Who had the best draft class of 2019 in the NFC North?

[VikingsVictorious]

If you think Montgomery improves the Bears as much as the combination of Bradbury, Smith, Mattison and Samia improves the Vikings, I simply don't know how to respond other than to say we Buried them in this draft and we will be better than they are.

Respond by saying I don't know what I'm talking about. That's fair. You conveniently didn't include Mack. I don't see a single guy we picked that will be at his dominate level. I hope they all are as good. I hope this Samia comes in and becomes the best G in football. I don't see that happening. He fell because he's lacking something. But I certainly hope the guy develops. The Bears also got Ridley. Yes I know he sucks and that's why he fell off the map. He probably gets cut. IMO he's a better prospect than the WR we picked. He fell into a hole and is now making every excuse up that he can. Including getting his daddy involved. That's a cluster F. Who wants that BS. So yes you are correct we buried them.

I'm talking about improvement through the draft from the end of the 2018 season to the start of the 2019 season. The Bears already had Mack for the 2018 season and it was a good move getting him. If you read my comments you would know I already acknowledged that. So Mack is not a part of what I'm talking about. I personally prefer Mitchell to Ridley, but that is debatable. IMO we got so much more help from the players acquired DURING this years draft than they did that we can surpass them.

[StpViking]

I can't believe I am writing this, but I thought the Packers did the best in this draft.

I could not disagree more with the "draft experts" criticism of Rashan Gary. He is going to be a young Clay Matthews.

Savage will be a nice starting Safety.

Elgton Jenkins was a steal in the 2nd. I personally thought he was the best Center prospect in the draft. Sorry Bradbury fan boys.

[J. Kapp 11]

For those who believe David Montgomery makes the Bears better ...

He's a good back. He won't be a breakaway back in the NFL, but he's solid and does a lot of things well.

However, remember the Bears traded away Jordan Howard. Even though Howard's YPC dropped to 3.7 in 2018, he did post consecutive 1,000-yard seasons prior to that and rushed for more than 900 last year. Montgomery is unlikely to exceed that production, so at best, the Bears broke even with the Montgomery pick.

As for Mack, it's not wrong to look at it as part of the 2018 draft, but if you're going to do that, then you need to look at the total cost -- not just the 2018 draft. The Bears gave up their first-round picks in both 2019 and 2020 and a 6th in 2019, receiving a 2nd-rounder and a 5th-rounder in return. It's more correct to look at both this year and next year to determine whether the Vikings or Bears did better. Plus, he affects things going forward as far as their roster is concerned. They're paying him starting quarterback money at $23.5 million per year. In 2021, when it's time to pay Trubisky, the Bears are going to be in a tough spot.

If you take into account all those factors, my personal opinion is that it's unlikely the Bears win the draft war over the Vikings, even if you include Mack. Time will tell.

[StumpHunter]

For those who believe David Montgomery makes the Bears better ...

He's a good back. He won't be a breakaway back in the NFL, but he's solid and does a lot of things well.

However, remember the Bears traded away Jordan Howard. Even though Howard's YPC dropped to 3.7 in 2018, he did post consecutive 1,000-yard seasons prior to that and rushed for more than 900 last year. Montgomery is unlikely to exceed that production, so at best, the Bears broke even with the Montgomery pick.

As for Mack, it's not wrong to look at it as part of the 2018 draft, but if you're going to do that, then you need to look at the total cost -- not just the 2018 draft. The Bears gave up their first-round picks in both 2019 and 2020 and a 6th in 2019, receiving a 2nd-rounder and a 5th-rounder in return. It's more correct to look at both this year and next year to determine whether the Vikings or Bears did better. Plus, he affects things going forward as far as their roster is concerned. They're paying him starting quarterback money at $23.5 million per year. In 2021, when it's time to pay Trubisky, the Bears are going to be in a tough spot.

