Rookie Surprises

[adam]

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/category...rookie-surprise

 

“We were in the fifth round of the draft and [coach Lovie Smith] looked at the board along with the scouts and said, ‘How about this Johnny Knox?’ He said, ‘We really don’t have anybody like him.’ We all talked together and we thought given the other players that we were considering that he had the traits we look for at the position. He was probably a little bit more unknown given his level of competition, but we knew that with Jay [Cutler] being on board, he could be another potential weapon, so we went ahead with it.”

 

Over the first four games, Knox has 14 receptions for 190 yards and two touchdowns. Only one NFL rookie has more catches, the New York Giants’ Kenny Britt, and none have exceeded his touchdown total. Knox also has taken over as the Bears’ primary kickoff returner, and on Sunday he dashed 102 yards for a touchdown against Detroit. Surprise, surprise.

 

Full article at the link.

[Guest TerraTor]

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/category...rookie-surprise

 

 

 

Full article at the link.

 

 

funny too how half the guys we took before him are inactive every week or not on the roster...

[adam]

funny too how half the guys we took before him are inactive every week or not on the roster...

Yeah, that is crazy. Also, I remember Mohamed Massaquoi during the draft and that some were thinking we would take him in the 2nd.

[Ed Hochuli 3:16]

Massaquoi had a huge week last week. I'm hoping that doesn't come back to bite us. IIRC, I wasn't a huge fan of Gilbert as I thought he was super raw. I hope Igelsias can be like Bennett next year.

[lemonej]

Massaquoi had a huge week last week. I'm hoping that doesn't come back to bite us. IIRC, I wasn't a huge fan of Gilbert as I thought he was super raw. I hope Igelsias can be like Bennett next year.

This pattern with Bears' WRs that they draft is puzzling. Every year a WR that is drafted by the Bears is basically useless.The common denominator is Ron Turner.It really appears that he prefers veterans over rookies and Johnny Knox is an exception to this trend.

[lemonej]

I did some digging and found the WRs drafted by JA and 3 of them are directly connected to Turner:Bennett, Airese Currie and Mark Bradley. The team didn't get much production from any of these guys in their first year and of the 4 WRs drafted before these the team got better first year production from just about all 4 prior to Turner.Berrian,Wade,Gage and Elliott. Of the 4 Elliott is the only one that is no longer playing in the league. So the Bears have drafted 7 WRs under JA and 5 of them are still playing in the league with only one still with the Bears.Of the 4 that got away Wade is the only one who I believe Lovie dismissed because of his constant turnovers on punts, kickoffs and some receptions.So who made the call on letting Bradley,Gage and Berrian go?JA,Lovie,Turner or Drake?We will never know because of how tight lipped this organization is and how the local beat writers don't ask questions like this when interviewing coaches.

[CrackerDog]

So who made the call on letting Bradley,Gage and Berrian go?JA,Lovie,Turner or Drake?

 

If Bradley ever took off her skirt I'd care more. Berrian is the only one on the list worth discussing and he left because of our cap situation, to my recollection.

[nfoligno]

While we passed on MM in the 2nd, opting to trade down,

 

(a) I think we likely did like him, but had hoped he would fall to the 3rd round

( he was actually drafted one spot after our 2nd round pick and

© he looked pretty good this past week w/ 8 catches for 148 yards.

 

Yeah, that is crazy. Also, I remember Mohamed Massaquoi during the draft and that some were thinking we would take him in the 2nd.

 

[nfoligno]

First, I would say that several of the WRs we have taken were considered raw talents who would need more time to develop. Knox too would fit this category, but simply developed quicker than expected. But a WR like Bradley is a perfect example. He was not even a starter in college, and was considered a very raw talent, but one w/ a high skill set. So I am not sure it is always so much an issue of not liking rookie WRs so much as some of the rookies we have drafted were raw coming out of college and even more in need of time to develop.

 

Second, I would say that it is harder to develop a young WR when you lack a good QB. With QBs like Rex, Orton and all the rest of the scrubs we have thrown out there, you need WRs to help prop up the QB, rather than being able to have young WRs who the QB can help develop, as we are now seeing w/ Cutler.

