BearFan PHX

Yes, I JUST wrote "And of course Ersery was on my radar and Trapilo wasnt, so it was a surpise for me, but Im willing to say that was a good trade."

no its not the original contract anymore - they extended it, which means a new longer deal.

they extended Bagents contract.

I actually think they KIND OF can, and that we did a good job of that. We targeted tradedowns, and the teams that took the players before us traded up into those spots, and that's where we were potentially a little too greedy? So we might have correctly predicted the teams on the board, but not considered people trading ahead of us.

right, Im talking about the tradedowns after that. 3rd round and later. I would have taken Ersery at 41, but if Trapilo works out, then that trade down was fantastic, and Turner (is that who you meant instead of Stewart?) is going to be great for us. So that trade down worked out OK *IF* Trapilo is good. And of course Ersery was on my radar and Trapilo wasnt, so it was a surpise for me, but Im willing to say that was a good trade. Im talking about after that, when we let HBs go, traded down, and then saw them stolen right before we picked - I think that happened twice? Like we were going down our HB list, and kept getting played. The question was more like KJ or Sketebo vs Rah the CB and someone else from the 5th round.

that all makes sense. i think they Bears might toy with the idea of converting him to a coach if circumstances force it, like an injury like you say, or a good crop of developing young players.

true. the 3rd emergency QB doesnt count against the gameday 47 or 48 or whatever that number is. But if that costs us one of our drafted guys getting poached off of the practice squad, then all the more reason to have taken a HB earlier and not trade down?

Im talking about in the 3rd round and later - our trade backs. There was an interview with Jeff King, which i cant find now, where he acknowledged that they were hoping for other HBs earlier; Kaleb Johnson, Cam Sketbo and one other guy I forget. There have also been a ton of articles suspecting the same. It seems like, more than once, we targeted a HB and traded back only to have someone pop up in front of us and take one of those HBs within a few picks of our new traded back picks. From all of this, I conclude that Pace read the board as afar as who needed what, and maximized value by trading back, but failed to calculate other teams trading in front of us to snag that HB. Also, just logically, would you rather have Kaleb Johnson or Cam Skatebo vs. our extra later picks that we got in those tradedowns?

Here's an interesting idea. Im not saying it will happen, but it has occurred to me. Given these facts: Case Keenum has said in interviews that he had planned to retire before this offseason, and then he met with Ben Johnson, and that turned him around. Keenum's primary role on this team is to mentor Caleb. We just paid Tyson Bagent, extending his contract. Roster spots are precious. Is it possible that Keenum will transition from player to coach when we cut down the roster? I could see him as Caleb's mentor, and he doesnt need to be a player to do that. Just thinking about stuff. Not saying i know it will happen, but it does fit the facts, and open a roster spot on the 53?

Yes, I am talking about the HBs. In multiple cases, we could have taken a HB we coveted, but instead traded down, betting they would still be there, and in each case, they miscalculated. I've also said that if Trapilo starts and does well, and Monangai is a good contributor, then it all ended well anyway. That's true. But it doesn't change that Poles also misread the board multiple times. If you have 30 lottery tickets, and you trade them for 1 lottery ticket, that is a mistake, EVEN IF the one you got turns out to be the winner in the end. Unless you had some inside info that your ticket had a batter chance to win, it was a mistake. The conversation with Jeff King was about missing on HBs. So unless we had Monongai rated higher than Kaleb Johnson, Cam Skatebo, and there was one other I'm forgetting, it was a series of mistakes. And that doesnt mean that the players we DID get wont be good. We could have done a great job of identifying late round talent, and having a board deep enough to withstand these mistakes too. We could have a great board, and misplayed draft day, both. But if I'm gonna praise Poles for drafting Odunze, for example, then I can criticize him for misjudging how far he could trade down to get HBs too.

again, most of what im talking about is the trade downs, and whether we got the player we expected to get when we made the trade. i think we didnt, and so we miscalculated in our trade downs throughout the draft. And I think that's a problem. Its OK to see positive and negative things in your team.

