THE CHICAGO BEARS HAVE THE #1 PICK

[BearFan PHX]

oh and even more to our point here, adam, the chart you posted shows not only a huge overpayment in JJ (Johnson points) but even the RH points Im talking about in your second column are out of whack.

Our pick is worth a LOT more than the JJ points suggest.

Lets go Poles!

[adam]

31 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said:

right, in modern times that first round QB is worth more than the old Jimmy Johnson pick #1 = 3000 points model.

This guy, Rich Hill, attempted to math out the real modern draft chart using information gained in trades. When teams thought a set of picks for another set of picks was a deal they'd both do (and then made the trade), that equivalence was put into the formula, and you jockey it around until it fits the most trades.

https://www.patspulpit.com/2017/4/23/15398184/2017-nfl-draft-creating-a-brand-new-nfl-draft-value-trade-chart

Hill's chart says that the #1 pick is worth a lot more relative to the other picks in the draft by FAR, than Johnson's old school chart implied. And the recent trades at the top of the draft after Hill made his chart in 2017 all tend to confirm this.

A lot of the difference between #1 and #2 or #4 has to do with the QB talent at the top of the draft each year. The forthcoming combine hype machine will increase the value of our pick consistently from Johnson's chart value today, until it more closely resembles Hill's by late April.

What I'm saying is, in running trade scenarios, when we've been referencing recent trades as models, we've been predicting the Bears to get a lot more than when we use to Johnson chart to make the same predictions.

For example, when we trade with Indianapolis, we fall to the 4th pick, and what we get in return varies wildly using the Johnson chart or recent trades and the Hill chart.

The Johnson chart says moving from #1 to #4 is equal to the the #12 pick overall.

The Hill chart says moving from #1 to #4 is equal to the #3 pick! You'd need to package both #3 and #4 overall to get #1. That's how valuable that pick is.

Or said another way, moving from #1 to #4 is equal to #16 and #29. The #1 pick is worth THREE first rounders! Especially if one of them is a 2024 first rounder!

You can see why people are starting to include players in these scenarios. Its hard to make up that massive value with just other picks without doing a Herschel Walker type deal.

Here's one interesting idea: Eberflus needs to stock his defense. He knows the players at Indi really well in his system. We've seen the thought that Indi would pay this years first (#4), next years first and Quentin Nelson, but we worry about the player and the huge deal.

What if, instead, we got this years #4, Next year's number one (which is likely to be a high pick). an extra 3rd or 4th this year, and a handful of defensive players that Eberflus thinks are about to take the next step?

I love reading all these scenarios you guys come up with. Check out the Hill chart, and see if it changes any of your predictions?

Yes, give me the Rich Hill chart all day long. The JJ chart was just a very simple even math comparison. The Rich Hill one is much more current and actually treats the Goff trade as even.

[adam]

35 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said:

oh and even more to our point here, adam, the chart you posted shows not only a huge overpayment in JJ (Johnson points) but even the RH points Im talking about in your second column are out of whack.

Our pick is worth a LOT more than the JJ points suggest.

Lets go Poles!

The way I am reading it is any percentage over 100, the team that traded the picks to move up, gave up more than the pick they traded for. 

In this scenario, using the JJ table, the Rams gave up 17% more than even to trade up. In the RH table, it was 101%, so basically an even trade.  So if that is the case, that trade should be the baseline for any Poles move. Get at least that much, if not more. 

[BearFan PHX]

I read it the same way, and you can see most trades on that list that went higher than RH!

I agree, the Goff trade is the floor of what we would accept.

[Alaskan Grizzly]

On 1/10/2023 at 10:47 AM, adam said:

I am seeing a lot of chatter about Indy. Some scenarios have Quenton Nelson being offered up as part of the package. 

I'm seeing similar talk about a scenario with the Colts involving DeForest Buckner.  Of the two, this seems more better.

[Stinger226]

Like AZ mentioned, I don't think Poles takes on a big contract for an aging veteran. DeBuckner and Nelson are paid a lot. Both have fallen off from their original status.  Nelson will cost a dead cap hit of 24 mil if traded  because he got a new contract last year. Are they better than what we have, absolutely.

