Interesting article on who the Bears will draft

[Stinger226]

This an interesting take on who the Bears draft. It basically states expect the unexpected and that is what is going to happen. A surprise in store for us in the first round.

 

http://www.chatsports.com/chicago-bears/a/...hange-2-9593154

[bradjock]

This an interesting take on who the Bears draft. It basically states expect the unexpected and that is what is going to happen. A surprise in store for us in the first round.

 

http://www.chatsports.com/chicago-bears/a/...hange-2-9593154

 

Is this guy a credible writer or blogger? He says, "If Emery drafted a defensive lineman in 14, the odds of him starting or getting meaningful snaps are nil." As far as we know, we intend to play Houston primarily at DE. That means our DT's are Ratliff, Paea, and Collins. Ratliff is old and injury prone. Paea is mediocre. Collins is a back-up. How is their nil chance of a DT we draft not getting meaningful snaps? At worst we would work him into the rotation. This statement seems particularly bad when he goes on to say that we will draft Justin Gilbert and work him in as a nickel or when someone gets hurt.

 

Speaking of which, where are the rumors he speaks of that we are setting our sights on Justin Gilbert? Anybody else here that? I'm not saying it's impossible, but it seems like speculation. ll agree with him when he says the draft is wide open. Several of us have been saying that since we signed Allen. It would be cool to draft Ebron, but still highly unlikely.

 

 

[AZ54]

Don't take a DT because he won't start? We will use a 3-man rotation as we always have and as all teams do. Who will someone like Aaron Donald not be ahead of: Paea? Collins?

 

From there he follows up that logicby saying we could draft an OG in Rd 1. This after we signed Slausson long term and have Long at the other spot. So that guy won't be a starter either

 

Last year drafting an OG in Rd 1 was not a surprise. Drafting Kyle Long at #19 was. So what we really know is that Emery will draft needs and he's not afraid to go get his guy earlier than we think. It was the same when he drafted SMC. DE was a need at that time it's just nobody thought we'd go after SMC that early (if at all given our scheme).

 

The better advice might be to look at the players ranked or expected to go in the first half of Rd 2 at one of our positions of need and expect one of them to be our pick at #14. I wouldn't rule out Ebron but I highly doubt we go that route. If we wanted to add a purely WR-type TE we can likely do that later in the draft.

 

[scs787]

I think the article is garbage.

 

I still hate/don't understand the logic in the whole "We signed 3 DEs so DT is less of a need". That's just simply not true and somewhat ridiculous IMO. Yes, there's a good chance Houston will be lining up at DT on occasion, but he won't be there every down so they shouldn't skimp on DT.

 

If Emery drafted a defensive lineman at 14 the odds of him starting or getting any meaningful snaps is nil.

 

That quote is ridiculous.

 

Is it possible that we go into the season with Ratliff/Paea as our starters or they can draft a guy later to compete with those 2? Sure. Is it ideal? Not in my opinion. Ratliff is gonna turn 33 this season and he hasn't had a season to write home about in 4 or 5 years, I think relying on him to be a guy to get you more than 3 or 4 sacks is a mistake. His spot is at NT IMO. I've been a Paea fan, I liked his upside but in all reality he hasn't been that great.

 

Aaron Donald takes this DL from potentially good, to potentially great.

 

I also disagree that there's no back up at OG. Did he forget about James Brown? I believe he's a player who still has some good upside, and I believe last year he was giving Long a run for his money last year.

 

The only unexpected thing he mentions is Ebron. Whom I wouldn't take over a DT.

[bradjock]

I agree with most of what you said. Particularly with the DL rotations and the potential of James Brown. What I don't necessarily agree with is your view of Stephen Paea. For so many of those bad games where the worst running back in the league had a career day, Paea was invisible. He started 13 games and did not appear to do a damn thing with running backs going wild. Playing the nose, he's not likely to pressure the quarterback. Except he's not good against the run.

 

Pretty much every regular defensive player who remained healthy has taken a ton of criticism. Unless I'm forgetting someone, the only exceptions to the criticism have been Tim Jennings, Corey Wootton, James Anderson, and Stephen Paea. Tim Jennings was rewarded with a big contract. Wootton signed with the Vikings for 1 year 1.5 million. James Anderson remains a free agent. Then there is Paea.

