Draft Season is Already Upon Us

For all things Chicago Bears

Moderator: wab

User avatar
wab
Mod
Posts: 29361
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:49 pm
Has thanked: 104 times
Been thanked: 1752 times

I read an article today that suggested Waldron might prefer Maye to Williams because Maye projects to be a more athletic Matt Stafford and would fit seamlessly into the offense.

In that scenario, the Bears would squeeze as much as the could out of Washington.
User avatar
The Marshall Plan
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8128
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 11:47 am
Location: Parts Unknown
Has thanked: 820 times
Been thanked: 1132 times

I would absolutely enjoy the entertainment of another UNC QB #10. I won’t like it. I’ll be sad about Justin. But I’ll enjoy it.
I Take The Field With Fields

Image
User avatar
The Cooler King
Head Coach
Posts: 4906
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 11:07 pm
Has thanked: 1112 times
Been thanked: 319 times

wab wrote: Tue Feb 06, 2024 1:04 pm I read an article today that suggested Waldron might prefer Maye to Williams because Maye projects to be a more athletic Matt Stafford and would fit seamlessly into the offense.

In that scenario, the Bears would squeeze as much as the could out of Washington.
On one hand through most of the college pre and post season, scouting reports on Maye were incredibly strong, to the point that I expected some to prefer him to Caleb. On the other, the most recent reports have really seemed to take a hit. I don't know which is real. Is he taking a hit because it's being over thought or we're the early reports really just overly optimistic?

I don't want the best scheme fit though. I want the best player. It feels like an implicit bias issue when framed like that than a substantive talent preference.
User avatar
Moriarty
Hall of Famer
Posts: 6645
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 1:22 pm
Has thanked: 361 times
Been thanked: 636 times

The Cooler King wrote: Tue Feb 06, 2024 1:18 pm
wab wrote: Tue Feb 06, 2024 1:04 pm I read an article today that suggested Waldron might prefer Maye to Williams because Maye projects to be a more athletic Matt Stafford and would fit seamlessly into the offense.

In that scenario, the Bears would squeeze as much as the could out of Washington.
I don't want the best scheme fit though. I want the best player. It feels like an implicit bias issue when framed like that than a substantive talent preference.
Scheme fit is a double-edged sword.


Going for scheme fit can be bad if a) there's a major talent gap or b) your HC and/or OC are launched in 1-3 yrs and the scheme you drafted the guy for is gone

But at the same time, many have spent the last 1-2 yrs crying that Fields talent has been wasted, because he's trapped in a scheme that's not what he needs.
(Whether you believe it to be the case in this specific instance, it certainly can happen)
1999-2002: Mouth Off Sports Forum (RIP)
2002-2014: KFFL (RIP)
2014-2016: USAToday Fantasy Sports Forum (RIP)

Hello, my name is Moriarty. I have come to kill your website, prepare to die.
User avatar
Moriarty
Hall of Famer
Posts: 6645
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 1:22 pm
Has thanked: 361 times
Been thanked: 636 times

wab wrote: Tue Feb 06, 2024 1:04 pm I read an article today that suggested Waldron might prefer Maye to Williams because Maye projects to be a more athletic Matt Stafford and would fit seamlessly into the offense.

In that scenario, the Bears would squeeze as much as the could out of Washington.

I don't know if that's a good (or bad) strategy, but the possibility is interesting and getting your favorite QB plus some extra is an enticing thought.
More interesting than staying put.
1999-2002: Mouth Off Sports Forum (RIP)
2002-2014: KFFL (RIP)
2014-2016: USAToday Fantasy Sports Forum (RIP)

Hello, my name is Moriarty. I have come to kill your website, prepare to die.
User avatar
Arkansasbear
Head Coach
Posts: 4580
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2020 10:41 am
Has thanked: 410 times
Been thanked: 591 times

Moriarty wrote: Tue Feb 06, 2024 2:25 pm
wab wrote: Tue Feb 06, 2024 1:04 pm I read an article today that suggested Waldron might prefer Maye to Williams because Maye projects to be a more athletic Matt Stafford and would fit seamlessly into the offense.

In that scenario, the Bears would squeeze as much as the could out of Washington.

