Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

The Bears vs Media Narratives
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Chicago Bears
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
G08


Joined: 28 Feb 2011
Posts: 6898
Location: World Championsville
PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2017 1:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RunningVaccs wrote:
The other thing I've heard in person and on the interwebz that is incredibly frustrating is that this offseason is somehow more indictment of the McCaskets being cheap, and they should sell the team.

So paying Glennon (over?), Sanchez, Cutler and Shaw for 2017 while developing a QB who might not even hit the field is cheap?

It's like all these people have is the same knee jerk reaction to news no matter what it is. Now that "Cutler sucks, no heart, bad face" doesn't apply I imagine we'll get more McCaskeys should sell talk. Wish they would all stick to politics!


You spelled "jump off Navy Pier" wrong Laughing
_________________
topwop1 wrote:
My point is you can find a franchise guy like [Derek] Carr in every draft


"I thought it was a stroke of genius. You give [Pace] an A++++ for the move to get Trubisky. That was magnificient." - Bill Polian
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
gah112


Joined: 30 Jan 2015
Posts: 817
PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2017 1:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

G08 wrote:
Quote:
If we take the Bears' draft as a whole, they came out OK from a value standpoint. The picks they held entering the draft were worth 3,179 points on the Jimmy Johnson trade chart. The picks they held in the end were worth 3,113 points, counting 2018 picks that were part of the Bears' trades.

The difference in value equates to the 114th overall pick, a small price to pay for a team to make sure it gets the quarterback it wants
. The deficit equates to the 48th overall pick if we use the trade chart Chase Stuart produced for his site, Football Perspective.


Yet Pace was "fleeced"??? GMAFB Laughing


You're evaluating one trade based on the results of multiple trades. That's not really fair.

If you look at the 49ers deal only (based on the FP trade value model), the Bears gave up about the equivalent of a 1st round pick. If you evaluate the trade by the Jimmy Johnson model, it's about a wash.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
topwop1


Joined: 08 Jan 2008
Posts: 7791
PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2017 1:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

gah112 wrote:
G08 wrote:
Quote:
If we take the Bears' draft as a whole, they came out OK from a value standpoint. The picks they held entering the draft were worth 3,179 points on the Jimmy Johnson trade chart. The picks they held in the end were worth 3,113 points, counting 2018 picks that were part of the Bears' trades.

The difference in value equates to the 114th overall pick, a small price to pay for a team to make sure it gets the quarterback it wants
. The deficit equates to the 48th overall pick if we use the trade chart Chase Stuart produced for his site, Football Perspective.


Yet Pace was "fleeced"??? GMAFB Laughing


You're evaluating one trade based on the results of multiple trades. That's not really fair.

If you look at the 49ers deal only (based on the FP trade value model), the Bears gave up about the equivalent of a 1st round pick. If you evaluate the trade by the Jimmy Johnson model, it's about a wash.


Is the Jimmy Johnson model not the more common and used trade reference chart?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ForteOz


Joined: 03 Sep 2013
Posts: 1147
PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2017 3:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

gah112 wrote:
G08 wrote:
Quote:
If we take the Bears' draft as a whole, they came out OK from a value standpoint. The picks they held entering the draft were worth 3,179 points on the Jimmy Johnson trade chart. The picks they held in the end were worth 3,113 points, counting 2018 picks that were part of the Bears' trades.

The difference in value equates to the 114th overall pick, a small price to pay for a team to make sure it gets the quarterback it wants
. The deficit equates to the 48th overall pick if we use the trade chart Chase Stuart produced for his site, Football Perspective.


Yet Pace was "fleeced"??? GMAFB Laughing


You're evaluating one trade based on the results of multiple trades. That's not really fair.

If you look at the 49ers deal only (based on the FP trade value model), the Bears gave up about the equivalent of a 1st round pick. If you evaluate the trade by the Jimmy Johnson model, it's about a wash.
There is a trade value chart where a 3rd, 4th, and future 3rd = a first round pick?
No f'ing way teams actually use that.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
G08


Joined: 28 Feb 2011
Posts: 6898
Location: World Championsville
PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2017 4:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ForteOz wrote:
gah112 wrote:
G08 wrote:
Quote:
If we take the Bears' draft as a whole, they came out OK from a value standpoint. The picks they held entering the draft were worth 3,179 points on the Jimmy Johnson trade chart. The picks they held in the end were worth 3,113 points, counting 2018 picks that were part of the Bears' trades.

The difference in value equates to the 114th overall pick, a small price to pay for a team to make sure it gets the quarterback it wants
. The deficit equates to the 48th overall pick if we use the trade chart Chase Stuart produced for his site, Football Perspective.


Yet Pace was "fleeced"??? GMAFB Laughing


You're evaluating one trade based on the results of multiple trades. That's not really fair.

