The Bears most underappreciated player

[HisRoyalSweetness]

Here's NFL Network Analytics Expert Cynthia Frelund's nomination for the most underappreciated player on the Bears roster:

Jaquan Brisker

APY: $1.839 million (rookie contract; 65th among safeties).

A second-round pick in last year's draft, Brisker enjoyed an exceptionally strong start to his career. Next Gen Stats show that he posted a -16.9 completion percentage over expected as the nearest defender in coverage last season -- that was the league's best mark among safeties. In other words, passes thrown into his coverage had a 60.6 expected completion percentage, but he only allowed 43.8 percent to be caught. Entering Year 2, Brisker deserves much more love than he's received

https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-s-most-und ... -nfc-picks

Do you agree with her or would you pick someone else?

[Bears Whiskey Nut]

Under appreciated in terms of salary to contribution, or more like under the radar/playing better than his draft status?

[dplank]

If it’s under appreciated by fans, I’ll go with JJ. He’s a damn good CB, premium position, and I keep hearing people act as if he can be easily replaced if not retained. And I’d probably say Gordon moreso than Brisker (again if it’s fan based). Personally, just a total gut call here and obviously could be wrong, but I think Gordon will be a better player than Brisker. He really came on and has better physical tools IMO.

[Hoog]

Justin Jones for me. He isn't paid a ton and he just does his job. I thought he was asked to do more than he really has in the past and stepped up. No, he isn't great but he will be the glue for the young guys. Underappreciated or just unnoticed? Eithet way, I respect the dude.

[The Marshall Plan]

JF1.

On a team with Walmart greeters, has beens, never will bes, and other assorted "talent" that was either injured or got traded away last year the guy balled out and did his best to be a one man wrecking crew.

Yet what are some of the comments?

He holds his balls too long. (I'm totally guilty as charged about this one too.)
He runs too much.
He doesn't do all the reads.
He hasn't made the leap yet.

I have an idea. Let's see a JF1 critic go into the office one day and be the only one who shows up, but yet the expectation is for all the work to get done. Not gonna happen.

[Rusty Trombagent]

If it’s under appreciated by fans, I’ll go with JJ. He’s a damn good CB, premium position, and I keep hearing people act as if he can be easily replaced if not retained. And I’d probably say Gordon moreso than Brisker (again if it’s fan based). Personally, just a total gut call here and obviously could be wrong, but I think Gordon will be a better player than Brisker. He really came on and has better physical tools IMO.

JJ's a great choice. The "HE DOESN'T GET INTERCEPTIONS" complaints really irk me.

There's like this weird uncanny valley that exists in football fandom where, if you're a REALLY GOOD player but not a TRULY ELITE player, when it comes to contract negotiation time people want to run the dude out of town. Fans love playing amateur capologist because they're all on the spectrum and numbers feel safe, but JJ is really good, one of the few bright spots on this team the last few years, and will not be so easy to replace.

[The Grizzly One]

I'm going with Justin Fields.

Why?

Because...
[video][/video]

[Bears Whiskey Nut]

I'm going with Justin Fields.

Why?

Because...
[video][/video]

Those outfits...UGH!

[Bears Whiskey Nut]

I am going to say Braxton Jones. He was heralded as a steal in last year's draft, but had some specific weaknesses. Last year he was drinking through a firehose as a rookie. This year he's going to clean up some of his technique, put on some lower body strength to stop the bull rush, and become a much better version of what we saw last year. He will be a fixture at LT for the Bears for the next 7+ years.

[Grizzled]

I'm going with Teven Jenkins. Drafted as a RT but initially tried at LT before an injury derailed him after 2 games. Then "tried" again at RT but yanked again. Then it looked like he was going to be cut but put at RG, was a beast there but still had to share time with Patrick. Then the Bears sign Nate Davis for RG and shift him to LG. It's hard to really say how good he is although he's been stellar at RG in limited action.

[UOK]

This is difficult to quantify. Every longsnap that gets to the punter or holder, every special teams tackle, every special teams rep that doesn't provoke a penalty. Each snap that isn't a false start. Besides the synchronicity between the longsnapper and kicking teams, the underbelly of the roster that doesn't fuck up are all heroes.

[Otis Day]

I'm going with Justin Fields.

Why?

Because...
[video][/video]

Those outfits...UGH!

Love it. Classic tune. The satin, the gruff and Grizzly Adams on bass.

