Jump to content

Fire Pace and Nagy


beardown3231

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Superman(DH23) said:

Hes drafted 4 very high quality players we can definitively say are right now.  2 more that are trending that way.  And a bunch of good ones.  And mind that's missing in the first round in all but 1 year.  That's a pretty damn good record, and I'll throw the question out to you, who has done better?

But dude, so what? They aren't winning consistently. He doesn't draft OL. He stinks at finding QB's. Besides Mooney he's lost at WR. He has finally found a solid TE after several swings and misses. I'm glad he found Goldman, Smith, etc but how is that translating to W/L's? It isn't. The roster, as a whole, isn't good. 

Seattle, GB, Philly, SF, Rams, Cardinals*, Saints, Bucs*

All of those organizations consistently put out better teams (asterisks indicate a toss up as I see ARZ improving annually but they aren't there yet & TB arguably is only good due to Brady although Brate, Smith, RoJo, Godwin, Evans are all solid offensive pieces) than the Bears. If you give me all 8, that's literally half of the NFC. If you give me 6, that means the Bears are in rough shape each year to even make the playoffs. 

They need someone who can get them to a high seed consistently. I realize Pace took over a dogs*** roster but he's had SIX offseasons. They have to move forward and find someone better and stop settling for someone who can't identify offensive talent on the first try with any sort of consistency

Edited by beardown3231
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Heinz D. said:

. And, I don't really give a flying **** if Angelo and Emery stunk at their jobs. Having someone who stinks a little less doesn't do much for me.

Except that isn't the case either. Pace's drafts have been MUCH better. 

Pace's 1st 6 drafts: Amos, Floyd, Whitehair, Kwiat, Bush, Howard, Jackson, Cohen, Quan, Daniels, Miller, Nichols, Monty, Kmet, JJ, Vildor, Mooney.  That's 17 notable mentions out of 39 total draft picks (44% hit rate) and that's all based on what we know right now.  Gipson and Hambright could turn into decent depth (Gipson showed a little last week). 


JA's first 6 drafts (and this is being very generous);  Urlacher, Peanut, Briggs, Brown, Scott, Colombo, Vasher, Tank, Tommie Harris, Chris Harris, Metcalf, Orton (hmmm if I include him do I include Mitch above?).  That's a very generous 12 notable mentions out 50 total draft picks (24% hit rate). 

I say generous because Ian was decent depth player but was easily replaceable. Colombo was a bust for us due to injuries but had a decent career with the Cowboys. Metcalf was solid depth (i'd keep him this list). The only reason I'm even putting Harris on here is because he had a solid year with Carolina while playing with a very good unit but all in all he wasn't very good at all. Oh and Vasher had 1 very good year, 1 solid, and that was it. But he's still worth mentioning.  

Edited by JAF-N72EX
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, JAF-N72EX said:

Yes they have, and they seem to have unrealistic expectations as well.  

Using PFRs weighted-career value then averaging the total as a non-biased base; the Bears are tied 13th in the lg in the 1st rnd,  7th in the 2nd rnd,  24th in the 3rd,  5th in the 4th,  1st in the 5th by a large margin (CHI is 20.0, KC is 2nd with 12.40), 28th in the 6th,  and 27th in the 7th. 

But facts be damned. 

When will people finally admit that Pace is not bad at drafting at all and is actually one of the best ones in the league. 

Expanding on the above. Since 1 good player can easily prop up an entire group and visa-versa when using averages I used med avg WCAV instead. 


1st Round: 
# of players drafted (lg avg):  4  (lg avg 5)
Med CarAV (lg avg / rank):  21.5  (lg avg 14.0 / RK 5th)
Avg Med per player (lg avg / rank):  5.4  (lg avg 4.4 / RK 5th)

2nd Round:
# of players drafted (lg avg):  5   (lg avg 5)
Med CarAV (lg avg / rank):  11.0   (lg avg 8.0 / RK T-10th)
Avg Med per player (lg avg / rank):  2.2   (lg avg 2.2 / RK T-13th)

3rd Round:
# of players drafted (lg avg):  3   (lg avg 6)
Med CarAV (lg avg / rank):  7.0   (lg avg 6.4 / RK T-8th)
Avg Med per player (lg avg / rank):  2.33   (lg avg 1.32 / RK 4th)

4th Round:
# of players drafted (lg avg):  8   (lg avg 6)
Med CarAV (lg avg / rank):  6.5   (lg avg 4.7 / RK 7th)
Avg Med per player (lg avg / rank):  0.81   (lg avg 0.92 / RK 14th) 

5th Round:
# of players drafted (lg avg):  4   (lg avg 6)
Med CarAV (lg avg / rank):  24.0  (lg avg 4.6 / RK 1,  next closest is LAC 15.0)
Avg Med per player (lg avg / rank):  6.00  (lg avg 0.84 / RK 1, next closest is LAC 3.00)  

6th Round: 
# of players drafted (lg avg):  4   (lg avg 6) 
Med CarAV (lg avg / rank):  0.5 (lg avg 2.1 / RK T-29th)
Avg Med per player (lg avg / rank):  0.13  (lg avg 0.40 / RK T-25th w/3 tms)

7th Round:
# of players drafted (lg avg):  4  (lg avg 6)
Med CarAV (lg avg / rank):  1.0  (lg avg 2.4 / RK T-16th w/ 8 tms)
Avg Med per player (lg avg / rank):  0.25  (lg avg 0.57 / RK T-13 w/ 1 tm)
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, JAF-N72EX said:

Except that isn't the case either. Pace's drafts have been MUCH better. 

