raw

On the OL point, I think at a certain point its fair to question if Wilson is making life harder on the OL. Most analytic minded guys will say that the QB is responsible for a great deal of sack % for example. If its 4 top 1-3 picks over the next 3 drafts... I guess the devil is just in the details. I'm slightly more concerned about net pick loss. I'd part with the 3 firsts if I got a 2nd back, for example, as the difference between say 20 to 50th in the draft is often pretty small. Three 1sts and a second is a lot different that two 1sts and two 3rds. Oh yeah, Wilson makes it much harder on his line. Sacks are actually harder to get now because teams get the ball out so quickly. He holds onto the ball and runs around which can create pressure (rusher can see him, lineman can't, rusher adjusts to QB leaving the pocket while OL trying to protect the pocket). As for the picks, I'm cool with giving up 1sts. I don't want to give up 1sts, and 2nds and 3rds. I mean, you still gotta hit on the picks, but you have to have the picks to hit on. Three 1sts and a 2nd is different from 2 1sts and 2 3rds because of that extra 1st round pick. But I'd also rather give up 3 1sts instead of 2 1sts and 2 2nds in the next 2 years, leaving your first pick in the 80s or later for 2 straight years.

Russell Wilson has won 10 games in every year of his career, except once, he only won 9 which was the only year the Seahawks missed the playoffs with him at QB. He had the Legion of Boom early in his career, with mediocre receiver talent. Then he's done it with receiver talent, but a weak defense. All the while, never having an OL. Basically, the point I'm making is that Wilson is so good that it would be pretty hard to really screw this up (in the next 3 years you'd lose picks), unless he gets injured. Doesn't guarantee a championship or even close to it, but the odds are you're making the playoffs at least 2 of the next 3 years, even if you have to transition from guys like Mack, Hicks, Quinn, Fuller on defense and not replace them with blue chip picks. Bears currently have 9 picks in the first 2 days of the next 3 drafts (potential to get another if Robinson walks this or next year). If you tell me they can keep 5 of those picks while getting a top 5 QB like Wilson, I'll take that.

I don't really see the Bears trading any of the core pieces for a QB. It kinda of defeats the purpose to gut portions of the defense to add a QB who you have to trade a bunch of top draft picks to get. I guess Fuller is a name coming up in rumors, but doesn't really make sense to me. This defense was built with guys like Fuller, Jackson, Mack, Trevathan, Hicks, Goldman and Smith. I don't see any of those guys being available unless the Bears really think Goldman can make up for the loss of Hicks. They'll have to work a bunch of stuff with cap space, but trading a bunch of draft picks for a QB means they are going for a big run at the title. Making a big run is tougher if they lose a big part of the defense, since their best means of replacing that part would be with a draft pick or spending even more money. I could see the Bears giving up Johnson or Nichols or maybe even Daniels on the offensive side (sounds like a lot of very good OGs are going to be cut). They are cheap contracts plus the Bears played significant snaps without 2 of them last year. Could be attractive to a team like Seattle who doesn't have much cap, will eat money in a Wilson deal, and need OL help + could lose their top CB who is a FA.

Whitehair was well above average once he moved to LG in the second half (of course there is a question of the quality of opponents during the win streak at the end). I'm going to need to see more from Mustipher; ideally they wouldn't go to camp next year with some competition for him. Either way, like goony, I'm definitely more confident on the interior than the tackles. With the number of cuts across the league, hopefully adding a guy like Wilson will help them attract competent players on the cheap. They have four competent guys in the middle with Mustipher, Whitehair, Daniels & Bars. If Bars is capable of sliding to RT, they've "only" need a LT to have a solid line. I'd feel a lot better if they could get an experienced center on the cheap. And no way do I want Bars starting, especially at RT. If Bars and Mustipher are your primary backups, I'd feel really good about the OL, even if Leno is manning one side. Bears absolutely have to add an early tackle in this (and probably the next) draft....assuming they actually have draft picks.

