The Chicago Bears are on the clock! OFFSEASON OPEN THREAD!

[Stinger226]

Listening to a lot of podcasts today and the same media that condemn Justin, turns around and are saying that they think we can get a first if we trade him. Does that make sense to anybody? He's good enough to get a one but he can't stay here.

[jason]

1 hour ago, ChileBear said:

Hold it, we've got two young and improving Tackles, cap space for free agents and draft capital. The OL will be better and I'd rather see a new QB with better skills than more of the same with Fields. And if what you say is true, then Fields was a lost cause two years ago, so why keep him longer, based on your arguement?

 

You hold Fields because he’s still under rookie contract and you try to fix the team around him. If they improve the OL like you suggest, then Fields will look better and the Bears will make an immediate ascension.

[jason]

1 hour ago, ChileBear said:

So we're hopeless, why follow the Bears as your team?

Because there is hope. There is always hope. Hope that they learn from past mistakes and try a new approach. 

[Daventry]

2 hours ago, Alaskan Grizzly said:

I didn’t really use any stats to “suit my narrative”.  I simply shared the same stats for Fields as Adam posted for Williams (while both were playing in college) and found both to have very similar results.  In fact if there was a consensus to be made, some would say Fields regressed after coming into the NFL…and probably because of the aforementioned shite situation he faced in Chicago.  
 

Be that as it may, I disagree that there is a “consensus” on how special and can’t miss that Williams is.  For every Williams supporter there is at least one Merril Hoge who will say he “isn’t special”.  So far most of what I’ve seen whether it be former and current players and execs, the so-called “experts” and those of us keyboard GMs (social media etc), it’s been pretty 50/50 on whether Justin will stay or go.  If anything I’d say there is a consensus among the Fields’ supporters he stay and a consensus among the Williams supporters he won’t.  

The cherry picking of stats, and bending them to prove particular points, is fairly commonplace on this site by some.  It’s laughable and very easy to distinguish.

From what I read, what I said is true.  The Hoge views are the exception rather than the rule.

[ChileBear]

1 minute ago, jason said:

You hold Fields because he’s still under rookie contract and you try to fix the team around him. If they improve the OL like you suggest, then Fields will look better and the Bears will make an immediate ascension.

I just don't think Fields has the next level in him as a QB. He has skill, but another year of "improve around him and "the Fields will look better" will just be another of our franchise failures you alluded to earlier.

 

[jason]

4 minutes ago, ChileBear said:

I just don't think Fields has the next level in him as a QB. He has skill, but another year of "improve around him and "the Fields will look better" will just be another of our franchise failures you alluded to earlier.

 

Certainly possible. But picking yet another first round QB and surrounding him with an incomplete roster and poorly run organization just means they swung at the same pitch the exact same way three times in a row and struck out without even attempting another approach.

I’d rather they at least try something different and build a complete team. Loading up on a first round QB almost guarantees the multiple glaring holes don’t all get filled.

[jason]

I’ll add this for supporting evidence. Fields had a bottom 5 receiving corp, and was pressured more than nearly every other QB in the league. Can’t properly evaluate any QB in that situation.

https://x.com/clayharbs82/status/1758697342184607896?s=46&t=TmVeSz5NqQC-GsJTz-8YiQ

[Daventry]

2 hours ago, jason said:

I’ll add this for supporting evidence. Fields had a bottom 5 receiving corp, and was pressured more than nearly every other QB in the league. Can’t properly evaluate any QB in that situation.

https://x.com/clayharbs82/status/1758697342184607896?s=46&t=TmVeSz5NqQC-GsJTz-8YiQ

That’s interesting, but the “bottom 5” idea was the commentators opinion, not a fact.  There was no mention of the pressure issue, I assume you are saying that is your opinion?  In my opinion, the line wasn’t great but it wasn’t horrible either, and the reason for most of JF’s issues were his poor decision making.

[Stinger226]

4 hours ago, jason said:

I’ll add this for supporting evidence. Fields had a bottom 5 receiving corp, and was pressured more than nearly every other QB in the league. Can’t properly evaluate any QB in that situation.

https://x.com/clayharbs82/status/1758697342184607896?s=46&t=TmVeSz5NqQC-GsJTz-8YiQ

That video gives insight into how well he does with competent WRs compared to lesser talent. The key is drop rate. Moore and Kmet were less than, 02%,_the rest were below league average. Plus add in his loss of confidence when throwing to them. Facts changes narratives but people ignore them unless it states something they want to hear.

