Chicago Bears offseason

[David]

Along with Longs retirememt that puts them at about 25m in cap. Still not a lot, around bottom 10. They could still free up some more, most notably Floyd's 13M.

 

And extend ARob.

[minnesotacubsfan]

Along with Longs retirememt that puts them at about 25m in cap. Still not a lot, around bottom 10. They could still free up some more, most notably Floyd's 13M.

 

And extend ARob.

 

then trade mitch for carr

[WrigleyField 22]

Along with Longs retirememt that puts them at about 25m in cap. Still not a lot, around bottom 10. They could still free up some more, most notably Floyd's 13M.

 

And extend ARob.

Arob extension probabky doesn't free up much. Though at this point the biggest question is if a new CBA deal gets done as that will have some impact on their flexibility due to "Final Year" CBA rules that will or won't go into effect.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

 

The defense, ranked 8th in DVOA last year, has now lost three starters as well as a lot of key depth guys. And it looks like we are gearing up to spend most of our offseason resources on a QB.

 

Good luck.

[jersey cubs fan]

And it looks like we are gearing up to spend most of our offseason resources on a QB.

 

it does feel that way, don't it

[BigbadB]

Along with Longs retirememt that puts them at about 25m in cap. Still not a lot, around bottom 10. They could still free up some more, most notably Floyd's 13M.

 

And extend ARob.

 

then trade mitch for carr

 

Don't think I'd hate a trade for Carr. Floyd and a 4th for Carr?

[minnesotacubsfan]

 

And extend ARob.

 

then trade mitch for carr

 

Don't think I'd hate a trade for Carr. Floyd and a 4th for Carr?

 

that would be something, we get the Raiders best D player and their QB and they get our failed D player and failed QB

[Hairyducked Idiot]

 

And extend ARob.

 

then trade mitch for carr

 

Don't think I'd hate a trade for Carr. Floyd and a 4th for Carr?

 

That would leave us with approximately $20m in cap space and 5 draft picks to fill the following:

 

Four defensive starters (S, CB, ILB, OLB), 3-4 immediate back-up/rotational depth pieces on defense, TE1, TE2, whatever you want to do with the OL, a WR2/3 and an RB2.

 

It's the perfect "I sure hope a decent QB can save my job" move from Pace, so I expect it to happen.

[Bertz]

 

then trade mitch for carr

 

Don't think I'd hate a trade for Carr. Floyd and a 4th for Carr?

 

That would leave us with approximately $20m in cap space and 5 draft picks to fill the following:

 

Four defensive starters (S, CB, ILB, OLB), 3-4 immediate back-up/rotational depth pieces on defense, TE1, TE2, whatever you want to do with the OL, a WR2/3 and an RB2.

 

It's the perfect "I sure hope a decent QB can save my job" move from Pace, so I expect it to happen.

 

Yup, I'm expecting Carr and a big-ish name at Tight End (Hooper?). And then inevitably everyone is going to be besides themselves next year when the defense unsurprisingly takes another step back.

[Brian]

I don't get expending draft capital to get Carr, isn't there like 3 guys at his tier that could just be signed?

[Derwood]

I don't get expending draft capital to get Carr, isn't there like 3 guys at his tier that could just be signed?

 

Also, Carr isn't very good

[BigbadB]

I don't get expending draft capital to get Carr, isn't there like 3 guys at his tier that could just be signed?

 

Also, Carr isn't very good

 

I would argue that he hasn't had much to work with. Other than Amari Cooper and Michael Crabtree, you'd have a tough time naming another WR that has caught passes for the Raiders during Carr's 6 seasons. I wouldn't have been able to name Crabtree without actually looking up the stats since he's played for so many teams.

[David]

I don't get expending draft capital to get Carr, isn't there like 3 guys at his tier that could just be signed?

 

Also, Carr isn't very good

 

carr is pretty good (averageish starter), would be a huge upgrade, and (i hate this line because it's such a low bar) would immediately be the best qb the bears have ever had.

 

i loved cutler too but he flat out turned the ball over too much.

[WrigleyField 22]

I don't get expending draft capital to get Carr, isn't there like 3 guys at his tier that could just be signed?

