2022 Free agency thread

[WindyCity]

Biggs said was likely going through on his Friday radio hit.

The Charlotte Observer quoted someone close to the situation who said he was going to the Bears.

The Instagram thing.

The Bills Athletic guy said he could not see the Bills matching an offer with 6 million in the first year and he heard the Bears cleared that easily.

[AZBearsFan]

4 hours ago, WindyCity said:

The Bills Athletic guy said he could not see the Bills matching an offer with 6 million in the first year and he heard the Bears cleared that easily.

Hopefully that means year 1 is the biggest year of the deal, and not that we did like 3/24. I want the player, but… 

[AZBearsFan]

For what that’s worth. 

[AZBearsFan]

I didn’t realize Jabrill Peppers was a FA. Tore his ACL last October but a guy I’ve always liked. He’s not the star to which his upside suggested coming out but I think he’s a capable starting safety with versatility. Coming off the major injury makes me think Poles won’t be interested though. 

[dll2000]

Glass half full view is Poles is playing high level analytical moneyball to date.

We have procured cheap effective talent.

Glass half empty view is these guys are 3rd level borderline starters and that doesn’t move needle to a contender even two years hence.  

My complaint is Oakland As were forced into creative moneyball strategies by relative extreme budget constraints.  While all NFL franchises are ostensibly playing on a level field.  But conversely, reality seems to suggest that LA and Dallas are not operating on exact same cap as Chicago at moment.  Not to extreme that is Dodgers vs Oakland, but all the same. 

If we are building for near future than young high level talent should be goal, not cheap mid level talent.  

If we are doing a tear down for a high pick in 2023 I think there is a danger in that plan to your QB development.  A disastrous season, even purposeful, in sophomore campaign can cause a lack of public confidence that can effect the player as well.

[WindyCity]

10 hours ago, AZBearsFan said:

Hopefully that means year 1 is the biggest year of the deal, and not that we did like 3/24. I want the player, but… 

We can do 3/24 as long as the guarantees are reasonable.

At some point we can spend some money, we can’t take it with us.

[StLunatic88]

11 minutes ago, WindyCity said:

At some point we can spend some money, we can’t take it with us.

Well we can, and if to target next years Free Agency is the real plan, it’s probably exactly what we will do

[AZBearsFan]

14 minutes ago, WindyCity said:

We can do 3/24 as long as the guarantees are reasonable.

At some point we can spend some money, we can’t take it with us.

Agreed. It’s a calculated risk, but still a risk. This deal could really be set up a lot of ways. For all we know it might be a 2 year $10M deal too with no 2nd year guarantees, but with a $7.5M cap hit in year 1. Might explain BUF’s lack of clarity on whether or not to match because $5M AAV on a shorter deal is probably about right value-wise for Bates but that year 1 number would be tough for them. 

Edited March 28, 2022 by AZBearsFan

[AZBearsFan]

A shorter deal with good money now that may set up GREAT money in 2 years going into his age 27 season makes a ton of sense for Bates too. 

[Nads786]

1 hour ago, dll2000 said:

Glass half full view is Poles is playing high level analytical moneyball to date.

We have procured cheap effective talent.

Glass half empty view is these guys are 3rd level borderline starters and that doesn’t move needle to a contender even two years hence.  

My complaint is Oakland As were forced into creative moneyball strategies by relative extreme budget constraints.  While all NFL franchises are ostensibly playing on a level field.  But conversely, reality seems to suggest that LA and Dallas are not operating on exact same cap as Chicago at moment.  Not to extreme that is Dodgers vs Oakland, but all the same. 

If we are building for near future than young high level talent should be goal, not cheap mid level talent.  

If we are doing a tear down for a high pick in 2023 I think there is a danger in that plan to your QB development.  A disastrous season, even purposeful, in sophomore campaign can cause a lack of public confidence that can effect the player as well.

Can you expand on why you think LA and Dallas are playing with a higher cap than the rest of the league?

[WindyCity]

36 minutes ago, AZBearsFan said:

A shorter deal with good money now that may set up GREAT money in 2 years going into his age 27 season makes a ton of sense for Bates too. 

Bates likely wants to do a deal like that you mentioned.

2/12 with 7 guarantee and a year 1 cap hit of 8… is what I think it will look like.

[dll2000]

11 minutes ago, Nads786 said:

Can you expand on why you think LA and Dallas are playing with a higher cap than the rest of the league?

They spend more.   Likely because they have higher local revenue outside the shared deal.