I don't know if that's a good (or bad) strategy, but the possibility is interesting and getting your favorite QB plus some extra is an enticing thought.
More interesting than staying put.
It's somewhat like trading with the Eagles last year to move to 10. They weren't taking Carter they were all in on Wright. So they got the guy they would have drafted anyway and a 4th round pick this year.
User avatar
Arkansasbear
Head Coach
Posts: 4580
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2020 10:41 am
Has thanked: 410 times
Been thanked: 591 times

The Marshall Plan wrote: Tue Feb 06, 2024 1:16 pm I would absolutely enjoy the entertainment of another UNC QB #10. I won’t like it. I’ll be sad about Justin. But I’ll enjoy it.
Only if he is still driving his high school car (which i doubt with NIL money) and he books reservations under the name Danny Hampton.
User avatar
The Cooler King
Head Coach
Posts: 4906
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 11:07 pm
Has thanked: 1112 times
Been thanked: 319 times

Moriarty wrote: Tue Feb 06, 2024 2:23 pm
The Cooler King wrote: Tue Feb 06, 2024 1:18 pm

I don't want the best scheme fit though. I want the best player. It feels like an implicit bias issue when framed like that than a substantive talent preference.
Scheme fit is a double-edged sword.


Going for scheme fit can be bad if a) there's a major talent gap or b) your HC and/or OC are launched in 1-3 yrs and the scheme you drafted the guy for is gone

But at the same time, many have spent the last 1-2 yrs crying that Fields talent has been wasted, because he's trapped in a scheme that's not what he needs.
(Whether you believe it to be the case in this specific instance, it certainly can happen)
If you had a Kyle Shannahan or Sean McVay as your HC I could see scheme being a tie breaker at QB. Later in the draft also, sure because your probably drafting a backup. At other positions that may have a short shelf life even in good outcomes? Sure. But at number 1, where the QB being good will lead to your OC being poached anyways? Where you expect the player to be a 10+ year investment if all goes well? I can't understand that.

I'd also put lots of pressure on any presumption that Caleb can't fit into an NFL scheme that Maye somehow fits. He of course does a lot of stuff outside of scheme, but he has plenty of tape working in scheme and has all the physical tools. It really feels like bad type casting to say Maye fits a scheme he can't.
User avatar
wab
Mod
Posts: 29361
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:49 pm
Has thanked: 104 times
Been thanked: 1752 times

The Cooler King wrote: Tue Feb 06, 2024 1:18 pm
wab wrote: Tue Feb 06, 2024 1:04 pm I read an article today that suggested Waldron might prefer Maye to Williams because Maye projects to be a more athletic Matt Stafford and would fit seamlessly into the offense.

In that scenario, the Bears would squeeze as much as the could out of Washington.
On one hand through most of the college pre and post season, scouting reports on Maye were incredibly strong, to the point that I expected some to prefer him to Caleb. On the other, the most recent reports have really seemed to take a hit. I don't know which is real. Is he taking a hit because it's being over thought or we're the early reports really just overly optimistic?

I don't want the best scheme fit though. I want the best player. It feels like an implicit bias issue when framed like that than a substantive talent preference.
I don't know that Williams is scheme transcendent though, so scheme matters to some extent.

As noted above, people have complained that Fields has been forced into schemes that don't fit his strengths, so wouldn't it be nice to have a top 2 prospect that is good match with what the OC wants to do? It's not like Maye is some schlub.
User avatar
Grizzled
Hall of Famer
Posts: 5329
Joined: Sun Dec 08, 2019 3:55 pm
Has thanked: 544 times
Been thanked: 439 times

wab wrote: Tue Feb 06, 2024 1:04 pm I read an article today that suggested Waldron might prefer Maye to Williams because Maye projects to be a more athletic Matt Stafford and would fit seamlessly into the offense.

In that scenario, the Bears would squeeze as much as the could out of Washington.
I read the same, that Waldron has worked more with dropback passers than mobile QBs (although he had a year of Russell Wilson). QBs that Waldron has worked with:

Geno Smith: 2021-2023
Russell Wilson: 2021
Matt Stafford: 2020
Jared Goff: 2017-2019
Kirk Cousins: 2016

So it's very possible he might prefer Maye over Williams.
Drafts are like snowflakes, no two are alike.
Magilla_Gorilla
Journeyman
Posts: 131
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 3:54 pm
Has thanked: 59 times
Been thanked: 70 times

Grizzled wrote: Tue Feb 06, 2024 2:57 pm
wab wrote: Tue Feb 06, 2024 1:04 pm I read an article today that suggested Waldron might prefer Maye to Williams because Maye projects to be a more athletic Matt Stafford and would fit seamlessly into the offense.

