremely disappointed. Don't get me wrong, I don't think we should move out of the first, either: I was just offering an alternate scenario for what we could do if we did. There's a reason that you almost never see teams trade out of the first round altogether. I was just trying to argue that, assuming we did trade out of the 1st, we would be better off picking up multiple 2nd-rounders this year than getting a 3rd this year and a 1st in 2010. In the real world, I'd like to see us trade down from 18 to somewhere in the 20s (unless Jenkins or Oher start to fall) and get some extra picks that way. The Bears could trade our 1st (#18 overall) and 5th-round (#147) picks to the Giants for their 1st (#29) and 2nd (#60). The value's about on par (Bears come out ahead by the value of a late 7th-round pick) and the Giants have New Orleans' 2nd anyway, so they wouldn't be missing out on the 2nd round. That gives us a late 1st, two 2nds, and (assuming we get the compensatory pick for Berrian) two 3rds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
defiantgiant Posted February 26, 2009 Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 Not to mention grabbing an OL in the late 3rd is just not a good idea... Umm, why? Kareem McKenzie was a third-round pick, and he's a great right tackle. Nick Kaczur was a late third-rounder, and he's definitely a better right tackle than what we've got. David Stewart of the Titans was a fourth-rounder, Jon Runyan was too. David Diehl was a fifth-rounder, etc. etc. There's no reason in the world why you can't get a starting right tackle in the third round. I mean, we were just discussing in the other thread how the Giants' line is one of the best in football, right? Here's their starting line: LT - David Diehl - 5th Round (#160) in 2003 for the Giants, started at RG in rookie season, then moved to RT, then LT. LG - Rich Seubert, UDFA for the Giants in 2001, starter since rookie season. C - Shaun O'Hara, UDFA for the Browns in 2000, starter since 2002 with 8 starts in 2000-2001. RG - Chris Snee, 2nd Round pick (#34) in 2004 for the Giants, starter since rookie season. RT - Kareem McKenzie - 3rd Round pick (#79) in 2001 for the NY Jets, starter since rookie season. ...they've got ONE pick higher than the 3rd round on their entire line, and we all agree (I think) that that's one of the best lines in football. And it's not like these guys were developmental projects, either. With the exception of O'Hara, they were all immediate impact players from their rookie years onward. So if it's a bad idea to wait until the late 3rd to take an o-lineman, explain that to the Giants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted February 26, 2009 Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 Becasue one should be grabbed earlier I feel. You can catch diamonds in the rough... But if you look at the Bears' history, thoe only diamonds we find in late rounds are on D. Bascially, I think the Giants draft better than we do... Umm, why? Kareem McKenzie was a third-round pick, and he's a great right tackle. Nick Kaczur was a late third-rounder, and he's definitely a better right tackle than what we've got. David Stewart of the Titans was a fourth-rounder, Jon Runyan was too. David Diehl was a fifth-rounder, etc. etc. There's no reason in the world why you can't get a starting right tackle in the third round. I mean, we were just discussing in the other thread how the Giants' line is one of the best in football, right? Here's their starting line: LT - David Diehl - 5th Round (#160) in 2003 for the Giants, started at RG in rookie season, then moved to RT, then LT. LG - Rich Seubert, UDFA for the Giants in 2001, starter since rookie season. C - Shaun O'Hara, UDFA for the Browns in 2000, starter since 2002 with 8 starts in 2000-2001. RG - Chris Snee, 2nd Round pick (#34) in 2004 for the Giants, starter since rookie season. RT - Kareem McKenzie - 3rd Round pick (#79) in 2001 for the NY Jets, starter since rookie season. ...they've got ONE pick higher than the 3rd round on their entire line, and we all agree (I think) that that's one of the best lines in football. And it's not like these guys were developmental projects, either. With the exception of O'Hara, they were all immediate impact players from their rookie years onward. So if it's a bad idea to wait until the late 3rd to take an o-lineman, explain that to the Giants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
