Re: Bears 2024: 5.0 It's Caleb Williams time
Posted: Sat Apr 27, 2024 10:09 pm
Brenden Rice falls all the way to the 7th round...
Sports is our Business
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=2368244
NesimLE wrote:Isn't the fact that punters are very underpaid a way to get almost free marginal value under the cap? That actually goes for special teams performance in general...every ounce you can squeeze out in the "third phase" is basically free since it comes down to underpaid kickers, punters, and return guys, plus coaching/culture.
Kurt Heimlich wrote:fleet wrote:Poles is objectively doing a good job. While he has done some things that annoy the **** outa me, but he also has the luck of the devil, and has above average draft judgment. This all could’ve gone more sideways, but the reality is that NFL owners look at the bottom line.
Claypool trade, Velus Jones draft pick (everyone misses on draft picks so this one feels like a nit) and the JF1 trade are the biggest complaints with Poles right? I guess there are some who still don't like the Sweat deal too...
fleet wrote:Hold That wrote:I think it’s pretty convenient to forget that Poles traded for Claypool because he needed a weapon to evaluate Justin properly and not because he was deciding “between tanking and not tanking”
Did the trade work out? no. But let’s not act like we weren’t on a timeline with Justin and why it needed to be done. The same reason why he was adamant about the Panthers including DJ Moore. We needed a weapon to evaluate fields especially since Claypool didn’t work.
gotta say with all due respect, making a bad trade of a valuable asset based on accepting a lot of risk just for the sake of evaluating the quarterback would be among the worst circumstances to make a trade that I can think of. That would be very questionable GM judgment. I think it was mostly just a miss by a GM that is (hopefully) still learning on the job.
dice wrote:NesimLE wrote:Isn't the fact that punters are very underpaid a way to get almost free marginal value under the cap? That actually goes for special teams performance in general...every ounce you can squeeze out in the "third phase" is basically free since it comes down to underpaid kickers, punters, and return guys, plus coaching/culture.
why do you feel that punters are very underpaid?
Almost Retired wrote:fleet wrote:Kurt Heimlich wrote:Booker definitely has that upside developmental frame/length poles loves. He's light though for a 4/3 3 down edge. But his tape looks pretty good for only 1 year of real college ball and that frame is great and hes still only 21. Hard not to be excited about the outcome of this draft right now.
It shouldn’t be too difficult to upgrade Dominique Robinson anyway. Appropriate round for a redux.
Booker could help with Special Teams until he adds weight and strength. Maybe insert him when the Defense has the opponent on a 3rd and very long. Give him a chance to disrupt the QB.
dice wrote:Hold That wrote:fleet wrote: gotta say with all due respect, making a bad trade of a valuable asset based on accepting a lot of risk just for the sake of evaluating the quarterback would be among the worst circumstances to make a trade that I can think of. That would be very questionable GM judgment. I think it was mostly just a miss by a GM that is (hopefully) still learning on the job.
Claypool was considered the best WR on the trade market at the time. Nobody thought it was a terrible trade at the time as they had multiple suitors offering 2nd rounders.
again, the bears were tanking. not all 2nd rounders are created equal. and tanking teams should not be adding talent mid-season
plenty of people questioned the trade at the time for the above obvious reasons. not to mention the high cost
Michael Jackson wrote:There is nothing to be said but it is very very very odd to draft a punter in the 4th round. You can only scratch your head. Might be a great punter for us but.... It is like the group of people suggesting drafting Janikowski in the 1st with the Urlacher pick. Ummmmmmm
dice wrote:IliketheBullsNBearstoo wrote:I’ll give Poles the benefit of the doubt with these picks. He’s done a great job rebuilding this team.
