Week 4 // Bears (1-2) vs. Rams (1-2)

[malk]

I'd be interested to see what that graph looks like for just week 3. Weeks one and two likely heavily skew it.

Hoge was banging on about how Williams was making full field reads and throwing to all three levels, comparing against Jayden Daniels.

I think you're bang on about the first couple of weeks skewing it.

[dplank]

I don't really care about a writer/podcaster tape review (I do value JT / Chase Daniels / etc). And I don't care about how CW stacks up against Daniels, Daniels was supposed to be the more NFL ready guy as he had more college time and is a bit older. I don't care if Caleb throws for 600 yards on 100 attempts, or anything else.

I want to see EFFICIENT FOOTBALL. We haven't seen that, not even close. That means a high completion percentage, minimal negative plays, smart adjustments at the LOS, taking what's given to him, controlling the ball, and protecting the ball. It's not one stat, it's a feel and personally I'll know it when I see it.

[Arkansasbear]

I'd be interested to see what that graph looks like for just week 3. Weeks one and two likely heavily skew it.

Week 1
Looking at this https://www.espn.com/nfl/playbyplay/_/gameId/401671719 (58 plays)

We had two explosive plays an 11 yard scramble and a 20 yard run by Switf (granted this is me just trying to look at it)

So 2 plays out of 58 is 3.44%

Week 2
https://www.espn.com/nfl/playbyplay/_/gameId/401671786 (59 plays)

My going through the play-by-play I saw a scramble for 10 and 24 yards and a pass to Rome for 27 (so either I didn't remember when I heard the commentators talk about his first completion over 20 yards or they were wrong.

3 plays out of 59 is 5.1%

Week 3
https://www.espn.com/nfl/playbyplay/_/gameId/401671865 (80 plays)

All I see is a 27 yard pass to Rome,

1 out of 80 is 1.25%

So it appears week 3 actually brought us down. But there were many passes in the 12-19 yard range which may explain why I was thinking like you that we did better week 3.

(full disclosure I'm missing something I think as I have us at 196 total plays and 6 explosive plays which would be 3.06% not 3.3 that they have.

[G08]

I'd be interested to see what that graph looks like for just week 3. Weeks one and two likely heavily skew it.

Have a spreadsheet on @UOK's desk by EOD.

[UOK]

[G08]

[Ditka’s dictaphone]

I’m pretty sure I read something like this before last weeks game.
All these season defining games

“The Bears are what we thought they were”

[HisRoyalSweetness]

I'd be interested to see what that graph looks like for just week 3. Weeks one and two likely heavily skew it.

Week 1
Looking at this https://www.espn.com/nfl/playbyplay/_/gameId/401671719 (58 plays)

We had two explosive plays an 11 yard scramble and a 20 yard run by Switf (granted this is me just trying to look at it)

So 2 plays out of 58 is 3.44%

Week 2
https://www.espn.com/nfl/playbyplay/_/gameId/401671786 (59 plays)

My going through the play-by-play I saw a scramble for 10 and 24 yards and a pass to Rome for 27 (so either I didn't remember when I heard the commentators talk about his first completion over 20 yards or they were wrong.

3 plays out of 59 is 5.1%

Week 3
https://www.espn.com/nfl/playbyplay/_/gameId/401671865 (80 plays)

All I see is a 27 yard pass to Rome,

1 out of 80 is 1.25%

So it appears week 3 actually brought us down. But there were many passes in the 12-19 yard range which may explain why I was thinking like you that we did better week 3.

(full disclosure I'm missing something I think as I have us at 196 total plays and 6 explosive plays which would be 3.06% not 3.3 that they have.

Last week Williams completed that beautiful 47 yard pass to Odunze as well as that 27-yarder. I guess the 44 yard Hail Mary that Moore caught a yard shy of the end zone at the half would also meet the definition for that graph.

He had a few other completions that were marginally below the 20 yard threshold.

