Why did Ryan Poles and Ben Johnson draft two slot receivers with the first two picks?

[Toast88]

I didn’t want a TE, and I have no clue if it’ll work out. But after reading more about him and how other teams wanted him, I’m excited.

I have a question for you. You said you’re trying to understand the thinking.

Do you actually not understand why someone wouldn’t want Colston Loveland at 10?

Like, is he a slam dunk pick for you there at 10?

 

[DaBears3434]

I have a question for you. You said you’re trying to understand the thinking.

Do you actually not understand why someone wouldn’t want Colston Loveland at 10?

Like, is he a slam dunk pick for you there at 10?

No. I wasn’t trying to understand why you didn’t like Loveland. I was trying to understand what you meant when you said you would have taken best OL/DL on your board. I was wondering if there was a limit to that line of thinking. Was there some point where the gap between best OL/DL available and your actual best player available at a different position gets so large that you decide to just take BPA?

 

[pseudonym]

Is Loveland going to be worth the 10th overall pick or not?

Seems unlikely.

After the LT/Jeanty went...yes. I think it was a brilliant pick. Teams were trying to trade up to get him.

 

[Toast88]

No. I wasn’t trying to understand why you didn’t like Loveland. I was trying to understand what you meant when you said you would have taken best OL/DL on your board. I was wondering if there was a limit to that line of thinking. Was there some point where the gap between best OL/DL available and your actual best player available at a different position gets so large that you decide to just take BPA?

Yeah, probably. I don’t know exactly where along the line that would come into play, but I think that’s fair to say.

 

[--CyBear--]

I get what the Op is saying about the bears specific process here but he should give his selection scenario to close the deal as opposed to vagaries. I wanted Nolen early but it may have been difficult to trade down so would have just taken him at 10. That said. I've seen enough drafts to let this play out and see what Loveland can do. I'll try and do that.

The slot was a no brane err and we needed another TE that could play early so the question becomes, would Nolan (or Conerly) plus Fannin be a better pairing than Loveland and Turner? If we're not sure,

My predraft scenario for the 1st 3 picks were Nolen, a TE in 2 and Johnson in 3.

 

[DaBears3434]

Yeah, probably. I don’t know exactly where along the line that would come into play, but I think that’s fair to say.

Fair enough. Let’s hope Colston has a hell of a career.

 

[Toast88]

I get what the Op is saying about the bears specific process here but he should give his selection scenario to close the deal as opposed to vagaries. I wanted Nolen early but it may have been difficult to trade down so would have just taken him at 10. That said. I've seen enough drafts to let this play out and see what Loveland can do. I'll try and do that.

The slot was a no brane err and we needed another TE that could play early so the question becomes, would Nolan (or Conerly) plus Fannin be a better pairing than Loveland and Turner? If we're not sure,
View attachment 45375
My predraft scenario for the 1st 3 picks were Nolen, a TE in 2 and Johnson in 3.

Again, you don’t have to be a chef to know the food is subpar.

I couldn’t be an NFL GM. But I can still tell that Poles sucks. I’m sure you can as well?

What would I have done? Not picked an injured backup tight end who appears to have a low ceiling.

It’s not rocket science, my dude.

 

[vabearsfan15]

The top 3 OTs that were worth taking at #10 were gone by our pick. A few decent DL I liked were availble, like Derrick Harmon, Walter Nolan, and James Pearce Jr, but #10 seemed high for any of them. If we trade back and get one of them that would have been great. But at the end of the day, I think most are fine with us drafting a TE as it is a key component of Ben Johnson's scheme to run plays with 2 TE sets.

 

[--CyBear--]

Again, you don’t have to be a chef to know the food is subpar.

I couldn’t be an NFL GM. But I can still tell that Poles sucks. I’m sure you can as well?

What would I have done? Not picked an injured backup tight end who appears to have a low ceiling.

It’s not rocket science, my dude.

True. More like figuring out sales tax with a calculator. Draft is over. It's easy now and still not?

 

[--CyBear--]

The top 3 OTs that were worth taking at #10 were gone by our pick. A few decent DL I liked were availble, like Derrick Harmon, Walter Nolan, and James Pearce Jr, but #10 seemed high for any of them. If we trade back and get one of them that would have been great. But at the end of the day, I think most are fine with us drafting a TE as it is a key component of Ben Johnson's scheme to run plays with 2 TE sets.

