Chicago Bears Offseason Thread (the tank must payoff)

[WrigleyField 22]

 

I think it's more favorable that Stroud declared. While I don't think it changes much, I do see the potential of 3 QB's going with the first 3 picks, leaving Anderson sitting there at #4. While I don't know enough about any of these QB's to know that any of them are top of the draft worthy, there are a lot of teams interested in a QB this offseason. Some can afford to move draft capital more easily than spending on their limited cap space for Jimmy G. or Carr. We only really need Houston to want to move up to the first pick and Indy to want to move to the second pick. Raiders or Atlanta could want to move up to 3rd after they miss out on the first two QB's.

 

A guy can dream.

 

 

Probably going to end up much ado about nothing, the Bears will end up keeping the #1 pick taking Will Anderson. Wouldn't be too bad ending up with the best player in the draft.

 

At the very least, they'll have a great deal being offered by the Colts.

I don't doubt he'll get offers, but I could imagine a scenario where he's not moved enough if he REALLY likes Anderson. I think the near certainty most fans have is probably still a bit optimistic.

[jumbo]

I know conventional thoughts are that this is bad for Bears, but I think it could have a chance of offsetting some new demand with the increased supply. Stroud could be a goldilocks candidate for some teams:

 

Simplified, but basically:

Player     Prod    Tools   Size  Age
Young       x       x       -     x
Stroud      x       x       x     x
Levis       -       x       x     - 
Richardson  -       x       x     x

 

None of these guys are really similar in their profile and teams create preferences on certain traits. Like car buyers shopping between cars/trucks and foreign/domestic. It's not just "car supply"

It's more like a Venn diagram where they have overlapping skill sets, but not necessarily with all of them at the same spot. Same with each player's weak spots. But, I agree it just depends on what the team's front offices key on. Young has the highest "football IQ"/game awareness, but he's not the most gifted physically. If he were five inches taller there wouldn't be any question that he is the clear #1.

Yea certainly more nuanced than my chart.

 

And, yea, I think if he had better size, he'd be a clear #1. What's he actually expected to come in at? He's listed at 6'0" 194, but seems like consensus is he's gonna measure smaller on both, by a lot. If he somehow measured at that height/weight he may clear the hurdle just enough for some teams who would be out if he's 5'10" 180.

 

On Hoge and Jahns an "expert" guest said he is smaller than Kyler (acknowledged Kyler is heavier/built thicker)

Kyler's combine numbers we 5' 10"/207

[Hairyducked Idiot]

There used to be a running joke among sportswriters about how short a guy had to he before media guides gave up on listing him as 6-0 and dropped to 5-10 (nobody is ever 5-11 for some reason). The consensus was the cutoff was around 5-8

[UMFan83]

It's more like a Venn diagram where they have overlapping skill sets, but not necessarily with all of them at the same spot. Same with each player's weak spots. But, I agree it just depends on what the team's front offices key on. Young has the highest "football IQ"/game awareness, but he's not the most gifted physically. If he were five inches taller there wouldn't be any question that he is the clear #1.

Yea certainly more nuanced than my chart.

 

And, yea, I think if he had better size, he'd be a clear #1. What's he actually expected to come in at? He's listed at 6'0" 194, but seems like consensus is he's gonna measure smaller on both, by a lot. If he somehow measured at that height/weight he may clear the hurdle just enough for some teams who would be out if he's 5'10" 180.

 

On Hoge and Jahns an "expert" guest said he is smaller than Kyler (acknowledged Kyler is heavier/built thicker)

Kyler's combine numbers we 5' 10"/207

 

Shorter than Kyler? Yikes...so Young would be the shortest QB in the NFL. I think you can be successful as a sub-6 foot QB and guys like Kyler, Russ Wilson and Brees have proven that, but at some point height becomes an issue.

[gflore34]

Yea certainly more nuanced than my chart.

 

And, yea, I think if he had better size, he'd be a clear #1. What's he actually expected to come in at? He's listed at 6'0" 194, but seems like consensus is he's gonna measure smaller on both, by a lot. If he somehow measured at that height/weight he may clear the hurdle just enough for some teams who would be out if he's 5'10" 180.

