Chicago Bears offseason

[WrigleyField 22]

32 minutes ago, BigSlick said:

That logic also applies to any potential trade partners: if there’s lots of interchangeable talent between 10-20, then what’s the motivation for other teams to offer much to move up in that area?

QB most likely.  Although it also only takes one. Could be for an edge or maybe even a OT (if Poles feels Braxton is good enough for now whereas some other team is more desperate)

[raw]

21 hours ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

There's zero scenarios where it makes sense to go with Fields for another year.

We'd be better off signing some dumb turd like Minshew off the free agent scraps.

I mostly agree with you. But why does it make sense to likely pay more to sign Minshew to play QB than stick with Fields?

[BigSlick]

I don't want to speak for him but I think the premise is that Fields is so bad he's below replacement level and the Bears would be better off with virtually anyone else in the league. 

I don't agree with that, but so it goes. 

[Hairyducked Idiot]

2 hours ago, raw said:

I mostly agree with you. But why does it make sense to likely pay more to sign Minshew to play QB than stick with Fields?

Less distraction, better QB play 

[Hairyducked Idiot]

38 minutes ago, BigSlick said:

I don't want to speak for him but I think the premise is that Fields is so bad he's below replacement level and the Bears would be better off with virtually anyone else in the league. 

I don't agree with that, but so it goes. 

I wouldn't say below replacement level, but it's not that far off.

 

You can't just pick up an equal or better QB off the street for the league minimum, which is what replacement level means.

But you can get one equal or better for a modest offseason one-year deal

[WrigleyField 22]

1 minute ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

I wouldn't say below replacement level, but it's not that far off.

 

You can't just pick up an equal or better QB off the street for the league minimum, which is what replacement level means.

But you can get one equal or better for a modest offseason one-year deal

I don't think you can get equal or better for Fields salary.

 

Now obviously there's the trade value you can get from Fields now verse less in a year (or nothing / maybe comp picks).  But that can be weighted against the possibility he and his trade value improves or the fact you are keeping continuity over a comparable player.

But that would take a bit more nuance than you like to treat Fields with.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

11 minutes ago, WrigleyField 22 said:

I don't think you can get equal or better for Fields salary.

 

Now obviously there's the trade value you can get from Fields now verse less in a year (or nothing / maybe comp picks).  But that can be weighted against the possibility he and his trade value improves or the fact you are keeping continuity over a comparable player.

But that would take a bit more nuance than you like to treat Fields with.

I don't think quarterback is a position you should be punching pennies at.

[Sammy Sofa]

1 hour ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

punching pennies

[WrigleyField 22]

1 hour ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

I don't think quarterback is a position you should be punching pennies at.

I mean sure, sign a 2017 Mike Glennon if you want?

 

Anything up to like $24M (just below Jimmy G) is a basically a high variance questionable pool not dissimilar in nature to Fields, (although most stylistically different). All almost certainly with less upside than Fields. Some with, I guess, less downside? But not like crazy certain floors either.

Edited January 29, 2024 by WrigleyField 22

[Hairyducked Idiot]

29 minutes ago, WrigleyField 22 said:

I mean sure, sign a 2017 Mike Glennon if you want?

 

Anything up to like $24M (just below Jimmy G) is a basically a high variance questionable pool not dissimilar in nature to Fields, (although most stylistically different). All almost certainly with less upside than Fields. Some with, I guess, less downside? But not like crazy certain floors either.

Fields isn't going to magically transform into something he's not.  The upside isn't there.

[WrigleyField 22]

3 minutes ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

Fields isn't going to magically transform into something he's not.  The upside isn't there.

It's not magic.  It's just that he's not your dream QB type and you can't let go of it.  I mean the FA alternative offered up is Minshew. He ain't magically getting better either you just like vibes better lol

[Wilson A2000]

In my dreams

 

 

[WrigleyField 22]

1 minute ago, Wilson A2000 said:

In my dreams

 

 

Agreed, that's dreaming.  

 

Also does that mock have Daniels going to 2 in favor of Maye?  I swear something happens to people's brains when there is a no doubter #1 QB and the next best obvious QB falls in favor of someone else (see Lawrence:Fields:Wilson) 

[We Got The Whole 9]

There are a lot of Bears players in Fields' corner. I wouldn't say discarding him would be less of a distraction necessarily. 

 

Draft Williams and make him QB3. Take a page out of the much-maligned Packers book and groom your prospect. 

[WrigleyField 22]

Just now, We Got The Whole 9 said:

There are a lot of Bears players in Fields' corner. I wouldn't say discarding him would be less of a distraction necessarily. 

