Bears 2022 Wide Receiver Watch

[JAF-N72EX]

1 minute ago, abstract_thought said:

I provided a reason for dismissing it.

For reference, this was my initial post:

 

So we should just replace OTC's estimations (a site designed by capologists) with a quote by you just because you said it. Got it.

 

[Sugashane]

39 minutes ago, JAF-N72EX said:

Agreed. Don't make the same mistake again by trying to fit a peg in a round hole.  Winston wouldn't be bad either depending on his knee.

As much as I dislike him I was adamant that if Nagy was going to try to be explosive and make the offense work in 2020 that he should have gone after Winston, not Foles.

 

Winston is and idiot but he has arm talent and can make any throw. Sadly that throw is often to the defender but still. Both have low floors, but Winston at least has a potential ceiling high enough you can stand up in.

[JAF-N72EX]

6 minutes ago, Sugashane said:

As much as I dislike him I was adamant that if Nagy was going to try to be explosive and make the offense work in 2020 that he should have gone after Winston, not Foles.

 

Winston is and idiot but he has arm talent and can make any throw. Sadly that throw is often to the defender but still. Both have low floors, but Winston at least has a potential ceiling high enough you can stand up in.

Oh I'm with you...i'm not a big fan of him either, but as a backup what the hell. You take a chance and hope he can make a play or two if he's ever needed. Much better than throwing a statue behind an offense that is supposed to be designed for RPOs.  Ugh...just typing that sounds absolutely insane to me.

[Sugashane]

45 minutes ago, JAF-N72EX said:

Oh I'm with you...i'm not a big fan of him either, but as a backup what the hell. You take a chance and hope he can make a play or two if he's ever needed. Much better than throwing a statue behind an offense that is supposed to be designed for RPOs.  Ugh...just typing that sounds absolutely insane to me.

In all fairness he kept Tru in the pocket when the few times the offense looked good - and not against terrible defenses - was when Tru was moving around and forcing the launch point to change. Even Belichick struggled to keep him in the pocket.

Nagy though did an exceptional job of forcing him to stay in it.

[abstract_thought]

17 hours ago, JAF-N72EX said:

So we should just replace OTC's estimations (a site designed by capologists) with a quote by you just because you said it. Got it.

 

I have already stated my reasoning. Effective cap space assumes a team will fill its roster with minimum salary players. Because of this, it over-represents spending power for teams like the Bears with lots of needs and under-represents spending power for teams with few needs.

We could demonstrate this with a scenario where Team A has 50 players signed and 20M in cap space and Team B has 30 players signed with 40M in cap space. Team A would have ~20M of effective cap space while Team B would have ~25M. And it's possible for Team B to outbid Team A for a player. But that would never happen because no NFL team fills 20 roster spots with minimum salary players. Team B has far more needs than Team A and can't practically spend as much money on any individual player, even though they have more effective cap space.

Even the author of OTC has written an article about effective cap and does not use effective cap the way you're describing.

Edited December 6, 2021 by abstract_thought

[soulman]

19 hours ago, Sugashane said:

I'd like it to be a mobile guy so if Fields does go down we don't have to try to completely reinvent the offense. Mariota for example, or even someone who is just athletic enough to be a running threat on rollouts like Blaine Gabbart. Or even just get a rookie that is mobile if we wait for round 5 or 6. Emory Jones, D'Eriq King, Malik Cunningham, someone with serious mobility will be available. Unless someone with major arm talent falls (assuming they won't) then try to match some sort of trait with Fields.

 

 

That would be smart.  Can we bring back Mitch as a #2?  (rotten tomatoes only, NO canned tomatoes).

Seriously though Mitch would not be the worst guy to have as backup to Fields.  He's not under contract in 2022 and only got paid $2.5 mil by Buffalo.  I realize it's not likely he'll ever be signed in Chicago again but someone who can operate an offense that requires a mobile QB would make the most sense.

[JAF-N72EX]

10 minutes ago, abstract_thought said:

I have already stated my reasoning

Which up to this point has been based on nothing but "because I said so" and not any facts.

12 minutes ago, abstract_thought said:

Effective cap space assumes a team will fill its roster with minimum salary players.

Effective cap space sets a base line for the estimated cap space for each team based on how many players they currently have under contract. Bears only have 33 players for 2022 but they also have more cap space to work than the average team. This is what you seem to not understand.

15 minutes ago, abstract_thought said:

Because of this, it over-represents spending power for teams like the Bears with lots of needs and under-represents spending power for teams with few needs.

And who is deciding which teams have more needs than the other, you?

You keep trying to paint this doom and gloom scenario in which 60M some how means nothing because the Bears are in such dire shape compared to rest of the league-- which is once again based on nothing except "because I said so". This not only comes off as cocky and arrogant but it also comes off as yet another fan who only watches the Bears and doesn't pay any attention to the rest of the NFL.

Again, look around the league and see what their needs are compared to the estimated cap space.

Lets deal in facts, not assumed fiction.

Here's a FACT: Every team in the league have needs. 

Another FACT: There are a 100 different scenarios that could play out this offseason that could change the entire free agency and draft landscape and I don't presume we know them all.

