2009 Chicago Bears offseason

[WrigleyField 22]

My needs as of now (hopefully we sign a WR and I change it)

 

WR

FS

DL

LB

CB

OL

 

I really think we'll find a WR in FA, a decent #2 guy, so my ideal draft would look something like:

2- Jarron Gilbert - San Jose St - DL

3- Rashad Johnson - Alabama - S

4- Ramses Barden - Cal Poly - WR

5- Michael Bennett - Texas A&M - DE

5- Nate Davis - Ball State - QB

6- Brandon Hughes -Oregon St - CB

7- Dave Philistin - Maryland- LB

7- Ramon Foster - Tennessee - OL

Some particular guys might change, but position wise and stuff, that looks good. Then my roster would be:

 

QB- Cutler, Davis, Hanie, Basanez (P.S.)

RB- Forte, Jones, Wolfe, Peterson

FB- Davis (if you find another vet or UDFA to compete, cool)

WR- Hester, #2 FA, Bennet, Davis, Barden, Rideau (P.S.)

TE- Olsen, Clark, Davis

OT- Pace, Williams, Shaffer, Foster (P.S)

OG- Beekman, Omilaye, Garza, Buenning

C- Kreutz

 

DE-Brown, Ogunleye, Anderson, Bennett

DT- Harris, Dvoracek, Harrison, Adams

DL- Gilbert, Idonije

OLB- Briggs, Hillenmeyer, Roach, Williams, LaRqocque,

ILB- Urlacher, Philistin (P.S.)

CB- Tillman, Vasher, Graham, McBride, Hamilton, Hughes (P.S.)

FS- Johnson, Bowman, Bullocks

SS- Payne, Steltz

DB/KR- Manning

K- Gould

P- Maynard

LS- Mannely

 

Possible cuts: Garza, Buenning, Adams, LaRocque, Bullocks, Hamilton

Other Borderline P.S./roster fillers: Reed (G), Balogh (T), Mines (TE), Clermond (DE), Toeaina (DT), Burgess (CB), Earl (S), Baldwin (DE), Aromashodu (WR), Broussard (WR)

 

So I think the biggest need right now is for the Bears to find a reliable stop gap #2 type receiver. Holt obviously would be great as a #1, but I don't see it happening, so we need to either look into the shaky background guys like Matt Jones or Plaxico, or older receivers like Amani Toomer or Joe Jurevicius. Not the sexiest names out there, but we don't need our #2 guy to a huge threat just yet, just reliable. Olsen, Clark, Hester, and Forte will get a lot of touches still. The defense on the other hand I think isn't too far from being good, it just needs to have a little youth injected into it, particularly at S and DL. I'd love to address those two spots with our first two picks. If we ignore the defense too much though, I think we'll be looking at it in a year or two and wondering how we are ever going to fix it. Most likely a WR at 2 will be a project type player. If we want a project, I'm sure we can find a high risk guy in round 4 who fell because of injury concerns or something along those lines. And there won't be pressure to perform right away. On the other hand I think we can find some immediate impact guys for the defense in round 2 and 3.

 

Basically our offense has been improved a lot with Cutler, Pace, Shaffer, and hopefully continued improvement from Hester, Forte, and Olsen. Our defense has been largely ignored so far, and has been declining the past few seasons. Lets please fix the defense and hope our improvements to the offense have been enough (including signing a decent vet WR)

[Magnetic Curses]

jarron gilbert can jump out of a pool.

[Wilson A2000]

jarron gilbert can jump out of a pool.

 

[dew1679666265]

I really didn't think of this WR class as top-heavy though. More than it has quite a few acceptable prospects that are just below that top level. I was hoping (obviously, for selfish reasons) that this meant several would drop.