[thefish7]

This illustrates one of those basic issues with statistics. They need rules to be relevant... But I'll take a 17 yard play every time and never complain about not being explosive enough. No matter what a stat like this says, the Bears offense in the 4th quarter (and it wasn't garbage time) was basically great. I don't need an explosive play % to tell me that.

[Mikefive]

This is a very difficult game for me. The Rams are 0-2 on the road. (So are the Bears.) But the Bears are 1-0 at home as are the Rams.
- Bears at home.
- Williams improving.
- Bears have been evolving (see the adjustment in Kmet's play after week 1) and look to run more with RJohnson.
- The Rams DL isn't anything like the Titans.
- Bears defense is good.
- Turf team playing on grass.
- Long flight LA to Chicago.

On the other hand...
- Bears OL is not just bad. It's bad and injured.
- Other injuries are not good either.
- Rams just beat the 49ers.
- Rams are trending upward with Bears trending downward.

I think this one could go either way. The defense will do it's thing. But every team has foiled our run game and disrupted the pass with their defensive front against our OL, which looks to be worse than any time this year thus far. For that reason, I just can't pick the Bears acknowledging full well that there's a good bounceback opportunity now at home.

Rams 20
Bears 19

Edit... Changed later

[malk]

Week 1
Looking at this https://www.espn.com/nfl/playbyplay/_/gameId/401671719 (58 plays)

We had two explosive plays an 11 yard scramble and a 20 yard run by Switf (granted this is me just trying to look at it)

So 2 plays out of 58 is 3.44%

Week 2
https://www.espn.com/nfl/playbyplay/_/gameId/401671786 (59 plays)

My going through the play-by-play I saw a scramble for 10 and 24 yards and a pass to Rome for 27 (so either I didn't remember when I heard the commentators talk about his first completion over 20 yards or they were wrong.

3 plays out of 59 is 5.1%

Week 3
https://www.espn.com/nfl/playbyplay/_/gameId/401671865 (80 plays)

All I see is a 27 yard pass to Rome,

1 out of 80 is 1.25%

So it appears week 3 actually brought us down. But there were many passes in the 12-19 yard range which may explain why I was thinking like you that we did better week 3.

(full disclosure I'm missing something I think as I have us at 196 total plays and 6 explosive plays which would be 3.06% not 3.3 that they have.

Last week Williams completed that beautiful 47 yard pass to Odunze as well as that 27-yarder. I guess the 44 yard Hail Mary that Moore caught a yard shy of the end zone at the half would also meet the definition for that graph.

He had a few other completions that were marginally below the 20 yard threshold.

It's important to think about who we're using that stat to assess as well. Waldron has schemed open loads of plays in addition to that, we just haven't connected on them. I haven't found a site that shows good stats split by depth of target but from here, https://nextgenstats.nfl.com/stats/passing#yards, Williams was 4th in average depth of target in week 3 and had a completion % over expected (CPOE) of 2.7pp. Now his overall efficiency was slightly under league average for the week but you can definitely win with that and it obviously includes the poor running game. If you exclude the plays with turnovers for all he moves into the top right quadrant with above average expected points added (EPA) and CPOE.

For the 3 games we're 6th in the league for average depth of target and just from the eye test a lot of those have been on. This offence is in the cusp even with the inherent problems. 363 yards and a couple of TDs on a game where we screw up, if there is a proper break out game what will that look like?

[Atkins&Rebel]

Bears 24
Rams 13

Thier D line isn't great. Bet we run the ball a lot more than we have with Roschon.
Control the clock and make explosive throws off play action. You know, help a rookie look better than he has.

[dplank]

Bears 24
Rams 13

Thier D line isn't great. Bet we run the ball a lot more than we have with Roschon.
Control the clock and make explosive throws off play action. You know, help a rookie look better than he has.

