Justin Fields

[Madmike90]

3 hours ago, AZBearsFan said:

Food for thought after finishing with today’s full slate of games. These don’t include today’s games because at the time of my post PFR hadn’t updated to include today’s stats yet:

Fields (career): 36 games (34 starts): 60.9% comp., 7.0 ypa, 1.37:1 TD/INT ratio, 83.4 QB rating, 11 fumbles lost, 1.06 turnovers/game

Trevor Lawrence (career): 47 games (47 starts): 63.9% comp., 6.7 ypa, 1.54:1 TD/INT ratio, 85.5 QB rating, 18 fumbles lost, 1.13 turnovers/game

*does not include his 2 playoff games last season in which he was significantly worse statistically than his regular season marks

Half our fan base wants to dump Fields to draft Williams and half wants to get Fields more help, but basically everyone on the outside thinks Fields should go. So, if we had Lawrence instead of Fields, we’re having the same conversations about replacing him with Williams or, if he stays, not picking up his 5YO, right? Right??! 

Lawrence will almost certainly have his 5YO picked up if he doesn’t receive a monster extension and basically nobody nationally will bat an eye at it, yet the idea of either with Fields is largely panned as crazy talk, and at best Lawrence has been marginally better on the field with 13 more starts and 11 more appearances worth of “development” and having gotten the full head start of all the QB1 prep from the day he was drafted. I also bring this up since Lawrence was the most recent “generational” QB prospect, a moniker that guarantees nothing other than an extended MSM grace period for on field shortcomings. 

The locals in Duval County seem to be having the same conversations we are though if the replies in this particular post are any indication. Swap in JF for TL in the original post and you’d think it was a thread in this forum.

 

https://twitter.com/sheanorling/status/1736606302434906514?s=46&t=SQdrLo9OvA4uiIQWb73aCg

Over the last 17 games both have played it’s even more telling.

[CWood21]

4 hours ago, chisoxguy7 said:

We got two firsts, two seconds, and DJ Moore to move from 1 to 9 last season.

Changing out DJ Moore for a third round pick to move from 1 to 3 instead of 1 to 9 doesn't seem that far off in terms of value.

The difference in value between picks 3 and 9 is roughly the 45th pick in the NFL Draft.  Figure a mid-3rd round pick that you're suggesting, and that same delta in value puts DJ Moore roughly at the 29th overall pick which values Moore as a late FRP.  Personally, I think that's a bit of an overvalue on Moore and even though it was rumored that the Packers offered a FRP for Moore, I've got serious doubts that was the case given that it'd break about a dozen different trends for the Packers.

But the bigger issue I have in trade value is the talent tier that the Bears dropped last year in order to get that package compared to the talent tier that Chicago would be dropping this year.  In this particular scenario, Chicago would presumably have their choice of any non-QB since Arizona would taken Caleb Williams or Drake Maye, and New England would take whoever is left.  When Chicago traded down with Carolina, they weren't going to pick either of the QBs (Young or Stroud) or the only other player who might have been graded similarly (or higher) in Will Anderson.  And they didn't even have their choice of any of the second tier players since there were 5 picks ahead of when the Panthers' original pick.

Going back and looking at all the top 5 picks that were dealt for QBs (excluding the Trubisky trade) since the rookie cap was created, you have:

2023: #1 for #9, #61, '24 FRP, and '25 FRP (Bryce Young)
2021: #3 for #12, '22 FRP, '22 3rd, and '23 FRP (Trey Lance)
2020: #3 for #6, #37, #49, and '19 SRP (Sam Darnold)
2016: #1, #113, #177 for #15, #43, #45, #76, '17 FRP, and '17 3rd (Jared Goff)
2016: #2 and '17 5th for #8, #77, #100, '17 FRP, and '18 SRP (Carson Wentz)
2012: #2 for #6, #39, '13 FRP, and '14 FRP (RG3)

In terms of prospect value, I don't think he's quite RG3 in terms of helium, but I also don't think he's Trey Lance either.  He's probably the 2nd highest valued prospect of those draft day trades, so I do think his value is closer to RG3 than it is Sam Darnold's.  I would personally argue that given the time value of picks, that proposal has more value in it than any other trade other than the RG3 trade.  And I think a meddling owner is probably the one factor that nobody (myself included) can calculate.

And I think you have to put yourself in Arizona's shoes as well.  Let's say they do that trade that @Madmike90 suggested, are they any different than the USC Trojans' team this year?  A bad team being masked by a really good QB.  In a rather difficult NFC West, they're a .500 team at best and more likely handing the Bears another top 12 pick to add to their mix.