He mentioned Alec Pierce, he's young and cheap and Kenny Moore on his last year of deal. Both would be a nice addition. Not sure if Pierce will be a #1 but will upgrade the WR room. 41-593-2.

[adam]

10 minutes ago, Stinger226 said:

Like AZ mentioned, I don't think Poles takes on a big contract for an aging veteran. DeBuckner and Nelson are paid a lot. Both have fallen off from their original status.  Nelson will cost a dead cap hit of 24 mil if traded  because he got a new contract last year. Are they better than what we have, absolutely.

He mentioned Alec Pierce, he's young and cheap and Kenny Moore on his last year of deal. Both would be a nice addition. Not sure if Pierce will be a #1 but will upgrade the WR room. 41-593-2.

They just drafted Pierce (and probably was someone Poles could've drafted instead of Gordon), so I doubt they would move on from him so soon.

However, Pittman (25) seems like a perfect candidate. He is on the last year of his rookie deal and average 95 receptions and 1000 yds per season over the last 2 years. That has been with some of the crappiest QB play as well. I would feel pretty good with Pittman, Claypool, Mooney, Rookie, Jones, and ESB.

[Stinger226]

3 minutes ago, adam said:

They just drafted Pierce (and probably was someone Poles could've drafted instead of Gordon), so I doubt they would move on from him so soon.

However, Pittman (25) seems like a perfect candidate. He is on the last year of his rookie deal and average 95 receptions and 1000 yds per season over the last 2 years. That has been with some of the crappiest QB play as well. I would feel pretty good with Pittman, Claypool, Mooney, Rookie, Jones, and ESB.

I mentioned Pittman before but he will be do a big contract next year. I'll take either one. Both have size.

Poles took BPA at the time, we don't know if he liked him or not. If Poles asks Indy to throw in trade, I don't think Colts are killing the trade because of Pierce.

[adam]

11 minutes ago, Stinger226 said:

I mentioned Pittman before but he will be do a big contract next year. I'll take either one. Both have size.

Poles took BPA at the time, we don't know if he liked him or not. If Poles asks Indy to throw in trade, I don't think Colts are killing the trade because of Pierce.

Very true on Pierce. I still wouldn't mind Pittman as it gives Poles some flexibility. 

[Mongo3451]

16 minutes ago, adam said:

Very true on Pierce. I still wouldn't mind Pittman as it gives Poles some flexibility. 

I'd beware of Pierce and Pittman.  Neither have great hands or explosive speed.  Pierce has long speed if he could get off the jam.  I live outside Indy, so my Colt buddies have given me an earful.

[jason]

On 1/10/2023 at 1:44 PM, adam said:

So don't pay an off ball LB $20M a year for the next 5 years?

BINGO!!!!!!!!!!!????

That's such a horrible contract. If you compare what he did/does to Sanborn or a dozen other lower round draft pick LBs, there is a difference, but not a difference that makes such a contract remotely acceptable.

[jason]

On 1/9/2023 at 5:06 PM, Stinger226 said:

Where  there could be a problem, it 2 or 3 QBs emerge as good and different teams want different QBs Everyone knows the Bears ain't drafting a QB. So that could screw up the trade scenarios.

I see what you're saying, but I think FOMO kicks in at that point. Teams who want Player X would be worried that another team has that same QB as #1 above all others, and terrified a rival would attempt to trade in front of them to steal their guy.

[jason]

On 1/9/2023 at 10:09 PM, Alaskan Grizzly said:

Aha.  We find ourselves once again on polar opposites on how the Lovie tenure went down.  You know he did ‘take your advice’ and draft (or “suggested”as you insinuate) two o-linemen in the first round during his time (Carimi and Williams) but they both flopped.  At any rate, there’s little doubt no other Bears HC has been able to duplicate what Lovie did, so far.   And for what it’s worth Urlacher thought Lovie getting fired was BS and that Phil Emery was “weird”.  

 

Notice I never said his players didn't love him. They did. I think Lovie is likely a great man, in terms of fellowship, and he's able to get players to buy into his program. But it's a helluva lot easier to do when you walk into a ready-made defense with Urlacher, Briggs, Tillman and several other solid players.

