Kevin Fishbain Answers Fan Questions.........For Discussion

[soulman]

 

How can the Bears attack the Cardinals? Finding a role for Teven Jenkins? Mailbag plus Week 13 picks

By Kevin Fishbain Dec 3, 2021 27

If all goes right for the Bears in the next few seasons, maybe one day they will renew their century-long rivalry with the Cardinals, with Justin Fields versus Kyler Murray being appointment viewing.

That day is not Sunday, when the No. 1-seeded Cardinals (9-2) come to Soldier Field for the first time in six seasons to take on the Bears (4-7), who might be starting Andy Dalton again.

The NFL had no viable option to replace Bears-Packers on “Sunday Night Football” in Week 14. If the Bears somehow upset the Cardinals, it could at least add some extra juice to a game fans seem to be dreading.

On to this week’s mailbag and our game picks …

(Note: Submitted questions have been edited for clarity and length.)

With Andy Dalton at QB, the passing game looked a lot more crisp and in rhythm, but the run game really struggled. Based on Arizona being No. 3 in defense DVOA, the best strategy seems to be controlling the clock and running the ball. How does the offense get the run game going with Dalton at QB? I feel like Justin Fields takes some pressure off the O-line since the defense needs to account for Fields. Additionally, wouldn’t starting Fields (a mobile QB) seem like it would be a high-risk gamble with cracked ribs this week? — Mike S.

The run game was the biggest disappointment from the Thanksgiving win against the Lions. Detroit had a good plan to attack, and the Bears did a poor job of countering but did get a couple of good runs from David Montgomery when they needed them in the fourth quarter.

As you mentioned, Arizona has the third-best defense by DVOA, the Football Outsiders metric, but it’s 15th against the run. The Cardinals have allowed an opponent to gain more than 4.5 yards per carry six times this season. Granted, it hasn’t negatively affected their overall record, but it’s an area to attack. A.J. Dillon and Aaron Jones combined for 137 rushing yards on 31 carries when the Packers beat the Cardinals earlier this season. The Panthers rushed for 166 yards in their win over Arizona.

As far as how to get it going, for one, the Bears have to avoid abandoning it. Using RPOs to keep the defense off balance will help. When the run game has been best, it’s been rushing left, though the Cardinals have given up the most yards up the middle and to the right this season. With the availability of Allen Robinson and Marquise Goodwin in doubt, the Bears are going to be deeper in the backfield than at wide receiver.

To the second question, if there’s a hint of concern about Fields’ ribs, then it makes sense to protect him by having him sit out. On the flip side, the moment there is no longer any concern, he should be the starter, so it all depends on what the doctors and trainers are seeing.

Hypothetical for you: I know you talked about the Ravens game as the potential spot where ownership could somehow justify keeping Matt Nagy after the season had the Bears won, but if they somehow pull off the upset and beat Arizona this week, could ownership point to this game and say, “What great ‘progress’ by Matt and his staff.” They could twist the story so hard and say, “They won two games straight after a six-game losing skid and took down the No. 1 seed in the NFC.” I know most questions about logic and ownership tend to not mix. Curious what you think. — Matthew B.

As you said, it’s tough to use logic when it comes to this front office. However, while we’re not at “fait accompli” level yet, it’s very difficult to see anything short of a run to the playoffs — and a postseason win — leading to maintaining the status quo.

Beating the Cardinals would have to start some kind of winning streak to overcome what has already transpired over the past three seasons, but if it did, that would include a potentially interesting scenario the following week at Lambeau Field. Imagine it: Justin Fields has his best game and the Bears upset Aaron Rodgers on national television in Green Bay. Now, that’s the type of result — paired with a strong finish in December and January to get to a more respectable final record — that would really make you wonder if the head coach gets another crack at this. A win against the Packers means more to the McCaskey family, but we’re also getting into very, very, very unlikely territory.

If and when Teven Jenkins is activated, what is the fastest way he can get some playing time? Not wishing an injury to anyone of course. — Julio A.

The way Nagy talked about the offensive tackle situation this week — lauding what they’ve gotten from Larry Borom and Jason Peters — tells me that Jenkins is going to be a backup. Then again, it wouldn’t be the first time a head coach has led us down a path different from his intent.

If Jenkins can be active on game day, which could be as early as this Sunday, the easiest way to get his feet wet is on the field goal team. Maybe he could be part of a goal-line package as an extra blocker in the Alex Bars role, too. Otherwise, it’ll take an injury to get Jenkins into the lineup. Maybe as we get into January and the playoffs are officially out of reach, Jenkins could take over for Peters.