 

Third, I think injuries have really been a factor.

 

2005

 

Bradley - He was a very raw talent who simply could not stay healthy, and while he is on the KC roster, he has continued to deal w/ injuries for them, and its not like he is playing great for them either.

 

Currie - As I recall, he was just a speedster who we hoped could develop into a WR. Didn't happen.

 

2006 and 2007 saw no WR drafted.

 

2008

 

Bennett - Turner flat out admitted we made a mistake on how we developed him. I think the key was believing the veterans we added would play well enough early on to allow Bennett time to develop w/o being thrown to the wolves and by the time we realized those veterans sucked, we had already screwed up how we handled Bennett and just couldn't get him on the field soon enough.

 

2009

 

Learned from the Bennett mistake, and lessened the load for Knox, and it looks to have paid off. Iglesias is not like Bennett IMHO. I do not believe he was given the entire playbook and told to learn every position like Bennett, but simply struggled through camp and did nothing in preseason, and thus isn't getting on the field quickly.

 

Of the young WRs Turner inherited.

 

Berrian - He actually developed well, especially when you consider the QB issues, but the decision was simply made that he was not worth the money Minny was prepared to offer. We were willing to re-sign him, and as I recall, for a nice deal, but he was able to get more elsewhere.

 

Gage - As I recall, he couldn't stay healthy, and while he has looked good at times for Tenn, he is a very inconsistent WR who has continued to deal w/ injury issues that knock him out of several games a year. He has been a starter for Tenn, but IMHO, that has as much to do w/ a lack of WR talent in Tenn as anything. A rookie this year has outplayed him, and before long, Gage could very well find himself in a depth role as Tenn improves their WR corp.

 

Wade was a decent WR, but (a) i think fans forget he was cut more due to his fumbles and issues on special teams. I think the staff tried to make a statement by cutting him and ( I have made this argument before, but the truth is, he has never really developed into a better WR since leaving the bears. He has seen increased snaps, which led to slightly better stats, but he has never really developed into much more than a depth chart WR.

 

IMHO, when I look at our inability to find WR talent, I think it comes down to two things.

 

(a) It is very hard to develop WR talent when you lack a QB. I think it far more than coincidence that as soon as we get a franchise QB, suddenly we find a rookie and 2nd year WR that look pretty solid.

 

( We have never really made WR a priority.

 

I did some digging and found the WRs drafted by JA and 3 of them are directly connected to Turner:Bennett, Airese Currie and Mark Bradley. The team didn't get much production from any of these guys in their first year and of the 4 WRs drafted before these the team got better first year production from just about all 4 prior to Turner.Berrian,Wade,Gage and Elliott. Of the 4 Elliott is the only one that is no longer playing in the league. So the Bears have drafted 7 WRs under JA and 5 of them are still playing in the league with only one still with the Bears.Of the 4 that got away Wade is the only one who I believe Lovie dismissed because of his constant turnovers on punts, kickoffs and some receptions.So who made the call on letting Bradley,Gage and Berrian go?JA,Lovie,Turner or Drake?We will never know because of how tight lipped this organization is and how the local beat writers don't ask questions like this when interviewing coaches.

 

[defiantgiant]

I've said it before, but I think Darryl Drake does a pretty decent job developing receivers, when you consider the miniscule investment the team has made in the position. With the exception of signing Moose, we've relied mainly on our draft picks (and the occasional no-name free agent) at wideout. The wide receiver position is probably the second biggest gamble in the draft, after quarterback, but a surprising proportion of our recent draft picks have turned out to be at least decent WRs.

 

The thing that I find the most heartening about Knox is that he's playing at all. This team, in the past, seemed way too reluctant to play young receivers. Maybe they're more confident since Cutler arrived, or maybe they've actually figured out that it was a mistake to sit their young guys in favor of the Marty Bookers and Brandon Lloyds of the world. Either way, I'm glad that we're finally treating that position like any other and putting the best guys on the field. I'm excited to see what Hester, Bennett, and Knox can do going forward.

