[USML Announce] Trubisky

Fri Apr 28 15:07:51 EDT 2017

If the Bears went that way, it seems Pat Mahomes would have been their guy, rather than Watson--Mahomes being supposedly more talented but less NFL-ready (and therefore also the kind of guy who'd sit behind Glennon for a couple of years).

BTW, Mahomes is a pretty good QB for a 46-year-old former starting pitcher.

Mark K

-----Original Message-----
From: Andy Klein <anrklein at gmail.com>
To: USML Announcements <announce at usml.net>
Sent: Fri, Apr 28, 2017 12:35 pm
Subject: Re: [USML Announce] Trubisky

I guess the upside for us Bears' fans is that this will reduce the number of bad picks the Bears make in the 3rd and 4th round during the next two years.  I read an article today pointing out that virtually every pick they have made in those rounds has busted going all the way back to Lance Briggs in 2003.

The trade sure looks like a bad move to me, unless Pace is right in evaluating Trubisky differently than the rest of the universe.  Even if someone jumped to #2 and took Trubisky, why not take Watson at #3 and keep all of the other picks?

-Andy

On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 12:05 PM, Blocker, Mark B. <mblocker at sidley.com> wrote:

As a Packer fan, I heartily applaud this pick/trade and the Retread Glennon signing. It all works for me.

Sent with BlackBerry Work
(www.blackberry.com)

From: Dennis Adams <dadams17 at gmail.com>
Date: Friday, Apr 28, 2017, 11:55 AM
To: Doug Shabelman <Doug.Shabelman at burnsent.com>
Cc: USML Announcements <announce at usml.net>

Subject: Re: [USML Announce] Trubisky

The move also basically signaled to Mike Glennon (who they just signed for a non-trivial amount of money) that they have no interest in getting pieces to help him to get better.  They traded away picks to get other players to help better the team.  Glennon is essentially now walking into a lose-lose situation.

I was shocked by the trades up for QBs.  The only one that made sense to me is Mahomes to KC.  He clearly will not be playing for a few years behind Alex Smith, and Andy Reid has a knack for finding young athletic QBs (see: Favre, Brett and Vick, Michael).  I think Watson ends up being the best QB in this draft class though.

Over/under on # of career starts at QB for the Bears for Trubisky:  8.5.

On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 11:42 AM, Doug Shabelman <Doug.Shabelman at burnsent.com> wrote:

Based on the two other quarterback trades, it doesn't appear to be the initial huge overpay if he becomes a good quarterback. Yes, it's an if and yes they have other needs as well. 

I liken this also to when Krause wanted to prolong his job tenure when he traded for/drafted Curry and Chandler.  

As this article points out, the value of quarterbacks on rookie contracts can far exceed their value on the open market and is far greater than most any other position.

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/19261281/how-lure-low-cost-qb-caused-bears-chiefs-texans-trade-2017-nfl-draft

On Apr 28, 2017, at 10:39 AM, springkerb--- via Announce <announce at usml.net> wrote:

Agreed.  I didn't see any pre-draft analysis that had Trubisky going that high.  On the other hand, two other teams traded up to take QBs, so there seems to have been a bit of a run on QBs--even though this was apparently a weak QB class and next year's is supposed to be pretty strong.

-----Original Message-----
From: Dennis Adams <dadams17 at gmail.com>
To: USML Announcements <announce at usml.net>
Cc: springkerb <springkerb at aol.com>
Sent: Fri, Apr 28, 2017 10:25 am
Subject: Re: [USML Announce] Trubisky

Unless he becomes a hall of famer or wins them a Super Bowl, this will never be a good pick.  If he ends up like a Philip Rivers (a well respected QB who has had a great career, but never taken the team very far), it will still be regarded as a bad move because people will question what other pieces they could have had if they hadnt dealt so mucht o move up 1 spot (not to mention that all indicators point to the fact that Trubisky would have very likely been there at #3 still).

I guess what I'm saying is.... he needs to be Eli Manning.

On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 11:19 AM, springkerb--- via Announce<announce at usml.net> wrote:

I've been looking for a draft analysis--beyond the rah-rah columns in the local press--that sees Trubisky as anything other than a bad trade (to move up) paired with a reach on the pick itself.  I haven't found one yet.  Time will tell.  In about five years, either this will look bold and visionary or we'll refer to it as the pick that helped end Ryan Pace's tenure with the Bears.

Mark K

_______________________________________________
Announce mailing list
Announce at usml.net
http://usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce_usml.net

-- 

Dennis F. Adams III
(732) 513-8661
dadams17 at gmail.com

_______________________________________________
Announce mailing list
Announce at usml.net
http://usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce_usml.net

-- 

Dennis F. Adams III
(732) 513-8661
dadams17 at gmail.com

****************************************************************************************************
This e-mail is sent by a law firm and may contain information that is privileged or confidential.
If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and any attachments and notify us
immediately.

****************************************************************************************************

_______________________________________________
Announce mailing list
Announce at usml.net
http://usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce_usml.net

_______________________________________________
Announce mailing list
Announce at usml.net
http://usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce_usml.net

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://usml.net/pipermail/announce_usml.net/attachments/20170428/03ea6f3c/attachment-0002.html>