Let’s talk... David Montgomery

[mgscott]

The Bears had limited draft capital due to the Mack and Anthony Miller deals and they still traded up for Montgomery. It’s not to be a back up or split time. Davis is a fine back up and Tarik will be all over the place. I took Alvin Kamara a few years ago just based off of Sean Payton trading up for him.

This is about the only reason I am taking him seriously as a prospect. The Bears not only took him with the first pick they had, but traded other picks to move up to take him. They likely plan to use him. I, for one, think it was a stupid move and will bite them in the bleep. They may regret not drafting to fill other needs or for depth and getting a comparable RB late in the draft or in UDFA. None the less, they did trade up to take him, so they think he has something and may force feed him even if he shows to be worse than Davis.

Or he may faceplant like RoJo last year and be irrelevant.

[rubber_duck]

MGScott ... yup!

Montgomery is a really good football player, but isn't athletic enough. Some of Nagy's comparison to Hunt I agree with. However, Hunt has much better play-speed than Montgomery does. Ultimately, I see him as a replaceable level of talent that was drafted into a really good situation. That makes him a decent buy for use in 2019 and then a sell ... maybe even a mid-season sell if you don't need him for a playoff run.

[WhatWouldDitkaDo]

I, for one, think it was a stupid move and will bite them in the bleep. They may regret not drafting to fill other needs or for depth and getting a comparable RB late in the draft or in UDFA.

What needs do they really have though? Homer bias aside, I think it's a pretty well-rounded roster.

[mgscott]

I'm mostly saying this from the philosophy of not drafting a RB early unless they are elite. I don't know the Bears roster front and back, but I would think their O-line and corners for one, could at least use some depth, if not improved talent. All teams need depth and have starters on expiring contracts. I feel it's smart to address more important positions than RB most if not every year with earlier picks, especially the first pick of your draft. Teams should always be looking to improve their roster.

[Jason3123]

Great landing spot opportunity wise. I wouldn't bury Mike Davis yet, and Cohen certainly ain't going anywhere. Davis could Chris Carson, Phillip Lindsay, DeMarco Murray Montgomery. I'm sure Montgomery will eventually win out but let's not crown him right away.

[rschroeder1]

I'm mostly saying this from the philosophy of not drafting a RB early unless they are elite. I don't know the Bears roster front and back, but I would think their O-line and corners for one, could at least use some depth, if not improved talent. All teams need depth and have starters on expiring contracts. I feel it's smart to address more important positions than RB most if not every year with earlier picks, especially the first pick of your draft. Teams should always be looking to improve their roster.

(Giddy) Bears fan here. The combination of Montgomery, Ridley and presumably Whyte pave the way for Davis, Gabriel and Patterson to be cut after '19, freeing up $12 million in cap space in '20 and covering three key positions for the next three years thereafter on the cheap. While I do think the Bears like Montgomery, there's an element to the long game here.

With two second round picks in '20, including the potential for an early round pick from the Raiders, Pace has set himself up nicely to address more critical roster spots with those second round picks.

Though the odds of him restraining himself from turning the two second-rounders into a first round pick...

[mgscott]

I guess those three would be less costly, so you can save some cap space. But I would argue you are also going with lesser talent at each of those spots too.

[rschroeder1]

I guess those three would be less costly, so you can save some cap space. But I would argue you are also going with lesser talent at each of those spots too.

Right, there's no guarantee of a drop-off, but I think given the cap limitations the Bears have right now, these picks represent a bit of a gamble. Given that Pace has been trading up consistently, not accumulating picks, these picks need to hit. If Whyte doesn't work out as the primary returner, it's not the end of the world, but clearly Ridley needs to be the real deal at this point in order to address needs at EDGE and LB.

Leonard Floyd will be a UFA next year, for whatever people think of him.

[HereForTheComments]

I have searched the forums and I'm not really able to find any real breakdown of David Montgomery to explain why he isn't higher on boards other than his "metrics". I am not sure how his metrics can be viewed as an issue when his metrics are basically identical to Kareem Hunt and no one is worried about him.

Can anyone help breakdown what it is that doesn't make him the clear #2, or even possibly #1, in rookie drafts outside of metrics? What am I not seeing, because, on film, he looks like the best back in this class.

