WrigleyField 22

Yeah, I mean outside of Phillips he’s the closest thing to a lifer in this upper ranks of this organization and has to be viewed with a tremendous amount of skepticism. Greg Gabriel love also a red flag.

Don't trust that account one bit. Anyways I've been pretty reserved about the unrepented Stein love from Chicago media and fans. Banner's ringing endorsement doesn't give me tons of comfort either. Little I've seen from him, he suffers from dumb person cap math for sure.

I think that guy may get some legit rumors. Not sure he's super plugged in and I can't remember any specific calls he had before, but I don't *think* he's just straight making it up.

Do you mean eye teets? Cuz those would be extraordinary Think he means eye testes

If Fields isn't ever a bottom 5 sack rate guy I'll actually be pleasantly surprised. But that still leaves room for the OL to improve by several ticks even if Fields is "typical high sack QB". Is Fields like a full standard deviation worse from other high sack QBs? Because that's basically where you have to be to be ESPN trying like hell to support PRWR to ends of earth.

ESPN writers can't rock the boat about the PBWR that calls the Bears a top 3 OL! It's just incredible how some have actually taken "Sacks are a QB stat" to such a logical extreme too. Go touch grass if you ever feel sack blame isn't still incredibly nuanced.

The SI article posted earlier mentioned this article in their praise of the signings: Not gonna read through the whole article, but yea in a contract basis ILB are as valued as they have been since late 90s. Most of the biggest contracts in cap terms are either late 90s or current deals. So defintiely a bit of a Renaissance there. Clearly Smith didn't fit Poles mold though, whether it was just the size or attitude.

I think it's crazy, but this FO never has seemed super enthused on him. Even when he was already clearly their best OL he was splitting snaps. And he has an injury history. Even if I thought they were fully over any other issue, that's maintained a question. He was getting nearly 100% of the snaps for a huge chunk of the season (92% or more in every game played between Week 5 and Week 13). I think the FO became sold on him as the season progressed. The injuries though are a concern, missing 4 of the last 8 games, and in 2 of the games he played he only played a few snaps. And he was easily the best lineman in weeks 1-4 and they said, "yea well take him out to keep Patrick in there half the time". And Patrick stunk.

I don’t want them to get rid of him either. But they’ve had a target on him from day one and tried to get rid of him all last summer. I’m not saying he can’t switch sides, but it is a position change and not as meaningless as you suggest. It just strikes me that with four other positions less settled than RG, the one lineman they sign is a RG, and the incumbent RG just so happens to be a guy they tried to run out of town already. As raw pointed out maybe that’s just because he was the best available interior linemen that meets their criteria. Quoting this because a like wasn't enough.

I think it's crazy, but this FO never has seemed super enthused on him. Even when he was already clearly their best OL he was splitting snaps. And he has an injury history. Even if I thought they were fully over any other issue, that's maintained a question.

presumably you aren’t signing a guy to that money and then asking him to change positions. So it looks like Jenkins has to move again after they spent last offseason jerking him around. It seems to me that Poles doesn’t like Jenkins’ attitude. There were vague comments about toughness around him. Maybe they’ve worked through it and see him as moving to the outside. Maybe he’ll go to LG or maybe he’s a prime candidate for being let go. Either way, I don’t think Jenkins is a long term piece in Poles’ mind, yet. If I had to guess Jenkins will slide over to RT I'm very skeptical that's the plan. I'd put money on him cut/traded over being starting day RT.

I'm not an Orlando Brown fan. He wants to be paid top LT money, and he's not a top 5 LT. He's also not a good fit to move around in the outside zone run game. That being said, the Bears are desperate to A) improve the pass blocking and B) spend a bunch of money. And Brown checks both those boxes. I'm thinking. Orlando Brown- LT/RT A'Shawn Robinson- 1-tech Samson Ebukam- Edge And if Ekeler is available, go get him. Trade one of the 2nds for him + a future pick no higher than a 3rd/4th. The Bears still could use an additional weapon and he caught 107 passes last year, and they can afford to pay him with the top RBs in the league. Maybe add a CB. Maybe add a TE2. Draft Jalen Carter at 9. Draft a DE in the 2nd. That gives you a DL of: Ebukam, Carter, A'Shawn, Walker on run downs Ebukam, Walker, Carter, Draft pick (Ojulari?, I'd like a smaller pass rush specialist type) on passing downs. Mix in Justin Jones, Dominique Robinson and Gipson. OL is: Brown, Davis, C (Patrick or 2nd rounder), Jenkins, Jones Ekeler and Herbert in the backfield. Yea, Brown is an overpay but worthwhile one especially at this stage. Unless you really like a guy in the draft and even are prepared to jump a few spots if need be. I assume he'd stay left and Jones to RT. Have had Ebukam on my list all. Off season. And Robinson would be fine too. Think you could add a solid backup there still - they really have no one and I don't think Robinson is a high snap count guy - so create a platoon.

