Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Would you trade 9 for Fields - straight up?


musicman
 Share

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Jon Snow said:

Tell that to Bucky Brooks. He has Hooker rated ahead of Levis and AR.  It's a long way to draft night. Anything can happen. 

I don’t knock analysts for having a different take than me. I wasn’t fond of what I saw from Hooker in college. He had big stats but he was more of a one-read QB than any of the other guys I watched this year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

You have a habit of really relishing the idea of bad things happening so people will be mad.

It's like that's more important to you than seeing the team succeed 😕

Well that's hogwash. Who says it's a bad thing. You? I relish the idea of us drafting a QB in the first that could finally lift this franchise out of this terrible funk where people sit around polishing turds that are failed QB's like Sam Darnold. Or wanting us to throw 30+ million a year at someone like Derek Carr. There are people here who do not want us to draft certain QB's because they still want the game to be played a certain way. I want QB in the first and I'll support whoever it is. But again I know if it's Stroud or Richardson the same folks who groaned about Newton and now Fields will continue the same trend. Me? I just want to win. And I want a QB who is going to bring some attitude to this team not this aw shucks just happy to be here nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jon Snow said:

Tell that to Bucky Brooks. He has Hooker rated ahead of Levis and AR.  It's a long way to draft night. Anything can happen. 

I agree anything can happen and watched most UT games because of where I live (Knoxville).  I don't think Hooker is a 1st round talent.  He looked very below average at VT with a traditional offense.  That Tennessee spread offense offense got his WRs wide open a lot.  It will be a big jump to go from that to a traditional NFL offense, now throw in his ACL and age.  He has a decent arm and is strong/fast for the position.  I would place him in the 2nd/3rd before the injury, but what do I know?  A lot less than Bucky Brooks when it comes to the NFL that's for sure...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, ForJimmy said:

Some interesting data to unpack here. Without a doubt Fields holds the ball too long. I think in college he got away with it because he could just out run or overpower defenders if they got pressure. I found it funny when scouts were saying he was a “one read” QB. He definitely went through his reads, just spent too long doing so (probably processing speed is a factor).

The pressure rate is what’s throwing me off. The Eagles have a great OL right now with basically the same players. PFF rated them as 4th in the league in 2021, but we all know how inconsistent it was about the Bears this year with a top 10 OL and two starters being in the bottom 5 for pass protection and a 3rd being the in lower half.

Yeah there is no way I watched all the Eagles games or Bears. I do good to catch all the Panthers games. Hell even if I did watch them I doubt I have the football IQ to legitimately break down the film and see where the issues were aside from the obvious…

 

https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-final-2021-offensive-line-rankings

There is the PFF article I was referring to for whatever it’s worth…

Yeah PFF is a little more ambiguous and murky because we don't know exactly how their grading is determined and it's a very holistic metric that accounts for every aspect of o-line performance (pass blocking, run blocking, penalties, etc.).  It kinda makes sense if PFF inflated the grade of the Eagles' 2021 o-line because it'd be consistent with them inflating the grade of the 2022 Bears' o-line.  So I think PFF is okay to use as a comparative tool (i.e. comparing one PFF score to another PFF score) since at least their methodology, however flawed, would be consistently applied.

I would think something like Pressure Rate would be a bit more straightforward because it's a very specific focused metric.  But even that would involve some subjectivity with respect to when a QB meets that specific threshold of being "pressured" or not.  I'm guessing it depends on how close a defender is to the QB, but probably more of a snap judgment than some kind of precise measurement.  But again since it'd theoretically be the same methodology applied consistently, I would feel comfortable comparing Pro-Football-Reference's Pressure Rate for 2021 Hurts against Pro-Football-Reference's Pressure Rate for 2022 Fields.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/14/2023 at 7:34 AM, Varking said:

1. The Bears aren’t going to trade Fields. 
2. If the Bears were trying to trade Fields I don’t believe a single first rounder is going to do it for a multitude of reasons. The Bears moved up to get him. So they invested multiple picks. He has improved as a passer despite his lack of weapons around him. He has shown he might be the top runner in all of football which will allow him more time to develop as a passer. He got an MVP vote this year. 
3. if we could have Fields going into his year 3 for just the #9 overall pick that would be a steal for us and I’d do it in a heartbeat. 
4. It wouldn’t make sense from a team standpoint for the Bears. Are you a better team with Stroud, Levis, Young or Richardson plus another player at 9 Vs Fields plus all the additional picks you get could for trading down one or two times? 
 

Does it make sense for us? Yes. Does it make sense for the Bears? No. 