That’s the right formula, set Caleb up for success not failure. Throw less, be more efficient

[HisRoyalSweetness]

Last week Williams completed that beautiful 47 yard pass to Odunze as well as that 27-yarder. I guess the 44 yard Hail Mary that Moore caught a yard shy of the end zone at the half would also meet the definition for that graph.

He had a few other completions that were marginally below the 20 yard threshold.

It's important to think about who we're using that stat to assess as well. Waldron has schemed open loads of plays in addition to that, we just haven't connected on them. I haven't found a site that shows good stats split by depth of target but from here, https://nextgenstats.nfl.com/stats/passing#yards, Williams was 4th in average depth of target in week 3 and had a completion % over expected (CPOE) of 2.7pp. Now his overall efficiency was slightly under league average for the week but you can definitely win with that and it obviously includes the poor running game. If you exclude the plays with turnovers for all he moves into the top right quadrant with above average expected points added (EPA) and CPOE.

For the 3 games we're 6th in the league for average depth of target and just from the eye test a lot of those have been on. This offence is in the cusp even with the inherent problems. 363 yards and a couple of TDs on a game where we screw up, if there is a proper break out game what will that look like?

But is Williams average depth of target in part due to going for the hero ball too often rather than taking the easy completion? In his breakdown video of the Colts game, posted in the Caleb Williams Mega-Thread (viewtopic.php?p=394121#p394121), Kurt Warner points out a number of instances where Williams doesn't see "the bigger picture" and ends up attempting more difficult throws than he needs to.

[JaxBearsFan]

Ram 15
Bear 10

I still think Waldron has his head up an orifice. Nice & all that the offense met with him, but I'm stuck in histrionics & that typically ends up doing not much in the long run. Defense is still terrific, but that unit can only do so much.

[dplank]

Last week Williams completed that beautiful 47 yard pass to Odunze as well as that 27-yarder. I guess the 44 yard Hail Mary that Moore caught a yard shy of the end zone at the half would also meet the definition for that graph.

He had a few other completions that were marginally below the 20 yard threshold.

It's important to think about who we're using that stat to assess as well. Waldron has schemed open loads of plays in addition to that, we just haven't connected on them. I haven't found a site that shows good stats split by depth of target but from here, https://nextgenstats.nfl.com/stats/passing#yards, Williams was 4th in average depth of target in week 3 and had a completion % over expected (CPOE) of 2.7pp. Now his overall efficiency was slightly under league average for the week but you can definitely win with that and it obviously includes the poor running game. If you exclude the plays with turnovers for all he moves into the top right quadrant with above average expected points added (EPA) and CPOE.

For the 3 games we're 6th in the league for average depth of target and just from the eye test a lot of those have been on. This offence is in the cusp even with the inherent problems. 363 yards and a couple of TDs on a game where we screw up, if there is a proper break out game what will that look like?

I don't really get the fascination with the 363 yards thing, I know it sounds like a lot but that would be expected if you throw 52 times. Everything requires context: number of attempts, number of turnovers, YPA, Completion %, TD/INT, total team score, etc. Terrible QB's can throw for a lot of yards, so that's not really the achievement. Now had he thrown for 363 and had like a 70% completion rate, 3 TD's 0 Turnovers type of game - then hell yes praise the heck out of it. But that's not what he did, he just stacked yards while overall playing mid-poor football, lowish completion rate, low YPA, padded stats with a hail mary and end of game 2 minute drill stats, and turned the ball over 3 times. To provide a little context, here are some other all time single game performances from former Bears:

Brian Hoyer - 397 yards
Jim Miller - 422 yards
Brian Griese - 381 yards
Matt Barkley - 362 yards

A better statline for Caleb would be something like 21/25 for 250 yards, 2 or 3 TDs and no turnovers. Give me that all day long over 33/52, 363, 1 TD and 3 Turnovers.