If you look at the 49ers deal only (based on the FP trade value model), the Bears gave up about the equivalent of a 1st round pick. If you evaluate the trade by the Jimmy Johnson model, it's about a wash.
There is a trade value chart where a 3rd, 4th, and future 3rd = a first round pick?
No f'ing way teams actually use that.


There isn't, it's pure nonsense.
_________________
topwop1 wrote:
My point is you can find a franchise guy like [Derek] Carr in every draft


"I thought it was a stroke of genius. You give [Pace] an A++++ for the move to get Trubisky. That was magnificient." - Bill Polian
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
gah112


Joined: 30 Jan 2015
Posts: 817
PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2017 6:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

G08 wrote:
ForteOz wrote:
gah112 wrote:
G08 wrote:
Quote:
If we take the Bears' draft as a whole, they came out OK from a value standpoint. The picks they held entering the draft were worth 3,179 points on the Jimmy Johnson trade chart. The picks they held in the end were worth 3,113 points, counting 2018 picks that were part of the Bears' trades.

The difference in value equates to the 114th overall pick, a small price to pay for a team to make sure it gets the quarterback it wants
. The deficit equates to the 48th overall pick if we use the trade chart Chase Stuart produced for his site, Football Perspective.


Yet Pace was "fleeced"??? GMAFB Laughing


You're evaluating one trade based on the results of multiple trades. That's not really fair.

If you look at the 49ers deal only (based on the FP trade value model), the Bears gave up about the equivalent of a 1st round pick. If you evaluate the trade by the Jimmy Johnson model, it's about a wash.
There is a trade value chart where a 3rd, 4th, and future 3rd = a first round pick?
No f'ing way teams actually use that.


There isn't, it's pure nonsense.


It's the same chart referenced in your quote...

And it's not nonsense. The Jimmy Johnson chart isn't backed up by any empirical data. Anyone who's looked at it will tell you that it severely undervalues later picks and overvalues high picks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
IronMike84


Joined: 17 Jun 2009
Posts: 8297
PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2017 6:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have to wonder how the Trubisky trade looks in comparison to the other QB trades in one year.

Mahomes and Watson were bought on credit for KC and Houston. Trubisky was a debit transaction. My thoughts are that even if the Bears have a bad year, at least they'll still have a first round pick.

And that's also something nobody will talk about: Pace doesn't do anything to set back the franchise. Trubisky may ultimately get Pace fired if he doesn't pan out, but Pace doesn't burn high future picks or hand out stupid contracts that'll make it more difficult for his successor to improve the team.
_________________
Rotoworld.com wrote:
...internet mock drafts, which have ridiculously become the measuring stick for where players are "supposed" to go.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
IronMike84


Joined: 17 Jun 2009
Posts: 8297
PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2017 6:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I also think that unless the Bears have a surprisingly good season this year, the national narrative will be that a top-down house cleaning is coming, and I don't think that's the case. I think Pace either chooses a new head coach or Fox gets a one-year extension. Either way, the narrative set in motion last week won't go away unless Trubisky really starts lighting it up.
_________________
Rotoworld.com wrote:
...internet mock drafts, which have ridiculously become the measuring stick for where players are "supposed" to go.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bkokot


Joined: 23 Apr 2008
Posts: 3148
PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2017 7:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

IronMike84 wrote:
"WHY DID PACE TAKE SO MANY SMALL-SCHOOL PLAYERS?!"

Pace has drafted players from:
West Virginia x 2
FSU
Oregon
Michigan State
Penn State
TCU
Georgia
Kansas State
Florida
West Virginia
Miami
North Carolina
Alabama

His small school players:
Indiana (still a power five conference)
William & Mary
Northern Iowa
Western Michigan
Ashland
North Carolina A&T
Kutztown

Yup, he sure does skew towards those small-school guys!



I don't have the data here, but if I had to guess, I'd say that taking almost 1/3 of all of your drafted players from smaller schools is a much higher than average percentage.

Just because he doesn't draft more small school guys than large school ones doesn't mean he doesn't draft more small school guys than average.
_________________
2016 Adopt-a-Bear
Alshon Jeffery

2013 Bears Forum Pick'em Champion
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Heinz D.


Joined: 26 Apr 2017
Posts: 52
Location: Tri-State Area
PostPosted: Fri May 05, 2017 3:38 pm    Post subject: Re: The Bears vs Media Narratives Reply with quote

I'm constantly finding myself hating the fact this site doesn't have a "like" (or "thumbs up") button/tab/function, as I find it sort of clunky to make posts that are simply, "You betcha! Totally agree!" Laughing

But I do agree with most of the stuff pointed out so far, both from the OP, and by others. There are some in the media that do get what happened on draft day--it was a really brilliant move. But...the rest of the knuckleheads out there will keep spewing nonsense, and putting up video of equally knuckleheaded Bears fans freaking out we didn't take a safety, or something, at #3. At this point, I don't think the weird narrative (everything: the pick, the trade, Pace's job security) will go away until the Bears start playing better, or maybe even not until Trubisky plays well. It's weird. As I said in the Trubisky thread--if the Browns had made that trade (and given up far more than the Bears did), they'd be geniuses. And also, a big part of the energy behind the weird narrative is that people don't want it to have been a good move, and still wish Smokin' Jay was still out there for them to kick around.

