What made Trubisky stand out in the draft compared to Mahomes and Watson?

[N4L]

On 9/24/2019 at 2:10 PM, ET80 said:

I'm seeing a lot of mentions on Trubisky's accuracy. I guess that didn't translate from college to pro.

He's accurate, but he can't see the field to save his life. 

Doesn't help to be accurate when you don't know who or when to throw the ball to

Even nagy knows it. I saw a press conference recently where nagy said he was impressed with some play on the final drive where he 'could have easily thrown it to the first guy who was double covered' and he 'made a nice decision to throw it somewhere else' 

Like, seriously?? That's something you praise him for? Not throwing it to someone who is double covered? It made nagy sound like a complete idiot too. I get not throwing your guy under the bus, but this was bush league from every angle 

[Tugboat]

I mean, the Jaguars decided that a Peyton Hillis RB was better than any of these QBs at the time...and for a year, they weren't even wrong.  They rode Fournette to within half a game of being in the Super Bowl.  

 

Point being...it really wasn't a highly regarded QB class at the time.  Sub-point being...honestly, i don't think anybody, including the teams...have any idea what they're actually doing when it comes to determining how a QB will pan out.  Aside from the "sure thing" bluechip guys like Luck et al, and the guys who were basically forced to be "long-term NFL QBs" due to the contracts prior to the rookie wage scale.

Drafting a QB high in the 1st round has to be scary as heck as a GM.  When you're out there on the plank with your livelihood on the line and you know that if it doesn't pan out, you'll be ****canned within a year or two.  It's easy to snipe from the sidelines, but i don't know many people batting a thousand on QBs.

 

I think that's where the appeal of Trubisky came in.  He was risky in that the NCAA sample size was tiny.  What he showed there though, was...he had the traits to play in the NFL.  He basically showed a floor a lot like what he's actually shown thus far in the NFL.  He's an NFL starter, just not a very good one.  It usually takes years for that kind of timebomb to blow up on you as a GM.

A guy like Watson or especially Mahomes...they both panned out, but very easily could've gone the other way.  In which case you'd be left trying to explain why you grabbed the wild risky QB over the "sure thing".  If you swing and miss on a risky QB, not only does it look "desperate" and generate tons of bad press...it looks pathetic.

 

At the end of the day...NFL GMs are a lot more risk averse than your average fan.  Because unlike fans...GMs have to stake their livelihood on making the right call.

[thebestever6]

8 hours ago, Heinz D. said:

Outside of Mahomes winning MVP on his first year as a starter, I have no idea what you're talking about. Absolutely everybody thought they'd be good. And weren't third round prospects. I mean--are you even serious? 

All I know is I watched that draft at a bar with friends can't remember the name. I didn't really scout that years QBs because Broncos went Paxton Lynch the year before. Seen Mahomes play in college was wowed. Was also wowed by Watsons composer and leadership. 

As soon as that Chiefs trade up happened I got a sick feeling in my stomach and it wasn't the bar food.

[topwop1]

7 hours ago, Tugboat said:

I mean, the Jaguars decided that a Peyton Hillis RB was better than any of these QBs at the time...and for a year, they weren't even wrong.  They rode Fournette to within half a game of being in the Super Bowl.  

 

Point being...it really wasn't a highly regarded QB class at the time.  Sub-point being...honestly, i don't think anybody, including the teams...have any idea what they're actually doing when it comes to determining how a QB will pan out.  Aside from the "sure thing" bluechip guys like Luck et al, and the guys who were basically forced to be "long-term NFL QBs" due to the contracts prior to the rookie wage scale.

Drafting a QB high in the 1st round has to be scary as heck as a GM.  When you're out there on the plank with your livelihood on the line and you know that if it doesn't pan out, you'll be ****canned within a year or two.  It's easy to snipe from the sidelines, but i don't know many people batting a thousand on QBs.

 

I think that's where the appeal of Trubisky came in.  He was risky in that the NCAA sample size was tiny.  What he showed there though, was...he had the traits to play in the NFL.  He basically showed a floor a lot like what he's actually shown thus far in the NFL.  He's an NFL starter, just not a very good one.  It usually takes years for that kind of timebomb to blow up on you as a GM.

A guy like Watson or especially Mahomes...they both panned out, but very easily could've gone the other way.  In which case you'd be left trying to explain why you grabbed the wild risky QB over the "sure thing".  If you swing and miss on a risky QB, not only does it look "desperate" and generate tons of bad press...it looks pathetic.

 

At the end of the day...NFL GMs are a lot more risk averse than your average fan.  Because unlike fans...GMs have to stake their livelihood on making the right call.

