Bears game 13: Sunday, Dec 12 @ Den 3pm

[sneakypower]

so...picks that have outplayed or played up to their draft position:

Conte, Wright, Webb, Melton, Moore, Knox, Forte, Bennett, Steltz, Bowman, Davis, Olsen, Graham, Manning, Hester, Anderson

 

I'd argue Olsen didn't outplay or play up to his draft position, but he's been worth more than a damn.

i saw it as, he led the team in receiving TDs three straight seasons and then netted a high 3rd rounder via trade

 

hard to complain too much about that from the 31st overall pick

[jersey cubs fan]

so...picks that have outplayed or played up to their draft position:

Conte, Wright, Webb, Melton, Moore, Knox, Forte, Bennett, Steltz, Bowman, Davis, Olsen, Graham, Manning, Hester, Anderson

 

I'd argue Olsen didn't outplay or play up to his draft position, but he's been worth more than a damn.

i saw it as, he led the team in receiving TDs three straight seasons and then netted a high 3rd rounder via trade

 

hard to complain too much about that from the 31st overall pick

 

Having a guy who was worth the 31st pick get traded for the 70ish pick 5 years later doesn't support that argument. And leading this team in TDs as a receiver says more about the Bears than him.

[minnesotacubsfan]

Olsen not being used to his fullest ability also shouldn't count against him, he wasn't a bust, he was a good pick

[jersey cubs fan]

Olsen not being used to his fullest ability also shouldn't count against him, he wasn't a bust, he was a good pick

 

There's pretty wide gap between being a bust and not playing up to the position you were drafted. The Bears didn't get 1st round TE production out of him and they didn't get good value in trade for him in the prime of his career. He wasn't a bust, he was a nice player who did some nice things. He just didn't perform up to what you'd hope for that pick.

[rawaction]

Having a guy who was worth the 31st pick get traded for the 70ish pick 5 years later doesn't support that argument. And leading this team in TDs as a receiver says more about the Bears than him.

 

Seems like an odd way to value a player. I understand the logic of it, but I would guess it's pretty rare for any player to bring back a pick as high as the one he was taken with. If a player is getting traded, there's usually a good reason why he doesn't get similar value. Cutler, ironically, is a rare exception of a top 15 pick getting a top 15 pick + in return.

[sneakypower]

There's pretty wide gap between being a bust and not playing up to the position you were drafted. The Bears didn't get 1st round TE production out of him and they didn't get good value in trade for him in the prime of his career. He wasn't a bust, he was a nice player who did some nice things. He just didn't perform up to what you'd hope for that pick.

using the trade value chart, a #31 has the same value as #54 and #70, together

 

(you're obviously going to disagree, but) i think it's pretty reasonable to say that his on-field play with the Bears would basically only have to justify that of a 54th overall pick, which he more than did

[jersey cubs fan]

There's pretty wide gap between being a bust and not playing up to the position you were drafted. The Bears didn't get 1st round TE production out of him and they didn't get good value in trade for him in the prime of his career. He wasn't a bust, he was a nice player who did some nice things. He just didn't perform up to what you'd hope for that pick.

using the trade value chart, a #31 has the same value as #54 and #70, together

 

(you're obviously going to disagree, but) i think it's pretty reasonable to say that his on-field play with the Bears would basically only have to justify that of a 54th overall pick, which he more than did

 

I think that's a silly way to try and justify it.

[jersey cubs fan]

Having a guy who was worth the 31st pick get traded for the 70ish pick 5 years later doesn't support that argument. And leading this team in TDs as a receiver says more about the Bears than him.

 

Seems like an odd way to value a player. I understand the logic of it, but I would guess it's pretty rare for any player to bring back a pick as high as the one he was taken with. If a player is getting traded, there's usually a good reason why he doesn't get similar value. Cutler, ironically, is a rare exception of a top 15 pick getting a top 15 pick + in return.

 

I'm not sure why you are trying to characterize trades the way you are. Trades in general are rare in the NFL. There's a couple different reasons for them. A) A team doesn't want the guy so they move him to another team, or B) A player outperforms expectations but the team that has him has another guy in place and so they trade him to a team that can use him. This often happens with QBs, like Cassel and Kolb. And on occasion, a team doesn't have interest in signing an extension to a star player and they move him for pretty high value, like Richard Seymour. All of those guys were traded for value at or above where they were taken.