Pace's 1st 6 drafts: Amos, Floyd, Whitehair, Kwiat, Bush, Howard, Jackson, Cohen, Quan, Daniels, Miller, Nichols, Monty, Kmet, JJ, Vildor, Mooney.  That's 17 notable mentions out of 39 total draft picks (44% hit rate) and that's all based on what we know right now.  Gipson and Hambright could turn into decent depth (Gipson showed a little last week). 


JA's first 6 drafts (and this is being very generous);  Urlacher, Peanut, Briggs, Brown, Scott, Colombo, Vasher, Tank, Tommie Harris, Chris Harris, Metcalf, Orton (hmmm if I include him do I include Mitch above?).  That's a very generous 12 notable mentions out 50 total draft picks (24% hit rate). 

I say generous because Ian was decent depth player but was easily replaceable. Colombo was a bust for us due to injuries but had a decent career with the Cowboys. Metcalf was solid depth (i'd keep him this list). The only reason I'm even putting Harris on here is because he had a solid year with Carolina while playing with a very good unit but all in all he wasn't very good at all. Oh and Vasher had 1 very good year, 1 solid, and that was it. But he's still worth mentioning.  

Urlacher Peanut and Briggs are all better than anyone Pace has drafted.

You have one HOF player and two guys that played at a HOF level for many years as well who you could probably make a case for.

Pace has done a fairly good job at adding solid players and depth but there's no real elites in his list.

The only guys who have a chance to be that good from what we've seen so far is Roquan if he continues to play at the high level he showed this year and maybe Eddie Jackson if he gets his act together and reverts back to how he played his first couple seasons. I am also encouraged by JJ but he is a rookie playing next to a baller in Fuller. Let's see how his body holds up.

Edited by topwop1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, topwop1 said:

Urlacher Peanut and Briggs are all better than anyone Pace has drafted.

You have one HOF player and two guys that played at a HOF level for many years as well who you could probably make a case for.

Pace has done a fairly good job at adding solid players and depth but there's no real elites in his list.

The only guys who have a chance to be that good from what we've seen so far is Roquan if he continues to play at the high level he showed this year and maybe Eddie Jackson if he gets his act together and reverts back to bow he played his first couple seasons. 

I'd much rather have a bunch of solid to very good players within 6 years than to have 1 HOFer,  2 borderlines and ton of busts. 

And no love for Mooney?  I know it's premature but he's ceiling looks pretty high. I feel like if he gets drafted by a team with a real offense he would probably already be a 1,000 yard receiver or very close to it at least.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, JAF-N72EX said:

I'd much rather have a bunch of solid to very good players within 6 years than to have 1 HOFer,  2 borderlines and ton of busts. 

And no love for Mooney?  I know it's premature but he's ceiling looks pretty high. I feel like if he gets drafted by a team with a real offense he would probably already be a 1,000 yard receiver or very close to it at least.  

Forgot about Mooney. I like the kid a lot. He has a lot of promise. I think once he fills out a bit more and gets NFL strong he will be a force.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, JAF-N72EX said:

So all-pro is what you're looking for and yet your whole premise has been to show that Pace is bad at drafting? That doesn't make any sense. Your expecting WAY too much. 

The next GM had better draft all future hall of famers or he can go. 

I don't judge each pick based on that criteria. But a GM who's made 4 top 10 picks should have more than 0 All Pros between them.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, abstract_thought said:

I don't judge each pick based on that criteria. But a GM who's made 4 top 10 picks should have more than 0 All Pros between them.

So let me get this straight, now it's based on an arbitrary draft range because in your opinion if they are top-10 then they should be All-Pros?  By that same logic, then it should be even more impressive for a GM to draft 2 players outside of the top-10 who still make the AP team. 

Edited by JAF-N72EX
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, JAF-N72EX said:

When will people finally admit that Pace is not bad at drafting at all and is actually one of the best ones in the league. 

Expanding on the above. Since 1 good player can easily prop up an entire group and visa-versa when using averages I used med avg WCAV instead. 


