Week 14 - Matt Barkley: Part Three (Bears at Lions Game-Thread)

[anotheridiot]

They never stopped feeding Howard. Not until they had to on the last drive.

My turn to ask, what game were you watching? He only got 13 carries, out of these 10 games he has basically been the back and averaging 6.6 per carry. Its the low mark other than Green Bay where he was injured.

 

[richig07]

I understand that, but picking earlier means we have a better shot at the players pace wants without trading up. It's a humongous advantage to be near the top in each round. What advantage does winning give us right now? Would it make you feel better if we finish the season 5-11 rather than 3-13?

It's not the actual notch in the W column that is better. It's our young players playing good football, improving and figuring out how to win football games.

Yeah, I'll take a top 3 pick. However, I'd much prefer a top ten pick with the knowledge that we already have some fucking ball players on the roster.

 

[richig07]

My turn to ask, what game were you watching? He only got 13 carries, out of these 10 games he has basically been the back and averaging 6.6 per carry. Its the low mark other than Green Bay where he was injured.

AI... We never had the ball the entire fucking first half, and then by our second possession in the second half. We were down by two scores. They controlled possession 35-25. They also possessed the ball the vast majority of the 4th quarter. Then, our drive late. We had no choice but to throw.

32 pass plays to 17 rushes is not a bad ratio given the game circumstance. That means we had basically an even 50/50 split prior to the final two possessions.

Everybody loves looking at the box score and blindly asking why a team didn't run more. Next time, pay attention to the game circumstances. It's not always in the cards.

 

[Beengay fudgepackers]

It's not the actual notch in the W column that is better. It's our young players playing good football, improving and figuring out how to win football games.

Yeah, I'll take a top 3 pick. However, I'd much prefer a top ten pick with the knowledge that we already have some fucking ball players on the roster.

I addressed this later in the post. You can do that while losing. In fact we do have some bright spots on this team. I want to play well and lose. It's what happens with young teams.

 

[anotheridiot]

AI... We never had the ball the entire fucking first half, and then by our second possession in the second half. We were down by two scores. They controlled possession 35-25. They also possessed the ball the vast majority of the 4th quarter. Then, our drive late. We had no choice but to throw.

32 pass plays to 17 rushes is not a bad ratio given the game circumstance. That means we had basically an even 50/50 split prior to the final two possessions.

Everybody loves looking at the box score and blindly asking why a team didn't run more. Next time, pay attention to the game circumstances. It's not always in the cards.

I was not looking at the box score, but now that I am, they had the ball for 4:17 more than the bears did and threw 35 times to the bears 32 times. The bears threw twice as much as they ran, which explains the time of possession being as fucked as it was.

In a game where Barkley basically negated Stafford, the bear running game should have dominated.

 

[richig07]

I addressed this later in the post. You can do that while losing. In fact we do have some bright spots on this team. I want to play well and lose. It's what happens with young teams.

Figuring out how to win football games is just as important for young players. Winning builds confidence and swagger. If we play well and lose, that's fine. However, winning football games is never a bad thing for a young team.

Draft positioning in the NFL is probably the single most overrated aspect in sports that is obsessed about. Fans go nuts over it, and at the end of the day. You can either draft well, or you can't. We all know the teams that are perennially at the top of the draft, and have been for the most part for a decade. We all know the teams that are consistently picking between 20-32, and yet always find great young talent. Pittsburgh, Green Bay, New England, Baltimore, Seattle, Denver... etc... Meanwhile, the last 15 years. Teams like TB, TEN and Oakland are just now getting it together, despite all of their top 5 picks. Cleveland still doesn't have it together, and is actually worse than ever before. The Rams certainly don't have it together.

For the first time in a while, we actually have a front office and talent evaluators that I am starting to believe in. The difference between picking 4th or 8th is so utterly minuscule in the grand scheme of things. It's absolutely irrelevant. When we're on the clock come late-April, it won't matter where we're picking. There's going to be a MULTITUDE of talent available. Who can see it? That's the question. It's not WHERE you draft, it's HOW you draft.

 

[richig07]

I was not looking at the box score, but now that I am, they had the ball for 4:17 more than the bears did and threw 35 times to the bears 32 times. The bears threw twice as much as they ran, which explains the time of possession being as fucked as it was.