 

On Hoge and Jahns an "expert" guest said he is smaller than Kyler (acknowledged Kyler is heavier/built thicker)

Kyler's combine numbers we 5' 10"/207

 

Shorter than Kyler? Yikes...so Young would be the shortest QB in the NFL. I think you can be successful as a sub-6 foot QB and guys like Kyler, Russ Wilson and Brees have proven that, but at some point height becomes an issue.

 

This is a lot of the reason why I don't get some in the media insistence that Young is a better prospect than Fields. Really? Because physically Fields >>> Young and it's not even that close, so, I guess the base of their argument is Young is better at the mental portion of the game. Which is questionable given Young has never played a down in the NFL.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

 

On Hoge and Jahns an "expert" guest said he is smaller than Kyler (acknowledged Kyler is heavier/built thicker)

Kyler's combine numbers we 5' 10"/207

 

Shorter than Kyler? Yikes...so Young would be the shortest QB in the NFL. I think you can be successful as a sub-6 foot QB and guys like Kyler, Russ Wilson and Brees have proven that, but at some point height becomes an issue.

 

This is a lot of the reason why I don't get some in the media insistence that Young is a better prospect than Fields. Really? Because physically Fields >>> Young and it's not even that close, so, I guess the base of their argument is Young is better at the mental portion of the game. Which is questionable given Young has never played a down in the NFL.

 

It's hard to generate a lot of hype for the upcoming draft if the no. 1 overall pick isn't better than a guy who fell outside the top 10 a couple years ago.

[CubinNY]

 

Shorter than Kyler? Yikes...so Young would be the shortest QB in the NFL. I think you can be successful as a sub-6 foot QB and guys like Kyler, Russ Wilson and Brees have proven that, but at some point height becomes an issue.

 

This is a lot of the reason why I don't get some in the media insistence that Young is a better prospect than Fields. Really? Because physically Fields >>> Young and it's not even that close, so, I guess the base of their argument is Young is better at the mental portion of the game. Which is questionable given Young has never played a down in the NFL.

 

It's hard to generate a lot of hype for the upcoming draft if the no. 1 overall pick isn't better than a guy who fell outside the top 10 a couple years ago.

Faulty assumption. There is no indication that Young is going to be the #1, 2 or 10 pick. It's too early to tell. However, he's a better prospect than Fields ever was. He's a better passer, has more situational awareness, and makes better decisions than Fields did in college. I'm not an expert (obviously), but if Fields and Young were both in the draft, Young would likely get drafted before him. But then again, he probably would have been a 2nd string QB for OSU.

 

Edit: That also does not necessarily mean that Young is going to be a better pro QB than Fields.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

 

This is a lot of the reason why I don't get some in the media insistence that Young is a better prospect than Fields. Really? Because physically Fields >>> Young and it's not even that close, so, I guess the base of their argument is Young is better at the mental portion of the game. Which is questionable given Young has never played a down in the NFL.

 

It's hard to generate a lot of hype for the upcoming draft if the no. 1 overall pick isn't better than a guy who fell outside the top 10 a couple years ago.

Faulty assumption. There is no indication that Young is going to be the #1, 2 or 10 pick. It's too early to tell. However, he's a better prospect than Fields ever was. He's a better passer, has more situational awareness, and makes better decisions than Fields did in college. I'm not an expert (obviously), but if Fields and Young were both in the draft, Young would likely get drafted before him. But then again, he probably would have been a 2nd string QB for OSU.

 

Edit: That also does not necessarily mean that Young is going to be a better pro QB than Fields.

 

If the Bears believe this, they should trade Fields and take Young.

[Old Style]

 

This is a lot of the reason why I don't get some in the media insistence that Young is a better prospect than Fields. Really? Because physically Fields >>> Young and it's not even that close, so, I guess the base of their argument is Young is better at the mental portion of the game. Which is questionable given Young has never played a down in the NFL.

 

It's hard to generate a lot of hype for the upcoming draft if the no. 1 overall pick isn't better than a guy who fell outside the top 10 a couple years ago.

Faulty assumption. There is no indication that Young is going to be the #1, 2 or 10 pick. It's too early to tell. However, he's a better prospect than Fields ever was. He's a better passer, has more situational awareness, and makes better decisions than Fields did in college. I'm not an expert (obviously), but if Fields and Young were both in the draft, Young would likely get drafted before him. But then again, he probably would have been a 2nd string QB for OSU.

