Should Emery get Aggressive

Apr 20, 2014

• #1

WindyCity

CCS Hall of Fame

Donator

CCS Hall of Fame '19

Joined:

Dec 12, 2011

Posts:

30,816

Liked Posts:

35,721

The Bears have 2 glaring needs on defence that will impact the 2014 season before he ball is snapped week 1, and that is S and DT.

These positions are still serious weaknesses after free agency. So I ask the question would you be upset if Emery moved aggressively to fill those 2 needs to with top talent?

An example

1[14] S Calvin Pryor [Louisville]

The Bears get a versatile safety with a ton if upside who starts week 1 of the season.

The Bears could trade 2[51], 4[117] and 2[2015] to move up as high as 29 if one of the top 4 DTs falls.

1[29] DT Louis Nix [[Notre Dame]

The Bears 2 biggest needs are filled by top talents that should start and provide immediate upgrades week 1 at their biggest positions of need.

 

Apr 20, 2014

• #2

hyatt151

CCS Donator

Donator

Joined:

Aug 23, 2012

Posts:

10,821

Liked Posts:

3,527

WindyCity said:

The Bears have 2 glaring needs on defence that will impact the 2014 season before he ball is snapped week 1, and that is S and DT.

These positions are still serious weaknesses after free agency. So I ask the question would you be upset if Emery moved aggressively to fill those 2 needs to with top talent?

An example

1[14] S Calvin Pryor [Louisville]

The Bears get a versatile safety with a ton if upside who starts week 1 of the season.

The Bears could trade 2[51], 4[117] and 2[2015] to move up as high as 29 if one of the top 4 DTs falls.

1[29] DT Louis Nix [[Notre Dame]

The Bears 2 biggest needs are filled by top talents that should start and provide immediate upgrades week 1 at their biggest positions of need.

Click to expand...

LOVE the idea, hate Nix

 

Apr 20, 2014

• #3

dayn44

Member

Joined:

Nov 5, 2012

Posts:

126

Liked Posts:

39

I love the idea. We would fill two positions of need. I dont think you could flip it and pick a DT first and get a great S with the second pick.

 

Apr 20, 2014

• #4

Milky

CCS Donator

Donator

Joined:

Aug 14, 2010

Posts:

3,371

Liked Posts:

3,643

I'd like to see Emery get aggressive for sure.

I'd rather see....

1[14] Donald >>> /Hagerman
Maybe even Ealy which
would push Houston inside

****TRADE****
2[51] & 4[117] for 2[37]

2[37] Buchanan (sp?)

 

Apr 20, 2014

• #5

botfly10

CCS Donator

Donator

Joined:

Jun 19, 2011

Posts:

32,872

Liked Posts:

26,846

Yeah, don't mind the idea if there is a guy that Emery is in love with. But not Nix. I would think there might be a better chance of Pryor falling than a top DT.

 

Apr 20, 2014

• #6

Gustavus Adolphus

?‍♂️?

Donator

CCS Hall of Fame '20

Joined:

Jun 15, 2010

Posts:

44,428

Liked Posts:

38,978

My favorite teams

1. 

1. 

1. 

1. 
2. 

Wait - do you mean he hasn't been aggressive thus far?

 

Apr 20, 2014

• #7

MidwestMonster2

CCS Donator

Donator

Joined:

Aug 20, 2012

Posts:

573

Liked Posts:

331

I would hate it if Emery traded up for Nix. Nix has a known torn meniscus. Not the worst knee injury there is, but when you are talking about a "fat boy" in the middle of the line, grinding and wear and tear will be an issue for the kid. Don't want to go down that road again of drafting a player with knee issues.
Hell, I'd rather have Hageman, and I hate Hageman.

 

Apr 20, 2014

• #8

rawdawg

Well-known member

Joined:

Apr 28, 2013

Posts:

8,013

Liked Posts:

6,542

Not trading a future 2. Not for Nix.

 

Apr 20, 2014

• #9

Runruffshod75

.

Joined:

Aug 20, 2012

Posts:

6,048

Liked Posts:

2,380

Location:

New York State(sucks)

hyatt151 said:

LOVE the idea, hate Nix

Click to expand...

Yep. BJ Raji 2.0

 

Apr 20, 2014

• #10

WindyCity

CCS Hall of Fame

Donator

CCS Hall of Fame '19

Joined:

Dec 12, 2011

Posts:

30,816

Liked Posts:

35,721

Change the player to Hageman, Tuitt or Jernigan.

The idea of moving up is not a bad one if we get 2 day 1 building blocks.

I also do not think Pryor or HCD get past 20.

Lions
Rams
Bears
cowboys
Ravens
Cardinals

All need safety.

 

Last edited: Apr 20, 2014

Apr 20, 2014

• #11

Sagbear

Well-known member

Joined:

Aug 21, 2012

Posts:

3,987

Liked Posts:

1,601

If we took a safety at 14 and Donald is still on the board and he slides past the cowboys also then I could see him trying to trade back into the first. Donald and Haha would be a great way to start the draft, 2 day 1 starters who have pro bowl potential.