A couple of quick points, though...

WindyCity wrote:
If Glennon even plays half way decent he gives the Bears and asset at the QB position and that is worth more than the 6-8 million they are over paying him.

Gotta disagree. Considering the inconsistency at the position we've had to endure for seemingly ever, if Glennon is half way decent, he isn't being overpaid. Smile

WindyCity wrote:
Glennon gives this coaching staff a chance to show what they can do. If the Bears can win 7-8 games with Glennon and show some development than I think they stay.

I think that's true, and I honestly think that's what will happen. Which, I feel, is good, as I'd hate to be facing the chance of the team losing Fangio and Loggains.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
51to54


Joined: 29 Jun 2008
Posts: 1802
PostPosted: Fri May 05, 2017 5:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

IronMike84 wrote:
I have to wonder how the Trubisky trade looks in comparison to the other QB trades in one year.

Mahomes and Watson were bought on credit for KC and Houston. Trubisky was a debit transaction. My thoughts are that even if the Bears have a bad year, at least they'll still have a first round pick.

And that's also something nobody will talk about: Pace doesn't do anything to set back the franchise. Trubisky may ultimately get Pace fired if he doesn't pan out, but Pace doesn't burn high future picks or hand out stupid contracts that'll make it more difficult for his successor to improve the team.

At the very least, Pace was drafting for 2018 and not to just try and grind out a lucky 9-7 to save Fox and Pace's jobs. Building for the future is what virtually every well managed team should be doing, except those few that are in a tight championship window much like Denver a couple of years ago.

Price-wise, when you compare what Pace paid to move up to get Trubisky versus what 5 other teams have paid to move up to get QB's in the last two drafts Pace got the bargain of bargains and still kept his eye on the 2018 goal by keeping our 1st and 2nd round picks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Badger75


Joined: 08 Apr 2008
Posts: 8555
PostPosted: Fri May 05, 2017 5:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There are two Chicago narratives that are eternal:

Chicago teams seldom win (narrow trophy cases)

The Bears are cheap (Halas didn't bring an entire league through the Depression and WW II being stupid. He was a gruff personality that sometimes irritated the media. He offended Bob Hope during the war and Hope spread it around.)

The national media loves NYC, NE and LA. And no where else.
So prove them wrong. Wink
_________________
"I have to keep playing so people over 40 will have somebody to root for on Sunday afternoons." George Blanda who played until he was 46
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Heinz D.


Joined: 26 Apr 2017
Posts: 52
Location: Tri-State Area
PostPosted: Fri May 05, 2017 7:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Badger75 wrote:
The national media loves NYC, NE and LA. And no where else.
So prove them wrong. Wink

Oh, it'll happen. Doesn't mean they'll win the SB under Pace, but it'll happen. Unfortunately, if (or when) Glennon plays fairly well, the media will be spinning all these "what if?" scenarios...forgetting that pretty much everybody was advocating the '17 crop of quarterbacks sitting, and learning...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
WindyCity


Joined: 26 Jun 2009
Posts: 16521
PostPosted: Fri May 05, 2017 9:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I should have "over paid"

I think Glennon will probably end up being a great financial investment.

He is worth the 18 million to just keep the Bears from rushing Trubisky.

If they can flip him for a pick he is easily worth that and more since the relative cash value of a 2nd round pick is 18 million (Osweiler). The Bears could be trading 2.5 million in dead money in 2018 for a draft pick.
_________________
John Fox
3-13 this season, 9-23 overall, 4-12 at home
Pathetic
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Badger75


Joined: 08 Apr 2008
Posts: 8555
PostPosted: Sat May 06, 2017 8:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Heinz D. wrote:
Badger75 wrote:
The national media loves NYC, NE and LA. And no where else.
So prove them wrong. Wink

Oh, it'll happen. Doesn't mean they'll win the SB under Pace, but it'll happen. Unfortunately, if (or when) Glennon plays fairly well, the media will be spinning all these "what if?" scenarios...forgetting that pretty much everybody was advocating the '17 crop of quarterbacks sitting, and learning...


So far I like the moves. The cost of operations has gone crazy and QB development is imprecise. Idea
_________________
"I have to keep playing so people over 40 will have somebody to root for on Sunday afternoons." George Blanda who played until he was 46
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Chicago Bears All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group