malagabears Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 As with all fantasy armchair GM disclaimers, none of this is going to happen but great to hope for if we decide to put all the cards on the table and go "All In". Pace hit his homerun on D last season paying a steep price. Why not go with Bell on O to really put us in the conversation for NFC elite and potential SB even more so. We are extremely strapped in CAP space right now but with 3-4 cuts and 2 bold salary to bonus conversions (we kick the can down the road) we can comfortably bid for Bell and afford Amos over Callahan. I do this because I see our true window now as 2019/20 and with the looming CBA issues anything can happen. The idea for Bell came from this recent article: https://www.bleachernation.com/bears/2019/02/12/hmm-are-the-bears-a-team-to-watch-in-the-leveon-bell-sweepstakes/ In a trip around the NFL free agency rumor mill, Fansided’s Matt Verderame calls the Bears a team to watch in the Le’Veon Bell sweepstakes. Hello. But is this something we fully buy? The Bears are in the thick of a competitive window, sure, but do they have what it takes to pull it off. Short answer: Yeah, probably. Longer answer: Yeah, probably … but it’s complicated. Based on the aggressive moves we’ve seen from Bears GM Ryan Pace in the recent past (moving up in the first round to draft the quarterback he wanted, landing a hot and popular head coach, making sweeping changes in free agency, and pushing his chips to the center in a trade for Khalil Mack), we can’t dismiss the idea of the Bears being in on Bell. And if you think about how Matt Nagy used his running backs, as well as the team’s consideration of signing Kareem Hunt (before he signed with the Browns), then it’s hard not to imagine the team actively seeking an upgrade at the position – something Bell would certainly provide. The author gives some ideas on how to achieve immediate CAP space but cutting Sims, Acho, & Kwia. I leave Kwia but cut the aforementioned 2 plus Parkey. I also: 1. Convert 10M of Mack's 2019 guaranteed salary to a signing bonus and spread the hit over 5 years which gives us 8M in CAP space. 2. Convert 4.5M of Long's 2019 salary into a signing bonus which gives us 3M in CAP back. Based on the screenshot below we have 23.4M of CAP. You have to account for the 2M for Mack and 1.5M for Long. Now we sign Bell to a 5/75M with 45M guaranteed. The CAP hits are as follows: 2019: 4M salary, 25M signing bonus spread out over 2019/20/21/22/23. 2019 CAP hit = 9M 2020: 6M salary, 3M roster bonus. 2020 CAP hit = 14M. 2021: 6M salary, 3M roster bonus, 2021 CAP hit = 11M (roster bonus not guaranteed) 2022: 10M salary, 4M roster bonus, 2022 CAP hit = 5M 2023: 10M salary, 4M roster bonus, 2023 CAP hit = 5M Remaining CAP = 14.5M At safety we resign Adrian Amos to a decent contract of 4/26M with 16M guaranteed. A bit higher than we would like but it was a choice of Callahan or Amos. In this case Amos comes in a little cheaper without Callahan's injury history/concerns. His 2019 CAP hit Is 5.5M with a 3M salary, 10M signing bonus spread out over 4 years. Rekaining CAP = 9M For our NDB we sign Brian Poole who was recently released by the Falcons. He put up good number but only graded out 81st according to PFF (Take it with a grain of salt). We give him a 2/6M with 3M guaranteed. For 2019 we give him a 1M salary with 2M signing bonus. A change of scenery should him good and he could thrive under Pegano. 2019 CAP = 1.5M Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dll2000 Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 I love the creativity of the post, but I would not want this to happen. Bell is a head case who has a particular unique running style that may or may not work with Bears oline. Overpaying RBs almost always turns out to be a mistake. A one year deal that isnt too crazy? Lets go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WindyCity Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 You would essentially detonate the salary cap situation. Most of our 2020 cap space would have been spent. Restructuring Long makes cutting him in 2020 half the savings. What do we do about Floyds option Whitehair Jackson Cohen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WindyCity Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 The 23 million is pretty much gone with 3 signings. You still need to add about 8 veteran players. The draft will be 2.75 million. In season emergencies 3-4 million Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sugashane Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 I'm open to a short deal but honestly Bell sitting the whole year really soured me on him. I can understand mistakes but his actions to me just make him seem like a head case. To sign him would be like signing a prime BMarsh (in retrospect), as you're getting an elite talent but are waiting for that bomb to go off. But I want a Super Bowl too, so if it could be structured to be guaranteed for the first two years only then we can cut him for little to nothing year 3 and use his money to help pay for Jackson, and give us time to find a replacement RB, then I'm good with it. But I don't want to lose out on our young talents to add him. It would be some work to make everything go smoothly and not rely on a bunch of minimum contracts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soulman Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 I all have to do is contrast the attitude