He's probably better than any of the guys who can be signed, but adding on draft capital too, no, that's probably not very smart.

[raw]

Cuts were pretty obvious. They aren't going to cut Floyd. 13M is obviously more than his production would indicate he should be paid. But he is a solid player. If you cut him, sure you gain 13M in space, but you still need an OLB with Floyd, you need 2 without him. And while 13M can do a lot of damage, to actually upgrade from Floyd would cost at least 10-12Mil on a long-term deal. And most of the guys in that price range will upgrade the pass rush, but downgrade the edge run D, which Floyd is really good at. I think the Bears try to sign him long-term, to lower the cap hit. Something like 4 years/40 mil, guaranteeing 18-20Mil. Floyd gets more guarantees, Bears get a lower cap hit, and basically only 1 extra year as they'd be able to get out with minimal dead cap after 2021. If he doesn't take the deal, I'm fine with paying him 13Mil in his walk year. Not ideal, but the Bears need him. I'd love to cap off the edge position by bringing in a pass rush specialist. My ideal guy would be Bruce Irvin (reuniting with Mack). He only played for 4Mil in Carolina last year, and had a career high 8.5 sacks. Ironically, my 1B choice for pass rush specialist would be Mario Addison who had 9.5 sacks for the same Carolina team. Offer both like 2/12 and see who bites first. 5Mil first year, 7Mil 2nd, but not guaranteed so there's a 1-year out.

 

2020- Mack, Floyd, Irvin, late round pick

2021- Mack, Floyd/Irvin (if Floyd on extension, cut Irvin; if no extension, keep Irvin a 2nd year), 2nd round pick, 2020 late pick

2022- Mack, 2021 2nd rounder, 2020 late pick, depending on how 2nd round works out can either spend or draft for 3rd/4th guy

 

As for Carr, I honestly think he's the best option potentially out there. That being said, I don't see it happening. The Raiders would have to get a better QB to agree to come to Vegas and play for a team that may/may not be a contender. If they cut him, maybe, but when you have to give up picks for him? That's a no-go. Same for Dalton. Not trading for a QB and paying him a bunch of money.

 

Ultimately, I really don't think the Bears go all out for a QB. Trubisky is going to be the starter. Think about it. There's a bunch of people (Bears fans, media members) who can't even agree what the Bears biggest offensive problem is. There are some that say OL, some say playcalling, some say lack of a run game, some say lack of TE production, the correct ones say QB play. But the Bears hired a new OL coach and will add a starting RG in free agency. The Bears added more guys to help with playcalling/design. They added coaches to help get the run game going. They added a QB coach.

 

They have also said this offseason that they see Mitch as the guy still. I don't think Pace is going to add a guy that will clearly win a legit competition against Mitch, like Carr or Bridgewater or Brady. They are going to add to all those other pieces so they can really determine if the major issue is the QB. And if the QB is the issue, they are going to try to put the team in a better position to overcome that by changing that issue on the fly if necessary. If they trade for a QB with a 17M cap hit, they aren't going to be able to fix all those other things. So, I'm thinking we're going to be looking at a Keenum, Mariota (though same agent as Mitch), or Dalton signing if he is cut.

[jersey cubs fan]

I don't get expending draft capital to get Carr, isn't there like 3 guys at his tier that could just be signed?

 

Also, Carr isn't very good

 

carr is pretty good (averageish starter), would be a huge upgrade, and (i hate this line because it's such a low bar) would immediately be the best qb the bears have ever had.

 

i loved cutler too but he flat out turned the ball over too much.

