Will one of the good WRs be available in the 2nd?!

[jason]

Looking at the end of the first round, there are several teams that might go WR...and that could cause a run on WRs that screws the Bears out of at least an option to take a second-tier WR with their second pick.

 

TB - They really need a WR badly.

Detroit - All jokes aside, they STILL need another WR. Someone to compliment Calvin

Philly- How many years will they need weapons for McNabb?

Minny-Berrian is their #1, but Rice and Wade aren't that impressive.

NE - Nope. They're good.

Atlanta - Need a compliment to Roddy White, and Jenkins isn't that great

Miami - Ginn is still not great...need more weapons

Baltimore - Always a need

Indianapolis - Marvin's gone

Philly - It will be shocking if they don't take a WR with one of their first rounders.

NY Giants - Are they worried about Plaxico still?

Tennessee - Their #1 WR is Justin Gage. Nuf said.

Arizona - They're stacked.

Pitt - Not bad.

 

So, that's 10 teams that need a WR. We could see a good four or five hit the end of the first round.

[brletich]

I mentioned this in another post. I really think that if we want a WR such as britt/nicks/robiskie, we will have to take them at 18, because I just don't see them being there in the second, unless someone switches out JA and we trade down from 18 or back into the bottom of the first. Too many teams need WR's for them to last that long.

[Stinger226]

Looking at the end of the first round, there are several teams that might go WR...and that could cause a run on WRs that screws the Bears out of at least an option to take a second-tier WR with their second pick.

 

TB - They really need a WR badly.

Detroit - All jokes aside, they STILL need another WR. Someone to compliment Calvin

Philly- How many years will they need weapons for McNabb?

Minny-Berrian is their #1, but Rice and Wade aren't that impressive.

NE - Nope. They're good.

Atlanta - Need a compliment to Roddy White, and Jenkins isn't that great

Miami - Ginn is still not great...need more weapons

Baltimore - Always a need

Indianapolis - Marvin's gone

Philly - It will be shocking if they don't take a WR with one of their first rounders.

NY Giants - Are they worried about Plaxico still?

Tennessee - Their #1 WR is Justin Gage. Nuf said.

Arizona - They're stacked.

Pitt - Not bad.

 

So, that's 10 teams that need a WR. We could see a good four or five hit the end of the first round.

That would be very possible that the top 7 receivers are gone before we get to pick in the second round. We cant control what other people do, just put together a plan and hope it works. We have so many holes to fill if we dont get one of the top receivers we will just fill a different hole early. I dont think you can fill all your holes in one offseason just fill as many as possible, and hope a later round WR becomes a suprize.

[defiantgiant]

Looking at the end of the first round, there are several teams that might go WR...and that could cause a run on WRs that screws the Bears out of at least an option to take a second-tier WR with their second pick.

 

TB - They really need a WR badly.

Detroit - All jokes aside, they STILL need another WR. Someone to compliment Calvin

Philly- How many years will they need weapons for McNabb?

Minny-Berrian is their #1, but Rice and Wade aren't that impressive.

NE - Nope. They're good.

Atlanta - Need a compliment to Roddy White, and Jenkins isn't that great

Miami - Ginn is still not great...need more weapons

Baltimore - Always a need

Indianapolis - Marvin's gone

Philly - It will be shocking if they don't take a WR with one of their first rounders.

NY Giants - Are they worried about Plaxico still?

Tennessee - Their #1 WR is Justin Gage. Nuf said.

Arizona - They're stacked.

Pitt - Not bad.

 

So, that's 10 teams that need a WR. We could see a good four or five hit the end of the first round.

 

I think you're pretty much on point as far as who needs to add a wideout, but you've got to take into account whether teams with a need are likely to commit a first-round pick to that need. I'd restructure your list like this:

 

 

TB - After they blew everything up on defense, they've got a bunch of holes all of a sudden. They need some guys to take over for Brooks and Cato June, and who knows what they'll do at quarterback. I hope they're not planning to start Griese. Add to that the money they shelled out for Clayton and Antonio Bryant, plus the role Winslow/Stevens will have in the passing game, and I would be shocked if they spent a first-rounder on a wideout.

Detroit - Needs a wideout, but not in the first. Even with two picks, they've got WAY too many needs. Receiver is one of maybe four or five positions where they currently have even ONE good player - they've got to address middle and strong-side LB, left tackle, tight end, and quarterback. Any one of those is a much, much bigger issue than receiver.

