jason Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 Nearly every measurable shows the Bears as having one of the worst OLs in the NFL. Pro Football Focus does individual and unit measurements, showing the Bears as the worst. Their Pass Block Efficiency shows that Garza wasn't as great at Center as some would believe. It should come as no surprise that Webb is one of the worst OTs, which I guess is a step up from begin the absolute worst RT in 2010 (Pssst, Omiyale was one of the worst LTs that year). On top of that, NFL.com shows the Bears OL as sixth worst in the NFL, 5th in sacks, and 5th in QB Hits. What's very interesting is the Power Left Stat, that shows a severe deficiency when attempting to get the difficult yards going left. When you combine the PBE from Pro Football Focus and the Power Left from NFL.com, it's no wonder ESPN classifies Webb as the worst full time starting LT in the NFL (though I suspect they could be referencing the 2010 figures and simply applying them to 2011 since he was bad enough not to shake the reputation as one of the worst OTs in the NFL). Finally, Football Outsiders gives a ton of reasons why OL should be first on the list, namely that the Bears are 9th worst in run blocking and 2nd worst in pass protection. I found the Stuffed statistic unsurprising, as the Bears OL last year was either boom or bust, with RBs being met in the backfield far too often (apparently at 24.1% of the runs). Will scheme change help this year? Yes. Will more experience help this year? Yes. Is the OL still weak, and one of the worst in the NFL? Yes. Is Webb still incredibly weak, and undeserving of a starting LT spot? Yes. No comparable stats exist that show the Bears' WRs are as bad at being WRs as the Bears' OL, and in particular Webb, are at being OLinemen. In my opinion, the facts bear out reality in this situation, and the Bears need a LT more than a WR. Since one isn't available in FA, it makes sense to land the WR (or two) in FA, and grab the LT prospect in the first. If one of the top four drops to the Bears, it should be a no brainer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 Compelling case for certain. However, I'm fairly certain if a similar study were done on WR's, we'd be ranked nearly as bad if not worse. I personally would love to see WR addressed in FA, and then take on best available in the draft with an eye on OL. We honestly have so many holes, than many a position would be OK to see. So much simply depends on what we do in FA. I feel that our OL, while still not good, can do OK. Our WR's...especially w/o Knox more than likely leave very little to be desired besides Bennett. We need to do something. And truly on both sides of the ball... Emery has his work cut out for him. Nearly every measurable shows the Bears as having one of the worst OLs in the NFL. Pro Football Focus does individual and unit measurements, showing the Bears as the worst. Their Pass Block Efficiency shows that Garza wasn't as great at Center as some would believe. It should come as no surprise that Webb is one of the worst OTs, which I guess is a step up from begin the absolute worst RT in 2010 (Pssst, Omiyale was one of the worst LTs that year). On top of that, NFL.com shows the Bears OL as sixth worst in the NFL, 5th in sacks, and 5th in QB Hits. What's very interesting is the Power Left Stat, that shows a severe deficiency when attempting to get the difficult yards going left. When you combine the PBE from Pro Football Focus and the Power Left from NFL.com, it's no wonder ESPN classifies Webb as the worst full time starting LT in the NFL (though I suspect they could be referencing the 2010 figures and simply applying them to 2011 since he was bad enough not to shake the reputation as one of the worst OTs in the NFL). Finally, Football Outsiders gives a ton of reasons why OL should be first on the list, namely that the Bears are 9th worst in run blocking and 2nd worst in pass protection. I found the Stuffed statistic unsurprising, as the Bears OL last year was either boom or bust, with RBs being met in the backfield far too often (apparently at 24.1% of the runs). Will scheme change help this year? Yes. Will more experience help this year? Yes. Is the OL still weak, and one of the worst in the NFL? Yes. Is Webb still incredibly weak, and undeserving of a starting LT spot? Yes. No comparable stats exist that show the Bears' WRs are as bad at being WRs as the Bears' OL, and in particular Webb, are at being OLinemen. In my opinion, the facts bear out reality in this situation, and the Bears need a LT more than a WR. Since one isn't available in FA, it makes sense to land the WR (or two) in FA, and grab the LT prospect in the first. If one of the top four drops to the Bears, it should be a no brainer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bears4Ever_34 Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 http://stats.washingtonpost.com/fb/protect...l&year=2011 That site is pretty interesting in how they rate an offensive lines performance. Were ranked last out of 32 NFL teams. Pretty bad stuff, yet the number is also deceptive because of the impact from Cutler's injury. Before our best player went down we were ranked in the middle of the pack, I believe it was around 17th after San Diego. Don't think it was a coincidence that the numbers were drastically altered when your backup quarterback was one of the worst in the league. Hell we went into the negatives after Cutler went down 3 times in the last 5 weeks of