Mitch Trubisky & General Quarterback Banter

[wab]

Who's revising?

I told friends at the time of the draft that Pace had botched the pick and magnified the error with the trade-up. And it turned out even worse than I imagined, so I'm not giving myself much credit for foresight.

You can send your resume here:
1920 Football Dr
Lake Forest, IL
60045

[Drone7]

I'm not smooth and good-looking enough, wab.

[UOK]

Who's revising?

I told friends at the time of the draft that Pace had botched the pick and magnified the error with the trade-up. And it turned out even worse than I imagined, so I'm not giving myself much credit for foresight.

Nobody cares about yours or anyone else's draft 'told-ya-so' nonsense.

Saying, "i tOlddD yoU draFTting _____ was BAD" irrationally pisses me off. Captain Hindsight posts have no value to anyone.

[Drone7]

Ya put me in my place, UOK !

Let's go back to rationalizing. That always feels better.

[UOK]

Ya put me in my place, UOK !

Let's go back to rationalizing. That always feels better.

There's something about listening to people on the radio, friends or family, etc, that always, always gotta announce that THEY were ahead, that THEY were smart, and if ONLY people had just listened to them, etc.

It's bottom of the barrel stuff.

[Drone7]

Been here a few weeks. Didn't come out the gates with "always, always"

I should have mentioned others that stated that at the time, but something tells me you would have attacked them too, resorting to experts you approve of that agreed with the move.

Given the consequences, not many experts seem to back it now.

[BamaBear09]

Does this mean he'll explode in year 5 like Alex Smith? Or will he put up a 100+ rated season in year 3 like Wentz? Be a Super Bowl MVP like Foles?

No fucking idea. None. BUT... if you look at where he is in his development in this offense compared to these other QBs, he is right on par.

Looking at the stats like that is a little misleading... Wentz was over 100 as a passer in his second season... and wasn't as good in his first season as Trubisky was in his first season in the offense. The difference is Wentz exploded that second season and was on pace for an MVP type season until he got hurt... Trubisky opened season 2 in the offense looking like a guy who was making his first start as a rookie... it's confusing to me... I know the oline had some issues in the first game but Trubisky locked in on his pre-snap read and didn't look to a second option throughout the entire first half... when that pre-snap read was open, Trubisky threw confidently and made a couple nice passes but when he wasn't open, he wouldn't look around and try to adjust, he either took a sack holding the ball too long, or threw a bad pass... he could have easily had 1-2 more INTs in that game... and there were plays where other guys were running wide open and he could have made plays but he didn't even look...

I believe the biggest issue he has is post snap adjustments... he can light up a team that tips him to what they are running pre-snap... IE the Dallas game, they went out and lined up and showed their coverage... but the moment a team rolls coverage post snap or tries to fool him... IE both GB games, KC... he can't process it quickly enough and make the correct change so he either locks up or he forces a bad throw... and the issue is those were the main problems from the year before and they didn't get any better the second year... he just didn't have as many short fields and DCs have a lot more film on what Nagy did year one to hide his deficiencies and so he couldn't hide them with the system... Plus he didn't have an anomaly game like he did vs TB in 2018...

How much longer do you think they have to hope he finally can make those adjustments quickly? I think his issue is not one that is easily fixed... freezing up on a decision is something some folks just never get over...

I guess everything will depend on how this off-season shakes out... if they get a clear backup, they are going to ride with him all season... if they get a former starter, I get the feeling he will have about 3-4 games to prove he can do it and if not, it will be time to pull him... I just feel like if they can't get a title this year that the roster will need to be torn down and rebuilt...

[UOK]

Been here a few weeks. Didn't come out the gates with "always, always"

Apologies if this was too pointed; I meant it more generally and all-encompassing as something that generally irritates me.

I should have mentioned others that stated that at the time, but something tells me you would have attacked them too, resorting to experts you approve of that agreed with the move.

Given the consequences, not many experts seem to back it now.