[nfoligno]

1. I am not sold on Drake. I used to call him out as one of the worst, but then began to question how much of the problem was Drake and our WRs, and how much was simply not having a QB. We now have a franchise QB, and suddenly Drake and our young WRs look good? I am not sold on Drake as being a good coach, but no longer view him as a bad coach. Essentially, now w/ a QB on the team, I have given him a blank slate.

 

2. I just do not understand this belief that we "seemed way too reluctant to play young WRs." Bennett was held back. No question. And the staff even admitted that was a mistake. Prior to that, the only WR I think anyone could try to make an argument for would be Bradley, but I would not even agree there either. Bradley got on the field as a rookie, but injuries continued to limit him. By the time fans said he was in Lovie's dog house for unknown reasons, he was well past his rookie games and his being held back was for reasons other than just youth.

 

I would argue we play our young guys, including WRs, at a very high rate. Not only do young players have a chance to get on the field their rookie years, but they have a legit opportunity to start. There are a couple players who fans get caught in their heads (Bradley, Wolfe, Bennett) and generalize to think we don't like to play young guys, but that just isn't the truth.

 

3. With all that said, the fact is, Knox got a chance to play largely due to injury. Aromashodu won the #3 job in camp, and would have been active game one had he not been injured. If that was the case, Knox may not have even been active, much less seen the field as we have thus far only dressed 4 WRs on game day, and one has been Davis who just plays special teams. If Knox did dress, he likely would have been primarily a returner and special teams player rather than seen the field as a WR.

 

Even if that happened, I would argue he wasn't help back due to being a rookie, but simply another young player in DA won the job in camp.

 

I've said it before, but I think Darryl Drake does a pretty decent job developing receivers, when you consider the miniscule investment the team has made in the position. With the exception of signing Moose, we've relied mainly on our draft picks (and the occasional no-name free agent) at wideout. The wide receiver position is probably the second biggest gamble in the draft, after quarterback, but a surprising proportion of our recent draft picks have turned out to be at least decent WRs.

 

The thing that I find the most heartening about Knox is that he's playing at all. This team, in the past, seemed way too reluctant to play young receivers. Maybe they're more confident since Cutler arrived, or maybe they've actually figured out that it was a mistake to sit their young guys in favor of the Marty Bookers and Brandon Lloyds of the world. Either way, I'm glad that we're finally treating that position like any other and putting the best guys on the field. I'm excited to see what Hester, Bennett, and Knox can do going forward.

 

[DABEARSDABOMB]

I did some digging and found the WRs drafted by JA and 3 of them are directly connected to Turner:Bennett, Airese Currie and Mark Bradley. The team didn't get much production from any of these guys in their first year and of the 4 WRs drafted before these the team got better first year production from just about all 4 prior to Turner.Berrian,Wade,Gage and Elliott. Of the 4 Elliott is the only one that is no longer playing in the league. So the Bears have drafted 7 WRs under JA and 5 of them are still playing in the league with only one still with the Bears.Of the 4 that got away Wade is the only one who I believe Lovie dismissed because of his constant turnovers on punts, kickoffs and some receptions.So who made the call on letting Bradley,Gage and Berrian go?JA,Lovie,Turner or Drake?We will never know because of how tight lipped this organization is and how the local beat writers don't ask questions like this when interviewing coaches.

Wasn't Currie hurt his entire Bear career? Bradley pretty much was too so I don't see how you can blame Turner for those two.

[flea]

Currie I believe has just been cut by Hamilton of the CFL

[bowlingtwig]

Currie I believe has just been cut by Hamilton of the CFL

Currie was indeed hurt his entire time with us and I wonder if he was even active for 1 game when he was with us.

[bowlingtwig]

He was selected with the fourth pick of the fifth round of the 2005 NFL Draft out of Clemson University. He spent his entire rookie season in 2005 with the Chicago Bears on injured reserve. In the 2006 season he was again placed on injured reserve on September 29, 2006 soon after playing his first NFL game. He was released on May 7, 2007.

