Is Justin Fields elite? Bears @ Browns Sunday at noon

[BigSlick]

47 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

So is Fields playing his way into a new contract? I didn’t watch so I’m not asking a loaded question. 

I think his stat line oversells how well he played yesterday. (And I think his stat line in the first Detroit game undersold how well he played). He was consistently missing guys high yesterday, and even a handful of completions didn't put the receiver in the best position to get YAC. He missed Mooney wide open a few times, he missed Kmet on a sure TD (which he later redeemed with his own rushing TD), and he took one egregious sack and caused another holding penalty holding onto the ball way too long. The pass protection overall I thought was adequate to good - he just didn't pull the trigger fast enough on several occasions, and on several others he made a good play the hard way. Your mileage may vary on if thats good or bad or neutral. 

[Brian707]

If Fields plays well these last 4 games. Is it realistic to get a 2nd rounder from a team like Atlanta or Pittsburgh?

[WrigleyField 22]

1 hour ago, Brian707 said:

If Fields plays well these last 4 games. Is it realistic to get a 2nd rounder from a team like Atlanta or Pittsburgh?

Yes. 

[NorthsideAvenger]

2 hours ago, Brian707 said:

If Fields plays well these last 4 games. Is it realistic to get a 2nd rounder from a team like Atlanta or Pittsburgh?

If that happens, I suspect the Bears will keep Fields.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

3 hours ago, Brian707 said:

If Fields plays well these last 4 games. Is it realistic to get a 2nd rounder from a team like Atlanta or Pittsburgh?

If fields plays well down the stretch, I think you can scam someone for a first.  Just takes one sucker.

I wouldn't if I were Atlanta though.  Fields isn't the guy you want if you have a ton of playmakers and just need someone to distribute the ball to them.  If you want fields, it should be because you have nothing and need a guy who can make plays for himself by himself 

[Rex Buckingham]

22 minutes ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

If fields plays well down the stretch, I think you can scam someone for a first.  Just takes one sucker.

I wouldn't if I were Atlanta though.  Fields isn't the guy you want if you have a ton of playmakers and just need someone to distribute the ball to them.  If you want fields, it should be because you have nothing and need a guy who can make plays for himself by himself 

Pittsburgh it is

[Old Style]

Fields had a couple bad passes but he also threw several missiles. I’m admittedly one of the last remaining fans here but I thought he played very well yesterday. Guess I’ll just have to resign myself to rooting for him on his next team while we draft the next in the long line of QB disappointments because we fail to see the biggest problem with this offense is Goatse’s play calling. 

[jersey cubs fan]

4 minutes ago, Old Style said:

Fields had a couple bad passes but he also threw several missiles. I’m admittedly one of the last remaining fans here but I thought he played very well yesterday. Guess I’ll just have to resign myself to rooting for him on his next team while we draft the next in the long line of QB disappointments because we fail to see the biggest problem with this offense is Goatse’s play calling. 

I really don’t envision a scenario where Getsy returns and Fields is gone. 

[Brian707]

9 hours ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

If fields plays well down the stretch, I think you can scam someone for a first.  Just takes one sucker.

I wouldn't if I were Atlanta though.  Fields isn't the guy you want if you have a ton of playmakers and just need someone to distribute the ball to them.  If you want fields, it should be because you have nothing and need a guy who can make plays for himself by himself 

On the Score this morning this topic came up. They said the Jets got a 2nd,4th,6th for Darnold. I would think Fields should get that. They also said to keep Fields until the trade deadline and then deal him next season(that would be dumb)

[jersey cubs fan]

7 minutes ago, Brian707 said:

. They also said to keep Fields until the trade deadline and then deal him next season(that would be dumb)

Disagree

whats your reason? There’s nothing dumb about that. There is no motivation to trade earlier than necessary.

[Rex Buckingham]

24 minutes ago, Brian707 said:

On the Score this morning this topic came up. They said the Jets got a 2nd,4th,6th for Darnold. I would think Fields should get that. They also said to keep Fields until the trade deadline and then deal him next season(that would be dumb)

Can't believe they got that much for Darnold. I think you could convince someone to give a first if Fields plays well the next few games. He's shown he can completely change a game, which is something Darnold has definitely never done. If they can't get a first, I would at least push for a 2nd and 3rd together... maybe a 2nd, 2025 3rd, and a 5th?