In a game where Barkley basically negated Stafford, the bear running game should have dominated.

4:17? No... Look again. You can do it! I know you can! "34:17 to our 26:43" Is that your knew answer? Okay bud. You got it now!

I already explained this to you, AI. The ratio was nearly at a dead even split prior to the final couple of drives when they had to throw.

The final drive was 12 plays, all passes. Then subtract two, due to the penalties. That's ten.

Now, do you see what I am getting at here? Do you see how it was nearly a dead even split in our rush/pass ratio?

I can't keep giving these free lessons AI.

 

[Beengay fudgepackers]

Figuring out how to win football games is just as important for young players. Winning builds confidence and swagger. If we play well and lose, that's fine. However, winning football games is never a bad thing for a young team.

Draft positioning in the NFL is probably the single most overrated aspect in sports that is obsessed about. Fans go nuts over it, and at the end of the day. You can either draft well, or you can't. We all know the teams that are perennially at the top of the draft, and have been for the most part for a decade. We all know the teams that are consistently picking between 20-32, and yet always find great young talent. Pittsburgh, Green Bay, New England, Baltimore, Seattle, Denver... etc... Meanwhile, the last 15 years. Teams like TB, TEN and Oakland are just now getting it together, despite all of their top 5 picks. Cleveland still doesn't have it together, and is actually worse than ever before. The Rams certainly don't have it together.

For the first time in a while, we actually have a front office and talent evaluators that I am starting to believe in. The difference between picking 4th or 8th is so utterly minuscule in the grand scheme of things. It's absolutely irrelevant. When we're on the clock come late-April, it won't matter where we're picking. There's going to be a MULTITUDE of talent available. Who can see it? That's the question. It's not WHERE you draft, it's HOW you draft.

I agree, but draft position helps a lot more than you guys are giving credit. Give a great talent evaluator the top pick in the first and second round, you could end up with two superstars. Getting the top pick gives your GM the player they want the most. Drafting 5th or 6th doesn't guarantee the players the brass wants. Drafting early is an advantage some teams don't need, but would love to have. It provides a huge advantage. Winning might build confidence, but the players will still look at this season next year as one in which they NEED to improve whether they win the last two games or not. It really doesn't matter. Arguing that draft position isn't an advantage is just asinine.

Teams we will be competing with for draft position are jax and nyj. Two teams that could easily take players we are targetting.

 

[richig07]

I agree, but draft position helps a lot more than you guys are giving credit. Give a great talent evaluator the top pick in the first and second round, you could end up with two superstars. Getting the top pick gives your GM the player they want the most. Drafting 5th or 6th doesn't guarantee the players the brass wants. Drafting early is an advantage some teams don't need, but would love to have. It provides a huge advantage. Winning might build confidence, but the players will still look at this season next year as one in which they NEED to improve whether they win the last two games or not. It really doesn't matter. Arguing that draft position isn't an advantage is just asinine.

Teams we will be competing with for draft position are jax and nyj. Two teams that could easily take players we are targetting.

I just think if you look back over the course of NFL history... you will see over and over again. That the difference between a few picks in the grand scheme means nothing. Great talent evaluators find talent in any slot. I really think its the most overstated thing in sports. In the NBA... no one's arguing that one guy changes an entire franchise. Nor will anyone argue the difference between 2nd overall... or say... 6th. In the NFL, there's such a big talent pool. Some superstars go in the top 3, and others fall all the way to the middle rounds. Every year there's a handful of stars that aren't even taken in the first round. It's not an anomaly, it happens every single year.

Therefore, I simply can never value losing for a slight shift in draft positioning. Like I said, the only way I could ever get behind it. Is if there is an Andrew Luck or Peyton Manning type of prospect coming out, and you're on the fringe of the #1 pick late in the season.

 

[Beengay fudgepackers]

I just think if you look back over the course of NFL history... you will see over and over again. That the difference between a few picks in the grand scheme means nothing. Great talent evaluators find talent in any slot. I really think its the most overstated thing in sports. In the NBA... no one's arguing that one guy changes an entire franchise. Nor will anyone argue the difference between 2nd overall... or say... 6th. In the NFL, there's such a big talent pool. Some superstars go in the top 3, and others fall all the way to the middle rounds. Every year there's a handful of stars that aren't even taken in the first round. It's not an anomaly, it happens every single year.