In that scenario, the Bears would squeeze as much as the could out of Washington.
I read the same, that Waldron has worked more with dropback passers than mobile QBs (although he had a year of Russell Wilson). QBs that Waldron has worked with:

Geno Smith: 2021-2023
Russell Wilson: 2021
Matt Stafford: 2020
Jared Goff: 2017-2019
Kirk Cousins: 2016

So it's very possible he might prefer Maye over Williams.
Drake Maye has more rush attempts and more rushing yards than Caleb Williams and is most likely the better athlete. Maye is much more likely to scramble to run than Caleb is (129 scrambles for Maye vs. 79 for Caleb).

Maye is thought of as a drop back passer because 'reasons'.
User avatar
wab
Mod
Posts: 29361
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:49 pm
Has thanked: 104 times
Been thanked: 1752 times

I don't think it has anything to do with being a drop back passer and more to do with the types of throws he makes (similar to Stafford). Maye is a "play within structure" QB. That's not necessarily equal to a drop back guy.

Williams is more of a "move around and make things happen" kind of a passer.

Interestingly enough, Daniels might actually be the best pure passer of the 3...even if he doesn't get a chance to show it off. His deep ball is phenomenal.
User avatar
Bears Whiskey Nut
Hall of Famer
Posts: 10890
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 4:06 am
Location: Oak Park, IL
Has thanked: 76 times
Been thanked: 458 times

wab wrote: Tue Feb 06, 2024 3:26 pm I don't think it has anything to do with being a drop back passer and more to do with the types of throws he makes (similar to Stafford). Maye is a "play within structure" QB. That's not necessarily equal to a drop back guy.

Williams is more of a "move around and make things happen" kind of a passer.

Interestingly enough, Daniels might actually be the best pure passer of the 3...even if he doesn't get a chance to show it off. His deep ball is phenomenal.
100% agree on Daniels. I was watching some of his throws. He has a lightning quick release, and his deep ball accuracy is insane. I also like this height much better than Williams'. And in an era of 6'6" OL, that matters.

I just watched more of Daniels' highlights, and I'm not sure anyone could convince me that Williams is a better QB than he is.
Image


Getsy responding to a question about adjustments
User avatar
Atkins&Rebel
Head Coach
Posts: 2153
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2016 3:56 pm
Has thanked: 29 times
Been thanked: 114 times

I've been contemplating the likelihood of trading up from 9 to 3 if we draft a QB (even with a Washington trade to take the 2nd QB available).
Justin Fields and some future picks (maybe some secured in the Washington trade?) to get up to #3 to grab QB and WR.
If we sit at 1 and trade up, we'd have to announce it after Washington selects to prevent Arizona from hopping over us. But that would be wild to get the QB we want and MHJr.

This possibility will be more viable if Poles gets a C and DE in FA.
I will kill you if you cut me at the knees. You will drink with me when invited and stay til I say so. We only listen to American Music. I make men nervous with just my presence. I expect an apology if you hold. I throw linemen at QB's. Believe the Lore!
User avatar
Bears Whiskey Nut
Hall of Famer
Posts: 10890
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 4:06 am
Location: Oak Park, IL
Has thanked: 76 times
Been thanked: 458 times

I'm going through some online mock draft scenarios, and I think this is my overwhelming take away. We have six draft picks this year. Two 1sts, a third, two 4ths and a fifth. You can get a QB, and maybe an EDGE rusher, or maybe Odunze if he's still on the Board. You're not getting a top tier OC, or S. You'll end up with two great players, some prospects, and no additional draft capital for next year. OR...you can draft down with a team like the NY Giants. Pick-up a 2nd, 3rd, and a 1st & 2nd in 2025. Still get Odunze, an Edge rusher, a top tier OC, and a solid S. Plus get solid prospects in the 3rd and 4th rounds. Then you also have additional draft capital for 2025.