 

Here is the site that I got this from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airese_Currie

[Ed Hochuli 3:16]

Gage would've never been the WR he currently is had he stayed in Chicago. You can say that for Bradley too, and probably Berrian.

['TD']

Bradley looked good with Thigpen last year. Wade has been serviceable to start at other teams he goes too. Gage has looked good with Kerry Collins and so on.

 

I think it's more of a slight on Turner, then Drake or the QB's. Bradley had an instant impact in KC last year.

[nfoligno]

Bradley had an instant impact, and then guess what, he went down with injury. New team, same story. This year, he has been pretty mediocre, and that is with a true stud WR (Bowe) opposite him.

 

Wade is a player I think so many forget what happened. The dude fumbled a ton on returns, and IMHO, was cut for that reason. I would argue Wade was a player that staff cut to make a point as much as anything. As a WR, I would argue he was really no different for us than he has been for other teams.

 

Gage was a decent looking WR for us, but couldn't stay healthy, and was let go. He caught on w/ a good team in Tenn, and when healthy, did look good, but even in Tenn, had health issues. Since his first game, he has sucked this year. I know because the joker is on my FF team.

 

For years, I wanted to rip Turner and Drake as well, but now that we have a legit QB, suddenly our WRs seem to be developing. Maybe the coaches are not great, but at the same time, maybe they are not as bad as perceived.

 

Bradley looked good with Thigpen last year. Wade has been serviceable to start at other teams he goes too. Gage has looked good with Kerry Collins and so on.

 

I think it's more of a slight on Turner, then Drake or the QB's. Bradley had an instant impact in KC last year.

 

[lemonej]

Bradley had an instant impact, and then guess what, he went down with injury. New team, same story. This year, he has been pretty mediocre, and that is with a true stud WR (Bowe) opposite him.

 

Wade is a player I think so many forget what happened. The dude fumbled a ton on returns, and IMHO, was cut for that reason. I would argue Wade was a player that staff cut to make a point as much as anything. As a WR, I would argue he was really no different for us than he has been for other teams.

 

Gage was a decent looking WR for us, but couldn't stay healthy, and was let go. He caught on w/ a good team in Tenn, and when healthy, did look good, but even in Tenn, had health issues. Since his first game, he has sucked this year. I know because the joker is on my FF team.

 

For years, I wanted to rip Turner and Drake as well, but now that we have a legit QB, suddenly our WRs seem to be developing. Maybe the coaches are not great, but at the same time, maybe they are not as bad as perceived.

Nfo I just want to add why I think Wade was let go,He made the same catches that he makes now but what he had that Lovie Smith seems to take issue with is critical turnovers. I believe that he has a similar issue with young players that are oft-injured. This may be the reason why players like Bradley,Gage,Dusty and JD Runnels were given releases or injury settlements. I personnally saw Davis practice at TC and he was brutal. He along with Adrian Petersen are two guys Lovie probably has a special fondness for and Davis may be reaching AP's status as one of the guys that Lovie may find a place for as long as he is the HC. This is just speculation on my part but if I had a street FA that failed at one position(DB) why would I keep him around unless I like having a bunch of "Underdogs" on my team. If you look at our roster this might be what the thinking is.Some of our key players came here unherald.

[madlithuanian]

There does seem to be something that Smith and crew seem to like underdogs, late picks and walk on's... Other than the current underacheiving Harris, who's really a top pick that's kicked butt for us? Not Olsen yet...

 

I've got to be mssing something.... Besides brain-matter.

 

Nfo I just want to add why I think Wade was let go,He made the same catches that he makes now but what he had that Lovie Smith seems to take issue with is critical turnovers. I believe that he has a similar issue with young players that are oft-injured. This may be the reason why players like Bradley,Gage,Dusty and JD Runnels were given releases or injury settlements. I personnally saw Davis practice at TC and he was brutal. He along with Adrian Petersen are two guys Lovie probably has a special fondness for and Davis may be reaching AP's status as one of the guys that Lovie may find a place for as long as he is the HC. This is just speculation on my part but if I had a street FA that failed at one position(DB) why would I keep him around unless I like having a bunch of "Underdogs" on my team. If you look at our roster this might be what the thinking is.Some of our key players came here unherald.