[Moriarty]

It's important to think about who we're using that stat to assess as well. Waldron has schemed open loads of plays in addition to that, we just haven't connected on them. I haven't found a site that shows good stats split by depth of target but from here, https://nextgenstats.nfl.com/stats/passing#yards, Williams was 4th in average depth of target in week 3 and had a completion % over expected (CPOE) of 2.7pp. Now his overall efficiency was slightly under league average for the week but you can definitely win with that and it obviously includes the poor running game. If you exclude the plays with turnovers for all he moves into the top right quadrant with above average expected points added (EPA) and CPOE.

For the 3 games we're 6th in the league for average depth of target and just from the eye test a lot of those have been on. This offence is in the cusp even with the inherent problems. 363 yards and a couple of TDs on a game where we screw up, if there is a proper break out game what will that look like?

I don't really get the fascination with the 363 yards thing, I know it sounds like a lot but that would be expected if you throw 52 times. Everything requires context: number of attempts, number of turnovers, YPA, Completion %, TD/INT, total team score, etc. Terrible QB's can throw for a lot of yards, so that's not really the achievement. Now had he thrown for 363 and had like a 70% completion rate, 3 TD's 0 Turnovers type of game - then hell yes praise the heck out of it. But that's not what he did, he just stacked yards while overall playing mid-poor football, lowish completion rate, low YPA, padded stats with a hail mary and end of game 2 minute drill stats, and turned the ball over 3 times. To provide a little context, here are some other all time single game performances from former Bears:

Brian Hoyer - 397 yards
Jim Miller - 422 yards
Brian Griese - 381 yards
Matt Barkley - 362 yards

A better statline for Caleb would be something like 21/25 for 250 yards, 2 or 3 TDs and no turnovers. Give me that all day long over 33/52, 363, 1 TD and 3 Turnovers.

There's some truth to what you're saying.
But at the same time - you mentioned context, but you're only considering unfavorable context and none of the favorable.

Caleb:

Is playing in his 3rd NFL game
Has a decimated OL which was constructed with the optimal goal of being "adequate"
Has an OC who looks completely clueless and lost
Has a garbage, barely existing rushing attack
Was behind all game


Sure, 21/25 for 250 yards, 2 or 3 TDs and no turnovers is better. But, given the context, he managed some encouraging things (including some less quantifiable things).


(Also, I will point out -
a) Fields never had a "21/25 for 250 yards, 2 or 3 TDs and no turnovers" level game as a rookie. Or Trevor Lawrence. That's a tough bar.
b) 7 ypa isn't low. Out of the top 32 passers last season, the median ypa was 7.1. Fields had 6.9 last season and so far this one. 7 is pretty normal.)



It's not a good performance for a finished product
It's a mildly encouraging performance for a 3rd game in bad circumstances

[dplank]

Agree with all that. If not for the turnovers, I'd have given him a solid grade for the game. With the turnovers, not so much.

[wab]

I never thought I'd see the day Bears fans downplay 360+ yards passing...volume or not. Rookie QB records aren't really a thing that happen in Chicago.

[malk]

It's important to think about who we're using that stat to assess as well. Waldron has schemed open loads of plays in addition to that, we just haven't connected on them. I haven't found a site that shows good stats split by depth of target but from here, https://nextgenstats.nfl.com/stats/passing#yards, Williams was 4th in average depth of target in week 3 and had a completion % over expected (CPOE) of 2.7pp. Now his overall efficiency was slightly under league average for the week but you can definitely win with that and it obviously includes the poor running game. If you exclude the plays with turnovers for all he moves into the top right quadrant with above average expected points added (EPA) and CPOE.

For the 3 games we're 6th in the league for average depth of target and just from the eye test a lot of those have been on. This offence is in the cusp even with the inherent problems. 363 yards and a couple of TDs on a game where we screw up, if there is a proper break out game what will that look like?