[Stinger226]

2 hours ago, Daventry said:

That’s interesting, but the “bottom 5” idea was the commentators opinion, not a fact.  There was no mention of the pressure issue, I assume you are saying that is your opinion?  In my opinion, the line wasn’t great but it wasn’t horrible either, and the reason for most of JF’s issues were his poor decision making.

PFF keeps track of pressure rates, he was second  only behind Geno Smith this year. First in 2022. A pressure is when a QB has less than 2.2 seconds to throw in  dropping back . Here's  a video from Swifty that has a nerdy guy on that breaks down statistics. 

 

[Daventry]

Interesting thoughts from a former player:

https://apple.news/Apf79tJgGQIG_ejvQG9dO9w

[Stinger226]

1 hour ago, Daventry said:

Interesting thoughts from a former player:

https://apple.news/Apf79tJgGQIG_ejvQG9dO9w

If Fields was set to make big money, this wouldn't even be a conversation but he's two years away from getting offered 40 plus million. 

[ChileBear]

28 minutes ago, Stinger226 said:

If Fields was set to make big money, this wouldn't even be a conversation but he's two years away from getting offered 40 plus million. 

So one senario would be the Aaron Rogers/Jorden Love one? Okay. Sounds a bit off with the Bears.

[Stinger226]

20 minutes ago, ChileBear said:

So one senario would be the Aaron Rogers/Jorden Love one? Okay. Sounds a bit off with the Bears.

The scenario is some team is about to make Poles a famous man in the GM world with two years of huge paydays  that keeps the cycle going a few more years. That would probably mean he's rolling one more year with Justin or taking a QB not in the first few picks. Huge decision will be coming down in April, any of his choices has risks, I will suspect whatever he  thinks gives him the  best chance to win in his opinion.

[Daventry]

A view from a former player suggesting keeping JF.  I thought a well written article.  Don’t agree but reasonable logic.

https://apple.news/AqKdP53BSRuurRh0Qn3-4SQ

[Alaskan Grizzly]

22 hours ago, Lucky Luciano said:

I CERTAINLY hope this is the year to pick the franchise qb. the first overall pick is a gift that we just can't use to stock up on filling the roster.

A few weeks ago Adam posted something about the likelihood of 1st round picks at QB were to win a Super Bowl.  While I was reading up on that (and being a contrarian by nature - lol) I found the article listed below.  It highlights how many ‘QBs picked in the 1st round overall have won a Super Bowl’ and came up with eight.  For some reason they didn’t include Joe Namath who won it in ‘69 and was written before  Stafford won his first a few years ago (and the first time #1s overall faced each other with he and Burrow). So technically, there would be 10.  
 

On that ‘list of 8’ includes the Mannings, Bradshaw, Aikman and Plunkett.  It also includes two others who were backups when they ‘won’ in David Carr and Drew Bledsoe.  So the question I have is how common is it really to have a ‘1st round overall QB win a Super Bowl’?  And go one step further in adding, with their original team (Stafford)?  

https://thelistwire.usatoday.com/lists/only-these-8-nfl-quarterbacks-drafted-no-1-overall-won-a-super-bowl-ring/

 

[Alaskan Grizzly]

15 minutes ago, Daventry said:

A view from a former player suggesting keeping JF.  I thought a well written article.  Don’t agree but reasonable logic.

https://apple.news/AqKdP53BSRuurRh0Qn3-4SQ

Good article and plays to what a few other players have said like Dj Moore, Chris Olave and Jaxson Smith-Njigba (all current WRs in the league by the way).  
 

Another thing that I forget about was how Fields didn’t really have a full season this year.  The reason being was due to him dislocating the thumb on his throwing hand.  And when you consider what the guy said in your article and he thought Justin ‘improved as the season wore on’, that to me seems pretty significant. 

[BearFan PHX]

It's a compound question.

A better set of questions might be:

1) How important is the QB in getting to and winning a superbowl?

2) Where are you most likely to find a QB like that?

I think the obvious answer you'll come up with is that the QB is easily the most important position in football, and the higher you draft them, the more likely you are to get a good one.

Honestly I'm surprised this is at all controversial. It seems really obvious to me.

Yes, good players are sometimes found later in the draft or free agency, and yes top picks sometimes bust, but statistically speaking, the best players generally go earlier in the draft, of course.

[Alaskan Grizzly]

33 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said:

I think the obvious answer you'll come up with is that the QB is easily the most important position in football, and the higher you draft them, the more likely you are to get a good one.

And to Jason’s point; like 1(2) or 1(11)?  

[ChileBear]

1 hour ago, Alaskan Grizzly said:

And to Jason’s point; like 1(2) or 1(11)?  