[Madmike90]

5 hours ago, CWood21 said:

ASSUMING that the Bears were trading back to #3 like you suggested in that last proposal, that'd be an astronomically high price tag for the Cardinals to pay.  And quite frankly, I'd probably anticipate them telling the Bears to buzz off.  The RG3 trade (3 FRPs and a SRP) was the highest we've seen a team trade up for a QB, and Washington moved up from 6 to 2.  And I'd venture a guess that the RG3 trade probably is going to keep teams from trading the farm away for Caleb Williams.  It's a little outdated, but I'd imagine that trade swap would be somewhere between the RG3 trade and the Eli Manning trade.

Moving to #3 is more of an example...if anything I suspect right now the likelihood could be moving to #4 and Washington looking to make a statement by getting the hometown kid to be the face of the franchise under new ownership...in terms of the value it's replaced Moore with a 3rd round pick from last year for the chance to take a better prospect...it's where the value should be and if more than one team are bidding (which there always is) the price should be driven up...I would also have no issue moving down further as long as we could still get Nabers and more resources since I think the gab between MHJ & Nabers is smaller than many others.

[beardown3231]

7 hours ago, AZBearsFan said:

C’mon, you know as well as any of the rest of us that if Tonyan catches that ball EVERYTHING today is different. Fields wasn’t great today, but he good enough to deserve to win that game, and was far better than his stat line. Nobody is saying Fields doesn’t need to continue to improve, but to say he hasn’t continued to improve in 2023 over 2022 is flatly ignoring so much that says otherwise. Whether or not it’s enough to keep him over drafting Williams is a different discussion. 

Oh, and FWIW, Lamar was 14-24 for 171 yards, 1 TD and 1 INT plus 97 rush yards tonight and they scored 23 points. Nobody in Baltimore is saying he’s not good enough to win with given the team full of top talent around him. 

Don't be that guy. Fields has had 3 years. 32 GM's would take LJ over Fields. The Jags are overrated and didn't have their QB for the 4th quarter & so BAL packed it in offensively. Nobody is saying Jackson isn't good enough because the stats you cited... well uhh.. don't help your argument. 171 yards on 24 passes is like 3 YPA better than Fields today + 97 rush yards is about 80 more than Fields had today. He also threw for touchdowns, not a Mickey Mouse one where it took 2:23 to get 1 yard. Full of top talent? Beckham is a shell of himself, his best/favorite weapon is hurt, Bateman is unreliable and Flowers is a rookie. Jackson elevates guys

Two black QB's with good run ability is about where the comps stop between them

Edited December 18, 2023 by beardown3231

[beardown3231]

6 hours ago, AZBearsFan said:

Food for thought after finishing with today’s full slate of games. These don’t include today’s games because at the time of my post PFR hadn’t updated to include today’s stats yet:

Fields (career): 36 games (34 starts): 60.9% comp., 7.0 ypa, 1.37:1 TD/INT ratio, 83.4 QB rating, 11 fumbles lost, 1.06 turnovers/game

Trevor Lawrence (career): 47 games (47 starts): 63.9% comp., 6.7 ypa, 1.54:1 TD/INT ratio, 85.5 QB rating, 18 fumbles lost, 1.13 turnovers/game

*does not include his 2 playoff games last season in which he was significantly worse statistically than his regular season marks

Half our fan base wants to dump Fields to draft Williams and half wants to get Fields more help, but basically everyone on the outside thinks Fields should go. So, if we had Lawrence instead of Fields, we’re having the same conversations about replacing him with Williams or, if he stays, not picking up his 5YO, right? Right??! 

Lawrence will almost certainly have his 5YO picked up if he doesn’t receive a monster extension and basically nobody nationally will bat an eye at it, yet the idea of either with Fields is largely panned as crazy talk, and at best Lawrence has been marginally better on the field with 13 more starts and 11 more appearances worth of “development” and having gotten the full head start of all the QB1 prep from the day he was drafted. I also bring this up since Lawrence was the most recent “generational” QB prospect, a moniker that guarantees nothing other than an extended MSM grace period for on field shortcomings. 

The locals in Duval County seem to be having the same conversations we are though if the replies in this particular post are any indication. Swap in JF for TL in the original post and you’d think it was a thread in this forum.

 

This sounds a lot like "see, Lawrence isn't good either. I think that should mean everyone should be quiet about Fields. Why? I don't know, but neither guy are good so hopefully this helps others see Fields isn't too bad."

