Hicks trade smoke is back

[WindyCity]

Jeremy Fowler

https://www.espn.com/nfl/insider/story/_/id/31591416/nfl-trade-frenzy-five-factors-ramped-high-profile-player-movement

 

“CHICAGO HAS ALLOWED HICKS AND AGENT DREW ROSENHAUS TO GAUGE TRADE INTEREST, AS THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE REPORTED IN MARCH. THERE ARE NO RECENT DEVELOPMENTS HERE. FOR NOW, HE’S STILL A BEAR.

 

SOME TEAMS BELIEVE HICKS IS A TOP-FIVE INTERIOR DISRUPTOR, BUT HIS AGE (31) COULD PREVENT THEM FROM GIVING UP DRAFT CAPITAL AND SIGNING HIM TO A NEW DEAL. HICKS, A 2022 FREE AGENT, IS DUE A TOTAL OF $10.5 MILLION THIS YEAR.

 

THIS ONE COULD HEAT UP CLOSER TO TRAINING CAMP.”

[WindyCity]

Obviously, Hicks makes the Bears better in 2021.

But, if they can add 10 million in cap space and even a late day 3 pick that is what is best for 2022.

[soulman]

1 hour ago, WindyCity said:

“CHICAGO HAS ALLOWED HICKS AND AGENT DREW ROSENHAUS TO GAUGE TRADE INTEREST, AS THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE REPORTED IN MARCH. THERE ARE NO RECENT DEVELOPMENTS HERE. FOR NOW, HE’S STILL A BEAR.

It doesn't really say anything has "heated up".

The solicitation of trade interest seemed to have taken place pre-draft back in March right before or after the beginning of the new league year.  Seemingly there was no serious interest then and that hasn't changed but that's not to say that it won't change.

15 minutes ago, WindyCity said:

But, if they can add 10 million in cap space and even a late day 3 pick that is what is best for 2022.

Maybe I'm just too old school but I would not accept a trade for that little.  Not even to rid myself of $10.5 mil of salary or cap.

Hicks is one of the most dominant DL in the NFL and even if his skills are diminishing a bit if he can stay healthy he's 3 down force for any team to deal with.  I can't know enough about his previous injuries and his conditioning to do any more than speculate but with no one else on the roster who can even come close to doing what he's capable of and I wouldn't be too quick to trade him for peanuts.

But Hicks is another example of what I posted about before relative to the NFL salary scale and expectations.

As players come off their rookie deals they're entering their prime years physically, mentally, and experientially.  That's when those who re the best at their positions will get their one big contract.  Fewer will ever get a second one as good and still others end up playing for half or less of what they had been getting or even having to settle for a one year vet minimum deal or slightly more.

Teams may end up releasing or trading players whose deals are about up feeling they won't be able to re-sign them but why?

Let's say Hicks has reached a point where he's not a $10 mil a year guy any longer but still worth 40%-50% of that for another year or two yet if he gets it he's more likely to get it from another team.  Kyle Fuller was asked to accept a 2021 salary reduction to help the Bears cap situation.  He declined to do so yet all he got from Denver was $9 mil on a one year deal.  What was the Bears offer?

Every summer we see UFAs still out there who are quality vets but who also seem to be asking more than teams will pay.

I'm not expecting any of this to change but thinking about it more logically why wouldn't it benefit both the player and the team more to agee to an extension for less money with his own team if it included at least one years salary guaranteed or that much in combination of salary and bonus?  Why go elsewhere for the same deal or very possibly even less money?

Earnings should look like a bell curve and often do but just as often players end up playing for several teams after their prime simply trying to earn one more years pay.  It makes sense to move on when you've drafted a key players replacement but how about when you haven't? What I see is you let your aging vet go only to sign someone else's aging vet or a younger player of less talent.

I can't see the logic in this.

[WindyCity]

I think the debate becomes whether Hicks on field impact in 2021 is more valuable than the cap space in 2022.

I am not sure.

I think Hicks is a great player, but we are in a far better position to compete in 2022 than we are in 2021 when we had limited cap space, some bad contracts strangling us, and a rookie QB.

[Heinz D.]

35 minutes ago, WindyCity said:

I think the debate becomes whether Hicks on field impact in 2021 is more valuable than the cap space in 2022.

I am not sure.

I think Hicks is a great player, but we are in a far better position to compete in 2022 than we are in 2021 when we had limited cap space, some bad contracts strangling us, and a rookie QB.

The heart of the debate, as far as team makeup goes, is whether Hicks is a rapidly declining player. I'm not certain we know either way...

[Epyon]

Wonder if it's trying to make room to get Morgan Moses.

Hicks is aging, and has had constant knee issues for a couple years now, so I get the logic in trying to move on while we can get something back for him.

That said, Hicks is far and away the most important person on the DL, and maybe even the most important person on the defense as a whole. It'd be a huge loss if he was gone.

[WindyCity]

I think that part of the thought process has to be that we need to do a ton of work in 2022 and we have still have limited resources. 