Philly- They need a wideout, but not compared to a running back (who weighs over 215 and isn't constantly injured) and an offensive line. DeSean Jackson had a ridiculous year for a rookie, Avant is a serviceable #3, and Baskett/Curtis could compete with a mid-round pick for the other spot. Receiver's not worth neglecting their other first-round needs.

Minny- They just spent a TON on Berrian, and Bobby Wade's been all right for them, too. Their quarterback situation is bad enough that they should really use this pick on a QB. They're the epitome of being a QB away from contending.

NE - Not a need. Definitely not a need.

Atlanta - Could upgrade at #2 receiver, but I don't think that's a first-round caliber need. Despite their success last season, they're still rebuilding. With both starting OLBs gone and no good receiving TE, I wouldn't expect to see them spend a first on a receiver.

Miami - Ginn was kind of a mistake, but Parcells seems to prefer to stick with role-players over stars at wideout. They got a nice surprise in Davone Bess, and Greg Camarillo started to look pretty good. I'd be surprised if they took a receiver in the first.

Baltimore - Could go wideout in the first. I like them to pick up DHB. They're already got a reliable vet in Mason, but they could stand to add a deep threat, and they don't have a ton of other needs.

Indianapolis - They lost Marvin, but Reggie Wayne is still performing at a high level, and Gonzalez looks like he'll be good. That said, it wouldn't be crazy for them to spend this pick on a receiver, given how much they rely on Manning and the passing game. They could really stand to add a defensive tackle, though.

Philly - See above. They really need to go RB and OT with their first two picks.

NY Giants - Could definitely go wideout in the first. They've got Manningham waiting in the wings, but there were reports that he struggled pretty badly. With Toomer gone and Mario and Plax both question marks, that's putting a lot on Hixon.

Tennessee - They definitely need a good wideout, but their system doesn't value one highly enough to make it a likely first-round pick, and they don't have a QB good enough to capitalize on a top-tier receiver.

Arizona - Not a need.

Pitt - Not a need. Even if Sweed isn't working out, they could replace Nate Washington with a FA or a late-round pick.

 

Of the whole list, I'd be very surprised if more than three of these teams took a receiver in round 1 - I'm thinking Baltimore, Indianapolis, and the Giants are the likeliest. There's enough depth at receiver in this draft that I think any of the other 11 teams could address that need in round 2 or 3.

 

I'd still like to see the Bears move down in the first and up in the second, but hopefully we won't have to reach for a receiver at #18.

[dawhizz]

It depends on what you consider a "good receiver". In my book, the WR cut off is after Robiskie, leaving you with Crabtree, Maclin, Heyward-Bey, Britt, Nicks, Harvin, and Robiskie (although I'm willing to consider Derrick Williams). We know with some certainty that Crabtree will go early. I also think that Harvin replecates too much of what Hester does, so he doesn't really interest me. I think that if the Bears want one of those WRs, they need to either take one in the first or trade up in the second, because those are the WRs I trust to be able to come in and contribute, which is what the Bears need, because if you don't you end up (like I did in the mock draft results I recently posted) with all those WRs gone. Now, certainly, a lot can happen between now and then. The best thing that can happen may be that the WRs stay relatively the same, but players at other positions start shooting up into the last half of the 1st/early 2nd to push the WRs down. But, again, at this point you can't really count on that.

[Stinger226]

It depends on what you consider a "good receiver". In my book, the WR cut off is after Robiskie, leaving you with Crabtree, Maclin, Heyward-Bey, Britt, Nicks, Harvin, and Robiskie (although I'm willing to consider Derrick Williams). We know with some certainty that Crabtree will go early. I also think that Harvin replecates too much of what Hester does, so he doesn't really interest me. I think that if the Bears want one of those WRs, they need to either take one in the first or trade up in the second, because those are the WRs I trust to be able to come in and contribute, which is what the Bears need, because if you don't you end up (like I did in the mock draft results I recently posted) with all those WRs gone. Now, certainly, a lot can happen between now and then. The best thing that can happen may be that the WRs stay relatively the same, but players at other positions start shooting up into the last half of the 1st/early 2nd to push the WRs down. But, again, at this point you can't really count on that.

I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING YOU SAID. Crabtree will be gone and Harvin not desirable for us. I also think DHB wont be a stud. He had average stats for such great measurables, think Troy Williamson

[azbearsfan]

One WR I am starting to like alot is Robiskie.

 

I wouldn't mind if we traded down in the first round or even took him at 18. He would be a reach as far as the experts were concerned, but I think he will be better than some of the guys that would go ahead of him.

