Ed Hochuli 3:16 Posted October 9, 2012 Report Share Posted October 9, 2012 1. Chance Warmack, OG, Alabama --Assuming the Bears are selecting in the 20's, this guy would be a great pick. It's clear that Rachal isn't the answer. Spencer sucks. Louis is in a contract year. At 6'4" 320, Warmack is arguably the best OL on the best team in college football. 2. William Gholston, DE, Michigan State --The Bears have never been shy about selecting DL, and why would they? Melton's in a contract year, Peppers has been silent since week 2 it seems, McClellin is getting there (slowly), Idonije is old, and Wootton could get hurt at any time. Gholston is a freak physically (6'7" 280) who's had a down year thus far but last year was a beast. 4. Jelani Jenkins, OLB, Florida --Jenkins is a really quick and physical OLB. Roach has been solid this year, and Briggs hasn't lost a step, but for how much longer? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted October 9, 2012 Report Share Posted October 9, 2012 1. Chance Warmack, OG, Alabama --Assuming the Bears are selecting in the 20's, this guy would be a great pick. It's clear that Rachal isn't the answer. Spencer sucks. Louis is in a contract year. At 6'4" 320, Warmack is arguably the best OL on the best team in college football. 2. William Gholston, DE, Michigan State --The Bears have never been shy about selecting DL, and why would they? Melton's in a contract year, Peppers has been silent since week 2 it seems, McClellin is getting there (slowly), Idonije is old, and Wootton could get hurt at any time. Gholston is a freak physically (6'7" 280) who's had a down year thus far but last year was a beast. 4. Jelani Jenkins, OLB, Florida --Jenkins is a really quick and physical OLB. Roach has been solid this year, and Briggs hasn't lost a step, but for how much longer? Seething hate. No LT despite it being a banner year. Although, I do likc Warmack. Your draft, despite frustrating me, looks like a Lovie Smith draft. I know this is very unlikely, but I'd love to see the Bears go OL in rounds one and two. Even more unlikely, I'd love to see the picks come from the same team. 1. Travis Frederick, OG, Wisconsin 2. Ricky Wagner, OT, Wisconsin Wisconsin is known as an offensive line factory, the Bears already have Carimi (who looks promising despite his two False Starts this past week), both of the positions on the left side need to be fixed, the cohesion between the two Wisconsin guys (really three) would go a long way towards assuaging the difficulties often associated with rookies, and it gets the Bears set for several years. But you're probably right, no way Lovie passes on DL help in the first three rounds. God forbid the offensive line get the same attention. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balta1701-A Posted October 9, 2012 Report Share Posted October 9, 2012 But you're probably right, no way Lovie passes on DL help in the first three rounds. God forbid the offensive line get the same attention. People make the same comments about the Bears stacking up on D-Lines and safeties all the time... but honestly...have you seen the Bears D Line and safeties performing lately? It's been...quality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted October 9, 2012 Report Share Posted October 9, 2012 1. Chance Warmack, OG, Alabama --Assuming the Bears are selecting in the 20's, this guy would be a great pick. It's clear that Rachal isn't the answer. Spencer sucks. Louis is in a contract year. At 6'4" 320, Warmack is arguably the best OL on the best team in college football. 2. William Gholston, DE, Michigan State --The Bears have never been shy about selecting DL, and why would they? Melton's in a contract year, Peppers has been silent since week 2 it seems, McClellin is getting there (slowly), Idonije is old, and Wootton could get hurt at any time. Gholston is a freak physically (6'7" 280) who's had a down year thus far but last year was a beast. 4. Jelani Jenkins, OLB, Florida --Jenkins is a really quick and physical OLB. Roach has been solid this year, and Briggs hasn't lost a step, but for how much longer? Brian, I was thinking the same thing, lol. Will post mine at lunch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted October 9, 2012 Report Share Posted October 9, 2012 People make the same comments about the Bears stacking up on D-Lines and safeties all the time... but honestly...have you seen the Bears D Line and safeties performing lately? It's been...quality. Yes, I HAVE. Which is why it makes sense to continually draft a position for success. Which is why the DL is doing well. The comment I made is not a disagreement with the notion that continuously drafting players for a specific group is likely to create success. That's just common sense. The problem is when other positions are neglected at the expense of the the "favored" position. Which is also why the inverse of the drafting strategy is true (i.e. don't draft it that much and it likely will not succeed), and why the OL has sucked for five years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bears4Ever_34 Posted October 9, 2012 Report Share Posted October 9, 2012 I'm kinda thinking that MLB is going to be one of the top priorities next year in the draft, believe it or not. Have you guys seen how bad Urlacher has been? The guy can't change directions and has been terrible in pursuit, because of that knee. I think this may be the last year for him as a Bear. If not, the team still needs to