Consensus of 19 Mocks Say Bears 1st Pick Is?...............

Discussion in 'Chicago Bears' started by soulman, Apr 22, 2014.

  1. riczaj01

    riczaj01 DaBears Ditka DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    22,610
    Likes Received:
    3,022
    Ratings:
    +3,653 / 10 / -8
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,839ß
    I won't be one of them unless somehow S and DT aren't addressed, and I just cannot see that happening. I won't like, but will understand if CB/LB aren't, and will assume they have plans to address it elsewhere until next draft.
  2. soulman

    soulman Pro-Bowler SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    4,947
    Likes Received:
    1,505
    Ratings:
    +1,914 / 7 / -3
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,761ß
    To me that's stretch based on whose picking before us. Sure it could happen but there's just as much likelihood that both Pryor and Donald will be there to chose from. What we can't predict is draft day trades and their effect on the top ten or twelve picks. That could throw this kind of monkey wrench into the picking order.

    If we ended up with Hageman I'm sure we can live with it. The kid needs some serious coaching and to learn to keep his motor revved up but there are vets on this team who could help motivate him that way. I take Hageman before taking Fuller or Jernigan who are also guys who've been chosen as possible picks.
  3. soulman

    soulman Pro-Bowler SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    4,947
    Likes Received:
    1,505
    Ratings:
    +1,914 / 7 / -3
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,761ß
    You see him LISTED at 305lbs and I've seen him LISTED at 303lbs but what I'm telling you is that his playing weight is 10-12lbs less than that. The prototype DT is 6'3" 295-300lbs. If they're less then 6'3" teams want them lighter. You can't go by that LISTED weight, I've already said that. I don't care what the team PR says, I'm going by what players or scouts have said.

    Houston is listed at 300lbs but he wasn't playing anywhere near that heavy last year (275lbs is what was said) and won't this year either. How do I know? Because he said it himself. Teams lie all the time about those weight. Hell the Bears still had Perry LISTED at 313lbs when he was a lot closer to 350lbs. You don't have to believe me if you don't want to. Use your own eyes instead and look at the players who are 300lbs and more and then look at the others.

    You have a right to your opinion but please base it on accurate info. As for a DT in a later round fine, we could probably use two, but you won't find one later on that's even close to the equal of Donald. We disagree about that. End of story.
  4. BSBEARS

    BSBEARS Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2014
    Messages:
    1,977
    Likes Received:
    690
    Ratings:
    +920 / 4 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,087ß
    You are so hung up on Donald, my whole point has nothing to do with Donald but by a position. And with the depth at DT there is quality there later in the rounds as opposed to S and CB. That is all I said, Donald weight really has nothing to do with it. We all know and understand why you like Donald, he carries his own risks like every other player in the draft. If we take him I will not be surprised, he has as much potential as the next guy and a solid college career. Once again I am not going to argue with you on a few pounds or anything else for that matter. We both have our opinions and we both know the only opinion that matters is Emerys and the coaches.
    Your opinions and my opinions will have no outcome on what happens, your correct in that we disagree on the best way to do it. I see the opportunity for 3 or 4 starters by taking a DE later and you are apparently willing to take one less starter and take Donald. This is why the time building up to the draft is exciting because we all have our methods on what we would do and then we watch and see how well we predicted what they actually do. Thats pretty much the story, The END.
  5. soulman

    soulman Pro-Bowler SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    4,947
    Likes Received:
    1,505
    Ratings:
    +1,914 / 7 / -3
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,761ß
    I'm not trying to be a smart ass but if you're gonna point this stuff out use correct facts and all of the facts.

    Who replaced Mike Brown and were the Safeties in the Super Bowl? Danieal Manning (2nd round) and Chris Harris (6th round). I really don't know what more I can say to prove that Safety never has been a priority draft position in any Bears defense in my lifetime and it's long life. We can and we have gotten starting caliber Safeties after round one.
  6. soulman

    soulman Pro-Bowler SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    4,947
    Likes Received:
    1,505
    Ratings:
    +1,914 / 7 / -3
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,761ß
    You're' right. I'm done with all of it now until after the draft. If Donald and Pryor are both on the board you take Donald because he will be the BPA who meets a primary need. I'm not about to change my mind and I stated why far too many time so I'm done.

