Yet another Caleb Williams Red Flag

[BearFan PHX]

yeah but we saw on film when Fields had all kinds of time and a man open he was looking right at and didnt pull the trigger. That happened a lot.

And also, there are #1 picks and #1 picks, they arent all the same. No one thinks that Young was rated as highly as Williams is this year.

[Stinger226]

6 hours ago, jason said:

Thanks. I was going to post this. 

Dude had pressure roughly 50% of drop backs. League average is 35%. No wonder his accuracy isn't perfect. No wonder he holds onto the ball sometimes. Side note: I would argue some of the stats are skewed because Fields is able to run and evade the pressure.

Trade the #1. Stockpile picks. Build around the team leader.

Actually it was 60.4% pressure rate .  Tell me what QB in the League looks good being under pressure 6 out of ten times. It's wreaks one's confidence. 

Also he was one of the highest in the League in completion rate when throwing to D j and Kmet. All the other WRs had at least a 15% drop passes rate. You lose confidence in WRs when hey continually dropping the ball. 

Example Mooney in the end zone that would have won the game. If he would had had one more reliable WR, he would have made the top 10 in the League.

[Lucky Luciano]

11 hours ago, Alaskan Grizzly said:

So by your rationale I’m more likely to be consistently successful by betting on the 0 or double 00 straight up than I do the column or corner bets?  

there are 38 numbers to play. every single number you play (no black/red even/odd) has the exact same chance to win.

just because you would play 5 numbers doesn't make each number a better odd to win.

[Lucky Luciano]

16 hours ago, Alaskan Grizzly said:

If you have a QB as capable as Fields and with Moore…yes it’s realistic. DJ Moore has said it himself.  

“His growth has been phenomenal. If you look at the games where he came back off of injury, he’s been everything you could ask out of a quarterback. Puts us in a position to win, getting the ball to his playmakers and if he’s gotta do it himself he does it himself and takes it like 50, 60 yards and does his thing. That’s all you can ask, is just steady growth and that’s what he did.”

And added that he and MHJ grew up together and ran on the same track team.  He also suggested it would be “all love” if he were to join the Bears.  

But what does Moore know?  He only played with Justin and had a career year while doing so.   🤷🏻‍♂️

 

so just for the record... are you saying that you would draft a franchise quality receiver instead of a franchise quality quarterback if you needed both?

that being said, do i assume that fields is a franchise quality qb to you?

[Lucky Luciano]

let's put all this into perspective.

let's say you have one of the following qb's on your roster and had coaches that knew what to do with them:

joe montana; steve young; dan morino, tom brady, brett favre, john elway, payton manning, aron rogers.

you have a chance to trade with another nfl team for an all-pro/pro-bowl LOT, an all-pro/pro-bowl WR AND an all-pro/pro-bowl DE straight up for those three players. which qb would you trade in this scenario?

then tell me how long you could keep them in this salary cap age.

[Stinger226]

1 hour ago, Lucky Luciano said:

let's put all this into perspective.

let's say you have one of the following qb's on your roster and had coaches that knew what to do with them:

joe montana; steve young; dan morino, tom brady, brett favre, john elway, payton manning, aron rogers.

you have a chance to trade with another nfl team for an all-pro/pro-bowl LOT, an all-pro/pro-bowl WR AND an all-pro/pro-bowl DE straight up for those three players. which qb would you trade in this scenario?

then tell me how long you could keep them in this salary cap age.

Caleb has talent but there's still a risk with any QB drafted. Much worst consequences with the first pick. Poles knows he has to win this year. 

Draft Williams knowing QBs usually struggle their first year and get one more blue chip player at 9. Your next pick is 75. Starters are more likely in round 1 +2 than later in draft. WR or Edge? 

