Official NFL Draft Thread - Bear Fans Only - and No Montucky!

[bamainatlanta]

The modern NFL offense can use more than one TE in the passing game, so there is room for Warren on the game day roster and both can be on the field at the same time.

That can't be said for OT/OG because if you draft those positions they can't be used at the same time as the players we currently have. So drafting Cambell/Banks/Membou means they are paying someone to only sit on the bench.

The DE position has the most money invested on the entire roster. Just because fans don't believe Dayo will be good, it doesn’t mean the Bears will invest even more top line money into that position by using #10 there.

DT is the deepest position in the draft and the Bears will be easily able to take one at #39 or #41.

Warren may or may not be the choice but if they do take him at #10, it does make a lot of sense.

Johnson had one of the most “modern” nfl offenses yet TE #2 had a grand total of 16 targets on the year(I believe, could be wrong). The modern nfl offense wouldn’t use 2 TE’s that are similar. They would use one like Warren or Kmet to go along with Fannin/Arroyo. Pats used 2 TE’s Gronk & Hernandez but those 2 TE’s are completely different, one being alive and the other 6 feet under.

 

[BaBaBlacksheep]

Who says they're staying at 10?

Just give some names or this is a pointless conversation

 

[bamainatlanta]

Just give some names or this is a pointless conversation

David Montgomery

 

[baredown]

Some fun from the last draft…

The Bears get the TE @ILoveDick covets!

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1907872105858728299

Interesting thing in this video. Right after Tennessee keeps their pick and spends it on Latham, Poles asks "what's the percentage?". The response from one of back rows is "77% Rome will be there". That almost has to be some type of real-time analytics. It shouldn't be surprising that teams might incorporate some form of real-time analytics during the draft, particularly in the top half of round one. But it would be curious to knowing what data they base their analytics on. While they have their own player rankings, they have zero idea about other teams rankings. I suppose they could include on-site visit and combine interview patterns. Maybe something on historical position selection patterns of other teams. Anyway, it's sort of fascinating to imagine how data analytics might be creeping into NFL draft day decision making...

Also humorous how Flus has basically been cut out of the video. Feels a little like the old Soviet Union, where dis-reputed party members simply disappeared from pictures...

 

[dabears70]

Nah, we need a rookie TE with a similar skillset of our current fringe top 10 TE we didnt use last year

/s

These dummies dont realize rookie TE's usually struggle and suck. Cole is going to put up a pro bowl level year in ben johnsons scheme.

You could have put brock bowers on the bears last year and it wouldnt have made a difference if he's not schemed for or targeted.


We're also one injury on the OL away from putting in bates or kiran again and being in the same situation as last year.
If kmet or one of rome/dj go down the offense can still function, if braxton or thuney go down its going to be a long season.

Who's these dummies? I've only seen one person on here that wants the Bears to draft Warren at #10 which is @Xplosive. I just think it's funny that you and some there's don't think Warren will be a great TE in the NFL. Over the years many TE's take time to develop but if Warren goes to right situation he will thrive as a rookie. Not all take time which has been very clearly shown over the last couple of years.

 

[thenewguy]

I’d rather take a stab at Green or even Membou(who has never played LT) than to take Warren. Or a BPA like Johnson or Walker if available.

Green has 2 sexual assault allegations and isn't a typical Dennis Allen edge. Do you really think the Bears would pick him? And where will you play Membou? You're good with him sitting or displacing Wright?

 

[dabears70]

Yes I watched him play. I watched when ND switched to Watts in single coverage on him and he couldn’t get open. He struggled against an unathletic Jack Kiser too. Taking a “very good” TE at #10 is the reason not to take him. I was impressed with his ability to beat the zone coverage in that game though. He couldn’t shake Watts in that game. That’s very telling.

Watts is a borderline 1st round pick so it's not like he was being covered by a bum.

 

[Enasic]

Yes, certainly. I fully understand your hesitation in drafting an outlier when there are no other examples of an OT with arms that short. I get that.

But the fact that many analysts are not shying away from drafting him is due to a) belief he can be the exception, and more importantly b) they feel he'd be a great guard. That's an important factor.

You mentioned that it's not automatic a college T can just become a guard - again, I agree. But in this specific case, it seems he's projected at least as a top guard and unlike many other college OTs this year being projected to be guards, some feel he's good enough to be that exception.

I think if he had played G in college and was projected as a great prospect at G in the NFL, he'd be talked about in the 20 range of the first. So you're gambling with a higher pick on that LT possibility. But you're not using #10 on LT or bust.