I think it's not a good argument to say we've failed previously in selecting a QB with the first pick so when one comes available that is much more highly touted than any since Andrew Luck or Peyton Manning, we should stick our heads in the sand and let some other team have him. To be great ya gotta take the swings. I see this as such an opportunity. We've got that no. 9 pick as well. What a great spot to be in. Don't f it up by worrying about possible failure. What about total success and a Super Bowl with a great QB? And that's to Jason's point about HOPE.

[Daventry]

29 minutes ago, ChileBear said:

I think it's not a good argument to say we've failed previously in selecting a QB with the first pick so when one comes available that is much more highly touted than any since Andrew Luck or Peyton Manning, we should stick our heads in the sand and let some other team have him. To be great ya gotta take the swings. I see this as such an opportunity. We've got that no. 9 pick as well. What a great spot to be in. Don't f it up by worrying about possible failure. What about total success and a Super Bowl with a great QB? And that's to Jason's point about HOPE.

Agreed.  Pick the best possible QB from a packed set of options.  Reap the benefits of reduced pay for this quarterback for a few years.  

[BearFan PHX]

2 hours ago, Alaskan Grizzly said:

And to Jason’s point; like 1(2) or 1(11)?  

sure, and if you identify that Spencer Rattler or something is the guy and you think you can reliably get him at 1(11) then I understand that plan.

But if you've identified a sleeper, you dont know who else might have. And even worse, the top guy(s) you evaluate are almost certain to be everyone else's top guys.

If youre looking to draft that real difference maker, you dont want to get too cute and miss on him.

And I just think that the real difference making QB in this draft, if there is one, is gonna be gone by pick #4. And I dont think passing on a guy like that is worth the extra players you get in return. I think rare difference making QBs are what the league is all about, and without one nothing else will matter.

Of course you want to put everything you can around a player like that. OL, WR, TE, RB, Defense all help a QB win games. But not to the point where its worth passing on the stud QB and thinking youll get one down the list who will be OK. There are so few of these difference making QBs and they win most of the superbowls.

[jason]

12 hours ago, Daventry said:

That’s interesting, but the “bottom 5” idea was the commentators opinion, not a fact.  There was no mention of the pressure issue, I assume you are saying that is your opinion?  In my opinion, the line wasn’t great but it wasn’t horrible either, and the reason for most of JF’s issues were his poor decision making.

See above. Although…PFF ?

As for the WRs, it’s their opinion, but also difficult to argue with that.

[jason]

3 hours ago, BearFan PHX said:

Yes, good players are sometimes found later in the draft or free agency, and yes top picks sometimes bust, but statistically speaking, the best players generally go earlier in the draft, of course.

True of all positions.

[BearFan PHX]

2 hours ago, jason said:

6 hours ago, BearFan PHX said:

 

True of all positions.

for sure. anyone who has watched teams get picked in gym knows this instinctively. It's obvious, and we agree.

But not all positions are equally important to winning championships.

That said, the weakest link on any team is an issue, and football is the ultimate team sport. So every position matters. And as I've said before, I agree with you that the offensive line is extremely important to a football team's success.

But I think you can more reliably find good offensive linemen, especially interior players, in the second round than you can reliably find championship QBs there, with the possible exception of left offensive tackle.

There is a reason that the best QBs get paid more $ than any other position by far. General Managers know this truth about the importance of the position and what a dominant one is worth.

Right defensive end is one of the most important positions on the defense, because they are the anti QB. They rush the QB to stop him from being able to throw. Their importance is a reflection of the QBs importance.

And of course then, to your point, the left offensive tackle is important because he blocks the DE who is trying to stop the QB. Again, all worth directly relative to the importance of the QB position.

Now it is also true that we have seen difference makers at every position in football history. You wouldnt normally think of safety as a position from which you can dominate the outcome of a game, but Ronnie Lott, Ed Reed and Troy Palumalu have shown otherwise. So real generational difference makers can come at any position.

But even when they do, at the height of their powers, they are not the most highly paid players in the league. That distinction always goes to a QB. And that value, expressed here as salary cap %, relates directly to effect on winning.

So if you think there's a hall of Fame QB available in the draft, you pay almost any price to get him.

And I do think the Bears roster building is far enough along to support a Caleb Williams, and I also think we will put more on the OL this offseason to make that even more true.

It isnt a true choice between a top rookie QB *OR* an offensive line. i think we can have both. And I think every metric and study shows that the top QB is the most important thing in football. Not the only important thing, but the most important.