Trade back to 2, draft capital. Trade back again and have 9 and a 10 to 15 pick. You can draft Verse or Latui and Brian Thomas plus get 2 to 3 second round picks. Draft Zach Frazier, OG-OT and maybe a QB prospect. Another WR? A Brandon Fiske? Jaylen Wright? 

If Poles believes Williams is the guy, he will take him and keep trading back for more picks. What if he doesn't? No one has that answer. 

The second option wins more games than drafting a rookie QB. Stroud was an outlier, that rarely happens. 

[jason]

3 hours ago, Lucky Luciano said:

there are 38 numbers to play. every single number you play (no black/red even/odd) has the exact same chance to win.

just because you would play 5 numbers doesn't make each number a better odd to win.

Your analogy is understood, but not ideal. More picks means more chance at success. It’s fact. Take it to the extreme and give a team every first round pick. They’d certainly have several successes and some busts. But if 10 first round picks every year are all pros, odds are better of getting one if you have more picks.

[BearFan PHX]

2 minutes ago, jason said:

Your analogy is understood, but not ideal. More picks means more chance at success. It’s fact. Take it to the extreme and give a team every first round pick. They’d certainly have several successes and some busts. But if 10 first round picks every year are all pros, odds are better of getting one if you have more picks.

the problem is that its a recipe for mediocrity.

youre saying instead of swinging for a big win, you want to swing a bunch of smaller times, some will miss and some will hit - so you have a better chance of not losing it all, but you also have a lesser chance of winning big.

It's like buying every lottery ticket, you cant lose, but you spent so much to buy them all that you dont win either.

When you take all the risk out, you end up with a more likely middle outcome.

We have a shot at a top QB, which is everything int he NFL, and because it's not a 100% shot, you want to buy insurance and lose a chance at winning.

So the question is, in the NFL, is it better to reliably go 9-8, or is it better to try to win a superbowl?

[Stinger226]

10 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said:

the problem is that its a recipe for mediocrity.

youre saying instead of swinging for a big win, you want to swing a bunch of smaller times, some will miss and some will hit - so you have a better chance of not losing it all, but you also have a lesser chance of winning big.

It's like buying every lottery ticket, you cant lose, but you spent so much to buy them all that you dont win either.

When you take all the risk out, you end up with a more likely middle outcome.

We have a shot at a top QB, which is everything int he NFL, and because it's not a 100% shot, you want to buy insurance and lose a chance at winning.

So the question is, in the NFL, is it better to reliably go 9-8, or is it better to try to win a superbowl?

What was San Francisco record last year?

[jason]

27 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said:

the problem is that its a recipe for mediocrity.

youre saying instead of swinging for a big win, you want to swing a bunch of smaller times, some will miss and some will hit - so you have a better chance of not losing it all, but you also have a lesser chance of winning big.

It's like buying every lottery ticket, you cant lose, but you spent so much to buy them all that you dont win either.

When you take all the risk out, you end up with a more likely middle outcome.

We have a shot at a top QB, which is everything int he NFL, and because it's not a 100% shot, you want to buy insurance and lose a chance at winning.

So the question is, in the NFL, is it better to reliably go 9-8, or is it better to try to win a superbowl?

Disagree. You’re making it like there is one lottery ticket. The #1 might be the Powerball winner, but the odds aren’t great. Having multiple tickets increases the odds of hitting that Powerball. And even if you don’t hit the Powerball, which is extremely rare anyway, having multiple tickets increases the odds of getting a few of those million dollar tickets. Several of the million dollar tickets can deliver the win.

[BearFan PHX]

8 minutes ago, jason said:

Disagree. You’re making it like there is one lottery ticket. The #1 might be the Powerball winner, but the odds aren’t great. Having multiple tickets increases the odds of hitting that Powerball. And even if you don’t hit the Powerball, which is extremely rare anyway, having multiple tickets increases the odds of getting a few of those million dollar tickets. Several of the million dollar tickets can deliver the win.

I disagree.