 

Paea looked good next to a healthy Henry Melton and a motivated Julius Peppers. When that went away, he became exposed.

 

That being said, he still has potential and he's good as a DT rotational player with limited snaps. But based on what he did last year, he's not a starter. Which brings me back to the stupid article the suggestion his starting job is untouchable. We still need help at DT.

 

I think the article is garbage.

 

I still hate/don't understand the logic in the whole "We signed 3 DEs so DT is less of a need". That's just simply not true and somewhat ridiculous IMO. Yes, there's a good chance Houston will be lining up at DT on occasion, but he won't be there every down so they shouldn't skimp on DT.

 

 

 

That quote is ridiculous.

 

Is it possible that we go into the season with Ratliff/Paea as our starters or they can draft a guy later to compete with those 2? Sure. Is it ideal? Not in my opinion. Ratliff is gonna turn 33 this season and he hasn't had a season to write home about in 4 or 5 years, I think relying on him to be a guy to get you more than 3 or 4 sacks is a mistake. His spot is at NT IMO. I've been a Paea fan, I liked his upside but in all reality he hasn't been that great.

 

Aaron Donald takes this DL from potentially good, to potentially great.

 

I also disagree that there's no back up at OG. Did he forget about James Brown? I believe he's a player who still has some good upside, and I believe last year he was giving Long a run for his money last year.

 

The only unexpected thing he mentions is Ebron. Whom I wouldn't take over a DT.

[scs787]

I agree with most of what you said. Particularly with the DL rotations and the potential of James Brown. What I don't necessarily agree with is your view of Stephen Paea. For so many of those bad games where the worst running back in the league had a career day, Paea was invisible. He started 13 games and did not appear to do a damn thing with running backs going wild. Playing the nose, he's not likely to pressure the quarterback. Except he's not good against the run.

 

Pretty much every regular defensive player who remained healthy has taken a ton of criticism. Unless I'm forgetting someone, the only exceptions to the criticism have been Tim Jennings, Corey Wootton, James Anderson, and Stephen Paea. Tim Jennings was rewarded with a big contract. Wootton signed with the Vikings for 1 year 1.5 million. James Anderson remains a free agent. Then there is Paea.

 

Paea looked good next to a healthy Henry Melton and a motivated Julius Peppers. When that went away, he became exposed.

 

That being said, he still has potential and he's good as a DT rotational player with limited snaps. But based on what he did last year, he's not a starter. Which brings me back to the stupid article the suggestion his starting job is untouchable. We still need help at DT.

 

 

FWIW he was dealing with a turf toe all season, and that's a beeatch....but ya I certainly think an upgrade is due regardless. Ratliff MIGHT be that upgrade at the nose, but I'm not so sure that's a great proposition either.

 

I'd actually love to see a DT in the 1st (Donald) to start at the 3T and another in the 3/4 round to push Ratliff and Paea at the nose.

 

 

 

[Stinger226]

FWIW he was dealing with a turf toe all season, and that's a beeatch....but ya I certainly think an upgrade is due regardless. Ratliff MIGHT be that upgrade at the nose, but I'm not so sure that's a great proposition either.

 

I'd actually love to see a DT in the 1st (Donald) to start at the 3T and another in the 3/4 round to push Ratliff and Paea at the nose.

It always fascinates me what writers(obviously not from Chicago) view the Bears situation. For the same reason he states we need to draft a CB, he states were ok at DT. I think if we were done with adding players we would get by at DT. With the 3 DTs you have Houston that will play inside and Izzy will see snaps there, but it is as glaring a need as any other position on the team. Drafting a guard high is ridiculous, we have two prime starters and a young backup plus Boggs can play OG. The idea of drafting another OL that could eventually play center isnt a bad idea but that will never happen before the 4th round.Our first round pick needs to be a starter from day one, at DT, be in a rotation. At CB, would have to push for at least nickel back starter time.

 

We need to add a DT,CB,S,and MLB in the first 4 rounds. DT is a little deeper if we waiter until the 3rd round there would still be a few players left that could possibly see playing time if we went CB and S with the first two picks. Anthony Johnson-Jones-Rejid-Ferguson-Uko-Coleman. I think CB has some depth but safety after the first two rounds will thin out drastically. So the first two rounds should be DT-S in either order, and then a CB in the third.