A couple things with Wilson. 1. I actually don't think where the Bears pick is a huge factor for a Wilson (or Watson) trade. In Wilson's case, he has said the teams he's willing to waive his NTC for. Dallas has the highest pick, but that would also mean letting Dak walk in a franchise tag decision they'd have to make before a trade would likely be made. The Raiders have a similar pick to the Bears. The Saints were the other team and they have an even lower pick (and no cap space). Also, we can't discount desperation. I honestly don't think anyone will beat the Bears in number of assets traded. A team like NYJ or MIA isn't going to be as willing to give up multiple other 1sts in addition to a top 3 pick. Then it just becomes a preference if Hou/Sea wants a top QB this year or a longer term rebuild with a Herschel Walker like trade haul. 2. That being said, the Bears big disadavantage is having no QB. While other teams may be hesitant to trade a bunch of assets because they have a bird in the hand with a QB and/or a high draft pick, the Bears have neither and HAVE to be desperate to give up quantity over quality. Seattle doesn't seem like a team (70-year old coach, 10-win seasons in all but 1 Wilson season, built to win now elsewhere on roster) that would be willing to just trade Wilson and rebuild right now. And if they do trade him to the Cowboys, I'd imagine it would be a sign and trade done in a couple months where Seattle gets Dak and he never sees the FA market.

I wasn't as down on Skrine as others, but that was probably the most obvious cut. He's not getting any younger and finding someone to play average nickel at less money shouldn't be that difficult. Callahan was probably better than Skrine, but the switch from Fangio to Pagano probably hurt the defense worse than the slight drop off in production at nickel. Callahan was/is much better than Skrine, but has played 10 games in 2 years in Denver. Skrine was mostly fine in 2019. He was mostly bad in 2020, and most damningly, missed like the final 6 games with a concussion. Taylor Gabriel had a similar hiatus with a concussion late in 2019 and hasn't played in the league since. There's probably a decent chance Skrine doesn't play again either.

Yeah, I don't hate Winston as an option at all. Mariota, Minshew or Darnold are basically Samoan Mitch, Mustache Mitch, and Mono Mitch. The only thing going for them is for at least 4-5 weeks Nagy would probably let them throw the ball without fear of them screwing up which seemed to be the issue with Trubisky. IDK that Winston would get that luxury. All those guys better be Glennon's to a rookie's Trubisky (Lance, Jones, or Fields seem most likely possibly with trade up).

It's funny to look at mock drafts around the internet and seeing people's thoughts on the Bears draft picks. Either people don't like or don't understand the Bears situation and don't understand their GM. The prevailing opinions are the Bears are NOT able to get any QB in a trade. Obviously, mock drafts don't really touch on free agency, but I've seen mocks predict trades not involving just picks. I've seen mocks with teams trading up for QBs. But never the Bears. Not only that, but the Bears don't even pick a QB in any of them. Pass on Mac Jones (which would be fine). There's even a mock that has Justin Fields going 24th to the Steelers, meaning passed on by the Bears (which would be terrible). It's weird because everyone acknowledges the Bears need a QB. Most acknowledge the pure desperation they have for a QB. They've been rumored to be in on Stafford, Wentz, Carr, Watson, Wilson, and Minshew. I've read rumored interest of Dak (if available). They have ties to Mariota (Pace tried to trade up for him in 2016). Yet, nobody has the Bears moving for a QB. Even weirder, I'd say over half the mocks around the web have them going WR in the 1st round. They're also assuming Allen Robinson walks. While that could happen, I think it's much more likely he gets tagged. I know mocks should be taken with a grain of salt, especially from the same people that thought the Bears were taking defense in 2017, even after the trade up to 2. But some of this stuff is just insanely uninformed.

Man, if Russell Wilson really mentions the Bears as a team he would play for, you offer a trade, right off the bat, that would make Seattle consider a deal even if they don't plan on trading Wilson. I don't really like the thought of trading 3 1sts for a 33 year old QB on the surface, but this is a top 5 guy still playing at an MVP level with no signs of slowing down.

Another year, another season where IU has its token top 10 team they unexplicably sweep only to likely put themselves on the outside looking in because they can't beat Rutgers, or Penn St, or Nebraska.