 

I mean I can certainly see Crabtree & Maclin getting snapped up quickly. Are all these other guys -- 5, 6 prospects down the line -- so good that they will all warrant being taken above 49? I'm having a hard believing that. We'll see if I'm just being stupid :)

 

Crabtree and Maclin are almost sure to be gone no later than 20, I'd say. Harvin, Britt and Nicks will be the next trio to go and, depending on who else is on the board, they could be gone as soon as the end of the first round or as late as the end of the second round. However, with teams in the teens appearing to show decent interest in those three, I think the chances are higher that all three are gone sooner than later.

 

Guys like Iglesias, Murphy, Robiskie, etc. should be there at 49, though.

 

Of course, I could be way off too. I thought there'd be a receiver taken in the first round last year. :D

[WrigleyField 22]

Bears need defensive help in this draft. Here is my attempt to break down how we've ignored defense.

 

Past three years, the offensive/defensive breakdown in the draft:

I assigned values based on the round:

1st- 10, 2nd - 8, 3rd - 6, 4th - 4, 5th - 2, 6th/7th - 1

Kind of a "Time Value" thing, I multiple the total of two years ago by .8, and 3 years by .6

 

Offense

1,2,3,5,7,7,7=10+8+6+2+1+1+1=29

1,3,4,7=10+6+4+1=21*.8= 16.8

2,6,6=8+1+1=10:*.6=6

Total=51.8

 

Defense

3,4,5,7,7=6+4+2+1+1=14

2,3,5,5,7=8+6+2+2+1=19*.8=15.2 (keep in mind, those first two aren't even here anymore- Bauzin,Okwo)

2,3,4,5=8+6+4+2=20*.6=12

Total=41.2

 

FA/Trade acquisitions Past two years:

Defense:

Archuleta

Adams

Bullocks

 

Offense:

Cutler

Pace

Shaffer

Omilaye

Jones

Booker

Lloyd

 

(I may be forgetting some, especially small signings, but thats a pretty good idea).

 

I'd say we've focused a lot on the offense, not just this off season, but the past three years. Let's see some defense at the top of this draft.

[Jehrico]

jarron gilbert can jump out of a pool.

 

Yeah, but the real question is...can he jump over a car?

[NCCubFan]

Do we still have Peterson?

According to the Bears' website, yes.

[SpongeWorthy]

I still think a good backup running back is a first day draft need.

[Outshined_One]

I still think a good backup running back is a first day draft need.

 

We only have one first day pick now. :D

[David]

I don't really mind Kevin Jones as our second back.

[rawaction]

Bears need defensive help in this draft. Here is my attempt to break down how we've ignored defense.

 

Past three years, the offensive/defensive breakdown in the draft:

I assigned values based on the round:

1st- 10, 2nd - 8, 3rd - 6, 4th - 4, 5th - 2, 6th/7th - 1

Kind of a "Time Value" thing, I multiple the total of two years ago by .8, and 3 years by .6

 

Offense

1,2,3,5,7,7,7=10+8+6+2+1+1+1=29

1,3,4,7=10+6+4+1=21*.8= 16.8

2,6,6=8+1+1=10:*.6=6

Total=51.8

 

Defense

3,4,5,7,7=6+4+2+1+1=14

2,3,5,5,7=8+6+2+2+1=19*.8=15.2 (keep in mind, those first two aren't even here anymore- Bauzin,Okwo)

2,3,4,5=8+6+4+2=20*.6=12

Total=41.2

 

FA/Trade acquisitions Past two years:

Defense:

Archuleta

Adams

Bullocks

 

Offense:

Cutler

Pace

Shaffer

Omilaye

Jones

Booker

Lloyd

 

(I may be forgetting some, especially small signings, but thats a pretty good idea).

 

I'd say we've focused a lot on the offense, not just this off season, but the past three years. Let's see some defense at the top of this draft.

 

Good post. When the Bears were good on defense, up until 2006, they were bringing in fresh faces from the draft consistently. Granted they kept trying, but failed miserably with Bazuin and Okwo. Also, Anderson regressing has hurt.

