2017 Draft deal...present and future ramifications

[Rory Sparrow]

Would I spend a #2 on someone I thought had "it" who at least hasn't shown it more than Trubisky did? Probably not. But if Pace didn't someone else would've. We could've passed on moving up and got Kizer. It wouldn't have necessarily been Mahomes or Watson or whoever else does better from 2017 next week.

But Pace could have gotten a prospect like Kizer in the 2015 or 2016 drafts. It makes no sense to go through 2 entire 'rebuilding year' drafts where you are picking in the top 10 every round and not select a single QB, then go balls-out for someone like Kizer. Pace couldn't have been specifically targeting Trubisky back in 2015 or even 2016, because Trubisky wasn't even starting in college yet.

 

[Myk]

But Pace could have gotten a prospect like Kizer in the 2015 or 2016 drafts. It makes no sense to go through 2 entire 'rebuilding year' drafts where you are picking in the top 10 every round and not select a single QB, then go balls-out for someone like Kizer. Pace couldn't have been specifically targeting Trubisky back in 2015 or even 2016, because Trubisky wasn't even starting in college yet.

I wanted that. We knew Cutler was going to be gone. Plan ahead.
The problem is hindsight tells us there really were no QBs available to us taken around where we picked that turned into anything. In that instance Pace was correct in his QB assessments (if that's why he didn't).
2017 really was the first year we had (guessing at this point) valid QBs available where we picked.

I could've went for a QB at #8 this year to hedge our bet at getting a QB before I'm dead.

 

[Rory Sparrow]

I wanted that. We knew Cutler was going to be gone. Plan ahead.
The problem is hindsight tells us there really were no QBs available to us taken around where we picked that turned into anything. In that instance Pace was correct in his QB assessments (if that's why he didn't).
2017 really was the first year we had (guessing at this point) valid QBs available where we picked.

But that fails the logic test, because by the same token Trubisky wouldn't have been around at #3 for the Bears, hence Pace's alleged need to trade up to #2. Pace could have traded up to #2 in 2016 and landed Wentz.

Also, lets say the Pace traded up in 2015 and drafted Mariota. Mariota ends up sucking for the Bears...but at least that is 'knowledge acquired' and in 2018 we would know "hey, we need a new QB". Pace is basically starting the rebuild clock this year, which is an issue IMO.

When I read your screen name, should I read it as "Mick" or "Mike"?

 

[PaytonHighstep]

He saw raw talent. Odd to draft raw talent at #2 but there were many projecting him to be the first QB gone so Pace wasn't alone.
It is odd the QB draft has been largely ignored in the draft. But I'm OK with that, I think if you're not getting a late rounder you actually expect to be someone those long shots are nothing but wasted picks.

I've never understood drafting QB after round 2-3. I'm taking off the chart type athletes at skill positions in rounds 4-7. I think the odds that a fast, athlete will hit is higher than a QB at that point of the draft. Each year the Bears took a QB in those late rounds, I just shook my head in disgust for giving up the chance to get another skill position athlete.

 

[Rory Sparrow]

I've never understood drafting QB after round 2-3. I'm taking off the chart type athletes at skill positions in rounds 4-7. I think the odds that a fast, athlete will hit is higher than a QB at that point of the draft. Each year the Bears took a QB in those late rounds, I just shook my head in disgust for giving up the chance to get another skill position athlete.

Kyle Orton ended up with a higher career rating than Rex Grossman and a better career win% than Jay Cutler.

 

[Broc]

I've been in CCS prison longer than Nelson Mandela, so I wasn't on the board during draft time.

Damn, well glad they finally let you out.

I thought Watson was the safest choice of the QBs because he had the most established track record and made plays. I didn't think much of Trubisky...I saw him play once and wasn't blown away, and his lack of experience/accomplishment in college was head-scratching. By the same token, I didn't think much of Mahomes as Texas Tech QB production is always hard to assess.

Gotcha. I felt pretty much the same, wasn't really high on any of them over the others honestly at #3. I probably would of taken Watson at #3 with a gun to my head because like you said he was the safest choice but I definitely didn't expect Trubisky to be the first one off the board much less see a team trade up for him.

My biggest issue with all of it was that it seemed so contrived by Pace. It was like he arbitrarily decided "This is the year we draft a QB!", and then he arbitrarily decided "Mitch Trubisky is the best QB!", and then he traded up for Trubisky, almost as a means to 'justify' his "Trubisky is the best QB" thinking..."See, Trubisky is the best QB and everyone wanted him so we had to trade up to #2 to get him before somebody else drafted him!".

Yeah the whole thing is baffling. Mitch must of blew Pace away in the interviews or something because from a production/talent standpoint it makes zero sense. It wasn't like he was an Andrew Luck type prospect everyone was going to be fighting over.

It seemed like Pace could have drafted a QB with Trubisky's credentials at any point in the last 4 years. I don't really understand what caused Pace to pursue Trubisky so intently, when in the past he would say "We will be drafting a QB every year" and then do the opposite.

Agreed. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out. Pace better hope Mitch starts showing some improvement as this might be the miss that does him in.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[Myk]

But that fails the logic test, because by the same token Trubisky wouldn't have been around at #3 for the Bears, hence Pace's alleged need to trade up to #2. Pace could have traded up to #2 in 2016 and landed Wentz.

Also, lets say the Pace traded up in 2015 and drafted Mariota. Mariota ends up sucking for the Bears...but at least that is 'knowledge acquired' and in 2018 we would know "hey, we need a new QB". Pace is basically starting the rebuild clock this year, which is an issue IMO.

When I read your screen name, should I read it as "Mick" or "Mike"?

We had #9, Browns traded for #8. Maybe they would've taken more picks but that's not a sure thing.

