A Real Look at Angelo's Draft History

by crackedcactus on Jan 25, 2012 9:17 PM CST

So essentially I broke down EVERY SINGLE PICK Angelo has ever made as the Bears GM. Since Ruskell has only been Director of Player Personnel for little over a year, there's not as much analysis as I would like on what his input was during this period. Essentially, Angelo managed to screw everything up by himself.

http://tinyurl.com/6vuoxpx

or if you need a preview:

http://preview.tinyurl.com/6vuoxpx

Come with me past the Jump to see what I took away from all the analysis.

So after looking everything through, Angelo had a 64.29% chance to screw up every pick. What's really notable is the ineffectiveness of Angelo in drafting through the most important times of the draft in the sub-100 pick range. Today's lack of depth is a damning indictment at just how poorly Angelo drafted.

I didn't judge the 2011 draft picks as there isn't enough history to judge them on yet. Taking a quick look at his draft in 2010, you can see that only TWO of his picks even grade out as decent (admittedly through my own subjective grading system whose parameters I lay out at the bottom). Even tagging the two as decent could be up for debate as Major Wright and Ja'Marcus Webb are the two graded as decent considering how much they started and the position that they were drafted in.

For every pick I listed his Bear career stats, as well as some armchair analysis.

I would say his absolute WORST draft was in 2007, as only two of his picks are still with the Bears and he had the full set of picks to screw up.

His ~~best draft~~ could be considered either the 2003 or the 2008 draft with the amount of players that graded out well/or were with the Bears through their most productive years.

An interesting trend that was discovered was that productive players were picked by the Bears, yet they didn't progress within the Bears system. Marc Columbo, Mark Anderson, Daniel Manning, Cedric Benson, Chris Harris, Bernard Berrian, and Justin Gage were all players who had productive careers outside of Chicago.

Another trend was Angelo making picks with known injuries or legal problems. His very first draft in 2001 had John Capel as a 7th rounder that had popped for the combine drug test program. Marc Columbo came to the Bears injured, as well as Chris Williams.

All in all, they evidence is pretty damning that Angelo wasn't able to build the Chicago Bears though the draft. If you feel differently, please....discuss in the comments below!

This FanPost was written by a Windy City Gridiron member, and does not necessarily reflect the ideas or opinions of its staff or community.

Tweet Comment 42 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

it's a little early to say Daniel Manning has had a productive career outside of Chicago isn't it?

"I'm too drunk to taste this chicken" - Colonel Sanders

It's all about THE []_[] baby!!!

~"Smile when u being attacked,laugh when they talking boutcha,wave when they hating on u and Pray when they leave u alone Somethings wrong!"~ Deion Sanders

At least FOLLOW ME ON TWITTER before you judge me fool

by suckmyditka on Jan 25, 2012 9:28 PM CST reply actions

Decent year for Houston, and he's likely to stay there with teh contract.

Given how that defense performed all year, and at the level that it did I would say he was productive even if the pure numbers didn’t show it. You don’t get a top-5 defense without having 11 guys on same page on almost every play.

Cacti are prickly.

by crackedcactus on Jan 25, 2012 9:33 PM CST up reply actions

yeaaah but it was his first year on the team... not nearly a "career"

"I'm too drunk to taste this chicken" - Colonel Sanders

It's all about THE []_[] baby!!!

~"Smile when u being attacked,laugh when they talking boutcha,wave when they hating on u and Pray when they leave u alone Somethings wrong!"~ Deion Sanders

At least FOLLOW ME ON TWITTER before you judge me fool

by suckmyditka on Jan 25, 2012 9:37 PM CST up reply actions

Essentially he's the next name on a long list of players who go on to successful careers...

I wouldn’t get hung up on one player out of 84. The point was the trend of not developing the talent that the Bears have on the team, especially with the amount of busts that Angelo had in the early rounds. When I did the list, his early round failures was ….disheartening.

Cacti are prickly.

by crackedcactus on Jan 25, 2012 9:42 PM CST up reply actions

Yeah I'm ecstatic about this whole "new GM" thing

"I'm too drunk to taste this chicken" - Colonel Sanders

It's all about THE []_[] baby!!!

~"Smile when u being attacked,laugh when they talking boutcha,wave when they hating on u and Pray when they leave u alone Somethings wrong!"~ Deion Sanders

At least FOLLOW ME ON TWITTER before you judge me fool

by suckmyditka on Jan 25, 2012 10:02 PM CST up reply actions

Well Houston fans love him.