The NFL is a QB league, and in truth if you dont have one of the top 2 QBs, your only chance of winning a superbowl is to get lucky in a year where one of those top 2 dont make it.

If you dont have a top 2 QB you have zero chance to win multiple superbowls - it just isnt a plan.

Now I agree with you entirely that football is the ultimate team sport, and a QB cant do it alone. You need an OL and WRs and a defense etc. But there are ways to build a roster that dont require trading down the #1 pick overall. I see Poles stacking the defense, and i think he will put more talent on the OL and get new WRs too this year.

And all of that works if you have a GREAT QB - and the only way to have on of those is to draft someone like Caleb, develop them, and have a little luck too - but not so much luck. He's a pretty good bet.

[Lucky Luciano]

47 minutes ago, Stinger226 said:

 

Caleb has talent but there's still a risk with any QB drafted. Much worst consequences with the first pick. Poles knows he has to win this year. 

OK. are you saying that there is no or minimal risk picking more non-QB player/players as long as you don't use the #1 pick? is that what you are really saying?

so to 'reduce' the risk of lower picks being a bust, do you draft the same player position with all your draft picks? otherwise what sense does that make?

Draft Williams knowing QBs usually struggle their first year and get one more blue chip player at 9. Your next pick is 75. Starters are more likely in round 1 +2 than later in draft. WR or Edge? 

so poles is going to figure it will take too long for a drafted qb to help the team he thinks has to win NOW (not a year or three from now) to keep his job? drafting edge or wide receivers is his goal to keep it? if that's the case he is surely the wrong man for the GM spot in chicago.

Trade back to 2, draft capital. Trade back again and have 9 and a 10 to 15 pick. You can draft Verse or Latui and Brian Thomas plus get 2 to 3 second round picks. Draft Zach Frazier, OG-OT and maybe a QB prospect. Another WR? A Brandon Fiske? Jaylen Wright? 

so GAMBLING on more draft 'capital' is the solution to winning a superbowl? more WR's, G's, DE's etc. and hope they turn out average at the worst?

If Poles believes Williams is the guy, he will take him and keep trading back for more picks. What if he doesn't? No one has that answer.

i already know the obvious, just tell me the incredibly obvious.

The second option wins more games than drafting a rookie QB. Stroud was an outlier, that rarely happens. 

who gives two shites if we win more games? there is only ONE game i want to win consistently!

[BearFan PHX]

14 minutes ago, Lucky Luciano said:

who gives two shites if we win more games? there is only ONE game i want to win consistently!

THIS

[jason]

19 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said:

THIS

Neither of our scenarios is guaranteed.
 

You increase odds by creating a good team that consistently makes the playoffs and threatens for the SB every year. It’s more realistic to build a team, create the culture, sustain excellence, and get to the big dance a few times a decade if you’re lucky. 
 

Otherwise you’re making “very good” the enemy of “perfect,” and ruining a good team every 4 years in search of virtually unattainable perfection.

[ChileBear]

3 minutes ago, jason said:

Neither of our scenarios is guaranteed.
 

You increase odds by creating a good team that consistently makes the playoffs and threatens for the SB every year. It’s more realistic to build a team, create the culture, sustain excellence, and get to the big dance a few times a decade if you’re lucky. 
 

Otherwise you’re making “very good” the enemy of “perfect,” and ruining a good team every 4 years in search of virtually unattainable perfection.

Bottom line:  Until we have a solid QB we ain't winning anything. Use that no. 1 on the best QB this year and paly with that no. 9 pick. What a unique and great position we're in for the draft.

[Stinger226]

5 minutes ago, jason said:

Neither of our scenarios is guaranteed.
 

You increase odds by creating a good team that consistently makes the playoffs and threatens for the SB every year. It’s more realistic to build a team, create the culture, sustain excellence, and get to the big dance a few times a decade if you’re lucky. 
 

Otherwise you’re making “very good” the enemy of “perfect,” and ruining a good team every 4 years in search of virtually unattainable perfection.

