51to54 Posted April 24, 2018 Share Posted April 24, 2018 Davenport at 8. High physical traits, high ceiling, key position/role, Pace not afraid to draft small school athletes, even with an early run on QB's I don't see a trade as likely. Pace believes he won't be drafting this high again for a long while so takes his swing at the highest ceiling with this pick. Can pick up quality Oline in later rounds along with WR to 'Protect Trubisky' this draft. There are 5-6 guys I wouldn't mind us taking with the assumption that Pace and crew know what they are doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heinz D. Posted April 24, 2018 Share Posted April 24, 2018 I hope you're right. Davenport or Landry would be the best choices for team, as I don't see that Floyd has cemented his status in the way we all were hoping. (Any good defense needs two guys on the edge, anyway.) I also agree that a trade seems unlikely, even though tons of folks are predicting otherwise. If the pick is Davenport (or Landry), I'm guessing that puts OG (or maybe OT, depending on how the board falls) squarely in Pace's crosshairs for the second round. Unfortunately...I'm sticking with my earlier prediction that Nelson will be on the board at #8, and Pace will take him. Yeah, I know it's weird to attach "unfortunate" to one of the top talents in the draft (in pretty much every analysts' opinion), but that need seems less important to me, and also a stretch at that high of a pick. Maybe they'd see if he could play RT, I dunno. In this scenario--Nelson at #8--that probably puts them on the hunt for WR in the second, as the edge rush value won't be the same there... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZBearsFan Posted April 24, 2018 Share Posted April 24, 2018 I want Landry at 8 even if it’s seen as early. I don’t care for the draft day takes - what matters is what he becomes once games start, and I think he’s DROY and an impact edge rusher from day 1. However, if we pick at 8 my gut tell me it’s Edmunds or Roquan. I don’t think they stay at 8 though. I think they trade down (whether Nelson is there or not) to 12 or 15 and take Landry or Davenport there while adding quantity in round 2-4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heinz D. Posted April 24, 2018 Share Posted April 24, 2018 3 minutes ago, AZBearsFan said: I don’t think they stay at 8 though. I think they trade down (whether Nelson is there or not) to 12 or 15 and take Landry or Davenport there while adding quantity in round 2-4. That would be the best case scenario, but a drop of four slots jeopardizes getting one of them (assuming they have a preference), and dropping seven slots means they could miss out on both. They'd have to have like 2-4 other dudes they'd be happy with if they trade down, and they well could. McGlinchey, Daniels, Smith...there are a fair amount of other options if they go that route. And provided they got decent quantity in return for the trade down, well, it would be hard to bad mouth that sort of maneuvering, really. Even though that wouldn't be my first choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZBearsFan Posted April 24, 2018 Share Posted April 24, 2018 2 minutes ago, Heinz D. said: That would be the best case scenario, but a drop of four slots jeopardizes getting one of them (assuming they have a preference), and dropping seven slots means they could miss out on both. They'd have to have like 2-4 other dudes they'd be happy with if they trade down, and they well could. McGlinchey, Daniels, Smith...there are a fair amount of other options if they go that route. And provided they got decent quantity in return for the trade down, well, it would be hard to bad mouth that sort of maneuvering, really. Even though that wouldn't be my first choice. My preference would to be to trade back no further than 12, for this exact reason. But, if AZ is trading up from 15 for the 4th QB I would expect we are also netting their 2019 1 or 2 which would make the risk far more palatable to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TB 1 Posted April 24, 2018 Share Posted April 24, 2018 30 minutes ago, Heinz D. said: I hope you're right. Davenport or Landry would be the best choices for team, as I don't see that Floyd has cemented his status in the way we all were hoping. (Any good defense needs two guys on the edge, anyway.) I also agree that a trade seems unlikely, even though tons of folks are predicting otherwise. If the pick is Davenport (or Landry), I'm guessing that puts OG (or maybe OT, depending on how the board falls) squarely in Pace's crosshairs for the second round. Unfortunately...I'm sticking with my earlier prediction that Nelson will be on the board at #8, and Pace will take him. Yeah, I know it's weird to attach "unfortunate" to one of the top talents in the draft (in pretty much every analysts' opinion), but that need seems less important to me, and also a stretch at that high of a pick. Maybe they'd see if he could play