 

I think it's much easier to bring in veteran offensive players than defensive players. Defensive players can easily step in and play right away, getting by on their god given ability. They also lose effectiveness as the age moreso than offensive players. So, I would rather draft a DL or a CB and put him in the rotation over drafting a WR, QB, or even an OL and throwing him to the wolves.

[UK1679666180]

I haven't been following the NFL since the reg. season started but if Reggie Williams is still avail. I'd like to see the Bears go after him.

[tfarks]

I haven't been following the NFL since the reg. season started but if Reggie Williams is still avail. I'd like to see the Bears go after him.

 

He just get a felony drug charge against him a couple days ago. Not gonna happen.

[Soul]

I still think a good backup running back is a first day draft need.

 

We only have one first day pick now. :D

 

RB is not very high on my list of needs, all things considered. We need a WR somewhere -- FA or draft -- and then D, D, D.

[Guest]

I still think a good backup running back is a first day draft need.

 

We only have one first day pick now. :D

 

RB is not very high on my list of needs, all things considered. We need a WR somewhere -- FA or draft -- and then D, D, D.

 

Agreed. I think you can find a halfway decent back up RB on the waiver wire. For as little as a RB is going to see playing time behind Forte, I'm fine with what we have.

[jersey cubs fan]

Bears need defensive help in this draft. Here is my attempt to break down how we've ignored defense.

 

Past three years, the offensive/defensive breakdown in the draft:

I assigned values based on the round:

1st- 10, 2nd - 8, 3rd - 6, 4th - 4, 5th - 2, 6th/7th - 1

Kind of a "Time Value" thing, I multiple the total of two years ago by .8, and 3 years by .6

 

Offense

1,2,3,5,7,7,7=10+8+6+2+1+1+1=29

1,3,4,7=10+6+4+1=21*.8= 16.8

2,6,6=8+1+1=10:*.6=6

Total=51.8

 

Defense

3,4,5,7,7=6+4+2+1+1=14

2,3,5,5,7=8+6+2+2+1=19*.8=15.2 (keep in mind, those first two aren't even here anymore- Bauzin,Okwo)

2,3,4,5=8+6+4+2=20*.6=12

Total=41.2

 

FA/Trade acquisitions Past two years:

Defense:

Archuleta

Adams

Bullocks

 

Offense:

Cutler

Pace

Shaffer

Omilaye

Jones

Booker

Lloyd

 

(I may be forgetting some, especially small signings, but thats a pretty good idea).

 

I'd say we've focused a lot on the offense, not just this off season, but the past three years. Let's see some defense at the top of this draft.

 

Good post. When the Bears were good on defense, up until 2006, they were bringing in fresh faces from the draft consistently. Granted they kept trying, but failed miserably with Bazuin and Okwo. Also, Anderson regressing has hurt.

 

I think it's much easier to bring in veteran offensive players than defensive players. Defensive players can easily step in and play right away, getting by on their god given ability. They also lose effectiveness as the age moreso than offensive players. So, I would rather draft a DL or a CB and put him in the rotation over drafting a WR, QB, or even an OL and throwing him to the wolves.

How is Hester counted on this list? He was drafted as a DB/KR, you can't count him as offense. That year they went DB, DB, DT, LB, DE, RB, G. Then, in 2007, they went Olsen 1, at the end of the draft, but your arbitrary value system gives more emphasis to that pick, even though he was closer in numerical order to DManning than Chris Williams. Aside from that, they wasted their next three picks on reaches that didn't come close to fulfilling their value, Bazuin, Wolfe, Okwo. The only guy still around is the offensive player, but I don't think you can say they emphasized offense over defense in that draft.

 

I don't think they have ignored defense, as much as they got cocky with their supposed ability to find gems there. They ignored the offensive line, but they've picked defensive players. They've just done a horrible job recently. The last three drafts they went heavy defense, mixed, and heavy offense. The free agent/trade aspect is meaningless, as they've had much more stability of players on defense and invested more money than most teams have done on defense during that time. They just kept their own because earlier in this regime they actually did a good job finding guys.