[WrigleyField 22]

14 minutes ago, jersey cubs fan said:

Disagree

whats your reason? There’s nothing dumb about that. There is no motivation to trade earlier than necessary.

Depending on the angle it sounds pretty dumb.  Are they saying bridge Fields for half a season and then trade him?  They'll never do that if he's starting and they're winning and if they're losing bad enough to be trade deadline dealers it is dumb (and his value will definitely suck) and also it's dumb because then you must have a ****** environment (somehow) for the rookie.

 

If it's carry him as a backup and then trade him it's dumb because he's not going to increase his value siting on the bench.

 

Struggling to think of the not dumb scenario for that.

[BigSlick]

I honestly don’t entirely hate the idea of drafting QB1 and keeping Fields as a bridge QB next year if you can’t get more than a 2nd for him. The roster is coming together nicely, I expect they’ll be competitive for a playoff spot next year, Why spend unnecessary money and time on an Andy Dalton type?

of course you may be worried that would ruin the lockeroom but if ever there was a guy with a good attitude, it’s Fields. And hell, if he plays amazing, all possibilities are open. 

[jersey cubs fan]

The de facto for any qb taken in draft is he starts on the bench. There should be no automatic path to starting. If fields is traded over summer, that draft pick is starting by default, unless you bring in Andy Dalton Jr. 

If Fields starts the season and succeeds, great. You don’t have to trade him. You can play out the season with the pick on the bench. 
If the rookie takes over the job, great, he should be able to eventually, but not necessarily preseason. Then you have Fields as backup in case of injury and/or trade him to a good team with a dead qb midseason. 
 

If you can get a 1st in the summer, by all means go ahead and deal Fields. But if your settling for the likely middling market for Fields, you might as well keep the insurance policy in your back pocket. 
 

there is no deadline to trade fields. You don’t have to do it. It’s not dumb at hold on to a talented qb

[WrigleyField 22]

3 minutes ago, jersey cubs fan said:

 

there is no deadline to trade fields. You don’t have to do it. It’s not dumb at hold on to a talented qb

If you're saying just that, I agree.

 

Specifically to the trade him at deadline idea I can't wrap my head around a scenario where that isn't a dumb thing.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

36 minutes ago, jersey cubs fan said:

Disagree

whats your reason? There’s nothing dumb about that. There is no motivation to trade earlier than necessary.

He's less valuable to his new team when he's missed training camp and half a season.  You'd literally be holding a depreciating asset for no reason.

Just sign a vet to hold the seat warm 

[WrigleyField 22]

1 minute ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

He's less valuable to his new team when he's missed training camp and half a season.  You'd literally be holding a depreciating asset for no reason.

Just sign a vet to hold the seat warm 

Even if you thought he's a depreciating asset you can pretty easily measure that expected depreciation against what seat-holding vet would bring.  What's the pick depreciation value of say, $10M in cash? You can actually quantify it pretty well.  And then you put some upside/downside risk around it and should be able to come up with a pretty reasonable estimate for how to treat a QB as a depreciating asset, but certainly shouldn't be a binary decision.

[Brian707]

1 hour ago, jersey cubs fan said:

Disagree

whats your reason? There’s nothing dumb about that. There is no motivation to trade earlier than necessary.

Only reason would be to wait until 2025 to use those picks

[Rex Buckingham]

"You know, we need that Tommy Davita guy. He knows how to beat the Packers."

/Score Caller

In all seriousness, surely we can find someone who can be a good enough bridge QB if the rookie QB they take isn't ready from Day 1. Jake Browning, Gardner Minshew and Baker Mayfield are all currently starting for teams in the playoff picture and are all FAs after this year per sportrac. They'll have enough cap room to pay a guy enough to be that bridge QB/backup

[Soul]

16 hours ago, BigSlick said:

I think his stat line oversells how well he played yesterday. (And I think his stat line in the first Detroit game undersold how well he played). He was consistently missing guys high yesterday, and even a handful of completions didn't put the receiver in the best position to get YAC. He missed Mooney wide open a few times, he missed Kmet on a sure TD (which he later redeemed with his own rushing TD), and he took one egregious sack and caused another holding penalty holding onto the ball way too long. The pass protection overall I thought was adequate to good - he just didn't pull the trigger fast enough on several occasions, and on several others he made a good play the hard way. Your mileage may vary on if thats good or bad or neutral. 