If you follow the analytics, after you find your QB, the wide receiver group should get priority and on defense the cornerbacks and then edge rushers. Everywhere else just shoot for league average. Based on these assumptions, we should trade Smith and Montgomery before signing them to extensions. Could they bring in enough draft capital to replenish the WR and DB positions? — Dave M.

Roquan Smith and David Montgomery are wildly different when it comes to value. Smith is on the field every snap. He’s a top-five impact inside linebacker in the NFC if not the entire league. Now, that doesn’t mean Smith should get top-five edge rusher or top-five cornerback money, but he is still worthy of the salaries given to his contemporaries at the position. Inside linebackers Bobby Wagner, Devin White and Dont’a Hightower meant a lot to their Super Bowl-winning teams.

Montgomery is incredibly important to this offense, not to mention that he has become a leader on the team, but Khalil Herbert stepped in and was productive in Montgomery’s absence. It’s also a position that doesn’t match the longevity of inside linebacker.

With both players entering the last year of their contracts, they could be trade chips, but I wouldn’t expect a ton in return. If the Bears traded Smith — which wouldn’t make any sense to me, because they’d then have zero inside linebackers (assuming they move on from Danny Trevathan) — I can’t imagine they would get more than a second- or third-round pick in return. The Bears traded Jordan Howard for a sixth-round pick. Maybe they could get a fifth for Montgomery. I’m not sure that’s enough to “replenish” wide receiver and corner. Those are positions worth double-dipping in free agency and the draft.

I do think Smith should get a lucrative extension before 2022. There are no other Bears in line for top-of-the-market money right now, so it’s not like the GM would have to sacrifice one star for Smith. Cap space shouldn’t be an issue. Justin Fields, Darnell Mooney and Jaylon Johnson can’t get extensions until 2023 at the absolute earliest. There is no obvious “we need to re-sign this guy” free agent. The Bears can still “rebuild” and get younger on defense while extending Smith, who’s only 24.

In the corner of the multiverse where the field goal goes through and the Bears beat the Eagles, how do you think the rest of the playoffs (and the next three seasons) unfold? — Andrew S.

I love a great hypothetical! In the micro sense, the Bears would have played in Los Angeles against a Rams offense they pummeled a few weeks earlier. Could Vic Fangio have done it again? Possibly, but it’s worth remembering that for the 2018 Bears to get to the Super Bowl, they would’ve had to win in L.A. and then the next week in New Orleans, and the 2018 Bears lost road games to the Dolphins and Giants.

The 2019 offseason wouldn’t have been so focused on the kicker carousel, and the hype for Mitch Trubisky might have been on another level because instead of his fourth-quarter throws leading to an almost-win, they would have led the Bears to their first playoff victory in eight years. But I don’t think any of that would have fixed what turned out to be a broken offense.

What would perhaps be the biggest impact on the 2019-21 seasons? Fangio. If Parkey makes the kick and the Bears advance, it’s possible he doesn’t get the Broncos job, a consequence of the timing. But though the defense could have been better in ’19 and ’20 with Fangio, I’m not sure that would’ve changed what happened to the offense. Then again, only one or two more wins in those two seasons could have made a difference to how this regime is viewed, in addition to the Bears having had a playoff win in your multiverse.

Kevin, if you were a fan rather than a writer, would you bother to watch Bears games this season? If so, why? — Steve G.

This might be one of my favorite mailbag questions. You’re talking to someone who spent last Saturday afternoon watching Northwestern lose 47-14 to Illinois to finish its season at 3-9, so my quick answer is yes, I would, because that’s the type of fan I am. I actually set aside time to watch Northwestern’s finale in its worst season in decades and even made it a group activity with my dad and my sister.

It all depends on your fandom. I’m the one who will be part of the orchestra on the Titanic, watching all the way until the end of a bad season. There have been a few reasons for that. Northwestern games have always been a family bonding experience, so if I had that hook as a Bears fan, I would watch. When I’m a fan, I’m rooting for the players. It can be a little easier when you’re talking about student-athletes who don’t have the salaries of professionals, but I simply want to support them, as Pollyannish as that may sound.

Then there’s the ultimate reason: Sometimes they win. If Northwestern beat Illinois on Saturday, it wouldn’t have got the Wildcats to a bowl or meant the season was a success, but I would’ve enjoyed that moment (like I did in 2019). If the Bears upset the Cardinals or Packers or Vikings, those still could be moments worth celebrating as a fan, especially if young players like Fields or Mooney or Kmet or Johnson play a big role.