[adam]

So the first two rounds should be DT-S in either order, and then a CB in the third.

I don't think you can narrow it down that much. In a perfect world, we go DT and S in the first two rounds and address our biggest needs with impact players.

 

However, the draft will dictate that order because I would hate to lock myself into a S in the 2nd after picking a DT in the first, then picking a guy with a 3rd round grade when there is a CB sitting there with a higher grade. Even though CB is not as big of a need as the other two, one injury to Jennings or Peanut and it will be.

 

I would think the best strategy would be to weight each position for need, then have a grade on every player. So if there is a DT with a B+ and a CB with an A sitting there, then you have to make the decision on which way to go. Then you apply this to every round. That way you are getting the best player available in a need area unless the grade itself outweighs the need (ie. OL from top 10 dropping to 14).

[Stinger226]

I don't think you can narrow it down that much. In a perfect world, we go DT and S in the first two rounds and address our biggest needs with impact players.

 

However, the draft will dictate that order because I would hate to lock myself into a S in the 2nd after picking a DT in the first, then picking a guy with a 3rd round grade when there is a CB sitting there with a higher grade. Even though CB is not as big of a need as the other two, one injury to Jennings or Peanut and it will be.

 

I would think the best strategy would be to weight each position for need, then have a grade on every player. So if there is a DT with a B+ and a CB with an A sitting there, then you have to make the decision on which way to go. Then you apply this to every round. That way you are getting the best player available in a need area unless the grade itself outweighs the need (ie. OL from top 10 dropping to 14).

I agree but in a ideal situation we should make those two our first two picks, but if you want an impact player you have to take BPA other than QB and DE, I would have to say everything else is open. An OT if one of the top 3 drop, but ideally not OL in the first.

[bradjock]

FWIW he was dealing with a turf toe all season, and that's a beeatch....but ya I certainly think an upgrade is due regardless. Ratliff MIGHT be that upgrade at the nose, but I'm not so sure that's a great proposition either.

 

I'd actually love to see a DT in the 1st (Donald) to start at the 3T and another in the 3/4 round to push Ratliff and Paea at the nose.

 

Even if the turf toe derailed Paea a bit, after 3 seasons with the Bears, we have no reason to believe he is anything more than just a "meh" player. If he was a free agent, I'm guessing he would get a deal similar to Corey Wootton. At best he's okay and he's not a difference maker. That's fine when you are lining up next to a disruptive pro bowl center like Henry Melton.

 

Mainly I'm agreeing with you. Ratliff MIGHT be that upgrade. But only for a season or two at best.

[bradjock]

I don't think you can narrow it down that much. In a perfect world, we go DT and S in the first two rounds and address our biggest needs with impact players.

 

However, the draft will dictate that order because I would hate to lock myself into a S in the 2nd after picking a DT in the first, then picking a guy with a 3rd round grade when there is a CB sitting there with a higher grade. Even though CB is not as big of a need as the other two, one injury to Jennings or Peanut and it will be.

 

I would think the best strategy would be to weight each position for need, then have a grade on every player. So if there is a DT with a B+ and a CB with an A sitting there, then you have to make the decision on which way to go. Then you apply this to every round. That way you are getting the best player available in a need area unless the grade itself outweighs the need (ie. OL from top 10 dropping to 14).

 

Yeah, but the grades are often very close. A lot of places grade them from 1 to 100. So Jadeveon Clowney might be a 97. You probably have several guys at 91 and several guys at 92. If it's the difference between 97 and 92, you go with 97, regardless of position. When you are talking the difference between 91 and 92, you draft the position of most need.

[Mongo3451]

Yeah, but the grades are often very close. A lot of places grade them from 1 to 100. So Jadeveon Clowney might be a 97. You probably have several guys at 91 and several guys at 92. If it's the difference between 97 and 92, you go with 97, regardless of position. When you are talking the difference between 91 and 92, you draft the position of most need.