 

Edit: That also does not necessarily mean that Young is going to be a better pro QB than Fields.

According to whom?

[mul21]

 

Shorter than Kyler? Yikes...so Young would be the shortest QB in the NFL. I think you can be successful as a sub-6 foot QB and guys like Kyler, Russ Wilson and Brees have proven that, but at some point height becomes an issue.

 

This is a lot of the reason why I don't get some in the media insistence that Young is a better prospect than Fields. Really? Because physically Fields >>> Young and it's not even that close, so, I guess the base of their argument is Young is better at the mental portion of the game. Which is questionable given Young has never played a down in the NFL.

 

It's hard to generate a lot of hype for the upcoming draft if the no. 1 overall pick isn't better than a guy who fell outside the top 10 a couple years ago.

 

So you're saying a team would have been dumb to trade the #1 pick for Brady at the peak of his playing days because he was a 6th rounder?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

 

This is a lot of the reason why I don't get some in the media insistence that Young is a better prospect than Fields. Really? Because physically Fields >>> Young and it's not even that close, so, I guess the base of their argument is Young is better at the mental portion of the game. Which is questionable given Young has never played a down in the NFL.

 

It's hard to generate a lot of hype for the upcoming draft if the no. 1 overall pick isn't better than a guy who fell outside the top 10 a couple years ago.

 

So you're saying a team would have been dumb to trade the #1 pick for Brady at the peak of his playing days because he was a 6th rounder?

 

Hmm. That doesn't sound like something I said.

[CubinNY]

 

It's hard to generate a lot of hype for the upcoming draft if the no. 1 overall pick isn't better than a guy who fell outside the top 10 a couple years ago.

Faulty assumption. There is no indication that Young is going to be the #1, 2 or 10 pick. It's too early to tell. However, he's a better prospect than Fields ever was. He's a better passer, has more situational awareness, and makes better decisions than Fields did in college. I'm not an expert (obviously), but if Fields and Young were both in the draft, Young would likely get drafted before him. But then again, he probably would have been a 2nd string QB for OSU.

 

Edit: That also does not necessarily mean that Young is going to be a better pro QB than Fields.

According to whom?

This is indicative of what people thought about Fields at the time of the draft where he was expected to go anywhere from 3 to 10

 

Tony Pauline’s Justin Fields Scouting Report

Positives: Big-armed passer with the ability to make all the throws. Patient in the pocket, keeps his eyes downfield, and takes the safe underneath outlet if nothing else is available. Sells ball fakes, remains poised under the rush, and buys as much time as necessary for receivers. Elusive, keeps plays alive, and easily gets outside the box to elude pass rushers and make the throw on the move.

 

Possesses a next-level arm, puts speed on all his throws, and loses nothing passing on the move. Displays a sense of timing, drives the deep throw, and delivers some outstanding long passes. Throws the ball 50+ yards with speed and spin, perfectly placing it in the receiver’s hands. Legitimate threat running the ball, showing the ability to pick up yardage with his legs. Tough and plays while injured.

 

Negatives: Does not always find the center fielder, which results in interceptions. Slow to process and at times slow pulling the trigger. Stares down the primary target.

 

Analysis: From the point of view of physical skills, Fields grades as highly as any quarterback in this draft and has the strongest arm of any of the top quarterbacks. He also struggles with his reads and is slow to process what’s happening on the field, which is a red flag. Fields absolutely has starting potential at the next level and could lead a franchise, but he will need the right coach who is able to match the mental skills with his physical ability.

 

Sounds familiar? He's basically the same guy he was in college.

 

Young, projected to go anywhere from 1 to 5

Young has a reasonably strong arm, but his arm elasticity is what truly generates appeal. The Alabama QB’s arm is very elastic, and he can throw from different arm angles while maintaining velocity generation. Moreover, he’s able to throw with easy velocity and accuracy off-platform. He’s a snappy, flexible thrower who can generate velocity from points of discomfort. Young can also actively adjust his arm angle to widen throwing windows, avoiding lurking rushers and deflection threats.