[malk]

If it’s under appreciated by fans, I’ll go with JJ. He’s a damn good CB, premium position, and I keep hearing people act as if he can be easily replaced if not retained. And I’d probably say Gordon moreso than Brisker (again if it’s fan based). Personally, just a total gut call here and obviously could be wrong, but I think Gordon will be a better player than Brisker. He really came on and has better physical tools IMO.

JJ's a great choice. The "HE DOESN'T GET INTERCEPTIONS" complaints really irk me.

There's like this weird uncanny valley that exists in football fandom where, if you're a REALLY GOOD player but not a TRULY ELITE player, when it comes to contract negotiation time people want to run the dude out of town. Fans love playing amateur capologist because they're all on the spectrum and numbers feel safe, but JJ is really good, one of the few bright spots on this team the last few years, and will not be so easy to replace.

For quite a few positions it isn't even the difference between really good and elite but really good without flashy stats and whatever kind of player but with flashy stats. The calls to overpay someone based on an outlier year for sacks/interceptions or worse, to go after someone who is a poorly rounded player because they almost exclusively go for sacks/interceptions whilst also running out the really solid contributor because they don't have enough "impact". Especially infuriating because the "impact" is about 6 plays a year whereas the solid guys are actually impacting 6 plays a game.

*whispers* see Amos vs Jackson...

[southdakbearfan]

Patrick scales - just does his job.

[Shadow]

If it’s under appreciated by fans, I’ll go with JJ. He’s a damn good CB, premium position, and I keep hearing people act as if he can be easily replaced if not retained. And I’d probably say Gordon moreso than Brisker (again if it’s fan based). Personally, just a total gut call here and obviously could be wrong, but I think Gordon will be a better player than Brisker. He really came on and has better physical tools IMO.

JJ's a great choice. The "HE DOESN'T GET INTERCEPTIONS" complaints really irk me.

There's like this weird uncanny valley that exists in football fandom where, if you're a REALLY GOOD player but not a TRULY ELITE player, when it comes to contract negotiation time people want to run the dude out of town. Fans love playing amateur capologist because they're all on the spectrum and numbers feel safe, but JJ is really good, one of the few bright spots on this team the last few years, and will not be so easy to replace.

Hard to get INTs when the opposing QB throws away from your side. j/s

[Shadow]

I am going to say Braxton Jones. He was heralded as a steal in last year's draft, but had some specific weaknesses. Last year he was drinking through a firehose as a rookie. This year he's going to clean up some of his technique, put on some lower body strength to stop the bull rush, and become a much better version of what we saw last year. He will be a fixture at LT for the Bears for the next 7+ years.

Another good candidate. Rookie year was way more than I expected from his draft place. He played very well and can only go up from there.

[Moriarty]

JJ's a great choice. The "HE DOESN'T GET INTERCEPTIONS" complaints really irk me.

There's like this weird uncanny valley that exists in football fandom where, if you're a REALLY GOOD player but not a TRULY ELITE player, when it comes to contract negotiation time people want to run the dude out of town. Fans love playing amateur capologist because they're all on the spectrum and numbers feel safe, but JJ is really good, one of the few bright spots on this team the last few years, and will not be so easy to replace.

For quite a few positions it isn't even the difference between really good and elite but really good without flashy stats and whatever kind of player but with flashy stats. The calls to overpay someone based on an outlier year for sacks/interceptions or worse, to go after someone who is a poorly rounded player because they almost exclusively go for sacks/interceptions whilst also running out the really solid contributor because they don't have enough "impact". Especially infuriating because the "impact" is about 6 plays a year whereas the solid guys are actually impacting 6 plays a game.

*whispers* see Amos vs Jackson...

CBs can sometimes be hard to judge, especially if you're not watching All22 and keying on them.

Yes, stats like INTs and sacks have high variability and you need to be careful about them. But after 3 extremely similar years, it's getting tough to write Jackson's lack of picks off as randomness.

Sure, he's an above average player. But it's still very easy for an above average player to want (and often get) more than they are worth. Witness McGlinchey this offseason, for example.
And I'm not sure JJ qualifies as REALLY GOOD.