 

 

If a player is taken in the 1st round, then gets traded 5 years later for a 3rd round pick, his team was trying to get rid of him and he didn't live up to his 1st round status.

[TruffleShuffle]

yeah even if you think chris williams has been a disappointment based on where he was drafted, he's seen significant playing time and been decent if not above average. it's quite obvious that the statement about no draftees in the last five years being worth a damn is complete nonsense.

[cubbyvirus00]

yeah even if you think chris williams has been a disappointment based on where he was drafted, he's seen significant playing time and been decent if not above average. it's quite obvious that the statement about no draftees in the last five years being worth a damn is complete nonsense.

 

 

So seeing significant playing time is indicative of how good a player is or proof that they've been a good draft pick?

 

That my friend, is nonsense. Chris Williams is a below average guard and has had one small stretch of decent play before getting hurt.

[imb]

So he's been worth a damn when he was on the field? It's the GM's fault that he's hurt.

[bukie]

yeah even if you think chris williams has been a disappointment based on where he was drafted, he's seen significant playing time and been decent if not above average. it's quite obvious that the statement about no draftees in the last five years being worth a damn is complete nonsense.

 

 

So seeing significant playing time is indicative of how good a player is or proof that they've been a good draft pick?

 

That my friend, is nonsense. Chris Williams is a below average guard and has had one small stretch of decent play before getting hurt.

Chris Williams was the only above average lineman the Bears had this year. Everything you've said the last two pages is nonsense.

[minnesotacubsfan]

That my friend, is nonsense. Chris Williams is a below average guard and has had one small stretch of decent play before getting hurt.

 

 

actually, I think football outsiders had him rated as an above average guard. and although until more recently it has never been in vogue to take guards in the 1st round, he (as an above average guard) was well worth him being picked where he was even if he was drafted as a LT.

 

eta: I forgot he was #14 that year. I guess that could be a reach for him as a guard, I was thinking he was drafted later in the 1st. But I still wont call that pick a total bust, as he did fill in a hole for the o-line with an above average performance

[rawaction]

Having a guy who was worth the 31st pick get traded for the 70ish pick 5 years later doesn't support that argument. And leading this team in TDs as a receiver says more about the Bears than him.

 

Seems like an odd way to value a player. I understand the logic of it, but I would guess it's pretty rare for any player to bring back a pick as high as the one he was taken with. If a player is getting traded, there's usually a good reason why he doesn't get similar value. Cutler, ironically, is a rare exception of a top 15 pick getting a top 15 pick + in return.

 

I'm not sure why you are trying to characterize trades the way you are. Trades in general are rare in the NFL. There's a couple different reasons for them. A) A team doesn't want the guy so they move him to another team, or B) A player outperforms expectations but the team that has him has another guy in place and so they trade him to a team that can use him. This often happens with QBs, like Cassel and Kolb. And on occasion, a team doesn't have interest in signing an extension to a star player and they move him for pretty high value, like Richard Seymour. All of those guys were traded for value at or above where they were taken.

 

 

If a player is taken in the 1st round, then gets traded 5 years later for a 3rd round pick, his team was trying to get rid of him and he didn't live up to his 1st round status.

 

I'm not arguing that Olsen lived up to his 1st round status. I even agree that those are the reasons players get traded. It was just weird to see "he was picked 31st and traded for 70th pick". Basically my point is not that he didn't live up to his billing because he didn't get the Bears a 1st round pick, but he didn't live up to his billing for the simple fact that he did get traded. Obviously, it's not a case where he was a star and or at a position of great depth like Seymour or Cassel so that puts him in the A category, which I agree with. For a player to be in the A category, it means he didn't live up to his billing.

[cubbyvirus00]

yeah even if you think chris williams has been a disappointment based on where he was drafted, he's seen significant playing time and been decent if not above average. it's quite obvious that the statement about no draftees in the last five years being worth a damn is complete nonsense.

