Video confirms Chicago Bears’ GM Ryan Poles wasn’t drafting a wide receiver in second round

Bearly

Dissed membered
Donator
Joined:
Aug 17, 2011
Posts:
35,618
Liked Posts:
18,760
Location:
Palatine, IL
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
I wonder where they had Watson ranked.
 

Visionman

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 28, 2017
Posts:
8,013
Liked Posts:
4,465
That’s easy, especially in hindsight. Because no other relevant nfl scouting department valued those players like Poles, and Gordon and Brisker (who he was willing to overcook the board for the safety position) were at the top of his board, there was no way he was choosing a wr in the second.
Your posts are worse than your articles….
 

napo55

Well-known member
Joined:
Mar 24, 2016
Posts:
1,646
Liked Posts:
953
“It’s disappointing the Bears didn’t rank a lower player higher because they play WR.” Not a direct quote, but it gets the just if it…
The real question is whether the Bears rankings were the correct rankings and how the WRs picked after 39 contribute compared to the DBs the Bears picked. We shall see.
 

Visionman

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 28, 2017
Posts:
8,013
Liked Posts:
4,465
The real question is whether the Bears rankings were the correct rankings and how the WRs picked after 39 contribute compared to the DBs the Bears picked. We shall see.
Even that’s not a good comparison. Did those other WRs fit what the Bears want to do one offense? Many had serious questions about that.

So the only thing that really matters is do Gordon and Brisker play well for the Bears?
 

napo55

Well-known member
Joined:
Mar 24, 2016
Posts:
1,646
Liked Posts:
953
Even that’s not a good comparison. Did those other WRs fit what the Bears want to do one offense? Many had serious questions about that.

So the only thing that really matters is do Gordon and Brisker play well for the Bears?
No, you always need to analyze your personnel decisions. If, for example, one of the receivers they passed on becomes an all-pro and the DBs are ok, but nothing special, they made a mistake.
 

Visionman

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 28, 2017
Posts:
8,013
Liked Posts:
4,465
No, you always need to analyze your personnel decisions. If, for example, one of the receivers they passed on becomes an all-pro and the DBs are ok, but nothing special, they made a mistake.
Glad you aren’t the one in charge…
 

JoJoBoxer

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 14, 2010
Posts:
8,661
Liked Posts:
6,067
That’s easy, especially in hindsight. Because no other relevant nfl scouting department valued those players like Poles, and Gordon and Brisker (who he was willing to overcook the board for the safety position) were at the top of his board, there was no way he was choosing a wr in the second.
Nice way of creating bullshit to try to get away with a crappy take, but ...

It was you who said that, if Gordon was to go at 38, the Bears were going to draft Brisker at 39.

If you REALLY believed no relevant NFL scouting department valued those players like Poles, you would have said that instead of talking about Brisker being drafted at 39 if Gordon were drafted at 38.

You cannot use hindsight, or what happened, to say that Poles would never draft a WR in the 2nd if the the draft had been different before 39.

What may have happened before 39 would change what may have happened at 39 and later.

As an example, the Lions refuse to trade with the Packers in the 2nd and the Packers cannot find a trade partner to move up.

Would Watson suddenly be the Bears BPA?

Lot's of things could have happened before 39 to change the Bear whole board at 39.

Now if you had said that Poles DIDN'T draft a WR in the 2nd because he drafted Gordon and Brisker, that would have been true.
 

mecha

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
10,393
Liked Posts:
7,555
there's probably a lot of players the Bears drafted in previous years that could've been offensive All-Pros, but were not because it's the Bears. I've been drumming this argument for years about all the people cunt clutching with what-if scenarios about WHAT IF THE BEARS DRAFTED PATRICK MAHOMES INSTEAD OF MITCH TRUBISKY???????//// like, I don't know, Patrick Mahomes more than likely never wins a Super Bowl and probably doesn't get awarded a 500 million dollar contract if he plays for the Bears instead of the Chiefs. if the Chiefs got Trubisky instead, do they still go to the Super Bowl? do they still win it all? I don't know.

same logic applies to the highest caliber college talent going to shit teams like the Jets. if you're a wide receiver and you have a garbage quarterback throwing to you, your numbers probably aren't going to be great.

it's why I think it's horseshit that Jerry Rice is ranked higher than Walter Payton on best players ever lists. Jerry Rice won't be Jerry Rice if he didn't have Joe Montana and Steve Young throwing to him. Walter Payton was still Walter Payton cause he had to produce with his own legs and fists.

grabbing your twazz over wide receiver potentials is as much of a waste of time as making a mock draft. if your Matt Nagy offense doesn't do dick and your secondary is garbage and allows other teams to score on you, then I would say secondary is a slightly higher priority than getting an A grade receiver. all of this shit are complete hypotheticals anyway until the team plays a real game. for all we know we might have vastly improved defense AND offense.

chill the fuck out with your theories, people.
 