So ask yourself. If you are Poles, are you done building your perennial powerhouse of an NFL franchise, and one you expect to make the playoffs next season with your new fancy rookie QB? Or can you wait one more year, and add significant pieces that will improve your team in the long term?
Image


Getsy responding to a question about adjustments
User avatar
The Cooler King
Head Coach
Posts: 4906
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 11:07 pm
Has thanked: 1112 times
Been thanked: 319 times

Bears Whiskey Nut wrote: Tue Feb 06, 2024 5:36 pm I'm going through some online mock draft scenarios, and I think this is my overwhelming take away. We have six draft picks this year. Two 1sts, a third, two 4ths and a fifth. You can get a QB, and maybe an EDGE rusher, or maybe Odunze if he's still on the Board. You're not getting a top tier OC, or S. You'll end up with two great players, some prospects, and no additional draft capital for next year. OR...you can draft down with a team like the NY Giants. Pick-up a 2nd, 3rd, and a 1st & 2nd in 2025. Still get Odunze, an Edge rusher, a top tier OC, and a solid S. Plus get solid prospects in the 3rd and 4th rounds. Then you also have additional draft capital for 2025.

So ask yourself. If you are Poles, are you done building your perennial powerhouse of an NFL franchise, and one you expect to make the playoffs next season with your new fancy rookie QB? Or can you wait one more year, and add significant pieces that will improve your team in the long term?
If it's truly about long term then one of these two fancy new QBs every single time.

Almost all the model teams that build long term team success do so almost always do so with consistent QB play and consistently picking outside of the top 25 and creating the surplus picks for long term development without ever having the benefit of a #1 type trade down haul. There's a relatively well understood route how to do it. Not that its guarantees any success, but the basic template can be implemented and it's relatively straightforward how to do it.
User avatar
LacertineForest
MVP
Posts: 1469
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 12:39 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Has thanked: 1444 times
Been thanked: 263 times

Bears Whiskey Nut wrote: Tue Feb 06, 2024 5:36 pm I'm going through some online mock draft scenarios, and I think this is my overwhelming take away. We have six draft picks this year. Two 1sts, a third, two 4ths and a fifth. You can get a QB, and maybe an EDGE rusher, or maybe Odunze if he's still on the Board. You're not getting a top tier OC, or S. You'll end up with two great players, some prospects, and no additional draft capital for next year. OR...you can draft down with a team like the NY Giants. Pick-up a 2nd, 3rd, and a 1st & 2nd in 2025. Still get Odunze, an Edge rusher, a top tier OC, and a solid S. Plus get solid prospects in the 3rd and 4th rounds. Then you also have additional draft capital for 2025.

So ask yourself. If you are Poles, are you done building your perennial powerhouse of an NFL franchise, and one you expect to make the playoffs next season with your new fancy rookie QB? Or can you wait one more year, and add significant pieces that will improve your team in the long term?
You trade Fields and you (likely) also get a second. You can trade down from #9 and pick up additional picks. It's possible to get the QB and still have both quality and quantity of picks available.
User avatar
The Marshall Plan
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8128
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 11:47 am
Location: Parts Unknown
Has thanked: 820 times
Been thanked: 1132 times

Bears Whiskey Nut wrote: Tue Feb 06, 2024 5:36 pm I'm going through some online mock draft scenarios, and I think this is my overwhelming take away. We have six draft picks this year. Two 1sts, a third, two 4ths and a fifth. You can get a QB, and maybe an EDGE rusher, or maybe Odunze if he's still on the Board. You're not getting a top tier OC, or S. You'll end up with two great players, some prospects, and no additional draft capital for next year. OR...you can draft down with a team like the NY Giants. Pick-up a 2nd, 3rd, and a 1st & 2nd in 2025. Still get Odunze, an Edge rusher, a top tier OC, and a solid S. Plus get solid prospects in the 3rd and 4th rounds. Then you also have additional draft capital for 2025.

So ask yourself. If you are Poles, are you done building your perennial powerhouse of an NFL franchise, and one you expect to make the playoffs next season with your new fancy rookie QB? Or can you wait one more year, and add significant pieces that will improve your team in the long term?
You build the TEAM.

One thing to note about those draft picks is that they're worth a substantial amount of money in cap savings v signing FAs.