All common sense.

[Stinger226]

53 minutes ago, Lucky Luciano said:

Caleb has talent but there's still a risk with any QB drafted. Much worst consequences with the first pick. Poles knows he has to win this year. 

OK. are you saying that there is no or minimal risk picking more non-QB player/players as long as you don't use the #1 pick? is that what you are really saying?

so to 'reduce' the risk of lower picks being a bust, do you draft the same player position with all your draft picks? otherwise what sense does that make?

Draft Williams knowing QBs usually struggle their first year and get one more blue chip player at 9. Your next pick is 75. Starters are more likely in round 1 +2 than later in draft. WR or Edge? 

so poles is going to figure it will take too long for a drafted qb to help the team he thinks has to win NOW (not a year or three from now) to keep his job? drafting edge or wide receivers is his goal to keep it? if that's the case he is surely the wrong man for the GM spot in chicago.

Trade back to 2, draft capital. Trade back again and have 9 and a 10 to 15 pick. You can draft Verse or Latui and Brian Thomas plus get 2 to 3 second round picks. Draft Zach Frazier, OG-OT and maybe a QB prospect. Another WR? A Brandon Fiske? Jaylen Wright? 

so GAMBLING on more draft 'capital' is the solution to winning a superbowl? more WR's, G's, DE's etc. and hope they turn out average at the worst?

If Poles believes Williams is the guy, he will take him and keep trading back for more picks. What if he doesn't? No one has that answer.

i already know the obvious, just tell me the incredibly obvious.

The second option wins more games than drafting a rookie QB. Stroud was an outlier, that rarely happens. 

who gives two shites if we win more games? there is only ONE game i want to win consistently!

It's very simple, if  Poles thinks Caleb is the guy , he's taking him. I put out  other options that are still on the table. If Justin is still on the team_ ( did he get traded) , he's an option. 

I guarantee Poles gives a shit if they win. He's not blowing off a season or two because 3 years from now he may have better odds of winning a SB. 

By he way, last years SB did not have any generational QBs prospects playing in it. 

[Lucky Luciano]

2 minutes ago, Stinger226 said:

I guarantee Poles gives a shit if they win. He's not blowing off a season or two because 3 years from now he may have better odds of winning a SB. 

By he way, last years SB did not have any generational QBs prospects playing in it. 

wow... according to your theory poles is just another same ole same ole GM we have had in chicago since finks. win now so i can keep my job. give the suckers some faux hope with high priced/aging free agents guaranteed to turn it around and we can worry about the future some time in the future. LOL

also just for curiosities sake... how long do YOU predict these wonder players we will be drafting in exchange for our #1 pick will take to become all-pro players (or for that matter even GOOD)? what is the average for ANY position to become acclimated to the NFL at a consistent HIGH all-pro level?

i guess nobody ever thought of that huh?

[Stinger226]

10 minutes ago, Lucky Luciano said:

wow... according to your theory poles is just another same ole same ole GM we have had in chicago since finks. win now so i can keep my job. give the suckers some faux hope with high priced/aging free agents guaranteed to turn it around and we can worry about the future some time in the future. LOL

also just for curiosities sake... how long do YOU predict these wonder players we will be drafting in exchange for our #1 pick will take to become all-pro players (or for that matter even GOOD)? what is the average for ANY position to become acclimated to the NFL at a consistent HIGH all-pro level?

i guess nobody ever thought of that huh?

I stated if Poles likes Caleb he's drafting him. Its  not Caleb or bust in his mind, only yours  . As the GM he can't get drunk on prospects and ignore all his options. He's not old school because he might not draft Caleb, he will have a reason. I will be glad when his actions clears up our future so we can all like the Bears again instead of debating choices.

