OT Bears 2019/20 season and beyond

[nomorezorro]

i don't think pace is a bad gm, necessarily, but i think he is flawed enough that if the team underwhelms next season, you should not feel bad at all about moving on from him in hopes of finding someone better.

he'll have had six seasons after this one; i think he is who he is at this point.

[MalagaBulls]

Ted Ginn signed. Veteran speed receiver who has good hands and runs good routes.

Read on Twitter

[Dresden]

Ted Ginn signed. Veteran speed receiver who has good hands and runs good routes.

Read on Twitter

That's not bad. Unless he's lost a step, that's a good addition. He is also a threat as a return man. Surprised he was on the market.

[Dresden]

thus, the name of the game is maximizing production relative to pay. and far and away the most reliable way to attain value contracts is to load up on draft picks. also finding a top QB, because they are the most chronically underpaid players in the league

I think you're missing a key point though. It's not just having incrementally better contracts throughout the team than the league average. It's having all-league type players as well. You're sunk without the second point. You can have players that are marginally good values, but unless you have a few star performers at key positions, you aren't going anywhere. The Bears had almost no players like that until they got Mack. He made that whole defense one of the best in the league in 2018. He was like a multiplier- you can take every other person on that defense, and multiply how good they were by a factor of 1.1 or 1.2, with the amount over 1.0 being attributable to playing alongside Mack. So you can't judge his contract on his worth alone.

[Dresden]

Bengals cut Andy dalton today. Paying draft capital for Foles is looking worse and worse with Cam and now Dalton both free for the taking.

If Foles/Bears underwhelm this year Pace needs to be reconsidered. His past failures are noted, but he continues to seemingly get played by his peers.

To be fair, Foles was always a target because of his familiarity with this system. In addition, he’s one of very few options that can say he has a Super Bowl win under his belt. While the others may have more experience starting, Foles may have very well been the best fit. Furthermore, nobody knew for certain when the other two would be available. So it’s not as cut and dry as it might seem.

Agree 100% on that. What if they got traded, and didn't get Foles, and then were stuck with no options? And Cam was not a good option at any cost. He's way too inaccurate to be good in the Bears system.

[Dresden]

maybe nfl teams are bad at identifying the qualities that make for good tight ends and should factor that into their decision-making when they consider whether to pick one in the first two rounds?

here's a list of rd 1-2 tight ends since the 2013 eifert-ertz draft:

tj hockenson
noah fant
irv smith jr.
drew sample
hayden hurst
mike gesicki
dallas goedert
oj howard
evan engram
gerald everett
adam shaheen
hunter henry
maxx williams
eric ebron
austin seferian-jenkins
jace amaro

they have one (1) pro-bowl appearance between them. and that was by a guy drafted 10 overall who's on his third team right now and signed for less money than washed jimmy graham

For this point to be meaningful, you would have to compare each position side by side. Maybe all positions have the same results. It would be odd if it were only TE's that this applied to, wouldn't it? It's hard to find a reason why that would be true, so maybe these past results are just due to small sample size.

[Nikola]

Watch on YouTube

It's really hard not to like Kmet. Didn't realize he was a hometown kid.

[bullsnewdynasty]

you said that the "going rate" for a high upside TE is 1st or 2nd round. he said that that is false given the performance history of TEs throughout the draft. because there is no evidence that early round TEs have significantly more upside

What's the hit rate on TE's in the 4th or 5th round? You could find a Kittle, but there's probably a better chance that the guy washes out of the league entirely. Most of the 1st and 2nd round picks listed are at least still in the league.

it's a reach for the same reason as my last response: because top TEs are not consolidated toward the top of the draft. it's unnecessary to waste that capital on a TE when you can draft another position and get a TE later

Talent doesn't exist in a vacuum, there are stronger and weaker draft classes at a given position that make the hindsight analysis shown over the last few pages to be pretty useless.

it suggests that nobody should be so egotistical as to assume that he's a significantly better bet than a TE taken later in the draft. this is the same front office that was egotistical enough to assume that their analysis of trubisky as head and shoulders above mahomes/watson was better than everybody else's

Except that's not what people are doing here.

