adam Posted Sunday at 11:24 PM Report Share Posted Sunday at 11:24 PM This move seems to have backfired on Poles. A waste of a 4th round pick and roster spot. Allen has been a liability and for some reason Caleb has targeted him a ton. He has 30 receptions on 56 targets with several drops. Kmet has 32 receptions on 37 targets. So 2 more receptions with 19 fewer targets. Allen also missed 2 games, so those numbers would be even higher if he didn't. It almost feels like Caleb feels obligated to throw the ball to Allen even though there are much more efficient options. Allen should be the 4th option, not the 1st or 2nd one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted Sunday at 11:35 PM Author Report Share Posted Sunday at 11:35 PM btw, coming into this game, Williams had a 122.5 Passer Rating when targeting Kmet, and he was 3-3 for 42 yards, so I assume that went up. Allen was 89.3, but 4-8 for 41 yds will definitely drop that down. Either way, there will be at least a 35 pt Passer Rating difference between targeting Kmet and Allen, yet Allen sees 2-3x the targets per game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bears4Ever_34 Posted Monday at 12:13 AM Report Share Posted Monday at 12:13 AM This is one move I don't fault Poles for. I hated the Bates trade. At least Allen was coming off a career year, albeit at age 32. For a 4th round pick, I felt like that was fair compensation at the time, and the Bears didn't know if they'd be able to draft Odunze yet. Obviously, it's turned out to be a terrible decision, but didn't hate the reasoning behind it. It's bizarre how the drop off could be this significant in 1 season right after the best season of his career. Has to be the heel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mongo3451 Posted Monday at 03:05 AM Report Share Posted Monday at 03:05 AM 2 hours ago, Bears4Ever_34 said: Obviously, it's turned out to be a terrible decision, but didn't hate the reasoning behind it. It's bizarre how the drop off could be this significant in 1 season right after the best season of his career. Has to be the heel. I thought it was just ok at the time. When I realized no OL help was on the horizon, I hated it. Same with Tory Taylor. Taylor is a stamp that says, "job complete". Nope... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted Monday at 03:38 PM Author Report Share Posted Monday at 03:38 PM 12 hours ago, Mongo3451 said: I thought it was just ok at the time. When I realized no OL help was on the horizon, I hated it. Same with Tory Taylor. Taylor is a stamp that says, "job complete". Nope... Yeah, Bates was a backup in BUF, but was coming to CHI to start, so at a minimum, Poles should've thrown 1-2 more targets a the O-Line between FA and the draft to protect against this exact outcome happening with injuries. 15 hours ago, Bears4Ever_34 said: This is one move I don't fault Poles for. I hated the Bates trade. At least Allen was coming off a career year, albeit at age 32. For a 4th round pick, I felt like that was fair compensation at the time, and the Bears didn't know if they'd be able to draft Odunze yet. Obviously, it's turned out to be a terrible decision, but didn't hate the reasoning behind it. It's bizarre how the drop off could be this significant in 1 season right after the best season of his career. Has to be the heel. The Bears already had Moore, Odunze, and Kmet. So by adding Allen, one of those 3 would get bumped down to option 4 in the passing game. In a way, Poles created a too many mouths to feed problem. Everyone can't get 7-8 targets a game. Kmet has been on the short end lately, but so has Odunze, all to give Allen more targets and drops. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bears4Ever_34 Posted Monday at 08:02 PM Report Share Posted Monday at 08:02 PM 4 hours ago, adam said: Yeah, Bates was a backup in BUF, but was coming to CHI to start, so at a minimum, Poles should've thrown 1-2 more targets a the O-Line between FA and the draft to protect against this exact outcome happening with injuries. The Bears already had Moore, Odunze, and Kmet. So by adding Allen, one of those 3 would get bumped down to option 4 in the passing game. In a way, Poles created a too many mouths to feed problem. Everyone can't get 7-8 targets a game. Kmet has been on the short end lately, but so has Odunze, all to give Allen more targets and drops. They didn't already have Odunze before they traded for Allen. The draft came afterwards. Had they not traded for Keenan, and then somebody else took Rome before #9, every Bears fan would have been livid at Poles for not doing enough to give Caleb talent to work with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearFan PHX Posted Monday at 08:10 PM Report Share Posted Monday at 08:10 PM 9 minutes ago, Bears4Ever_34 said: They didn't already have Odunze before they traded for Allen. The draft came afterwards. Had they not traded for Keenan, and then somebody else took Rome before #9, every Bears fan would have been livid at Poles for not doing enough to give Caleb talent to work with. right. plus they knew there was a decent chance that they'd get Odunze, and so Allen would teach him route running. So it was a win under each scenario. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted Tuesday at 03:50 AM Report Share Posted Tuesday at 03:50 AM I dont know if anyone mentioned it but he got Allen before he drafted Rome. He was totally surprised when Rome was there at 9 which tells me he didnt think he could get him. It was Allen and Moore. Had he not traded for Allen and not be able to get Rome. tons of people would be complaining ( Poles didnt get any weapons to help the rookie QB). No matter what Poles does he gets judged all the time on his choices until we win. His plan was to win in 25 and 26, its a bonus for any wins we get this yr. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mongo3451 Posted Tuesday at 04:23 AM Report Share Posted Tuesday at 04:23 AM 34 minutes ago, Stinger226 said: I dont know if anyone mentioned it but he got Allen before he drafted Rome. He was totally surprised when Rome was there at 9 which tells me he didnt think he could get him. It was Allen and Moore. Had he not traded for Allen and not be able to get Rome. tons of people would be complaining ( Poles didnt get any weapons to help the rookie QB). No matter what Poles does he gets judged all the time on his choices until we win. His plan was to win in 25 and 26, its a bonus for any wins we get this yr. I still would have taken Brock Bowers. To me he was the biggest matchup problem in the draft... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearFan PHX Posted Tuesday at 04:33 AM Report Share Posted Tuesday at 04:33 AM 10 minutes ago, Mongo3451 said: I still would have taken Brock Bowers. To me he was the biggest matchup problem in the draft... Bowers is a hell of an athlete and slot receiver even as a TE. i think that because we had just spent money extending Kmet, we went with a more traditional receiver. But I would trade Kmet for Bowers straight up any day of the week for sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted Tuesday at 01:21 PM Report Share Posted Tuesday at 01:21 PM I loved Bowers too but hindsight is a window I didnt have while the draft was going on. I would have loved us to draft Puka the year before in the 6th round but it didnt happen. We can do that all day looking back, its just wasted thinking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mongo3451 Posted Tuesday at 04:22 PM Report Share Posted Tuesday at 04:22 PM 11 hours ago, BearFan PHX said: Bowers is a hell of an athlete and slot receiver even as a TE. i think that because we had just spent money extending Kmet, we went with a more traditional receiver. But I would trade Kmet for Bowers straight up any day of the week for sure. We talked about this before the draft. Kmet is a classic inline and Bowers is a classic move. They would have played like a dream in eleven personnel. Bowers would have been very affordable on a rookie contract while Kmet aged. I'm not bitching about Rome because I really like him and trust/ed Poles to make the right call. In the end, I believe both will have great careers. I'm just always looking for a matchup edge... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearFan PHX Posted Tuesday at 04:24 PM Report Share Posted Tuesday at 04:24 PM 2 minutes ago, Mongo3451 said: We talked about this before the draft. Kmet is a classic inline and Bowers is a classic move. They would have played like a dream in eleven personnel. Bowers would have been very affordable on a rookie contract while Kmet aged. I'm not bitching about Rome because I really like him and trust/ed Poles to make the right call. In the end, I believe both will have great careers. I'm just always looking for a matchup edge... no doubt Bowers is great, and your point about them being different in style and complementary is a good one too. I just think they couldnt sink that much value into the TE position, And maybe thats a mistake, too, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mongo3451 Posted Tuesday at 04:54 PM Report Share Posted Tuesday at 04:54 PM 19 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said: no doubt Bowers is great, and your point about them being different in style and complementary is a good one too. I just think they couldnt sink that much value into the TE position, And maybe thats a mistake, too, Yeah, it's a philosophy with me. Waldron was supposed to be two TE and heavy run, so Bowers made more sense in my head. I also see the NFL through a fantasy football lense. When looking at players and I'll use Kelce as example. He was scoring like a high end receiver and his theoretical gap with the other TE's has been pretty big over a long span. As a result, I started drafting Kelce like a WR before anyone. (Even the experts). Was I lucky, yes. Even better, I was on to something. My fantasy league is in it's 26th year and they roasted me for drafting a TE in the third round. It got worse when I drafted him in the second. Now, my arch rival has beat me to the punch the last couple of years. It's not the total value that Kelce provides, it's the steady mailbox money points. He's there when called upon. That's what I thought of Bowers and he's more athletic than Kelce. Before Stinger comes in and tells me real football is not fantasy or that I'm wasting brain energy, I'll say, if you parallel the difference making concept, it's here... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearFan PHX Posted Tuesday at 05:46 PM Report Share Posted Tuesday at 05:46 PM 52 minutes ago, Mongo3451 said: Yeah, it's a philosophy with me. Waldron was supposed to be two TE and heavy run, so Bowers made more sense in my head. I also see the NFL through a fantasy football lense. When looking at players and I'll use Kelce as example. He was scoring like a high end receiver and his theoretical gap with the other TE's has been pretty big over a long span. As a result, I started drafting Kelce like a WR before anyone. (Even the experts). Was I lucky, yes. Even better, I was on to something. My fantasy league is in it's 26th year and they roasted me for drafting a TE in the third round. It got worse when I drafted him in the second. Now, my arch rival has beat me to the punch the last couple of years. It's not the total value that Kelce provides, it's the steady mailbox money points. He's there when called upon. That's what I thought of Bowers and he's more athletic than Kelce. Before Stinger comes in and tells me real football is not fantasy or that I'm wasting brain energy, I'll say, if you parallel the difference making concept, it's here... I think the great teams always have a TE that really contributes to the passing game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted Tuesday at 09:07 PM Author Report Share Posted Tuesday at 09:07 PM Bowers has had the luxury of a ton of targets. Same with a few other TEs compared to Kmet. If Kmet had their number of targets, in most cases his stats would look even better than theirs, in some cases by a lot. Kmet leads all TEs in Catch% at 86.5 and is 3rd in EPA/Rec for TEs. Bowers: Targets - 89, Receptions - 70, 702 yds, 3 TD If Kmet had 2x the volume: Kmet: Targets - 74, Receptions - 64, 716 yds, 6 TD and if you compare Kmet's projected volume numbers with the next few TEs, you can see his numbers exceed theirs as well. Kelce: Targets - 80, Receptions - 62, 507 yds, 2 TD Otton: Targets - 70, Receptions - 49, 456 yds, 4 TD McBride: Targets - 65, Receptions - 49, 552 yds, 0 TD Waldron really messed up this offense. Hopefully we can see a solid stretch of 7 games with increased volume for Kmet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.