Yes and yes in theory. You bracket your needs based on availability. If you have a 90 at S, DB, LB and DL, it's not as easy as saying we need DL the most so we are going there. If you think you can get suitable DL later, although it's the greatest need, you maximize by drafting what you think won't be there later. That's why they have runs on positions. Actually like in the mid rounds of a fantasy football draft.

[lemonej]

FWIW he was dealing with a turf toe all season, and that's a beeatch....but ya I certainly think an upgrade is due regardless. Ratliff MIGHT be that upgrade at the nose, but I'm not so sure that's a great proposition either.

 

I'd actually love to see a DT in the 1st (Donald) to start at the 3T and another in the 3/4 round to push Ratliff and Paea at the nose.

I am still of the mind that there should be two young bodies brought in to the interior to be a future tandem like what was done when Tommie Harris and Tank Johnson were drafted back to back. Donald in round one and Hageman in round 2 would be ideal, but pressing needs in the secondary make my fantasy a little crazy. I could invision Donald and Hageman forming a nice tandem with no injury or gun issues to set us up nicely for a few years.

[scs787]

I am still of the mind that there should be two young bodies brought in to the interior to be a future tandem like what was done when Tommie Harris and Tank Johnson were drafted back to back. Donald in round one and Hageman in round 2 would be ideal, but pressing needs in the secondary make my fantasy a little crazy. I could invision Donald and Hageman forming a nice tandem with no injury or gun issues to set us up nicely for a few years.

 

I don't think it's that crazy at all. They can still find a good safety to compete with Conte in the 3rd, and CB is deep so there's still probably gonna be some good options to compete with Frey and Hayden in the 4th.

 

The only crazy thing about your statement is Hageman in the 2nd, that's wishful thinking. I don't think he makes it out of the 1st.

 

DT is fairly deep as well though too, I'd wait till the 3rd to get a guy like Daquan Jones or Ego Ferguson to pair with Donald

 

 

 

 

[Chitownhustla]

This an interesting take on who the Bears draft. It basically states expect the unexpected and that is what is going to happen. A surprise in store for us in the first round.

 

http://www.chatsports.com/chicago-bears/a/...hange-2-9593154

 

So thinking about the past two Emery drafts, was there any talk about Emery drafting SMC and Long???? I do not remember any talks about these two guys. I remember being like WHO THA freak???

 

 

I don't think there is any way to predict what Emery will do. He is very tight lipped about what he wants to do. IE the Jared Allen signing, no one knew what was going on, Jared said he didn't know half the time.

 

 

 

I would think it would be a safe bet that if the kid from Pit was sitting there at 14 Emery would pull the trigger. I would like that pick, I think he is going to be a beast!

[scs787]

So thinking about the past two Emery drafts, was there any talk about Emery drafting SMC and Long???? I do not remember any talks about these two guys. I remember being like WHO THA freak???

 

 

I don't think there is any way to predict what Emery will do. He is very tight lipped about what he wants to do. IE the Jared Allen signing, no one knew what was going on, Jared said he didn't know half the time.

 

 

 

I would think it would be a safe bet that if the kid from Pit was sitting there at 14 Emery would pull the trigger. I would like that pick, I think he is going to be a beast!

 

I just don't see how they can pass on him if he's there.....Shaun King of yahoo sports called him the 3rd best prospect in the draft behind Robinson and Clowney, and I agree with that.

[Bears4Ever_34]

Clinton-Dix, Gilbert, Pyror are at the top of my wish list right now. Emery won't draft either of those players. He won't draft Aaron Donald. It's going to be somebody that's not talked about a lot. Maybe Ward or Denard.

[scs787]

Clinton-Dix, Gilbert, Pyror are at the top of my wish list right now. Emery won't draft either of those players. He won't draft Aaron Donald. It's going to be somebody that's not talked about a lot. Maybe Ward or Denard.

 

That's just silly IMO.

[lemonej]

I don't think it's that crazy at all. They can still find a good safety to compete with Conte in the 3rd, and CB is deep so there's still probably gonna be some good options to compete with Frey and Hayden in the 4th.

 

The only crazy thing about your statement is Hageman in the 2nd, that's wishful thinking. I don't think he makes it out of the 1st.

 

DT is fairly deep as well though too, I'd wait till the 3rd to get a guy like Daquan Jones or Ego Ferguson to pair with Donald

 

Good reply a few mocks have us going after Ferguson and doing Roberson in the 2nd.