 

[nfoligno]

I think Lovie's love for Davis comes from a couple things. One, heading into the season, we had VERY little experience at the WR position, so I think he viewed Davis as a sefety net. Two, Davis is a special teams ace, and Lovie has been very consistent in demanding depth chart players be capable of playing special teams at a high level, and it isn't just w/ veterans. You look at a safety like Steltz, who has been awful on defense, but is solid on special teams. McBride got the nod after a pretty weak camp because of his play on special teams.

 

Fans love the potential DA or even Rideau bring to a suspect WR corp., but for Lovie, these guys have to make their bones on special teams first, and just haven't been able to do so. Understand, I disagree w/ this. While I realize the need to have a solid special teams, I hate the idea of not giving the nod to players who simply can offer more on offense or defense.

 

As for AP, I think that is a unique situation. He just loves AP, and at times can have blinders on.

 

At the end of the day, I think Lovie simply puts more value in special teams than most fans, thus when Wade not only struggled on special teams, but proved a total liability, he was cut. He may have offered more at WR than some others, but in Lovie's book, a player like Wade must prove himself on special teams, and he did the opposite.

 

Additionally, I think Lovie does have an issue w/ players he can't count on, and injury is a big part of that. Rex is the exception to the rule, but the QB position often is. Players like Bradley and Gage simply couldn't be relied on due to injuries. If you went a bit more back, I think Columbo would be in this category. Lovie seems ready to give the nod to lesser players who he feels he can count on to play an entire season over those who he isn't sure if he can count on for more than a couple plays.

 

Nfo I just want to add why I think Wade was let go,He made the same catches that he makes now but what he had that Lovie Smith seems to take issue with is critical turnovers. I believe that he has a similar issue with young players that are oft-injured. This may be the reason why players like Bradley,Gage,Dusty and JD Runnels were given releases or injury settlements. I personnally saw Davis practice at TC and he was brutal. He along with Adrian Petersen are two guys Lovie probably has a special fondness for and Davis may be reaching AP's status as one of the guys that Lovie may find a place for as long as he is the HC. This is just speculation on my part but if I had a street FA that failed at one position(DB) why would I keep him around unless I like having a bunch of "Underdogs" on my team. If you look at our roster this might be what the thinking is.Some of our key players came here unherald.

 

[lemonej]

I think Lovie's love for Davis comes from a couple things. One, heading into the season, we had VERY little experience at the WR position, so I think he viewed Davis as a sefety net. Two, Davis is a special teams ace, and Lovie has been very consistent in demanding depth chart players be capable of playing special teams at a high level, and it isn't just w/ veterans. You look at a safety like Steltz, who has been awful on defense, but is solid on special teams. McBride got the nod after a pretty weak camp because of his play on special teams.

 

Fans love the potential DA or even Rideau bring to a suspect WR corp., but for Lovie, these guys have to make their bones on special teams first, and just haven't been able to do so. Understand, I disagree w/ this. While I realize the need to have a solid special teams, I hate the idea of not giving the nod to players who simply can offer more on offense or defense.

 

As for AP, I think that is a unique situation. He just loves AP, and at times can have blinders on.

 

At the end of the day, I think Lovie simply puts more value in special teams than most fans, thus when Wade not only struggled on special teams, but proved a total liability, he was cut. He may have offered more at WR than some others, but in Lovie's book, a player like Wade must prove himself on special teams, and he did the opposite.

 

Additionally, I think Lovie does have an issue w/ players he can't count on, and injury is a big part of that. Rex is the exception to the rule, but the QB position often is. Players like Bradley and Gage simply couldn't be relied on due to injuries. If you went a bit more back, I think Columbo would be in this category. Lovie seems ready to give the nod to lesser players who he feels he can count on to play an entire season over those who he isn't sure if he can count on for more than a couple plays.