    C'ya all later.
  7. BSBEARS

    BSBEARS Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2014
    Messages:
    1,977
    Likes Received:
    690
    Ratings:
    +920 / 4 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,087ß
    And I am not changing mind either.
  8. jackiejokeman

    jackiejokeman Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2013
    Messages:
    1,752
    Likes Received:
    175
    Ratings:
    +229 / 2 / -1
    ßearz ßuckz:
    626ß
    How do you draft a team at defense to stop what is coming next ?

    Obviously the team is always one year behind the curve.

    Because they didnt see that coming on offense.

    The way to eliminate that is for defense to dictate policy on the field.

    Ask Peyton Manning. We need our old defense back.

    One year behind the curve or not our defense was always rock solid against whatever

    tricks offense had, and always prevailed until last year.

    We were fifth against the run in 2012. What the hell Happened ?
  9. Bearsinhouston

    Bearsinhouston Position Coach

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    7,374
    Likes Received:
    1,620
    Ratings:
    +2,284 / 10 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,703ß
    BS - not wanting to get involved in a long, involved back and forth, but in my mind (granted limited real estate there), the whole premise of getting a second starter with a later pick is flawed from the start. I don't buy it. First, we have no idea if even the first rounders will be good players. Yes, they will start, but they may not continue to start if they don't pan out. And the other big flaw I find with the logic is that you typically trade back with a player or two in mind for the later pick. You have no idea at all if any of the targeted players will still be there. That is a real risk. Add to that the aforementioned inherent risk for any player chosen lower and lower as to the chance for success and it compounds the risk.

    If you have a bird in the hand -- a player you feel strongly about being able to contribute and he is in a position of need, that is a REAL gamble to pass on him in the hopes that the other picks you will make from that trade will either make as big an impact or even be there. Obviously, worst case scenario is you make the trade and the guys you wanted all are gone and now you have some players you really would never have made the trade for to choose from.

    I am not saying never to trade down. When it works as planned and the players are there and they actually turn out to be productive, it's a great thing. I'm just making the argument that just because you envision a trade going a certain way in your mind, it won't necessarily go that way and that there is a certain value to KNOWING you can choose a guy that is there in real time before you trade the pick.

    It's not a straightforward done deal to pick two later starters. Kind of like saying if I start a company I can retire. yeah. If all goes well sure. And in their mind, no one that envisions starting a company ever sees it failing in their minds camera. But they do fail. I'm not making an argument one way or another, but I do like taking a guy I believe is a difference maker when I have the opportunity to do so.
  10. JustAnotherBearsFan99

    JustAnotherBearsFan99 Coordinator SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    May 21, 2012
    Messages:
    9,987
    Likes Received:
    2,638
    Ratings:
    +3,053 / 4 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,778ß
    It seems like no two drafts are the same, so no two trade down situations are the same either. Each one is unique. I think guys like Emery have to evaluate each situation, and weigh the cost/benefit for a trade down for that particular draft, at that particular point. If it looks like you get mediocrity in return for your top pick then it makes no sense, but if it looks like the trade will allow you to harvest greater talent (quality not just quantity) then you do. Sure, it's not a for-sure thing. But a sharp guy like Emery (hopefully) has the gears to play this poker game and win. This doesn't mean THIS draft is the one to do this. Only Emery knows. But I don't think you can't make a valid blanket argument for always holding pat, or trading down. It depends upon each unique draft and how Emery believes it is going to play out.
  11. BSBEARS

    BSBEARS Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2014
    Messages:
    1,977
    Likes Received:
    690
    Ratings:
    +920 / 4 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,087ß
    I understand what you are saying, but I see ILB and S as not very deep and if you want to get a potential starter I think you need to take them first. There will still be decent DT's in rd 3. Sutton, Quarles, and Ferguson and 2 of the 3 will prob be there, maybe all 3. I do not have a trade down in this. If not ILB you can look at CB in 2 or go DT in 2 and CB in 3. I just see more options to match are needs by picking DT later. I am not trying to get in an argument either, just stating my opinion as I see it. I trust Emery to identify the talent and with the depth in this draft I see us capable of filling multiple needs and the deep class of DT's allows us to take one later and get extra potential starters. There is no guarantee any of the picks will pan out, there is as much likelihood of a first rd DT failing in the NFL as the much as there is for any other position, but the likelihood of a DT in rd 3 compared to other positions seems more likely to succeed based on the depth at that position this year. That is my logic and reasoning.
  12. The Benjamin

    The Benjamin George Halas Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Messages:
    47,089
    Likes Received:
    1,885
    Ratings:
    +2,158 / 7 / -9
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,574ß
    Decent, sure. But I want GREAT. Games are won in the trenches. Having a great line is better than a decent line. A great line will make a decent secondary look good. A decent line will make a decent secondary look decent at best.