If the argument was "X player is a better value than Kmet because A, B, and C," I can understand that, not the lazy arguments put forth here.

If people are such experts on college football, let's hear some names.

kmet is not considered a particularly good blocker, so i'm not sure what point you're trying to make here

Why is Kmet not a good blocker? I'd love to hear your analysis why that is.

The point is that the average meathead fan only looks at receiving yardage to judge a TE.

Other positions are harder to judge off of raw stats, which makes it easier to say that TE's bust more than other positions.

nobody said that, but i'm going to guess that there are other positions are less of a crap shoot than TE has proven to be. otherwise the entire draft is a more or less a crap shoot

There's a lot of people that said that. The bust rate is pretty high regardless of what position you're looking at.

[dice]

thus, the name of the game is maximizing production relative to pay. and far and away the most reliable way to attain value contracts is to load up on draft picks. also finding a top QB, because they are the most chronically underpaid players in the league

I think you're missing a key point though. It's not just having incrementally better contracts throughout the team than the league average. It's having all-league type players as well. You're sunk without the second point.

you don't even need the top tier players. it's just that the teams that have extra money left over due to an abundance of value contracts can afford the higher tier free agents and are thus more likely to land those guys

You can have players that are marginally good values, but unless you have a few star performers at key positions, you aren't going anywhere.

i don't think that's true at all. if you're above average across the board you're a super bowl contender. but there is inevitably more variation in ability than that across a roster

for years the redskins signed big name, big dollar free agents. but they always stunk. because that strategy simply doesn't work

The Bears had almost no players like that until they got Mack. He made that whole defense one of the best in the league in 2018. He was like a multiplier- you can take every other person on that defense, and multiply how good they were by a factor of 1.1 or 1.2, with the amount over 1.0 being attributable to playing alongside Mack. So you can't judge his contract on his worth alone.

his contract value FACTORS IN all that intangible improvement of other players. and you're wrong about the level of teammate improvement you're attributing to him. because that all went away in 2019. he was still great and his teammates' production fell off a cliff. mainly because they weren't generating turnovers

if you go back and watch the video of all the interceptions the bears had in 2018, for example, almost NONE of them were the result of khalil mack pressuring the quarterback. they didn't get those interceptions in 2019, and the defense wasn't nearly as good. khalil mack had little to do with any of it. he did his job at a very high level, but he's still just one guy on an 11 man unit. if he happens to be up against a strong offensive tackle, his impact is neutered to some degree (as occurred in the playoffs against the eagles). same if the other team runs the ball. or runs a quick release pass play. or rolls out the QB away from him, etc.

the raiders defense the year before mack left was awful. so he clearly wasn't having some huge multiplier effect on his teammates then either

the simple reality is that the bears had a young and improving defense before mack arrived. went from 24th in the league in points against to 9th. then khalil mack arrived and the young defense CONTINUED to improve, resulting in an elite defense. also, trubisky and the offense improved by leaps and bounds, which was MUCH more responsible for the team's improvement than the defense was. yet who got the lion's share of the credit for ALL of it? the big name acquisition: khalil mack ("OMG, he's made his teammates so much better and even inspired the offense!" - c'mon)

[dice]

you said that the "going rate" for a high upside TE is 1st or 2nd round. he said that that is false given the performance history of TEs throughout the draft. because there is no evidence that early round TEs have significantly more upside

What's the hit rate on TE's in the 4th or 5th round? You could find a Kittle, but there's probably a better chance that the guy washes out of the league entirely. Most of the 1st and 2nd round picks listed are at least still in the league.

it's a reach for the same reason as my last response: because top TEs are not consolidated toward the top of the draft. it's unnecessary to waste that capital on a TE when you can draft another position and get a TE later

Talent doesn't exist in a vacuum, there are stronger and weaker draft classes at a given position that make the hindsight analysis shown over the last few pages to be pretty useless.

and yet not a single person has suggested that the 2020 draft is strong on tight ends. so why are the bears reaching on a TE in this particular draft when it doesn't typically work in general?

it suggests that nobody should be so egotistical as to assume that he's a significantly better bet than a TE taken later in the draft. this is the same front office that was egotistical enough to assume that their analysis of trubisky as head and shoulders above mahomes/watson was better than everybody else's

Except that's not what people are doing here.