I think if GarPax were still in charge they would be without a doubt standing pat to try to squeeze out a playoff appearance. Im thinking AK and crew will take a more long term view and not let some success deviate them from their plans. That doesn't mean they will gut a team that has a lot of positive momentum and seems to be growing with a competent coach but I think if they can get some long term value for a piece that won't necessarily gut the team they will strongly consider it. There's also a ton of value is giving these guys playoff experience. There's definitely value in not gutting the team around Zach LaVine to show him you can build around him. Thad and Sato make this really difficult though. The Bulls would likely pull the trigger if they can get a PG for Lauri, but that could cut down Sato's minutes or require Thad's salary to match depending on the PG they would get.

Bulls are in an interesting spot. Obviously, looking like a potential playoff team and just 1/2 game out of the 4th seed in the East. But also obvious is that they likely aren't getting out of the 1st round of the playoffs as constructed. They have been on a great run without Lauri and Otto Porter. So, I would think those guys (one a UFA after the year, the other RFA) would definitely be on the trade block. But then there's guys like Thaddeus (Thadgic Johnson) Young, Tomas Satoransky, and Garrett Temple, who aren't going to be part of the Bulls going too much further in the future who could bring back some decent assets but are a HUGE part of the winning rotation right now. They probably have to keep the latter 3 for a playoff run this year. But if they get an offer they can't refuse for any of them (or have to add them as part of a Markannen/Porter trade) then it's probably worth screwing up the rotation this year for long-term gain.

As bad as the Bears have been at drafting and developing QBs, their inability to do so with pass rushers is equally bad. Floyd never developed into a pass rusher and before that wasn't Mark Andersen the last one? And Anderson was basically a 1-year wonder. They've plugged pass rush through free agency and trade for the most part this century - Quinn, Mack, Peppers, Ogunleye. They've really failed at all the premier positions. If I had to rank the top 5 most important positions in football they'd be QB, OT, Pass rusher, CB, and recently I'd put WR 5th. Not only have the Bears had a sheer lack of picks at this positions, they've failed when picking these positions early. QB- no early picks o QB between 2003 (Grossman) and 2017 (Trubisky) OT- Only 4 picks on tackles before the 5th round this century. Those pick were Gabe Carimi in 2011 (injured bust), Chris Williams in 2008 (bust moved to guard), Marc Columbo (Bears bust, who Cowboys got a few good years out of) and Mike Gandy in 02 and 01 respectively. Pass rusher- Floyd and McClellin are the only top 100 picks this decade. Going back to 2000 throws more bad picks in there, Dan Bazuin and Michael Haynes (Alex Brown was pick 104 in 2002). CB- Actually have done well here. Jaylon Johnson's the only Pace pick at CB (that wasn't moved to S). Fuller was a previous regime pick, which worked. Tillman was the previous early pick at CB. But have been able to add guys like Vasher, Bowman, Callahan, etc. here thru the draft UDFA process. WR- Jeffery was a good pick. But since, Miller and Kevin White. Some OK picks mixed in (Bennett, Knox, Hester, Berrian) and some bad (Iglesias, Bradley)

Good game. Embiid is a monster. Bulls are close, but still so far away. Sent from my SM-A115AZ using Tapatalk

what part of "tank this horsefeathers" dont you understand The people who are serious about Darnold being a reclamation project aren't pro-tank. They have just been bludgeoned by the team for decades so they have no standards for the team There's 1 partially pro-Darnold post in this thread.

It's not outrageous to think he can be fixed. Probably is to think Nagy and DeFilippo and co. can fix him. Agree with your assessment of him though, in regards to Pace's interest. The news that Pace never offered Wentz or Stafford is interesting to me. Honestly, it either says to me that Pace isn't going to go stupid for a guy that might not be the answer (or isn't allowed to) or maybe thinks he has a legit shot at a legit answer. I do still think in the end it will be someone like Mariota and a draft pick. Mariota is just as much of a reclamation project as Wentz, and may cost just money if the Raiders stick w/ Carr. Pace had interest in him the year he was drafted.

LaVine's a killer, man. He went from needing to carry the team to respectability because there was nobody else to wanting to carry the team to wins. He hasn't always come thru in the clutch this year, but he's stepped up and taken over on the offensive end and even turned it up defensively when the team needed him to.