[nfoligno]

Nicks is still my favorite WR, but Robiskie is a close 2nd. Iglesias is probably my 3rd choice.

 

All three of these WRs have one common knock on them. They lack great straight line/ 40 speed, and are thus not considered game breakers. That is fine w/ me. IMHO, we have that WR (potentially) in Hester, and what we need more than anything is a complimentary WR, which I think all three of these WRs would fit very well.

 

Problem for me is, I question whether Angelo feels the same way. To read his Q&A, he sounds like he is after a #1 WR. I really fear that if he is there, he would rather get a WR like DHB. I like him, but just feel he is the wrong WR for us. While he may be among the most physically gifted WR in the entire draft, he is also among the most raw, and likely going to need the most development. Our history developing WRs is not great, which makes me really question drafting a WR like DHB, who I think could go the route of Bradley, another talented, but raw WR we drafted. If we draft DHB, I think he will be another WR who looks better after leaving the bears than he ever did for us.

 

One WR I am starting to like alot is Robiskie.

 

I wouldn't mind if we traded down in the first round or even took him at 18. He would be a reach as far as the experts were concerned, but I think he will be better than some of the guys that would go ahead of him.

[defiantgiant]

It depends on what you consider a "good receiver". In my book, the WR cut off is after Robiskie, leaving you with Crabtree, Maclin, Heyward-Bey, Britt, Nicks, Harvin, and Robiskie (although I'm willing to consider Derrick Williams). We know with some certainty that Crabtree will go early. I also think that Harvin replecates too much of what Hester does, so he doesn't really interest me. I think that if the Bears want one of those WRs, they need to either take one in the first or trade up in the second, because those are the WRs I trust to be able to come in and contribute, which is what the Bears need, because if you don't you end up (like I did in the mock draft results I recently posted) with all those WRs gone. Now, certainly, a lot can happen between now and then. The best thing that can happen may be that the WRs stay relatively the same, but players at other positions start shooting up into the last half of the 1st/early 2nd to push the WRs down. But, again, at this point you can't really count on that.

 

I'd add Iglesias to that list, albeit at the bottom after Robiskie. His ceiling certainly isn't as high as Robiskie's, and he's not as polished a product, either. He could still end up a pretty good #2, though, and he could step in as a slot receiver right away for Chicago. I don't know about Derrick Williams: he seems to be in the same category as Harvin - project receiver, great return guy.

 

I agree that Harvin is Hester-lite, though, and the Bears don't need that. Somebody else will, though...think Ted Ginn to the Dolphins. I think Harvin's value will be pushed up a lot by his return potential, which will hopefully push more of the pure receivers down toward the Bears' second-round pick. Maclin's in the same boat, even more so. If Maclin pushes Crabtree and DHB down, and Harvin pushes Britt, Nicks, Robiskie, and Iglesias, then the Bears could have a shot at one of those last four by the time we pick in the 2nd. Still, I really hope we find a way to move up significantly in round 2: I don't want to have to gamble on those four still being there, even if it's a relatively safe gamble.

[defiantgiant]

Nicks is still my favorite WR, but Robiskie is a close 2nd. Iglesias is probably my 3rd choice.

 

All three of these WRs have one common knock on them. They lack great straight line/ 40 speed, and are thus not considered game breakers. That is fine w/ me. IMHO, we have that WR (potentially) in Hester, and what we need more than anything is a complimentary WR, which I think all three of these WRs would fit very well.

 

Couldn't agree with you more on what kind of WR we need, but I think Robiskie could end up being even more than that. He showed some decent speed at the Combine: he had a 4.48 in the 40, and everybody's times seemed to be slow this year. I don't know if it was the new track or the timers, but compared to the field this year, 4.48 isn't slow. He certainly timed a lot faster than Boldin or Fitzgerald (4.72 and 4.63 respectively,) both of whom are built pretty comparably. Andre Johnson ran a 4.4 flat, Greg Jennings ran a 4.42, Marques Colston ran a 4.50, and all of them were on a faster track than Robiskie was on. I think Robiskie's definitely got enough speed that it's not going to hinder his game. I see him as a great #2, borderline #1 receiver in a year or two.

[nfoligno]

Honestly, I could care less about the 40 times. I swear, I dang near laugh at this drill. A kid looks like he has blazing speed and is untouchable in college, on the field, in games, and then has a sub-par 40 running in shorts on a track, and suddenly he is considered slow. Scouts and GMs always talk about how unimportant 40 times are, and yet they still seem to place so much consideration for it on draft day. W/ that said,

 

From what I have read, Nicks and Robiskie had nearly identical top 40 times. I have seen Nicks 40 range between 4.48 and 4.492, but it just does not seem there is a great difference between the two. I think the key between the two is Nicks had a more productive collegiate career, while some question whether Robiskie is a one year wonder.

