2015 Brad Kaaya = 2016 Mitch Trubisky

Adipost

Adipost

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Sep 28, 2014
Posts:
8,616
Liked Posts:
10,212
Location:
Chicago, IL
This post is to show how drastically different we could see players based on differing circumstances. I watched all the games of 2015 Brad Kaaya that were available to me, as I did for 2016 Trubisky. They were similarly impressive. They even played within similar offenses at the time.

2016 Mitch Trubisky shows great accuracy. He's got a good arm. He showed that he could read the entire field and make good decisions. Good pocket presence. He has an impressive 68% adjusted completion percentage under pressure, good for 2nd in all of college football. He also has one of the lowest sack percentages under pressure, at 15%. He is regarded as the 1st or 2nd QB in this class, mocked as high as the #1 overall pick. His college resume is over after 1 season as a starting QB.

2015 Brad Kaaya shows great accuracy. He's got a good arm. He showed that he could read the entire field and make good decisions. Good pocket presence. He has an impressive 64% adjusted completion percentage under pressure. He also has one of the lowest sack percentages under pressure, at 11%. He is regarded as the 1st or 2nd QB of his class. In the "too early" mock drafts for 2017, SI has him going #1 overall, while McShay and Football Outsider has him going #2 overall. This is his 2nd year as a starter, and he's going back for another.

2016 rolls around, and Brad Kaaya has a new coach. He has to learn a new pro style offense under center. His offensive line starts to fall apart and he starts to see ghosts in the pocket. His stock drops dramatically.

The same could go for Deshone Kizer. With a competent team around him in 2015, scouts thought he could be the next great QB. He was clutch as can be, a great leader. Then 2016 rolled around, and his team was in shambles. His defense was atrocious, so he had to take more chances. This was turned around on him and his decision making was questioned. His coaching staff failed but he was the one blamed for no longer being a good leader. Imagine if he had the talent around him of a Clemson.

Looking at it the other way, Deshaun Watson is being regarded as the #1 QB in this class. And he's been put in an ideal situation, with 2 top WR's and a top TE. His team is filled with top notch talent all over. And because he won a NC, many experts jumped him up a round or two. Imagine if he was put in Kizer's shoes? On ND. How would he be viewed?

I'm not here trying to bash any QB's. Just wanted to point out how differently we could view a player based on situation and circumstance. Moral of the story, draft the QB with the highest upside that translates best to the NFL game...I think.
 
Beast15

Beast15

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Sep 5, 2012
Posts:
2,441
Liked Posts:
2,806
I, for one, think that is who pace is targeting.
 
Broc

Broc

well baked
Donator
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
6,570
Liked Posts:
10,109
Good post. While we're on the topic of random QB thoughts.. with all the talk of value and when and where players should go I can't help but think of Cam Newton.

I'm betting 95% of this msgboard's heads would explode if we took Kizer at #3 yet Newton was a 1 year starter at Auburn with similar numbers (and scouting report weaknesses) to Kizer and went #1 overall in his 2011 draft.

Is it really a "reach" taking a guy like Kizer at #3 if he ends up developing and panning out like Newton did? Sure it would be nice to get a playmaker at S like Adam or Hooker and hopefully getting lucky and snagging a guy like Kizer or Watson in the 2nd but IMO that's just as risky (if not more) as taking the QB straight up at #3 and hoping he pans out. Either way you're hoping your QB pans out but at least if you take one at #3 you're guaranteed to get the QB you want instead of settling for everyone else's leftovers.
 
Smokey Robinson

Smokey Robinson

Well-known member
Joined:
Mar 12, 2013
Posts:
4,893
Liked Posts:
4,184
Location:
The 6ix
I personally think Trubisky looked better than Kaaya ever did but the point is valid with one year of experience we don't know what he will look like when teams adjust.
 
PolarBear

PolarBear

Well-known member
Joined:
Jul 8, 2013
Posts:
4,711
Liked Posts:
2,811
Broc said:
Good post. While we're on the topic of random QB thoughts.. with all the talk of value and when and where players should go I can't help but think of Cam Newton.

I'm betting 95% of this msgboard's heads would explode if we took Kizer at #3 yet Newton was a 1 year starter at Auburn with similar numbers (and scouting report weaknesses) to Kizer and went #1 overall in his 2011 draft.

Is it really a "reach" taking a guy like Kizer at #3 if he ends up developing and panning out like Newton did? Sure it would be nice to get a playmaker at S like Adam or Hooker and hopefully getting lucky and snagging a guy like Kizer or Watson in the 2nd but IMO that's just as risky (if not more) as taking the QB straight up at #3 and hoping he pans out. Either way you're hoping your QB pans out but at least if you take one at #3 you're guaranteed to get the QB you want instead of settling for everyone else's leftovers.
Click to expand...