That’s just wrong

[BigbadB]

Cuts were pretty obvious. They aren't going to cut Floyd. 13M is obviously more than his production would indicate he should be paid. But he is a solid player. If you cut him, sure you gain 13M in space, but you still need an OLB with Floyd, you need 2 without him. And while 13M can do a lot of damage, to actually upgrade from Floyd would cost at least 10-12Mil on a long-term deal. And most of the guys in that price range will upgrade the pass rush, but downgrade the edge run D, which Floyd is really good at. I think the Bears try to sign him long-term, to lower the cap hit. Something like 4 years/40 mil, guaranteeing 18-20Mil. Floyd gets more guarantees, Bears get a lower cap hit, and basically only 1 extra year as they'd be able to get out with minimal dead cap after 2021. If he doesn't take the deal, I'm fine with paying him 13Mil in his walk year. Not ideal, but the Bears need him. I'd love to cap off the edge position by bringing in a pass rush specialist. My ideal guy would be Bruce Irvin (reuniting with Mack). He only played for 4Mil in Carolina last year, and had a career high 8.5 sacks. Ironically, my 1B choice for pass rush specialist would be Mario Addison who had 9.5 sacks for the same Carolina team. Offer both like 2/12 and see who bites first. 5Mil first year, 7Mil 2nd, but not guaranteed so there's a 1-year out.

 

2020- Mack, Floyd, Irvin, late round pick

2021- Mack, Floyd/Irvin (if Floyd on extension, cut Irvin; if no extension, keep Irvin a 2nd year), 2nd round pick, 2020 late pick

2022- Mack, 2021 2nd rounder, 2020 late pick, depending on how 2nd round works out can either spend or draft for 3rd/4th guy

 

As for Carr, I honestly think he's the best option potentially out there. That being said, I don't see it happening. The Raiders would have to get a better QB to agree to come to Vegas and play for a team that may/may not be a contender. If they cut him, maybe, but when you have to give up picks for him? That's a no-go. Same for Dalton. Not trading for a QB and paying him a bunch of money.

 

Ultimately, I really don't think the Bears go all out for a QB. Trubisky is going to be the starter. Think about it. There's a bunch of people (Bears fans, media members) who can't even agree what the Bears biggest offensive problem is. There are some that say OL, some say playcalling, some say lack of a run game, some say lack of TE production, the correct ones say QB play. But the Bears hired a new OL coach and will add a starting RG in free agency. The Bears added more guys to help with playcalling/design. They added coaches to help get the run game going. They added a QB coach.

 

They have also said this offseason that they see Mitch as the guy still. I don't think Pace is going to add a guy that will clearly win a legit competition against Mitch, like Carr or Bridgewater or Brady. They are going to add to all those other pieces so they can really determine if the major issue is the QB. And if the QB is the issue, they are going to try to put the team in a better position to overcome that by changing that issue on the fly if necessary. If they trade for a QB with a 17M cap hit, they aren't going to be able to fix all those other things. So, I'm thinking we're going to be looking at a Keenum, Mariota (though same agent as Mitch), or Dalton signing if he is cut.

 

I think each of Keenum, Mariota and Dalton are better QB options than Trubisky. They would be cheaper than Carr, so hopefully they get someone who can step in if Trubisky shows no improvement. There is no reason to waste an entire season if you realize after the first few weeks that Trubisky just isn't the guy. I do admit that trading for Carr is giving up on Trubisky, whereas the other 3 might be willing to challenge Trubisky in training camp. Before Carr was rumored to be available, I didn't really think the Bears would go after a starting caliber QB to begin with, mostly because of cap space restrictions.

[David]

 

Also, Carr isn't very good

 

carr is pretty good (averageish starter), would be a huge upgrade, and (i hate this line because it's such a low bar) would immediately be the best qb the bears have ever had.

 

i loved cutler too but he flat out turned the ball over too much.

That’s just wrong

 

i don't even see how it's up for debate tbh

 

i'm assuming you're referring to the cutler part, and if i'm wrong, nevermind. what is the argument for cutler being better?

[David]

[raw]

 

I think each of Keenum, Mariota and Dalton are better QB options than Trubisky. They would be cheaper than Carr, so hopefully they get someone who can step in if Trubisky shows no improvement. There is no reason to waste an entire season if you realize after the first few weeks that Trubisky just isn't the guy. I do admit that trading for Carr is giving up on Trubisky, whereas the other 3 might be willing to challenge Trubisky in training camp. Before Carr was rumored to be available, I didn't really think the Bears would go after a starting caliber QB to begin with, mostly because of cap space restrictions.