 

I also think a portion of the problem is that after the Super Bowl run, Lovie and the coaches got more decision making power, and they were able to get guys they wanted.

[WrigleyField 22]

I did count Hester as offense. I was kind of unsure where to put him, but I thought about it and went offense for two reasons:

 

1. He was drafted as a KR, with whatever benefit he had as a DB thought of as just added benefit.

2. He's on offense now.

 

Also, I realize the numbers are arbitrary and like you said, Olsen and Manning are a lot closer in value, but it was easier to go by round, just for a simple explanation.

 

Also, I thought about adding a breakdown of not only the pick we made, but whos still here now. If I did that, it would shift even more towards the offense.

[jersey cubs fan]

I did count Hester as offense. I was kind of unsure where to put him, but I thought about it and went offense for two reasons:

 

1. He was drafted as a KR, with whatever benefit he had as a DB thought of as just added benefit.

2. He's on offense now.

 

Also, I realize the numbers are arbitrary and like you said, Olsen and Manning are a lot closer in value, but it was easier to go by round, just for a simple explanation.

 

Also, I thought about adding a breakdown of not only the pick we made, but whos still here now. If I did that, it would shift even more towards the offense.

 

Well, he was drafted at defense, so you should change that. As for your last point, that has nothing to do with ignoring defense. The fact that guys aren't here means they drafted the wrong guys and/or there were guys already here that were better enough to make them worthless.

 

The Bears haven't ignored defense. They've pretty much drafted equals amounts of both over the past three years. They just have wasted too many picks on failed defensive players.

[Soul]

I think it would be more accurate to say that Angelo has given additional attention to the offense recently, with picks such as Forte, Williams, and Olsen.

[WrigleyField 22]

I did count Hester as offense. I was kind of unsure where to put him, but I thought about it and went offense for two reasons:

 

1. He was drafted as a KR, with whatever benefit he had as a DB thought of as just added benefit.

2. He's on offense now.

 

Also, I realize the numbers are arbitrary and like you said, Olsen and Manning are a lot closer in value, but it was easier to go by round, just for a simple explanation.

 

Also, I thought about adding a breakdown of not only the pick we made, but whos still here now. If I did that, it would shift even more towards the offense.

 

Well, he was drafted at defense, so you should change that. As for your last point, that has nothing to do with ignoring defense. The fact that guys aren't here means they drafted the wrong guys and/or there were guys already here that were better enough to make them worthless.

 

The Bears haven't ignored defense. They've pretty much drafted equals amounts of both over the past three years. They just have wasted too many picks on failed defensive players.

My quantitative breakdown would disagree, even if you shifted Hester over to defense, which you would be silly, so I won't.

 

And you do have to look at how your picks have turned out when determining what you're gonna do next. The fact that two of our highest defensive picks flamed out says a lot.

 

And beyond the draft, most of our acquisitions in trade and free agency have gone to the offense. Time to put some youth into the defense, because I think we could get some impact players, and I don't see that with WR (pretty much the only offensive position you could justify taking an early pick with.

[WrigleyField 22]

Okay here's a more in depth view.

 

This time I used the trade value chart. I didn't account for comp picks so after round three, its just based off the rounds and not the true overall value. Anyone after Rd 7 pick 32 just got a value of two.

 

I put one with Hester on offense and the other with Hester on defense.

 

I still used the 100%, 80%, 60% rule.

 

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v313/snetsrak43/bears.jpg

 

Then add in the addition of Cutler, who I'd say if you could put a value on him draft wise would be top 5, so thats 1,500+ pts in value. And three new lineman, two of whom should start. Yea, our defense has gotten the shaft a little. We could use some picks, especially since our one main offensive need will be hard to fill through the draft with an immediate impact.

