Jump to content

Ryan Pace optimistic about Bears' salary cap space


soulman

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, AZBearsFan said:

Goff also came into the NFL with 24 more college starts and is a full season ahead of Mitch in terms of NFL experience. Goff’s first season under McVey after Fisher showed a more substantial improvement over Mitch last year (who’s was in its own right a significant one) but Goff also had Todd Gurley putting up nearly 2,100 yards of total offense where Mitch had Jordan Howard. Remember 2 years ago Goff was a sure fire colossal bust. He showed to be pretty good in year 2 and then better in year 3. 

With that, assuming 2019 Mitch production wise is somewhere between 2018 Mitch and 2018 Goff (pretty likely) then the contract that may dictate Mitch’s next pay day is that of Dak Prescott, who apparently is going to get similar money. 

 

Pretty comparable production last year, but that was year 3 for Dak. Here’s their year 2 comparisons:

 

Mitch appears ahead of the curve from Dak in most measurable ways through 2 seasons and you can make a pretty solid argument that he’s at least on par with year 3 Dak overall already. For the life of me, I can’t find a reason how people can say Dak Prescott is a $30-$35M QB but Trubisky is another Blake Bortles other than that he has a star on his helmet and Mitch doesn’t. Can one objectively say that if Dak gets $30-35M per that Mitch shouldn’t as well? I sure don’t think so. 

I think that's how we have to approach it or should I say how Pace and Laine are approaching it.

We're still not certain what Mitch's trajectory will be both statistically and in the W/L column.  Both will come into play.

Once we have a better handle on that projections for a new contract become more obvious or in the alternative will there even be a new contract?   We can control him through all of 2021 with a 5th year option without having to commit to a long term deal if necessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, WindyCity said:

My biggest fear with Mitch is that he comes out and plays about the same as last season or just marginally better. That puts the Bears in a very difficult grey area when it comes to his contract.

So you wait.  Like I said we can control him through all of 2021 without having to make a long term commitment.

That's 3 more seasons.  If we still don't know what we have in him by then it probably isn't good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, WindyCity said:

The truth is that Trubisky has not even sniffed Goff statistically.

I am going to need to see him close the gap in terms of production before I hand over that amount of money next offseason.

I assume you are talking about 2018, bc comparing their 2nd years, they are about as equal as their first years.  Goff edges out Tru in a couple categories and Tru edges Goff in a couple.  But they are remarkably similar years

Goff:

15 games 62.1 comp% 3855 total yards, 29 total TDs (5.9%) 7 INTs (1.5%), pass rate 100.5, QBR 52.1

Trubisky: 

14 games 66.7 comp% 3634 total yards, 27 total TDs (5.5%), 12 INTs (2.8%) pass rate 95.4 QBR 72.8

Funny story, in terms of efficiency Goff's 3rd year was even more in line with Tru than 2017.  

So yeah I have no idea where you come up with the "hasnt sniffed" comment unless you are only looking at raw #s.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Superman(DH23) said:

I assume you are talking about 2018, bc comparing their 2nd years, they are about as equal as their first years.  Goff edges out Tru in a couple categories and Tru edges Goff in a couple.  But they are remarkably similar years

Goff:

15 games 62.1 comp% 3855 total yards, 29 total TDs (5.9%) 7 INTs (1.5%), pass rate 100.5, QBR 52.1

Trubisky: 

14 games 66.7 comp% 3634 total yards, 27 total TDs (5.5%), 12 INTs (2.8%) pass rate 95.4 QBR 72.8

Funny story, in terms of efficiency Goff's 3rd year was even more in line with Tru than 2017.  

So yeah I have no idea where you come up with the "hasnt sniffed" comment unless you are only looking at raw #s.

I am talking about 2018. 

Mitch needs to get into the realm of Goff's 2018 production before I would feel comfortable in giving him an extension.

Comparing their 2nd years offers very little as no 2 QBs have the same trajectory or arch. With their 2nd seasons being comparable we would be projecting that their 3rd seasons would be similar, if that is the case EXTEND away.

Edited by WindyCity
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, WindyCity said:

Mitch needs to get into the realm of Goff's 2018 production before I would feel comfortable in giving him an extension.

I think that’s pretty naive, Windy. Statistically Goff was top 5 in most passing metrics last year. Mitch doesn’t have to be a top 5 QB statistically to justify an extension. If he gives you 4100 yards and a 3-1 TD/INT ratio he’s probably borderline top 10 statistically but Pace would 100% be bringing in the Brinks truck for that. Frankly if he is at Goff’s 2018 level statistically in 2019 we may not lose all year with our defense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, AZBearsFan said:

I think that’s pretty naive, Windy. Statistically Goff was top 5 in most passing metrics last year. Mitch doesn’t have to be a top 5 QB statistically to justify an extension. If he gives you 4100 yards and a 3-1 TD/INT ratio he’s probably borderline top 10 statistically but Pace would 100% be bringing in the Brinks truck for that. Frankly if he is at Goff’s 2018 level statistically in 2019 we may not lose all year with our defense. 