find that next heir apparent sooner than later. Just overall youth on the defense is much needed. It's great that the D is playing as well as they are now, but pretty soon here we're going to have to replace Lance Briggs, and Tillman, Peppers, and Urlacher. I don't know about you, but I don't see anybody on the roster right now, that's ready to replace any of those guys, and that's a big deal, because if not, this defense will SUCK. LT, if not #1, it's 1B. I don't think the Bears have as much of an "Offensive Line" problem as they have a "Left tackle" problem. Of course, Carimi is still essentially a rookie, but the guys on the interior are not an issue. It's going to be hard to find quality out there though, because the league is being depleted of great young OL talent. Offensive line has become a league wide epidemic. It seems like every other week we're playing a team with troubles up front. So if the Bears are going after a LT in the 1st next year, they better be damn sure it's the right one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted October 9, 2012 Report Share Posted October 9, 2012 The biggest need is OL for sure, but then after that, I could see LB or DB. Interesting that I have seen a few early Mock Drafts having us take Manti Te'o in the first. If he can take over for Urlacher in a year or two, that would be a nice pick, but I don't think he will be there. Most of the mocks have us picking around 20, and I see us picking around 32. For the first round, I would look at: Chance Warmack, G David Amerson, CB Barrett Jones, G/C/OT 2nd round: Larry Warford, G Ricky Wagner, OT Terry Hawthorne, CB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASHKUM BEAR Posted October 9, 2012 Report Share Posted October 9, 2012 I would be happy with the draft addressed like this: RD 1 = ODAY ABOUSHI OLT 6-6 310 VIRGINIA RD 2 = KEVIN REDDICK ILB 6-3 240 NORTH CAROLINA RD 3 = TRADE (BRANDON MARSHALL) RD 4 = ALVIN BAILEY OG 6-5 319 ARKANSAS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted October 9, 2012 Report Share Posted October 9, 2012 I would be happy with the draft addressed like this: RD 3 = TRADE (BRANDON MARSHALL) I am not trading Marshall for a 3rd, sorry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted October 10, 2012 Report Share Posted October 10, 2012 I'm kinda thinking that MLB is going to be one of the top priorities next year in the draft, believe it or not. Have you guys seen how bad Urlacher has been? The guy can't change directions and has been terrible in pursuit, because of that knee. I think this may be the last year for him as a Bear. If not, the team still needs to find that next heir apparent sooner than later. Just overall youth on the defense is much needed. It's great that the D is playing as well as they are now, but pretty soon here we're going to have to replace Lance Briggs, and Tillman, Peppers, and Urlacher. I don't know about you, but I don't see anybody on the roster right now, that's ready to replace any of those guys, and that's a big deal, because if not, this defense will SUCK. LT, if not #1, it's 1B. I don't think the Bears have as much of an "Offensive Line" problem as they have a "Left tackle" problem. Of course, Carimi is still essentially a rookie, but the guys on the interior are not an issue. It's going to be hard to find quality out there though, because the league is being depleted of great young OL talent. Offensive line has become a league wide epidemic. It seems like every other week we're playing a team with troubles up front. So if the Bears are going after a LT in the 1st next year, they better be damn sure it's the right one. Wouldn't you also say they have a LG problem? And a very-near-future Center problem? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balta1701-A Posted October 10, 2012 Report Share Posted October 10, 2012 Wouldn't you also say they have a LG problem? And a very-near-future Center problem? Do you really think a Center is a position they should be addressing in the top 2-3 rounds this year? Certainly depth there is fine, but you can find centers late in the draft, or by moving people there, or fairly cheaply in free agency. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted October 10, 2012 Report Share Posted October 10, 2012 Do you really think a Center is a position they should be addressing in the top 2-3 rounds this year? Certainly depth there is fine, but you can find centers late in the draft, or by moving people there, or fairly cheaply in free agency. very-near-future Center problem That means it's not an immediate problem. But it's certainly going to become a problem; Garza can't play forever. And you may be able to find cheap Centers in FA or late in the draft, but you get what you pay for. If you look at the previous post I think thet left side of the line needs priority over Center....as well as a few other positions. Center is not a need right now, but give it two years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balta1701-A Posted October 10, 2012 Report Share Posted October 10, 2012 If you look at the previous post I think thet left side of the line needs priority over Center....as well as a few other positions. Center is not a need right now, but give it two years. Great. Try to grab a guy in the 5th/6th round and count him as depth/an understudy/another backup guard for those years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bears4Ever_34 Posted October 11, 2012 Report Share Posted