Yes.  The ball simply has to come out quicker and on target.  I think we've seen enough to know that's not going to happen consistently.

[WrigleyField 22]

28 minutes ago, Rex Buckingham said:

"You know, we need that Tommy Davita guy. He knows how to beat the Packers."

/Score Caller

In all seriousness, surely we can find someone who can be a good enough bridge QB if the rookie QB they take isn't ready from Day 1. Jake Browning, Gardner Minshew and Baker Mayfield are all currently starting for teams in the playoff picture and are all FAs after this year per sportrac. They'll have enough cap room to pay a guy enough to be that bridge QB/backup

While the cap space is definitely not a deterrent, it's still also a question of what you think puts you in the best position to compete while developing that QB.  There's good reason to believe Fields will leave you in a better position to compete than those FAs (thus also put less pressure on rushing the rookie), still be a tradeable asset after year where the others won't (potentially more, potentially less) and save 8-10(?) million.

Of course it's not without risk, whether it's questioning Fields ability to stay healthy, risk of regression, and lockerroom concerns, but none of those should also be non starters, IMO. Though history tells us the lockerroom part tends to be treated as a non-starter.  So realistically I don't expect it at all.  But I think it's interesting internet forum filler to chat about lol

Edited December 12, 2023 by WrigleyField 22

[raw]

17 hours ago, BigSlick said:

I think his stat line oversells how well he played yesterday. (And I think his stat line in the first Detroit game undersold how well he played). He was consistently missing guys high yesterday, and even a handful of completions didn't put the receiver in the best position to get YAC. He missed Mooney wide open a few times, he missed Kmet on a sure TD (which he later redeemed with his own rushing TD), and he took one egregious sack and caused another holding penalty holding onto the ball way too long. The pass protection overall I thought was adequate to good - he just didn't pull the trigger fast enough on several occasions, and on several others he made a good play the hard way. Your mileage may vary on if thats good or bad or neutral. 

I think too much is made on those high throws. I don't think there were many yards lost and they were all 1st down completions for the most part anyway. Extra yards are nice, but gravy. And I think the Mooney throws were fine. Justin could have put more touch on them, but those are catches a good WR should make. 19-33 isn't a great completion percentage, but for a guy that goes down the field as much as Fields, that's not horrible, especially with the throwaways he had as well. 

Justin showed anticipation. Threw in tight windows. Found wide open WRs. And finally got a free play TD. Expecting a whole lot more than that is expecting perfection for a QB that is just shooting for competence at this point. 

[raw]

36 minutes ago, Rex Buckingham said:

"You know, we need that Tommy Davita guy. He knows how to beat the Packers."

/Score Caller

In all seriousness, surely we can find someone who can be a good enough bridge QB if the rookie QB they take isn't ready from Day 1. Jake Browning, Gardner Minshew and Baker Mayfield are all currently starting for teams in the playoff picture and are all FAs after this year per sportrac. They'll have enough cap room to pay a guy enough to be that bridge QB/backup

In this scenario there would hopefully be a new coach, so he's starting out from square 1 again, but I think Bagent showed enough to be the bridge QB. He's probably not as good as those guys, but the difference isn't worth the money, even if you have a ton of it.

[raw]

12 hours ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

If fields plays well down the stretch, I think you can scam someone for a first.  Just takes one sucker.

I wouldn't if I were Atlanta though.  Fields isn't the guy you want if you have a ton of playmakers and just need someone to distribute the ball to them.  If you want fields, it should be because you have nothing and need a guy who can make plays for himself by himself 

I think the Atlanta fit is just to get dynamic playmakers everywhere. That'd give Atlanta a top 3 athlete at QB, RB, TE and a 6'5 freak at WR who makes insane catches every week. They aren't throwing to Pitts anyway, so no big deal if Justin doesn't either, I guess.

 

[WrigleyField 22]

I mean the big sell with Atlanta is just Smiths comfort and commitment to the run game... And then hoping he schemes up slot of big throws with easy reads when he does pass.  Maybe selling Fields potential short,but also not requiring much or any further passer developmemt either.