Therefore, I simply can never value losing for a slight shift in draft positioning. Like I said, the only way I could ever get behind it. Is if there is an Andrew Luck or Peyton Manning type of prospect coming out, and you're on the fringe of the #1 pick late in the season.

That's where we disagree. A few picks is the difference between Calvin Johnson and tedd ginn. A few picks is the difference between Kevin White and amari Cooper. A few picks can make or break your draft. I'd rather have the guy at the top of our draft board then the guy that's second or third. I understand the guy that's second could still be a very good player, but the guy at the top of our draft board is there for a reason and I'd much rather us be in the position to take him than have him taken a pick or two in advance. A great example is the year Aaron Donald was taken before Kyle fuller. Donald was who we wanted and has been the better player and that was only 1 pick. Same thing with us taking Leonard Floyd ahead of the giants. They really wanted Floyd, but had to settle for apple. Floyd is the better player and had we been back a few picks we would've probably ended up with a consolation prize.

 

[richig07]

That's where we disagree. A few picks is the difference between Calvin Johnson and tedd ginn. A few picks is the difference between Kevin White and amari Cooper. A few picks can make or break your draft.

Do I really have to go back through NFL history now and find where the opposite is true, and players taken later than the first handful of picks wound be stars? While the earlier ones were busts.

You just destroyed your argument with your own logic.

 

[Beengay fudgepackers]

Do I really have to go back through NFL history now and find where the opposite is true, and players taken later than the first handful of picks wound be stars? While the earlier ones were busts.

You just destroyed your argument with your own logic.

We will just have to agree to disagree. I just thank the lord you aren't GM and you can do the same for me. I still find it asinine to argue that it doesn't matter where you pick.

 

[anotheridiot]

4:17? No... Look again. You can do it! I know you can! "34:17 to our 26:43" Is that your knew answer? Okay bud. You got it now!

I already explained this to you, AI. The ratio was nearly at a dead even split prior to the final couple of drives when they had to throw.

The final drive was 12 plays, all passes. Then subtract two, due to the penalties. That's ten.

Now, do you see what I am getting at here? Do you see how it was nearly a dead even split in our rush/pass ratio?

I can't keep giving these free lessons AI.

If Detroit has the ball 4:17 less, that means we would have had it 4:17 more. 30 minutes is even.

(I cannot believe you fell for that one, you are so worried about being king of the hill, you dont pay attention when you fall down on your own arguing with an idiot) Never mind, I am sure you are too focused to see the joke.

Bottom lion, Detroit had 14 more plays, a depleted running game and chose to use 11 of those extra plays for runs which is why they won time of possession that made the difference in the game. If Stafford chose to pass more the bears might have gotten 2 more picks.

Lets see what this week brings. See if Barkley feeds Alshon heavy or the bears decide to continue to throw to players that cannot catch the ball. You just feel like Alson is going to be paid regardless of this PED stuff, but the price can come down if he does not have receptions when he is "clean".

 

[richig07]

If Detroit has the ball 4:17 less, that means we would have had it 4:17 more. 30 minutes is even.

(I cannot believe you fell for that one, you are so worried about being king of the hill, you dont pay attention when you fall down on your own arguing with an idiot) Never mind, I am sure you are too focused to see the joke.

Bottom lion, Detroit had 14 more plays, a depleted running game and chose to use 11 of those extra plays for runs which is why they won time of possession that made the difference in the game. If Stafford chose to pass more the bears might have gotten 2 more picks.

Lets see what this week brings. See if Barkley feeds Alshon heavy or the bears decide to continue to throw to players that cannot catch the ball. You just feel like Alson is going to be paid regardless of this PED stuff, but the price can come down if he does not have receptions when he is "clean".

If Detroit has the ball 4:17 less, that means we would have had it 4:17 more. 30 minutes is even.

But that's not how the game works AI! They had the ball 9+ minutes more than us! Not 4:17.