Works for me. Wentz hasn't actually gone anywhere either, so there's still opportunity to revisit when he and/or the Eagles become more reasonable. I tend to think at least one, probably both of Bridgewater/Garappolo can be had too. They're a little lower upside than Wentz, but that much safer. And I'd say the expected production of all three guys is similar (somewhere in the teens if you were ranking every QB ordinally). For me, the play is to get whichever of those three guys costs the least in draft picks and take a day 2 QB in the draft. In FA, do what you can, but don't add any long term $ except maybe a Robinson extension. Yeah, other than Watson and Prescott, none of the options are long-term, franchise changing QBs. Wentz, Bridgewater, Jimmy G, MInshew, etc. are all guys that can get the team by for a couple years (at best) while you hopefully draft and develop an actual real long-term QB. If they can get any of the latter guys, I'd hope it's for cheap enough that the Bears can potentially add an early QB in this draft, even if they have to trade up (Lance). Derek Carr is an interesting one, because he's probably somewhere in the middle. He's better than the latter group, but would be treated like he's one of the elites, requiring a lot of trade capital and likely a big contract extension.

Sounds like the Bears are all but out of the Wentz "sweepstakes" now. They won't trade for him unless they know he wants to be in Chicago. No word on whether he would want to be in Chicago, but definitely prefers Indianapolis. Definitely seems like the Bears had the best offer though. I probably like Wentz more than most Bears fans, so I had talked myself into that this was going to happen. NGL, I'm slightly disappointed, because I don't know where else the Bears can realistically go to find competent QB play. Not that Wentz was guaranteed competence, but not many of the other options seem very realistic at this point. Carr doesn't seem like he's being traded. If Watson gets traded, it won't be to Chicago. Sounds like Dak is getting tagged again. Doesn't seem like they're interested in draft prospects.

So the theory now is the Bears have been the most aggressive in Wentz trade talks, but Wentz really wants to go to Indianapolis. Not sure why what Wentz wants matters, but many still think the Bears get a deal done, and several reports that they haven't (and probably won't) give up #20. Sent from my SM-A115AZ using Tapatalk

Believe he was 6th in QB pressures this year.

Ah yeah, that's true. And the Packers have a true need on the D-line, unlike the Bears and Steelers.

If Watt would play for a significantly lower cap hit than the 12 Hicks is going to get, then yes. Sent from my SM-A115AZ using Tapatalk with Goldman back and Nichols coming on, Hicks isn't as critical as he once was. Quinn, however.... I also would be a bit surprised to see JJ Watt taking a big pay cut, however. I'm sure he'll still get a choice on whether he wants to take a big paycut or not, but he's probably an 8Mil + incentives type player at this point in his career. But with his reputation and marketability, if he wants to continue to be a 15M/year player, I'm sure there are several teams that will oblige him. But if there's anyone that doesn't care about money and would take much less money in order to win a ring, it's JJ. The teams that make the most sense are Pittsburgh with his brothers or Chicago with his wife, unless he goes for a pure ring chase. And those 2 teams don't have the cap room to pay him a bunch.

Watt would be fun with this defense. The problem is with Mack, Quinn, Hicks and Goldman....adding Watt would be about 75M in cap going to the front 5 of the defense. But if they could trade Hicks, and sign Watt for a small cap hit in 2021, it would be a move I would like. Watt does have the ability to rush from the edge if Quinn can't turn it around. Although, I just saw Vita Vea dominate rushing from the edge in the Superbowl so maybe they could get similar from putting Hicks outside at times. You want to trade Hicks and replace him with Watt? If Watt would play for a significantly lower cap hit than the 12 Hicks is going to get, then yes. Sent from my SM-A115AZ using Tapatalk

The Bears need more old DE. Watt would be fun with this defense. The problem is with Mack, Quinn, Hicks and Goldman....adding Watt would be about 75M in cap going to the front 5 of the defense. But if they could trade Hicks, and sign Watt for a small cap hit in 2021, it would be a move I would like. Watt does have the ability to rush from the edge if Quinn can't turn it around. Although, I just saw Vita Vea dominate rushing from the edge in the Superbowl so maybe they could get similar from putting Hicks outside at times.