They talk about him being the safety they have been missing since their team got into the NFL. He also got a decent contract, so there must have been some competition for him.

by weepingbear on Jan 26, 2012 6:43 AM CST up reply actions

It's a little harsh to give a missed 7th round pick

the same grade as a missed 1st round pick. Angelo was known to stock up on late picks.

And not to pick on you here, but this is the second time I’ve seen an analysis that rates a role player found in the 7th round at the same level as a star player found in the 3rd round. That’s not at all realistic. Bill Polian built a decade-long contender off of about six star picks…. while late pick contributors like Zach Bowman and Lance Louis mean nothing.

Angelo did well to draft Briggs, Hester, Tillman, Tommie Harris, and trade for Cutler. That’s a solid group of star players that allowed the Bears to be in the hunt every year.

by YaoPau on Jan 25, 2012 11:31 PM CST reply actions

Instead of creating an elaborate grading system I tried to simply.

If a player was drafted, I expected him to at least produce for a year. Many of the later round picks never played in the NFL, or a couple games at most. I mentioned that I was super harsh for picks made between 1-100, as those are your franchise impact players.

I actually graded Bowman and Louis as great picks by Angelo, as they contributed to the Bears tangibly. To me the Louis’s and Bowman’s don’t mean “nothing” as they are important contributors. Five players don’t make a team, and the Bears passed on many great players over the years. I think the career Bear stats for picks Angelo made on selections between 1-100 speak for itself.

Cacti are prickly.

by crackedcactus on Jan 26, 2012 9:56 AM CST up reply actions

Bowman and Louis haven't given the Bears

anything beyond what a cheap veteran pickup would have provided for about the same cost.

by YaoPau on Jan 26, 2012 12:11 PM CST up reply actions

I don't know about "cheap" veteran pickups

When you consider Chester Taylor and TE Manamamalalajjskaksjda (about as close as I can get) were. Considering they were spot starters, I graded them generously in terms of value after being drafted. I’m not talking pro-bowl, but I certainly believe that they have value compared to players that didn’t even last a year.

Cacti are prickly.

by crackedcactus on Jan 26, 2012 3:29 PM CST up reply actions

Martz pickups a different breed of pickups :)

I was thinking more along the lines of John St. Clair, Tim Jennings, Roberto Garza.

by YaoPau on Jan 26, 2012 3:42 PM CST up reply actions

*are

by YaoPau on Jan 26, 2012 3:42 PM CST up reply actions

Angelo was AMAZING

We should get him back immediately.

by MidwayMonster55 on Jan 26, 2012 3:26 AM CST reply actions

I think you may have picked up on something

That seems to largely go unnoticed. I’m interested in the trend of “not developing” the players that are drafted. Or, players that leave Chicago, and go on to have a productive career outside of Chicago, with another team. That issue would obviously have nothing to do with Angelo, or any other GM that we may bring in to fix the early round draft problems.

by JimmyMack on Jan 26, 2012 4:06 AM CST reply actions

I think Lovie plays a huge part in our draft failures. I doubt Angelo was the only one who want Dan Bazuin. Tthat pick always seemed like a Lovie pick to me. Manning is a good example of a player not being developed. Even has a syndrome named after him.

sorry. forgot to drop into this box.

by Ryan21 on Jan 26, 2012 7:26 AM CST via Android app up reply actions

And look who took the fall

for the guy who’s power has been elevated – to the point where whoever we bring in as GM is literally “stuck” with Lovie for at least a year.

Don’t get me wrong – I partied hard when the Angelo firing first broke. But he and Lovie were a team. And I think both of them have played significant roles in the mediocrity that we’ve seen out of this team since the Super Bowl in ‘06. Let’s hope that Lovie doesn’t use DMS on Conte and try to turn him into something that he isn’t.

by JimmyMack on Jan 26, 2012 11:37 AM CST up reply actions

+1

Agree completely.

in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The practice of repeating the same action while expecting different results.

by Timothy Hockemeyer on Jan 26, 2012 5:51 PM CST up reply actions

When you write that Conte 'makes Bears fans wince'

it gives a strong impression that you don’t know what you are talking about. He was selected to the NFL all rookie team and solidified the defensive backfield when he got the start. He was a very good draft pick.

Columbo was starting to look like a decent player when he suffered one of the strangest knee injuries I have ever seen, was it Angelo’s fault that the Bears played one season on the Champaign field of doom? – during which they set a record for most injuries sustained in the modern era.