sounds like the AKME defense circa 2022. and the pace defense circa 2018
the only difference is that poles has caleb due to the initial tank and an extraordinary amount of luck. that could go a long way in overcoming bad GMing
one needs only look to jerry jones to recognize how much a good QB means. i don't think anyone would mistake jerry for an astute GM, but he's had some success
Michael Jackson wrote:There is nothing to be said but it is very very very odd to draft a punter in the 4th round. You can only scratch your head. Might be a great punter for us but.... It is like the group of people suggesting drafting Janikowski in the 1st with the Urlacher pick. Ummmmmmm
fleet wrote:Michael Jackson wrote:There is nothing to be said but it is very very very odd to draft a punter in the 4th round. You can only scratch your head. Might be a great punter for us but.... It is like the group of people suggesting drafting Janikowski in the 1st with the Urlacher pick. Ummmmmmm
For team scouts, it was said to be a relatively noticeable drop off on normal quality somewhere around the 4th/5th. The value/need for the Bears must have approached the prospect value of what was left on the board. If that was the case, it might be a special circumstance to draft the punter in that spot.
Michael Jackson wrote:fleet wrote:Michael Jackson wrote:There is nothing to be said but it is very very very odd to draft a punter in the 4th round. You can only scratch your head. Might be a great punter for us but.... It is like the group of people suggesting drafting Janikowski in the 1st with the Urlacher pick. Ummmmmmm
For team scouts, it was said to be a relatively noticeable drop off on normal quality somewhere around the 4th/5th. The value/need for the Bears must have approached the prospect value of what was left on the board. If that was the case, it might be a special circumstance to draft the punter in that spot.
I guess but yet still traded for another pick later than that for a position of need. Pretty odd. Why not just take Booker there and keep the pick. If the talent was soooo bad why are you trading a higher pick to draft a guy that was there? Very strange.
Dresden wrote:Hold That wrote:dice wrote:we'll see how it all looks in retrospect. here's the first fruits of poles's strategy:
joey porter jr. was expected to go in the middle of the 1st round last year. the bears needed a corner. he fell out of the first round and the steelers nabbed him...with the pick the bears gave up for claypool. porter had a good rookie season
poles clearly felt that booker's value fell somewhere between 122 (punter) and 144. that's not a big difference at that stage of the draft. and i find it hard to believe that one draft differs much from another talent-wise when you get to that point in the draft
Poles detractors will be talking about Chase claypool for a 2nd rounder for the next 4-5 seasons.
If that’s been his biggest mistake thus far we’re in very good shape in comparison to other regimes.
Despite us getting Stevenson the NEXT ROUND who cares about Porter Jr. when we got someone arguably better.
Look at the total return we got for Bryce Young, and then tell me Poles is a lousy GM:
Darnell Wright, Stevenson, DJ Moore, Caleb Williams, and 2025 2nd round pick.
That trade alone has vaulted us from just another team trying to rebuild, to one of the most promising young rosters in the league.
Michael Jackson wrote:fleet wrote:Michael Jackson wrote:There is nothing to be said but it is very very very odd to draft a punter in the 4th round. You can only scratch your head. Might be a great punter for us but.... It is like the group of people suggesting drafting Janikowski in the 1st with the Urlacher pick. Ummmmmmm
For team scouts, it was said to be a relatively noticeable drop off on normal quality somewhere around the 4th/5th. The value/need for the Bears must have approached the prospect value of what was left on the board. If that was the case, it might be a special circumstance to draft the punter in that spot.
I guess but yet still traded for another pick later than that for a position of need. Pretty odd. Why not just take Booker there and keep the pick. If the talent was soooo bad why are you trading a higher pick to draft a guy that was there? Very strange.
fleet wrote:Michael Jackson wrote:fleet wrote:For team scouts, it was said to be a relatively noticeable drop off on normal quality somewhere around the 4th/5th. The value/need for the Bears must have approached the prospect value of what was left on the board. If that was the case, it might be a special circumstance to draft the punter in that spot.
I guess but yet still traded for another pick later than that for a position of need. Pretty odd. Why not just take Booker there and keep the pick. If the talent was soooo bad why are you trading a higher pick to draft a guy that was there? Very strange.
Ah. Don’t get your hopes up on Booker indeed. And also, while I actually don’t mind the trade-in in this instance, as previously mentioned Poles often has a tendency to do things under pressure with picks that annoy the crap outa me. Desperate times.