I don't have the desire to gather stats on all starting CBs, but consider JJ against Jamel Dean, a FA CB I really wanted them to pick up this offseason.
(last 3 years for each, JJ was in college and Dean didn't play much 4 yrs back)

JD Snaps: 708, 685, 885
JJ Snaps: 867, 933, 658

JD tgts: 70, 66, 65
JJ tgts: 78, 72, 51

both played and were targeted pretty comparably
then

JD INT: 1,2,2
JJ INT: 0,1,0

JD QBR: 85, 50, 86
JJ QBR: 108, 102, 95

QB rating against can be volatile, also. But all 3 of Dean's years were better than all 3 of JJ, with an avg of a little over 100 vs a little over 70

JD PFF: 77, 75, 78
JJ PFF: 55, 64, 63


So Johnson has poor INT numbers, pretty bad QB rating throwing against, and very ho-hum PFF rating (in general, not just in comparison to Dean).
Everything that's reasonably straightforward and accessible statistically isn't saying great things.

I'm not against him, per se, but

Dean signed for a very modest 13M per
Suppose hypothetically JJ refuses to extend for less than 15M per. How do you feel about that?

[IE]

If it’s under appreciated by fans, I’ll go with JJ. He’s a damn good CB, premium position, and I keep hearing people act as if he can be easily replaced if not retained. And I’d probably say Gordon moreso than Brisker (again if it’s fan based). Personally, just a total gut call here and obviously could be wrong, but I think Gordon will be a better player than Brisker. He really came on and has better physical tools IMO.

JJ's a great choice. The "HE DOESN'T GET INTERCEPTIONS" complaints really irk me.

There's like this weird uncanny valley that exists in football fandom where, if you're a REALLY GOOD player but not a TRULY ELITE player, when it comes to contract negotiation time people want to run the dude out of town. Fans love playing amateur capologist because they're all on the spectrum and numbers feel safe, but JJ is really good, one of the few bright spots on this team the last few years, and will not be so easy to replace.

The new regime focuses on taking the ball away for a reason. It's the T in HITS, man. The turnover battle/ratio plays a huge role in winning in football - that's why.

JJ doesn't take the ball away - he is deficient in that area, at least. That's just true. Why? I don't know... is it a lack of anticipation of where the ball is going... like, he's decent at defending a player but not playing the ball? I don't think he's bad or anything - but I don't know about great. Are his stats great? PFF has him rated right around Jaylon Jones. I don't know the answer - but I recognize the gap between what various people say.

[Rusty Trombagent]

For quite a few positions it isn't even the difference between really good and elite but really good without flashy stats and whatever kind of player but with flashy stats. The calls to overpay someone based on an outlier year for sacks/interceptions or worse, to go after someone who is a poorly rounded player because they almost exclusively go for sacks/interceptions whilst also running out the really solid contributor because they don't have enough "impact". Especially infuriating because the "impact" is about 6 plays a year whereas the solid guys are actually impacting 6 plays a game.

*whispers* see Amos vs Jackson...

CBs can sometimes be hard to judge, especially if you're not watching All22 and keying on them.

Yes, stats like INTs and sacks have high variability and you need to be careful about them. But after 3 extremely similar years, it's getting tough to write Jackson's lack of picks off as randomness.

Sure, he's an above average player. But it's still very easy for an above average player to want (and often get) more than they are worth. Witness McGlinchey this offseason, for example.
And I'm not sure JJ qualifies as REALLY GOOD.

I don't have the desire to gather stats on all starting CBs, but consider JJ against Jamel Dean, a FA CB I really wanted them to pick up this offseason.
(last 3 years for each, JJ was in college and Dean didn't play much 4 yrs back)

JD Snaps: 708, 685, 885
JJ Snaps: 867, 933, 658

JD tgts: 70, 66, 65
JJ tgts: 78, 72, 51

both played and were targeted pretty comparably
then

JD INT: 1,2,2
JJ INT: 0,1,0

JD QBR: 85, 50, 86
JJ QBR: 108, 102, 95

QB rating against can be volatile, also. But all 3 of Dean's years were better than all 3 of JJ, with an avg of a little over 100 vs a little over 70

JD PFF: 77, 75, 78
JJ PFF: 55, 64, 63


So Johnson has poor INT numbers, pretty bad QB rating throwing against, and very ho-hum PFF rating (in general, not just in comparison to Dean).
Everything that's reasonably straightforward and accessible statistically isn't saying great things.

I'm not against him, per se, but

Dean signed for a very modest 13M per
Suppose hypothetically JJ refuses to extend for less than 15M per. How do you feel about that?

