2022 Free agency thread

[G08]

9 minutes ago, StLunatic88 said:

Or, and just hear me out, I know this is a radical idea, maybe we just take the best talent we can find in the draft? 

I know I’m talking crazy, but that might just work out in the long run

Greeting your snark with snark here so bear with me...

If the best talent is at QB you want us to draft a QB?

 

That is crazy!

[StLunatic88]

11 minutes ago, G08 said:

Greeting your snark with snark here so bear with me...

If the best talent is at QB you want us to draft a QB?

 

That is crazy!

My snark is a legitimate strategy, instead of pigeon holing ourselves into one or two positions with our most valuable picks while this entire roster needs an infusion of talent (which is why Poles isn’t wasting dollars trying to bring in guys who won’t be here/be on useful contracts in a few years when the roster is turned over and ready to compete)

But if you want to play that fun little game, then Yes, draft the QB if you think he’s better than Fields. I don’t personally think any QB in this class is close, but if Arizona doesn’t do it with Kyler, where are they today?

And if you don’t think they are better than your incumbents, then use them to gain more assets and trade down, instead of forcing a pick because of a perceived immediate need. That’s what good GMs do, collect the most value on days one and two. You can grab a need or two later, as there will be guys who can help in the short term even if they don’t have much long term potential (especially at a spot like OL)

[G08]

I mean no **** man... you stack your board by best talent available and when you're up and have a cloud of similarly graded players, you take the position of need.

[StLunatic88]

2 minutes ago, G08 said:

I mean no **** man... you stack your board by best talent available and when you're up and have a cloud of similarly graded players, you take the position of need.

Oh so you’re just ignoring this in your other post. Good to know, glad we cleared that up

[G08]

1 minute ago, StLunatic88 said:

Oh so you’re just ignoring this in your other post. Good to know, glad we cleared that up

Nah I still want WR at 39 and OL at 48 😂

[WindyCity]

5 minutes ago, G08 said:

Nah I still want WR at 39 and OL at 48 😂

At this moment… how could we pick anything else.

[G08]

5 minutes ago, WindyCity said:

At this moment… how could we pick anything else.

Precisely, and the amount of talent in the top 48 picks should provide plenty of prospects from which to choose.

I suppose a trade-down from 39 is also likely if we have 10 players we like when we're on the clock...

[StLunatic88]

7 minutes ago, WindyCity said:

At this moment… how could we pick anything else.

Such an awful way to look at a draft. And Poles would be a bad GM to go about it that way. 

So many chicken-littles around here

[Heinz D.]

2 hours ago, beardown3231 said:

Wagner wants to go somewhere where he can win immediately, which is why he'll probably sign with the Rams

Yeah, I suppose you're right about that. Don't know if the Rams can afford him, though. 

The Colts certainly can.

1 hour ago, DABEARSLCF04 said:

Some one needs to make a meme of the guy poking Poles saying "do something"

Patience. He's doing plenty. 

49 minutes ago, StLunatic88 said:

Or, and just hear me out, I know this is a radical idea, maybe we just take the best talent we can find in the draft? 

I know I’m talking crazy, but that might just work out in the long run

In a best case scenario kind of world...that would be exactly what the Bears braintrust is gearing up to do.

We ain't in that sort of scenario. Pace saw to that. Repeatedly. 

However, our needs align well to our draft positioning. So it's all good. 

[G08]

6 minutes ago, StLunatic88 said:

Such an awful way to look at a draft. And Poles would be a bad GM to go about it that way. 

So many chicken-littles around here

Actually, I think our first three picks in the draft should be WR, even if better players are on the board. And they should do it from best 40 time to worst 40 time.

[StLunatic88]

13 minutes ago, Heinz D. said:

However, our needs align well to our draft positioning. So it's all good. 

The thing is we have needs EVERYWHERE 

So many of you are focused on OL and WR, are you just burying your heads in the sand for the rest of the roster? 

We need upgrades at just about every spot in the secondary, we still need more help at LB, and there is never enough talent along the DL, especially since I don’t see anyone on this roster to be guaranteed a spot farther out than next year. 

Yes it would be nice to find a high upside Weapon, but as pointed out by everyone here (even those clamoring we prioritize WR in the draft) we aren’t likely to find a day one impact guy, especially in the second round. This seems to stem from not trusting that Mooney is a top target, well Poles seems to disagree with that, and the group here can’t seem to get over it

And I have no doubt we will be adding Lineman via the draft, but you can find guys that fit this scheme all over the draft. The Rams did it, and that’s where most of you wanted to point to target their Free Agent lineman. The thing is in all OL schemes, but especially this one, you don’t need superstars, you need guys who fit and will gel as a unit. The new FO clearly thinks we already have a few guys who fit that, they have also targeted a few others. But they aren’t what some around here liked or envisioned going into the offseason, so instead it’s easier to cry that they “haven’t done anything”

It truly comes down to, some of you want this to run like Madden, and the reality is that can’t happen. Poles is actually taking the long view for once, instead of trying to patch holes and sacrifice future assists and flexibility while pretending we’re still a contender. We’re not, we won’t be this year, and probably not next either. But a bunch here seem to want to skip the tear down part of the rebuild, and are blaming those now in charge for doing it the correct way. 

[Heinz D.]

15 minutes ago, G08 said:

Actually, I think our first three picks in the draft should be WR, even if better players are on the board. And they should do it from best 40 time to worst 40 time.

Get where you're coming from...but there are plenty of wrinkles. It can't be set in stone that way...

[Heinz D.]

2 minutes ago, StLunatic88 said:

Yes it would be nice to find a high upside Weapon, but as pointed out by everyone here (even those clamoring we prioritize WR in the draft) we aren’t likely to find a day one impact guy, especially in the second round. This seems to stem from not trusting that Mooney is a top target, well Poles seems to disagree with that, and the group here can’t seem to get over it

I totally agree with the bulk of your post. 

However...I do think Mooney is a top target, and I also think Poles views him as such--and also realizes he is going to have to PAY THE MAN, and soon. 

Going further, there will be an impact receiver, at either of the Bears picks in the second round. That's just how this draft is shaping up, and that's just how it will unfold. My take on this? The Bears need another dude--and can get one. 

There should be a good to great O lineman available at either slot in the second, as well. Again, because of how the draft will shake out. 

But...I'm sure there are exceptions, and Poles isn't totally locked in. Perrion Winfrey might fall to #39, for example. 

[WindyCity]

4 hours ago, Bigbear72 said:

We signed guard Dakota Dozier from Minnesota. Depth signing.

Dozier is terrible. We would be better off starting a PR guy. At least they would have a hint of upside.

[WindyCity]

1 hour ago, StLunatic88 said:

Such an awful way to look at a draft. And Poles would be a bad GM to go about it that way. 

So many chicken-littles around here

We don’t have a starting RG or WR.

Fields is too important to not have talent around him.

I wish our GM was actively plugging holes, but he isn’t, so the draft will likely have to be needs based.