Exactly, although I was leaning more towards them taking Watson due to his accolades and clutch play throughout his collegiate career a lot of the scouting reports coming out that draft year were low on Watson's NFL prospects and Mahomes was no sure thing either as there were a lot of concerns with him as well so I get why Bears made what they thought was the higher floor / safer pick in Trubisky. 

He has the size, athletic ability and arm strength to play QB in this league.  He still has a lot to learn and correct as far as reading NFL coverage schemes and mechanics, etc. but I find it extreme and unfair that a lot of people are already writing him off as a bust only 3 years in with a total of 30 games of NFL starting experience coupled with 13 games as a starter for North Carolina in CFB.  After all, he has the least experience out of all the QB's drafted from his class.

If Mitch's floor ends up being similar to that of an Alex Smith or Eli Manning in their prime then I think Bears would be happy to take that considering how unlucky they've been with the QB position ever since their inception.

 

 

 

 

[thebestever6]

I don't think it has anything to do with what the qb class was viewed as. I think it was a similar situation to 05 of how rodgers fell for the most part.

Look at the teams in the top 10. They either had coaches on the hot seat(Cin,Jets,Cleveland) long term high paid starters ( Chargers, Panthers,) or first round qbs on rookie contracts ( Titans,Jags).

San Francisco was the only outlier and I just don't think they felt their roster was there yet to gamble. And bears had a rookie gm and old school head coach. 

Jaguars were considering Watson it took the perfect storm for it to fall like it did.

Edited September 26, 2019 by thebestever6

[Chiefer]

What if Mahomes was drafted by the Chicago Bears?

 

[SBLIII]

4 minutes ago, Chiefer said:

What if Mahomes was drafted by the Chicago Bears?

 

PAIN

[jetjuice]

Everyone nitpicked Watson and Mahomes, Trubisky was seen to be the "safest" pick IIRC. The critics thought Watson was too erratic and didn't trust Mahomes coming from that Texas Tech system. 

[thebestever6]

1 minute ago, jetjuice said:

Mahomes coming from that Texas Tech system. 

I heard Mahomes being pegged as a late first legitimately which struck some red flags. 

Usually when there are late first round qb prospects you hear them being called a developmental 3rd round prospect. 

[thebestever6]

10 minutes ago, Chiefer said:

What if Mahomes was drafted by the Chicago Bears?

 

A 2.0 version  of the 85 bears run once John Fox gets let out the door.

John Fox wouldn't of progressed Mahomes.

[Danger]

On 9/25/2019 at 1:39 AM, tab said:

not having read through the thread, i think i read in Bears circles that some scouts had Trubisky ranked at Andrew Luck's level, and said that if he stayed in school another year he would go first overall

LOL

[malak1]

46 minutes ago, SBLIII said:

PAIN

3-Peat

[Thelonebillsfan]

His footwork and ability to work the other half of the field were issues even in college, I have no idea how the hell he was valued as highly as he was. Watson clearly had the pedigree, talent, and tape advantage over him. He also had the dreaded "only one year of starting" hurdle which as far as I am aware, is still batting 1.000 in terms of busts produced.

[Thelonebillsfan]

But Tugboat's take is right, most NFL scouting is incredibly archaic, trapped in 20 year old conventions, and headed by the same people who have been around the league for the majority of most of us postings here adult lives thanks to the absurd culture of nepotism and the circular nature of NFL hiring. NFL talent evaluation is incredibly dated. Which is why the teams that adapt and advance even slightly are the ones that usually get it right.

[Heinz D.]

19 hours ago, CWood21 said:

The statistical odds of finding two franchise QBs in a given draft isn't very high.

That's a fair assessment. The scouts and draft gurus don't really roll that way, though. 

16 hours ago, goldfishwars said:

Because that move doesn't just tell us how high they were on Trubisky, but how low they must have been on the alternatives. 

The move up was small. Trubisky was their guy, right or wrong. I mean...I get what you're saying, but when you're convinced on a guy, you don't settle on someone else. 

3 hours ago, topwop1 said:

He has the size, athletic ability and arm strength to play QB in this league.  He still has a lot to learn and correct as far as reading NFL coverage schemes and mechanics, etc. but I find it extreme and unfair that a lot of people are already writing him off as a bust only 3 years in with a total of 30 games of NFL starting experience coupled with 13 games as a starter for North Carolina in CFB.  After all, he has the least experience out of all the QB's drafted from his class.

People wrote him off before he even took the field, including plenty of Bears fans. We see it on the forums here. The crazy part about that is that Trubisky has had some really good games. QBs who bust don't normally show as much as Mitchell has.