What is the point of bothering to do a breakdown if you simply use it as an excuse to evangelise your existing feelings. I am also fairly convinced that Angelo’s first draft pick was Columbo as he was brought in after the draft.

by weepingbear on Jan 26, 2012 6:51 AM CST reply actions

this....

Angelo had nothing to do with the 2001 draft.

in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The practice of repeating the same action while expecting different results.

by Timothy Hockemeyer on Jan 26, 2012 8:13 AM CST up reply actions

Since he was hired in 2001, I simply assumed it was before the draft in the early months

and wasn’t able to find any other information to suggest otherwise. Honestly I don’t remember much from 2001.

Cacti are prickly.

by crackedcactus on Jan 26, 2012 9:31 AM CST up reply actions

It's a common mistake, Bro.

Believe me, more people seem to attribute Terrell to Angelo than not, even though Angelo had no part in the deal.

in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The practice of repeating the same action while expecting different results.

by Timothy Hockemeyer on Jan 26, 2012 10:18 AM CST up reply actions

When DID he come on board in 2001?

Why the h*ll was he NOT on board before the draft?

Cacti are prickly.

by crackedcactus on Jan 26, 2012 10:23 AM CST up reply actions

Mark Hately was the director of player personel.

Presumably Angelo had been working for the Bucs and they didn’t release him until after the draft.

by weepingbear on Jan 26, 2012 12:42 PM CST up reply actions

He was hired in June of 2001.

He wasn’t in before the draft because the Bears didn’t decide they wanted to bring in a general manager until after the draft (presumably because they weren’t happy with the way Jauron handled the 2001 draft, but who knows). Angleo wasn’t replacing anyone, remember. The Bears had been operation for a decade and a half without a GM.

And people find it easy to crap on the FO for hiring a search firm to find him, but they forget that the NFL was advocating that sort of search at the time. The League was trying to persuade teams to hire executives in more of a “corporate America” style and bring teams out of the “good ol’ boy” ways of the past. It screwed the Bears in some ways as, If I remember correctly the length of the search pissed off a couple of candidates to include the top candidate (I can’t remember his name, but I remember he was from the Eagles organization).

The Bears tried to be progressive for the league’s sake (not for the first time, either) and ended up taking a hit, IMO.

in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The practice of repeating the same action while expecting different results.

by Timothy Hockemeyer on Jan 26, 2012 5:44 PM CST up reply actions

Tom Modrak

You’re welcome ;-)

by Sweetness Lives On on Jan 26, 2012 6:31 PM CST up reply actions

That was him.

Thanks.

in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The practice of repeating the same action while expecting different results.

by Timothy Hockemeyer on Jan 27, 2012 9:17 PM CST up reply actions

I admit I screwed up on Conte.

I wrote that after watching some highlights of him getting burned on coverage. Too harsh there.

As for Columbo, it IS Angelo’s fault that he was let go and never developed. He was waived after the season opener. My point on Columbo is that if he had such talent, why didn’t Angelo keep him for a season when he was healthy to see what he could do? He was on the PUP list in 2003 then IR into the tail end of 2004. Why waive a first round pick on the OLine when you didn’t draft ANY lineman besides Bryan Anderson in 2003? It’s not like they had someone waiting behind me being blocked by Columbo.

Look below for mea culpa on 2001. Couldn’t find exactly when in 2001 Angelo was hired so I simply assumed that the Bears would do whatever reasonable football organization would do and replace in January/February timeframe. March at the latest.

As for evangelize existing feelings, I put each players Bears career numbers within the analysis. If you don’t like what I did then take the PDF and come up with something better. I graded as every player taken in the draft should at least contribute a year. If they don’t even make the practice squad, then you wasted a draft pick and let a UFA go on the open market. I looked at it as using a draft pick on player essentially gives the team same power as the restricted free agent list. Taking a Danny Woodhead as a pick in the seventh round at least ensures the Bears locked up the rights to someone who looks talented.

If anything, the list is a damning indication of the Bears scouting department throughout the years.

Cacti are prickly.

by crackedcactus on Jan 26, 2012 9:47 AM CST up reply actions

My post may have been a bit strong.

I seem to be the only Bears fan that thinks sacking Angelo was a poor decision, especially as I thought he had been drafting better over the last few years. Without Angleo the Bears wouldn’t have Cutler or Peppers (alternatively known as the best two players on the team). I guess I get a bit wound up at what I see as a lazy trope of folks simply slagging Angelo off by chucking out drivel like ‘he never met a pick he didn’t like to waste’ etc. My reaction to your post is at least as much a reaction to that as to your post. This is unfair to your post.