defiantgiant Posted February 26, 2009 Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 Becasue one should be grabbed earlier I feel. You can catch diamonds in the rough... But if you look at the Bears' history, thoe only diamonds we find in late rounds are on D. Bascially, I think the Giants draft better than we do... I mean, the Giants probably do scout talent better than the Bears do. But those players were originally brought in by the Giants, Jets, and Browns. I'm definitely not ready to say that the Jets and Browns draft better than the Bears. Angelo's big problem appears to be the first round: he keeps getting hung up on guys produced at the college level but have major question marks attached to them (see: Cedric Benson, Rex Grossman, Michael Haynes.) Then they get handed the job based on draft position. If anything, I'd prefer that we got at least one solid contributor at RT or RG through free agency, then used the shotgun approach in the draft. Use a third-round pick on a lineman, then another second-day pick, then bring in as many UDFA linemen as you can: open the RT or RG spot to competition between all the guys. Clearly we haven't gotten anywhere by using high picks and then handing guys the starting job. The difference between the Giants' line and ours is that every guy on the Giants' line originally had to compete to become a starter. That means there were other guys competing with them, which means the Giants used multiple (probably late) picks to get a starter at one position. That's a winning strategy. Agreeing that Angelo doesn't draft that well in the first round, let's say that Chicago's success rate for a first-round OL pick is 50%, versus 35% for a second-day pick and, say, 15% for a UDFA. I'm just making numbers up, but you get the idea. You can take a 50-50 on one first round pick, who you'll be counting on to start, or you can roll the dice on one guy emerging from among two second-day picks and like three UDFAs. You're paying those five guys less than you'd pay the first-rounder, and you're more likely to succeed. Drafting the first-round guy, you have a 50% chance that he's a bust. But for ALL the later guys to bust, that's 65%x65%x85%x85%x85% - just over a 1 in 4 chance. So you've got about a 75% chance that at LEAST one of them ends up being a solid contributor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted February 26, 2009 Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 I follow what you're saying. But, the flip side with the BEars is for every hester, there's an Okwo. I'm sure the same is for the Browns and Jets. We just don't know their draft picks as well. And if both were stallar, they'd be in the playoffs more consistently. I completely agree with your assessment of JA in the 1st round! It's pretty awful unless the obvious lands in his lap like Olsen. I would LOVE to get one of the many OL available in FA! There are so many, and with the added caop room, there is honestly no excuse for JA not to nab one or 2. If we do get a few OL via FA, I'm a bit more willing to wait longer to draft one...but really we need to infuse the line with youth. We don't need a project. We need a cornerstone we can rely on for years to come. While I understand your point on our 1st rounds whifs...you still have to approach it that the talent pool get worse as you prgess in the draft. Thus, meaning, that odds are you hit on good players in the 1st 3 rounds, and get lucky to get a few in the later. We all know reality happens differently on occasion, but you have to gamble by the rules. You always hit on 16 or less when the dealer's showing a face card. yeah, you can bust, or he can have a 3 under, but you have to play the odds. My general feeling for this draft is the shore the lines up. Both O and D, with more emphasis on O. If a player of remarkable quailty from another position come into play when we pick, then I'd consider it for sure. But my overall game plan would be shore the lines. I'd simpky rather take chances on other positions later in the draft than the lines...and specifically O line. I mean, the Giants probably do scout talent better than the Bears do. But those players were originally brought in by the Giants, Jets, and Browns. I'm definitely not ready to say that the Jets and Browns draft better than the Bears. Angelo's big problem appears to be the first round: he keeps getting hung up on guys produced at the college level but have major question marks attached to them (see: Cedric Benson, Rex Grossman, Michael Haynes.) Then they get handed the job based on draft position. If anything, I'd prefer that we got at least one solid contributor at RT or RG through free agency, then used the shotgun approach in the draft. Use a third-round pick on a lineman, then another second-day pick, then bring in as many UDFA linemen as you can: open the RT or RG spot to competition between all the guys. Clearly we haven't gotten anywhere by using high picks and then handing guys the starting job. The difference between the Giants' line and ours is that every guy on the Giants' line originally had to compete to become a starter. That means there were other guys competing with them, which