 

Statistically speaking, they aren't much better if at all. Granted, QB rating isn't the end all be all of statistics but:

 

Keenum- has 2 seasons in the last 4 worse than Trubisky's 2019 83 QB rating. Only 1 season in his career better than Trubisky's 2018 95.4 rating. Also, 32 years old with no upside to get better.

 

Mariota- has 1 season better than Trubisky's 2018 95.4, and that was a 95.6 season. Same issues as Mitch with taking sacks. Doesn't throw a lot of picks, but similar gunshy and doesn't process quick enough to anticipate hitting an open receiver. More consistently mediocre though than the rest of this group, Trubisky included.

 

Dalton- was statistically worse than Trubisky in 2019. Only has 1 season with a better QB rating than Mitch's 2018, and that was back in 2015. Older than Keenum so also doesn't have upside to improve. A little INT happy at times. Doesn't have a bunch of arm talent.

[David]

 

I think each of Keenum, Mariota and Dalton are better QB options than Trubisky. They would be cheaper than Carr, so hopefully they get someone who can step in if Trubisky shows no improvement. There is no reason to waste an entire season if you realize after the first few weeks that Trubisky just isn't the guy. I do admit that trading for Carr is giving up on Trubisky, whereas the other 3 might be willing to challenge Trubisky in training camp. Before Carr was rumored to be available, I didn't really think the Bears would go after a starting caliber QB to begin with, mostly because of cap space restrictions.

 

Statistically speaking, they aren't much better if at all. Granted, QB rating isn't the end all be all of statistics but:

 

Keenum- has 2 seasons in the last 4 worse than Trubisky's 2019 83 QB rating. Only 1 season in his career better than Trubisky's 2018 95.4 rating. Also, 32 years old with no upside to get better.

 

Mariota- has 1 season better than Trubisky's 2018 95.4, and that was a 95.6 season. Same issues as Mitch with taking sacks. Doesn't throw a lot of picks, but similar gunshy and doesn't process quick enough to anticipate hitting an open receiver. More consistently mediocre though than the rest of this group, Trubisky included.

 

Dalton- was statistically worse than Trubisky in 2019. Only has 1 season with a better QB rating than Mitch's 2018, and that was back in 2015. Older than Keenum so also doesn't have upside to improve. A little INT happy at times. Doesn't have a bunch of arm talent.

 

isn't passer rating up league wide?

 

if it were a good statistic we wouldn't be talking about replacing trubisky. his 2018 wasn't nearly as good as his passer rating makes it out to be. at least, not if you're looking at it from the standards of even 5-10 years ago.

[minnesotacubsfan]

 

I think each of Keenum, Mariota and Dalton are better QB options than Trubisky. They would be cheaper than Carr, so hopefully they get someone who can step in if Trubisky shows no improvement. There is no reason to waste an entire season if you realize after the first few weeks that Trubisky just isn't the guy. I do admit that trading for Carr is giving up on Trubisky, whereas the other 3 might be willing to challenge Trubisky in training camp. Before Carr was rumored to be available, I didn't really think the Bears would go after a starting caliber QB to begin with, mostly because of cap space restrictions.

 

Statistically speaking, they aren't much better if at all. Granted, QB rating isn't the end all be all of statistics but:

 

Keenum- has 2 seasons in the last 4 worse than Trubisky's 2019 83 QB rating. Only 1 season in his career better than Trubisky's 2018 95.4 rating. Also, 32 years old with no upside to get better.

 

Mariota- has 1 season better than Trubisky's 2018 95.4, and that was a 95.6 season. Same issues as Mitch with taking sacks. Doesn't throw a lot of picks, but similar gunshy and doesn't process quick enough to anticipate hitting an open receiver. More consistently mediocre though than the rest of this group, Trubisky included.

 

Dalton- was statistically worse than Trubisky in 2019. Only has 1 season with a better QB rating than Mitch's 2018, and that was back in 2015. Older than Keenum so also doesn't have upside to improve. A little INT happy at times. Doesn't have a bunch of arm talent.

 

isn't passer rating up league wide?