[ASHKUM BEAR]

That's just silly IMO.

If he goes Ward, he better trade way down. It is still unknown how he will be able to play with screws in his foot.

[Bears4Ever_34]

That's just silly IMO.

That's Phil though. Nobody predicted Shea McCellin or Kyle Long last year. Probably because both guys were largely projected as 2nd round picks. Would not surprise me to see Phil go that route again. Expect the unexpected.

[Stinger226]

That's Phil though. Nobody predicted Shea McCellin or Kyle Long last year. Probably because both guys were largely projected as 2nd round picks. Would not surprise me to see Phil go that route again. Expect the unexpected.

The possiblity exists he could draft any of the players previous mentioned, but he could surprise with a pick. I can see him trading down to the end of the round and grabbing a Truitt,Hageman or a Ward.

[scs787]

That's Phil though. Nobody predicted Shea McCellin or Kyle Long last year. Probably because both guys were largely projected as 2nd round picks. Would not surprise me to see Phil go that route again. Expect the unexpected.

 

Eh, maybe that's more on mock drafts and the talent evaluators who put those round grades on them. In both cases we heard about other teams who were planning on drafting SMC and Long with their picks in the first.

 

I also think Emery loves his Senior Bowl prospects and puts a lot of stock in how those guys look there....and there wasn't a better prospect at the Senior Bowl than Aaron Donald.

[bradjock]

Eh, maybe that's more on mock drafts and the talent evaluators who put those round grades on them. In both cases we heard about other teams who were planning on drafting SMC and Long with their picks in the first.

 

I also think Emery loves his Senior Bowl prospects and puts a lot of stock in how those guys look there....and there wasn't a better prospect at the Senior Bowl than Aaron Donald.

 

With the last two Emery drafts, I'd add that we were drafting lower (19,20) and the talent wasn't as good. It's too early to rank the 2013 class, but if you go back and look at the 2012 first round draft class . . . there's a lot of blech. At a glance I'd say that 2/3's of the players drafted in the first round of 2013 could be considered busts. Granted, there was some elite talent at the top with Andrew Luck, RG3, and Matt Kalil, and Luke Kuechley. But it gets ugly quickly. Trent Richardson--bust, Justin Blackmon--suspended for drugs, Morris Claiborne--2 interceptions in 2 years, Mark Barron--mediocre.

 

Emery's taken a ton of grief for Shea, but the majority of the 2012 round 1 is pretty damn ugly in hindsight. There's not that guy where you think, "We really should have drafted him instead of Shea." If there is, that guy would be Alshon Jeffrey who's easily a top 10 pick if you re-did the draft today.

 

Getting back to my original point: at #14 this year Emery has far more talent than he has in either of his first two previous years. It's a better position with better depth. Because the talent is top-heavy, it's far more likely we draft a guy we expect to be drafted.

[Stinger226]

With the last two Emery drafts, I'd add that we were drafting lower (19,20) and the talent wasn't as good. It's too early to rank the 2013 class, but if you go back and look at the 2012 first round draft class . . . there's a lot of blech. At a glance I'd say that 2/3's of the players drafted in the first round of 2013 could be considered busts. Granted, there was some elite talent at the top with Andrew Luck, RG3, and Matt Kalil, and Luke Kuechley. But it gets ugly quickly. Trent Richardson--bust, Justin Blackmon--suspended for drugs, Morris Claiborne--2 interceptions in 2 years, Mark Barron--mediocre.

 

Emery's taken a ton of grief for Shea, but the majority of the 2012 round 1 is pretty damn ugly in hindsight. There's not that guy where you think, "We really should have drafted him instead of Shea." If there is, that guy would be Alshon Jeffrey who's easily a top 10 pick if you re-did the draft today.

 

Getting back to my original point: at #14 this year Emery has far more talent than he has in either of his first two previous years. It's a better position with better depth. Because the talent is top-heavy, it's far more likely we draft a guy we expect to be drafted.

It is considered a deeper draft but you never know how those things play out. I think Lovie was in the in Emery's ear on draft day, so I kinda of cut him a little slack on his first year. Was thrown in late and last year will be a better judge on him.