If you take into account all those factors, my personal opinion is that it's unlikely the Bears win the draft war over the Vikings, even if you include Mack. Time will tell.

Two starters, one arguably the best player at the most important position on defense, versus a starting center and depth and the Bears don't win?

[VikingsVictorious]

I can't believe I am writing this, but I thought the Packers did the best in this draft.

I could not disagree more with the "draft experts" criticism of Rashan Gary. He is going to be a young Clay Matthews.

Savage will be a nice starting Safety.

Elgton Jenkins was a steal in the 2nd. I personally thought he was the best Center prospect in the draft. Sorry Bradbury fan boys.

You agree with PFF on Elgton. Every other reputable source has Bradbury better and by a very large margin. What about Elgton makes you think he was better. Bradbury gave up 2 pressures and zero sacks while pass blocking and by most was considered the best run blocking lineman at any position.

[VikingsVictorious]

For those who believe David Montgomery makes the Bears better ...

He's a good back. He won't be a breakaway back in the NFL, but he's solid and does a lot of things well.

However, remember the Bears traded away Jordan Howard. Even though Howard's YPC dropped to 3.7 in 2018, he did post consecutive 1,000-yard seasons prior to that and rushed for more than 900 last year. Montgomery is unlikely to exceed that production, so at best, the Bears broke even with the Montgomery pick.

As for Mack, it's not wrong to look at it as part of the 2018 draft, but if you're going to do that, then you need to look at the total cost -- not just the 2018 draft. The Bears gave up their first-round picks in both 2019 and 2020 and a 6th in 2019, receiving a 2nd-rounder and a 5th-rounder in return. It's more correct to look at both this year and next year to determine whether the Vikings or Bears did better. Plus, he affects things going forward as far as their roster is concerned. They're paying him starting quarterback money at $23.5 million per year. In 2021, when it's time to pay Trubisky, the Bears are going to be in a tough spot.

If you take into account all those factors, my personal opinion is that it's unlikely the Bears win the draft war over the Vikings, even if you include Mack. Time will tell.

Great points and once again they already had Mack and his salary when the 2019 draft rolled around. In looking how the 2019 draft affects teams moving forward he was not added to their team during this draft. The Vikings, Packers and Lions all improved more from the 2019 draft than the Bears did.

[VikingsVictorious]

For those who believe David Montgomery makes the Bears better ...

He's a good back. He won't be a breakaway back in the NFL, but he's solid and does a lot of things well.

However, remember the Bears traded away Jordan Howard. Even though Howard's YPC dropped to 3.7 in 2018, he did post consecutive 1,000-yard seasons prior to that and rushed for more than 900 last year. Montgomery is unlikely to exceed that production, so at best, the Bears broke even with the Montgomery pick.

As for Mack, it's not wrong to look at it as part of the 2018 draft, but if you're going to do that, then you need to look at the total cost -- not just the 2018 draft. The Bears gave up their first-round picks in both 2019 and 2020 and a 6th in 2019, receiving a 2nd-rounder and a 5th-rounder in return. It's more correct to look at both this year and next year to determine whether the Vikings or Bears did better. Plus, he affects things going forward as far as their roster is concerned. They're paying him starting quarterback money at $23.5 million per year. In 2021, when it's time to pay Trubisky, the Bears are going to be in a tough spot.

If you take into account all those factors, my personal opinion is that it's unlikely the Bears win the draft war over the Vikings, even if you include Mack. Time will tell.

Two starters, one arguably the best player at the most important position on defense, versus a starting center and depth and the Bears don't win?

Not when it comes to players added during the 2019 draft. Also the Bears actually didn't acquire Mack with just assets/picks from the 2019 draft. It was the 2019 and 2020 draft used to acquire Mack. Also it is questionable if Montgomery is a starter. Cohen IMO is easily a better player. Also you claim the Vikings only got one starter out of the draft and I am pretty confident Smith will be a starter and wouldn't be surprised if Samia is a starter before the end of the season.