[jason]

On 1/9/2023 at 10:31 PM, DABEARSDABOMB said:

Okay - so this is my absolute semi plausible dream scenario from a trade perspective:

Bears trade 1 to Texans for #2 and their 2nd rounder this year and next year. 
Bears than trade with Colts - moving from 2 to 4 and get Colts 1st round pick, 2nd, and 4th this year plus a 1st and 3rd next year and Buckner.  
Cardinals trade down at 3 to somebody looking to get last QB. 
Bears draft Anderson at 4. 
Note: Total wet dream scenario is the original Texans trade is 1 for 2 and 12. Colts trade still happens as is. 

I love this scenario. 

[BearFan PHX]

Ha! This is so silly. I was just playing with the draft simulator at:

https://www.profootballnetwork.com/mockdraft/

First I traded the #1 pick to the Texans:

Texans get: Pick #1

Bears get: Pick #2, Pick #12, Pick #33, 2024 Houston first rounder, and 2024 Cleveland first rounder

the Texans then take Bryce Young QB Alabama

Then I trade Pick #2 to the Colts for pick #4, and pick #79

The Colts then take CJ Stroud at #2, and Arizona picks Kelee Ringo CB from Georgia with pick #3

Then I trade Pick #4 to Seattle for Pick #5 and Pick #53

Seattle takes Myles Murphy with the Pick #4

I then use Pick #5 to take Will Anderson Jr. EDGE Alabama

Later with Pick #12, I take Bryan Bresee DT Clemson

---

So I turned Pick #1 into:

Will Anderson Jr. EDGE Alabama
Bryan Bresee DT Clemson
2024 HOU 1st Round pick
2024 CLE 1st Round pick
Pick #33

Pick #53

Pick #79

This would be insane. It is completely impossible. The Texans trade is crazy. The simulator offered it to me.

These drafts are silly. Either that or Im the best GM that ever lived. Yeah i know. They're silly LOL

[BearFan PHX]

More Silliness:

Trade Downs to turn Pick #1 into:

Pick #9: Quentin Johnson WR TCU

Pick #12: Bryan Bresee DT Clemson

Picks #33 and #44

2024 CAR, CLE, HOU & ATL First Round Picks (we'd have 5 in the first round! LOL)

2024 INDI 2nd Round Pick

Insanity.

[lemonej]

On 1/9/2023 at 6:24 AM, adam said:

I still can't believe what I watched in the Texans game for the Bears to get the #1 pick. The Colts ended up 0-1-1 vs the Texans, even the tie was all that was needed for the Bears to get the 1st pick because if the Texans and Bears tied, the Bears would've picked #2 due to SoS. 

Adam if the Bears and Texans tied the Bears would have picked 2nd because they beat the Texans head to head.

[Mongo3451]

8 hours ago, jason said:

terrified a rival would attempt to trade in front of them to steal their guy.

That's forever called a Pace.  The act of fleecing a Pace is forever called a Trubisky.

[adam]

6 hours ago, lemonej said:

Adam if the Bears and Texans tied the Bears would have picked 2nd because they beat the Texans head to head.

yep, pretty much every tie  breaker had the Bears picking after the Texans, H2H, SoS, etc. 

I still find it fascinating that the Colts performance against the Texans in 2 games ultimately decided the fate of the Bears draft position, and now the Bears can negotiate with the Colts for the same draft capital.

[adam]

9 hours ago, BearFan PHX said:

More Silliness:

Trade Downs to turn Pick #1 into:

Pick #9: Quentin Johnson WR TCU

Pick #12: Bryan Bresee DT Clemson

Picks #33 and #44

2024 CAR, CLE, HOU & ATL First Round Picks (we'd have 5 in the first round! LOL)

2024 INDI 2nd Round Pick

Insanity.

Yeah, the options are through the roof. 

My guess is this:

Poles trades down once and if HIS guy is still on the board, he drafts him there. If not, I can see him moving down like your scenario and just stocking up on picks. 

[AZ54]

3 hours ago, Mongo3451 said:

I'd beware of Pierce and Pittman.  Neither have great hands or explosive speed.  Pierce has long speed if he could get off the jam.  I live outside Indy, so my Colt buddies have given me an earful.

Gotta love it when the regional scouts check in.  Though I'm not sure what Stinger is scouting in Thailand.  