The Mitch pick/trade isn't something I'm necessarily wanting to defend or debate, nor should anyone who defended the trade initially be too terribly keen on defending it at present. That said, those that feel the need to take a victory lap, "draft expert" from TV/print media all the way down to message board random, should probably abstain for the sake of decorum, unless there's some larger point they want to make beyond, "I was right about this thing, and I'd like to cash that in for some form of acknowledgement."

[Drone7]

Right on, Alabama. Very well stated.

Thanks for the clarification, UOK. I wasn't trying to take a victory lap. Am just VERY concerned about Pace's record building the offense not just at the QB position. Kyle Long made some recent comments about how Trubisky has been somewhat held back by his cast too.

Jury's still out.

[wab]

Let's go back to rationalizing. That always feels better.

Who's rationalizing? You ignore all fact based logic and assume you simply "know" what happened in pre-draft discussions. You ignore the fact that, at the time, there were people that didn't even have Mahomes in R1. You ignore the fact that it was widely reported that Mitch was QB1 on multiple teams boards and that there were in fact teams wanting to move up to take him. Never mind the fact that the other two QB's went outside of the top 10, so a minimum of 10 other teams "failed" and "botched" their picks too.

You (and others) act like Pace did absolutely no due diligence and blindly picked Mitch (who was the consensus #1 QB in the draft - this is not disputable) like some dope.

That's being a revisionist.

[Drone7]

Wab. I read those columns, so I'm not ignoring them. I followed the draft buildup pretty closely because the Bears' were likely to take a QB high despite grossly overpaying for Mike 4-Game Bridge Glennon.

I agree that other teams botched their evals too. Think the Bengals wouldn't rather have Mahomes or Watson than brittle John Ross?

I realize that Pace and his Personnel Dept put a lot of time into his eval. That should alarm anyone. Did he do "due diligence" because he spent an unknown, but probably considerable amount of time into the decision? Some people put a lot of time into their work, but lack the acumen to get a good result, right? I would hope he learned somethings, but he's not going to divulge that and throw his project under the bus. At least he worked out Mahomes and had dinner with him. How he could conclude that Trubisky threw a football better or lifted teammates as well is beyond me. He didn't seem very interested in Watson who was a much better QB than Trubisky in college.

For the record, I would have stayed at 3 and taken Watson mostly because of his leadership skills and clutch record in big games. I thought Mahomes had more natural passing ability, but I questioned whether he would avoid picks as well as he has. I thought Trubisky was a low first round prospect not a top ten guy because of his inexperience flags. In hindsight, Mahomes has been the best of the three, but he also went into by far the best situation.

[thunderspirit]

There were lots of concerns going into the 2017 draft that Deshaun Watson was a product of the talent surrounding him at Clemson and that his reckless style would make him more susceptible to injury. Watson was my guy, but to say those concerns weren't there is revisionist.

There were lots of concerns going into the 2017 draft that Patrick Mahomes would be just another in a long line of Air Raid offense QBs who didn't succeed in the NFL. I liked Mahomes, but to say he wasn't a huge gamble to adapt to NFL play is revisionist.

They all had concerns. That's why they're prospects.

Pace swung for the fences on Trubisky. Thus far, it looks like a swing and a miss. At QB, missing actually happens more often than most other positions. If you want someone who's going to be right all the time — with any prospect, but ESPECIALLY on QBs — you're going to be disappointed in every person alive.

[dplank]

My take on this is that Pace just simply chunked the pick. I didn't mind him trading up to get "his guy" at all. If he believed that Trubisky was the best QB in the draft, then he took any risk of losing him off the table and went up one spot and grabbed him. I'm ok with that. Had he traded up for Watson, which is what I was sure he was doing when the trade up was announced, it would be a non-issue. It happens to have turned out that he could have sat where he was, lost Mitch, and we'd have been happy with either of the other two. But at that time, he couldn't know that. He liked Mitch so he got him.

The core problem is that he missed on his evaluation in a big, big way. The bigger worry for me is if he clings on to his mistake for too long. We'll see what he does this offseason, then we'll know. I'm hoping he addresses it!

This was the year Mitch was supposed to take off, it didn't happen. Instead of making excuses for why, it would be better IMO to accept it and move on with an alternate plan. If you can somehow do that without completely throwing away the possibility that the light magically comes on for Mitch in Year 4, then great. But I wouldn't allow us to be in a situation in 2020 where that HAS to happen or we end up out of the playoffs again.