However to back you up Stump considering Mack to have been added with assets from just the 2019 draft which isn't quite correct and disregarding his salary which is possibly more than all of the other NFC North teams salaries for 2019 draft picks combined than the Bears did win the 2019 draft.

[mansquatch]

If you are going to include coaching changes then the Bears Defense got worse. They lost Vic Fangio, one of the three best defensive coaches in the league. (The others are Zimmer and BB.) They replaced him with Chuck Pagano. There is no way that isn't a step backwards coaching wise. Nothing against Pagano, here, just that he has HUGE shoes to fill. Meanwhile the Vikings traded up from JDF to Stefanski/Kubiak, an obvious upgrade. To me, these are quantifiable changes. Unlike draft picks which are all about potential outcomes, coaches have resumes and can be more readily judged.

I agree Mack is a monster, but as Kapp pointed out, the cost to getting him is spread across multiple years, including 2018. If you are going to count Mack, you can only count him as 1/3 or 1/2.

In terms of players, the overall improvement remains to be seen.

[CharVike]

For those who believe David Montgomery makes the Bears better ...

He's a good back. He won't be a breakaway back in the NFL, but he's solid and does a lot of things well.

However, remember the Bears traded away Jordan Howard. Even though Howard's YPC dropped to 3.7 in 2018, he did post consecutive 1,000-yard seasons prior to that and rushed for more than 900 last year. Montgomery is unlikely to exceed that production, so at best, the Bears broke even with the Montgomery pick.

As for Mack, it's not wrong to look at it as part of the 2018 draft, but if you're going to do that, then you need to look at the total cost -- not just the 2018 draft. The Bears gave up their first-round picks in both 2019 and 2020 and a 6th in 2019, receiving a 2nd-rounder and a 5th-rounder in return. It's more correct to look at both this year and next year to determine whether the Vikings or Bears did better. Plus, he affects things going forward as far as their roster is concerned. They're paying him starting quarterback money at $23.5 million per year. In 2021, when it's time to pay Trubisky, the Bears are going to be in a tough spot.

If you take into account all those factors, my personal opinion is that it's unlikely the Bears win the draft war over the Vikings, even if you include Mack. Time will tell.

You said it much better than I could. Mack needs to be included in 2020 also. But they got a dominate player. I looked at the guys stats and he is a true force. He forced 6 fumbles. Had a pick and scored a TD. 18 QB hits. 12 sacks. The key for us will we get a dominate player this year or next year just to keep us even. It will be very hard for a rookie to be dominate because it usually takes time. The Bears got a guy that was already developed. Instant big time upgrade. That's a hard one to beat.

[VikingsVictorious]

For those who believe David Montgomery makes the Bears better ...

He's a good back. He won't be a breakaway back in the NFL, but he's solid and does a lot of things well.

However, remember the Bears traded away Jordan Howard. Even though Howard's YPC dropped to 3.7 in 2018, he did post consecutive 1,000-yard seasons prior to that and rushed for more than 900 last year. Montgomery is unlikely to exceed that production, so at best, the Bears broke even with the Montgomery pick.

As for Mack, it's not wrong to look at it as part of the 2018 draft, but if you're going to do that, then you need to look at the total cost -- not just the 2018 draft. The Bears gave up their first-round picks in both 2019 and 2020 and a 6th in 2019, receiving a 2nd-rounder and a 5th-rounder in return. It's more correct to look at both this year and next year to determine whether the Vikings or Bears did better. Plus, he affects things going forward as far as their roster is concerned. They're paying him starting quarterback money at $23.5 million per year. In 2021, when it's time to pay Trubisky, the Bears are going to be in a tough spot.

If you take into account all those factors, my personal opinion is that it's unlikely the Bears win the draft war over the Vikings, even if you include Mack. Time will tell.