Kizer is a step down from Cam from a physical standpoint and really without that physical skillset, Cam Newton isn't a very good QB.

If Kizer is Cam Newton-lite, count me out.
 
PolarBear

PolarBear

Well-known member
Joined:
Jul 8, 2013
Posts:
4,711
Liked Posts:
2,811
I think the Kaaya criticism is slightly overblown. I would be happy with him in the 2nd round.
 
Smokey Robinson

Smokey Robinson

Well-known member
Joined:
Mar 12, 2013
Posts:
4,893
Liked Posts:
4,184
Location:
The 6ix
PolarBear said:
I think the Kaaya criticism is slightly overblown. I would be happy with him in the 2nd round.
Click to expand...

I personally don't see the point in drafting Kaaya. There are plenty of QBs who are statues that crumble under pressure. The Bears signed one this year with those traits who also has 10x the arm.

The Bears have low upside guys that can start on the roster I would like to see them take a chance on someone with a little more juice. Seeing as they are paying Glennon to be the starter I think Mahomes makes the most sense as he needs time but has wild upside.
 
WindyCity

WindyCity

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Dec 12, 2011
Posts:
30,816
Liked Posts:
35,721
Mitch Trubisky could break his leg and would be more athletic and mobile than Brad Kaaya.

If you can't handle pressure you cannot play in the NFL. Pass rushers are too good for any QB to expect consistently clean pockets.
 
Adipost

Adipost

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Sep 28, 2014
Posts:
8,616
Liked Posts:
10,212
Location:
Chicago, IL
Smokey Robinson said:
I personally don't see the point in drafting Kaaya. There are plenty of QBs who are statues that crumble under pressure. The Bears signed one this year with those traits who also has 10x the arm.

The Bears have low upside guys that can start on the roster I would like to see them take a chance on someone with a little more juice. Seeing as they are paying Glennon to be the starter I think Mahomes makes the most sense as he needs time but has wild upside.
Click to expand...

The problem with a guy like Deshaun Watson is that he is a very different QB than Mike Glennon. He has different strengths and weaknesses than Glennon. He would do best in an offense taylored around him. Unfortunately, he will be engrossed in an offense that is taylered around a guy like Mike Glennon. Unless you think the Bears will be teaching 2 separate offenses to 2 separate QB's, which I find very unlikely.
 
Adipost

Adipost

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Sep 28, 2014
Posts:
8,616
Liked Posts:
10,212
Location:
Chicago, IL
WindyCity said:
Mitch Trubisky could break his leg and would be more athletic and mobile than Brad Kaaya.

If you can't handle pressure you cannot play in the NFL. Pass rushers are too good for any QB to expect consistently clean pockets.
Click to expand...

As I highlighted in my OP, Kaaya did a great job avoiding the pass rush in 2015.
 
SugarWalls

SugarWalls

Well-known member
Joined:
Sep 17, 2013
Posts:
6,077
Liked Posts:
6,523
Adipost said:
As I highlighted in my OP, Kaaya did a great job avoiding the pass rush in 2015.
Click to expand...

Yes, but trubisky is quick as he showed at the combine, where as Kaaya opted out of the 40 for obvious reasons
 
Smokey Robinson

Smokey Robinson

Well-known member
Joined:
Mar 12, 2013
Posts:
4,893
Liked Posts:
4,184
Location:
The 6ix
Adipost said:
The problem with a guy like Deshaun Watson is that he is a very different QB than Mike Glennon. He has different strengths and weaknesses than Glennon. He would do best in an offense taylored around him. Unfortunately, he will be engrossed in an offense that is taylered around a guy like Mike Glennon. Unless you think the Bears will be teaching 2 separate offenses to 2 separate QB's, which I find very unlikely.
Click to expand...

I didn't bring up Watson but he is my guy so I'll respond. From what I have seen and read I believe Watson is the type of dedicated professional that can learn any offense. He gets a lot of Mariota comps and while some don't work that is the area I find them nearly identical. I feel he is smart enough and dedicated enough to learn and eventually master any offense. I also don't feel this offense will be tailored to Glennon and will be QB friendly for the most part. As much flack as Loggains has received thus far, I think he has created a scheme that has been QB friendly and allowed bums to look better than they normally would. Some of his play calling has been questionable but he got more out of Hoyer and Barkley than most could.

I don't see the Bears investing the high pick it will take to land Watson which is why I said Mahomes may be the ideal QB to bring in. I have less faith in Mahomes, and every other prospect, than I do Watson but I think he has a ridiculous set of tools and if you aren't going to invest in Watson, I would hope they invest in someone with elite upside.
 
