2011 Bears Offseason thread

[jersey cubs fan]

What do you guys think of resigning Daniel Manning? Reading this Bears FA article: http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/bears/post/_/id/4670732/bears-free-agents-who-will-be-back

 

It sounds like the Bears don't want to budge on the money they've already offered - which he will be able to beat elsewhere.

 

They have Major Wright and Chris Conte for either S position so they might be planning on rolling the dice. Could blow up in their face though, Manning was really solid last year.

 

I like his talent but I've never loved his total game and I don't mind holding firm on a player of his stature. If somebody wants to pay him big, good for them.

 

 

We have to remember that Cutler's cap hit is likely to go way up in the next year or two (either that or we will be looking for another QB).

[Soul]

Hate to lose Manning's speed. I also like how he's made improvements over time, to the point where now it seems he's found a place on the team.

 

But you're right, there's only so much we can offer a guy like that, who has holes in his game.

[rawaction]

Hate to lose Manning's speed. I also like how he's made improvements over time, to the point where now it seems he's found a place on the team.

 

But you're right, there's only so much we can offer a guy like that, who has holes in his game.

 

I agree with the sentiment (don't pay him big money, stand firm and let someone else pay him). But Manning really put it all together last year though. Pro Football Focus has some stuff up, and he was one of the best safeties in football last year. He's one of the best tackling DBs in the league and he allowed the lowest completion % against of all NFL safeties last year, with 0 TDs allowed. He played very well last year.

 

The problem, he wants a lot of money. He's a speed guy that is already 28 years old, so he will undoubtedly lose a couple steps in his next contract. I hate to lose him, but I'd also hate to be paying a 32 year old safety, that has never been a turnover machine, like he's one of the league's best.

[Guest]

So, with the new CBA, Sidney Rice will be a UFA. Go get em, Jerry. Make it happen.

 

Sean Jensen of the Chicago Sun-Times believes the Bears would only be interested in free agent Sidney Rice "at the right price."

Chicago may be one of the teams unwilling to offer more than an incentive-laden deal. That being the case, they would have to be considered a longshot to land the talented downfield threat, injury history and all.

 

Doesn't sound promise regarding the Bears chances of signing Rice.

[Banedon]

So, with the new CBA, Sidney Rice will be a UFA. Go get em, Jerry. Make it happen.

 

Sean Jensen of the Chicago Sun-Times believes the Bears would only be interested in free agent Sidney Rice "at the right price."

Chicago may be one of the teams unwilling to offer more than an incentive-laden deal. That being the case, they would have to be considered a longshot to land the talented downfield threat, injury history and all.

 

Doesn't sound promise regarding the Bears chances of signing Rice.

 

I wasn't saying I thought it was likely, but until he signs somewhere else, I'm gonna keep hopin....

[apete6]

This has probably been discussed earlier in the thread, but what are peoples' interest levels in the old receivers: Burress, Moss, Ochocinco, and TO?

 

I would take Burress with open arms, be possibly interested in TO if he's healthy, pass on Moss and Ochocinco. Obviously money would be a concern, but I can't see any of these guys making any significant money or signing more than a 1 or 2 year deal.

[Banedon]

This has probably been discussed earlier in the thread, but what are peoples' interest levels in the old receivers: Burress, Moss, Ochocinco, and TO?

 

I would take Burress with open arms, be possibly interested in TO if he's healthy, pass on Moss and Ochocinco. Obviously money would be a concern, but I can't see any of these guys making any significant money or signing more than a 1 or 2 year deal.

 

Burress - Yes

TO - No, he's broken

Moss and Ochocinco - very price dependent

[rawaction]

This has probably been discussed earlier in the thread, but what are peoples' interest levels in the old receivers: Burress, Moss, Ochocinco, and TO?

 

I would take Burress with open arms, be possibly interested in TO if he's healthy, pass on Moss and Ochocinco. Obviously money would be a concern, but I can't see any of these guys making any significant money or signing more than a 1 or 2 year deal.

 

Moss

Ochocinco

Burress

TO

 

in order. The old WR is an interesting option because any of those guys will be done about the same time as Peppers, Briggs, Urlacher, and Tillman on D really start to age. It would give the Bears the chance to make a legit run in the next 2 years, while hopefully, retooling thru the draft. This is a pretty good year to draft a WR, so if the Bears feel they can develop a young WR and add a vet to make a run, any of these guys would be OK.

 

I'd rather go with a young WR that has a chance to play with Jay Cutler for a long time, but if the Bears are going to commit to going after a wR early in the draft, then I'm ok with an older guy on a very short, cheap contract.

[SpongeWorthy]

I admit that I don't know a whole lot about the NFL salary cap but after reading this: http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/bears/post/_/id/4670732/bears-free-agents-who-will-be-back

 

...and seeing that other article about the Bears being 37 million or whatever under the cap. Wow, it seems like they could add some really nice pieces. None of thsoe UFAs should command a huge amount of money right? They could add a little of everything.

[Soul]

What's the read on Burress? Just not going to be ready?

 

I think he's just lacking in any kind of common sense. But the talent is pretty hard to ignore for a team in our position.