If the argument was "X player is a better value than Kmet because A, B, and C," I can understand that, not the lazy arguments put forth here.

If people are such experts on college football, let's hear some names.

you haven't compared him to any of the other available prospects either, yet you're defending his selection. despite the overwhelming evidence that you don't need to take a TE in the 2nd round. why are you putting the onus on others to do the work for you?

you can find the answer to your question with a simple google search of all the analysts who didn't like the kmet pick

but there's one answer that's quite obvious as to who they could have taken instead. and it's a guy they took several picks after taking kmet: jaylon johnson. he was the #40 prospect on the composite big boards. kmet was #59. but the bears took kmet at 43 and risked losing johnson. they were probably significantly more likely to get both had they taken johnson first. but the bears for whatever reason valued kmet significantly more than others did. it strikes me as poor strategy. just like trading up for trubisky was and just like trading valuable assets for a record new contract w/ khalil mack was

lest we forget, this is the same FO that also just grossly overpaid another TE in jimmy graham. hard to have confidence in their evaluation abilities at the position

also, what did the bears fail to address in the draft? the safety position. safeties grant delpit and antoine winfield were the #22 and #36 prospects on the composite big board. both fell to the bears selection at 43, but the bears took #59 prospect kmet. delpit and winfield went with the next 2 picks. maybe the bears were gambling on one of them falling to #50. if so, the strategy failed

also, wide receiver KJ hamler was rated higher than kmet. the bears took kmet. was another tight end a higher priority than another WR? arguable

kmet is not considered a particularly good blocker, so i'm not sure what point you're trying to make here

Why is Kmet not a good blocker? I'd love to hear your analysis why that is.

i'm only going by what the experts are saying - that he's nothing special in that area. he has good hands. if he was a good blocker as well he'd be an obviously special prospect and been ranked much higher. instead, he was not even the consensus top TE in what is not considered a strong TE draft

The point is that the average meathead fan only looks at receiving yardage to judge a TE.

i cited expert analysis on the best tight ends in the league based on overall performance. those players came from throughout the range of draft rounds

[Susan]

dice will be talking about the Mack trade in 2030.

Tashaun Gipson just signed. This defense is more talented than the 2018 defense. Quinn being the big difference maker over Leonard.

[dice]

dice will be talking about the Mack trade in 2030.

the problem is that people like yourself were wetting yourselves about it...for a year. meanwhile the deal will have consequences through at LEAST the next few seasons. and mack will probably be cut after next season (at which point his guaranteed balloon payments will have been discharged). but ryan pace got to maintain his job a while longer by suckering the fans and mortgaging the team's future, so...mission accomplished

[Dresden]

i don't think that's true at all. if you're above average across the board you're a super bowl contender.

But you were talking about having better contracts. I'm talking about talent. You could have a team full of 6th round talent, but be paying them slightly below what 6th rounders typically make. So you have better than average value contracts across the board. You aren't winning any Super Bowls that way. You have to have talented players, too, not just good value.

[Susan]

dice will be talking about the Mack trade in 2030.

the problem is that people like yourself were wetting yourselves about it...for a year. meanwhile the deal will have consequences through at LEAST the next few seasons. and mack will probably be cut after next season (at which point his guaranteed balloon payments will have been discharged). but ryan pace got to maintain his job a while longer by suckering the fans and mortgaging the team's future, so...mission accomplished

And who cares?