I'm with you NFO and I also think we should keep an eye on Bowman who has all the talent in the worl but tends to get dinged up a bit.

[nfoligno]

A bit? I swear I cringe everytime I see him even make a tackle.

 

Bowman had numerous injuries in college, which prompted him to drop in the draft. We got him on a flyer basically, taking a later round chance he could avoid the injuries. First season, basically his first game, he goes down for the year. Following season he goes down in camp. I thought he was done when he went down in the other game, but he returned.

 

I agree though. He is a player we took an injury chance on, but has not come close to showing he can avoid the injury. He too could find his way to the Lovie dog house.

 

I have to say, it seems a bit of a conflict to me. Angelo seems to be okay taking draft day risk on injury risk players, but we have a coach who seems to really dislike players w/ such injury risks. Personally, I can't fault Lovie too much on this one. A coach needs to have confidence in a player, and some of the players talked about have not even given coaches a reason to be confident they can stay healthy, much less play well. I really question the number of injury related risks we take on draft day. Some players go down w/ injury after no history, but many of the players we have had injury problems w/ had injury related red flags on draft day.

 

I'm with you NFO and I also think we should keep an eye on Bowman who has all the talent in the worl but tends to get dinged up a bit.

 

[AZ54]

JA said he was changing that aspect (taking players w/ injury history) in the draft this year and he lived up to it, at least until the later rounds. I think it's ok to take a flyer like that because most of the players there have a low ceiling. Why not go after a guy or two with a higher ceiling especially if you already have a good team? Otherwise you tend to end up with mostly practice squad players. You do find the occasional Afalava in there. Knox didn't have injury history but he too was a clear risk/reward type.

 

It will take a few years to see if the new approach proves to be better but so far this year I think it's been good.

 

 

[nfoligno]

I have NO problem w/ a draft pick like, for example, Bowman, who comes w/ an injury red flag, but is a mid 2nd day pick, and thus the risk/reward is solid.

 

I really question Angelo "changing" anything by taking some injury risks this year. IMHO, he has been taking just such risks, injury and other.

 

2004

 

Tommie Harris - Understand, I really liked the pick then, and even called for it, but Harris came w/ questions. He was a rotation player, and had some prior injuries. There were questions then whether or not he could be an everydown player, and that was a prime reason he slipped in the draft.

 

Tank - Tank, as I recall, came w/ both injury and character red flags.

 

2005

 

Benson - Maybe there were no flags at the time, but IMHO, simply coming from the University of Texas should carry a flag all it owns, just like QBs from Florida and RBs from Penn State.

 

Bradley - Injury and playing time red flags. Never started in college, and was a #3 WR w/ raw talent, but part of the reason he had been slow to develop was numerous minor injury set backs.

 

2006

 

Dusty - character red flags after several alcohol related incidents.

 

2007

 

Nothing I really recall

 

2008

 

DJ Moore - Injury related.

 

If we wanted to add level of competition, we could add numerous other small school players, but my point here is, Angelo has not been scared to take risks, even w/ his earlier picks. W/ the exception of Moore, I only looked at first day picks. On the 2nd day, I think there is little argument against the risk/reward factor in looking at a high ceiling players who has red flags, but we have also done so in day one.

 

I am not trying to blast my new BFF for taking risks, but just questioning the idea he has avoided such risks in the past. I don't think Angelo has ever been one to really go the safe route in the draft.

 

 

 

JA said he was changing that aspect (taking players w/ injury history) in the draft this year and he lived up to it, at least until the later rounds. I think it's ok to take a flyer like that because most of the players there have a low ceiling. Why not go after a guy or two with a higher ceiling especially if you already have a good team? Otherwise you tend to end up with mostly practice squad players. You do find the occasional Afalava in there. Knox didn't have injury history but he too was a clear risk/reward type.

 

It will take a few years to see if the new approach proves to be better but so far this year I think it's been good.