You should argue with that tweeter there. If they're having the Lawrence conversation and he's statistically similar to Fields, why don't you get defensive of Fields? It should be dumb to have that talk about Lawrence just like they shouldn't talk **** about Fields

Edited December 18, 2023 by beardown3231

[AZBearsFan]

31 minutes ago, beardown3231 said:

Don't be that guy. Fields has had 3 years. 32 GM's would take LJ over Fields. The Jags are overrated and didn't have their QB for the 4th quarter & so BAL packed it in offensively. Nobody is saying Jackson isn't good enough because the stats you cited... well uhh.. don't help your argument. 171 yards on 24 passes is like 3 YPA better than Fields today + 97 rush yards is about 80 more than Fields had today. He also threw for touchdowns, not a Mickey Mouse one where it took 2:23 to get 1 yard. Full of top talent? Beckham is a shell of himself, his best/favorite weapon is hurt, Bateman is unreliable and Flowers is a rookie. Jackson elevates guys

Two black QB's with good run ability is about where the comps stop between them

You’re right - everyone who doesn’t see things exactly like you do is an idiot.

Don’t be that guy.

The entire point of my inclusion about Lamar is that the stats don’t tell the whole story. It wasn’t a “they’re essentially the same” argument. You were using stats to support your opinion that Fields was awful yesterday, and he wasn’t awful IMO. I think I was being pretty objective about it - I literally said that he wasn’t great yesterday but played well enough to win. Those around him let him down yesterday and that was both the difference between winning and losing and the reason Fields’ stats looked as poor as they did. Tonyan’s drop literally cost us 7 points in a game decided by 3. The defense allowing 214 passing yards to Flacco in the 4Q alone mattered a whole lot. Flus inexplicably having Justin Jones in coverage on Njoku on a key 3rd and 15 late was a giant factor in the outcome. 

You’ve decided Fields isn’t the guy. Cool. You’re entitled to that and I both respect that that’s your opinion and understand it. But, that doesn’t mean that people who haven’t are just flat wrong. 

[AZBearsFan]

41 minutes ago, beardown3231 said:

This sounds a lot like "see, Lawrence isn't good either. I think that should mean everyone should be quiet about Fields. Why? I don't know, but neither guy are good so hopefully this helps others see Fields isn't too bad."

You should argue with that tweeter there. If they're having the Lawrence conversation and he's statistically similar to Fields, why don't you get defensive of Fields? It should be dumb to have that talk about Lawrence just like they shouldn't talk **** about Fields

I was pondering whether we would also be looking to replace Lawrence if he was our QB in our very unique scenario because he has also been disappointing to expectations. It probably should’ve been in one of the other threads though, because not everything people write that does anything other than bash or support Fields is in some indirect way about Fields. My post was about Lawrence and how JAX fans view him right now, and what we’d do if he was our guy. 

[beardown3231]

1 hour ago, AZBearsFan said:

You’re right - everyone who doesn’t see things exactly like you do is an idiot.

Don’t be that guy.

The entire point of my inclusion about Lamar is that the stats don’t tell the whole story. It wasn’t a “they’re essentially the same” argument. You were using stats to support your opinion that Fields was awful yesterday, and he wasn’t awful IMO. I think I was being pretty objective about it - I literally said that he wasn’t great yesterday but played well enough to win. Those around him let him down yesterday and that was both the difference between winning and losing and the reason Fields’ stats looked as poor as they did. Tonyan’s drop literally cost us 7 points in a game decided by 3. The defense allowing 214 passing yards to Flacco in the 4Q alone mattered a whole lot. Flus inexplicably having Justin Jones in coverage on Njoku on a key 3rd and 15 late was a giant factor in the outcome. 

You’ve decided Fields isn’t the guy. Cool. You’re entitled to that and I both respect that that’s your opinion and understand it. But, that doesn’t mean that people who haven’t are just flat wrong. 

Jackson played just fine last night minus the one pick. Nobody is just looking at stats to determine Fields' game yesterday. Everyone here watched it in it's entirety I assume. He was not good enough. Period. Take away the bs TD thanks to the long INT return + add Tonyan's and the offense scored 10 points. 10. That isn't good enough unless you're playing the Jets or Panthers. I hope one day the Bears are good enough offensively where you can stop discussing the faults of the defense in a game where they had 3 INT's (1 for a TD, one that was taken back to the opposing 1 yard line) and 4 sacks. Justin Jones was on Njoku? Yeah, that was dumb as ****. You know what else was dumb as ****? Having something like 8 three and outs out of 13 drives. We know it's the Bears and the defense needed 3 more turnovers to win, but maybe the mindset will change soon enough for you.