I've enjoyed the past two seasons. I like the defense they have right now. They have an out of this world defense on paper this season and if they stay healthy, they have a chance to win a Super Bowl without an elite QB.

Winning at the highest level requires a bit of luck. We had a shot in 2018 and the luck went the other way when Parkey hit the cross bar. That run never happens without Mack.

The Bulls have been building for the future ever since trading Jimmy Butler. How's that worked out for them?

[dice]

i don't think that's true at all. if you're above average across the board you're a super bowl contender.

But you were talking about having better contracts. I'm talking about talent. You could have a team full of 6th round talent, but be paying them slightly below what 6th rounders typically make. So you have better than average value contracts across the board. You aren't winning any Super Bowls that way. You have to have talented players, too, not just good value.

if you're paying 6th round talent less than 6th round pay, you've got gobs of money left over. if you have great players making what they're worth on the open market, you have no money left to fill out the roster and your team will be mediocre

[dice]

dice will be talking about the Mack trade in 2030.

the problem is that people like yourself were wetting yourselves about it...for a year. meanwhile the deal will have consequences through at LEAST the next few seasons. and mack will probably be cut after next season (at which point his guaranteed balloon payments will have been discharged). but ryan pace got to maintain his job a while longer by suckering the fans and mortgaging the team's future, so...mission accomplished

And who cares?

I've enjoyed the past two seasons.

exactly why GMs mortgage the future. at the expense of your long-term enjoyment

I like the defense they have right now. They have an out of this world defense on paper this season and if they stay healthy, they have a chance to win a Super Bowl without an elite QB.

exactly what most fans of most teams in the nfl think in the pre-season. by design. even if their team is projected to miss the playoffs (like the bears are in 2020), they think that with a little luck they can win the super bowl. and the truth is, most teams do have an outside shot. by design. even if they have GMs who have no idea what they're doing

Winning at the highest level requires a bit of luck.

of course it does. that doesn't justify a GM making bad decisions, which obviously reduces your chances

and guess what? the bears GOT LUCKY in 2018 by trubisky playing well and the defense generating lots of turnovers independent of khalil mack. and it was that luck that was the primary reason they got into the playoffs

We had a shot in 2018 and the luck went the other way when Parkey hit the cross bar. That run never happens without Mack.

you're looking at the exact same result w/o mack: a first round loss. you just have 2-3 less wins in the regular season. for ONE SEASON. but w/o the mack trade, you get more potential for wins/playoff success going forward

The Bulls have been building for the future ever since trading Jimmy Butler. How's that worked out for them?

not relevant on multiple levels. in the nfl you can turn things around quickly and win both now AND in the future. if you do things the right way. because of the hard salary cap and no max contract, neither of which is the case in the nba

[dice]

out of curiosity, i compared the draft positions of all-pro TE, QB and safety selections from the year 2000 on. ed reed's 7 all-pro selections, for example, were counted as 7 data points

average draft round of all-pro TEs (45 data points): 3.22
average of all-pro QBs (40): 2.55
average of all-pro safeties (96): 2.26

somewhat limited data for TE and QB positions, but what's there suggests that you can wait longer in the draft to score a potentially elite tight end. and i suspect that brady's 6 all-pro selections as a 6th rounder unusually distort the QB data

[bullsnewdynasty]

and yet not a single person has suggested that the 2020 draft is strong on tight ends. so why are the bears reaching on a TE in this particular draft when it doesn't typically work in general?

Is it reaching? You have no idea. Kmet was clearly in a tier above the others based on the combine and when the other players at his position got drafted.

Your chances of getting an NFL starter at the position are much better in round 2 than round 4 or 5. That's not even a debate.

Kittle was a round 1 talent who got drafted in round 5. Yet you have people here who think there's a Kittle in every draft, wrong. A handful of current starters got drafted late, and a lot more washed out of the league.

you haven't compared him to any of the other available prospects either, yet you're defending his selection. despite the overwhelming evidence that you don't need to take a TE in the 2nd round. why are you putting the onus on others to do the work for you?