This is my fear when it comes to a Trubisky contract.

We saw Mitch put together a nice season when measured by traditional statistics, but the performance and play on the field and some of the advanced statistics don't support an extension. I'd even be OK with a regression in traditional stats if I saw fewer missed throws and fewer should-be INTs.

What I'd hate to see is statistical progress but more of the same issues with consistency and decision-making. If we continue to see those issues, I'd find it tough to justify a Goff-like deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, abstract_thought said:

This is my fear when it comes to a Trubisky contract.

We saw Mitch put together a nice season when measured by traditional statistics, but the performance and play on the field and some of the advanced statistics don't support an extension. I'd even be OK with a regression in traditional stats if I saw fewer missed throws and fewer should-be INTs.

What I'd hate to see is statistical progress but more of the same issues with consistency and decision-making. If we continue to see those issues, I'd find it tough to justify a Goff-like deal.

You see a lot of that stuff watching Goff beyond the box score too. He was a deer in headlights against us in December. He was pretty bad in the Super Bowl too. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, AZBearsFan said:

I think that’s pretty naive, Windy. Statistically Goff was top 5 in most passing metrics last year. Mitch doesn’t have to be a top 5 QB statistically to justify an extension. If he gives you 4100 yards and a 3-1 TD/INT ratio he’s probably borderline top 10 statistically but Pace would 100% be bringing in the Brinks truck for that. Frankly if he is at Goff’s 2018 level statistically in 2019 we may not lose all year with our defense. 

He needs to be close.

The stats you lay out are very close to Goff. 4000 yards, 30 TDs, 3:1 would be what I think the benchmark should be. That puts him around 10th in all areas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, AZBearsFan said:

You see a lot of that stuff watching Goff beyond the box score too. He was a deer in headlights against us in December. He was pretty bad in the Super Bowl too. 

Agreed he struggles off script. But that system likes a guy who is robotic, look at Matt Ryan. They apparently do not want QBs to audible or change things at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, abstract_thought said:

This is my fear when it comes to a Trubisky contract.

We saw Mitch put together a nice season when measured by traditional statistics, but the performance and play on the field and some of the advanced statistics don't support an extension. I'd even be OK with a regression in traditional stats if I saw fewer missed throws and fewer should-be INTs.

What I'd hate to see is statistical progress but more of the same issues with consistency and decision-making. If we continue to see those issues, I'd find it tough to justify a Goff-like deal.

All QBs have those issues.

What we need to see is production. He can get dinged by PFF as much as he wants, we need TDs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, abstract_thought said:

This is my fear when it comes to a Trubisky contract.

What's to fear?  If he's that good we may well have won two Super Bowls back to back BEFORE his new money kicks in.

If that's the case I'll drive to Chicago and personally drive him to the bank to deposit his bonus check.  ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, soulman said:

What's to fear?  If he's that good we may well have won two Super Bowls back to back BEFORE his new money kicks in.

If that's the case I'll drive to Chicago and personally drive him to the bank to deposit his bonus check.  ;)

My fear is the extend him based on how they feel and not what we are seeing on the field.

They love the kid. They love his leadership, make up, skills, but you have to pay his production and those 2 things may not line up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, WindyCity said:

All QBs have those issues.

What we need to see is production. He can get dinged by PFF as much as he wants, we need TDs.

Trubisky has them to a larger degree than most starting QBs.

Production is important, but you pay for future production. You have to be confident that any success Mitch has is repeatable before you pay him top QB money. IMO that's predicated on him cleaning up his issues with accuracy and decision-making.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, AZBearsFan said:

You see a lot of that stuff watching Goff beyond the box score too. He was a deer in headlights against us in December. He was pretty bad in the Super Bowl too. 

The last two years the Rams seasons have ended with Goff's offense being outscored by the opposing kicker alone.  He has been trash in the two biggest games of his career so far - his first postseason game after taking the league by storm, and the Super Bowl.  Honestly in the postseason he has been just crap.

Goff.png

 

I like Goff, but until he can step it up in the postseason he isn't a top QB.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Sugashane said:

The last two years the Rams seasons have ended with Goff's offense being outscored by the opposing kicker alone.  He has been trash in the two biggest games of his career so far - his first postseason game after taking the league by storm, and the Super Bowl.  Honestly in the postseason he has been just crap.

Goff.png

 

I like Goff, but until he can step it up in the postseason he isn't a top QB.

 

I do not think anyone is arguing he is a top QB or a flawless QB.

 

The argument is whether he is worth keeping and he is. You chances of replacing him with a better player are pretty small.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...