 

Edit-

If you take away the 100,80,60% rule, the numbers are

 

With Hester on Offense:

Offense: 3,213

Defense: 1,511

 

With Hester on Defense:

Offense: 2,883

Defense: 1,841

 

EditII- Also, if I had gone back 4 years. The 2005 draft:

2005	
       1       1       4	4	Cedric Benson	RB	Texas
	2	2	7	39	Mark Bradley	WR	Oklahoma
	3	4	5	106	Kyle Orton	QB	Purdue
	4	5	4	140	Airese Currie	WR	Clemson
	5	6	7	181	Chris Harris	DB	Louisiana-Monroe
	6	7	6	220	Rodriques Wilson	DB	South Carolina

[WrigleyField 22]

Here's some more Bear related draft stuff at RealGM.

 

Q:

Jeff - You have said the Bears really liked Pat White in the second round, but I'm going to go ahead and assume that the Cutler trade changed things.

 

Who will the Bears be targeting in the second round now that they don't have a lot of early picks. Will one of Hicks/Britt/Harvin be there?

 

Maybe that tackle Gilbert or a high potential end like Michael Johnson?

 

A:

None of the WRs you mentioned will be there. In that range it looks like Brandon Tate, Derrick Williams, Mike Thomas, Joaquin Iglesias, maybe Brian Robiskie but probably not. Hakeem Nicks is falling and it's not OOTQ he's there. I don't think either defensive guy you mentioned will be there either. Lawrence Sidbury is possible, Fili Moala, Ron Brace, maybe Paul Kruger as the possibilities up front. Larry English could fit there but it seems he's destined to play 3-4 OLB.

 

I could see them going safety but none really fit in that range. Probably the 3rd rounder with someone like Rashad Johnson or William Moore.

 

I've brought him up before, but keep an eye on New Mexico WR Marko Mitchell in the later rounds to Chicago. Real big and pretty fast, decent hands. The Bears have been all over him on the scouting trail and he fits the role that Marcus Monk couldn't. They also spent a lot of time at GVSU looking at OLB Dan Skuta, who looks like a 5th-6th rounder and fits Lovie's defense well.

 

Q:

I know you've kind of addressed it in an earlier question, but how confident do you think the Bears will go WR in round two? Would them signing a WR, like Holt or Toomer change your opinion?

 

I'm personally hoping for a stop gap WR like Holt and seeing defense with their first two picks.

 

A:

If Angelo feels like it's not a reach pick they'll take a WR, but he won't force it. If there's a safety or DL that rates higher on their board than any WR available that will be their pick. Anyone they bring in at this point doesn't change anything. They are looking more long-term solutions with their draft picks, and they need at least 2 long-term WRs.

 

FWIW Holt is a real longshot from what I'm hearing. Haven't heard anything about Toomer, but consider that the Giants loved him, they need a WR and they still let him go.

 

His latest mock has:

49: Hakeem Nicks, WR, NCU

99: Jason Phillips, LB, TCU

 

I'd be surprised to see Nicks fall that far, and thats a situation where even if you addressed WR in FA, that would be too good of value to pass up. I like the one bolded part above, if true.

[Soul]

didn't he just contradict himself? in the first part he says nicks won't be there, then he says it's not out of the question, then his mock has us taking him.

 

FWIW, I could definitely see Nicks falling to 49.

[WrigleyField 22]

He does kind of contradict himself, but keep in mind from that question until the most recent mock there was a lag of a few days. So he did ultimately imply in that answer that Nicks could fall, and then came to the conclusion with his mock draft that he would. Could change again by the next mock.

 

And as I've said before, I don't think his answers are the gospel, but its good to hear from someone than just Kiper, and he isn't a random guy. He has sources. Would I put them against Kiper's? No, but I can't also just ask Kiper a question on a message board whenever I have one.

 

Take it for what its worth, basically.

[Soul]

Oh it's definitely good to hear from more than Kiper.