A more practical answer to your question is that I would watch for Fields. I imagine fans want to keep seeing glimpses that reinforce the hope he could be the guy. That wasn’t the case in 2016 when Matt Barkley was playing out the string, but there are enough young players worth watching each week, even if the team itself hasn’t been fun.

---

[soulman]

I like Kevin Fishbain's mailbag and responses to fans.  Unlike Brad Biggs he's not as much on a Bears Beat guy so I feel he's a little more open and even more accurate with his answers.  He also tackles some very good questions we all may be asking.

1 hour ago, soulman said:

As you said, it’s tough to use logic when it comes to this front office. However, while we’re not at “fait accompli” level yet, it’s very difficult to see anything short of a run to the playoffs — and a postseason win — leading to maintaining the status quo.

Like this.  That's a pretty damming comment when it comes to the clown show the Bears front office has become at times.

1 hour ago, soulman said:

With both players entering the last year of their contracts, they could be trade chips, but I wouldn’t expect a ton in return. If the Bears traded Smith — which wouldn’t make any sense to me, because they’d then have zero inside linebackers (assuming they move on from Danny Trevathan) — I can’t imagine they would get more than a second- or third-round pick in return. The Bears traded Jordan Howard for a sixth-round pick. Maybe they could get a fifth for Montgomery. I’m not sure that’s enough to “replenish” wide receiver and corner. Those are positions worth double-dipping in free agency and the draft.

I do think Smith should get a lucrative extension before 2022. There are no other Bears in line for top-of-the-market money right now, so it’s not like the GM would have to sacrifice one star for Smith. Cap space shouldn’t be an issue. Justin Fields, Darnell Mooney and Jaylon Johnson can’t get extensions until 2023 at the absolute earliest. There is no obvious “we need to re-sign this guy” free agent. The Bears can still “rebuild” and get younger on defense while extending Smith, who’s only 24.

I also like his response about trading two key building blocks.  The MLB/ILB position has long been a feature of every great Bears defense so why would they trade yet another potential All Pro/HOF LB whose one of the leaders of their defense?  And as for Monty I doubt trading him vs working out an acceptable extension makes any sense.  Every NFL team can benefit from having depth at RB and in Monty and Herbert we have that in addition to both being slightly different style runners.  Monty is affordable.

[Sugashane]

4 minutes ago, soulman said:

I also like his response about trading two key building blocks.  The MLB/ILB position has long been a feature of every great Bears defense so why would they trade yet another potential All Pro/HOF LB whose one of the leaders of their defense?  And as for Monty I doubt trading him vs working out an acceptable extension makes any sense.  Every NFL team can benefit from having depth at RB and in Monty and Herbert we have that in addition to both being slightly different style runners.  Monty is affordable.

 

If one person is set to make serious money then it is Smith, he's earned it. That being said you'd likely get more out of a compensation pick than a straight up trade because someone WILL pay him a ransom.

Monty will hopefully be reasonable with his contract terms. If he demands a top 5 contract I don't know if I even bother with a counteroffer. He's a good RB but not a premier or game-breaking talent.

[soulman]

1 hour ago, Sugashane said:

Monty will hopefully be reasonable with his contract terms. If he demands a top 5 contract I don't know if I even bother with a counteroffer. He's a good RB but not a premier or game-breaking talent.

Yup.  He's a very good back for the Bears to have especially if the next HC brings a more efficient running game with him but he's not worth premium money and hopefully he knows that too.  RB is no longer a premium position and Herbert still on his rookie deal doesn't help Monty's bargaining position.

[JAF-N72EX]

Roquan is going to get paid.  It's just a matter of how much.  If he makes the all-pro team for the 2nd year in a row then I could very well see him asking for Fred Warner money (5/95/28 gtd).  If he doesn't make the AP team then it's probably more in line with Zach Cunningham (4/58/24) and Myles Jack (4/57/26).  Letting him walk is not an option either. We could let him play out his 5th year at 9.5M before making a decision but we can't afford to let him go IMO. It's counterintuitive to let talent walk when we're trying to build around Fields over the next few years. I'd be more inclined to trading Mack this offseason (to recoup some draft capital and clear 6M in cap space while his value is still relatively high) than to let Roquan go. 

Roquan's first 3 seasons compared to all 3 aforementioned players.