means the Giants used multiple (probably late) picks to get a starter at one position. That's a winning strategy. Agreeing that Angelo doesn't draft that well in the first round, let's say that Chicago's success rate for a first-round OL pick is 50%, versus 35% for a second-day pick and, say, 15% for a UDFA. I'm just making numbers up, but you get the idea. You can take a 50-50 on one first round pick, who you'll be counting on to start, or you can roll the dice on one guy emerging from among two second-day picks and like three UDFAs. You're paying those five guys less than you'd pay the first-rounder, and you're more likely to succeed. Drafting the first-round guy, you have a 50% chance that he's a bust. But for ALL the later guys to bust, that's 65%x65%x85%x85%x85% - just over a 1 in 4 chance. So you've got about a 75% chance that at LEAST one of them ends up being a solid contributor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chwtom Posted February 26, 2009 Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 Angelo's problems in the first baffle me. He says that he goes after guys with high floors, even if they don't have high ceilings (basically he goes after the safe pick, even if he misses out on the stars). But his first round picks are almost universally busts. So whatever he is doing to evaluate the players floor isn't working. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted February 26, 2009 Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 It is truly baffling. Angelo's problems in the first baffle me. He says that he goes after guys with high floors, even if they don't have high ceilings (basically he goes after the safe pick, even if he misses out on the stars). But his first round picks are almost universally busts. So whatever he is doing to evaluate the players floor isn't working. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
defiantgiant Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 While I understand your point on our 1st rounds whifs...you still have to approach it that the talent pool get worse as you prgess in the draft. Thus, meaning, that odds are you hit on good players in the 1st 3 rounds, and get lucky to get a few in the later. We all know reality happens differently on occasion, but you have to gamble by the rules. You always hit on 16 or less when the dealer's showing a face card. yeah, you can bust, or he can have a 3 under, but you have to play the odds. My general feeling for this draft is the shore the lines up. Both O and D, with more emphasis on O. If a player of remarkable quailty from another position come into play when we pick, then I'd consider it for sure. But my overall game plan would be shore the lines. I'd simpky rather take chances on other positions later in the draft than the lines...and specifically O line. Emphasis mine. This is what I'm talking about: if you're comparing one early pick to one late pick, then yeah, you have a better chance with the early one. But if you're comparing one early pick to a large number of late picks, and you're talking about a position like o-line, where there are at least SOME quality players available in every round, then you have a better chance with the late picks. I know it doesn't work like that for quarterbacks or shutdown corners, but there's a pretty long history of teams getting quality starters on the line in the later rounds. I don't want the Bears gambling on one dude being the answer; they need to hedge their bets here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 I follow... But I think one way to hedge is get one at least by the 2nd round. I guess we just differ how we'd hedge! Emphasis mine. This is what I'm talking about: if you're comparing one early pick to one late pick, then yeah, you have a better chance with the early one. But if you're comparing one early pick to a large number of late picks, and you're talking about a position like o-line, where there are at least SOME quality players available in every round, then you have a better chance with the late picks. I know it doesn't work like that for quarterbacks or shutdown corners, but there's a pretty long history of teams getting quality starters on the line in the later rounds. I don't want the Bears gambling on one dude being the answer; they need to hedge their bets here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
