Jump to content

abstract_thought

Members
  • Content Count

    903
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by abstract_thought

  1. Pace has had 4 top 10 picks: Kevin White, Leonard Floyd, Mitch Trubisky, and Roquan Smith. 😬
  2. I would say the draft was done with more forward-thinking. Free agency involved a win-now approach that did compromise the team's future flexibility.
  3. This is why you don't judge GMs on individual decisions or by each acquisition. A guy like Pace looks good when we analyze him this way, because he doesn't have that many glaring misses. But he gives away a lot of picks in the process and doesn't bring in impactful players at the premium positions. The goal of a GM should be to assemble a winning team, not to have a squeaky-clean record of solid acquisitions. Whether you win by getting 1 pick right or by getting every pick right doesn't matter.
  4. There are very obvious things - the most common is something like, "X GM drafted a really good QB." This is a league where good QB play is rewarded. Another common one is "X GM picked a really good coach." But the underlying factors that set GMs apart from their peers lead to victories on the football field. That's why winning GMs are kept and losing ones are fired. I would say that given 5 years to do a job, if the best you can manage is 1 playoff season with no actual shot at contention, then you have not done the job. We're not talking about firing every GM tomorrow. We're talking about a period of uncompetitive play that spans 5 years and ends with a team regressing. Most GMs would be fired under those circumstances. You're drawing a false equivalence here. Ballard is 29-32 with a team that is on the upswing. He'll likely have a winning record by the end of this season. Ted Thompson won a Super Bowl in his 5th season and built a team that consistently made the playoffs and competed. Would you rather have a GM who wins a Super Bowl or a GM who doesn't whif big time in building a defense? Results are dictated by how you evaluate people. If you don't place importance on winning, you won't win consistently. The things that happen behind the scenes need to, after 5 years, contribute to success on the football field.
  5. It would help if Kmet actually contributed something. Pace made TEs the focus of the offseason and the Bears are still underwhelming at that position. This is the problem with Pace - even when he focuses on a position, the results are often subpar. Last offseason he brought in multiple RBs and the running game was still bad. He's focused on the interior OL for the past 2 offseasons and none of those players are more than average. At some point the focus has to turn into results.
  6. Many people cautioned against giving away the picks. It's great to have Mack here and he's lifted this team, but you can only make that type of move if you have most of the roster figured out. When Pace made the trade, the Bears had a struggling OL, a brand new QB, and a bunch of new supporting players who didn't pan out as expected. It was a huge gamble and it didn't pay off.
  7. People said the same thing about DeFilippo and he's done nothing of note since leaving Philadelphia. IMO Wentz is another case where a young guy puts together some good but inconsistent play and people overrate him way too early in his career.
  8. Of course, but comparing is not the same as judging. And evaluating a GM's work involves finding differences that set him apart from his peers, not just using his peers' failures as an excuse. Perhaps lost here is that likening Pace's work to that of most GMs means he doesn't stand out as being better. And if that's the case, why should he be kept? Thankfully we have a way to judge a GM's work relative to his peers - we can look at his team's won/loss record. Pace is 39-52 over his tenure, with 1 playoff appearance and 0 playoff wins in 5 seasons.
  9. At least we already have our bridge QB!
  10. Anyone still have hope for Mitch after this game?
  11. If the main argument for keeping Pace rests on comparing him to other GMs around the league, then there's no point in keeping him. We're not trying to be like the rest of the league. We're trying to be better.
  12. Trubisky can probably go in the garbage time Hall of Fame.
  13. And Jackson had a chance to make the play but instead put his shoulder on the wrong side of the ballcarrier and made no attempt to wrap-up.
  14. Jackson missing the tackle because he misread the play and wont wrap up...
  15. I don't know if that's fair to say. He's been given numerous coaches and has had the job handed to him simply because of his draft stock. He's done next to nothing to earn a starting job at the NFL level. It's not as if he was a storied college QB who the Bears ruined. He was highly inexperienced and the Bears rolled the dice on him. And the mistakes he continues to make are simply inexcusable for an NFL QB, regardless of coaching staff.
  16. It's not as though Mitch has a long track record of success. He may have potential to unlock but at this point he doesn't seem to have the mental ability to play QB at the NFL level.
  17. That may happen in the future, but Mitch certainly wasn’t Nagy’s hand-picked guy. I think getting our GM and coach on the same page would help our QB problems.
  18. He’ll go back into the OC ranks, sometimes failed HCs get 2nd chances if they show renewed success.
  19. Mitch wasn't the only miss. What about White, Grasu, Bullard, Shaheen, Miller, Montgomery? Ryan Pace's best acquisition was a guy who was already considered one of the best players in the league. Apart from that he's been underwhelming.
  20. I'd say the STs are improved for the Bears in 2020 but Tabor's tenure has been underwhelming. Toub's track record is very good.
  21. Success as a GM is not about individual moves. When you trade away resources like Pace, the guys you pick have to hit. When you spend premium picks on non-premium positions, the guys you pick have to be impactful. Nobody looks at Trubisky, Floyd, Montgomery, or Miller as being so special they were worth giving up resources. That’s not an unreasonable standard. The consistent problem with Pace is not in how he evaluates players but in how he manages the resources available to improve the team. Not everyone was optimistic about the Mack trade, and some argued that committing so much to Mack would put a limit on how much more the team could improve. It turns out those concerns were valid and the team’s talent level has stagnated. That would be OK if more of Pace’s acquisitions worked out. But with most of them stagnating, this version of the Bears tops out as a 9-10 win team with no chance at a Super Bowl.
  22. Does Trask have enough mobility to be a good NFL QB? Seems like the modern game is moving in that direction.
  23. I don't trust Pace to build a great team. Being a great GM is about managing the overall roster, not individual moves. Pace's failures aren't in individual transactions. He fails to adequately manage all of his resources to build the team properly.
×
×
  • Create New...