 

 

So seeing significant playing time is indicative of how good a player is or proof that they've been a good draft pick?

 

That my friend, is nonsense. Chris Williams is a below average guard and has had one small stretch of decent play before getting hurt.

Chris Williams was the only above average lineman the Bears had this year. Everything you've said the last two pages is nonsense.

 

Thanks for adding to the discussion. :roll:

 

I couldn't find anything about Williams on Football Outsiders. I do know he played well for a small stretch of games this year, but from 2008 until now, hes been a bust. You don't select a G with the 14th overall pick.

[TruffleShuffle]

yeah even if you think chris williams has been a disappointment based on where he was drafted, he's seen significant playing time and been decent if not above average. it's quite obvious that the statement about no draftees in the last five years being worth a damn is complete nonsense.

 

 

So seeing significant playing time is indicative of how good a player is or proof that they've been a good draft pick?

 

That my friend, is nonsense. Chris Williams is a below average guard and has had one small stretch of decent play before getting hurt.

Chris Williams was the only above average lineman the Bears had this year. Everything you've said the last two pages is nonsense.

 

yeah my recollection was that he was at least adequate at tackle.

 

the virus seems to not realize that there is quite a bit of value in a young player in his rookie contract playing average football. like i said, one can express disappointment at angelo's drafts without saying that everyone he's drafted in the past 5 years is worthless. and i shouldn't have to list names (thanks to sneaky for doing that though) to avoid being accused of trolling - if anyone is trolling it's the guy who's throwing out inane statements with no basis in reality.

[cubbyvirus00]

yeah even if you think chris williams has been a disappointment based on where he was drafted, he's seen significant playing time and been decent if not above average. it's quite obvious that the statement about no draftees in the last five years being worth a damn is complete nonsense.

 

 

So seeing significant playing time is indicative of how good a player is or proof that they've been a good draft pick?

 

That my friend, is nonsense. Chris Williams is a below average guard and has had one small stretch of decent play before getting hurt.

Chris Williams was the only above average lineman the Bears had this year. Everything you've said the last two pages is nonsense.

 

yeah my recollection was that he was at least adequate at tackle.

 

the virus seems to not realize that there is quite a bit of value in a young player in his rookie contract playing average football. like i said, one can express disappointment at angelo's drafts without saying that everyone he's drafted in the past 5 years is worthless. and i shouldn't have to list names (thanks to sneaky for doing that though) to avoid being accused of trolling - if anyone is trolling it's the guy who's throwing out inane statements with no basis in reality.

 

The point of my initial post, was to really hammer home on how JA hasn't drafted a blue chip player in many years. I'm fine with young players playing average, but sadly that is all we are seeing with his drafts are just plain average players. The point being average is the status quo with the current administration.

[Guest]

Yikes, Chris Williams is nowhere near a below average guard.

[Soul]

The point of my initial post, was to really hammer home on how JA hasn't drafted a blue chip player in many years.

 

Nobody's really arguing that Angelo has had his share of disappointments (at least, it doesn't look like it).

 

But you aren't stating your case very well. Forte is not only blue chip, but he's a blue chip player that very few other than Angelo (and his team) identified.

[UMFan83]

yeah even if you think chris williams has been a disappointment based on where he was drafted, he's seen significant playing time and been decent if not above average. it's quite obvious that the statement about no draftees in the last five years being worth a damn is complete nonsense.

 

 

So seeing significant playing time is indicative of how good a player is or proof that they've been a good draft pick?

 

That my friend, is nonsense. Chris Williams is a below average guard and has had one small stretch of decent play before getting hurt.

Chris Williams was the only above average lineman the Bears had this year. Everything you've said the last two pages is nonsense.

 

yeah my recollection was that he was at least adequate at tackle.

 

the virus seems to not realize that there is quite a bit of value in a young player in his rookie contract playing average football. like i said, one can express disappointment at angelo's drafts without saying that everyone he's drafted in the past 5 years is worthless. and i shouldn't have to list names (thanks to sneaky for doing that though) to avoid being accused of trolling - if anyone is trolling it's the guy who's throwing out inane statements with no basis in reality.