Mariota probably wasn't available since the team that was there took him and didn't trade to get there. But we don't know that he didn't try.

Mike.

I've never understood drafting QB after round 2-3. I'm taking off the chart type athletes at skill positions in rounds 4-7. I think the odds that a fast, athlete will hit is higher than a QB at that point of the draft. Each year the Bears took a QB in those late rounds, I just shook my head in disgust for giving up the chance to get another skill position athlete.

Sometimes talent does get passed everyone. Generally I agree and I think when the Bears take those low round QBs it's just trying to appease the fans to show that they're trying to find a QB.

 

[Midway Fields]

I've been in CCS prison longer than Nelson Mandela, so I wasn't on the board during draft time.

I thought Watson was the safest choice of the QBs because he had the most established track record and made plays. I didn't think much of Trubisky...I saw him play once and wasn't blown away, and his lack of experience/accomplishment in college was head-scratching. By the same token, I didn't think much of Mahomes as Texas Tech QB production is always hard to assess.

My biggest issue with all of it was that it seemed so contrived by Pace. It was like he arbitrarily decided "This is the year we draft a QB!", and then he arbitrarily decided "Mitch Trubisky is the best QB!", and then he traded up for Trubisky, almost as a means to 'justify' his "Trubisky is the best QB" thinking..."See, Trubisky is the best QB and everyone wanted him so we had to trade up to #2 to get him before somebody else drafted him!".

It seemed like Pace could have drafted a QB with Trubisky's credentials at any point in the last 4 years. I don't really understand what caused Pace to pursue Trubisky so intently, when in the past he would say "We will be drafting a QB every year" and then do the opposite.

I disagree. Mitch was the consensus #1 QB in the draft among NFL teams. I think the main reason you and others think this is that was not the case for draft pundits.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/...bisky-ended-calls-about-trades-for-no-5-pick/

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.c...or-mitchell-trubisky-but-not-as-high-as-no-2/

https://bleacherreport.com/articles...ed-mitchell-trubisky-ryan-pace-explains-trade

Hope that clears things up.

 

[Midway Fields]

Damn, well glad they finally let you out.



Gotcha. I felt pretty much the same, wasn't really high on any of them over the others honestly at #3. I probably would of taken Watson at #3 with a gun to my head because like you said he was the safest choice but I definitely didn't expect Trubisky to be the first one off the board much less see a team trade up for him.



Yeah the whole thing is baffling. Mitch must of blew Pace away in the interviews or something because from a production/talent standpoint it makes zero sense. It wasn't like he was an Andrew Luck type prospect everyone was going to be fighting over.



Agreed. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out. Pace better hope Mitch starts showing some improvement as this might be the miss that does him in.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

:cum:

 

[Rory Sparrow]

I disagree. Mitch was the consensus #1 QB in the draft among NFL teams. I think the main reason you and other's think this is that was not the case for draft pundits.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/...bisky-ended-calls-about-trades-for-no-5-pick/

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.c...or-mitchell-trubisky-but-not-as-high-as-no-2/

https://bleacherreport.com/articles...ed-mitchell-trubisky-ryan-pace-explains-trade

Hope that clears things up.

Nothing clears things up like a link to a ProFootballTalk article.

 

[DC]

Mitch wasnt Peyton, but he was the #1 QB.

 

[Midway Fields]

Nothing clears things up like a link to a ProFootballTalk article.

Good thing there are countless others indicating Mitch was the consensus #1 QB in the draft. Jon Robinson's quote tells you everything you need to know.

 

[PrideisBears]

Chicago dealt the No. 3 pick, their third round pick (No. 67), one of their fourth round picks (No. 111) and a 2018 third-round pick to move up and take Trubisky

To swap one spot in the draft, Pace gives up two 3rds and a 4th. Possibly excessive, but not super-high picks given up.

Unfortunately, Pick #67 in the draft ended up being Alvin Kamara...ouch.

What if Bears stood pat at #3 and simply waited for Trubisky? Trubisky falls to the Bears, they keep their other mid-round picks, and conceivably they wind up with both Trubisky and Kamara. Would the Bears passed on a RB like Kamara in the 3rd round since they already had Jordan Howard? Well, the Bears did take a RB in the 4th round (Cohen), so its not out of the realm of possibility, IMO.

What if the Bears stood pat at #3, and somebody traded up to #2 and selected Trubisky? Possibly the best case scenario. Not only is the Kamara situation still in play, but the Bears could have added Jamal Adams from LSU with their #3 overall pick. Or, if they were intent on drafting a QB, they could have settled for Patrick Mahomes or even Deshaun Watson.

I was one of those who hated the trade up for one spot in the draft. I thought Pace got scared and blew his load to early. That being said I still hate the trade up but not because of the loss of picks but because we got the wrong guy so far.

 

[Midway Fields]

https://twitter.com/adamhoge/status/948953244558127104?lang=en

 

[PrideisBears]

https://twitter.com/adamhoge/status/948953244558127104?lang=en

Good thing the Chiefs missed eh?

 

[botfly10]

Not really. Its more of an issue with the Bears giving up picks to trade up one spot, when it also seems like the best outcome would have been some other team taking Trubisky at #2 and the Bears 'settling' for Watson or Mahomes or Jamal Adams at #3.

I thought that was clear in my posting, but I have been gone a long time and perhaps I misread my audience.

So the point is that the Bears should have saved their picks and drafted other players?

OK, noted. Very timely thread. Original premise. 10/10

 

[Myk]

Good thing the Chiefs missed eh?

I thought Mahomes looked pretty bad in the last game last year. Maybe Pace is telling the truth and 3 weeks plus an offseason doesn't equal 2 offseaons, a season and 3 weeks.