Well there are two guards on every OL so unless you think Davis and Jenkins can only play RG and not LG I don't really see the issue here. I think fans often overrated the importance of sides. But it's not something without consideration. Especially if a guy has spent a very long time me on one side, like Davis. If I was certain they loved Jenkins I'd think nothing of it. But based on the totality of the facts we know I think Jenkins is the odd man out. Maybe they'll get flipped for a 2024 7th.

Whelmed is pretty fair. I can't point to any obvious bad deal (though I'm quite surprised at Edmunds). But collectively and roster construct wise.. Just feels a bit flat. Within next few days needs to hit a few more areas hard (the trenches basically). Then FA becomes a depth and flyer period. You could conceivably leave one position as an obvious hole at 9 if it's a deep position, but I'd much rather they go in with little to no obvious holes and can just go crazy with premium value picks with those first 4 picks in top 64.

Bears (and all teams) need to spend 554M in cash from 2021 - 2023. This is to meet Minimum spending requirements. Right now, after today's FA spending and all the other salaries they have for 2023 and their rookie pool they're probably at somewhere around $500M. So need another $54M scheduled to spend to meet minimum. Some of that can come from other forms, like extensions, practice squad, and in season signings. But really the main bucket left is FA. I'd say at least 40 of that 54 probably should come from FA. That all just meet a minim spending level. The fact they will barely scrape it is kind of crazy in itself. The median team is probably gonna be like $100M over minimum and some will be like $200M. Bears are just one of a few teams where it's even a question. Hopefully that isn't too confusing or technical. When thinking about contracts they may still hand out, they can front load cash. But to get $40M cash I'd say still 33 in APY they'd likely be looking to add (they been front loading cash on all their deals so far).

Ebukam and Key were my two edge targets. Both young with decent upside play and some good pressure stats. Key probably more a specialist. And definitely need help up middle. Even at NT, if not 3T (maybe Poles wasn't lying when he praised Jones)

No worries! I add value where I can, but raws x and O feedback is valuable here.

Wasn't including extensions. Like one $5-7M guy, one $10-12 guy and one $15-17 guy would be a very conservative minimum to hit the cash numbers. That's with a lot of gut math. Flexibility to do more than that for sure. And if he does less... I don't know. Edit - just double checked my gut math and I'll stick with those ranges. If Poles does less than that, feels like extensions need to come in really high or contract structures are gonna be extra goofy (not bad per se, but GOOFY) to work out the minimum cash needs they have. Are you saying the Bears need to commit ~$33 million for 2023 to hit the cap minimum? I'm focused on cash, not cap. So I'm expecting (partially based on reporting of Edmunds - Edwards) that they're front loading cash. So like 65M of APY contracts to hit 90M+ of 2023 spending. But these are still conservative low end estimates. And something like cutting Whitehair creates another $8M in the cash defecit. And the cap hit will be much lower than 65M too then.

It's just kind of hard to say without a little more details. But with some indication of frontloads on two of these, could be as little as two substantial signings. But certainly could be 3-4 more as well. Lots of flexibility on what they do. I'd think 3 more big-ish signings. I know you are doing guesswork here with not a full set of data but is 3 signings accounting for potential extensions for 1-2 guys? Also I'm assuming something like re-signing Monty would be considered a big-ish signing? Wasn't including extensions. Like one $5-7M guy, one $10-12 guy and one $15-17 guy would be a very conservative minimum to hit the cash numbers. That's with a lot of gut math. Flexibility to do more than that for sure. And if he does less... I don't know. Edit - just double checked my gut math and I'll stick with those ranges. If Poles does less than that, feels like extensions need to come in really high or contract structures are gonna be extra goofy (not bad per se, but GOOFY) to work out the minimum cash needs they have.

It's just kind of hard to say without a little more details. But with some indication of frontloads on two of these, could be as little as two substantial signings. But certainly could be 3-4 more as well. Lots of flexibility on what they do. I'd think 3 more big-ish signings.

Seems to be reading too much into IMO. You're still trying to balance the total package so overpaying on non premium positions isn't 3D chess I think.

Is he a Edge in Eberflus defense? No. He is probably a Mike? So maybe TJ is Will? I don't know, flexibility I guess.

Spending dam is breaking but I definitely have questions

Nate Davis, 3 years. Had questions about scheme fit, but I'm sure an upgrade. Whitehair cut incoming?

I'd say they're still another 3-4 big chips to fall before we say that. There is probably a lot of value in tier 2 still as well, but would be a lot of work to connect on that many, which is part of reason just splurging can make sense.