 

Draft Williams and make him QB3. Take a page out of the much-maligned Packers book and groom your prospect. 

QB3 may be taking it a bit too far.  I mean I guess you kind of have to chose early and either give him all the early reps early or not and commit to a slow development, but at the absolute worst case expectation if you planned to bench Williams is that he's QB3 for like 4-6 weeks max. After that point, I'd really expect he can take over for injury even if the plan was to sit him. But the gameplan may have to adjust (as opposed to the 2021 plan with Fields when he got inserted earlier than planned against Cleveland and the plan was "Eh horsefeathers it, run it back with the Dalton O")

[UMFan83]

29 minutes ago, Wilson A2000 said:

In my dreams

 

 

lol I believe I proposed a NE trade a few pages ago where the Bears were giving up more and was told it was not enough. That’s way more than not enough. Based on the Jimmy Johnson calculator the difference between 1.03 and 1.09 is roughly equal to 1.20. This trade is saying that Fields is worth more than 1.20 (given that NE is also giving up a 4th and 2025 3rd and 5th for a Bears 6th). Lmao

[Rex Buckingham]

The "Packers plan" only worked because they had HOF QBs in place. Mahomet did the same thing, with Alex Smith playing pretty dang well. Smith threw for over 4000 yards, 26 TDs and only 5 INTs in 15 games that year while rushing for over 300 yards as KC went 9-6. Hard to bench a guy playing like that. 

Fields hasn't shown he can replicate Smith's performance or even a close facsimile, let alone that of Rodgers or Favre

[Hairyducked Idiot]

1 hour ago, WrigleyField 22 said:

It's not magic.  It's just that he's not your dream QB type and you can't let go of it.  I mean the FA alternative offered up is Minshew. He ain't magically getting better either you just like vibes better lol

Minshew is better at playing quarterback than Justin Fields is.

It has nothing to do with vibes. You can't shackle your team to someone who is *that* bad at the quarterback's most important job: Decision-making.

[raw]

37 minutes ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

Minshew is better at playing quarterback than Justin Fields is.

It has nothing to do with vibes. You can't shackle your team to someone who is *that* bad at the quarterback's most important job: Decision-making.

I mean, it's no more shackling than Minshew would be. In fact, one could argue it's less of a shackle to stay with Fields and his 3.23M cash amount in 2024, (if you decline his 5th year option) than it would be to get Gardner Minshew, who certainly would want a significant pay raise from his 3.5M salary after starting 1 3 games,

Also worth noting, Fields was better in every metric across the board, other than 0.8% completion percentage and QB wins, if you care about that sort of thing. 

[raw]

***should be noted that I do NOT want to stay with Fields. 

[Hairyducked Idiot]

7 minutes ago, raw said:

I mean, it's no more shackling than Minshew would be. In fact, one could argue it's less of a shackle to stay with Fields and his 3.23M cash amount in 2024, (if you decline his 5th year option) than it would be to get Gardner Minshew, who certainly would want a significant pay raise from his 3.5M salary after starting 1 3 games,

Also worth noting, Fields was better in every metric across the board, other than 0.8% completion percentage and QB wins, if you care about that sort of thing. 

Succ%, ANY/A, INT%, passing yards, total yards, QBR, fumbles

Fields has terrible stats, worse than a guy like Minshew, and the bad part is that he's actually worse than that. The stats don't show all the times he screwed over the run game with bad line checks.

He really is that bad at QB and there's literally no plausible scenario where it makes sense for him to be your starting QB in 2024.

Edited January 30, 2024 by Hairyducked Idiot

[raw]

3 minutes ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

Succ%, ANY/A, INT%, passing yards, QBR

QBR isn't a real stat. Passing yards is a counting stat, which you know better than to use for a guy with 120 more passing attempts.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

7 minutes ago, raw said:

QBR isn't a real stat. Passing yards is a counting stat, which you know better than to use for a guy with 120 more passing attempts.

They had the same number of starts.

Fields is the worst i've ever seen at turning called passes into non-attempts. Everyone is going to have more attempts than him in similar playing time.

[WrigleyField 22]

16 minutes ago, raw said:

***should be noted that I do NOT want to stay with Fields. 

Yea this is really dumb to argue over what the third best option is at QB

[WrigleyField 22]

2 minutes ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

They had the same number of starts.

Fields is the worst i've ever seen at turning called passes into non-attempts. Everyone is going to have more attempts than him in similar playing time.

How many snaps of Minshew did you watch?