the season! Make no mistake, we need offensive line help but it's not more important than getting quality WR's. Were not rolling out Devin Hester, Dane Sanzenbacher, and Earl Bennett out there as our starting unit next season. We need talented bodies and bodies in general with Knox's status up in the air. The new scheme will definitely help the line get better just by virtue of less 7 step drops and changing the pocket, you know, like most other teams in the league do. Thankfully we should have a legit shot at a veteran WR in free agency so you could kill two birds with one stone if you wanted to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted February 23, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 Compelling case for certain. However, I'm fairly certain if a similar study were done on WR's, we'd be ranked nearly as bad if not worse. I personally would love to see WR addressed in FA, and then take on best available in the draft with an eye on OL. We honestly have so many holes, than many a position would be OK to see. So much simply depends on what we do in FA. I feel that our OL, while still not good, can do OK. Our WR's...especially w/o Knox more than likely leave very little to be desired besides Bennett. We need to do something. And truly on both sides of the ball... Emery has his work cut out for him. I welcome a similar, stat-based WR study that can paint a picture as bleak. Considering Knox was 2nd in YPC for starting WRs, and Roy Williams (a player most on this board hate) had nearly identical stats to Mario Manningham (a player many seem to want), Hester is still dynamic and capable of a TD on every play, and Bennett has some of the most reliable hands in the NFL, I just don't see the comparison to being equal. Is an upgrade needed? Absolutely. Would I rather see a WR in FA? You bet. But LT has got to be a bigger need in terms of which part of the team has an actual flaw. Interesting Stat: When Earl Bennett had more than one catch last year, the Bears were 5-0 When Earl Bennett had one catch or less last year, the Bears were 0-6. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 If I find that kind of analysis, I'll definitely post it. But, as of now, I only have the smell test. What Manningham brought to the Giants and what Williams brought to us was very different. Stats don't tell the whole story. I make no bones that Bennett is a key WR for us. I think he's really the only fairly young legit WR we have. Sadly, I am excluding Knox in conversation because I fear he may never return to football. I just hoe the young man can lead a normal life. Hester is simply a wild card. Sometimes he does great stuff, sometime he does dumb stuff. The epitome of unreliable. I want a FA stud WR. Not in the draft personally. I want the bird in hand. For an OL, I'd prefer the draft pick. So, really in a nutshell, I think you and I are in agreement. We just differ in the extent of matters... I welcome a similar, stat-based WR study that can paint a picture as bleak. Considering Knox was 2nd in YPC for starting WRs, and Roy Williams (a player most on this board hate) had nearly identical stats to Mario Manningham (a player many seem to want), Hester is still dynamic and capable of a TD on every play, and Bennett has some of the most reliable hands in the NFL, I just don't see the comparison to being equal. Is an upgrade needed? Absolutely. Would I rather see a WR in FA? You bet. But LT has got to be a bigger need in terms of which part of the team has an actual flaw. Interesting Stat: When Earl Bennett had more than one catch last year, the Bears were 5-0 When Earl Bennett had one catch or less last year, the Bears were 0-6. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 Nearly every measurable shows the Bears as having one of the worst OLs in the NFL. Pro Football Focus does individual and unit measurements, showing the Bears as the worst. It's amazing that the Giants won despite the 2nd worst O-Line in the league. It seems that some of these numbers don't reflect true output because Forte was leading the league in total yards before going down and Cutler was not getting sacked nearly as much as previous years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mongo3451 Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 We got rid of the biggest detriment to our OL already. Martz. I agree OL needs addressed at the tackle position still. We have a tree trunk on one side and a potential gimp on the other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balta1701-A Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 We got rid of the biggest detriment to our OL already. Martz. I agree OL needs addressed at the tackle position still. We have a tree trunk on one side and a potential gimp on the other. Frank Omiyale disagrees. I think Mike Martz could block better than him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 You know, I was having a perfectly nice day until you brought up Matador Omiyale... Buzzkill! Frank Omiyale disagrees. I think Mike Martz could block better than him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Hochuli 3:16 Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 If Jonathan Martin falls to the Bears, he just has to be the pick. Granted, this is counting on the fact that a big time WR will be signed in FA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 If Jonathan Martin falls to the Bears, he just has to be the pick. Granted, this is counting on the fact that a big time WR will be signed in FA. There is not many options in fagency at LT, so hopefully one of the tip 4 tackles are there at 19.I think LT is our highest priority, We have to have an impact player at .19 so if one of LTs aren't there we can't make a reach. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted February 24, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 24, 2012 It's amazing that the Giants won despite the 2nd worst O-Line in the league. It seems that some of these numbers don't reflect true output because Forte was leading the league in total yards before going down and Cutler was not getting sacked nearly as much as previous years. It actually is amazing. I still can't believe they won. But when your team is solid is so many other areas, and has a group of DEs that rape opposing QBs, it makes things a little easier. As for the stats not reflecting truth, we all know they don't tell the whole picture. That's why I included so much from so many sites. The Forte total yards could have been more a product of the fact that the Bears couldn't pass block than anything else. Him being the #1 RB, without a true #2 taking carries (which is so popular today), means he's in the game for most of the snaps. So he gets a heaping portion of the rushing attempts, and since the OL was so bad at pass blocking, a ton of passes thrown to him as an outlet. It was/is no shock that he had so much impact on the Bears' offense. Regarding Cutler, it doesn't matter if the number got slightly better; it was still horrible. Going from really horrible to horrible doesn't help the team that much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted February 24, 2012 Report Share Posted February 24, 2012 Watching Moon Mullin on Trib live last night, he suspects the Bears will go WR in FA, then draft a pass rusher for Smith. I'm not sure what his track record is for predictions, but it makes sense given a lot of what we know... It basically makes the assumption that Smith needs to get more for his D, and puts in a solid WR for the O. Thus, both sides of the ball are addressed. Sadly, that means the best best we hope for is an OL in FA or in rounds 2 or lower. It actually is amazing. I still can't believe they won. But when your team is solid is so many other areas, and has a group of DEs that rape opposing QBs, it makes things a little easier. As for the stats not reflecting truth, we all know they don't tell the whole picture. That's why I included so much from so many sites. The Forte total yards could have been more a product of the fact that the Bears couldn't pass block than anything else. Him being the #1 RB, without a true #2 taking carries (which is so popular today), means he's in the game for most of the snaps. So he gets a heaping portion of the rushing attempts, and since the OL was so bad at pass blocking, a ton of passes thrown to him as an outlet. It was/is no shock that he had so much impact on the Bears' offense. Regarding Cutler, it doesn't matter if the number got slightly better; it was still horrible. Going from really horrible to horrible doesn't help the team that much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DABEARSDABOMB Posted February 24, 2012 Report Share Posted February 24, 2012 If Jonathan Martin falls to the Bears, he just has to be the pick. Granted, this is counting on the fact that a big time WR will be signed in FA. Absolutely. I'm all over Martin if he's there. I'd even trade a few spots to get him. Rarely are you going to find a franchise left tackle outside of the top 20 picks or so in the draft. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted February 24, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 24, 2012 Watching Moon Mullin on Trib live last night, he suspects the Bears will go WR in FA, then draft a pass rusher for Smith. I'm not sure what his track record is for predictions, but it makes sense given a lot of what we know... It basically makes the assumption that Smith needs to get more for his D, and puts in a solid WR for the O. Thus, both sides of the ball are addressed. Sadly, that means the best best we hope for is an OL in FA or in rounds 2 or lower. Which would fall right in line with the Lovie M.O. of paying more attention to the D than he does the O. Whenever there is a split, the advantage always goes to his defense. This is one of the most aggravating things about the Lovie Smith regime, and the few before him. They seem to think because they are defensive coaches it makes more sense for the team to be defensive oriented, and it's almost always at a detriment to the offense. Just once I'd love to see the Bears hire someone with an extensive record of offensive success as their HC. At the same time, I'd love to see that same coach just go full retard and draft the Bears an offensive machine we've been talking and hoping about for...well...over 20 years. This league is unmistakeably an offensive-oriented league, with most of the benefits going towards the side of the ball that scores and has skill positions. Teams in the playoffs and their offensive rank: New Orleans - 1 New England - 2 Green Bay - 3 Detroit - 5 New York Giants - 8 Atlanta - 10 Pittsburgh - 12 Houston - 13 Baltimore - 15 Cincinnati - 20 Denver - 23 San Fran - 26 Which two teams didn't have a chance in hell of winning it all? Cincy and Denver. San Fran had a chance, but mostly because they had the #4 defense. Other than that, each team had an offense in the top half of the league and were an offensive heavy