Another FACT: While the Bears are indeed in the middle of a rebuilding process and have alot of pressing needs they also have more cap space to fill those needs compared to most teams. And let's be perfectly honest and realistic here.....we are not going to be able to fix every position in one offseason even if we had 100M in cap space. That's not how the NFL works. Just ask teams like the Browns, Jets and Jags how many years they had virtually unlimited money.

Another FACT: The Bears currently have the 11th most cap space in the league based on early estimates and that's before any adjustments are made (just like the rest of the league).
 

 

[JAF-N72EX]

1 hour ago, soulman said:

That would be smart.  Can we bring back Mitch as a #2?  (rotten tomatoes only, NO canned tomatoes).

Seriously though Mitch would not be the worst guy to have as backup to Fields.  He's not under contract in 2022 and only got paid $2.5 mil by Buffalo.  I realize it's not likely he'll ever be signed in Chicago again but someone who can operate an offense that requires a mobile QB would make the most sense.

I wouldn't be against it but I don't think he would want to come back. Atleast not yet anyhow. Maybe some years down the line. It sucks too because he's not a bad option as a backup QB.

[soulman]

7 minutes ago, JAF-N72EX said:

I wouldn't be against it but I don't think he would want to come back. Atleast not yet anyhow. Maybe some years down the line. It sucks too because he's not a bad option as a backup QB.

But wouldn't it be crazy if he did return under a different HC and OC and really began to put pressure on Fields?  It'd be like the old 49'ers with Montana and Young or GB with Favre and Rodgers.

[JAF-N72EX]

4 minutes ago, soulman said:

But wouldn't it be crazy if he did return under a different HC and OC and really began to put pressure on Fields?  It'd be like the old 49'ers with Montana and Young or GB with Favre and Rodgers.

Yeah that's true. Plus I think the fans would welcome him back too. He left a good impression...nice guy and always respectful. Look at how he got a standing ovation in the preseason against the Bills.

[soulman]

2 minutes ago, JAF-N72EX said:

Yeah that's true. Plus I think the fans would welcome him back too. He left a good impression...nice guy and always respectful. Look at how he got a standing ovation in the preseason against the Bills.

As tough as he may be Fields has already shown that he's gonna have a tough time making it through a 17 game season unless he runs less.  If he does then he loses one of his biggest weapons.  I think we're also done with any idea that QBs like Dalton, Foles, Daniel, etc are even worth having any longer.

If Fields is the #1 and an offense is built around his mobility and skill set then IMHO his #2 also needs to posses similar skills.  He doesn't have to be great but he does need to be mobile and reasonably accurate as a passer.  Pace and whoever is HC need to find that guy and build around them both.

[Heinz D.]

41 minutes ago, JAF-N72EX said:

I wouldn't be against it but I don't think he would want to come back. 

Yeah...simply too much bad blood, or whatever you'd like to call it. Plus, he's probably still hoping for an outside chance to be a starter.  Hard to see that Chicago would be anywhere near the top of his list.

I wouldn't be surprised if he ends up in Houston or Miami. 

[abstract_thought]

  

18 hours ago, JAF-N72EX said:

Effective cap space sets a base line for the estimated cap space for each team based on how many players they currently have under contract. Bears only have 33 players for 2022 but they also have more cap space to work than the average team. This is what you seem to not understand.

I understand this perfectly well. That the Bears have 33 players under contract is the exact reason I am making the claim that they have more needs than most teams. They have a lot of roster spots to fill and few draft picks.

18 hours ago, JAF-N72EX said:

And who is deciding which teams have more needs than the other, you?

Yes - after comparing depth charts with contracts set to expire for all 32 teams. The Bears will need to replace more starters (9) than most teams in the league. The positions they will need to replace (WR, CB, LT, DT) are traditionally expensive. And they will have the 2nd worst total draft value of any NFL team.

So yes, I am deciding this - based on available facts. But your analysis distills these details into a platitude: "Every team in the league have needs." Which ignores known facts about the quantity and relative cost of the Bears' specific needs and the Bears' limitations in the draft.

It would be more interesting if, rather than drawing a line in the sand over broader statements, we could have a real discussion about these details.

[soulman]

1 minute ago, abstract_thought said:

Yes - after comparing depth charts with contracts set to expire for all 32 teams. The Bears will need to replace more starters (9) than most teams in the league. The positions they will need to replace (WR, CB, LT, DT) are traditionally expensive. And they will have the 2nd worst total draft value of any NFL team.

This is where the rubber meets the road as far as retaining Pace goes.  Do you keep him so he can work his way out of what he's created himself or do you fire him and hand it over to another GM and give him the same leeway we've given Pace because of the hot mess he inherited?  Whose more likely to get the needed repairs done efficiently and quickly?

[abstract_thought]

5 minutes ago, soulman said:

This is where the rubber meets the road as far as retaining Pace goes.  Do you keep him so he can work his way out of what he's created himself or do you fire him and hand it over to another GM and give him the same leeway we've given Pace because of the hot mess he inherited?  Whose more likely to get the needed repairs done efficiently and quickly?

I see arguments for either position:

Keep Pace:
He drafted Fields, he has the most familiarity with many existing players who are either up for new contracts or could be cut, and he has relationships with the existing staff, scouting department, and ownership.

Fire Pace:
He's not created a winning team over many years, he's had several high-profile failures, he's not shown a knack for hiring coaches, and the 2022 roster situation can be seen as a carte-blanche for a new GM who wants to rebuild.