 

Monty is a good player but he's nothing special that you can't find in any mid-late round draft. He is Melvin Gordon 2.0 and you don't extend Melvin Gordon.  Pick up his 5th year option this offseason and let him play out his contract for the next 2 years before letting him walk.  Likewise for Herbert after the 2023 season.

If it were me, this is how the RB situation would look for the next 8+ years

2022: Monty/Herbert (pick up Monty's 5th yr in offseason)
2023: Monty/Herbert (draft RB1)
2024: Herbert/RB1 (pick up Herbert's 5th yr in offseason)
2025: Herbert/RB1 (draft RB2)
2026: RB1/ RB2  (pick up RB1 5th yr in offseason).
2027: RB1/ RB2 (draft RB3)
2028: RB2/RB3 (pick up RB2 5th yr in offseason)

......rinse and repeat.

SEE MCCASKEY!  FORWARD THINKING CAN WORK IF YOU ACTUALLY TRY!   This is how you keep really cheap productive RBs flowing through the pipeline without ever breaking the bank.

[soulman]

44 minutes ago, JAF-N72EX said:

Monty is a good player but he's nothing special that you can't find in any mid-late round draft. He is Melvin Gordon 2.0 and you don't extend Melvin Gordon.  Pick up his 5th year option this offseason and let him play out his contract for the next 2 years before letting him walk.  Likewise for Herbert after the 2023 season.

There are no 5th year options for 3rd round picks.

[JAF-N72EX]

7 minutes ago, soulman said:

There are no 5th year options for 3rd round picks.

Aww **** that's right. In that case, let him walk. He's not worth an extension --very few RBs are.

[Heinz D.]

5 hours ago, soulman said:

(Too be clear--Kevin Fishbain "said" this--NOT soulman):

With both players entering the last year of their contracts, they could be trade chips, but I wouldn’t expect a ton in return. If the Bears traded Smith — which wouldn’t make any sense to me, because they’d then have zero inside linebackers (assuming they move on from Danny Trevathan) — I can’t imagine they would get more than a second- or third-round pick in return. 

[soulman]

7 minutes ago, JAF-N72EX said:

Aww **** that's right. In that case, let him walk. He's not worth an extension --very few RBs are.

I would say that it depends on his price tag.  Monty is a very good RB.  Top five ?  No  Top ten?  Probably.

[soulman]

4 minutes ago, Heinz D. said:

He may not be wrong.  Like RBs the NFL does not value MLB/ILB that highly.

[JAF-N72EX]

15 minutes ago, soulman said:

I would say that it depends on his price tag.  Monty is a very good RB.  Top five ?  No  Top ten?  Probably.

Top 10 is stretching it. I'm certainly not okay with a 8-12/yr deal but that's the going rate.

RBs are not worth paying unless they're Adrian Peterson special (and even then it's a tough call). They are too easy to find in mid-late rounds for much cheaper. Howard was a 5th round pick and a borderline top-10 RB at one point and we found his replacement in the 3rd round and possibly found Monty's replacement in the 5th round.

31 minutes ago, Heinz D. said:

We're not getting anything for Trevathan at this stage.  Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised to him released and take the 3M hit.  He's 32 years old and has been declining every year for the last 3 seasons and can barely stay healthy when he does play. Cut our losses now and move on. Maybe try to get something on the backend in return like a late round comp but I wouldn't expect much more.  He's a good leader but all he's doing is taking up a roster spot that could be reserved for younger talent. I could also see him either retiring or getting the Lamar Houston treatment and being a late summer cut.

 

[beardown3231]

52 minutes ago, JAF-N72EX said:

Top 10 is stretching it. I'm certainly not okay with a 8-12/yr deal but that's the going rate.

RBs are not worth paying unless they're Adrian Peterson special (and even then it's a tough call). They are too easy to find in mid-late rounds for much cheaper. Howard was a 5th round pick and a borderline top-10 RB at one point and we found his replacement in the 3rd round and possibly found Monty's replacement in the 5th round.

We're not getting anything for Trevathan at this stage.  Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised to him released and take the 3M hit.  He's 32 years old and has been declining every year for the last 3 seasons and can barely stay healthy when he does play. Cut our losses now and move on. Maybe try to get something on the backend in return like a late round comp but I wouldn't expect much more.  He's a good leader but all he's doing is taking up a roster spot that could be reserved for younger talent. I could also see him either retiring or getting the Lamar Houston treatment and being a late summer cut.