You said it much better than I could. Mack needs to be included in 2020 also. But they got a dominate player. I looked at the guys stats and he is a true force. He forced 6 fumbles. Had a pick and scored a TD. 18 QB hits. 12 sacks. The key for us will we get a dominate player this year or next year just to keep us even. It will be very hard for a rookie to be dominate because it usually takes time. The Bears got a guy that was already developed. Instant big time upgrade. That's a hard one to beat.

Mack is a great player. A difference maker no doubt. They didn't acquire him in the 2019 draft. They acquired him with assets from the 2019 and 2020 draft plus paying him in the ballpark of all of the 2019 NFC North draft picks combined.

[StpViking]

I can't believe I am writing this, but I thought the Packers did the best in this draft.

I could not disagree more with the "draft experts" criticism of Rashan Gary. He is going to be a young Clay Matthews.

Savage will be a nice starting Safety.

Elgton Jenkins was a steal in the 2nd. I personally thought he was the best Center prospect in the draft. Sorry Bradbury fan boys.

You agree with PFF on Elgton. Every other reputable source has Bradbury better and by a very large margin. What about Elgton makes you think he was better. Bradbury gave up 2 pressures and zero sacks while pass blocking and by most was considered the best run blocking lineman at any position.

Bradbury does not anchor well. You can look up any of his games on youtube. He sinks his hips but he still gets pushed backwards. With all due respect for the Outside Zone run blocking scheme they are implementing this year. We've been here before, as far as being a run heavy offense. It got us no closer to the Superbowl. I am looking for OL that can be good at 1 on 1 blocking. That is what Kirk Cousin needs. The Superbowl will still be in the QBs hands. I just don't know if this collection of OL are good enough 1 on 1 blockers to help him.

[VikingsVictorious]

You agree with PFF on Elgton. Every other reputable source has Bradbury better and by a very large margin. What about Elgton makes you think he was better. Bradbury gave up 2 pressures and zero sacks while pass blocking and by most was considered the best run blocking lineman at any position.

Bradbury does not anchor well. You can look up any of his games on youtube. He sinks his hips but he still gets pushed backwards. With all due respect for the Outside Zone run blocking scheme they are implementing this year. We've been here before, as far as being a run heavy offense. It got us no closer to the Superbowl. I am looking for OL that can be good at 1 on 1 blocking. That is what Kirk Cousin needs. The Superbowl will still be in the QBs hands. I just don't know if this collection of OL are good enough 1 on 1 blockers to help him.

If by not anchoring well you mean sometimes he gives up a step before taking the defender out of the play that is true. However, he virtually always took his man out of the play. As for every single game he got pushed around no way in hell. He is very good at 1 on 1 blocking. He dominated Lawrence from Clemson in their head to heads I have seen. He pancaked Wilkins from Clemson on at least two plays in their last matchup. Giving up two pressures and zero sacks over the course of his final season makes me quite confident in his abilities. Do you believe Elgton Jenkins anchored any better? Based on this better anchoring do you believe Jenkins is the better player of the two? If so than Green Bay without any question whatsoever got the steal of the draft in Jenkins. Most analysts thought he was as good of a bargain for his position in the second round as Bradbury was for his spot in the first round. Time will tell. We will see which team is having better success and we will see which player is making pro bowls and all pro.

[CharVike]

Bradbury does not anchor well. You can look up any of his games on youtube. He sinks his hips but he still gets pushed backwards. With all due respect for the Outside Zone run blocking scheme they are implementing this year. We've been here before, as far as being a run heavy offense. It got us no closer to the Superbowl. I am looking for OL that can be good at 1 on 1 blocking. That is what Kirk Cousin needs. The Superbowl will still be in the QBs hands. I just don't know if this collection of OL are good enough 1 on 1 blockers to help him.