 

Apr 20, 2014

• #12

Treehorn

Well-known member

Joined:

Sep 14, 2012

Posts:

1,770

Liked Posts:

1,110

Location:

California

I like the idea but we also need depth on defense which we currently do not have. If someone starts to fall, which history shows will happen, if would be hard to jump back into the the bottom of the first.

The vikings did it last year and they still suck and i remember the Browns doing it for Brady Quinn and Brandon Weedon and that didn't work for them.

 

Apr 20, 2014

• #13

1000ftditka!

Throbbing

Joined:

Aug 28, 2010

Posts:

3,009

Liked Posts:

887

Location:

Civilization, also known as Massachusetts

Emery needs two starters out of this draft....a DT and a FS. I think that he can tease out some combination of these two with our first two picks. If he has to move down in the second....so be it....but i would hope that he would trade this years picks rather than mortgaging future draft picks.....you really don't want to go there.....

I'd go DT with the #14...especially if Donald is there....if Donald is gone.....pivot to the best safety on the board and trade down for Hageman at our 2nd pick...

 

Apr 20, 2014

• #14

ZOMBIE@CTESPN

Well-known member

Joined:

Dec 19, 2012

Posts:

17,960

Liked Posts:

19,659

Location:

MICHIGAN

Do we have the cap for two first rounders

 

Apr 20, 2014

• #15

xer0h0ur

HS Referee HoF

Donator

Joined:

Aug 20, 2012

Posts:

22,260

Liked Posts:

17,824

Location:

Chicago, IL.

My favorite teams

1. 

1. 

1. 

1. 

BEARZOMBIE said:

Do we have the cap for two first rounders

Click to expand...

If you're eliminating having to pay the rest of those draft picks and still have the 8Milish for the draft class and emergency dough then I don't see why not.

 

Apr 20, 2014

• #16

beckdawg

Well-known member

Joined:

Oct 31, 2012

Posts:

11,723

Liked Posts:

3,723

Slightly different than what I was saying prior to signing Allen but it's a similar concept. I thought trading up for someone like Clowney made sense because your offense is going to start to decline in the next several years so you need to get as much out of this run as you can. If they can get 2 impactful players then I'm fine with giving up future picks.

 

Apr 20, 2014

• #17

xer0h0ur

HS Referee HoF

Donator

Joined:

Aug 20, 2012

Posts:

22,260

Liked Posts:

17,824

Location:

Chicago, IL.

My favorite teams

1. 

1. 

1. 

1. 

beckdawg said:

Slightly different than what I was saying prior to signing Allen but it's a similar concept. I thought trading up for someone like Clowney made sense because your offense is going to start to decline in the next several years so you need to get as much out of this run as you can. If they can get 2 impactful players then I'm fine with giving up future picks.

Click to expand...

I would never advocate with trading up to get Clowney. Its not because of the player so much as the cost to trading up to the first/second overall pick. The cost would be too high and on top of that you would have to be giving up future picks which are worth less now than a current draft pick.

 

Apr 20, 2014

• #18

gwharris2254

Well-known member

Joined:

Nov 6, 2012

Posts:

6,551

Liked Posts:

1,964

My favorite teams

1. 

1. 

I think he stays at 14 because he can't find a trading partner to give us enough value for the 14th pick.

However, I can definitely see him move up to the early 2nd late first to get another Day 1 starter.

He did it before with Alshon and the probabilities of a blue chip player higher up in the draft are in his favor.

He loves to play the percentages.

However, I think he goes DT with his first pick and safety with his second.


.....Before the Conte surgery there were a couple of higher quality safeties in FA that Emery was never linked to. I think that means the safety position is lower down on his totem pole as far as needs.

 

Apr 20, 2014

• #19

playthrough2001

Monday Morning QB

Donator

Joined:

Aug 21, 2012

Posts:

12,582

Liked Posts:

14,423

Location:

United Club

My favorite teams

1. 

1. 

1. 

1. 

1. 
2. 

Bucky Brooks from NFL.com has his updated 2 round draft out. He has the Bears taking Donald at 14 over Pryor and Ward at 51 with both Tuitt and Nix still on the board at 51. So if Brooks is correct, would you want Donald and Ward or Pryor paired with Tuitt or Nix without giving up any picks?

Link below...

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000341602/article/mock-draft-50-jadeveon-clowney-aj-mccarron-to-texans

 

Apr 20, 2014

• #20

DrGonzo

Gazpacho Police

Donator

Joined:

Aug 21, 2012

Posts:

9,244

Liked Posts:

5,707

Location:

Albuquerque, NM

I think either HCD or Donald is still there at 14, most likely Haha as I increasingly think the Giants take Donald at 12 despite also needing OL help. Either way you fill a need. If Emery wants to trade up in the second for a particular guy that's ok by me.