Because I wasn't the one complaining about the pick.

you can find the answer to your question with a simple google search of all the analysts who didn't like the kmet pick

Who cares? Those guys are wrong every year. Some liked him, some didn't like him.

but there's one answer that's quite obvious as to who they could have taken instead. and it's a guy they took several picks after taking kmet: jaylon johnson. he was the #40 prospect on the composite big boards. kmet was #59. but the bears took kmet at 43 and risked losing johnson. they were probably significantly more likely to get both had they taken johnson first. but the bears for whatever reason valued kmet significantly more than others did. it strikes me as poor strategy. just like trading up for trubisky was and just like trading valuable assets for a record new contract w/ khalil mack was

lest we forget, this is the same FO that also just grossly overpaid another TE in jimmy graham. hard to have confidence in their evaluation abilities at the position

also, what did the bears fail to address in the draft? the safety position. safeties grant delpit and antoine winfield were the #22 and #36 prospects on the composite big board. both fell to the bears selection at 43, but the bears took #59 prospect kmet. delpit and winfield went with the next 2 picks. maybe the bears were gambling on one of them falling to #50. if so, the strategy failed

also, wide receiver KJ hamler was rated higher than kmet. the bears took kmet. was another tight end a higher priority than another WR? arguable

I didn't want them to take 2 defensive players given the offense was horrendous last year and in desperate need of more playmakers.

About those guys specifically, Delpit is bad at tackling, more of a free safety and duplicates Eddie Jackson. Winfield is small and injury prone. Hamler is a slot guy, Anthony Miller already plays that position.

i'm only going by what the experts are saying - that he's nothing special in that area. he has good hands. if he was a good blocker as well he'd be an obviously special prospect and been ranked much higher. instead, he was not even the consensus top TE in what is not considered a strong TE draft

i cited expert analysis on the best tight ends in the league based on overall performance. those players came from throughout the range of draft rounds

Now you're just making stuff up. He was the #1 TE on almost every board and got mocked in the 1st round on a handful.

[dice]

and yet not a single person has suggested that the 2020 draft is strong on tight ends. so why are the bears reaching on a TE in this particular draft when it doesn't typically work in general?

Is it reaching? You have no idea.

that's like saying you have no idea whether kmet was worthy of being drafted at all. it's nonsensical. because everybody felt that he was

the bears were reaching relative to the range of projections. which is all we have to go by, isn't it? but you can feel free to trust the bears FO over everybody else. how's that working out w/ trubisky?

Your chances of getting an NFL starter at the position are much better in round 2 than round 4 or 5. That's not even a debate.

at the tight end position, yes it is a debate. i'm not making **** up here. there's data out there. c'mon. your chances in round 2 are better, obviously. but they're not MUCH better. and it most certainly doesn't justify taking a guy in the 2nd round who could fall to the 3rd. taking a guy higher than he's projected doesn't transform him into a better prospect

Kittle was a round 1 talent who got drafted in round 5

what in god's name are you talking about? he had a total of 737 receiving yards in 4 years at iowa. he obviously developed his game as a pro. which is apparently more common w/ TEs than it at some other positions

and you inadvertently made my point. why not take whatever TE drops to the middle rounds and hope that he's a fallen "first round talent"?

Yet you have people here who think there's a Kittle in every draft, wrong.

you're making stuff up now. nobody said anything remotely like that

you haven't compared him to any of the other available prospects either, yet you're defending his selection. despite the overwhelming evidence that you don't need to take a TE in the 2nd round. why are you putting the onus on others to do the work for you?