But is Williams average depth of target in part due to going for the hero ball too often rather than taking the easy completion? In his breakdown video of the Colts game, posted in the Caleb Williams Mega-Thread (viewtopic.php?p=394121#p394121), Kurt Warner points out a number of instances where Williams doesn't see "the bigger picture" and ends up attempting more difficult throws than he needs to.

Quite possibly! Most of what I'm saying here is a bit of a defence of Waldron. If he's calling plays that have a both deep options open and easier completions then that's a pretty good spot. Caleb will hopefully get better both at hitting the deep shots and identifying when to take an easier completion, that isn't a terrible problem to have.

It's important to think about who we're using that stat to assess as well. Waldron has schemed open loads of plays in addition to that, we just haven't connected on them. I haven't found a site that shows good stats split by depth of target but from here, https://nextgenstats.nfl.com/stats/passing#yards, Williams was 4th in average depth of target in week 3 and had a completion % over expected (CPOE) of 2.7pp. Now his overall efficiency was slightly under league average for the week but you can definitely win with that and it obviously includes the poor running game. If you exclude the plays with turnovers for all he moves into the top right quadrant with above average expected points added (EPA) and CPOE.

For the 3 games we're 6th in the league for average depth of target and just from the eye test a lot of those have been on. This offence is in the cusp even with the inherent problems. 363 yards and a couple of TDs on a game where we screw up, if there is a proper break out game what will that look like?

I don't really get the fascination with the 363 yards thing, I know it sounds like a lot but that would be expected if you throw 52 times. Everything requires context: number of attempts, number of turnovers, YPA, Completion %, TD/INT, total team score, etc. Terrible QB's can throw for a lot of yards, so that's not really the achievement. Now had he thrown for 363 and had like a 70% completion rate, 3 TD's 0 Turnovers type of game - then hell yes praise the heck out of it. But that's not what he did, he just stacked yards while overall playing mid-poor football, lowish completion rate, low YPA, padded stats with a hail mary and end of game 2 minute drill stats, and turned the ball over 3 times. To provide a little context, here are some other all time single game performances from former Bears:

Brian Hoyer - 397 yards
Jim Miller - 422 yards
Brian Griese - 381 yards
Matt Barkley - 362 yards

A better statline for Caleb would be something like 21/25 for 250 yards, 2 or 3 TDs and no turnovers. Give me that all day long over 33/52, 363, 1 TD and 3 Turnovers.

Sure, but the other piece of context is that I'm replying to the general tone that's saying that the offence is terrible. I don't think that anyone is saying that it was a great game by Williams but one that has promise. I also think you're over egging a little when you say that 363 should be expected when you throw that much. There are plenty of occasions where teams have needed to throw lots and failed. It wasn't the most efficient game but 7 yards per attempt isn't awful (Mahomes' season average last year fwiw). The overarching point here is that we leaned on a rookie his third game and he managed a decent performance. You're being far too harsh on the other elements, as said it isn't particularly low YPA, 63.5% completion is fine, fair enough on the hail mary but end of game was live so absolutely counts imo.

I don't know what point you're trying to make with the other performances to be honest?

And yes, the other statline you offer would be better, but again, I'm not saying it was a great performance, but it definitely wasn't a bad one!

[dplank]

The over stating goes both ways. I never said it was a terrible performance, just that it wasn’t a great one as many seem to believe simply because of the pass yardage. So we’re almost saying the same thing, seems like you think it was just a tick better than I do. People just like to cast other peoples opinions to some extreme to try and win a point, but that’s not how I view it. I just think a lot of folks are over their skis a bit because of the gaudy yardage, which masked an otherwise poor game - thereby taking both points on the whole and calling it “average” I guess? Lots of yards but also low scoring and 3 turnovers.

I’m not here to shit on Caleb, he’s doing fine 3 weeks in to his career. I am here to shit on the idea that throwing 50+ times is a good idea and I could give a shit how many yards he gets with that kind of volume. I don’t like Herbert for this exact reason.