[AZ_Bearfan]

I think Pace felt comfortable with not only drafting Trubisky, but with the trade up as well because the entire room of scouts unanimously picked Trubisky as the #1 QB heading in to the draft. He felt conviction with that and made his move. Now, is this a case of all the scouts being "yes men" and not wanting to say anything bad about boss-man's QB crush.... or does it expose some garbage metric they use for evaluation? I don't know, but I do know that Pace felt like he had the support of the entire scouting department with this pick.

[Atkins&Rebel]

Kyle Long's opinion:

“It’s also unfair to criticize a guy who was drafted to play in a system that runs the hell out of the ball and showcase his arm talent in the play action game outside the pocket. Because if you really watch the Bears, that’s not what we’re doing. That’s a byproduct of personnel…I couldn’t block. I wasn’t healthy enough. In the run game or the pass game.
When I was healthy? When Josh Sitton was here, when we were rolling, when we were putting up 300 rushing yards in Baltimore? That’s the offense Mitch was meant to play in. Pound the friggin rock and throw the ball downtown Julie Brown when everybody’s in the box and the next thing you know you’ve scored 40 points and that Bears defense has suffocated the life out of the opposition.”
“Matt Nagy was not brought in to run the I-formation and Mitch Trubisky potentially was brought in to run the I-formation. I think that’s where the miscommunication is.”

[wab]

I don’t believe he swung and missed on Mitch. Right now it looks like he hit a double with a chance to score.

[dplank]

How do you justify that POV when he was the 28th ranked QB in the NFL last year? You could maybe argue a double if we had a middle of the pack QB, but a near bottom guy? Here's the writeup from NFL.com...

RANK

28


2019 stats: 14 games | 62.6 pct | 2,931 pass yds | 6.1 ypa | 17 pass TD | 10 INT | 192 rush yds | 2 rush TD | 1 fumble lost

Parr: Trubisky did nothing in Week 16 to quiet those calling for his head in Chicago, as the Bears put a measly three points on the board in a blowout loss to close out their home schedule for 2019. The vitriol against the third-year passer was only made more vicious by the fact that this numbing defeat came at the hands of the reigning MVP QB whom the Bears passed on in favor of Trubisky in the 2017 draft. Trubisky's line for the night: 18 of 34 for 157 yards, no TDs, no INTs, 65.4 passer rating. He now has a league-leading nine starts this season with a sub-80 passer rating, and seems to follow up any performance in which he offers a glimmer of hope with a deflating dud. Mitchell has had a sub-70 passer rating in back-to-back games after having a passer rating of 115-plus in the previous two games. This team doesn't need sensational QB play to win (it's 4-1 this season when he has a rating of 80 or better), but it can't count on the former No. 2 overall pick to provide play that's in line with, or even slightly below, the league average (90.9 rating).

[dplank]

BTW...love Kyle Long's comments and agree 100%. Trubisky appears to be a bad fit for Nagy's offense. He'd probably do a lot better playing in a rush heavy, PA pass offense. The issue with that though is that Pace took Nagy after Trubisky was already here, did he not know this when he hired Nagy? So even if this is at the heart of the issue, it's still on Pace.

[UOK]

If we’re going with baseball analogies, Trubisky was a single that we’re hoping to move to third with a couple steals, but he may require a sacrifice to score.

[IE]

Long paraphrased my thoughts exactly, in that last sentence. It isn't that I dislike Mitch or think he can't be a serviceable QB and even win a LOT in a friendly offense. It is just that I have a pretty solid inkling that Nagy can't (meaning: won't). For Nagy, it is religion.

So in spite of what they say, I do expect at the end of the day that the Bears will move on from Mitch if Nagy remains.

Pace totally sold me the Glennon head fake. I actually had ZERO opinions about QBs in 2017 for that reason. I respected Watson for what he accomplished, and knew nothing about the other two guys (although I remember wab you mentioning Mahomes was interesting like 3 years earlier).