October 11, 2012 Wouldn't you also say they have a LG problem? And a very-near-future Center problem? I don't think it's that big of an issue. You don't generally spend first round picks on centers anyways. I can live with a LG that's marginally serviceable, as long as he's not blowing things up... Replacing Jamarcus Webb is really my only major concern on the o-line right now. Maybe later Carimi might become a concern if he turns out to be bad. I'm not advocating against drafting a center or a guard, just not with the first couple of picks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted October 11, 2012 Report Share Posted October 11, 2012 I don't think it's that big of an issue. You don't generally spend first round picks on centers anyways. I can live with a LG that's marginally serviceable, as long as he's not blowing things up... Replacing Jamarcus Webb is really my only major concern on the o-line right now. Maybe later Carimi might become a concern if he turns out to be bad. I'm not advocating against drafting a center or a guard, just not with the first couple of picks. That philosophy is what got us in this poor situation to begin with. Getting by with marginally serviceable offensive lineman has almost turned Jay Cutler into David Carr. It's time to retire that line of thought. The OL needs just as much attention as any other aspect of the team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balta1701-A Posted October 11, 2012 Report Share Posted October 11, 2012 That philosophy is what got us in this poor situation to begin with. Getting by with marginally serviceable offensive lineman has almost turned Jay Cutler into David Carr. It's time to retire that line of thought. The OL needs just as much attention as any other aspect of the team. To be fair..."the Bears last 2 first round picks before Shea, along with a couple of late rounders and several free agent signings including a blocking TE" is a fair amount of attention. The problem out of there is that the 2 first rounders haven't yet performed like first rounders. One of them was hurt all last year and so is currently making his rookie mistakes, the other one looks like a goner. And for that reason perhaps more than any other, the GM who did those drafts is gone. If the Bears had a "Hit" on Williams, their line looks solid right now, and all people are asking for is "guys who can step in a year or two down the road or in the case of injury". Another thought edit: Perhaps part of the difference is that with the O-line, the bears have tried to plug in first round talent to basically try to go for the moon, while on the D, the Bears have added more players overall, but fewer with first round talent. If a 3rd round/2nd round D-Line or safety pick winds up released in 2 years it stings but it doesn't kill (The Bears have had several of those). But when a first round pick busts...that is a real killer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucky Luciano Posted October 11, 2012 Report Share Posted October 11, 2012 very-near-future Center problem That means it's not an immediate problem. But it's certainly going to become a problem; Garza can't play forever. And you may be able to find cheap Centers in FA or late in the draft, but you get what you pay for. If you look at the previous post I think thet left side of the line needs priority over Center....as well as a few other positions. Center is not a need right now, but give it two years. i agree that center is a need and have been hoping a good one was drafted in rounds 1-3 over the last 3 years. i don't agree that it is not an immediate problem. those who think you just draft an O lineman and plug him in the same season and get pro-bowl results are kidding themselves (except in rare circumstances). this goes for not only tackles and guards but more importantly for centers. these are the guys that call the signals at the LOS for blocking assignments and blitz pickups. it takes a combination of brains, athletic ability and experience. another misconception is that any old center in any round can step in and you get results that are good enough. in today's rule changed NFL everything is geared for an offensive passing attack that scores points. that means you HAVE to have a solid line up the middle to form the pocket to keep your qb off of the IR especially with the size and speed of today's defensive tackles. we have been lucky over the years in finding good centers in hilgenberg and kreutz (who by the way was a 3rd round pick) but in today's NFL with the number of teams you have to spend the higher picks on your centers and guards to compete or the guy you spend millions on getting and is the only hope to win superbowls is getting his brains beat out like we have seen for the last 5+ years. 