Image Image Image Image

How did the Bears do in the 2017 Overall?

Moderators: chitownsports4ever, emperorjones

Bears 2017 Draft Grade

Grade A
0
No votes
Grade B
2
11%
Grade C
4
22%
Grade D
6
33%
Grade F
6
33%
 
Total votes: 18

Axxo
Starter
Posts: 2,389
And1: 386
Joined: Jun 28, 2016

How did the Bears do in the 2017 Overall? 

Post#1 » by Axxo » Sun Apr 30, 2017 2:15 pm

Select a grade and provide commentary on your selection. All opinions welcome.
NZB2323
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,570
And1: 1,680
Joined: Aug 02, 2008

Re: How did the Bears do in the 2017 Overall? 

Post#2 » by NZB2323 » Sun Apr 30, 2017 6:19 pm

I had to give them an F. Trading multiple picks for a QB who played 13 games and struggled against good defenses is a failure. Picking multiple division 2 players is a failure. I hope I'm wrong.
Fire GarPax! How do you start the rebuilding process by trading a draft pick for money? I know it was a late pick, but so were Butler, Taj Gibson, Draymond Green, and Isiah Thomas. The Warriors wanted the guy, and they're good at evaluating talent.
Betta Bulleavit
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,864
And1: 1,006
Joined: Oct 29, 2004
       

Re: How did the Bears do in the 2017 Overall? 

Post#3 » by Betta Bulleavit » Sun Apr 30, 2017 8:05 pm

So here's the thing. I didn't like the draft moves myself. But the mere fact that all of the "analysts" and "anonymous executives" seem to have no clue of what the Bears were thinking is actually quite encouraging since these guys have notorious track records of getting a lot of stuff wrong.

What does bother me is the fact that the head coach and the GM seem to be at odds, which is real bad for business. I think that is probably my most concerning take away from this draft. Not the talent that we got. The popular knock on the guys we drafted is that they came from relatively small schools. A concern that (while valid) is very unfounded. There are a ton of guys in the HOF that came from small schools. This isn't the NBA we're talking about. The next big thing could be sitting atop the hill at Alabama or down the road at Alabama Central College. You just never know.
City of Trees
RealGM
Posts: 10,776
And1: 2,073
Joined: Dec 23, 2009
Location: Roseville, CA
   

Re: How did the Bears do in the 2017 Overall? 

Post#4 » by City of Trees » Sun Apr 30, 2017 8:23 pm

Grade: C-

As much as I like drafting a QB to sit and develop, I have to acknowledge that Pace didn't fill a ton of needs for the upcoming season. The D2 guys look like they have potential but No one knows how these guys will turn out going against NFL competition.

Boom or bust draft by Pace.

Sent from my SM-J700T using RealGM mobile app
patryk7754
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,294
And1: 481
Joined: Jan 22, 2012

Re: How did the Bears do in the 2017 Overall? 

Post#5 » by patryk7754 » Sun Apr 30, 2017 8:58 pm

I'd have to give them a C. Something Pace did to the extreme this season was over draft guys. I would say that the Trubisky pick was bad not because if who Trubisky is but the talent that was available might be at 2011 draft levels.

In retrospect the trade up wasn't bad imo. The trade back in the second round was arguably a very smart strategic move that I think was planned at the start of the draft. Pace new that the TE would be available later in the second so he knew he'd make up the picks he'd lose in the Trubisky trade. At the end of the day giving up a 3rd round pick for someone you think is a franchise QB.

The only picks that "made sense" was the Jackson pick and the TE. The Trubisky pick is self explanatory, the RB pick wasn't a need but he might turn out to be Sproles or Woodhead. The oline pick wasn't spectacular but you can always use oline depth.

At the end of the day we have to give Pace the benefit of the doubt since he has had so much success drafting in the past, but ultimately I have to give him a C for who he left on the board.
User avatar
Dominater
Head Coach
Posts: 6,542
And1: 3,268
Joined: Jan 16, 2005
Location: Cuba

Re: How did the Bears do in the 2017 Overall? 

Post#6 » by Dominater » Sun Apr 30, 2017 9:31 pm

F. Mainly because giving those extra picks wasn't necessary. By all accounts, nobody was trading up to #2 to take Trubisky, and SF sure as hell didn't want him. I wouldn't mind the risk in taking Trubisky at all if it was just the #3 straight up
KC: Do you still think your a championship caliber team?
Gar: I never said that and correct me if i'm wrong
KC: You were asked that question at the news conference announcing Thibodeau's dismissal and you answered yes
Axxo
Starter
Posts: 2,389
And1: 386
Joined: Jun 28, 2016

Re: How did the Bears do in the 2017 Overall? 

Post#7 » by Axxo » Sun Apr 30, 2017 11:21 pm

Grade D

Didn't like trading up though I had contact(s) tell me that Lynch did confirm another deal in place for MT at #2. MT didnt see top competition in college so Im not so high on his intangibles. I think going with Adams would have been better, and 1) wait for next years draft with high rated QBs, 2) if not getting Adams trade back with Jets, Jags or panthers to try and get Watson, 3) Go with other prospects like Webb this draft then grab another next draft. We needed a tackle didn't get it. Could have used one of those receivers. Jackson is extremely beat up and we just came off a season riddled with injuries. As others stated too many developmental prospects not likely to be to ready to contribute this season. And the move for offense and not building up the defense in key positions smells like Pace and Fox are not working well together. We have a tough schedule out the gate. Doesn't look good for us improving over last seasons record. Very disappointed in Pace with these selections.
fleet
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 42,942
And1: 9,843
Joined: Dec 23, 2002
     

Re: How did the Bears do in the 2017 Overall? 