 

The arm talent is strong with Young, but his creation capacity — a near-generational quality of his — is by far his best trait. The Alabama QB is a quick-twitch athlete with excellent suddenness, stop-and-start ability, and elusiveness. He’s an amped-up, but controlled runner who halts and generates momentum on demand, causing defenders to lurch. He can levy devastating cuts in open field and extend running lanes for himself. He’s also very well-balanced between cuts, and instinctive when maneuvering away from contact. Going further, Young shows off great burst and good speed.

 

Young has the requisite athleticism to be an elite creation threat, but his creative instincts take his off-script game to an entirely different level. Young has an uncanny feel of where defenders are, and he can manipulate space to the highest degree, while also keeping his eyes up and aware of roaming receivers. Young’s ability to generate positive plays through adverse situations, as consistently as he does, is incredibly rare.

 

Areas for Improvement

Young is shorter and lighter than average, and while he hasn’t had major durability concerns yet — despite being subjected to steady pressure in 2022 — it could potentially be a source of issues in the NFL. That size threshold may be Young’s most pressing issue in the 2023 NFL Draft cycle, but there are other imperfections beyond that.

 

Young has a strong arm, but he doesn’t have elite arm strength. His velocity is good, but has a visible cap, and can be inconsistent. Young also operates with a lot of schemed plays and predetermined reads by design, and he has room to become a more independent processor. There are times when Young sticks to his first read too long, and he can be reliant on rhythm throws.

 

Conversely, Young could also be more patient at times and anticipate certain reads better. He’s shown growth with his anticipation in 2021 and has always displayed the necessary processing capacity. But overall, Young still has room to gain more experience and comfort with full-field reads and progression work.

 

Off-platform, Young’s accuracy and placement can be a bit more volatile, as his mechanics become more lopsided when rolling out. He sometimes abandons the pocket prematurely, eroding opportunities and creating unneeded chaos. Mechanically, Young could improve both during and at the conclusion of his drop-back. He sometimes releases right on the drop and throws off his back foot. This can tug his front shoulder up, forcing passes high.

[Bertz]

 

Matt Miller has Fields as having been better at draft time FWIW.

 

Saying "but he went #11" is generally a tell for someone hot taking since A) most people at the time thought Fields should have gone higher and B) he was in a draft with 4 other very good QB prospects, including the guy most folks felt was the best QB prospect since Luck. Different drafts have varying levels of talent, and in particular the shape of the top end talent varies drastically.

[Old Style]

Maybe I'm just a dummy but those evaluations don't seem to support your claim I bolded in my response.

[CubinNY]

 

Matt Miller has Fields as having been better at draft time FWIW.

 

Saying "but he went #11" is generally a tell for someone hot taking since A) most people at the time thought Fields should have gone higher and B) he was in a draft with 4 other very good QB prospects, including the guy most folks felt was the best QB prospect since Luck. Different drafts have varying levels of talent, and in particular the shape of the top end talent varies drastically.

Yes, if Trever Lawerence is in this draft he's #1. A lot also depends on who is at the top of the draft and what they need as evidenced by all this talk. I think the Bears should keep Fields but I also don't necessarily think they should trade the #1 pick. It depends on who they think their top target is and who is drafting at what spots who may also be targeting the same player. If they trade down just to get more picks and lose out on their target, well that doesn't seem to make sense to me. But like I said before they have many and varied needs so there may not be a top target, but a few of them. If so, it makes more sense to trade down. You kind of have to put trust in the management team here.

[UMFan83]

 

Matt Miller has Fields as having been better at draft time FWIW.

 

Saying "but he went #11" is generally a tell for someone hot taking since A) most people at the time thought Fields should have gone higher and B) he was in a draft with 4 other very good QB prospects, including the guy most folks felt was the best QB prospect since Luck. Different drafts have varying levels of talent, and in particular the shape of the top end talent varies drastically.

 

Fields was the consensus number 2 pick in the draft almost all season. I remember getting mad that the Bears already had too many wins and would have no shot at Lawrence or Fields. Nothing Fields did in his last season should have caused a drop in draft stock IMO. He didn't start dropping until after the season when people started talking about him throwing to his first read a high percentage of the time. I'm sure there's more to it but he was very highly regarded as a prospect until draft time.

[CubinNY]

Maybe I'm just a dummy but those evaluations don't seem to support your claim I bolded in my response.