The predraft dread of taking a TE was always with the assumption that drafts never fall in an expected way and there's always an extra QB or 2 taken in the top 10. This draft took the top 9 players in the top 9 spots outside of TE and with 2 TEs being what fell, nobody a few picks behind the Bear was going to trade up, even if they wanted one since one had to fall. I guess Mykel and Nolen were viable options for the Bear at 10 but their 3rd pick should also fill that need.

I just checked 4 major sites to see how they felt about the Bears draft and the grades were B+ B+ B and A- . For a draft the seemingly fell away from the Bear early, that's pretty good.

For a draft that seemingly ran out of supposed targets a pick or 2 before the Bears draft slot in a few rounds, that doesn't seem bad to me. It's also a draft where I expect all 7 selections to be on the team. The pick that probably brings down the grade is Hyppolite who is a RAS player. He may be the D version of VJJ or maybe he can actually take coaching. He was taken about a 1/2 round earlier than projected but a 4.39 236lb player should be a genuine asset on ST.

In this draft I got everything I expected too though perhaps not in the order expected, Perhaps and a pure edge wasn't taken but the DL they took can play that fine in this D if desired.

​

 

[TL1961]

Seems like luxury picks when there are glaring holes and potential studs who could fill those holes.

Would love to look back in a couple of years and be wrong, but I doubt it.

The beauty of saying simply "I would have done something else" is that you're not going to look back and say "I was wrong".

Because simply bitching about moves without detailing the preferred alternative is essentially betting the field against one guy at each position.

Easy to GM that way. Not the luxury real GMs are afforded however.

 

[Luke]

I think you should change the thread title to “The Bears are wrong and I am right but I really can’t tell you why.”

there is a lot of that going on around here.

 

[playthrough2001]

The beauty of saying simply "I would have done something else" is that you're not going to look back and say "I was wrong".

Because simply bitching about moves without detailing the preferred alternative is essentially betting the field against one guy at each position.

Easy to GM that way. Not the luxury real GMs are afforded however.

That’s it exactly. Nobody has to like, love, or hate what Poles and Johnson did. However, when you want to criticize with conviction, let’s us know your “master plan.” Give us better insight.

 

[TL1961]

Bears have the uncanny ability to always end up missing on an obvious target right before their own pick in the first and then seem completely caught off guard on what to do as a result. Loveland might turn out to be great but nothing in college indicated that. You take guys with traits on day 3 instead of production since you’re paying them peanuts. A top 10 pick is earning millions and you better get some ROI as a result.

Well, when you make assumptions that fit this narrative, it's easy to say "it always happens". Does the phone "always" ring when you're in the shower? Does the other lane "always" move faster on the highway?

The Bears were reportedly not targeting Banks, so it didn't happen.

What was it that signaled to you that made it "seem they were caught completely off guard"? Was it the fact they turned in their pick at #10 with no hesitation? Was that the signal?

See, here's the deal. The Bears aren't always right, and I don't think they are always right. But when you are fabricating things that fit a preconceived narrative, you can say "they always this" or "they always that". But the facts simply don't back it up.

So for those who are mad at the GM for doing something because they invented everything to be mad about, sure it must seem others are always praising the GM. Kissing ass. But we're not.

We're simply taking a mature, level-headed approach to what happened.

Membou-Henderson would have been my choice. The Pats landed close to that, with their first choice at OT and Henderson.
Warren was rumored to be a Bears' target and I didn't want him. Or any TE at 10. But the draft fell in such a way that what the Bears did was a great alternative. And the NFL-experienced people analyzing the draft seem to have a consensus that the top of the Bears draft was very good

No panic. No reaching. No trading away draft capital. Not passing on BPA for lesser talent due to need. Not drafting the wrong TE because he was "rated higher" in a generic sense that had nothing to do with the Bears current roster.

 

[doctorbear]

The beauty of saying simply "I would have done something else" is that you're not going to look back and say "I was wrong".

Because simply bitching about moves without detailing the preferred alternative is essentially betting the field against one guy at each position.

Easy to GM that way. Not the luxury real GMs are afforded however.

I was fine with the TE pick as the throw a bone to BJ pick. It felt like Banks was scooped right before (for me, maybe not for them). I kind of saw the 1st/2nd/2nd together and wanted to see how that looked rather than judge 1 pick.

It was bizarre trading back to the end of each round without much return and to ultimately get a late 4th/5th out of it.

If the board fell that way to me, I would've liked to see something like Jalon Walker (might not fit Dennis Allen system) or Kenneth Grant or Nolen/Ersery/Tuimolau. Something like that. This would complete both the O-line and D-line in the top 3 picks now and in the next 3 years with the FA picks, and you can go wild on skill positions from there this year and next. I could see a deep playoff run with that in the next couple years.