You have the draft picks to replace EJax and Whitehair. You then don't need to sign an $18M WR2 when you draft Odunze.

That's why getting a guy like Burns to bookend with Sweat is easily doable.

The potential this team has is phenominal.
I Take The Field With Fields

Image
User avatar
dplank
Hall of Famer
Posts: 11619
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am
Has thanked: 1108 times
Been thanked: 1921 times

LacertineForest wrote: Tue Feb 06, 2024 6:17 pm
Bears Whiskey Nut wrote: Tue Feb 06, 2024 5:36 pm I'm going through some online mock draft scenarios, and I think this is my overwhelming take away. We have six draft picks this year. Two 1sts, a third, two 4ths and a fifth. You can get a QB, and maybe an EDGE rusher, or maybe Odunze if he's still on the Board. You're not getting a top tier OC, or S. You'll end up with two great players, some prospects, and no additional draft capital for next year. OR...you can draft down with a team like the NY Giants. Pick-up a 2nd, 3rd, and a 1st & 2nd in 2025. Still get Odunze, an Edge rusher, a top tier OC, and a solid S. Plus get solid prospects in the 3rd and 4th rounds. Then you also have additional draft capital for 2025.

So ask yourself. If you are Poles, are you done building your perennial powerhouse of an NFL franchise, and one you expect to make the playoffs next season with your new fancy rookie QB? Or can you wait one more year, and add significant pieces that will improve your team in the long term?
You trade Fields and you (likely) also get a second. You can trade down from #9 and pick up additional picks. It's possible to get the QB and still have both quality and quantity of picks available.
It’s not nearly the same. You can trade down 4 times in the 5th round and accumulate extra 7ths also, like Poles did his first draft. But it’s not the same as getting 4-5 top 50 picks added to your capital.

IMO there’s no need to try and spin this. The decision is straightforward. Poles owns this draft, and he can choose to own the next two drafts as well or he can cash in his chips on Williams now and our run of multiple firsts and seconds will end in 2024. That’s it, is Caleb worth it? If he’s as good as some think, yes. If he’s not a Top 5 NFL QB, then no. Place your bets.
User avatar
LacertineForest
MVP
Posts: 1469
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 12:39 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Has thanked: 1444 times
Been thanked: 263 times

dplank wrote: Wed Feb 07, 2024 8:52 am
LacertineForest wrote: Tue Feb 06, 2024 6:17 pm

You trade Fields and you (likely) also get a second. You can trade down from #9 and pick up additional picks. It's possible to get the QB and still have both quality and quantity of picks available.
It’s not nearly the same. You can trade down 4 times in the 5th round and accumulate extra 7ths also, like Poles did his first draft. But it’s not the same as getting 4-5 top 50 picks added to your capital.

IMO there’s no need to try and spin this. The decision is straightforward. Poles owns this draft, and he can choose to own the next two drafts as well or he can cash in his chips on Williams now and our run of multiple firsts and seconds will end in 2024. That’s it, is Caleb worth it? If he’s as good as some think, yes. If he’s not a Top 5 NFL QB, then no. Place your bets.
It is nearly the same for this year's draft. Any team you trade with is likely giving a pick swap in the 1st, and additional 2nd, and maybe a 3rd or 4th this year. In the scenario where you draft a QB at #1, you keep your 1st and get a 2nd for Fields. Trading back even one spot from 9 to 10, like last year, can net an additional 4th. The number and position of picks this year are not going to be all that different, depending on who your trade partner is (in either scenario).

The real difference comes in additional years, and if Fields doesn't work out and you need to draft a QB, you're likely going to need to use at least one of those extra 1sts to move up and get the guy you want.

I'm not trying to spin it, I'm trying to show that this narrative that we are suddenly going to be able to plug all the holes this year and build around Fields if we trade the #1, yet can't do that if we use the #1 on a QB is false.
User avatar
dplank
Hall of Famer
Posts: 11619
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am
Has thanked: 1108 times
Been thanked: 1921 times

LacertineForest wrote: Wed Feb 07, 2024 9:58 am
dplank wrote: Wed Feb 07, 2024 8:52 am

It’s not nearly the same. You can trade down 4 times in the 5th round and accumulate extra 7ths also, like Poles did his first draft. But it’s not the same as getting 4-5 top 50 picks added to your capital.