team. The longer the Bears organization ignores or dismisses that, the longer the Bears will be an up-and-down or noncompetitive team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted February 24, 2012 Report Share Posted February 24, 2012 Yeah, that's pretty much how Mullin described it w/o coming all out and saying it regarding the Smith MO. I fully agree with your assessment. Which would fall right in line with the Lovie M.O. of paying more attention to the D than he does the O. Whenever there is a split, the advantage always goes to his defense. This is one of the most aggravating things about the Lovie Smith regime, and the few before him. They seem to think because they are defensive coaches it makes more sense for the team to be defensive oriented, and it's almost always at a detriment to the offense. Just once I'd love to see the Bears hire someone with an extensive record of offensive success as their HC. At the same time, I'd love to see that same coach just go full retard and draft the Bears an offensive machine we've been talking and hoping about for...well...over 20 years. This league is unmistakeably an offensive-oriented league, with most of the benefits going towards the side of the ball that scores and has skill positions. Teams in the playoffs and their offensive rank: New Orleans - 1 New England - 2 Green Bay - 3 Detroit - 5 New York Giants - 8 Atlanta - 10 Pittsburgh - 12 Houston - 13 Baltimore - 15 Cincinnati - 20 Denver - 23 San Fran - 26 Which two teams didn't have a chance in hell of winning it all? Cincy and Denver. San Fran had a chance, but mostly because they had the #4 defense. Other than that, each team had an offense in the top half of the league and were an offensive heavy team. The longer the Bears organization ignores or dismisses that, the longer the Bears will be an up-and-down or noncompetitive team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bears4Ever_34 Posted February 24, 2012 Report Share Posted February 24, 2012 Lovie made some comments yesterday about needing a bigger receiver and having better depth at the quarterback and safety positions. I believe he was interviewed at the combine. "A quarterback doesn't have to have that ball right in the perfect spot every time if you have a big body to throw to,'' Smith said. "Most guys would tell you they would like to have big receivers, but as much as anything you would like to have good receivers that can do something with the ball." http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/footb...0,145831.column Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockren Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 Watching Moon Mullin on Trib live last night, he suspects the Bears will go WR in FA, then draft a pass rusher for Smith. I'm not sure what his track record is for predictions, but it makes sense given a lot of what we know... I will be irate if the Bears draft a DE in the 1st Round. The Bears have paid a premium to get Lovie pass rushers throughout his tenure (trading for Wale, Adams and giving 90 million to Peppers). I'm not critical of the Adams move as I loved it and believed it would have worked....God rest his soul. With that being said- if the Bears constantly have to make moves to get pass rushers while he inherited a solid DE in Alex Brown....what does that say about Lovie's ability to develop talent? At some point- if Lovie is such a defensive guru, he'll have to make it work with having Peppers on the team and develop a Corey Wootten type guy to play on the other side of the HOF DE. I know I'm getting worked up over nothing, but the Bears would be admitting Lovie's lack of player development in regards to DEs if they have to draft him a pass rusher in RD1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 I will be irate if the Bears draft a DE in the 1st Round. The Bears have paid a premium to get Lovie pass rushers throughout his tenure (trading for Wale, Adams and giving 90 million to Peppers). I'm not critical of the Adams move as I loved it and believed it would have worked....God rest his soul. With that being said- if the Bears constantly have to make moves to get pass rushers while he inherited a solid DE in Alex Brown....what does that say about Lovie's ability to develop talent? At some point- if Lovie is such a defensive guru, he'll have to make it work with having Peppers on the team and develop a Corey Wootten type guy to play on the other side of the HOF DE. I know I'm getting worked up over nothing, but the Bears would be admitting Lovie's lack of player development in regards to DEs if they have to draft him a pass rusher in RD1. Of course they need a DE, they need lots of spots filled, but this year you have to cater to Cutler. You add WRs and OLs, and do the best you can on the defense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted February 26, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 I will be irate if the Bears draft a DE in the 1st Round. The Bears have paid a premium to get Lovie pass rushers throughout his tenure (trading for Wale, Adams and giving 90 million to Peppers). I'm not critical of the Adams move as I loved it and believed it would have worked....God rest his soul. With that being said- if the Bears constantly have to make moves to get pass rushers while he inherited a solid DE in Alex Brown....what does that say about Lovie's ability to develop talent? At some point- if Lovie is such a defensive guru, he'll have to make it work with having Peppers