2nd guessing Trubisky & the "Deep Class of '19"

Myk

Myk

85in25
Joined:
Sep 27, 2010
Posts:
11,142
Liked Posts:
4,467
While running the draft sim often some of the QBs were there at 8. I got to wondering if we would've been better off waiting.

Trubisky graded 6.54 "should be pro-bowl". The only one higher this year is Darnold 7.10 "pro-bowl". Close would be Mayfield 6.09 "instant starter". Usually Rosen is the one to take who's left at #8.
I'm sure Darnold will be special but the cost to move up high enough to get him would've been ridiculous, if it was even possible.
All others would be a step down or require a move up to be at best a wash.
The only thing that could've helped would've been to play Glennon the whole year, and there wouldn't have been a dick left attached at CCS.
How much it helped is not even a guarantee since the teams picking above us were really bad. I doubt even with Glennon all year we would've been above #4, definitely not above #3. It still likely wouldn't have been enough for Darnold.

I don't think we did bad on the QB end of things making the move when we were in place to make it instead of waiting for the deep 2019 QB class.
As far as this year at #8 we have a good chance to get a great one at a position of need at #8 since we already have our QB and the "Deep Class of '19" should fill a lot of the picks before us.
I'm feeling good about the future of the Bears. I hope this draft works out.
 
WindyCity

WindyCity

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Dec 12, 2011
Posts:
30,816
Liked Posts:
35,721
I would be pissed if I had to talk myself into one of these turnover machines this season. We would be making a major Wentz like trade up for a guy who completed 55% of his passes in the Mountain West.
 
nc0gnet0

nc0gnet0

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Nov 27, 2014
Posts:
17,616
Liked Posts:
3,582
Myk said:
While running the draft sim often some of the QBs were there at 8. I got to wondering if we would've been better off waiting.

Trubisky graded 6.54 "should be pro-bowl". The only one higher this year is Darnold 7.10 "pro-bowl". Close would be Mayfield 6.09 "instant starter". Usually Rosen is the one to take who's left at #8.
I'm sure Darnold will be special but the cost to move up high enough to get him would've been ridiculous, if it was even possible.
All others would be a step down or require a move up to be at best a wash.
The only thing that could've helped would've been to play Glennon the whole year, and there wouldn't have been a dick left attached at CCS.
How much it helped is not even a guarantee since the teams picking above us were really bad. I doubt even with Glennon all year we would've been above #4, definitely not above #3. It still likely wouldn't have been enough for Darnold.

I don't think we did bad on the QB end of things making the move when we were in place to make it instead of waiting for the deep 2019 QB class.
As far as this year at #8 we have a good chance to get a great one at a position of need at #8 since we already have our QB and the "Deep Class of '19" should fill a lot of the picks before us.
I'm feeling good about the future of the Bears. I hope this draft works out.
Click to expand...

So, if Cleveland offered you this years 1st and 4th picks (for Trubisky) in the first round, would you take it?
 
Toast88

Toast88

Well-known member
Joined:
May 10, 2014
Posts:
12,641
Liked Posts:
12,821
Being an Arizona alum who keeps up with his team big-time and therefore watches a TON of PAC 12 football, I see absolutely nothing remarkable about Rosen or Darnold. I have no idea why someone would draft them, let alone in the first round.

As far as Allen, dude’s like Christian Hackenberg, but with worse stats somehow while playing in a worse conference.

Jackson and Mayfield—Who knows? I’ll leave other people to judge them, but it wouldn’t surprise me to see them be the most successful out of this draft class, considering the other options are butt.
 
Myk

Myk

85in25
Joined:
Sep 27, 2010
Posts:
11,142
Liked Posts:
4,467
nc0gnet0 said:
So, if Cleveland offered you this years 1st and 4th picks in the first round, would you take it?
Click to expand...

Not sure what you're getting at. They won't, and we couldn't have had them both even if we were as bad as the Browns.

If we had #1 and #4 I'd still be happy we got Trubisky when we did and take Chubb and Barkley. I bet they'll be happy they got Garrett, Barkley and a Darnold or Mayfield. Or maybe not, Browns fans I know are worse than Bears fans.

Trubisky vs Darnold isn't a guarantee as Windy points out. That's why I'm just going by their Combine grades, they're not that far off and it's doubtful we'd be in the position for Darnold even with Glennon all year (and we just may still have Fox for another contract).
 
Myk

Myk

85in25
Joined:
Sep 27, 2010
Posts:
11,142
Liked Posts:
4,467
Toast88 said:
Being an Arizona alum who keeps up with his team big-time and therefore watches a TON of PAC 12 football, I see absolutely nothing remarkable about Rosen or Darnold. I have no idea why someone would draft them, let alone in the first round.
Click to expand...

With what little college football I managed to watch this year I thought Darnold would translate to the NFL. I also thought Windy's int points valid.
 
gallagher

gallagher

Nothing left to do but smile, smile, smile
Donator
Joined:
Sep 27, 2010
Posts:
6,371
Liked Posts:
5,611
Location:
Semi-Nomadic
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Michigan Wolverines
  2. Ohio Bobcats
I remember people putting stock onto some draft simulator. My first question is - what is it about these simulators that one finds reliable, or at least persuasive for it's use? How much does it take GM drafting habit, team needs, potential trades, etc?