Bottom lion, Detroit had 14 more plays, a depleted running game and chose to use 11 of those extra plays for runs which is why they won time of possession that made the difference in the game. If Stafford chose to pass more the bears might have gotten 2 more picks.

AI... how do you not understand this? We had an EVEN pass/run ratio. Holy hell...

 

[wood20ks]

Ask the GM`s for the teams that are picking from no.15 to the 32nd as see what they tell you.

I`m betting they would love to draft the most coveted players every season.

 

[richig07]

Ask the GM`s for the teams that are picking from no.15 to the 32nd as see what they tell you.

I`m betting they would love to draft the most coveted players every season.

No shit. They'd also tell you that they'd rather keep winning and contending than have a top pick.

 

[averagejoe]

You bring up the Steelers, Patriots, and Packers, but that's unfair. Those teams have HOF QBs that make their entire team better. That's a HUGE deal in today's NFL. Without Rodgers, the packers are shit and competing with us as the worst team in the NFC north. Without Big Ben, the Steelers are terrible. Without Brady, I seriously doubt the Pats win all of those Super Bowls.

I understand that some teams can and do get good players late, but what would the patriots, Steelers, or Packers do if they had a top pick? I think they would get even better. You also bring up the browns (another team desperate for a great QB) That's unfair too because they just suck as a franchise. Take the Lions for instance when they drafted a WR in the first round 4 out of 5 years. That's incredibly stupid and good franchises don't do that. If Pace keeps drafting like he has, maybe we can get into that elite category. However, if he keeps drafting this way we will not have picks this high again.

Would the cowboys be as good if they didnt suck it up last year earning them Zeke with the fourth pick? I seriously doubt it. Would Atlanta be in the hunt if they didn't have julio because they sucked? I don't even think they would have a winning record.

I'm not saying we should tank every year, but getting the best draft position possible while we are still terrible with no hope of the playoffs only makes sense. We have nothing to gain from winning. Absolutely nothing. I'm also not saying Fox should tell the team to tank, that would just stunt the growth of the young players. But getting every advantage we can is what we as fans should be wanting now that a playoff berth is impossible. Even if we don't use our early pick, it gives us even better trade bait. If we lose, it means better assets for our front office to use. Yeah, the patriots, packers, and Steelers don't need those picks to be good, but they sure as hell would use that opportunity to turn those picks into even better players than what they get with their usual picks.

This upcoming draft is crucial for the bears, because I seriously doubt they'll be picking this early again for a while. I'm not aware of the players coming out for this draft, but picking 3rd rather than 7th could be the difference between getting that franchise left tackle we so sorely need or a shut down corner that would solidify the defense rather than just getting a pretty good player that can contribute. it just gives the FO better tools to succeed.

Fudge, I didn't want to turn this into a debate.
You disagree... that's fine with me.
But it is fair to mention those teams.
I think they all picked after our Bears in most cases.
Based on your argument, the talent of the players should drop off a little... no?
Rodgers was a late 1st round pick. Brady is annoyingly referred to as a late round gem.
As for the Cowboys, they moved up to get EE. (Plus they have a heralded O-line.)
I think stealing Prescott in the 4th round is the bigger story.

I like the points Rich made too.
A good GM and scouting org will find "first round" talent in any round.

 

[beardown07]

Jordan Howard is the best pick in the last draft IMO.


5th freaking rd.


Kid is special.

 

[richig07]

Fudge, I didn't want to turn this into a debate.
You disagree... that's fine with me.
But it is fair to mention those teams.
I think they all picked after our Bears in most cases.
Based on your argument, the talent of the players should drop off a little... no?
Rodgers was a late 1st round pick. Brady is annoyingly referred to as a late round gem.
As for the Cowboys, they moved up to get EE. (Plus they have a heralded O-line.)
I think stealing Prescott in the 4th round is the bigger story.

I like the points Rich made too.
A good GM and scouting org will find "first round" talent in any round.

Exactly.

Even Ben wasn't a top ten overall pick. We passed on Rodgers, and then Brady countless times. If anything, once again. I think he only presented evidence that strengthens my point.

 

[Ice_nine]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/tartan...ng-draft-value-by-position/amp/?client=safari