[NCCubFan]

I think this is just making the inevitable official, but the Hall of Fame game against the Rams has been cancelled. All teams will have just the normal 4-game preseason.

[Guest]

I admit that I don't know a whole lot about the NFL salary cap but after reading this: http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/bears/post/_/id/4670732/bears-free-agents-who-will-be-back

 

...and seeing that other article about the Bears being 37 million or whatever under the cap. Wow, it seems like they could add some really nice pieces. None of thsoe UFAs should command a huge amount of money right? They could add a little of everything.

 

I heard them mention this in passing on the radio today, but they also mentioned that they have to not only sign their own free agents, but their draft class as well. I'm not sure how much that would cost, but it sounds like they'd be wanting to sign a dozen guys before they even looked outward.

[Magnetic Curses]

I admit that I don't know a whole lot about the NFL salary cap but after reading this: http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/bears/post/_/id/4670732/bears-free-agents-who-will-be-back

 

...and seeing that other article about the Bears being 37 million or whatever under the cap. Wow, it seems like they could add some really nice pieces. None of thsoe UFAs should command a huge amount of money right? They could add a little of everything.

 

I heard them mention this in passing on the radio today, but they also mentioned that they have to not only sign their own free agents, but their draft class as well. I'm not sure how much that would cost, but it sounds like they'd be wanting to sign a dozen guys before they even looked outward.

 

i've seen it broken down where they could afford to give some nice money out at positions of need (including a huge contract to sidney rice), sign their free agents and draft class, and have a bit of money left over.

[biittner77]

Regarding the old WRs

 

TO and Moss are done. They aren't who they used to be and not worth the drama they undoubtedly would eventually bring.

 

Buress is interesting. Though he is old he's had 2 years off with his body not getting the abuse that comes from playing in the NFL. He certainly has something to prove on the field. Off the field you'd think he'd have more sense now.

 

Signing 85 reminds me a lot of when the Bears signed Golden Richards or the Cubs signing Jason Kendall 3 years after they stopped being good.

[rawaction]

I admit that I don't know a whole lot about the NFL salary cap but after reading this: http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/bears/post/_/id/4670732/bears-free-agents-who-will-be-back

 

...and seeing that other article about the Bears being 37 million or whatever under the cap. Wow, it seems like they could add some really nice pieces. None of thsoe UFAs should command a huge amount of money right? They could add a little of everything.

 

I heard them mention this in passing on the radio today, but they also mentioned that they have to not only sign their own free agents, but their draft class as well. I'm not sure how much that would cost, but it sounds like they'd be wanting to sign a dozen guys before they even looked outward.

 

i've seen it broken down where they could afford to give some nice money out at positions of need (including a huge contract to sidney rice), sign their free agents and draft class, and have a bit of money left over.

 

The Bears have a lot of cheap FAs though. Only Manning and Kreutz will require deals over 2Mil annually. I think they can afford 1 big contract this offseason, and probably a couple mid level contracts 3-5 Mil annually. And that's with re-signing Kreutz and everyone other than Manning, draft picks, and UDFAs.

[Banedon]

Probably not worth a lot, but John Clayton has an article listing the Bears as a dark horse for Braylon Edwards. Also a dark horse for Brandon Mebane because of Ruskell's association with the Seahawks....

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/6783433/nnamdi-asomugha-headlines-2011-free-agent-class

[UMFan83]

Probably not worth a lot, but John Clayton has an article listing the Bears as a dark horse for Braylon Edwards. Also a dark horse for Brandon Mebane because of Ruskell's association with the Seahawks....

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/6783433/nnamdi-asomugha-headlines-2011-free-agent-class

 

I was just about to ask what people thought of signing Mebane. As much as I want Henry Melton and Matt Toeania to be capable of holding down the DT position, we could certainly benefit from an upgrade. I don't know much about Mebane though other than apparently he's a run stopper. Can he be the three technique DT for the Bears? He only had 1 sack last year, and 10 for his career (5 seasons). I know that's clearly not the end all for a DT but I wonder if he's only a run stopper.

[Pushfrog98]

I'm disheartened by the lack of talk about Cutler and Cavallari have called off their engagement.

 

In other news... does FA Signing begin today or what?

[Banedon]

I'm disheartened by the lack of talk about Cutler and Cavallari have called off their engagement.

 

In other news... does FA Signing begin today or what?

 

If it does, it won't be till later. The players still have to vote. There'll probably be a press conference this afternoon with details.

[UMFan83]

I'm disheartened by the lack of talk about Cutler and Cavallari have called off their engagement.

 

 

Sounds like Cutler flat out dumped her ass.

[NCCubFan]

I'm disheartened by the lack of talk about Cutler and Cavallari have called off their engagement.

 

In other news... does FA Signing begin today or what?

The latest I read is that teams may be able to re-sign their own free agents later today and start signing free agents from other teams tomorrow afternoon.

[Guest]

It will be an interesting week of offseason football, that's for sure. Teams have to work fast to fill holes and players won't have the usual time to weigh their options.

[Banedon]

It will be an interesting week of offseason football, that's for sure. Teams have to work fast to fill holes and players won't have the usual time to weigh their options.