Because I wasn't the one complaining about the pick.

you were the one complaining about the many people who think that taking him that high was a reach. including many, many draft analysts

you can find the answer to your question with a simple google search of all the analysts who didn't like the kmet pick

Who cares? Those guys are wrong every year. Some liked him, some didn't like him.

who cares? YOU asked the question!

but there's one answer that's quite obvious as to who they could have taken instead. and it's a guy they took several picks after taking kmet: jaylon johnson. he was the #40 prospect on the composite big boards. kmet was #59. but the bears took kmet at 43 and risked losing johnson. they were probably significantly more likely to get both had they taken johnson first. but the bears for whatever reason valued kmet significantly more than others did. it strikes me as poor strategy. just like trading up for trubisky was and just like trading valuable assets for a record new contract w/ khalil mack was

lest we forget, this is the same FO that also just grossly overpaid another TE in jimmy graham. hard to have confidence in their evaluation abilities at the position

also, what did the bears fail to address in the draft? the safety position. safeties grant delpit and antoine winfield were the #22 and #36 prospects on the composite big board. both fell to the bears selection at 43, but the bears took #59 prospect kmet. delpit and winfield went with the next 2 picks. maybe the bears were gambling on one of them falling to #50. if so, the strategy failed

also, wide receiver KJ hamler was rated higher than kmet. the bears took kmet. was another tight end a higher priority than another WR? arguable

I didn't want them to take 2 defensive players given the offense was horrendous last year and in desperate need of more playmakers.

that's fine. but improving the offense by x doesn't benefit the team any more than improving the defense by x

About those guys specifically, Delpit is bad at tackling, more of a free safety and duplicates Eddie Jackson. Winfield is small and injury prone. Hamler is a slot guy, Anthony Miller already plays that position.

i'll take your word for it

i'm only going by what the experts are saying - that he's nothing special in that area. he has good hands. if he was a good blocker as well he'd be an obviously special prospect and been ranked much higher. instead, he was not even the consensus top TE in what is not considered a strong TE draft

i cited expert analysis on the best tight ends in the league based on overall performance. those players came from throughout the range of draft rounds

Now you're just making stuff up. He was the #1 TE on almost every board and got mocked in the 1st round on a handful.

i made nothing up. the word 'consensus' means that everybody agrees. as in 'mitchell trubisky is a consensus 1st round pick.' and not everybody had kmet as the top TE. starting with the people who actually analyze every damn play of a prospect's college career:

https://www.pff.com/news/draft-2020-nfl-draft-position-rankings-tight-ends

and while i'm sure that somebody somewhere had the top TE going in the first round, i didn't see him in any 1st round projections

[bullsnewdynasty]

TE's taken in rounds 3-5 over the last 5 drafts:

Spoiler:

2014 3 Crockett Gillmore
2014 3 Richard Rodgers
2014 3 C.J. Fiedorowicz
2015 3 Jeff Heuerman
2015 3 Tyler Kroft
2015 3 Clive Walford
2016 3 Nick Vannett
2016 3 Austin Hooper
2017 3 Jonnu Smith
2018 3 Jordan Akins
2018 3 Mark Andrews
2019 3 Dawson Knox
2019 3 Kahale Warring
2019 3 Jace Sternberger
2019 3 Josh Oliver
2015 4 Blake Bell
2016 4 Seth Devalve
2016 4 Tyler Higbee
2017 4 Michael Roberts
2018 4 Dalton Schultz
2018 4 Durham Smythe
2018 4 Will Dissly
2018 4 Chris Herndon
2018 4 Ian Thomas
2019 4 Foster Moreau
2019 4 Trevon Wesco
2014 5 Arthur Lynch
2015 5 James O'Shaughnessy
2015 5 Nick Boyle
2015 5 Jesse James
2015 5 C.J. Uzomah
2015 5 MyCole Pruitt
2017 5 Eric Saubert
2017 5 Jeremy Sprinkle
2017 5 Jordan Leggett
2017 5 George Kittle
2017 5 Jake Butt
2018 5 Jaylen Samuels
2018 5 Tyler Conklin
2018 5 Troy Fumagalli
2019 5 Zach Gentry

Based on those drafts, your odds of drafting a 3 down tight end are about 15% if you're being generous.