All that I'm asking is to stop grading these guys on a handicap. We did it for Cutler (get him an OL and get him some WR's and watch him flourish!) and then we did it for Trubisky (yeah he's still raw but Nagy is the reason he sucks. He'll be great when he gets out of this city). 

 

1 hour ago, AZBearsFan said:

I was pondering whether we would also be looking to replace Lawrence if he was our QB in our very unique scenario because he has also been disappointing to expectations. It probably should’ve been in one of the other threads though, because not everything people write that does anything other than bash or support Fields is in some indirect way about Fields. My post was about Lawrence and how JAX fans view him right now, and what we’d do if he was our guy. 

Well it seems like I'd be ready to find a replacement and you'd be talking about signing another #1 WR and drafting a stud rookie to help him.

Edited December 18, 2023 by beardown3231

[dll2000]

8 hours ago, AZBearsFan said:

Food for thought after finishing with today’s full slate of games. These don’t include today’s games because at the time of my post PFR hadn’t updated to include today’s stats yet:

Fields (career): 36 games (34 starts): 60.9% comp., 7.0 ypa, 1.37:1 TD/INT ratio, 83.4 QB rating, 11 fumbles lost, 1.06 turnovers/game

Trevor Lawrence (career): 47 games (47 starts): 63.9% comp., 6.7 ypa, 1.54:1 TD/INT ratio, 85.5 QB rating, 18 fumbles lost, 1.13 turnovers/game

*does not include his 2 playoff games last season in which he was significantly worse statistically than his regular season marks

Half our fan base wants to dump Fields to draft Williams and half wants to get Fields more help, but basically everyone on the outside thinks Fields should go. So, if we had Lawrence instead of Fields, we’re having the same conversations about replacing him with Williams or, if he stays, not picking up his 5YO, right? Right??! 

Lawrence will almost certainly have his 5YO picked up if he doesn’t receive a monster extension and basically nobody nationally will bat an eye at it, yet the idea of either with Fields is largely panned as crazy talk, and at best Lawrence has been marginally better on the field with 13 more starts and 11 more appearances worth of “development” and having gotten the full head start of all the QB1 prep from the day he was drafted. I also bring this up since Lawrence was the most recent “generational” QB prospect, a moniker that guarantees nothing other than an extended MSM grace period for on field shortcomings. 

The locals in Duval County seem to be having the same conversations we are though if the replies in this particular post are any indication. Swap in JF for TL in the original post and you’d think it was a thread in this forum.

 

Yes, I would be.   Trevor Lawrence has underachieved.

 

 

[JibjeResearch]

4 hours ago, Madmike90 said:

https://twitter.com/sheanorling/status/1736606302434906514?s=46&t=SQdrLo9OvA4uiIQWb73aCg

Over the last 17 games both have played it’s even more telling.

JF1 is good enough.  He needs more experience and talents around him.

More importantly, He needs the right leadership from the CoachingStatffs.

Bring in Jim Harbaugh!  ASAP!

[Bigbear72]

3 minutes ago, dll2000 said:

Yes, I would be.   Trevor Lawrence has underachieved.

 

 

This is not an argument for or against this train of thought but something that I have been pondering for a while. Are these qbs really underachieving or is it fans unrealistic expectations that have us feeling this way? Don't we hear every draft that x player is a generational talent only to be disappointed when they are not the game wrecking players that we thought they would be? I believe it is human nature to make comparisons for just about anything that we encounter and are disappointed when our expectations are not met. We get spoiled with a handful of players that actually may be generational players and then that becomes the measuring stick for what we look for to be the norm. Could it be that our own expectations simply aren't realistic?

[beardown3231]

This sums it up for me

[StLunatic88]

22 minutes ago, Bigbear72 said:

This is not an argument for or against this train of thought but something that I have been pondering for a while. Are these qbs really underachieving or is it fans unrealistic expectations that have us feeling this way? Don't we hear every draft that x player is a generational talent only to be disappointed when they are not the game wrecking players that we thought they would be? I believe it is human nature to make comparisons for just about anything that we encounter and are disappointed when our expectations are not met. We get spoiled with a handful of players that actually may be generational players and then that becomes the measuring stick for what we look for to be the norm. Could it be that our own expectations simply aren't realistic?

Dont be coming in here making good points. Who do you think you are? Me? 

[Madmike90]

 

Good to see Moore doubling down...this guy has been around a lot of QBs and the fact he is happy to put himself on the line for Fields is telling IMO.

[beardown3231]

13 minutes ago, Madmike90 said:

 

Good to see Moore doubling down...this guy has been around a lot of crappy QBs and the fact he is happy to put himself on the line for Fields is telling IMO.

fify