WindyCity

WindyCity

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Dec 12, 2011
Posts:
30,816
Liked Posts:
35,721
I don't think the system changes as much as the game plan and play calls.

Loggains system will have bootlegs and designed QB runs, but there is no way they are running them with Glennon, but they are in there.

My guess is the system they run for Glennon will have little hating on their choice. My hope is the 1st year is all mechanics and reading defenses and a little system mixed in.
 

Luke

Well-known member
Joined:
Mar 25, 2016
Posts:
2,157
Liked Posts:
1,570
You have to wonder just how much Pace thinks of MG and this will prove out in the draft. TB offered him a crazy 8mil to be Winstons backup so you know they think pretty highly of him. As Smokey mentioned, Loggins has created schemes to make lesser QB's look pretty good. Could Pace feel that MG could improve in his system and be a solid NFL starting QB? at 16mil, I'm thinking Pace thinks he can.
 
dabears70

dabears70

Well-known member
Joined:
Dec 31, 2013
Posts:
33,933
Liked Posts:
-985
Location:
Orlando
My favorite teams
  1. New York Mets
  1. New York Knicks
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. New York Rangers
  1. Syracuse Orange
Adipost said:
This post is to show how drastically different we could see players based on differing circumstances. I watched all the games of 2015 Brad Kaaya that were available to me, as I did for 2016 Trubisky. They were similarly impressive. They even played within similar offenses at the time.

2016 Mitch Trubisky shows great accuracy. He's got a good arm. He showed that he could read the entire field and make good decisions. Good pocket presence. He has an impressive 68% adjusted completion percentage under pressure, good for 2nd in all of college football. He also has one of the lowest sack percentages under pressure, at 15%. He is regarded as the 1st or 2nd QB in this class, mocked as high as the #1 overall pick. His college resume is over after 1 season as a starting QB.

2015 Brad Kaaya shows great accuracy. He's got a good arm. He showed that he could read the entire field and make good decisions. Good pocket presence. He has an impressive 64% adjusted completion percentage under pressure. He also has one of the lowest sack percentages under pressure, at 11%. He is regarded as the 1st or 2nd QB of his class. In the "too early" mock drafts for 2017, SI has him going #1 overall, while McShay and Football Outsider has him going #2 overall. This is his 2nd year as a starter, and he's going back for another.

2016 rolls around, and Brad Kaaya has a new coach. He has to learn a new pro style offense under center. His offensive line starts to fall apart and he starts to see ghosts in the pocket. His stock drops dramatically.

The same could go for Deshone Kizer. With a competent team around him in 2015, scouts thought he could be the next great QB. He was clutch as can be, a great leader. Then 2016 rolled around, and his team was in shambles. His defense was atrocious, so he had to take more chances. This was turned around on him and his decision making was questioned. His coaching staff failed but he was the one blamed for no longer being a good leader. Imagine if he had the talent around him of a Clemson.

Looking at it the other way, Deshaun Watson is being regarded as the #1 QB in this class. And he's been put in an ideal situation, with 2 top WR's and a top TE. His team is filled with top notch talent all over. And because he won a NC, many experts jumped him up a round or two. Imagine if he was put in Kizer's shoes? On ND. How would he be viewed?

I'm not here trying to bash any QB's. Just wanted to point out how differently we could view a player based on situation and circumstance. Moral of the story, draft the QB with the highest upside that translates best to the NFL game...I think.
Click to expand...

Good post with good points and for me just shows even more just how hard it is for these GM's to choose which QB's will make it in the NFL and which won't. We can all do our little GM homework from behind our computers but we don't have all the ways to go about scouting these QB's that these GM's do and all the work they'll put in on each one.
 
Bearly

Bearly

Dissed membered
Donator
Joined:
Aug 17, 2011
Posts:
41,314
Liked Posts:
23,616
Location:
Palatine, IL
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
They are very different players. Kaaya is a pocket passer that has VG mechanics and must stay with them. Trubs can throw from almost any position or on the move and has a much better deep ball. ALso significantly more mobile and physical. You expect Kaaya to fluctuate more because protection is a requirement and he can't really create. Easier to scheme against unless his protection is outstanding. Doesn't mean that he can't overcome this stuff with quicker reads and getting stronger but Trubisky could just as easily be compared to some random Qb that got better his 2nd year. It's a false equivalency. It may be correct or completely the opposite. It's simply has no correlation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

10,878members
93,008threads
4,372,568posts
315online users

Members online NOW

  • Member
  • Admin
  • Mod
  • Donor
  • HOF
Total: 315 (members: 27, guests: 288)

Staff online NOW

Top