I think when there is a negative media story, and you want to get ahead of it, you WANT that hard question, because it gives you the chance to say your side of it? From the reporter's point of view, he's hoping Caleb says something definitive, so he can write his story with quotes "I am my own man, my dad doesnt speak for me" etc It's like when reporters ask "how did it feel scoring the winning TD?" It's not because the reporter is wondering whether the player was sad or happy lol everyone knows the player is thrilled - it's to generate a quote for the article "Winning means everything to me" or whatever. AZ54 - completely agree with your take on it.

yeah its obvious that BJ was thrilled with Loveland. On that day I said i suspected he knew he ought to get a LT, but wanted the TE instead, when Loveland was the guy, he was overjoyed, not having to do the boring conservative thing, but to add firepower. But mostly, despite the only quotes i had happened to find, i was more talking about about whether we traded back too far and missed HBs we wanted with those tradebacks, and that it happened more than once. Probably Kaleb Johnson and Cam Skatebo. Now I cant say Im unhappy with Kyle Monangai either. And if Trapilo ends up starting, and Monangai ends up a big contributor, then im gonna say our board was pretty smart and deep. But none of that says that Poles didnt miscalculate the trade downs either?

Yeah I am not finding it at all - which is weird. I know it happened on April 26th, the last day of the draft, after it was all over, and I know it was CC at Halas Hall with Jeff King. I remember they were standing. I remember first seeing it in a vertical clip on youtube. I remember being surprised that Jeff King was so forthcoming about getting played on the trade downs. He used softer terms, but he admitted targeting several HBs and seeing them go before they picked after tradebacks. I think it might have been a remote for ESPN? Ive used google filters to limit to the day, and with those names, it should come right up. Possibly the Bears asked to have that removed because of what it said? i remember at the time I thought "holy crap thats a headline!" but it was just in the conversation and didnt get focus at the time. Just kind of "oh ok, thats what happened" Later, in the TTNL clip I posted above, a few days later, she spoke authoritatively about it. If you look at her twitter from the 24th to the 26th you see she gets a lot of quotes from underlings - scouts, asst directors of scouting etc. So she was in the building at Halas Hall talking to people on those days. Both covering press conferences, and getting quotes from people like Jeff King. She also still has tweets up with other quotes from Jeff King, so we know she interviewed him then too. Crazy that it's missing, unless the bears requested it to come down?

I havent found it yet - it was from Halas Hall, with Jeff King, who was standing to the left of CC from our perspective (CC's right) I remember the setup very clearly. Ill keep looking. In the meanwhile, here is CC saying it without attributing it. She says it in a definite way, so shes not expressing a guess. She had already said these were facts in the video Im not finding, but at least you can hear her say it with some authority. Go to 50:30

LOL you do get credit for watching TTNL videos! Ill look and see what i can find, cant promise ill find it, but Ill try.

Ok i watched some of Stinger's highlights, and I should amend my point, and maybe this brings me more into harmony with what Mongo is saying. When the play breaks, and Daniels scrambles, he does look around. I should have included that caveat. I guess Im saying on regular downs when the play is still in rhythm, i dont see a lot of reading. maybe hes only being given 2 reads, and told to get the ball out fast? Across the season i did see a lot of that. It looked like 1 read or run and create. Sometimes it looked like a scripted look off. I think I said 90% of the time hes a one read guy, so yes there are plays where he looks to a second read. In fact the first play of the tape, you can see his head move ever so much when he comes off the primary read, and on to Ertz. I might also say thats evidence of him turning his head to make a read too - but I admit he did get to his second read on that one. Maybe the truth is more like 70%, and you guys are saying 60% and Im saying 90% or something, meaning maybe a difference in how often it feels like it happens - I surely havent counted, I assume no one has. So my impression was that hes a one read guy, and you guys are saying maybe he does read more than I think? Either way, i dont think he is a fully functional pocket QB. Maybe we agree on that too.

I dunno man I think were just gonna have to disagree on this one

CC absolutely interviewed Jeff King on camera, and he said half of this, and the other half she attributed to him later in her own interview. I saw it with my own eyes, i feel like I even pasted to it on this board. You can say it didnt happen. Whatever. You win because things that happened never happened. Cool. As far as trading down, Poles took a gamble a certain player would be there later and they werent multiple times. Thats not a win for Poles. it IS OK for the Bears to not be perfect you know? Its Ok to criticize the bad stuff and praise the good stuff. Nothing is going to happen if we think the Bears had some stumbles in the draft. I dunno, maybe you're superstitious, but our comments cant hurt the bears, and it is OK to look at the good and the bad both. It's even ok to cut, trade or fire people who might be replaced by people who would be better. That's good for the team.