on the team and develop a Corey Wootten type guy to play on the other side of the HOF DE. I know I'm getting worked up over nothing, but the Bears would be admitting Lovie's lack of player development in regards to DEs if they have to draft him a pass rusher in RD1. A-Freaking-Men Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted February 26, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 Of course they need a DE, they need lots of spots filled, but this year you have to cater to Cutler. You add WRs and OLs, and do the best you can on the defense. They don't need one in the first round. If they do, then it's exactly as rockren says: a black mark on Lovie's inability to develop a DE despite having invested far more in various ways into the position than other commonly neglected positions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LT2_3 Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 They don't need one in the first round. If they do, then it's exactly as rockren says: a black mark on Lovie's inability to develop a DE despite having invested far more in various ways into the position than other commonly neglected positions. Other than trading a second round pick for a guy that died and spending a couple of 4ths in recent years, just exactly what has been invested in the 2nd DE position recently? I think that Wooten and Melton have done relatively well for 4th rounders. I'm certainly not a huge Lovie fan, but I think people are being a little harsh on this. As for what to do in the first round, I only want a LT if they are a legit LT. I'm not convinced that Williams or Carimi couldn't do the job in a scheme not designed to get bad stats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradjock Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 Other than trading a second round pick for a guy that died and spending a couple of 4ths in recent years, just exactly what has been invested in the 2nd DE position recently? I think that Wooten and Melton have done relatively well for 4th rounders. Wootton showed flashes year #1. Being healthy, I thought he'd be great in year 2, but he was only active 7 games and did nothing. He could get cut this year. Melton looks great at times, but how many times have we seen a young DT with potential that amounts to nothing? I'm think of Dvoracek & Marcus Harrison. D-line was easily JA's greatest failure. He drafts a d-lineman with a top for pick every year but 2005. Often years we drafted two. We still have to sign guys like Peppers and Adams. We're basically left hoping Paea and Melton develop. As for the #2 DE, we have devoted that much to it, but it shouldn't be that hard playing opposite of Peppers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DABEARSDABOMB Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 Other than trading a second round pick for a guy that died and spending a couple of 4ths in recent years, just exactly what has been invested in the 2nd DE position recently? I think that Wooten and Melton have done relatively well for 4th rounders. Wootton showed flashes year #1. Being healthy, I thought he'd be great in year 2, but he was only active 7 games and did nothing. He could get cut this year. Melton looks great at times, but how many times have we seen a young DT with potential that amounts to nothing? I'm think of Dvoracek & Marcus Harrison. D-line was easily JA's greatest failure. He drafts a d-lineman with a top for pick every year but 2005. Often years we drafted two. We still have to sign guys like Peppers and Adams. We're basically left hoping Paea and Melton develop. As for the #2 DE, we have devoted that much to it, but it shouldn't be that hard playing opposite of Peppers. They are 4th round picks though. Melton looks like he can be an above average DT in this league. If you get that out of a 4th round pick, you hit the jackpot. In terms of Wooten, he might get cut. Clearly injuries got him, but I haven't exactly since the Bears invest a top pick in a dlineman since Tommie (and prior to that Michael Haynes, who was drafted based upon Jauron's system, IIRC). Heck, as a franchise, the Bears haven't had many draft picks in the past few years that were in meaningful spots (e.g,. 1st/2nd round + early 3rd round). This year they will actually be in a decent position and it will be interesting to see what happens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockren Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 Other than trading a second round pick for a guy that died and spending a couple of 4ths in recent years, just exactly what has been invested in the 2nd DE position recently? I think that Wooten and Melton have done relatively well for 4th rounders. I'm certainly not a huge Lovie fan, but I think people are being a little harsh on this. It isn't an attack on Lovie as much as it is the organization should have more faith in him to develop a pass rusher on the outside....especially with Marinelli to help things progress. I should have pointed out Lovie and the staff has done a great job with Izzy in making him an okay DE opposite Peppers. I even like how Henry looks when the move him outside and allow him to pin his ears back on passing downs. I feel Lovie has done well in regards to his overall work in identifying talent to work with, but management bought him Peppers. Lovie needs to fill in the blanks with exhausting other avenues instead of using a 1st Round pick on a pass rusher. 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.