Chicago Bears offseason

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Just now, sneakypower said:

fun question is if this was available, would you rather have a) Caleb or b) Maye, Barton, Nubin, KJenkins (and maybe Egbuka?)

Williams.

 

 

[Tryptamine]

With trading 1.9 almost a certainty as this point,  I wonder if #9 and #122 to Cincinnati for #18, #49 and #80 makes sense. They need a WR, especially with Higgins wanting out. They could snag Odunze a #9. The Bears could go either Brian Thomas+Bralen Trice+Sedrick Van Pran on that or maybe Latu+Xavier Leggette+Van Pran. They'd still have pick #75 too.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

D/p

Edited March 18, 2024 by Hairyducked Idiot

[Tim]

1 hour ago, sneakypower said:

fun question is if this was available, would you rather have a) Caleb or b) Maye, Barton, Nubin, KJenkins (and maybe Egbuka later?)

It would take more for me to move. I'd certainly understand taking the deal if you have them rated similarly, but I think there is enough separation there to require a massive haul to swap.

[WrigleyField 22]

3 minutes ago, Tim said:

It would take more for me to move. I'd certainly understand taking the deal if you have them rated similarly, but I think there is enough separation there to require a massive haul to swap.

Even if you had them similarly, it's hard to put a price on even a small edge.  Especially over the quality of prospect we're talking about (assuming consensus opinion).

 

Maybe there should be a price you can put in a small edge, but  practically speaking it's hard to separate a GM actually putting his name on that and separating logic from optics.

[CubinNY]

2 hours ago, Tryptamine said:

With trading 1.9 almost a certainty as this point,  I wonder if #9 and #122 to Cincinnati for #18, #49 and #80 makes sense. They need a WR, especially with Higgins wanting out. They could snag Odunze a #9. The Bears could go either Brian Thomas+Bralen Trice+Sedrick Van Pran on that or maybe Latu+Xavier Leggette+Van Pran. They'd still have pick #75 too.

I don’t know how certain it is. 

[gflore34]

1 minute ago, CubinNY said:

I don’t know how certain it is. 

Me neither, I fairly certain Poles is going to trade down from 9 and take a DL but, even though the need is strong and it's right move. I'm not certain he's going to take a WR the latter pick.  Wouldn't surprise me one bit if takes another SS or CB before looking at WR and C.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I think trading down from 9 is fine and extremely likely, but staying put wouldn't upset me at all.  There's some really good offensive talent that's going to drop to about there because of the run on QBs 

[jersey cubs fan]

I’m definitely in the use the 9 pick camp especially if there’s a run on QBs that leaves real top ten talent available. I get why people think poles will trade down, but for all the talk of him craving draft capital, he’s never hesitated to trade away picks for impact talent (real or not) and I think he’d love to add a blue chipper there. 

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Going down the list of no. 1 QB's rookie seasons gives me a lot of optimism.  Only Goff, Stafford and Young had completely turd rookie years.

Even before you account for surrounding cast, Williams coming in and throwing for 3500 yards would be an extremely reasonable expectation, which would make him only the third bears QB to ever do so (Kramer and Cutler)

[WrigleyField 22]

33 minutes ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

Going down the list of no. 1 QB's rookie seasons gives me a lot of optimism.  Only Goff, Stafford and Young had completely turd rookie years.

Even before you account for surrounding cast, Williams coming in and throwing for 3500 yards would be an extremely reasonable expectation, which would make him only the third bears QB to ever do so (Kramer and Cutler)

How far back did you go? Both Mannings were pretty turdy off top of my head. And actual busts too like Russell.

[jersey cubs fan]

3 minutes ago, WrigleyField 22 said:

How far back did you go? Both Mannings were pretty turdy off top of my head. And actual busts too like Russell.

Payton threw for 3,700 yards

eli was backing up Kurt Warner 

[Hairyducked Idiot]

5 minutes ago, WrigleyField 22 said:

How far back did you go? Both Mannings were pretty turdy off top of my head. And actual busts too like Russell.

15 years.

I'd be fine with a repeat of Peyton Manning though. Set the rookie record for yards and I think TD passes, just with a billion INTs.

[WrigleyField 22]

6 minutes ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

15 years.

I'd be fine with a repeat of Peyton Manning though. Set the rookie record for yards and I think TD passes, just with a billion INTs.

I mean, led the league in PA.  So he wasn't very efficient.  21st in ANY/A. That's at least a little turdy.

 

Others ANY/A ranked as rookies

Couch: 33rd

Vick : DNQ (2 starts)

Carr: 35th

Palmer : DNQ no snaps

E Manning : DNQ but would have been last (7 starts)

Also if they didn't qualify because they backed up and not injury, maybe they were turdy and being protected as rookies.

 

 

 

Edited March 18, 2024 by WrigleyField 22

[WrigleyField 22]

5 minutes ago, jersey cubs fan said:

Payton threw for 3,700 yards

eli was backing up Kurt Warner 

He backed up because he was turdy. Still started 7 games and sucked.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

5 minutes ago, WrigleyField 22 said:

I mean, led the league in PA.  So he wasn't very efficient.  21st in ANY/A. That's at least a little turdy.