Post#8 » by fleet » Mon May 1, 2017 12:58 am

Depends doesn't it? If they hit on the first 2 picks, this will be a hell of an offense. I was tempted to give them an 'A', as they are finally coming out with the right focus that winning teams have on priorities. Which largely is always finding a franchise QB to build around. I love their current mindset. Down to a 'B', because I thought a change of pace running back was the last thing they should have drafted when they need a young corner, and help on both lines. 'B'
JackFinn wrote:I see you're back from a trip at the smarty pants store.
hoosierdude12
Ballboy
Posts: 23
And1: 2
Joined: May 01, 2017

Re: How did the Bears do in the 2017 Overall? 

Post#9 » by hoosierdude12 » Mon May 1, 2017 4:12 am

I give them an A, so long as this is the reason why:

- Pace now buys himself time through John Fox
- He also gave Fox a sit-em rookie QB as the top pick, and NOT someone that can make a huge difference (Jamal Adams, Lattimore, etc)
- He took a TE that will be good LATER
- The Bears are maybe a 5 win team depending on what happens. They will get a good pick, have their QB, and get a ransom for someone that needs a QB

Aside from that, they had opportunities to completely solidify two facets of football; Defense and Special Teams.

I don't understand why they worked to trade up for Trubisky. I don't mind the pick, but if it costs to get Trubisky, then I would have rather gone for multiple defensive picks and stacking picks than giving them up.

I liked the trade back to get more picks, but I don't understand why we drafted him at that point. I think we should have addressed our secondary or offensive line.

In my opinion, we had holes everywhere and now we have less holes everywhere. I just would have liked to see those studs on defense that other teams seemed to stack (*cough, Packers).

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using RealGM mobile app
User avatar
johnnyvann840
RealGM
Posts: 24,214
And1: 10,056
Joined: Sep 04, 2010

Re: How did the Bears do in the 2017 Overall? 

Post#10 » by johnnyvann840 » Mon May 1, 2017 7:40 am

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/heres-what-nfl-execs-are-saying-about-the-bears-draft-and-its-not-good/


"We don't know what the hell they were doing," said an executive from one team that is routinely in the postseason. "It's all anyone is talking about. It's really bad between Pace and Fox. Fox is fuming about being left in the dark on the trade (for Trubisky). I don't know anyone who likes their draft. From the first pick on, we can't figure out what they were doing. Go back and look at how many small-school kids they took. People around the league are shocked. It's really bad between Pace and Fox."

An executive from another team noted: "Either the Bears know something no one else in the league knows, or that draft just got a lot of people fired only they don't know it yet."

------

The Trubisky pick will tell the tale of this franchise moving forward. And it remains to be seen whether or not this old-school ownership group would blow everything up again in 2018 or not (front office and coaching staff), but few groups will go into this season under more scrutiny. The Bears had just five picks in total after trades, and selected players from Ashland University, North Carolina A&T and Kutztown to go with Trubisky and an injured safety from Alabama, despite having glaring holes all over the roster.

Oh, and don't forget they gave Mike Glennon $18.5M to play quarterback for them this season. Perhaps the Bears will prove the skeptics and critics wrong, but if they don't, there is almost certain to be a significant shakeup there come January. If Pace does get to hire another head coach next year, I expect you hear plenty about longtime Saints assistant Pete Carmichael, who he worked with in New Orleans, and highly-regarded Northwestern coach Pat Fitzgerald.


User avatar
Susan
RealGM
Posts: 14,205
And1: 1,676
Joined: Jan 25, 2005
Location: jackfinn & Scott May appreciation society
     

Re: How did the Bears do in the 2017 Overall? 

Post#11 » by Susan » Tue May 2, 2017 12:04 am

Does the fact that Pace wanted Mariota make anybody else feel better about his ability to judge talent at the position?
User avatar
Bulls69
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,954
And1: 215
Joined: Jul 13, 2002
Location: LA via Chicago

Re: How did the Bears do in the 2017 Overall? 

Post#12 » by Bulls69 » Tue May 2, 2017 1:55 am

I give them a D you invited Mike Glesson to draft party only to choose a QB at #2
Knicksgod wrote: I know LeBron won't go to Chicago. There could be another surprise team, but if he leaves Cleveland, then teaming with Bosh and Gallo in NYC is a likely scenario.
Rhyder78
Pro Prospect
Posts: 839
And1: 114
Joined: Jul 28, 2004

Re: How did the Bears do in the 2017 Overall? 

Post#13 » by Rhyder78 » Wed May 10, 2017 4:09 pm

I actually liked all of the Bears picks, but giving them a B for overdrafting players and only ending up with 5 bodies. In my opinion, we could have traded down again in the second round and in the fourth round, still picked up Adam Shaheen and Tarik Cohen and gotten a couple more bodies/lottery tickets in the process. I would have liked to come away with at least one more CB/S other than Eddie Jackson, especially with Jackson's injury history.

Return to Chicago Bears