IMO there’s no need to try and spin this. The decision is straightforward. Poles owns this draft, and he can choose to own the next two drafts as well or he can cash in his chips on Williams now and our run of multiple firsts and seconds will end in 2024. That’s it, is Caleb worth it? If he’s as good as some think, yes. If he’s not a Top 5 NFL QB, then no. Place your bets.
It is nearly the same for this year's draft. Any team you trade with is likely giving a pick swap in the 1st, and additional 2nd, and maybe a 3rd or 4th this year. In the scenario where you draft a QB at #1, you keep your 1st and get a 2nd for Fields. Trading back even one spot from 9 to 10, like last year, can net an additional 4th. The number and position of picks this year are not going to be all that different, depending on who your trade partner is (in either scenario).

The real difference comes in additional years, and if Fields doesn't work out and you need to draft a QB, you're likely going to need to use at least one of those extra 1sts to move up and get the guy you want.

I'm not trying to spin it, I'm trying to show that this narrative that we are suddenly going to be able to plug all the holes this year and build around Fields if we trade the #1, yet can't do that if we use the #1 on a QB is false.
Dude, there's nothing to argue about here. This isn't a 1 year discussion, I'm talking about picks obtained for the next several drafts. Trading the #1 overall pick will net a huge haul of high value picks. Trading any other pick will not have nearly the same effect - full stop, no need to elaborate it's as obvious as water being wet. So the choice is, and always has been, do you take the haul or do you bet your stack on Williams? If you really believe in the player, you go for it. If you have any doubts, you don't IMO. I'm not leading anyone to my conclusion here, that's entirely up to you and your risk profile. Just pointing out the simple facts here - we have a unique opportunity to draft a highly touted QB prospect, and we have a unique opportunity to net a huge trade down haul - the choice is ours to make and there's merit in both choices. But you cannot have your cake and eat it to. If you take Williams, you pass on the haul.
User avatar
LacertineForest
MVP
Posts: 1469
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 12:39 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Has thanked: 1444 times
Been thanked: 263 times

@dplank, I agree completely with what you said. One part I'd like to address:
dplank wrote: Wed Feb 07, 2024 10:09 amBut you cannot have your cake and eat it to. If you take Williams, you pass on the haul.
I don't think I've seen anybody argue that you can get both Williams and a draft haul. All I'm saying is that the draft haul scenario doesn't impact things much for this year compared to drafting a QB at 1. There seems to be a consensus that if the Bears keep Fields, he has to improve as a passer this coming year and make the playoffs or he's out. Building around Fields only works if Fields pans out. If not, you're using top parts of the draft haul to pick another QB, anyway.

There seems to be this belief by those championing the draft haul scenario that it's a no-brainer, and I don't buy it - I think there's a lot of risk in either scenario.
User avatar
dplank
Hall of Famer
Posts: 11619
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am
Has thanked: 1108 times
Been thanked: 1921 times

LacertineForest wrote: Wed Feb 07, 2024 10:38 am dplank, I agree completely with what you said. One part I'd like to address:
dplank wrote: Wed Feb 07, 2024 10:09 amBut you cannot have your cake and eat it to. If you take Williams, you pass on the haul.
I don't think I've seen anybody argue that you can get both Williams and a draft haul. All I'm saying is that the draft haul scenario doesn't impact things much for this year compared to drafting a QB at 1. There seems to be a consensus that if the Bears keep Fields, he has to improve as a passer this coming year and make the playoffs or he's out. Building around Fields only works if Fields pans out. If not, you're using top parts of the draft haul to pick another QB, anyway.