I would've also been fine with Loveland/Ersery/Ezeraiku. That would've got them close to the above too.

 

[TL1961]

Pick an o-line or d-line guy who was taken in the first after Loveland. Almost all those guys will have a better NFL career. Very predictable.

No, YOU pick one. Name ONE.

GMs don't get to pick all the OL and DL guys. They have to pick ONE. Will someone on the DL arguably have a better career? Possibly. Can you identify who it will be? They're so obvious to you that you should easily be able to name them. And you're implying there were several, so tell us which OT will have a better career?

But consider this - the OT "having a better career" is subjective, and also ignores the more important issue. The question is which OT is so decidedly better than what is on the Bears' roster that he will have a more positive impact on the Bears' offense than Loveland. THAT is the true question.

 

[TL1961]

“This food sucks.”

“wELL wHaT wOuLd yOu hAvE cOoKeD!?!? yOu tHiNk yOu kNoW mOrE tHaN nFL gMs!?”

You don’t have be a chef to know the food sucks.

You do not have to be a chef to know when the food sucks. But you also should probably refrain from criticizing the meal while the chef is still at the market.

 

[playthrough2001]

Well, when you make assumptions that fit this narrative, it's easy to say "it always happens". Does the phone "always" ring when you're in the shower? Does the other lane "always" move faster on the highway?

The Bears were reportedly not targeting Banks, so it didn't happen.

What was it that signaled to you that made it "seem they were caught completely off guard"? Was it the fact they turned in their pick at #10 with no hesitation? Was that the signal?

See, here's the deal. The Bears aren't always right, and I don't think they are always right. But when you are fabricating things that fit a preconceived narrative, you can say "they always this" or "they always that". But the facts simply don't back it up.

So for those who are mad at the GM for doing something because they invented everything to be mad about, sure it must seem others are always praising the GM. Kissing ass. But we're not.

We're simply taking a mature, level-headed approach to what happened.

Membou-Henderson would have been my choice. The Pats landed close to that, with their first choice at OT and Henderson.
Warren was rumored to be a Bears' target and I didn't want him. Or any TE at 10. But the draft fell in such a way that what the Bears did was a great alternative. And the NFL-experienced people analyzing the draft seem to have a consensus that the top of the Bears draft was very good

No panic. No reaching. No trading away draft capital. Not passing on BPA for lesser talent due to need. Not drafting the wrong TE because he was "rated higher" in a generic sense that had nothing to do with the Bears current roster.

Another excellent post...

I was a Banks guy, but I’m not sure they liked him at all. I heard the pick and listened to their explanation and I get it. Quite frankly, it seems like with actual NFL talent evaluators, Loveland was the preferred option over Warren too. Plus, Loveland was drafted right about where he was slotted by the draftniks like Jeremiah and Brugler. I think Loveland could have easily been the pick even if Banks was on the board.

The Bears explained it too. Loveland fits with Cole. Warren is like Cole. Loveland increases their ability to create mismatches and mask their intentions on offense. They can play him in other groupings than 12 too because of his route running and receiving prowess.

 

[Discus fish salesman]

After banks went there wasn't another LT prospect in rd 1 I would've taken over Loveland. I didn't like conerly. Simmons injury was too big of a risk. I would have taken nolen or probably mykel Williams over him. I can deal with Loveland though. Increased 12 personnel and having multiplicity in what you run out of that can and should help with pass protection.

Burden or will Johnson were almost certainly BPA at that pick. Did I like the pick? Not in particular. But I also think Johnson envisions a lot of creative alignments and motions with burden.

The 4th round pick was the most atrocious pick of the draft. Could've taken him in 7 and dj Giddens in 4.

Missing on rb earlier and either edge or dt (whichever turner isn't going to play most often) was a mistake in this draft. I think they wanted Henderson and I was saying Friday that they probably should make a move up if they want him, so that was foreseeable. Outside of that, I did like the process of moving back and accumulating picks. I didn't agree with who they picked often (which doesn't make it wrong, other than the Maryland LB because that was unquestionably a bad pick), but I thought in moving back there was generally still good players of need on the board.

 

[Noonthirtyjoe]

What would I have done? Not picked an injured backup tight end who appears to have a low ceiling.

Who are you referring too? Because no one picks up a backup low ceiling anything with a top ten pick. This is not a backup TE. This is a top TE maybe the best in his class TE that catches everything and can play in the slot when needed. Maybe not the position you wanted but hardly a low ceiling back up player.