 

It's gonna be the busiest week of football transactions ever, most likely.

[UMFan83]

Football outsiders (via ESPN.com) has an article saying that based on 'numerous metrics', Matt Forte is on par with Adrian Peterson.

 

http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/6783289/nfl-why-matt-forte-adrian-peterson-equal?addata=2009_insdr_mod_nfl_xxx_xxx

 

When looking back at the running backs of the 1970s, one can't help but notice the historical plight of former Minnesota Vikings star Chuck Foreman.

 

From 1973-77, Foreman was one of only three running backs to gain more than 7,000 yards from scrimmage (O.J. Simpson and Lydell Mitchell being the other two). This achievement led to five straight Pro Bowl appearances and one All-Pro nomination, but it did not lead to longer-term recognition because of what might be termed the Darrell Evans effect.

 

According to The New Bill James Baseball Abstract, Evans was the 10th-best third baseman of all time but isn't thought of as an elite player because he had too many of the characteristics that tend to plague underrated players, the most notable of which was, "Specialists and players who do two or three things well are overrated; players who do several things well are underrated."

 

This tendency helped improve the historical standing of bell cow rushers (e.g. Simpson, Franco Harris) who gained the bulk of their yards on the ground and didn't rely much on pass receiving yards. For proof, consider that aerial production accounted for only 13.4 percent and 11.7 percent, respectively, of Simpson's and Harris' total yards from scrimmage in this time frame. Foreman had 33.8 percent of his overall yards from scrimmage through the air.

 

We have a similar situation in today's NFL in the case of Matt Forte. His jack-of-all-trades skill set has led to the idea that he isn't an elite running back (he has no Pro Bowl or All-Pro nominations in his career), but a closer look at the numbers shows that he can actually go toe-to-toe with Adrian Peterson for the title of best running back in the NFC North.

 

Really.

 

Before getting into the specifics (and arguments) of that last statement, consider this: Over the past three years, Forte has gained 4,731 yards from scrimmage.

 

Only four other running backs have bettered that mark during that time frame: Chris Johnson (5,606), Peterson (5,343), Maurice Jones-Drew (4,795) and Steven Jackson (4,783).

 

That output shows why Forte has earned an upper-class spot at his position, but the comparison with Peterson is what really drives this point home.

 

The most compelling place to start this assessment might be in the overall yards per attempt category. This measures how productive a runner is whenever he is targeted with either a rushing or pass-receiving attempt.

 

In the past three years, Peterson has posted 1,106 targets of this nature, giving him a 4.8 YPT average; Forte has tallied 1,029 targets and a 4.6 YPT average.

 

To put the two-tenths of a yard difference into perspective, over the course of a season with 350 total targets, it would equal a 70-yard advantage for Peterson. Divide those yards by 16 games and it means only four-plus extra yards per game.

 

Peterson also loses some of that edge when his fumbles are accounted for. Since 2008, he has lost 11 fumbles versus Forte's six fumbles lost. Most football statisticians place the value of a turnover at somewhere between 40-50 yards, which would equal a 200- to 250-yard penalty for Peterson. Take that volume of yardage out of Peterson's numbers and the difference between their productivity drops to practically zero.

 

The above figures showcase the three-year evaluation for these two, but if it were simply a measure of the 2010 season, Forte would have a significant lead.

 

There are many areas one can use to illustrate this.

 

For starters, Forte and Peterson were almost dead even in yards from scrimmage (1,616 for Forte versus 1,639 for Peterson) but Forte topped Peterson on yards per target (5.3 for Forte versus 4.9 for Peterson).

 

The advantage doesn't stop there, as Forte also topped Peterson by a yard in the yards per reception (10.7 versus 9.5) and yards per pass attempt (7.8 versus 6.8) categories.

 

Those figures show how well Forte adapted to the Mike Martz offense, but his 2010 performance is even more impressive when one considers that Peterson had an edge in run blocking.

 

The evidence for this statement can be found in the ROBIN run blocking breakdown study I did for each team's 2010 season (explained here).

 

This year's version of that system focused on determining how often a running back was given a good blocking situation. This is quite important, because most running backs gain around one yard per carry on plays with a poor blocking situation (which, loosely defined, is when the defense does something to disrupt the running play).

 

Peterson was given good blocking on 60.8 percent of his rushing attempts and tallied a 6.6 good blocking yards per attempt (GBYPA) total.

 

By contrast, Forte was given good blocking on just 53.0 percent of his rush attempts and racked up a 7.5 GBYPA.

 

This means Forte had to close the yardage gap on Peterson with fewer quality blocking chances and he did so by beating him by nearly a yard in GBYPA.

 

All of these items show that Forte has taken the lead over Peterson in a multitude of on-field categories, but he still trails All Day in the court of public opinion for many of the same reasons Foreman lost his battle for elite recognition.

 

Unless, and until, the general perception of jack-of-all-trades players changes, Forte may still falter in his quest to be seen as one of the best ballcarriers in the NFL. But it doesn't change the fact that, at this moment, the numbers show he is as good as Peterson.

 

[Banedon]

No wonder Forte is pushing for a contract extension.