There seems to be this belief by those championing the draft haul scenario that it's a no-brainer, and I don't buy it - I think there's a lot of risk in either scenario.
Yea I agree, thx for the clarification. I'm not looking at just this year as the main value of the trade down haul or driver of my decision - it's more about how well it sets us up for the next 5 years. I definitely don't see this as a no brainer, obviously if we miss on an opportunity to get the next Mahomes that's a big fail, and that's the allure of going with Williams. And as much as history is littered with QB1 busts, it's also littered with plenty of examples where trade down hauls are wasted on bad picks. Nothing is certain. Given what we know about Poles and how he wants to build this franchise, I think the trade down is the smarter bet. Let Poles cook with those picks, he's done REALLY well thus far and I trust him. Build this thing up with talent stacked all over the roster, then plug in your QB in a year or two (and maybe, just maybe, JF1 shows everyone he was the guy all along - if not, strike then)
User avatar
The Marshall Plan
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8128
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 11:47 am
Location: Parts Unknown
Has thanked: 820 times
Been thanked: 1132 times

LacertineForest wrote: Wed Feb 07, 2024 10:38 am @dplank, I agree completely with what you said. One part I'd like to address:
dplank wrote: Wed Feb 07, 2024 10:09 amBut you cannot have your cake and eat it to. If you take Williams, you pass on the haul.
I don't think I've seen anybody argue that you can get both Williams and a draft haul. All I'm saying is that the draft haul scenario doesn't impact things much for this year compared to drafting a QB at 1. There seems to be a consensus that if the Bears keep Fields, he has to improve as a passer this coming year and make the playoffs or he's out. Building around Fields only works if Fields pans out. If not, you're using top parts of the draft haul to pick another QB, anyway.

There seems to be this belief by those championing the draft haul scenario that it's a no-brainer, and I don't buy it - I think there's a lot of risk in either scenario.
I disagree about the impact timing of a trade down. Looking at last year Moore, Wright and Stevenson all had positive impacts for us last year.
I Take The Field With Fields

Image
User avatar
dplank
Hall of Famer
Posts: 11619
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am
Has thanked: 1108 times
Been thanked: 1921 times

Yea a lot depends on if we get a premium vet as part of the deal. DJ Moore was an essential part of the package
User avatar
wab
Mod
Posts: 29361
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:49 pm
Has thanked: 104 times
Been thanked: 1752 times

dplank wrote: Wed Feb 07, 2024 2:45 pm Yea a lot depends on if we get a premium vet as part of the deal. DJ Moore was an essential part of the package
Going up from 9 to 1 is a lot different than going up from, say, 2 to 1. That's a big reason why Moore was involved.
User avatar
Arkansasbear
Head Coach
Posts: 4580
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2020 10:41 am
Has thanked: 410 times
Been thanked: 591 times

wab wrote: Wed Feb 07, 2024 3:21 pm
dplank wrote: Wed Feb 07, 2024 2:45 pm Yea a lot depends on if we get a premium vet as part of the deal. DJ Moore was an essential part of the package
Going up from 9 to 1 is a lot different than going up from, say, 2 to 1. That's a big reason why Moore was involved.
Put the "prize" for going to number one this year is the greatest QB prospect since Elway (or whoever the "experts want to put in there). Some out there are saying we could get #2, a second this year, a first next year and a player. That is simply insane IMO. But teams makes foolish moves all the time.

I"m SO ready to get to the point we know the answer.
User avatar
wab
Mod
Posts: 29361
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:49 pm
Has thanked: 104 times
Been thanked: 1752 times

Arkansasbear wrote: Wed Feb 07, 2024 3:38 pm
wab wrote: Wed Feb 07, 2024 3:21 pm

Going up from 9 to 1 is a lot different than going up from, say, 2 to 1. That's a big reason why Moore was involved.
Put the "prize" for going to number one this year is the greatest QB prospect since Elway (or whoever the "experts want to put in there). Some out there are saying we could get #2, a second this year, a first next year and a player. That is simply insane IMO. But teams makes foolish moves all the time.

I"m SO ready to get to the point we know the answer.
I don't think Washington is crazy enough to make that deal, but if they are, I'd be happy with keeping Fields and taking MHJ, or drafting Maye or Daniels.
User avatar
dplank
Hall of Famer
Posts: 11619
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am
Has thanked: 1108 times
Been thanked: 1921 times

I’m increasingly happy I don’t have to make this decision lol
User avatar
Arkansasbear
Head Coach
Posts: 4580
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2020 10:41 am
Has thanked: 410 times
Been thanked: 591 times

dplank wrote: Wed Feb 07, 2024 4:37 pm I’m increasingly happy I don’t have to make this decision lol
Everyone here is equally as happy you don't get to make it as well. :evilgrin:

Poles is the first GM since Finks that I feel has the ability to make the right choice.
Post Reply