Is Jamel Dean covering team's number 1 receivers?

[Moriarty]

CBs can sometimes be hard to judge, especially if you're not watching All22 and keying on them.

Yes, stats like INTs and sacks have high variability and you need to be careful about them. But after 3 extremely similar years, it's getting tough to write Jackson's lack of picks off as randomness.

Sure, he's an above average player. But it's still very easy for an above average player to want (and often get) more than they are worth. Witness McGlinchey this offseason, for example.
And I'm not sure JJ qualifies as REALLY GOOD.

I don't have the desire to gather stats on all starting CBs, but consider JJ against Jamel Dean, a FA CB I really wanted them to pick up this offseason.
(last 3 years for each, JJ was in college and Dean didn't play much 4 yrs back)

JD Snaps: 708, 685, 885
JJ Snaps: 867, 933, 658

JD tgts: 70, 66, 65
JJ tgts: 78, 72, 51

both played and were targeted pretty comparably
then

JD INT: 1,2,2
JJ INT: 0,1,0

JD QBR: 85, 50, 86
JJ QBR: 108, 102, 95

QB rating against can be volatile, also. But all 3 of Dean's years were better than all 3 of JJ, with an avg of a little over 100 vs a little over 70

JD PFF: 77, 75, 78
JJ PFF: 55, 64, 63


So Johnson has poor INT numbers, pretty bad QB rating throwing against, and very ho-hum PFF rating (in general, not just in comparison to Dean).
Everything that's reasonably straightforward and accessible statistically isn't saying great things.

I'm not against him, per se, but

Dean signed for a very modest 13M per
Suppose hypothetically JJ refuses to extend for less than 15M per. How do you feel about that?

Is Jamel Dean covering team's number 1 receivers?

Not sure.
That may be the only thing Johnson has going in that comparison.

But, even supposing he doesn't, all 3 of those stats (INT, QBR, PFF) are unimpressive for Johnson, irrespective of Dean.

[The Marshall Plan]

JJ's a great choice. The "HE DOESN'T GET INTERCEPTIONS" complaints really irk me.

There's like this weird uncanny valley that exists in football fandom where, if you're a REALLY GOOD player but not a TRULY ELITE player, when it comes to contract negotiation time people want to run the dude out of town. Fans love playing amateur capologist because they're all on the spectrum and numbers feel safe, but JJ is really good, one of the few bright spots on this team the last few years, and will not be so easy to replace.

The new regime focuses on taking the ball away for a reason. It's the T in HITS, man. The turnover battle/ratio plays a huge role in winning in football - that's why.

JJ doesn't take the ball away - he is deficient in that area, at least. That's just true. Why? I don't know... is it a lack of anticipation of where the ball is going... like, he's decent at defending a player but not playing the ball? I don't think he's bad or anything - but I don't know about great. Are his stats great? PFF has him rated right around Jaylon Jones. I don't know the answer - but I recognize the gap between what various people say.

JJ is not a true #1 CB and that's the position he's supposed to be playing for us. There's no reason to avoid throwing to his side of the field. Now maybe some of that is because we have no pass rush and if we did maybe JJ's stats would be better. That being said, I think there's upgrade potential.

Next offseason I would be fine spending real money (JJ's extension money plus incremental) on a real #1 CB or taking one of the two first rounders and draft an elite prospect. We're going to have a shit ton of cap space again. If we go the draft pick route then we could keep JJ, make him the #2 CB, and move the rookie over to #1. But JJ should not be getting #1 CB money.

Think of the impact Peanut Tillman had for us. Now what would that defense be like if we DIDN'T have him? Ask Megatron what Peanut would do to him. THAT'S a #1 CB.

[IE]

The new regime focuses on taking the ball away for a reason. It's the T in HITS, man. The turnover battle/ratio plays a huge role in winning in football - that's why.

JJ doesn't take the ball away - he is deficient in that area, at least. That's just true. Why? I don't know... is it a lack of anticipation of where the ball is going... like, he's decent at defending a player but not playing the ball? I don't think he's bad or anything - but I don't know about great. Are his stats great? PFF has him rated right around Jaylon Jones. I don't know the answer - but I recognize the gap between what various people say.

JJ is not a true #1 CB and that's the position he's supposed to be playing for us. There's no reason to avoid throwing to his side of the field. Now maybe some of that is because we have no pass rush and if we did maybe JJ's stats would be better. That being said, I think there's upgrade potential.