15 and more years ago it was unusual to draft guards higher than the 4th round. as free agency has shown in today's nfl you can spend the moon on a good guard and this is why if you want your franchise player to succeed you draft them in rounds 1-3. these type of players you need to have vision and planning to acquire as they take time to develop and draft them a year or two in advance. this is a concept that the bears have utterly failed to realize and leads to the situation we are in NOW. where the guy we haven't had running our offense for the past decades and finally DO get is in a shooting gallery and lucky to still be playing with the amount of punishment he has been dealt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted October 11, 2012 Report Share Posted October 11, 2012 To be fair..."the Bears last 2 first round picks before Shea, along with a couple of late rounders and several free agent signings including a blocking TE" is a fair amount of attention. The problem out of there is that the 2 first rounders haven't yet performed like first rounders. One of them was hurt all last year and so is currently making his rookie mistakes, the other one looks like a goner. And for that reason perhaps more than any other, the GM who did those drafts is gone. If the Bears had a "Hit" on Williams, their line looks solid right now, and all people are asking for is "guys who can step in a year or two down the road or in the case of injury". Another thought edit: Perhaps part of the difference is that with the O-line, the bears have tried to plug in first round talent to basically try to go for the moon, while on the D, the Bears have added more players overall, but fewer with first round talent. If a 3rd round/2nd round D-Line or safety pick winds up released in 2 years it stings but it doesn't kill (The Bears have had several of those). But when a first round pick busts...that is a real killer. Please stop. This has been done time and time and time again. Just grabbing two first rounders is not enough. Especially if one of them was injury prone and questioned out of college. It's the equivalent of betting half of your life savings on one bet, and the other half on a similar bet. Do we have to rehash the "sacks don't equal all pressure problems"-line of reasoning again? Go back and look at the last ten drafts. The OL has been drastically ignored when compared to the DL. And people wonder why the Bears have had good defenses and shit offenses. Since 2003 OT: 5 OG:5 DT:7 DE:9 Since 2003, by round OT: 1,1,7,7,7 OG: 6,7,7,7 DT: 1,2,2,3,3,4,5 DE: 1,1,2,3,4,4,5,5,7 Since 2003, visually OT: XX-,---,---,---,---,---,XXX OG: ---,---,---,---,---,X--,XXX DT: X--,XX-,XX-X--,X--,---,--- DE: XX-,X--,X--,XX-,XX-,---,X-- See the difference? It is not, nor has it been for a decade, a "fair amount of attention." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balta1701-A Posted October 11, 2012 Report Share Posted October 11, 2012 I do like the trick of including 2003, exactly 0 of whose D-lineman are still on the Bears, but excluding 2002, where the Bears picked 2 O-linemen in their first 3 picks. If I equally arbitrarilly pick 2005...and go to the draft value charts, I find that since the 2005 draft, the Bears have spent about 1800 points on O-linemen and 1465 points on D-Linemen. That's what I mean by the Bears having put substantial value into trying to find O-linemen...the value of a first round pick (and in particular, a mid to late first rounder under the previous CBA) is enormous compared to all those other picks. And that's why it's so lethal when you spend 1100 points on Chris Williams and bust. The Bears could have put 2-3 2nd round picks into their offensive line for the value of Chris Williams. And furthermore, the balance is even stronger if you focus more on post 2006 when the Bears O-line needs were more obvious (but when D-line needs became apparent as well) 2004 is the year that really tips the scales the other way since 2004 is when Tommy Harris is drafted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted October 11, 2012 Report Share Posted October 11, 2012 I do like the trick of including 2003, exactly 0 of whose D-lineman are still on the Bears, but excluding 2002, where the Bears picked 2 O-linemen in their first 3 picks. If I equally arbitrarilly pick 2005...and go to the draft value charts, I find that since the 2005 draft, the Bears have spent about 1800 points on O-linemen and 1465 points on D-Linemen. That's what I mean by the Bears having put substantial value into trying to find O-linemen...the value of a first round pick (and in particular, a mid to late first rounder under the previous CBA) is enormous compared to all those other picks. And that's why it's so lethal when you spend 1100 points on Chris Williams and bust. The Bears could have put 2-3 2nd round picks into their offensive line for the value of Chris Williams. And furthermore, the balance is even stronger if you focus more on post 2006 when the Bears O-line needs were more obvious (but when D-line needs became apparent as well) 2004 is the year that really tips the scales the other way since 2004 is when Tommy Harris is drafted. It's not a trick, nor is it arbitrary. It's a round, ten years. It's about the time when they officially started to ignore the OL. The year before that they got OL in the 1st and the 3rd, and the year before that they got help in the 3rd and the 5th. If you were talking about draft value charts, it wasn't clear. Nonetheless, if you were, then you basically agree that it's a completely moronic way of drafting. Anyone with a brain has to know this. And it's specifically the reason why the DL - the much favored of the two lines under the Bears current staff - under Lovie Smith has been much better than the OL. He favors the DL because he's thought of as a defensive coach, and the offense suffers as a direct result. Make no mistake, part of my point is that this strategy is tied to Lovie Smith and the type of team he'd like to have. Regarding your numbers, you are off. Since 2005: OL - Roughly* 1822 DL - Roughly 2134 *Some draft picks no longer exist as slated originally Since 2003: OL - 1821 DL - 4890 Even with the two first rounders, and even excluding 2003 & 2004, the Bears STILL have more DL draft chart value! Considering how ugly the rest of the data looks, this is damning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bears4Ever_34 Posted October 11, 2012 Report Share Posted October 11, 2012 That philosophy is what got us in this poor situation to begin with. Getting by with marginally serviceable offensive lineman has almost turned Jay Cutler into David Carr. It's time to retire that line of thought. The OL needs just as much attention as any other aspect of the team. Well not on the interior it doesn't. The interior is fine. I don't know what you are talking about. If you replace Jamarcus Webb with someone with talent, you suddenly no longer have offensive line issues. I would be furious if a 1st round pick was wasted on a center or guard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lemonej Posted October 11, 2012 Report Share Posted October 11, 2012 The 2 OGs takem in the 1st round of the 2012 draft De Castro and Zeitler were taken towards the end of the round and currently De Castro is on IR and Zeitler is the Bengals starting RG. De Castro was very talked up at draft time by the experts but started to slide as the draft unfolded.Usually the only time a team will draft a OG early 1st round is when they project them to be able to play OT. That was the case when the Chiefs took Brandon Albert who was listed as an OG with the 15th pick. In 2010 the 9ers drafted OG Mike Iupati at 17 and the Steelers followed that with C Marquis Pouncey at 18. Both guys were immediately put into the starting lineup and are solid players. In 2011 Pouncey's twin brother was taken with the 14th pick and he too was special enough to go right into the starting spot. Drafting interior OLinemen earlier than the 20th pick happens rarely and usually is reserved for guys like Albert and Michael Oher who scouts projected to be able to play OT and played the position some in college. Hopefully the Bears will be drafting at the end of the first round and all positions except punter and kicker can be considered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balta1701-A Posted October 11, 2012 Report Share Posted October 11, 2012 Regarding your numbers, you are off. Since 2005: OL - Roughly* 1822 DL - Roughly 2134 The DL shot upwards again from Shea this year, that's the numbers difference. I wasn't counting htis year's draft yet on the "New GM" grounds, did I fail to explain that? My bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted October 11, 2012 Report Share Posted October 11, 2012 It's not a trick, nor is it arbitrary. It's a round, ten years. It's about the time when they officially started to ignore the OL. The year before that they got OL in the 1st and the 3rd, and the year before that they got help in the 3rd and the 5th. If you were talking about draft value charts, it wasn't clear. Nonetheless, if you were, then you basically agree that it's a completely moronic way of drafting. Anyone with a brain has to know this. And it's specifically the reason why the DL - the much favored of the two lines under the Bears current staff - under Lovie Smith has been much better than the OL. He favors the DL because he's thought of as a defensive coach, and the offense suffers as a direct result. Make no mistake, part of my point is that this strategy is tied to Lovie Smith and the type of team he'd like to have. Regarding your numbers, you are off. Since 2005: OL - Roughly* 1822 DL - Roughly 2134 *Some draft picks no longer exist as slated originally Since 2003: OL - 1821 DL - 4890 Even with the two first rounders, and even excluding 2003 & 2004, the Bears STILL have more DL draft chart value! Considering how ugly the rest of the data looks, this is damning. I only look at the first 3 rounds, because those are normally the picks that are expected to start. Rounds 4-7 are more for projects, backups, and ST. Now you can find gems in the later rounds, but the odds are increasingly against you as the picks get later. Just looking at the first 3 rounds since 2005, the Bears selected 6 DL and 2 OL. For the 2 years where the Bears selected OL, they also selected DL in the first 3 rounds. The picks like Dvoracek, Bazuin, Harrison, and Gilbert look really bad now, and weren't that great back then. Going forward, OL should be addressed annually in the first 3 rounds, with at least one pick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASHKUM BEAR Posted October 11, 2012 Report Share Posted October 11, 2012 I only look at the first 3 rounds, because those are normally the picks that are expected to start. Rounds 4-7 are more for projects, backups, and ST. Now you can find gems in the later rounds, but the odds are increasingly against you as the picks get later. Just looking at the first 3 rounds since 2005, the Bears selected 6 DL and 2 OL. For the 2 years where the Bears selected OL, they also selected DL in the first 3 rounds. The picks like Dvoracek, Bazuin, Harrison, and Gilbert look really bad now, and weren't that great back then. Going forward, OL should be addressed annually in the first 3 rounds, with at least one pick. I agree, said this the past 4 years. Hoping Emery believes in this route also. There are a nice group of potential OLTs in this class and I would suspect the Bears seen this before we did and passed on reaching on a tackle like Rieff. 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.