I agree but not for the same reasons.

 

The Bears suck.

They suck hard.

As skeptical everyone is about Fields' ability to take his passing game to the next level, he's still probably the best player on that team.

When the roster is this devoid of talent - it makes WAY more sense to trade down, take the BPA with every pick, and hope to draft a core group of guys you can build a team around.  The Bears have nothing to lose letting Fields start for a few more years.  If he does not improve they can always move on from him.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, frankw said:

Well that's hogwash. Who says it's a bad thing. You? I relish the idea of us drafting a QB in the first that could finally lift this franchise out of this terrible funk where people sit around polishing turds that are failed QB's like Sam Darnold. Or wanting us to throw 30+ million a year at someone like Derek Carr. There are people here who do not want us to draft certain QB's because they still want the game to be played a certain way. I want QB in the first and I'll support whoever it is. But again I know if it's Stroud or Richardson the same folks who groaned about Newton and now Fields will continue the same trend. Me? I just want to win. And I want a QB who is going to bring some attitude to this team not this aw shucks just happy to be here nonsense.

Yeah sure 😕

You just also want people you disagree with to be mad and unhappy. Same as with your long-running feud with people who were fans of Christian McCaffrey, who you hoped would get traded (again, just to make people mad) regardless of whether it was the best thing for the team or not.

You're pretty transparent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Yeah sure 😕

You just also want people you disagree with to be mad and unhappy. Same as with your long-running feud with people who were fans of Christian McCaffrey, who you hoped would get traded (again, just to make people mad) regardless of whether it was the best thing for the team or not.

You're pretty transparent.

You're still stewing about McCaffrey? Time to move on big guy!

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

The teams ahead of us.

 

People are crazy if you don't think Fields will have suitors. Im on record I would take Fields over any QB in this draft not named Stroud. Im still going back to his Ohio State days when he had an actual Oline the dude can pass. He's not been able to show that in Chicago because he is running for his life every other play. Fields will be a problem when he gets a Oline.

Sweet hyper bull. 

I'm not going to declare Fields the next anything, because it's clear he still has a ways to go.  

While you may still be all over his jock, I'm not sure that our head coach would even consider him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Canes now have 19 losses on the year. Here is the truly alarming stat. 13 of those were multiple goal loses. 9 of those were 3 goal plus losses. This team is getting blown out more than any other year under Rod.     why?  Blue line is a total mess. It’s just no good with their combinations.  It pains me to say this, but they were mikes better with Burns and Orlov. They need Slavin so bad.  Health.  Size. The team is too small and has no physical play. Most forwards do not forecheck.  Worst under Rod.  Goalie play. Pretty average to sub par. PK is downright bad. It’s allowing a little over a goal a game. Worst under Rod.    Team will not win a playoff round under its current group of players. It’s not constructed to do so against heavy teams.      solutions.  Must get physical size by the trade deadline. Rod and Tulsky know this. That probably has to come with the 2C.  KKs size but a better scorer and meaner.  The need another physical winger.  Goalie. Either go all in on a top guy on a bad team or get average. Lastly, better defense. Need a Right shot heavy defenseman.  Yes that could mean someone’s favorite dman could sit. Looking at you Boom.    thats 3-4 new guys that must be brought in for them to have a chance at a cup.  And it’s all players that are different and better than what they have.  They have the cap. KK is gone. Add 4 mill back.    And then hope it’s jells unlike Mikko.  
    • A 2 year deal for Coker would be terribly short sighted as I pointed out in another thread the other day. T-Mac will be eligible for an extension after 2 more seasons, and while there is still 2 years to go, he's very much looked like the type of player you extend right away, knowing waiting will only cost more money and take longer before the contract becomes a bargain with rising contracts every year. So if we sign Coker to a 2 year extension, that means we either let Coker walk after those 2 years or we don't extend T-Mac when we should, as I can't see signing both in the same off season much of an option, it was terrible for the Bengals this year. I like doing a 1 year deal for Coker to set his market value with a full season as the #2, and then sign him to a 3 or 4 year deal after that, which also separates Coker and T-Mac's contract years to help keep both around instead of having to choose at some point, like the Bengals should have done. I also think coming to an agreement on a multi year deal right now could be tough, the team will want to pay the rate of his actual production so far and his agent will want to be paid on his potential from his few breakout games, everyone might just be too far apart for a multi year deal.
    • I would love Sonny Styles!.   I don’t think he slips that far.   Get the best OT available at 19.  There is a good chance icky will miss next year and then come back and may switch to guard.
×
×
  • Create New...