I would put a very simple argument thusly; if there are 704 starters in the league (ignoring specials for simplicity) then over a ten year period you would expect 70.4 players per year to get drafted and become starters – yes I know this is overly simplistic but it is only to demonstrate an argument. That is 2.2 per team per year, even if they end up starting somewhere else.

So here is my list of players Angelo drafted who have been starters in the NFL for at least a few seasons; Columbo. Metcalf, Brown, Grossman, Tillman, Briggs, Gage, T Harris, T Johnson, Berrian, Vasher, Benson, Orton, C Harris, Manning, Hester, Anderson, Olson, Williams, Forte, Bennett, Davis, Melton, Knox, Moore, Louis, Wright, Webb, Carimi, Paea, Conte. Count’em that us 31 names and it doesn’t include some handy players who have had decent NFL careers either as role players or special teams demons – original AP, Ian Scott, Bobby Wade, Rod Wilson, Corey Graham, Bowman, Steltz – or a couple of young guys on the roster who may be useful in the future – ie Wooton, Enderle, Thomas. So that is 31 starters and nine role players in ten years. That seems to be above average. Don’t just take my word for it PFW carried out some leaguewide research to create a proper grading system and their grades basically went;

no starters – crap F
one starter – poor D
two starters – average C
three starters- good B
four starters – excellent A

They gave extra credit for finding reserves, role players, special teamers and for elite players. This esearch wasn’t carried out by a one eyed Jerry Angelo supporter but rather by an impartial media organisation and according to their grading system Jerry averages out to a B+ (possibly even A-) over his career. Maybe it was the coaches who failed to develop the talent? (although I doubt criticism of Terry Shea or Ron Turner goes down well around here, have I got that right?)

by weepingbear on Jan 26, 2012 12:41 PM CST up reply actions

Even that is a poor grading system as it doesn't take into account the existing team.

For a team like the 2012 packers it would take a far more impressive draft to find four starters than it would for the 2012 Colts or Vikings, who have a ton of holes.

And I agree that the failures of Angelo are overstated by his detractors. I also think his successes are overstated by his supporters. For example, trading for Cutler is something that several terrible teams with poor personnel people attempted to make happen but the Bears lucked into having the backup that McDaniels wanted. And signing Julius Peppers wasn’t exactly rocket science, He was the best free agent on the market and Chicago had the most cap space of any team at the time. These weren’t genius moves that only Angelo could or would have pulled off. Just as I don’t dock him for guys like Colombo or Bazuin (sorry haters, but there was nothing in Dan Bazuin’s history that said that he would catastrophically injure his knee) or even Benson (Mack Brown is one of the best talent evaluators in college football and was actively behind promoting Benson, who went undiagnosed for his mental conditions at Texas).

But I disagree that recent drafts have been better. Even taking into account that the Bears weren’t playing with first or second round picks for a while, the production from third rounders was terrible. Just the idea that 2010 or 2009 could be considered an improvement is a testiment to how poor drafting has been that expectations have been lowered that much.

And don’t ever criticize Shea or Turner around here. Someone might buy you a beer.

in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The practice of repeating the same action while expecting different results.

by Timothy Hockemeyer on Jan 26, 2012 5:30 PM CST up reply actions

A fair bunch of arguments.

I guess I thought Angelo was a better than average GM and that there is a decent chance that whoever gets the job may not be as good. I do think that the reasons and the timing of his sacking are unfortunate. If you want to sweep the house clean do it all at once, the current set up seems destined for problems.

by weepingbear on Jan 27, 2012 7:43 AM CST up reply actions

I agree.

in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The practice of repeating the same action while expecting different results.

by Timothy Hockemeyer on Jan 27, 2012 9:17 PM CST up reply actions

I like the concept here...

…though I disagree with a number of player evaluations (which I suspect everyone will have their own opinion on each player and it’s tough to boil it down to one, definitive answer).

I guess my biggest complaint is giving too many below average players “4s” just because they were late round picks. If you’re going to evaluate how good the pick was, they shouldn’t get a bonus because they beat out a terrible depth and started/played practically by default. Some examples:

3’s not 4’s:
Webb, Louis, Steltz, Moore, Bowman, Davis (the key is that even though they made the team, none of them are good)

2’s not 3’s:
Wright, Bennett

3’s not 2’s:
Manning

2’s not 1’s:
Olsen, Benson

That’s with just a cursory glance. A 1st rounder is supposed to produce more than a 7th rounder, but getting a 7th rounder who still plays poorly isn’t excellent… at best it’s good value. That’s more of how I’d look at it. A 1st rounder who plays 4-5 seasons of average football is closer to a “2” than a “1” on that kind of grading scale.

by IOftenPanic on Jan 26, 2012 11:37 AM CST reply actions

I wasn't trying to grade by their career

But rather through their production at the position relative to where they were drafted. I’m not happy with Webb as LT, but getting a mid 7th rounder as a starter is GOOD production from that slot.