 

if it were a good statistic we wouldn't be talking about replacing trubisky. his 2018 wasn't nearly as good as his passer rating makes it out to be. at least, not if you're looking at it from the standards of even 5-10 years ago.

 

it is up, but so what. None of those 3 are significanlty better the Mitch. Bridgewater is probably the only available *obvious upgrade, unless he resigned already and I missed it.

[BigbadB]

 

Statistically speaking, they aren't much better if at all. Granted, QB rating isn't the end all be all of statistics but:

 

Keenum- has 2 seasons in the last 4 worse than Trubisky's 2019 83 QB rating. Only 1 season in his career better than Trubisky's 2018 95.4 rating. Also, 32 years old with no upside to get better.

 

Mariota- has 1 season better than Trubisky's 2018 95.4, and that was a 95.6 season. Same issues as Mitch with taking sacks. Doesn't throw a lot of picks, but similar gunshy and doesn't process quick enough to anticipate hitting an open receiver. More consistently mediocre though than the rest of this group, Trubisky included.

 

Dalton- was statistically worse than Trubisky in 2019. Only has 1 season with a better QB rating than Mitch's 2018, and that was back in 2015. Older than Keenum so also doesn't have upside to improve. A little INT happy at times. Doesn't have a bunch of arm talent.

 

isn't passer rating up league wide?

 

if it were a good statistic we wouldn't be talking about replacing trubisky. his 2018 wasn't nearly as good as his passer rating makes it out to be. at least, not if you're looking at it from the standards of even 5-10 years ago.

 

it is up, but so what. None of those 3 are significanlty better the Mitch. Bridgewater is probably the only available *obvious upgrade, unless he resigned already and I missed it.

 

Bridgewater is gone from NO. Brees is coming back and Tayson Hill has already stated he's willing to stick around NO behind Brees another year. Free Agency hasn't opened yet, so he is available. He's going to cost more than the Bears can afford most likely.

[David]

 

Statistically speaking, they aren't much better if at all. Granted, QB rating isn't the end all be all of statistics but:

 

Keenum- has 2 seasons in the last 4 worse than Trubisky's 2019 83 QB rating. Only 1 season in his career better than Trubisky's 2018 95.4 rating. Also, 32 years old with no upside to get better.

 

Mariota- has 1 season better than Trubisky's 2018 95.4, and that was a 95.6 season. Same issues as Mitch with taking sacks. Doesn't throw a lot of picks, but similar gunshy and doesn't process quick enough to anticipate hitting an open receiver. More consistently mediocre though than the rest of this group, Trubisky included.

 

Dalton- was statistically worse than Trubisky in 2019. Only has 1 season with a better QB rating than Mitch's 2018, and that was back in 2015. Older than Keenum so also doesn't have upside to improve. A little INT happy at times. Doesn't have a bunch of arm talent.

 

isn't passer rating up league wide?

 

if it were a good statistic we wouldn't be talking about replacing trubisky. his 2018 wasn't nearly as good as his passer rating makes it out to be. at least, not if you're looking at it from the standards of even 5-10 years ago.

 

it is up, but so what. None of those 3 are significanlty better the Mitch. Bridgewater is probably the only available *obvious upgrade, unless he resigned already and I missed it.

 

dalton is probably better but i wouldn't bother with him mariota fine whatever if they want him to back up and have someone to throw in if mitch really shits the bed. don't care at all to bother with keenum.

 

carr is the best of the bunch. carr or bust.

[minnesotacubsfan]

 

isn't passer rating up league wide?

 

if it were a good statistic we wouldn't be talking about replacing trubisky. his 2018 wasn't nearly as good as his passer rating makes it out to be. at least, not if you're looking at it from the standards of even 5-10 years ago.

 

it is up, but so what. None of those 3 are significanlty better the Mitch. Bridgewater is probably the only available *obvious upgrade, unless he resigned already and I missed it.

 

dalton is probably better but i wouldn't bother with him mariota fine whatever if they want him to back up and have someone to throw in if mitch really horsefeathers the bed. don't care at all to bother with keenum.

 

carr is the best of the bunch. carr or bust.

 

i'd prolly go Bridgewater or Carr, then Mitch...or bust