WrigleyField 22
-
Posts
19,040 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
16
Content Type
Profiles
Joomla Posts 1
Chicago Cubs Videos
Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking
News
2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
Guides & Resources
2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
The Chicago Cubs Players Project
2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker
2026 Chicago Cubs Draft Tracker: Picks & Bonuses
Blogs
Events
Forums
Store
Gallery
Everything posted by WrigleyField 22
-
I’m ready to do the same and then start embracing the tank If it's true they're getting major leaguers back, doesn't seem to be a very ambitious tank effort. -
Yea I figured that was the issue it's just funny they get that west coast road trip early in the year just like they used to.
-
Yea, they can't overpay Mitch. Even if this is the new/real Mitch that just isn't a QB you can pay 20-25M to. I'd give him something like 2/12 in guaranteed money and some snap count incentives that could bump it to 10M per year. Additional performance incentives they can bump it to 15m per year. If he can beat that on the market, do your best with a Flacco or whatever on a cheap deal and focus on the draft for acquiring a QB in the next 2 years.
-
Man the schedule gets ridiculously rough from here for awhile. 9 of next 10 on the road, 7 of the 10 against 2020 playoff teams 9 of 10 on the road? How did the Bulls get the old Circus trip in the year of Covid?
-
Bears Packers wild card matchup? yup our only hope is to hurt Aaron Rodgers Upon closer inspection they do also need Arizona to beat LA in that case. In any case, GB would need SF to beat SEA for the game not to matter but there's almost no chance that's decided first. So the Pack are playing for a bye and potentially to eliminate the Bears. Joy.
-
But if Ten comes back tonight, and the Bears manage to upset them next week..... Bears Packers wild card matchup?
-
Brock something from Boise State I think? Mid 2000s ish?
-
Packers fan relish it even more. I think gushing over white RB (or white WR) is just your typical NFL fan thing. The backup QB thing though definitely is unique to a franchise like the Bears.
-
Well probably get him on the same part of his career trajectory as Jimmy Graham and pay him twice as much.
-
Well hopefully once you learn a challenging task, subsequent efforts have a quicker turnaround lol. Though pro sports are rarely the forgiving type of atmosphere that allow the 2nd attempt like that.
-
Yea, seems like it's shaking out to be a good year for OT. I guess some are slotting Slater as a OG due to short arms, but others think he'll be fine. I've also seen Mayfield drop into rd2. I think there's some small school guy who could go end of Rd1. Some guy from NDSU maybe? I can't remember his name but I've seen him mocked Rd1. As to QB I'm reading more and more about Wilson maybe being QB2 over Fields and now with the Jets projected at 2 many are speculating they could stick with Darnold for another year if they aren't in a position for Lawrence. They'd still probably have a shot next year for a decent QB prospect if Darnold flops and they can give him a shot under a new regime. So suddenly it's feasible QB 2 is number 4 to Carolina, and could be Wilson. Then Fields could drop. Does Atlanta bite on a QB to replace Ryan? Detroit to replace Stafford? A team like Saints or Indy trade up? SF could look to replace Jimmy G. Either way though you are potentially outside the top 10 for QBs 3 and 4.
-
Kmet has had it locked down all of like 2 games and plenty of good teams utilize 2 TE's. (we can basically do this about every position of we wanna be bearish enough). From a practical perspective I think Pitts is the only TE that will go high and it will likely be in the top 10. But if he drops to the mid first you probably have a compelling value case on your hands. Agreed. If Pitts is there in the teens, you take him and easily scheme him in with Kmet. CB (Fuller and Johnson + Vildor and Shelley are decent depth even after Skrine is cut) and RB (Montgomery + poor positional value in the first round) are the only positions I would be shocked to see the Bears pick in the first round. Yea, Etienne looks like RB1 and he's really exciting, but I don't think he's that Rd1 RB value. Though I would pop if there was one there, and not let Montgomery block that. As for CB, Fuller is, as of now l, entering his final contract year and about to enter the downside of the age curve. I think you could argue some need there. Not sure what the Rd1 CBs look like.
-
Also, damning with faint praise and all, but I felt Mooney was the most exciting young WR the Bears have ever had all year and now he's statistically backed it up: (note he's still behind Forte and Ditka for all Bears rookies)
-
Kmet has had it locked down all of like 2 games and plenty of good teams utilize 2 TE's. (we can basically do this about every position of we wanna be bearish enough). From a practical perspective I think Pitts is the only TE that will go high and it will likely be in the top 10. But if he drops to the mid first you probably have a compelling value case on your hands.