Second point, we got our QB, last year would have been a waste had we not gotten Trubisky. Because we have our QB now, we can make more tangible improvement towards the future success of the franchise than had we waited too take the fourth best QB of this year.

My third point is that if Pace's favorite targets are gone and QBs are left, I'd be willing to deal our pick for a long ransom all that Buffalo, Arizona, or similar can get their QB of the future. I normally don't like trading down in the first, but I'd rather gain a bunch of draft picks than pick a player that the GM and coaches don't think would upgrade the roster more than a similar player available later.
 
Myk

Myk

85in25
Joined:
Sep 27, 2010
Posts:
11,142
Liked Posts:
4,467
gallagher said:
I remember people putting stock onto some draft simulator. My first question is - what is it about these simulators that one finds reliable, or at least persuasive for it's use? How much does it take GM drafting habit, team needs, potential trades, etc?

Second point, we got our QB, last year would have been a waste had we not gotten Trubisky. Because we have our QB now, we can make more tangible improvement towards the future success of the franchise than had we waited too take the fourth best QB of this year.

My third point is that if Pace's favorite targets are gone and QBs are left, I'd be willing to deal our pick for a long ransom all that Buffalo, Arizona, or similar can get their QB of the future. I normally don't like trading down in the first, but I'd rather gain a bunch of draft picks than pick a player that the GM and coaches don't think would upgrade the roster more than a similar player available later.
Click to expand...

Fanspeak seems to go on need and rankings with some randomness thrown in (or maybe it's not random but I sure can't figure out why sometimes the same databases have teams taking different players). It changes greatly depending on which ranking database and need database you select. I think trades is a pay version.

That too. We're a year ahead of where we would be taking a QB this year. Not worth it for what would likely be an equal potential.

I don't see a trade for a QB happening. If their QB is there at #8 they will probably make it the rest of the way. It would be nice if there would be a trade war for the left over QBs happen on our doorstep. I think any QB pick trades are to jump over us, but that's just as good, the more QBs that go before #8 mean the better choices we will have at #8.
 

AussieBear

Guest
WindyCity said:
No. This QB class is deep. Deep with ass QBs who turn the ball over a ton.
Click to expand...

like watson who put trubs to shame while on da field last year?? what about dat qb from da huge MVC conference........wentz and his 10 ints da year before dat?

i guess mayfield 6 ints last year was a lot though.. dats exactly how many trubs threw his jr year..
 
Da Coach

Da Coach

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
2,332
Liked Posts:
1,461
Location:
Helena MT
I'd say Mayfield and Rosen are the only two I like out of all these guys. Rudolf and White as bigger projects.

But after a year of starting, no way I trade Mitch for either one of these guys.



Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 
nc0gnet0

nc0gnet0

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Nov 27, 2014
Posts:
17,616
Liked Posts:
3,582
Myk said:
Not sure what you're getting at. They won't, and we couldn't have had them both even if we were as bad as the Browns.

If we had #1 and #4 I'd still be happy we got Trubisky when we did and take Chubb and Barkley. I bet they'll be happy they got Garrett, Barkley and a Darnold or Mayfield. Or maybe not, Browns fans I know are worse than Bears fans.

Trubisky vs Darnold isn't a guarantee as Windy points out. That's why I'm just going by their Combine grades, they're not that far off and it's doubtful we'd be in the position for Darnold even with Glennon all year (and we just may still have Fox for another contract).
Click to expand...

Huh?

Your not going to get a 1 and a 4 and keep trubisky, your trading him for those picks. But relax, it's just a hypothetical question.....

Although, having picks 1,4 and 8 would make the mocks really fun

;)

But essentially your saying MT year two is better than Rosen + the fourth pick in this draft.
 
PolarBear

PolarBear

Well-known member
Joined:
Jul 8, 2013
Posts:
4,711
Liked Posts:
2,811
Trubisky is a better prospect than any of these guys.
 
Icemanx

Icemanx

Member
Joined:
Aug 24, 2012
Posts:
309
Liked Posts:
45
Location:
Chicago
Da Coach said:
I'd say Mayfield and Rosen are the only two I like out of all these guys. Rudolf and White as bigger projects.

But after a year of starting, no way I trade Mitch for either one of these guys.



Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Agree.
 
satchice

satchice

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 21, 2010
Posts:
3,720
Liked Posts:
1,463
Location:
Schaumburg
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
It’s kind of funny that you don’t see anyone media outlet was making a big deal out of the quarterbacks in this class. Maybe I’m just not paying that much attention.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Myk

Myk

85in25
Joined:
Sep 27, 2010
Posts:
11,142
Liked Posts:
4,467
nc0gnet0 said:
Huh?

Your not going to get a 1 and a 4 and keep trubisky, your trading him for those picks. But relax, it's just a hypothetical question.....

Although, having picks 1,4 and 8 would make the mocks really fun

;)

But essentially your saying MT year two is better than Rosen + the fourth pick in this draft.
Click to expand...

Ahh, complete thoughts spelled out helps. Trubisky for #1 & #4 this year? And we keep #8? Yes please. That would be like a kid in a candy store draft.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

10,882members
93,064threads
4,374,504posts
396online users

Members online NOW

  • Member
  • Admin
  • Mod
  • Donor
  • HOF
Total: 396 (members: 49, guests: 347)

Staff online NOW

Top