[wab]

How do you justify that POV when he was the 28th ranked QB in the NFL last year? You could maybe argue a double if we had a middle of the pack QB, but a near bottom guy? Here's the writeup from NFL.com...

RANK

28


2019 stats: 14 games | 62.6 pct | 2,931 pass yds | 6.1 ypa | 17 pass TD | 10 INT | 192 rush yds | 2 rush TD | 1 fumble lost

Parr: Trubisky did nothing in Week 16 to quiet those calling for his head in Chicago, as the Bears put a measly three points on the board in a blowout loss to close out their home schedule for 2019. The vitriol against the third-year passer was only made more vicious by the fact that this numbing defeat came at the hands of the reigning MVP QB whom the Bears passed on in favor of Trubisky in the 2017 draft. Trubisky's line for the night: 18 of 34 for 157 yards, no TDs, no INTs, 65.4 passer rating. He now has a league-leading nine starts this season with a sub-80 passer rating, and seems to follow up any performance in which he offers a glimmer of hope with a deflating dud. Mitchell has had a sub-70 passer rating in back-to-back games after having a passer rating of 115-plus in the previous two games. This team doesn't need sensational QB play to win (it's 4-1 this season when he has a rating of 80 or better), but it can't count on the former No. 2 overall pick to provide play that's in line with, or even slightly below, the league average (90.9 rating).

Because I look at the totality of his career. People act like he only playing in 2019.

[IE]

Sort these 2018 stats on QBR. Mitch is 3rd, which was awesome. Then look at all the stats in the top 10. His stats stand out as an anomaly across most of the stat areas. So there is something in the QBR calculations that strongly favor certain things he did last year. The one stat that seems to correlate is DPI (defensive PI, where the yards go into QBR). Another must be the rush yards that Mitch had last year that factor into the calculation but are not on the chart.

It's interesting. Any casual observer asked to pick the one that didn't belong, it would clearly be him. But for some reason his QBR calculated high.

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/nfl/qb/2018

[dplank]

No, that's not right for me at least - I include 2018 in my thinking. I just view 2019 as the most recent and relevant results and weigh that more heavily. It's splitting hairs, but I'd have said he was a "seeing eye single" after 2018. But with the more recent results in, I'd roll that assessment back to a ground out. Another year like 2019 in 2020, and it's a full on whiff.

[BamaBear09]

Sort these 2018 stats on QBR. Mitch is 3rd, which was awesome. Then look at all the stats in the top 10. His stats stand out as an anomaly across most of the stat areas. So there is something in the QBR calculations that strongly favor certain things he did last year. The one stat that seems to correlate is DPI (defensive PI, where the yards go into QBR). Another must be the rush yards that Mitch had last year that factor into the calculation but are not on the chart.

It's interesting. Any casual observer asked to pick the one that didn't belong, it would clearly be him. But for some reason his QBR calculated high.

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/nfl/qb/2018

QBR equals the percentage of the chance a team has to win with a game with said QB... hence why it is never over 100... every team with a winning record normally has a QB with a higher QBR

Per ESPN's total QBR breakdown
Finally, the per-play measure of efficiency is translated to a number on a 0-to-100 scale to produce a player’s Total QBR. The scaling process is a fairly standard logistic regression that produces a number that is easier to grasp. An average quarterback will have a QBR around 50, and a Pro Bowl-level player will have a QBR around 75 for the season. On a game level, however, a QBR of 75 means that holding all other factors constant (defense, offensive teammates, etc.), a quarterback’s team would be expected to win about 75 percent of time, given that level of QB play.

Passer rating doesn't view sacks as a negative factor... so it's actually better for a passer rating to step out of bounds 8 yards behind the line of scrimmage than it is for the QB to throw the ball away...

[G08]

@BamaBear09 great posts and valid points. Regarding Wentz, I will point to his 2019 "regression" and look at his total production in this offense (92.7 rating). I'm not saying a QB rating is the end-all-be-all, it's just a quick and lazy way to offer a metric while I'm on the shitter posting this (you're welcome for the image ).