Yes, "experts" are claiming that Campbell would be fine at LT despite the arm length/wingspan, and if not, hell, just play him at OG. That's fine if that's their opinion, I just couldn't disagree more. Not only is his wingspan short for OT standards, it's actually short for OG standards too. His wingspan is 77 3/8....the average wingspan for an OT is 82 inches. That's a 5 inch disparity...that's fucking huge. The average wingspan for an OG? 79 inches...he falls short of that mark too. Furthermore, experts have talked about his stance and how it would be a HUGE adjustment for him to transition to OG.

Again, I keep going back to Peter Skoronski who was every bit of the prospect Campbell is, and IMO, was better. His technique and feet were every bit as good if not better.

Peter Skoronski:

Arm Length: 32 1/4
Wingspan: 79 1/2

Will Campbell:

Arm Length: Somewhere between 32 5/8 - 33
Wingspan: 77 3/8

How's Skoronski doing in the NFL? He's playing mediocre footbal (at best) at LG two seasons in. "Experts" are wrong all the time, every year, about countless prospects. Typically, they either ignore measurements, or put too much stock into measurements. In this case, I think ignoring the wingspan and arm length is foolish considering there are ZERO NFL examples you can point to at LT. So yeah, if these "experts" want to ignore that, my prediction is they are going to be proven wrong.

Ironically enough, I was in the camp of thinking the measurement stuff was overblown. I was a HUGE Skoronski fan coming out. I thought man, this dude has flawless technique, he's strong, he has great feet....but he couldn't cut it in the NFL because of his physical limitations. There's a reason why there are zero examples of a player overcoming that at LT...it's because it's incredibly important. Betting on a guy to be the first and only outlier is a bad bet, it just is...and banking on him to become a great OG isn't realistic either. He's never played the position before, his wingspan is still below average for it, and he will have to majorly adjust his stance. Why not just draft a proven OG prospect in the 2nd round? There will be a lot, and they will likely be better OGs in the NFL than Will Campbell.

 

[Xplosive]

Johnson had one of the most “modern” nfl offenses yet TE #2 had a grand total of 16 targets on the year(I believe, could be wrong). The modern nfl offense wouldn’t use 2 TE’s that are similar. They would use one like Warren or Kmet to go along with Fannin/Arroyo. Pats used 2 TE’s Gronk & Hernandez but those 2 TE’s are completely different, one being alive and the other 6 feet under.

The Lions other TE was a UDFA and primarily a blocking TE. So are you saying Johnson failed to properly use him?

Ben Johnson runs a variant of the offense that the Patriots run. *Spoiler alert* NE was known to successfully use two TE's in their offense.

 

[TL1961]

The modern NFL offense can use more than one TE in the passing game, so there is room for Warren on the game day roster and both can be on the field at the same time.

That can't be said for OT/OG because if you draft those positions they can't be used at the same time as the players we currently have. So drafting Cambell/Banks/Membou means they are paying someone to only sit on the bench.

The DE position has the most money invested on the entire roster. Just because fans don't believe Dayo will be good, it doesn’t mean the Bears will invest even more top line money into that position by using #10 there.

DT is the deepest position in the draft and the Bears will be easily able to take one at #39 or #41.

Warren may or may not be the choice but if they do take him at #10, it does make a lot of sense.

We all understand that more than one TE makes the roster. And a 2nd TE will be used more than a 6th WR, but the point was that the Bears don't have a huge hole at TE that needs to be filled at #10.

 

[dabears70]

Because TE's dont go in the top 10. The only time they should is when they are brock bowers freak talents.

Its not a position of value, guy is getting massively overhyped.

Look at the lapoopa draft, the guy wasnt even considered a top 5 TE in that class by many and is looking like the best by a decent margin

But now Laporta would go top 10 for sure.

 

[Xplosive]

Who's these dummies? I've only seen one person on here that wants the Bears to draft Warren at #10 which is @Xplosive. I just think it's funny that you and some there's don't think Warren will be a great TE in the NFL. Over the years many TE's take time to develop but if Warren goes to right situation he will thrive as a rookie. Not all take time which has been very clearly shown over the last couple of years.

I was amongst the first to say Warren was a good option for #10, I didn't say thats who I want.

 

[TL1961]

Yes, "experts" are claiming that Campbell would be fine at LT despite the arm length/wingspan, and if not, hell, just play him at OG. That's fine if that's their opinion, I just couldn't disagree more. Not only is his wingspan short for OT standards, it's actually short for OG standards too. His wingspan is 77 3/8....the average wingspan for an OT is 82 inches. That's a 5 inch disparity...that's fucking huge. The average wingspan for an OG? 79 inches...he falls short of that mark too. Furthermore, experts have talked about his stance and how it would be a HUGE adjustment for him to transition to OG.