It's more subjective than not, so there is little reason to argue about it. One could say that there were three quarterbacks drafted ahead of him and he dropped to 11 is a pretty good indication that he's not as good a prospect as Young, but as Bertz pointed out the context of each draft is different.

[Tryptamine]

 

Matt Miller has Fields as having been better at draft time FWIW.

 

Saying "but he went #11" is generally a tell for someone hot taking since A) most people at the time thought Fields should have gone higher and B) he was in a draft with 4 other very good QB prospects, including the guy most folks felt was the best QB prospect since Luck. Different drafts have varying levels of talent, and in particular the shape of the top end talent varies drastically.

Yes, if Trever Lawerence is in this draft he's #1. A lot also depends on who is at the top of the draft and what they need as evidenced by all this talk. I think the Bears should keep Fields but I also don't necessarily think they should trade the #1 pick. It depends on who they think their top target is and who is drafting at what spots who may also be targeting the same player. If they trade down just to get more picks and lose out on their target, well that doesn't seem to make sense to me. But like I said before they have many and varied needs so there may not be a top target, but a few of them. If so, it makes more sense to trade down. You kind of have to put trust in the management team here.

 

Sure, there are are scenarios I could see them using the #1. For example, if they view Anderson as a significantly better prospect than Jalen Carter. In that scenario you have to take him at #1 because Arizona probably snags Anderson at #3. If Stroud/Young somehow tank their draft stock in the combine where it's unlikely that QBs go #1 and #2 and Anderson/Carter are gone before #4 then maybe you have to use the #1 there as well. Outside of those 2 scenarios I can't really envision a time where using #1 makes sense, but it's plausible.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Saying "but he went #11" is generally a tell for someone hot taking since A) most people at the time thought Fields should have gone higher and B) he was in a draft with 4 other very good QB prospects, including the guy most folks felt was the best QB prospect since Luck. Different drafts have varying levels of talent, and in particular the shape of the top end talent varies drastically.

 

So should we expect a poor return for our no. 1 pick?

[Bertz]

Saying "but he went #11" is generally a tell for someone hot taking since A) most people at the time thought Fields should have gone higher and B) he was in a draft with 4 other very good QB prospects, including the guy most folks felt was the best QB prospect since Luck. Different drafts have varying levels of talent, and in particular the shape of the top end talent varies drastically.

 

So should we expect a poor return for our no. 1 pick?

 

The Colts are not far removed from giving up a 2nd for a clearly washed Carson Wentz, I'm very much not worried about it.

[WrigleyField 22]

Well in non overdone Fields talk, the press conference for Warren crashed hard on twitter for me.

 

But in the 5 minutes I saw, Warren is about 100x more personable than Ted. So there's that I guess. Any actual good Q and As happen?

[David]

 

Matt Miller has Fields as having been better at draft time FWIW.

 

Saying "but he went #11" is generally a tell for someone hot taking since A) most people at the time thought Fields should have gone higher and B) he was in a draft with 4 other very good QB prospects, including the guy most folks felt was the best QB prospect since Luck. Different drafts have varying levels of talent, and in particular the shape of the top end talent varies drastically.

 

Fields was the consensus number 2 pick in the draft almost all season. I remember getting mad that the Bears already had too many wins and would have no shot at Lawrence or Fields. Nothing Fields did in his last season should have caused a drop in draft stock IMO. He didn't start dropping until after the season when people started talking about him throwing to his first read a high percentage of the time. I'm sure there's more to it but he was very highly regarded as a prospect until draft time.

 

Think it was concerns about his epilepsy and BS reports (like Orlovsky's "last guy in, first guy out" garbage) about his work ethic that caused his stock to fall more than anything.

 

Whatever it was, I'm selfishly very happy it happened.

[17 Seconds]

is this a nice grill?

 

[champaignchris]

There used to be a running joke among sportswriters about how short a guy had to he before media guides gave up on listing him as 6-0 and dropped to 5-10 (nobody is ever 5-11 for some reason). The consensus was the cutoff was around 5-8

 

I’m 5’10”. I remember walking around Illinois’ campus when I was a student in the 90s and being amused that I was taller than a couple Illini basketball players who’d been listed at 6’2”.

[jersey cubs fan]

Perfect suburban dad grill. 4 zone genesis probably about $1600-$1700.