[Mongo3451]

21 minutes ago, AZ54 said:

Gotta love it when the regional scouts check in.  Though I'm not sure what Stinger is scouting in Thailand.  

He's busy with 20 year old laundry specialists...?

[BearFan PHX]

2 hours ago, adam said:

Yeah, the options are through the roof. 

My guess is this:

Poles trades down once and if HIS guy is still on the board, he drafts him there. If not, I can see him moving down like your scenario and just stocking up on picks. 

for sure, but theres no way the Texans would have to give that much to move up one slot.

[DABEARSDABOMB]

So was thinking about Justin Fields and the whole construct around the #1 pick. I'm clearly in the camp of trade the pick, with that said, if I put myself in Poles shoes - below is kind of how I would hope him and the organization are thinking of the decision.  

In general - If Fields can't become a good passer (which given his legs means just okay as a pure passer) - than I think they are fine and they have their franchise quarterback. If the Bears don't think he can do that or have extreme reservations around that front - than they really do need to due all the diligence on the QB's (the reality is they need to anyway - if for nothing else to ensure they maximize all the leverage they can).  

I know 3 absolute positives:

1. Fields is an amazing athlete (like one of the most special ever at the position),

2. He has arm talent to make all the throws, and

3. He has the "it" factor in terms of being a natural born leader + right work ethic.  

I also see 2 material negatives: 

1. His ability to process the field quickly - I see him go through progressions - but his ability to get rid of the football quickly and take the play in front of him, is absolutely horrific (I don't have a metric behind it - but I think its one of the worse I've ever seen - maybe because I think of all his other attributes). Does he need to be elite with this to be good, no, but he needs to be serviceable here.  Having poor wideouts and poor protection DID not help him here and only the Bears knows how much growth he made (or didn't make this year).  If in film review they know he made material progress - than you have real momentum that helps build on a belief that he can make major growth here. The inverse is - if through film review the team DID NOT see that progression or minimal progression - that is a real issue because you can't just blame it all on talent, etc. That might just tell you what you have.  

2. Need to continue to clean-up his footwork and mechanics - he has all the arm talent (as I mentioned in the strengths) - but his ability to be more consistency on check downs and short / intermediate throws - will require continued improvements in this camp. Given the material progress he showed (this year vs. last year) on this front - I see zero reason to not project this out. 

Bottom line:

This means if I am the Bears - my assessment in Fields upside really all comes down to there views around his ability to process the field quickly.  If you saw real progress this year - than I think you should feel real comfort with another year in the league, one year in the system, and improved blocking and weapons around him - that you could see a major step forward in '24. If you saw minimal progress - than you have to be looking at QB. 

And as a fan - we really can't assess the above - because we don't know the expectations of the plays, the calls at the line, etc.  Only the coaching staff and player know that.

What I can say is - Getsy's body language most of the year seemed to insinuate very strong growth in the above and positive momentum there (with the exception of the Lions game - where he was pretty clear in how poor that performance was).   

[DABEARSDABOMB]

1 hour ago, BearFan PHX said:

for sure, but theres no way the Texans would have to give that much to move up one slot.

It really comes down to - how much leverage can we get.  If the Texans want a QB and they grade them out at the top and there is a big difference between him and someone else. It doesn't matter if it is just one spot - cause if they need to ensure they get there guy they have to pay a premium (presuming you have at least 1 or 2 other teams who are aggressive and feel the same way).  

That could mean you get 2 and a future 1st as the package (I don't know how much more you can get). That is a pretty strong offer (I don't know how much more greedy I could be in that scenario) but dream would be get a 2nd or 3rd this year plus a future first (or the Texans also have 12 - but maybe they prefer taking a pick at 1 and 12 to give some good foundation (from Texans perspective) for that young QB.  

 

My hope as a Bears fan is there is a strong view of you have a 1A and a 1B in this draft (and also the Bears have a strong view that they saw material progress in Fields progressions to think he's a 1A+) but the difference between 1A and 1B is also big (or teams have different views of who 1A / 1B are).  That should maximize value and opportunity to get maximum value out of a Houston team while than putting Bears in a position that they can get maximum value for 2 (in a double trade down scenario).