That 10 million in rolled forward cap space vs the 2021 on field difference between Hicks and Edwards has to be something that they are weighing heavily.

[AZBearsFan]

7 hours ago, WindyCity said:

I think the debate becomes whether Hicks on field impact in 2021 is more valuable than the cap space in 2022.

I am not sure.

I think Hicks is a great player, but we are in a far better position to compete in 2022 than we are in 2021 when we had limited cap space, some bad contracts strangling us, and a rookie QB.

Assuming this would be his last year in Chicago, we’ll be getting the cap space in 2022 whether we trade him now or not. He’s a UFA after 2021. The only question would be whether we get access to it earlier.

[abstract_thought]

4 hours ago, AZBearsFan said:

Assuming this would be his last year in Chicago, we’ll be getting the cap space in 2022 whether we trade him now or not. He’s a UFA after 2021. The only question would be whether we get access to it earlier.

Can they carry over this year’s savings into next offseason?

[soulman]

12 hours ago, Heinz D. said:

The heart of the debate, as far as team makeup goes, is whether Hicks is a rapidly declining player. I'm not certain we know either way...

That's where I'm at with him and although injuries can happen more frequently as players age and may take longer to recover from I still like to separate what injuries are simply once only deals from those that are chronic.  This year would be a good time to evaluate Hicks in that regard but to do that he has to play here.

He's huge bearlike guy with massive natural strength and reminds me a bit of ol' Teddy Washington who along with Keith Traylor was one of Urlacher's early protectors allowing him to roam and to blitz which Roquan Smith can also do quite well.  I still feel we benefit from having him in there as a run stopper who can also collapse a pocket on passing downs and allow others to get home.

His sack numbers were down last year but how much of that may have been impacted by not having Goldman holding down the fort at NT? The rest of his stats were nearly identical to those from 2018 and he started 15 games so his injuries didn't keep him out much.  I don't see us getting more value for him in trade than he's worth to us.

[soulman]

10 hours ago, WindyCity said:

I think that part of the thought process has to be that we need to do a ton of work in 2022 and we have still have limited resources. 

That 10 million in rolled forward cap space vs the 2021 on field difference between Hicks and Edwards has to be something that they are weighing heavily.

I'd bet you a dollar that if Pace gained another $10 mil in cap he'd be using it now on other extensions.  It won't all rollover.

[soulman]

5 hours ago, AZBearsFan said:

Assuming this would be his last year in Chicago, we’ll be getting the cap space in 2022 whether we trade him now or not. He’s a UFA after 2021. The only question would be whether we get access to it earlier.

While I'd prefer not to assume he can't be extended if we did trade him now I'll bet you a buck as well that Pace will use up some of the savings on extensions and one for certain would be Nichols.  Before we let go of Hicks I'd like to see what Tonga can do.  From looking at his college stats and videos he's almost more of a player like Hicks than a pure NT like Goldman.

[WindyCity]

7 hours ago, AZBearsFan said:

Assuming this would be his last year in Chicago, we’ll be getting the cap space in 2022 whether we trade him now or not. He’s a UFA after 2021. The only question would be whether we get access to it earlier.

We could roll it forward into next offseason.

Or, as Soul mentioned, we could use it on extensions this offseason.

I do not see how Hicks can be extended. The Bears already have 100 million [about 50% of the 2022 cap] spent on defense for only 15 players. That is without a Nichols extension, which I would prioritize to Hicks. That is a ton of money when they have like 8 guys on the offensive roster next year.

[soulman]

20 minutes ago, WindyCity said:

I do not see how Hicks can be extended.

He can't be for the kind of money he's getting now but maybe something more like we did with Trevathan would work.  If we're at all interested in keeping him around we can at least have a discussion with his agent about it.

It may came down to letting him hit FA to see what kind of offers he gets and then sitting down to talk realities.  But again, we have to see how well he plays this year before we can make a final call on what to do.

It's not Hicks whose killing us.  It's Quinn which is one reason why I tend to believe we're far better off rewarding and keeping our own FA than to go fishing for more questionable vet FA.  Hick is "invested" in the Bears.  Quinn is little more than a mercenary edge rusher.

[WindyCity]

3 hours ago, soulman said:

He can't be for the kind of money he's getting now but maybe something more like we did with Trevathan would work.  If we're at all interested in keeping him around we can at least have a discussion with his agent about it.

It may came down to letting him hit FA to see what kind of offers he gets and then sitting down to talk realities.  But again, we have to see how well he plays this year before we can make a final call on what to do.

It's not Hicks whose killing us.  It's Quinn which is one reason why I tend to believe we're far better off rewarding and keeping our own FA than to go fishing for more questionable vet FA.  Hick is "invested" in the Bears.  Quinn is little more than a mercenary edge rusher.

If Hicks was willing to work out a team friendly deal with the Bears on an extension so he can finish his career here, that might work.

We would need super low cap hits in 21-22, but it could work.

The issue is that we have a number of big deals on defense that we cannot really move around or work with and we have a Roquan extension incoming. I think that Hicks is going to be the casualty of the bad deals handed to Quinn and Trevathan.