yeah its cool if we disagree. i think Daniels is a fantastic athlete, but I think 90%+ of the time, he was making a single read. And a lot of the time, his head was aiming right at that WR even before the snap. I agree NFL defenders should be all over that, but somehow they got open anyway. Im impressed with Kingsbury's ability to make that happen. it is kind of amazing, because you're right about defenders keying. As for scanning with eyes, I think the idea is that you move your head to influence defenders too. I dont see other QBs in the league going thru progressions without moving their head? As for your last sentence here, it's a good argument. Whatever they did obviously worked. I am surprised that it did, and I do predict the league catches up with it, but until they do, success is the best predictor of success, so you may well be right about not seeing a letdown. Well first off, a HUGE % of the time his firest read was open, which is why Im singing Kingsbury's praises. I don't know how he did that. I hope we can do that! And to be fair, when the first read is open, theres no reason to turn your head. But I didnt see more than a small handful of plays where Daniel's head moved. I didnt see him read to second and third options very much at all. It was mostly first read, or run when I watched him.

I think Kingsbury is a real offensive genius. I also understand him to be difficult to be around. I'm happy with Ben Johnson as our coach, but I think Kingsbury is his equal in Xs and Os, but BJ is the far better head coach.

still, it seemed like the primary receiver was open most of the time. I gotta give credit to Kingsbury for that. And I didnt do any kind of film analysis or anything, but Id love to know how he gets his first read open so much. But we agree that its basically a one read and run offense for Daniels, and that cant be sustainable?

When I say passer, in this case, I just mean the physical act of throwing the ball, not including decision making. And I personally have always thought that Fields has an incredible arm. He has a killer deep ball, very accurate. I think Fields' body with Bagent's brain would make an incredible QB, for example. As for your description of Kingsbury's scheme, I totally agree. If you watch film of Daniels, he locks on to his primary receiver before the snap, and its yes, or run. You almost never see his head turn. A couple plays have what looks like a scripted look off, but i dont see Daniels making multiple reads. Ive only seen him do that a handful of times, overwhelmingly, it is as you described, and I agree the NFL will catch up to it. But how does Kingsbury get his primary receiver so wide open on so many plays? That's the part thats astounding to me!

that is SO fair. Im trying to bend over sideways to not be negative, so maybe I went too far positive LOL maybe I could spin it like this? Poles got the two best candidates out there for these jobs. So he succeeded. Now whether they work out, is another thing? But yeah. Im not sold on Poles. I'd really like to know whether he was allowed to fire Flus last year or not. If he was, then he is definitely suspect. But maybe he wasnt, and I'll probably never know. Let's see how Dalman and Jackson look on the OL. We are assuming those holes are plugged now, but I thought Nate Davis' tape was awesome too. Youre right - lets wait and see. Like you said - looks good on paper, cant wait to see it on grass.

OK youre missing two very important details. 1) It was said AFTER the draft, not before. CC says she spoke to the dir of player personnel after the draft, and he said Loveland wasnt necessarily their first choice, that if Banks had fallen, for example, they would have taken him. I believe CC is not a liar. I feel like it may even have been partly on video, so you could see hm say it - Jeff something. 2) It matters who was available when, because we did trade down multiple times. *IF* we traded down thinking we would get a certain targeted HB at a lower pick, one who was still available on the board BEFORE the trade down, and we could have just picked them then, but instead if we traded down and then someone got in front of us and took the HB, then that means we read the situation poorly, and missed out on HBs we were targeting more than Monangai. If it happened multiple times, then it is fair to criticize the draft process as having misread the board, and missed out on players we mistakenly thought would be available later, got greedy, and missed the HB that was targeted. And even if that did happen, I'm not unhappy value-wise with the players we DID pick either, but if you're going to be evaluating the team, you gotta look into the places where they failed too. Is it fireable? No it's not. But that doesnt mean it isnt important. It's important in the continued evaluation of Poles who has done some amazing things, some good things, gotten lucky some, made some very questionable moves, and a few flat out bad decisions too. For me, right now, Poles is getting a B. Maybe a B+, and most of that is due to Caleb and Johnson, two massive pieces we got VERY right. But Caleb was luck as much as anything, and Johnson picked the Bears because of Caleb. So Poles could easily have lost both of them, if the Texans don't score a last minute touchdown in the last game of the season that didnt matter to them. For me, that all adds up to: Poles is worth keeping an eye on. I'm not totally sold on him or Warren. Not the way I am about the coaching staff, for example.