As for how much time I give him? 3 years in the same system has always been my default when it comes to QBs. Both Nagy and Childress have said it takes 5 years to truly master THIS scheme (Alex Smith put up career numbers his 5th year in this offense) but we don't live in a patient world.

If it's me, I do everything I can to support the kid this year in terms of protection, run game, and a legit TE. If he shits the bed, cut bait and draft / acquire his replacement for 2021. That kid should then walk into a developed offense, rather than one that is being built on the fly.

[The Cooler King]

G08 those stats are garbage in that context.

Will Mitch break out as a 100 rated passer in year 3 like Wentz? No, because Wentz broke out as a 100 rated passer in year 2, the same year that Mitch put up a 83 rating. That their stats are close is because it covers Wentz's rookie year, and most rookie QBs suck, as did Mitch. Most great QBs figure it out pretty quickly though.

Then we start jumping up in 3 pt rating intervals, but also moving back in time where average passer rating has risen. Smiths 91 rating in 13/14 would be about a 10-14th ranked passer. In 18/19 is more like a 14-20th rated passer.

Mitch is not right where he should be. He's behind and playing catchup.

[UOK]

Mitch is not right where he should be. He's behind and playing catchup.

One could argue that "behind and playing catchup" is pretty much where he should be, considering he barely played in college, wasted his rookie year tutoring under Mike Glennon, Mark Sanchez, and Dowell Loggains, had a major shoulder injury, and has a crisis of confidence on an hourly basis as people will eternally compare him to Mahomes and Watson.

I'm not saying Trubisky will develop to or exceed their level, but he needs time. Problem with the Bears is that their window is currently open, and closing fast, so you have to decide if the patience is worth risking wasting the primes of several great players around the roster.

[The Cooler King]

Mitch is not right where he should be. He's behind and playing catchup.

One could argue that "behind and playing catchup" is pretty much where he should be, considering he barely played in college, wasted his rookie year tutoring under Mike Glennon, Mark Sanchez, and Dowell Loggains, had a major shoulder injury, and has a crisis of confidence on an hourly basis as people will eternally compare him to Mahomes and Watson.

I'm not saying Trubisky will develop to or exceed their level, but he needs time. Problem with the Bears is that their window is currently open, and closing fast, so you have to decide if the patience is worth risking wasting the primes of several great players around the roster.

And rolling with Mitch is definitely a pragmatic decision for 2020 if for no other reason than the Bears are limited in resources to upgrade the position, let alone the other holes. So, I agree let's give him another whirl and hope he is a late developer, but G08 has tried to spin this system BS before and make Mitch's development look normal and it's just patently false. Other QBs in the Reid scheme have done just fine picking it up and seeing positive play fairly quickly.

[crueltyabc]

If you believe Kyle's statement then Mitch was a good pick but the Nagy hire was a bad one. In that case I guess we should be in a different thread calling for Nagy to get fired and Gary Kubiak hired?

Ugh. Anyway. The reality is that Pace is keeping Nagy so the QB needs to fit or go.

I continue to feel like Dalton is a good fit with the team because he's an older guy who should be affordable and is a known commodity - an average talent with knowledge of the system. If he can truly beat out Mitch then Mitch isn't the guy and we're drafting a QB in 2021. Dalton is then our bridge QB.

The next guy drafted or signed needs to be an appropriate fit and/or learn the system quickly. The defense has a window based on Mack, Hicks, and Fuller.

[wab]

If you believe Kyle's statement then Mitch was a good pick but the Nagy hire was a bad one. In that case I guess we should be in a different thread calling for Nagy to get fired and Gary Kubiak hired?

Ugh. Anyway. The reality is that Pace is keeping Nagy so the QB needs to fit or go.

I continue to feel like Dalton is a good fit with the team because he's an older guy who should be affordable and is a known commodity - an average talent with knowledge of the system. If he can truly beat out Mitch then Mitch isn't the guy and we're drafting a QB in 2021. Dalton is then our bridge QB.

The next guy drafted or signed needs to be an appropriate fit and/or learn the system quickly. The defense has a window based on Mack, Hicks, and Fuller.

Except at the moment, Dalton isn't affordable. He's going to cost a pick and come with a significant cap number.