 

Nicks had 660 yards as a freshman, followed by 960 and 1,200. He was productive from start to finish, and displayed consistent development. Robiskie didn't do much his first two seasons, but then broke out his junior year w/ 935 yards. But then followed that up w/ a big slide his senior year posting only 535 yards. Now, many point to the change in the teams system and other things, but at the end of the day, Robiskie only had one big year, and could not follow it up, and thus he has more questions surrounding him.

 

On the other hand, as I mentioned, the 40 times are a joke, but some of the drills I do put more weight into, Robiskie did quite well (20 shuttle, 3 cone and vertical). I think Robiskie offers a slightly higher ceiling, but I also think he has a lower floor due to his lack of overall production in college. A question in my mind is whether we are better off w/ Nicks in the 1st or Robiskie in the 2nd, though I am not sure Robiskie is there for us in the 2nd.

 

 

Couldn't agree with you more on what kind of WR we need, but I think Robiskie could end up being even more than that. He showed some decent speed at the Combine: he had a 4.48 in the 40, and everybody's times seemed to be slow this year. I don't know if it was the new track or the timers, but compared to the field this year, 4.48 isn't slow. He certainly timed a lot faster than Boldin or Fitzgerald (4.72 and 4.63 respectively,) both of whom are built pretty comparably. Andre Johnson ran a 4.4 flat, Greg Jennings ran a 4.42, Marques Colston ran a 4.50, and all of them were on a faster track than Robiskie was on. I think Robiskie's definitely got enough speed that it's not going to hinder his game. I see him as a great #2, borderline #1 receiver in a year or two.

[defiantgiant]

Honestly, I could care less about the 40 times. I swear, I dang near laugh at this drill. A kid looks like he has blazing speed and is untouchable in college, on the field, in games, and then has a sub-par 40 running in shorts on a track, and suddenly he is considered slow. Scouts and GMs always talk about how unimportant 40 times are, and yet they still seem to place so much consideration for it on draft day. W/ that said,

 

From what I have read, Nicks and Robiskie had nearly identical top 40 times. I have seen Nicks 40 range between 4.48 and 4.492, but it just does not seem there is a great difference between the two. I think the key between the two is Nicks had a more productive collegiate career, while some question whether Robiskie is a one year wonder.

 

Nicks had 660 yards as a freshman, followed by 960 and 1,200. He was productive from start to finish, and displayed consistent development. Robiskie didn't do much his first two seasons, but then broke out his junior year w/ 935 yards. But then followed that up w/ a big slide his senior year posting only 535 yards. Now, many point to the change in the teams system and other things, but at the end of the day, Robiskie only had one big year, and could not follow it up, and thus he has more questions surrounding him.

 

On the other hand, as I mentioned, the 40 times are a joke, but some of the drills I do put more weight into, Robiskie did quite well (20 shuttle, 3 cone and vertical). I think Robiskie offers a slightly higher ceiling, but I also think he has a lower floor due to his lack of overall production in college. A question in my mind is whether we are better off w/ Nicks in the 1st or Robiskie in the 2nd, though I am not sure Robiskie is there for us in the 2nd.

 

I'm with you there, I think the 40 is over-emphasized. I was just trying to make the point that he's definitely not slow. I didn't elevate him above Nicks and Britt until I saw him in the gauntlet and the route drills at the combine. The guy's hands are just unbelievable, and you can tell the level of concentration that he's got from watching him.

 

Honestly, I think Robiskie's floor is a lot higher than Nicks' is. Robiskie looks more fluid and is a more natural catcher, plus he's definitely a student of the game; it's not his fault he was underutilized when they changed the focus of the offense his senior year. I'm not as sure about Nicks, to tell you the truth. He's great running after the catch, and has very good hands, but he also had two other legitimate threats at wideout to draw attention off of him. A lot of the things that he got away with in college on account of his strength and athleticism, he won't be able to do in the NFL. Everybody remembers that insane catch against West Virginia, but you can't put the ball between your legs and switch hands behind your back in the NFL - that's a forced fumble with a bow on it.

 

All in all, I think Nicks is more physically impressive, and might end up the better player down the road, but Robiskie seems like he's ready to step in and play right now.