[Boris13c]

interesting how "statement game" keeps getting tossed about ... I think every game makes a statement ... and so far, the statements made are the team is in need of much improvement ... not surprising with a rookie QB, but I had bought into the Bears propaganda about building the team around the rookie QB so that he has adequate support, implying the team did their best ... if what we have seen in 3 weeks is what the Bears consider a prepared offense, then 1-15 might be a realistic possibility of end result

though I picked the Rams to win, my hope is the Bears do make this a statement game of things clicking in place so that competence in actions becomes a real and constant element from which to build ... I hope very much to have this prediction wrong, and the Bears put on a display of professionalism, understanding and execution as they ride off to victory

but I'm not holding my breath

[wab]

interesting how "statement game" keeps getting tossed about ... I think every game makes a statement ... and so far, the statements made are the team is in need of much improvement ... not surprising with a rookie QB, but I had bought into the Bears propaganda about building the team around the rookie QB so that he has adequate support, implying the team did their best ... if what we have seen in 3 weeks is what the Bears consider a prepared offense, then 1-15 might be a realistic possibility of end result

though I picked the Rams to win, my hope is the Bears do make this a statement game of things clicking in place so that competence in actions becomes a real and constant element from which to build ... I hope very much to have this prediction wrong, and the Bears put on a display of professionalism, understanding and execution as they ride off to victory

but I'm not holding my breath

1-15 might be the single biggest overreaction I've seen around here in a long time.

[BreadNCircuses]

My expectations going into this year was a 9 win team, maybe 10 but I took the under on the 9.5 line -- that's a 2 game improvement over last year.
Honestly, I still feel that's probably where we end up, barring debilitating injuries.

The line is bad, the Nate Davis acquisition failed badly and presumably we're eating that for the rest of the year before he Haynesworths himself into retirement.
I'm hopeful that Matt Pryor plays well enough in supplanting Davis in the lineup that when Bates comes back from IR, he might replace Shelton since the original plan was Bates as the starting C. We'll see. We'll see where Kiran slots in at some point this year. At this point, I fully expect at least 40% of the starting offensive line to be swapped out by next season, maybe 60% if Tevin doesn't come back. At this point, the only guy I'm certain will be starting for the bears (presuming healthy) next year is Wright.

We've got the D, the Offense needs to show continued development. This year really is about getting Caleb (and Rome) fully up to NFL speed, and given the progression over 3 games, I'm at least encouraged.

[Moriarty]

Final injury report is not bad - on paper

Given how bad Wed and Thur were, I can't help but feel a lot of guys are pushing themselves to play, while a long way from 100%

[dplank]

interesting how "statement game" keeps getting tossed about ... I think every game makes a statement ... and so far, the statements made are the team is in need of much improvement ... not surprising with a rookie QB, but I had bought into the Bears propaganda about building the team around the rookie QB so that he has adequate support, implying the team did their best ... if what we have seen in 3 weeks is what the Bears consider a prepared offense, then 1-15 might be a realistic possibility of end result

though I picked the Rams to win, my hope is the Bears do make this a statement game of things clicking in place so that competence in actions becomes a real and constant element from which to build ... I hope very much to have this prediction wrong, and the Bears put on a display of professionalism, understanding and execution as they ride off to victory

but I'm not holding my breath

1-15 might be the single biggest overreaction I've seen around here in a long time.

Gonna be hard to be 1-15 when we are 2-2 after Sunday

[dplank]

Final injury report is not bad - on paper

Given how bad Wed and Thur were, I can't help but feel a lot of guys are pushing themselves to play, while a long way from 100%

We need to talk about Zacch Pickens.

[UOK]

But in good news:

[UOK]

We need to talk about Zacch Pickens.

I don't know what he could or will be, but whatever it is, it won't be with the Bears.

[Moriarty]

We need to talk about Zacch Pickens.

Don't have much to say.

I've written him off. If he ever gives us anything, it's a bonus in my book.