 

The point of my initial post, was to really hammer home on how JA hasn't drafted a blue chip player in many years. I'm fine with young players playing average, but sadly that is all we are seeing with his drafts are just plain average players. The point being average is the status quo with the current administration.

 

I don't get how Matt Forte, who was leading the NFL in yards from scrimmage until recently despite playing with a terrible offensive line, is average.

 

Or Devin Hester, who is on a track to become a Hall of Famer albeit at a specialized position, is considered average.

 

The weird thing is that almost everyone who is arguing against you thinks that Jerry Angelo has had a bad track record in his last several drafts, but take issue with the statement that he has drafted literally 0 good players. Even the blind squirrel finds the nut sometimes.

 

I am disappointed with Angelo's drafting because it was somewhat promising after the 2003 draft where we drafted Grossman, Tillman, Briggs, Todd Johnson, Ian Scott and Justin Gage (of course his first 1st round pick was a spectacular bust). That one draft alone supplied 5 starters for the Super Bowl Bears. Then in 2004, the first 3 picks were pretty good (Tommie Harris, Tank Johnson and Berrian). Now we're at 8 starters for a super bowl team in 2 drafts. The rest of the draft consisted of a bunch of unknowns, and from that point on the drafts got progressively worse.

 

He does seem to do OK with 2nd and 3rd round picks and once in awhile he will find a steal in the later rounds, but for the most part he's struggled everywhere else.

[minnesotacubsfan]

His biggest struggle has been in ignoring certain positions for extended periods of time, see o-line

[cubbyvirus00]

 

I don't get how Matt Forte, who was leading the NFL in yards from scrimmage until recently despite playing with a terrible offensive line, is average.

 

Or Devin Hester, who is on a track to become a Hall of Famer albeit at a specialized position, is considered average.

 

The weird thing is that almost everyone who is arguing against you thinks that Jerry Angelo has had a bad track record in his last several drafts, but take issue with the statement that he has drafted literally 0 good players. Even the blind squirrel finds the nut sometimes.

 

I am disappointed with Angelo's drafting because it was somewhat promising after the 2003 draft where we drafted Grossman, Tillman, Briggs, Todd Johnson, Ian Scott and Justin Gage (of course his first 1st round pick was a spectacular bust). That one draft alone supplied 5 starters for the Super Bowl Bears. Then in 2004, the first 3 picks were pretty good (Tommie Harris, Tank Johnson and Berrian). Now we're at 8 starters for a super bowl team in 2 drafts. The rest of the draft consisted of a bunch of unknowns, and from that point on the drafts got progressively worse.

 

He does seem to do OK with 2nd and 3rd round picks and once in awhile he will find a steal in the later rounds, but for the most part he's struggled everywhere else.

 

For the record, I enjoy a good back and forth discussion regarding my favorite sports teams. My original post was a slight exaggeration, but with much emphasis on slight. I also do not in any way think Forte or Hester are average run of the mill players. But two quality players in a 5 year period will not turn a franchise into a perennial winner and that ratio to me is absolutely pathetic.

 

Do I have concerns regarding Forte and his ability to be consistent and sustain a long term period of success? Yes. But that is another discussion.

 

You hit the nail on the head in regards to Angelo's drafting and I agree with everything you said. For this fact alone, it is amazing to me that Angelo has lasted this long and I think Lovie's coaching regrettably has helped to keep Angelo in town. Management will only make a big change if we have a below average season and I am anxious to see how our o-line will be next year.

[Soul]

Angelo's been just good enough to hang around, with a franchise that doesn't pull the trigger quickly on changes, and a team that has tasted just enough success to make it highly unlikely ownership will go fish.

 

Nobody's talking about this if Cutler doesn't bust up his hand. We're sailing to another playoff berth, and people are talking about what a great job the coaching staff has done turning lemons into lemonade on the OLine, Cutler developing into a leader, yada yada.

 

That said, personally I would like to see what a different GM could do with this franchise. I'd like to see a fresh face around here, maybe even some youthful exuberance.

[Banedon]

I think we've got one more season of Angelo, after reading that blurb from Biggs.

[minnesotacubsfan]

I hope its his best, we kind of need it.