-
If you resign Trubisky, you can draft EDGE or WR in the 1st round, depending on who is there. That frees up letting Arob go or trading Mack. If you draft OL, you will likely have to bring Arob back. Or, you simply BPA the pick I guess the point is if Trubisky plays himself into a new contract you have more options than if he flat out sucked and you HAVE to draft QB in the 1st. I’m really not in the mood to draft a linebacker. My preferences for the first round would be o-line, QB, WR I generally hate narrowing down on the first round. Just get the best players you can. Obviously positional value plays some role if you're talking QB v ILB, but I can come up with needs anywhere on the roster basically.
-
In a trade you don't pick up the guaranteed salary hits, just pro-rations from bonuses. So theres 5M in guaranteed 2021 (4) and 2022 (1) the new team picks up. Bears just eat the signing bonus pro-ration from signing bonus from the restructure. In a cut, the Bears eat that pro ration and the guarantee base salaries. I'm admittedly starting to go on a bit of a "the base salaries are all that matters crusade.". The signing bonuses are all sunk costs and you don't want to fall into a sunk cost fallacy with your decision making. So even moves that people say "cost you" cap space really are net savings in a big picture. The cap hits year over year are pretty fungible so there's almost always ways to move around dead hits without increasing guarantees. Basically if you can get out of unearned cash payments, these moves always save cap. If you cant get out of new cash payments, they don't. So if he's traded (rather than cut), the new team takes the cap hit on guaranteed but not-paid-yet money, right? That would be his 2021 salary, $1m of his 2022 salary, and a 2022 $4m roster bonus. Also, if Trubisky manages to stay healthy and play these last two games, we avoided any of his escalator clauses. Yep. I think that roster bonus for 2022 isn't earned until next year though.
-
In a trade you don't pick up the guaranteed salary hits, just pro-rations from bonuses. So theres 5M in guaranteed 2021 (4) and 2022 (1) the new team picks up. Bears just eat the signing bonus pro-ration from signing bonus from the restructure. In a cut, the Bears eat that pro ration and the guarantee base salaries. I'm admittedly starting to go on a bit of a "the base salaries are all that matters crusade.". The signing bonuses are all sunk costs and you don't want to fall into a sunk cost fallacy with your decision making. So even moves that people say "cost you" cap space really are net savings in a big picture. The cap hits year over year are pretty fungible so there's almost always ways to move around dead hits without increasing guarantees. Basically if you can get out of unearned cash payments, these moves always save cap. If you cant get out of new cash payments, they don't.
-
Since he has all that dead money, knowing Pace he will trade Foles and a 4rd round pick for a conditional 7th rounder to get rid of him. But in all seriousness, having Foles stuck on the roster should not hinder the Bears from trying to find and develop a potential QB of the future. Yea can't let the dead hits dictate Foles. He's a somewhat tradeable contract for the receiving team. But worst case he's a backup and you have to carry 3 QBs assuming you have a rookie too. If you really only wanted to go 2 QBs then I guess you take the dead hits even though it doesn't save you anything at all.
-
The Mariota comp is an interesting one as far as contracts go. It was ~10 guarantee, which is the important number. Give Mitch 2/12 with 10 guarantee and some snap count incentives/escalators that guarantee his 2022 portion... that basically makes it a Mariota equivalent. And it's a small enough contract the high guarantee isn't a huge issue. Winston got the minimum on the other hand, and while I'd rather have Mariota over Winston, it's not a 10M difference, IMO. So the market can be tough to predict. If Pace doesn't get set on one guy I'm pretty sure someone will shake out of the bottom of the market that's acceptable for a super low cost. Speaking of Mariota, he's a cut candidate. If Mitch gets outbid elsewhere for dumb money, they could do worse that Mariota as a bridge QB.
-
Yea, I'm like at 12/2 range tops and that's assuming he plays well the next two weeks. Same, and even that feels like a sentimental overpay. *looks at what it would cost to get rid of Foles* God *dammit* pace Trade him for a conditional 2034 7th rounder.
-
Complain about your fantasy team that no one cares about here
WrigleyField 22 replied to UMFan83's topic in Fantasy Sports
Okay I need 6.5 points tomorrow. Ty Higgins or Chase Claypool? -
Yea, I'm like at 12/2 range tops and that's assuming he plays well the next two weeks.
-
Trubisky's 5th year option was either the amount of the transition tag or franchise tag. So that would still technically be an option (though that sounds insane to me) if it really came to it. Though you lose the ability to use the tag for Arob. All things considered, it was a super low risk move to not pick up that option, even given a super low odd outcome where he came out and slayed all 16 games.
-
Complain about your fantasy team that no one cares about here
WrigleyField 22 replied to UMFan83's topic in Fantasy Sports
My decision to drop Fournette a couple weeks back may likely end up very consequential as my Rd 1 opponent picked him up and he just had a solid outing. I have to decide between Higgins or Claypool Monday night. He has Chubb tonight and I have about a 8 point edge right now (and if Mahomes picks up a few more here). -
Cue the Riddick for GM rumor mill