RT, I dunno. In this scenario--Nelson at #8--that probably puts them on the hunt for WR in the second, as the edge rush value won't be the same there... That is why I am hoping Nelson goes before 8. Guards just aren't good value in the top 10-15 picks of an NFL draft. I would draft a defensive play maker with the first pick. Despite ranking in the top 10 in defense they lack impact players on defense. The Bears don't intercept passes and they badly need an edge rusher. The Bears can get a guard later in the draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madmike90 Posted April 24, 2018 Share Posted April 24, 2018 Smart money is on staying at #8 and it being Davenport or Edmunds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowler1215 Posted April 25, 2018 Share Posted April 25, 2018 I fear we're taking Nelson. I fear more we're going to trade up to get him and sacrifice a future pick for him. We have 2 solid starters in Long and Whitehair. We have Kush, Watford, Morgan and I heard we're converting Rashad Coward to OG. We're set there. We need a center and a RT for the future since Massies contract is up after this season. I hope Landry is the pick, and we get him at 12 or 15 with an extra 2nd and/or 3rd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TB 1 Posted April 25, 2018 Share Posted April 25, 2018 1 hour ago, Madmike90 said: Smart money is on staying at #8 and it being Davenport or Edmunds. I hope you are right but i see the Bears taking Nelson at 8 if he is there. Which i don't like the value. This defense will regress this year with out a good draft. The Bears need pass rushers badly. The problem is there will be guys you think will be there in the 2nd who wont be because pass rushers get overdrafted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beardown3231 Posted April 25, 2018 Share Posted April 25, 2018 57 minutes ago, Bowler1215 said: I fear we're taking Nelson. I fear more we're going to trade up to get him and sacrifice a future pick for him. We have 2 solid starters in Long and Whitehair. We have Kush, Watford, Morgan and I heard we're converting Rashad Coward to OG. We're set there. We need a center and a RT for the future since Massies contract is up after this season. I hope Landry is the pick, and we get him at 12 or 15 with an extra 2nd and/or 3rd. Couldn’t they move Whitehair to C in your scenario? I mean, I don’t want Nelson either but I wouldn’t say “fear” is the word. I just would rather have other guys Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowler1215 Posted April 25, 2018 Share Posted April 25, 2018 1 minute ago, beardown3231 said: Couldn’t they move Whitehair to C in your scenario? I mean, I don’t want Nelson either but I wouldn’t say “fear” is the word. I just would rather have other guys Whitehair was drafted to be a guard, not a center. He's an ok center, but I feel he's better as a guard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZBearsFan Posted April 25, 2018 Share Posted April 25, 2018 22 minutes ago, Bowler1215 said: Whitehair was drafted to be a guard, not a center. He's an ok center, but I feel he's better as a guard. Nagy made a really complimentary comment about him as a center during camp last week. Don’t remember exactly what it was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronMike84 Posted April 25, 2018 Share Posted April 25, 2018 3 hours ago, AZBearsFan said: I want Landry at 8 even if it’s seen as early. I don’t care for the draft day takes - what matters is what he becomes once games start, and I think he’s DROY and an impact edge rusher from day 1. However, if we pick at 8 my gut tell me it’s Edmunds or Roquan. I don’t think they stay at 8 though. I think they trade down (whether Nelson is there or not) to 12 or 15 and take Landry or Davenport there while adding quantity in round 2-4. I'm all-in for Roquan at this point. His draft stock is on fire, though. I think his ceiling is Indi at #6. We know Pace is a "traits" guy. Roquan's traits are off the chart, so it's just a matter of how pace views his ceiling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heinz D. Posted April 25, 2018 Share Posted April 25, 2018 18 minutes ago, IronMike84 said: I'm all-in for Roquan at this point. His draft stock is on fire, though. I think his ceiling is Indi at #6. We know Pace is a "traits" guy. Roquan's traits are off the chart, so it's just a matter of how pace views his ceiling. It's rare a guy who doesn't really rush the passer goes in the top ten, though. Especially a top ten that will likely feature four quarterbacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronMike84 Posted April 25, 2018 Share Posted April 25, 2018 2 minutes ago, Heinz D. said: It's rare a guy who doesn't really rush the passer goes in the top ten, though. Especially a top ten that will likely feature four quarterbacks. Kuechly went at 9. He's worth if he's projected to have the same sort of impact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.