[Lucky Luciano]

8 minutes ago, Stinger226 said:

I stated if Poles likes Caleb he's drafting him. Its  not Caleb or bust in his mind, only yours  . As the GM he can't get drunk on prospects and ignore all his options. He's not old school because he might not draft Caleb, he will have a reason. I will be glad when his actions clears up our future so we can all like the Bears again instead of debating choices.

yeaaaaa i'm caleb ONLY or bust at least in my mind. it HAS to be him no matter what. add that to all the other non-information from you and....

dude, i am LAUGHING at you.

[Alaskan Grizzly]

6 hours ago, Lucky Luciano said:

 

[BearFan PHX]

3 hours ago, jason said:

Neither of our scenarios is guaranteed.
 

You increase odds by creating a good team that consistently makes the playoffs and threatens for the SB every year. It’s more realistic to build a team, create the culture, sustain excellence, and get to the big dance a few times a decade if you’re lucky. 
 

Otherwise you’re making “very good” the enemy of “perfect,” and ruining a good team every 4 years in search of virtually unattainable perfection.

I totally understand you, and you and i both agree on things like how important a good OL is etc. We really are aligned on that.

The only difference we have is that I think it's all exhibition unless you have that world beater QB. I think without one, you can be a playoff team, and possibly sneak into a superbowl victory with a lot of luck, mostly relating to the leagues world beater QB not making it that year, but unless youve got that guy at QB, you're not realistically in the hunt.

And I think most years there just isnt one available. And every now and then one does come along, and usually your team isn't in position to get them.

But right now, we have a shot at one. Now I cant say he IS one of course, i agree with you again there, but I think he has a good chance to be one, and so you gotta take a swing at it.

None of that defeats anything you say about building a roster either, although I think Poles is well on his way to that, and by September you might even be happy with the state of the offensive roster too. I expect another free agent OL, and either a stud LT or a stud WR (or Bowers) with the #9 pick. probably an interior rookie OL to compete with what we've got too.

We added a running back today too, so the 2024 Bears QB should have a lot of support.

[Stinger226]

5 hours ago, Lucky Luciano said:

yeaaaaa i'm caleb ONLY or bust at least in my mind. it HAS to be him no matter what. add that to all the other non-information from you and....

dude, i am LAUGHING at you.

If Fields ends up back here we can have a good laugh together. 

I have been told Rapoport is an insider. He reported today that the Bears have not been seeking trades for Fields.

All team needing QBs have been signing players in the market. 

I'm not saying he won't be traded but if a team is not seeking trading a player, there is no market for him. All of this trade talk stuff has been media generated. All that tells me is  they haven't decided yet . I keep being  told their trading Fields and drafting Caleb. What actions are  they doing that screams Fields is gone?  

I understand you will be upset if Fields comes back but IDC. 

[Stinger226]

2 hours ago, BearFan PHX said:

I totally understand you, and you and i both agree on things like how important a good OL is etc. We really are aligned on that.

The only difference we have is that I think it's all exhibition unless you have that world beater QB. I think without one, you can be a playoff team, and possibly sneak into a superbowl victory with a lot of luck, mostly relating to the leagues world beater QB not making it that year, but unless youve got that guy at QB, you're not realistically in the hunt.

And I think most years there just isnt one available. And every now and then one does come along, and usually your team isn't in position to get them.

But right now, we have a shot at one. Now I cant say he IS one of course, i agree with you again there, but I think he has a good chance to be one, and so you gotta take a swing at it.

None of that defeats anything you say about building a roster either, although I think Poles is well on his way to that, and by September you might even be happy with the state of the offensive roster too. I expect another free agent OL, and either a stud LT or a stud WR (or Bowers) with the #9 pick. probably an interior rookie OL to compete with what we've got too.

We added a running back today too, so the 2024 Bears QB should have a lot of support.

I love the way you have a conversation with Jason yet I say the same things and I'm delusional and pathetic. 

Nothing to see here

[killakrzydav]

What would you take for #1 overall?