Next offseason I would be fine spending real money (JJ's extension money plus incremental) on a real #1 CB or taking one of the two first rounders and draft an elite prospect. We're going to have a shit ton of cap space again. If we go the draft pick route then we could keep JJ, make him the #2 CB, and move the rookie over to #1. But JJ should not be getting #1 CB money.

Think of the impact Peanut Tillman had for us. Now what would that defense be like if we DIDN'T have him? Ask Megatron what Peanut would do to him. THAT'S a #1 CB.

I hope it is Stevenson. He gives me Peanut vibes.

[The Marshall Plan]

JJ is not a true #1 CB and that's the position he's supposed to be playing for us. There's no reason to avoid throwing to his side of the field. Now maybe some of that is because we have no pass rush and if we did maybe JJ's stats would be better. That being said, I think there's upgrade potential.

Next offseason I would be fine spending real money (JJ's extension money plus incremental) on a real #1 CB or taking one of the two first rounders and draft an elite prospect. We're going to have a shit ton of cap space again. If we go the draft pick route then we could keep JJ, make him the #2 CB, and move the rookie over to #1. But JJ should not be getting #1 CB money.

Think of the impact Peanut Tillman had for us. Now what would that defense be like if we DIDN'T have him? Ask Megatron what Peanut would do to him. THAT'S a #1 CB.

I hope it is Stevenson. He gives me Peanut vibes.

It would be substantially easier if that's true.

The meatball in me wants us to take Kool-Aid McKinstry next year for the nickname alone. This team needs personality desperately.

[Arkansasbear]

Patrick scales - just does his job.

I think that's a good call. It's "underappreciated." I think may of the guys listed have done great jobs for the team, but they get talked about quit a bit. Heck, last year I might even say Morrow. He showed up did his job, slid over when Roquan was traded and was steady. Not an all-pro, not a star, not a guy that was talked about. Just a guy who did what he was supposed too. That's what I'd call underappreciated.

[Middleguard]

Think of the impact Peanut Tillman had for us. Now what would that defense be like if we DIDN'T have him? Ask Megatron what Peanut would do to him. THAT'S a #1 CB.

I'm not sure you remember Tillman's first few years. Fans were all over his case. Bust. Worst draft pick. Don't re-sign him. But then again, Bears fans.
For years, Megatron was the only receiver that Tillman could adequately cover. It was truly puzzling, perhaps height had something to do with it.

[IE]

Think of the impact Peanut Tillman had for us. Now what would that defense be like if we DIDN'T have him? Ask Megatron what Peanut would do to him. THAT'S a #1 CB.

I'm not sure you remember Tillman's first few years. Fans were all over his case. Bust. Worst draft pick. Don't re-sign him. But then again, Bears fans.
For years, Megatron was the only receiver that Tillman could adequately cover. It was truly puzzling, perhaps height had something to do with it.

I don't remember that. I do remember the "Moss is Tillman's bitch" memes. I also do remember people talking about moving him to safety in his later years. But I don't remember the bust story.

[Moriarty]

I'm not sure you remember Tillman's first few years. Fans were all over his case. Bust. Worst draft pick. Don't re-sign him. But then again, Bears fans.
For years, Megatron was the only receiver that Tillman could adequately cover. It was truly puzzling, perhaps height had something to do with it.

I don't remember that. I do remember the "Moss is Tillman's bitch" memes. I also do remember people talking about moving him to safety in his later years. But I don't remember the bust story.

Tillman?

I don't remember that at all.

He had 14 picks on his rookie contract and got a couple DRoY votes, right off the bat.

[southdakbearfan]

I don't remember that. I do remember the "Moss is Tillman's bitch" memes. I also do remember people talking about moving him to safety in his later years. But I don't remember the bust story.

Tillman?

I don't remember that at all.

He had 14 picks on his rookie contract and got a couple DRoY votes, right off the bat.

I'm pretty sure someone thought that, but I am also sure it was a very tiny minority. Peanut was good, very quick.

[HurricaneBear]

I remember alot of arguments about who was better Vasher or Tillman and most fans I talked to preferred Vasher. Peanut had his successes against some receivers early but generally was overlooked as a corner. It took him a few years to really latch on with the majority of the fan base imo

[dplank]

The Interceptor! Lol.