LIBlue

Active member
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
204
Liked Posts:
244
That’s easy, especially in hindsight. Because no other relevant nfl scouting department valued those players like Poles, and Gordon and Brisker (who he was willing to overcook the board for the safety position) were at the top of his board, there was no way he was choosing a wr in the second.
It is nice to know you knew the draft board of every other team. So, how do you know that the teams drafting at 40 to 50 did not have Gordon rated at 30? Say a team is drafting at 12, and passed on Gordon to choose somebody they had rated at 12. That does not mean they rated Gordon 40 or lower. Your logic is flawed.
 

JoJoBoxer

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 14, 2010
Posts:
8,661
Liked Posts:
6,067
The real question is whether the Bears rankings were the correct rankings and how the WRs picked after 39 contribute compared to the DBs the Bears picked. We shall see.
Well, the Bears rankings were correct in the minds of Poles and the gang. Of course, there could be some major flaws in how they scouted and ranked the players, but I guess that is why they make the big money and we don't.

Once the Bears made their rankings, they would pick BPA from that. If there were two defensive backs who were head and shoulders above the rest, it would be a no brainer especially if it were at a position of need. That is what almost every smart GM would do. They would pick BPA and would run the pick in (like within seconds for Gordon) if it were at a position of need.

You are correct in, if the scouting to create the board is flawed, the Bears could be in for some serious difficulties with their draft picks.

Now if, let's say, Gordon, Brisker and Pierce were all ranked exactly the same, I would have a problem with drafting a safety over a WR. Looking at the video, Gordon and Brisker were both ranked higher than anyone else on their board.
 

JoJoBoxer

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 14, 2010
Posts:
8,661
Liked Posts:
6,067
No, you always need to analyze your personnel decisions. If, for example, one of the receivers they passed on becomes an all-pro and the DBs are ok, but nothing special, they made a mistake.
I don't believe this is correct.

Let's take Gordon, Brisker and Pierce.

The Bears scouting departments creates their big board and Gordon and Brisker are head and shoulders above anyone else they think will be there after 39. This is true because they themselves said this in the video.

This means that Tyquan Thornton, George Pickens, Alec Pierce and Skyy Moore are all rated at a lower level than both Gordon and Brisker. CB, S and WR are all positions of need.

Poles picked BPA at a position of need, twice.

Are you suggesting that Poles should have bypassed the two players (or one of them) who were head and shoulders above the rest to draft a lower ranked player, by their board, to cover a position of need?

If they completed their scouting to the best of their abilities, they picked the two BPA players (at positions of need) yet Gordon and/or Brisker turned out worse than one of the above WRs, they can live with using the process correctly and they can see what went wrong with the players. Was it scouting, ranking, Flus influence to draft defense or some other reason?

How would you feel, if the Bears ranked everyone in 2022 perfectly but decided to draft for need instead of BPA and Brisker and Gordon were stars while Pickens, who the Bears drafted to get a #1 receiver, was out of the league because the red flags the Bears ignored came back to bite them in the collective ass?
 

napo55

Well-known member
Joined:
Mar 24, 2016
Posts:
1,646
Liked Posts:
953
Glad you aren’t the one in charge…
Surely you don't think it's best to pass on an all-pro for a mediocre player. Yes, I understand we don't know now. The question is: should we go back and look at the process and try to learn from our mistakes-or successes?
 

dweebs19

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Aug 16, 2011
Posts:
9,048
Liked Posts:
5,568
nah...this only proves that Gordon and Jaquan were the highest on their board. If Treylon Burks had dropped to 39, you don't know if Poles still takes Gordon
 

Visionman

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 28, 2017
Posts:
8,013
Liked Posts:
4,465
Surely you don't think it's best to pass on an all-pro for a mediocre player. Yes, I understand we don't know now. The question is: should we go back and look at the process and try to learn from our mistakes-or successes?
I surely think your 2-3 year down the road hypotheticals are idiotic…
 

Top