Dude, I’m not going down the Trubisky hole again, but you absolutely made the case that Trubisky “was playing about as well as Mahomes” and used stats to do it. I have to paraphrase because it was so long ago and that whole conversation was scrubbed. It was a ridiculous take then, and looks even way more ridiculous now.
Question: do you still think the Bears won the Khalil Mack trade?
Well, depends on the goal. If the goal was to build a team that could contend with their QB on a rookie deal? Yeah, that was a win. They were certainly better than they'd have been without Mack. The QB didn't work out though, so if the goal was to win a super bowl - which I assume it was - then no, it didn't work out how they planned. I'm not sure the Raiders were any better off all things considered, though.
And yes, again, you're leaving out a pretty notable bit of my take here to make it sound unreasonable. You do it literally every. single. time. I've explained what I was saying literally a hundred times to you, and you simply don't listen, move on, and repeat the lie next time.
Trubisky, when I said it, WAS playing about as well as Mahomes over the previous three weeks, which as you know since you're being honest and not lying about my position, is exactly and specifically what I was talking to make a point about judging a dude's career potential on his first 15 games.