 

Fishbain was talking about not getting more than a 2nd or 3rd for Smith, not Trevathan, so that was Heinz's response

[soulman]

3 hours ago, JAF-N72EX said:

Top 10 is stretching it. I'm certainly not okay with a 8-12/yr deal but that's the going rate.

RBs are not worth paying unless they're Adrian Peterson special (and even then it's a tough call). They are too easy to find in mid-late rounds for much cheaper. Howard was a 5th round pick and a borderline top-10 RB at one point and we found his replacement in the 3rd round and possibly found Monty's replacement in the 5th round.

We're not getting anything for Trevathan at this stage.  Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised to him released and take the 3M hit.  He's 32 years old and has been declining every year for the last 3 seasons and can barely stay healthy when he does play. Cut our losses now and move on. Maybe try to get something on the backend in return like a late round comp but I wouldn't expect much more.  He's a good leader but all he's doing is taking up a roster spot that could be reserved for younger talent. I could also see him either retiring or getting the Lamar Houston treatment and being a late summer cut.

 

A 3 year extension for Monty would probably cost us a bit more than Tarik Cohen's 3 year extension which averages just under $6 mil per year and guarantees $12 mil.  Surely Monty is more valuable as a RB than Cohen is.  I'm always of the opinion that you should not replace productive players only because you can or at least you believe you can.  IMHO Monty is worth an extension.

On the other hand overpaying declining talent like DT and Jimmy Graham makes zero sense especially if it's costing the team an ability to keep younger talent that is productive and/or keeping younger talent who may be more productive on the bench.  I was one who was not in favor of keeping DT over Kwit and I believe that opinion has been proven correct for two years now.

[JAF-N72EX]

1 hour ago, soulman said:

A 3 year extension for Monty would probably cost us a bit more than Tarik Cohen's 3 year extension which averages just under $6 mil per year and guarantees $12 mil. 

I would be fine that deal but I don't think Tarik Cohen's extension is comparable to what Monty is going to be asking though. They play completely different roles. Monty is a RB, who plays the majority of snaps, and is actually being used as a traditional RB, while Cohen was a limited scat back being used as a swiss army knife-- similar to Nyheim Hines who just got a similar extension to Cohen's worth over 6M.  Darren Sproles went thru the same thing back in the day when he was trying to get paid like a traditional back and he was much better than Cohen and Hines.

There's a big difference in roles here and with that comes a price tag. One is taking alot more abuse than the others and they wanna be compensated for it. (this is each players first 3 years and 2021 isn't over yet)

 

But we'll see. We're getting ahead of ourselves anyhow. Monty is still here thru 2022 and RB is the least of our worries.

Edited December 5, 2021 by JAF-N72EX

[soulman]

25 minutes ago, JAF-N72EX said:

I would be fine that deal but I don't think Tarik Cohen's extension is comparable to what Monty is going to be asking though. They play completely different roles. Monty is a RB, who plays the majority of snaps, and is actually being used as a traditional RB, while Cohen was a limited scat back being used as a swiss army knife-- similar to Nyheim Hines who just got a similar extension to Cohen's worth over 6M.  Darren Sproles went thru the same thing back in the day when he was trying to get paid like a traditional back and he was much better than Cohen and Hines.

There's a big difference in roles here and with that comes a price tag. One is taking alot more abuse than the others and they wanna be compensated for it. (this is each players first 3 years and 2021 isn't over yet)

 

But we'll see. We're getting ahead of ourselves anyhow. Monty is still here thru 2022 and RB is the least of our worries.

Tarik Cohen's impact as a PR and his big play potential in his multiple roles got him a nice payday.  Personally I believe we overpaid a bit but prior to his injury it was pretty clear that we weren't gonna let him just walk.

Monty will undoubtedly ask a little more and will get it which is why I placed his deal above Cohen's.  You can probably look at what Melvin Gordon got as base level for a 3yr/$24 mil/$16 mil gtd kinda deal.  Could it go a little higher?  Yeah, but unless Monty really stacks up some big yardage and TDs.  If he's sharing carries with Herbert that's not as likely to happen.

If you take a look at the terms of the deals those guys ranked 6th-8th who got $12 mil deals their guarantees are only in the $10 mil to $20 mil range.  So even if we pay that much it could be for as little as one year.  But as you say we're covered for 2022 with Monty and Herbert and it's easy enough to pick up a 3rd RB somewhere in FA or later in the draft or a UDFA.