Stinger226 Posted March 4, 2014 Report Share Posted March 4, 2014 Since the best draft teams take the BPA regardless of position. What if? one of the 3 OTs fall to us-Robinson-Mathews-Lewan (getting a top 10 LT that would move Bushrod to the right side, cant be all bad for a improving OL) What if? Barr or Mack drop to us- they are both 3-4 OLBers.( consistent top10 players that can rush the QB but are strictly 3-4 backers) What if? Watkins or Evans drops to us( these are elite type WRs and not sure we could pass them up) I would not like to consider any of those possibilities, but one of those situations could come up. I would think someone would be willing to give us lots of draft picks to grab one of those top 10 type players. That would be my choice and then address the D with those picks. What say you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted March 4, 2014 Report Share Posted March 4, 2014 Since the best draft teams take the BPA regardless of position. What if? one of the 3 OTs fall to us-Robinson-Mathews-Lewan (getting a top 10 LT that would move Bushrod to the right side, cant be all bad for a improving OL) What if? Barr or Mack drop to us- they are both 3-4 OLBers.( consistent top10 players that can rush the QB but are strictly 3-4 backers) What if? Watkins or Evans drops to us( these are elite type WRs and not sure we could pass them up) I would not like to consider any of those possibilities, but one of those situations could come up. I would think someone would be willing to give us lots of draft picks to grab one of those top 10 type players. That would be my choice and then address the D with those picks. What say you Let's say the one or two guys the Bears wanted just left the board and absolutely nobody will trade up. If so... If Robinson or Matthews is there, you take him. Pass on Lewan because he will be there anyway. If Barr or Mack are there, you pass. That would be repeating the McClellin mistake, especially with Mack since he played horrible competition. If Watkins or Evans is there, you hope it's Watkins because he fits better. And then you take him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted March 5, 2014 Author Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 Let's say the one or two guys the Bears wanted just left the board and absolutely nobody will trade up. If so... If Robinson or Matthews is there, you take him. Pass on Lewan because he will be there anyway. If Barr or Mack are there, you pass. That would be repeating the McClellin mistake, especially with Mack since he played horrible competition. If Watkins or Evans is there, you hope it's Watkins because he fits better. And then you take him. I think top 10 players being there would definitely change our pick. Emery's board may look much different than the consensus opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradjock Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 Let's say the one or two guys the Bears wanted just left the board and absolutely nobody will trade up. If so... If Robinson or Matthews is there, you take him. Pass on Lewan because he will be there anyway. If Barr or Mack are there, you pass. That would be repeating the McClellin mistake, especially with Mack since he played horrible competition. If Watkins or Evans is there, you hope it's Watkins because he fits better. And then you take him. That's a more interesting way to look at it. I think we can agree we'd be thrilled to trade down if the right deal is in place. Adding a top shelf LT would be huge. Bushrod's more of a RT. As for Barr or Mack, if they're that talented, you find a way to make them work in your system. Talent wins. Adding a 3rd WR alongside BM and AJ? Wow. How the hell do you match up with that? Not going to happen. But you never know. When we entered the 2006 draft, we had one of the best defenses in the league and our #1 top priority was an offensive playmaker. We responded by drafting defense in the first 5 rounds (D Manning, Hester, Dvoracek, Jamar Williams and Mark Anderson). I only mention that because I feel like we were responding to Lovie's wants. He was a defensive minded guy who didn't give a damn how old our o-line was. Trestman is an offensive minded guy who might press Emery for BM's future replacement or an upgrade over Jordan Mills. It's a possibility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZ54 Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 If the Mathews or Robinson are there then it's a no brainer…draft them. LT2 once said you only get elite LT one way and that is you draft them. Can't pass on one at #14. Watkins I'd take as well and put him in the slot for now. His quickness and acceleration is unreal and he can go up and get the ball wherever it is. Cover him with your NB while your safeties are worried over the top about Jeffrey or Marshall, or leave them in single coverage on the outside. Either way is fine by me. Evans I'm not as high on and I'd probably take Donald over him. Barr or Mack….I think here again I prefer the inside presence of Donald or Jernigan. Mack is much more fluid rushing the passer than SMC but he's still not a 4-3 DE and that's a problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted March 6, 2014 Author Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 If the Mathews or Robinson are there then it's a no brainer…draft them. LT2 once said you only get elite LT one way and that is you draft them. Can't pass on one at #14. Watkins I'd take as well and put him in the slot for now. His quickness and acceleration is unreal and he can go up and get the ball wherever it is. Cover him with your NB while your safeties are worried over the top about Jeffrey or Marshall, or leave them in single coverage on the outside. Either way is fine by me. Evans I'm not as high on and I'd probably take Donald over him. Barr or Mack….I think here again I prefer the inside presence of Donald or Jernigan. Mack is much more fluid rushing the passer than SMC but he's still not a 4-3 DE and that's a problem. I agree, the QBs are out, Barr and Mack are closer to our slot, we can justify a better fit in our defense but I think everybody else is in play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lemonej Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 The scenario that is being presented means that there is a run on other positions prior to the 14th pick. WTBS it would have to be DB(CB or S).Leaving the top WR and the top 2 rated LBs on the board would give the Bears great bargaining power but I don't know if you can pass up a talent like Watkins at 14 unless your getting a number one and a 2nd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted March 7, 2014 Author Report Share Posted March 7, 2014 The scenario that is being presented means that there is a run on other positions prior to the 14th pick. WTBS it would have to be DB(CB or S).Leaving the top WR and the top 2 rated LBs on the board would give the Bears great bargaining power but I don't know if you can pass up a talent like Watkins at 14 unless your getting a number one and a 2nd. I think if any of those players on are on board, we could have a couple of teams running up the ante to gain that slot. That would be great, but wouldnt want to drop more that 10 spots. I think one of Ealy,Donald,or Hageman could still be there at that spot. I am starting to think Hageman could be a target, with his athleticism. Someone Phil could get behind. 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.