Cacti are prickly.

by crackedcactus on Jan 26, 2012 3:33 PM CST up reply actions

Understood.

But I think it’s still relative. Webb is pretty bad. You can get a lot of guys drafted in the 7th round to play poorly on your team. The Bears lack of a viable alternative contributed as much to Webb starting as talent has. If Cutler got injured game one and Hanie played awful the whole season, no one would be calling him a “starter”. Webb is starter more by default than anything he’s shown on the field. He’s been good enough to make the roster and beat out Omiyale and an oft-injured, almost-busted-out Chris Williams. That’s not a “4” or “excellent” on the scale you set up in my opinion.

Again, like the concept, appreciate the work, I would just tweak it that way personally.

by IOftenPanic on Jan 26, 2012 3:36 PM CST up reply actions

Thanks for the props

Once again, by how I was grading out Angelo’s picks, Webb had to be a good pick by definition.

I did my best not to make exceptions, and the fact that he is a starter on the Bears is more of an indictment to JA’s inability to fill out the roster.

Cacti are prickly.

by crackedcactus on Jan 26, 2012 3:48 PM CST up reply actions

Idk

Berrian and Gage werent exactly world beaters. Benson ran himself outta town by getting arrested. Anderson flopped with another team after the Bears let him walk. Harris was an all pro with the Bears but nowhere else. Columbo was solid but stayed injured with the Bears. I cant think of any players that have gone on to match the success they had with the Bears under normal circumstances.

See me on Twitter follow me @ EddieCheeze, Catch me on FB friend me Eddie Cheeze, See my group on youtube listen to us Hood Platinum, want me ta kill a track email me Cheeze2k11@gmail.com....Im errwhere

by EmmCeee on Jan 26, 2012 12:45 PM CST via Android app reply actions

Uummm...

Benson was a decent runner for Cincinnati.
Berrian and Gage were either #2/#3 options for their team for multiple years.

Columbo is a multi-year starting right guard for pass-prolific offense that put up 360 YpG/425 total points then 365.7 YpG and 455 point the next year. He was a key element to their run blocking schemes, often getting to the second level

Anderson is with the Patriots and is co-Leader in Sacks for a year that they are going to the Super Bowl

Harris set the Panthers team record in Tackles and led the league in Forced Fumbles the first year he was there.

Harris was only all-pro the second time with the Bears.

Cacti are prickly.

by crackedcactus on Jan 26, 2012 3:45 PM CST up reply actions

Benson is good with the Bengals

But HE got himself in constant trouble in Chicago. Columbo was solid. Berrian was invisible when he left for more money. Gage was ok but nothing special. Harris was an all pro with the bears which was better than he was with carolina. He’s pretty much finished. Anderson had 10 sacks which is less than his best Season as a bear after he went to another team and did nothing. The 1 or 2 ex bears that have been good are severely outnumbered by the Ex Bear Flops

by EmmCeee on Jan 26, 2012 11:16 PM CST via Android app up reply actions

yeah . . .

Yeah, but look how GB and even Detroit develop their talent. They don’t have the big first round misses that the Bears do. I was convinced that Chris Williams would be different. He wasn’t. Angelo has an alarming trend of drafting 1st and 2nd rounders who were flagged medically.

K. McAllister

by Aube2012 on Jan 28, 2012 1:04 PM CST up reply actions

What Annoyed me the most about Angelo Was Not Really his Drafts

because draft picks are hit or miss but rather his under the radar free agent signings- Im not including obvious big name stars like Cutler or Peppers but rather his way of signing castoffs like Merriweather, the Manatee, Gaines Adams (which was tragic but the Bucs weren’t too happy with him), Omiyale and such.

by Gaak on Jan 27, 2012 1:10 AM CST reply actions

unreal

Imagine if Angelo had done a LITTLE better in FA and the draft. We could have won the SB last year w/ a little more talent. What I hated about JA was that his FA acquisitions were as equally poor as his drafting, w/ a few exceptions. The guy didn’t value WR’s, and that ultimately cost us last Jan.

K. McAllister

by Aube2012 on Jan 28, 2012 1:02 PM CST reply actions