 

Others ANY/A ranked as rookies

Couch: 33rd

Vick : DNQ (2 starts)

Carr: 35th

Palmer : DNQ no snaps

E Manning : DNQ but would have been last (7 starts)

Also if they didn't qualify because they backed up and not injury, maybe they were turdy and being protected as rookies.

 

 

 

I think going back 15 years gives us something more meaningful to the modern NFL than going back to before Caleb Williams was born.

[WrigleyField 22]

36 minutes ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

I think going back 15 years gives us something more meaningful to the modern NFL than going back to before Caleb Williams was born.

Maybe. Obviously since they've moved to protecting both QBs and defenseless WRs, it should have helped young QB learning curves. Not sure of the exact date for that changeover.

 

But so it's 3 turds out of what 10-12? (taking out the non QB1.1 years)

[raw]

I'd prefer the Bears stick at 9 if the draft board looks like I think it will.

1. Caleb Williams

2. QB- either Washington stays or Minnesota gives them an offer they can't refuse

3. QB/Harrison Jr- Either NE stays and takes a QB or MHJ, or Minnesota gives them an offer they can't refuse

4. QB/Harrison Jr- Either Arizona stays and takes MHJ or Minnesota........

Three QBs and Harrison or 4 QBs are gone top 4.

5. Key Spot- either LAC stays and takes WR2 or OT1 (Joe Alt) off the board, or Minnesota, you get the point.

6. NYG- the Giants could take a QB, but they did sign Drew Lock to go with Danny Dimes. They for sure won't take QB5. This could be a WR. Their WR corps is pretty terrible. 

7. TEN takes OL. They have Ridley, Hopkins and former 1st rounder, Treylon Burks. They have the worst OTs in the league. If Alt is here, they run to the podium. If Alt is gone, they take an OL with the last name starting with "F": Fuaga, Fautanu, or Fashanu

8. ATL has London, Mooney and Rondale Moore. They have no Edge talent. They get top edge on the board. 

 

Seems to be pretty good intelligence out there that 4 QBs are going to go top 8. Vikings clearly gearing up for a trade up. Denver, Vegas, and the Giants could also move up too. Marvin Harrison and Joe Alt are certainly going top 8 as well. That leaves 1 of Odunze, Nabers or DE1 (Verse, Latu, Turner) on the board at 9. Depending where QB4 and WR2 go, I think WR3 is in play at 9. Whether Poles takes WR3 or not, remains to be seen.

[jersey cubs fan]

I feel like qb4 won’t go as soon as people assume 

 

every year people mock a ton of QBs in the top ten and some drop to 20. 

[Hairyducked Idiot]

1 hour ago, WrigleyField 22 said:

Maybe. Obviously since they've moved to protecting both QBs and defenseless WRs, it should have helped young QB learning curves. Not sure of the exact date for that changeover.

 

But so it's 3 turds out of what 10-12? (taking out the non QB1.1 years)

Sounds about right.  I'm not saying it's a gimme, but there were a lot more seasons that I would consider ok than not 

[WrigleyField 22]

I think I'd submit Bradford to turd list.  Though he did win OROY, and he had a good comp%, he was pretty bad overall. I mean he did throw for over 3,500 yards, but not efficient.

 

I guess it just depends like the turd scale.  Top 5 Bears passing yardage could be a turd rookie with lots of throws.  I actually think they could try and protect Caleb a bunch and ease him into a run heavy environment still.  Do we measure Caleb mostly on counting stats or efficiency stats for 2024?  Is a 2009 Jay Cutler year a successful rookie campaign?

 

Edited March 18, 2024 by WrigleyField 22

[Hairyducked Idiot]

2 hours ago, WrigleyField 22 said:

I think I'd submit Bradford to turd list.  Though he did win OROY, and he had a good comp%, he was pretty bad overall. I mean he did throw for over 3,500 yards, but not efficient.

 

I guess it just depends like the turd scale.  Top 5 Bears passing yardage could be a turd rookie with lots of throws.  I actually think they could try and protect Caleb a bunch and ease him into a run heavy environment still.  Do we measure Caleb mostly on counting stats or efficiency stats for 2024?  Is a 2009 Jay Cutler year a successful rookie campaign?

 

Your Turd Standards are a lot higher than mine. Not as high as truffle's...

[Tryptamine]

I'm kind of hopping Poles trades Herbert. I wonder if a 5th is doable.

[UMFan83]

15 minutes ago, Tryptamine said:

I'm kind of hopping Poles trades Herbert. I wonder if a 5th is doable.

oooo that's an interesting idea I hadn't thought of.  That said I'm not sure how much a RB that can't pass block, isn't a major factor in the passing game and has 1 year left on his contract will fetch.  Maybe a 5 or 6 for a team that could use some RB depth.

[Derwood]

Chase Young signs with the Saints