of a Kahlil Mack with that of guys like Bell and where I see how well Mack fits I see just the opposite with Bell. No doubt he has the talent we'd be looking for but the way our offense is structured to use as many weapons as possible I would not be in favor of paying any RB and average of $15 mil per year. I don't see him as being the same kind of difference maker on offense Mack has been on defense. Beyond that Pace has done and excellent job of drafting and signing a young core group of players I would hope we can ride with for several years. I wouldn't want to create a cap situation whereby we'd struggle to keep that group intact for the long haul and acquiring Bell may risk that. For whatever reason the Bears always seemed to have had success drafting RBs while failing at drafting QBs. Mitch may have broken that streak as far as QBs go and we can only hope we don't lose our touch drafting good backs. Pace has done well with it so far in Howard and Cohen. If the NFL cleared him I was all for bringing in Hunt on a short term deal but with that possibility gone I'd be content to keep Howard and simply draft a rookie RB whose both complimentary and a better fit long term for what Nagy has in mind. Or we trade Howard now in order to get some value for him and bring in several backs to compete for the #1 spot. Either way I don't think it will hurt us as far as advancing this offense. It's not ground based. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sugashane Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 2 hours ago, soulman said: I'd be content to keep Howard and simply draft a rookie RB whose both complimentary and a better fit long term for what Nagy has in mind. Or we trade Howard now in order to get some value for him and bring in several backs to compete for the #1 spot. Either way I don't think it will hurt us as far as advancing this offense. It's not ground based. I think it was @dll2000 who said Lesean McCoy wouldnt play for under $4 mil, but if we traded Howard I could roll with that. Howard is due for just over $2 mil and McCoy brings in a receiving threat in the backfield who can make people miss, then we can use a 4th or whatever on a RB. McCoy-Cohen-rookie would be a good start for having dual threat RBs, if even be willing to trade a 2020 2nd and get one if he had a really high ceiling. McCoy is only a year or two option, but it lets us be more unpreficatble rigjt now. Or maybe we can trade Howard and our 3rd for a late 2nd this year. Could allow Pace to get a more valued prospect or room to trade back to recoup draft capital. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heinz D. Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 2 hours ago, soulman said: I all have to do is contrast the attitude of a Kahlil Mack with that of guys like Bell and where I see how well Mack fits I see just the opposite with Bell. No doubt he has the talent we'd be looking for but the way our offense is structured to use as many weapons as possible I would not be in favor of paying any RB and average of $15 mil per year. I don't see him as being the same kind of difference maker on offense Mack has been on defense. Beyond that Pace has done and excellent job of drafting and signing a young core group of players I would hope we can ride with for several years. I wouldn't want to create a cap situation whereby we'd struggle to keep that group intact for the long haul and acquiring Bell may risk that. For whatever reason the Bears always seemed to have had success drafting RBs while failing at drafting QBs. Mitch may have broken that streak as far as QBs go and we can only hope we don't lose our touch drafting good backs. Pace has done well with it so far in Howard and Cohen. If the NFL cleared him I was all for bringing in Hunt on a short term deal but with that possibility gone I'd be content to keep Howard and simply draft a rookie RB whose both complimentary and a better fit long term for what Nagy has in mind. Or we trade Howard now in order to get some value for him and bring in several backs to compete for the #1 spot. Either way I don't think it will hurt us as far as advancing this offense. It's not ground based. I agree with most of your thinking in that post there, but I gotta say...it seems that more and more players in Pittsburgh are developing "attitude problems". At some point, maybe we have to stop and consider that the organization has the problems, and not the players. People always talk about the Pittsburgh way and such...maybe their system has gotten sort of out dated? I'd take Bell in a heartbeat if he'd play for cheap, but he won't so there's no need for us to screw up the cap and risk losing out on, say, Jackson. As you point out, we'll probably just have to trust in Pace to find us a guy. 11 minutes ago, Sugashane said: I think it was @dll2000 who said Lesean McCoy wouldnt play for under $4 mil, but if we traded Howard I could roll with that. Howard is due for just over $2 mil and McCoy brings in a receiving threat in the backfield who can make people miss, then we can use a 4th or whatever on a RB. McCoy-Cohen-rookie would be a good start for having dual threat RBs, if even be willing to trade a 2020 2nd and get one if he had a really high ceiling. McCoy is only a year or two option, but it lets us be more unpreficatble rigjt now. Or maybe we can trade Howard and our 3rd for a late 2nd this year. Could allow Pace to get a more valued prospect or room to trade back to recoup draft capital. I have no idea why everyone is so hot to trade Howard. Is the consensus honestly that his play will be about the same next year? Didn't we see an uptick in the second half of the season? Shouldn't the '19 offense be better overall, even if we don't change a single player? I don't get this "dump Howard" mentality at all. The only way I'd be for that would be if it allowed us to get a pick in the second round so we could draft Montgomery or Snell... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sugashane Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 1 hour ago, Heinz D. said: I have no idea why everyone is so hot to trade Howard. Is the consensus honestly that his play will be about the same next year? Didn't we see an uptick in the second half of the season? Shouldn't the '19 offense be better overall, even if we don't change a single player? I don't get this "dump Howard" mentality at all. The only way I'd be for that would be if it allowed us to get a pick in the second round so we could draft Montgomery or Snell... I dont want to trade him, just musing more than anything. After Emery I quit trying to figure out what the GMs will do and just offer a talking points or what I would personally do. People have been seemingly adamant that Howard made us predictable but i call b.s. overall. If so that is on Nagy entirely. I just think our runblocking sucked for the most part and he did miss a few holes. But he was hit in the backfield WAY more than what is acceptable. I'd prefer to keep him unless there was a way to find a young back I could get that I really wanted, but I haven't really watched any of them enough to say who. That only because I value the RB position less than a number of others and while he is a fan good runner, he isn't close to elite for me to want to pay him what he will likely get in an open market. More than that is prefer to return to a zone scheme where the run blocking was MUCH better. Passblocking improved but runblocking was trash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damikeeeee Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 Um no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soulman Posted February 17, 2019 Share Posted February 17, 2019 5 hours ago, Heinz D. said: I'd take Bell in a heartbeat if he'd play for cheap, but he won't so there's no need for us to screw up the cap and risk losing out on, say, Jackson. As you point out, we'll probably just have to trust in Pace to find us a guy. So would we all but that's not gonna happen so I'm not gonna theorize it can either. Pitt may have some internal issues just as we've had at times but I won't use that to excuse Bell for choosing to sit one out. JMHO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malagabears Posted February 17, 2019 Author Share Posted February 17, 2019 Yeah, it was just an exercise at throwing crap at the wall. I myself can't see Pace ever mortgaging the futjre for one player when it means eating away future CAP space. The idea really was about making the final move on O to put us over the top since we didn't or go after Hunt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WindyCity Posted February 17, 2019 Share Posted February 17, 2019 8 hours ago, malagabears said: Yeah, it was just an exercise at throwing crap at the wall. I myself can't see Pace ever mortgaging the futjre for one player when it means eating away future CAP space. The idea really was about making the final move on O to put us over the top since we didn't or go after Hunt. It is an interesting thought exercise. I just think we are too mortgaged even right now. I am thinking more about how do we sustain what we have. I know current wisdom is to have a window and take a huge shot at it and live with the mess. But, what if the real way to get the Super Bowl is to be in the playoffs 6-8 times in a 10 year period and increase the volume of chances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heinz D. Posted February 17, 2019 Share Posted February 17, 2019 20 hours ago, Sugashane said: People have been seemingly adamant that Howard made us predictable but i call b.s. overall. If so that is on Nagy entirely. I just think our runblocking sucked for the most part and he did miss a few holes. But he was hit in the backfield WAY more than what is acceptable. The run blocking got better as the season went on which, as I recall, we BOTH predicted would happen. Second year in the scheme, improved play from the young linemen and Trubisky , maybe even improved health from Long...I'm not that worried, to be honest. Cohen probably even has a better year, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sugashane Posted February 17, 2019 Share Posted February 17, 2019 11 minutes ago, Heinz D. said: The run blocking got better as the season went on which, as I recall, we BOTH predicted would happen. Second year in the scheme, improved play from the young linemen and Trubisky , maybe even improved health from Long...I'm not that worried, to be honest. Cohen probably even has a better year, too. Against most teams I'm sure we will do fine, but when we played a seriously stout front 4 like we did vs PHI, we saw the strength disparity IMO. Now technique wasn't there either, as has been pointed out by a few guys on here, but I just don't believe it is a good fit for our OL compared to the zone scheme. Oh well, lol take a break from beating that dead horse. Lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.