    Fix the line and everything behind them looks better
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. BSBEARS

    BSBEARS Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2014
    Messages:
    1,977
    Likes Received:
    690
    Ratings:
    +920 / 4 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,087ß
    I agree and if Donald was the size of Hagemann it would be a no brainer, but Donald will not win every battle, even winning 10% of them says you need the other guys 90% of the time
  14. The Benjamin

    The Benjamin George Halas Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Messages:
    47,089
    Likes Received:
    1,885
    Ratings:
    +2,158 / 7 / -9
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,574ß
    I still build up the lines first
    • Like Like x 1
  15. BSBEARS

    BSBEARS Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2014
    Messages:
    1,977
    Likes Received:
    690
    Ratings:
    +920 / 4 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,087ß
    so with 30 defensive plays a game that would be 3 sacks a game x 16 = 48 sacks for the yr. (we all know that is not realistic.)
  16. JustAnotherBearsFan99

    JustAnotherBearsFan99 Coordinator SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    May 21, 2012
    Messages:
    9,987
    Likes Received:
    2,638
    Ratings:
    +3,053 / 4 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,778ß
    This may not be as simple as saying we want a great DL and our defense will all look better. Having a great DL is important. Nobody here is arguing that. The question some have is will Donald result in our DL being great. Maybe. Maybe not. And while a DL certainly can make the players behind them look better, it also goes the other way. Those players can make the DL look better too. There are 11 players on defense. The four DL are vitally important. So are the other 7 players behind them.

    This reminds me of when we got Cutler. Some acted like it was a done deal that the offense was going to shine. The trouble was that there were 10 other guys on offense - and they were not so hot. No Lombardi's that way. We had to elevate the overall talent on offense for something meaningful to happen.
    • Like Like x 1
  17. Bearsinhouston

    Bearsinhouston Position Coach

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    7,374
    Likes Received:
    1,620
    Ratings:
    +2,284 / 10 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,703ß
    Well, as you say... those are sacks and too high at that. How many others will the QB be pressured into making a bad throw or having to throw it away or having the deisgned play get blown up for no yardage.

    Add ALL of those up. An effective DL can (and should) make ALL of those things happen. Basically keeping the offense on its heels and not alowing them to play their game. You keep them from scoring as much as they want to while being able to score often with your O wins enough games for you.
  18. Bearsinhouston

    Bearsinhouston Position Coach

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    7,374
    Likes Received:
    1,620
    Ratings:
    +2,284 / 10 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,703ß
    I agree in the sense that I trust Emery to make the right evaluation of the risks in choosing certain players and positions while having a decent degree of confidence of who might be left and whether or not those guys can also add enough to the roster to make the risk viable.

    I am with you in the sense that because I trust Emery, even if he does something different that I think is thr right course of action (like what I want really even matters anyway) I will be happy with it. Or at least give it a chance.
    • Like Like x 1
  19. abegibronlives

    abegibronlives Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2013
    Messages:
    155
    Likes Received:
    57
    Ratings:
    +84 / 1 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    91ß


    Since that is the consensus, I suppose we should expect the Bears to pick someone else.
    • Like Like x 1
  20. JJ-30

    JJ-30 Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    192
    Likes Received:
    117
    Ratings:
    +167 / 0 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    57ß
    Cleveland has two first-round picks. They could draft receiver Sammy Watkins fourth overall and look to grab a quarterback to throw to him. Cleveland can look to aggressively hold off another team looking to get back into the first round. What if the Bears first chose is off the board, would you trade down with Cleveland. It would cost the Browns their 26th overall pick in this year's draft and the third pick in the second round. This trade would be a win for the Bears, who need two defensive starters. Of course this only works if we feel that one of our next two guys will be there at 26.

Share This Page