If by not anchoring well you mean sometimes he gives up a step before taking the defender out of the play that is true. However, he virtually always took his man out of the play. As for every single game he got pushed around no way in hell. He is very good at 1 on 1 blocking. He dominated Lawrence from Clemson in their head to heads I have seen. He pancaked Wilkins from Clemson on at least two plays in their last matchup. Giving up two pressures and zero sacks over the course of his final season makes me quite confident in his abilities. Do you believe Elgton Jenkins anchored any better? Based on this better anchoring do you believe Jenkins is the better player of the two? If so than Green Bay without any question whatsoever got the steal of the draft in Jenkins. Most analysts thought he was as good of a bargain for his position in the second round as Bradbury was for his spot in the first round. Time will tell. We will see which team is having better success and we will see which player is making pro bowls and all pro.

Bradbury is a very good player there's no doubt there. But like all players he has some issues. The biggest problem is base strength which means he struggles to anchor. Does that make him a bum? No. But teams will charge him with a bull and he better hold.

[J. Kapp 11]

You agree with PFF on Elgton. Every other reputable source has Bradbury better and by a very large margin. What about Elgton makes you think he was better. Bradbury gave up 2 pressures and zero sacks while pass blocking and by most was considered the best run blocking lineman at any position.

Bradbury does not anchor well. You can look up any of his games on youtube. He sinks his hips but he still gets pushed backwards. With all due respect for the Outside Zone run blocking scheme they are implementing this year. We've been here before, as far as being a run heavy offense. It got us no closer to the Superbowl. I am looking for OL that can be good at 1 on 1 blocking. That is what Kirk Cousin needs. The Superbowl will still be in the QBs hands. I just don't know if this collection of OL are good enough 1 on 1 blockers to help him.

With all due respect, what YOU are looking for in an offensive lineman doesn't matter. What Gary Kubiak and Kevin Stefanski are looking for is what counts.

They're going to run a particular scheme, one that requires a certain type of O-lineman. This point has been made over and over on this board, yet a lot of people are still going with this "we need bruisers up front" narrative. No, we don't. We need whatever works best in the Vikings' offense.

Gary Kubiak has a history and a proven track record in this league. And it's not the "sort of good back in the 1990s with three Hall-of-Famers" track record that Norv Turner had. Kubiak has repeatedly created effective rushing attacks out of linemen who aren't All-Pros but have a particular skill set, and out of a grab-bag of running backs who know how to wait for a seam and go. He's also gotten tremendous production out of mostly mediocre quarterbacks, using those same offensive linemen. He does this through the use of play-action and by putting the QB in the best position to succeed, rather than relying on the QB to improvise miraculous plays. I can't think of a better way to utilize Kirk Cousins, who is great at play-action and terrible at improvisation.

Until this offense fails, I'm going to side with the guy who has a track record, as opposed to the armchair offensive coordinators on this board.

[VikingsVictorious]

If by not anchoring well you mean sometimes he gives up a step before taking the defender out of the play that is true. However, he virtually always took his man out of the play. As for every single game he got pushed around no way in hell. He is very good at 1 on 1 blocking. He dominated Lawrence from Clemson in their head to heads I have seen. He pancaked Wilkins from Clemson on at least two plays in their last matchup. Giving up two pressures and zero sacks over the course of his final season makes me quite confident in his abilities. Do you believe Elgton Jenkins anchored any better? Based on this better anchoring do you believe Jenkins is the better player of the two? If so than Green Bay without any question whatsoever got the steal of the draft in Jenkins. Most analysts thought he was as good of a bargain for his position in the second round as Bradbury was for his spot in the first round. Time will tell. We will see which team is having better success and we will see which player is making pro bowls and all pro.

Bradbury is a very good player there's no doubt there. But like all players he has some issues. The biggest problem is base strength which means he struggles to anchor. Does that make him a bum? No. But teams will charge him with a bull and he better hold.

What I saw at his worse was he would be pushed back a step, but then recover and use his agility and Football IQ to direct the defender out of the play. So his "weakness" wasn't really much of a weakness.