[dvpkwys]

I can't answer that question, but I have posted a few threads regarding the top 3 rookie RB rankings. There was lots of discussion, with no real knock on him (besides the metrics as mentioned). I had my choice, and after months of research and debate I went with my gut and took Montgomery ahead of Jacobs last night in my draft. From those threads this is what I have taken out of it:

Jacobs - I like him, and with his history as a person, I think he will work his butt off, be a good team-mate and human. He goes into an immediate role, and will get tons of action. He can catch well, likes contact and has juice to go. I don't love the situation in Oakland, and don't like the tough run schedule for the first 5 weeks. Someone had posted that the RB list from Alabama isn't great (not sure that matters). Does his draft capital sway his ADP? If he was drafted in the second or third would he be the top guy?

Monty - Same as Jacobs, he seems like a good person and team mate. No off field crap with either of them. Cohen is there yes, but he will still get a lot of action. Chicago is a good young team, with a great defence to setup the run game. Breaks a ton of tackles. I just like the situation better there. If Kareem Hunt is his comparable as a player, I am excited for that!

[HereForTheComments]

I can't answer that question, but I have posted a few threads regarding the top 3 rookie RB rankings. There was lots of discussion, with no real knock on him (besides the metrics as mentioned). I had my choice, and after months of research and debate I went with my gut and took Montgomery ahead of Jacobs last night in my draft. From those threads this is what I have taken out of it:

Jacobs - I like him, and with his history as a person, I think he will work his butt off, be a good team-mate and human. He goes into an immediate role, and will get tons of action. He can catch well, likes contact and has juice to go. I don't love the situation in Oakland, and don't like the tough run schedule for the first 5 weeks. Someone had posted that the RB list from Alabama isn't great (not sure that matters). Does his draft capital sway his ADP? If he was drafted in the second or third would he be the top guy?

Monty - Same as Jacobs, he seems like a good person and team mate. No off field crap with either of them. Cohen is there yes, but he will still get a lot of action. Chicago is a good young team, with a great defence to setup the run game. Breaks a ton of tackles. I just like the situation better there. If Kareem Hunt is his comparable as a player, I am excited for that!

I appreciate your input.

Playerprofiler, which pretty much looks at metrics only but a ton of it, says Montgomery's comparable player is Kareem Hunt. I looked at their metrics side by side from the combine and they were about as close as they could be on everything.

[BucFanJKE]

So the problem for me personally is that Kareem Hunt is the exception, not the rule. We shouldn't make excuses for his poor athletic profile and write it off as a non issue because Kareem Hunt is clouding our judgement. He could be great. But I just don't see his ceiling as that high.

Also, there are concerns with Hunt in a lot of the community that he was a product of the KC system and not actually good. So it's not like the entire community even after seeing Hunt ball out two years straight is on board with him as a stud.

[jenkins.math]

The issue with Montgomery when you compare him with Jacobs is opportunity. Jacobs is going to get all the touches he can handle according to Gruden and there really isn't any threat to steal work from him in Oakland. He will be a 3 down back for them until he proves that he can't.

Mike Davis isn't a bum and could very well steal some carries from Montgomery. We know Cohen will still get touches and virtually all of the obvious passing down work.

When there isn't a huge gap in talent you're better off taking the RB with the path of least resistance since they have such a short life span.

[Dynasty DeLorean]

Here's are all the 3rd round Rb's I have stats for, you can kind of look for yourself if Montgomerys profile looks good in comparison to others. I personally think running a 4.6x+ kind of puts you in another category of player, and when looking at those Rb's that have run that "slow" it's quite a mixture of hits, misses and everything inbetween. I think Thomas, Greene, and Gore all stacked together kind of says it all, he could be a HOF'er, a plodding compiler, or just a flat out bust.

[remedy29]

I heard Montgomery being compared to Shonn Greene. He was a solid RB when healthy, but no one is claiming All Pro potential. Kareem Hunt had a lot of positive film review and great senior bowl. There were questions on his level of competition and what kind of player was Hunt going to be? Small and fast or big and strong, his weight fluctuated a lot by the time he entered the combine. Then Hunt goes to an ideal situation in KC. I don't think they are comparable as players in the least bit.