Again, I keep going back to Peter Skoronski who was every bit of the prospect Campbell is, and IMO, was better. His technique and feet were every bit as good if not better.

Peter Skoronski:

Arm Length: 32 1/4
Wingspan: 79 1/2

Will Campbell:

Arm Length: Somewhere between 32 5/8 - 33
Wingspan: 77 3/8

How's Skoronski doing in the NFL? He's playing mediocre football at LG two seasons in. "Experts" are wrong all the time, every year, about countless prospects. Typically, they either ignore measurements, or put too much stock into measurements. In this case, I think ignoring the wingspan and arm length is foolish considering there are ZERO NFL examples you can point to at LT. So yeah, if these "experts" want to ignore that, my prediction is they are going to be proven wrong.

Ironically enough, I was in the camp of thinking the measurement stuff was overblown. I was a HUGE Skoronski fan coming out. I thought man, this dude has flawless technique, he's strong, he has great feet....but he couldn't cut it in the NFL because of his physical limitations. There's a reason why there are zero examples of a player overcoming that at LT...it's because it's incredibly important. Betting on a guy to be the first and only outlier is a bad bet, it just is...and banking on him to become a great OG isn't realistic either. He's never played the position before, and his wingspan is still below average for it. Why not just draft a proven OG prospect in the 2nd round? There will be a lot, and they will likely be better OGs in the NFL than Will Campbell.

True.

And the argument of "can he play LT?" still implies he's not going to be a top LT, and at #10 you want a stud.

I think it's high for a G, and risky. I just think those pushing for him feel his technique is just that good.

I heard a former OL discussing arm length and why it matters and he said simply when the DE has longer arms than me,I can't get my hands on his body, and that matters. In those cases, it doesn't matter if you're "only" 1/2 inch short, you're too short to reach.

And when really short, you run into that problem with more DEs than just those with really long arms.

 

[Xplosive]

We all understand that more than one TE makes the roster. And a 2nd TE will be used more than a 6th WR, but the point was that the Bears don't have a huge hole at TE that needs to be filled at #10.

They have a huge hole at playmaker and offensive weapon however.

Warren will likely be better than Kmet and whoever the #3 WR ends up being.

 

[Enasic]

True.

And the argument of "can he play LT?" still implies he's not going to be a top LT, and at #10 you want a stud.

I think it's high for a G, and risky. I just think those pushing for him feel his technique is just that good.

I heard a former OL discussing arm length and why it matters and he said simply when the DE has longer arms than me,I can't get my hands on his body, and that matters. In those cases, it doesn't matter if you're "only" 1/2 inch short, you're too short to reach.

And when really short, you run into that problem with more DEs than just those with really long arms.

For sure, and it's not just arm length... wingspan is just as important, or even more important.

 

[thenewguy]

I won't be upset if they draft in the trenches at all. But that's not the end all be all. Find me a Superbowl team in the past 25 years that didn't have absolute dogs somewhere on the roster that could change games. Mack was the last one Chicago has had and that was forever ago now and it's pathetic.

This is the point I'm trying to get across with Warren and Jeanty. You plan on not picking in the top 10 again, so go and try and get a pro bowl caliber player there. In this draft I think it's Carter, Hunter, Graham, Walker, Jeanty, and Warren, in that order. I think Jeanty and Warren are who's left. If there was a surefire starting LT I would put them at the top of the list. I don't think there is one this year.

 

[SugarWalls]

The Lions other TE was a UDFA and primarily a blocking TE. So are you saying Johnson failed to properly use him?

Ben Johnson runs a variant of the offense that the Patriots run. *Spoiler alert* NE was known to successfully use two TE's in their offense.

They literally fckn traded Hockenson. If they valued having 2 TE's so much why did they trade Hockenson?????

 

[DefNextYear]

I can't recall seeing Hampton as high as Top 15, let alone 10-15, and I have absolutely not heard anyone discuss Johnson in terms of even a sure first rounder, let alone Top 10-15.

At 39 or 41 I hope for a better back than Johnson, of which there should be a few. At 10, my dick would be totally ripped off.

I wouldn’t be surprised if 3 RBs are off the board in the 1st, almost certainly about the Bears 2nd pick. That would mean our most likely options, at best, at 39 are probably Judkins, Johnson, or Skat. Some are ok waiting til late, but those are probably the options if going with a RB in the early 2nd.

 

[BaBaBlacksheep]

We should take him at 10

Honestly he would be a perfect fit. Would just make me sick to do it at 10.

 

[ndgt10]

I hope Jalon Walker gets to 10