1st Round: 
# of players drafted (lg avg):  4  (lg avg 5)
Med CarAV (lg avg / rank):  21.5  (lg avg 14.0 / RK 5th)
Avg Med per player (lg avg / rank):  5.4  (lg avg 4.4 / RK 5th)

2nd Round:
# of players drafted (lg avg):  5   (lg avg 5)
Med CarAV (lg avg / rank):  11.0   (lg avg 8.0 / RK T-10th)
Avg Med per player (lg avg / rank):  2.2   (lg avg 2.2 / RK T-13th)

3rd Round:
# of players drafted (lg avg):  3   (lg avg 6)
Med CarAV (lg avg / rank):  7.0   (lg avg 6.4 / RK T-8th)
Avg Med per player (lg avg / rank):  2.33   (lg avg 1.32 / RK 4th)

4th Round:
# of players drafted (lg avg):  8   (lg avg 6)
Med CarAV (lg avg / rank):  6.5   (lg avg 4.7 / RK 7th)
Avg Med per player (lg avg / rank):  0.81   (lg avg 0.92 / RK 14th) 

5th Round:
# of players drafted (lg avg):  4   (lg avg 6)
Med CarAV (lg avg / rank):  24.0  (lg avg 4.6 / RK 1,  next closest is LAC 15.0)
Avg Med per player (lg avg / rank):  6.00  (lg avg 0.84 / RK 1, next closest is LAC 3.00)  

6th Round: 
# of players drafted (lg avg):  4   (lg avg 6) 
Med CarAV (lg avg / rank):  0.5 (lg avg 2.1 / RK T-29th)
Avg Med per player (lg avg / rank):  0.13  (lg avg 0.40 / RK T-25th w/3 tms)

7th Round:
# of players drafted (lg avg):  4  (lg avg 6)
Med CarAV (lg avg / rank):  1.0  (lg avg 2.4 / RK T-16th w/ 8 tms)
Avg Med per player (lg avg / rank):  0.25  (lg avg 0.57 / RK T-13 w/ 1 tm)
 

This analysis should be used with caution for several reasons:

  1. Using the median of CarAV penalizes GMs who have drafted superstar players. The value of an elite player in the NFL is fairly obvious.
  2. There's no normalization for draft position between teams.
  3. Averaging by the number of picks may reward GMs who trade up in the draft.
  4. Breaking things down by round ignores the value differences between picks in each round. Drafting well in the 1st round is far more valuable than drafting well in the 4th.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, JAF-N72EX said:

So let me get this straight, now it's based on an arbitrary draft range because in your opinion if they are top-10 then they should be All-Pros?  By that same logic, then it should be even more impressive for a GM to draft 2 players outside of the top-10 who still make the AP team. 

I'm not sure if you're being intentionally obtuse. I credit Pace for his pick of Jackson. But I would hope that of his 4 top 10 picks, at least 1 would turn into an All Pro. The importance of drafting elite players is obvious and Pace has largely failed at that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JAF-N72EX said:

Except that isn't the case either. Pace's drafts have been MUCH better. 

I guess? But you're nitpicking now, aren't you? The team results aren't much better. In fact, without Lovie at the helm, they're worse.

18 minutes ago, JAF-N72EX said:

So let me get this straight, now it's based on an arbitrary draft range because in your opinion if they are top-10 then they should be All-Pros?  By that same logic, then it should be even more impressive for a GM to draft 2 players outside of the top-10 who still make the AP team. 

You can't really ignore missing on White, Trubisky, and Floyd. (Floyd was a reach, but a good player in a different system.) Jackson may never make any sort of all-anything team again, based on current level of play. 

I've never denied Pace has done some good things. It's the indefensible mistakes that do him in...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, abstract_thought said:

This analysis should be used with caution for several reasons:

  1. Using the median of CarAV penalizes GMs who have drafted superstar players. The value of an elite player in the NFL is fairly obvious.
  2. There's no normalization for draft position between teams.
  3. Averaging by the number of picks may reward GMs who trade up in the draft.
  4. Breaking things down by round ignores the value differences between picks in each round. Drafting well in the 1st round is far more valuable than drafting well in the 4th.

1. That value is made clear in the formula. If a player is an elite player than his CarAV will show this. 
2. Feel free to do your own research. 
3. Or penalize them....depending on who they drafted. Besides, I only added the number of picks for better clarity. 
4. And this info is clearly shown. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, abstract_thought said:

I'm not sure if you're being intentionally obtuse. I credit Pace for his pick of Jackson. But I would hope that of his 4 top 10 picks, at least 1 would turn into an All Pro. The importance of drafting elite players is obvious and Pace has largely failed at that.

Not at all being obtuse. I'm simply trying to find where the balance is at because it seems like many are holding Pace to an unrealistic standard here.  And if you want an All-pro in the 1st 10 then I would mention Roqaun b/c he very much deserves it. 2nd team at least.  

Edited by JAF-N72EX
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, JAF-N72EX said:

1. That value is made clear in the formula. If a player is an elite player than his CarAV will show this. 

You're removing that value by using a median of the CarAV by round. That penalizes a team like the Chiefs who drafted an extreme outlier that has thrust them into perennial SB contention.

Edited by abstract_thought
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...