defiantgiant Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 I follow... But I think one way to hedge is get one at least by the 2nd round. I guess we just differ how we'd hedge! Yeah, I guess at this point we just differ on how heavily we want the Bears to invest in the o-line, versus how heavily we think they should invest in the holes in the secondary and receiver corps. I'm of the mind that, since it's easier to find good linemen than good corners/wideouts on the second day, we should go WR/DB early, then burn a bunch of late picks and FA/UDFA signings on o-line. If the Bears could land at least one premier DB or receiver in free agency, though, I would definitely not be opposed to getting a tackle on day 1. Really, the only need that I hope we DON'T address on day 1 is d-line. I don't see a single d-lineman in this draft who'd be worth passing up on the chance to get a starter at safety, receiver, or even right tackle. Jerry can find defensive starters on the second day, that's his one real area of strength when it comes to the draft. Every time I see Mel Kiper projecting Tyson Jackson to the Bears at #18, I die a little inside. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 I think I have a basic fear drafting WR's high... Too many seem like busts. Or projects that I fear this franchise has no clue how to develop. I'd somewhat rather err on the side of getting D...but it seems like we can indeed find D gems in the rough in later rounds. I guess I'm really approaching this as a complete by-stander. There's really no one near our slot that I feel that strongly about. I htink it'll depend on who falls... I've got a personal vibe on Laurinaitis that borders on irrational...but really, I truly want BPA with a lean on the O line... I just hope that whoever we get, they rock! Yeah, I guess at this point we just differ on how heavily we want the Bears to invest in the o-line, versus how heavily we think they should invest in the holes in the secondary and receiver corps. I'm of the mind that, since it's easier to find good linemen than good corners/wideouts on the second day, we should go WR/DB early, then burn a bunch of late picks and FA/UDFA signings on o-line. If the Bears could land at least one premier DB or receiver in free agency, though, I would definitely not be opposed to getting a tackle on day 1. Really, the only need that I hope we DON'T address on day 1 is d-line. I don't see a single d-lineman in this draft who'd be worth passing up on the chance to get a starter at safety, receiver, or even right tackle. Jerry can find defensive starters on the second day, that's his one real area of strength when it comes to the draft. Every time I see Mel Kiper projecting Tyson Jackson to the Bears at #18, I die a little inside. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted February 28, 2009 Report Share Posted February 28, 2009 I mean, the Giants probably do scout talent better than the Bears do. But those players were originally brought in by the Giants, Jets, and Browns. I'm definitely not ready to say that the Jets and Browns draft better than the Bears. Angelo's big problem appears to be the first round: he keeps getting hung up on guys produced at the college level but have major question marks attached to them (see: Cedric Benson, Rex Grossman, Michael Haynes.) Then they get handed the job based on draft position. If anything, I'd prefer that we got at least one solid contributor at RT or RG through free agency, then used the shotgun approach in the draft. Use a third-round pick on a lineman, then another second-day pick, then bring in as many UDFA linemen as you can: open the RT or RG spot to competition between all the guys. Clearly we haven't gotten anywhere by using high picks and then handing guys the starting job. The difference between the Giants' line and ours is that every guy on the Giants' line originally had to compete to become a starter. That means there were other guys competing with them, which means the Giants used multiple (probably late) picks to get a starter at one position. That's a winning strategy. Agreeing that Angelo doesn't draft that well in the first round, let's say that Chicago's success rate for a first-round OL pick is 50%, versus 35% for a second-day pick and, say, 15% for a UDFA. I'm just making numbers up, but you get the idea. You can take a 50-50 on one first round pick, who you'll be counting on to start, or you can roll the dice on one guy emerging from among two second-day picks and like three UDFAs. You're paying those five guys less than you'd pay the first-rounder, and you're more likely to succeed. Drafting the first-round guy, you have a 50% chance that he's a bust. But for ALL the later guys to bust, that's 65%x65%x85%x85%x85% - just over a 1 in 4 chance. So you've got about a 75% chance that at LEAST one of them ends up being a solid contributor. Sorry, man, but stats don't work like that. Vegas makes huge money at the roulette wheel on people who think that a 37:1 odds over and over again eventually makes the odds greater than 37:1. You can't add them up. It's the same crap percentage every time, exclusive of the other rolls of the ball/dice/draft pick. 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.