Specifically, the cap can be manipulated.   I don't know all the ways, but generally it seems you can spread money into future years so future caps will be effected and not present one.  Allowing you to spend more in present.   

Then when future cap comes around you can do it again as needed with other deals.   And future caps are generally likely to be higher.

This allows teams willing to spend more to have a higher effective cap.

Rodgers for example is getting paid 150 million over next 3 years, but is only costing 100 million against cap in next 3 years.

He can then be released and it only costs 16 million in cap space.   It isn't a dollar for dollar equation.   

 

 

 

 

[BEAR FACE DOWN ARROW]

Whether it's agreeable to me or not, at least Poles is (now, after Larry fell through) really sticking to a plan.  I really would have preferred an approach with lots of cheap, young flyer types but one or two concrete additions to the O.  

Kind of seems to be taking the approach that if Fields is going to be great he'll get there one way or the other which is scary. This poor team has so many holes that they were never going to get there in year one anyway.

Say what you will about the tenets of a tight wallet in FA, at least it's an ethos. 

[AZBearsFan]

1 hour ago, RunningVaccs said:

I really would have preferred an approach with lots of cheap, young flyer types but one or two concrete additions to the O.  

I think we’re well on our way to that, though our definitions of what “concrete additions” may be different. Patrick is a concrete addition on the OL IMO of a veteran guy who was a solid starter the past 2 years in GB in 28 games. You already know Pringle is an effective #3 WR, who may be more with an expanded role, so he qualifies as a concrete addition to me. He’s a guy you know can and will fill a top 3 WR role for you. Bates (if we get him) kind falls between a cheap flyer and concrete addition IMO - what has been seen from him so far is limited in volume but of a good quality.

The cheaper flyers are coming, if for no other reason than that we need bodies. Those deals aren’t typically the signings you see the first few weeks of FA - those are usually the guys who didn’t land multi-year deals early in FA and want to bet on themselves in roles and opportunities where they think they can show out to get that deal next year.

Our roster arguably presents more of those opportunities than most others because we have so few guys volume-wise at some spots. I think our roster is optimal for a guy just like that at CB, S and SLB, and maybe at WR depending on what we do in the draft there. Those guys don’t necessarily have to be “young” for me either IMO, but young enough (< 30) to maybe still get a bigger payday (or their first one). Some guys who might fit that bill for us might be:

CB: Tavon Young, Fabian Moreau, Kevin King (not super high on him but always loved his potential if the light ever fully came on so wouldn’t hate to see him compete for a spot)

S: Keanu Neal, Terrell Edmunds, Ronnie Harrison, Jabrill Peppers, Landon Collins (not necessarily cheap, but somehow still only 28 years old)

LB: Rashaan Evans, Kwon Alexander (somehow only 27)

[BEAR FACE DOWN ARROW]

36 minutes ago, AZBearsFan said:

I think we’re well on our way to that, though our definitions of what “concrete additions” may be different. Patrick is a concrete addition on the OL IMO of a veteran guy who was a solid starter the past 2 years in GB in 28 games. You already know Pringle is an effective #3 WR, who may be more with an expanded role, so he qualifies as a concrete addition to me. He’s a guy you know can and will fill a top 3 WR role for you. Bates (if we get him) kind falls between a cheap flyer and concrete addition IMO - what has been seen from him so far is limited in volume but of a good quality.

The cheaper flyers are coming, if for no other reason than that we need bodies. Those deals aren’t typically the signings you see the first few weeks of FA - those are usually the guys who didn’t land multi-year deals early in FA and want to bet on themselves in roles and opportunities where they think they can show out to get that deal next year.

Our roster arguably presents more of those opportunities than most others because we have so few guys volume-wise at some spots. I think our roster is optimal for a guy just like that at CB, S and SLB, and maybe at WR depending on what we do in the draft there. Those guys don’t necessarily have to be “young” for me either IMO, but young enough (< 30) to maybe still get a bigger payday (or their first one). Some guys who might fit that bill for us might be:

CB: Tavon Young, Fabian Moreau, Kevin King (not super high on him but always loved his potential if the light ever fully came on so wouldn’t hate to see him compete for a spot)

S: Keanu Neal, Terrell Edmunds, Ronnie Harrison, Jabrill Peppers, Landon Collins (not necessarily cheap, but somehow still only 28 years old)

LB: Rashaan Evans, Kwon Alexander (somehow only 27)

You make good points and frankly know more about these players than I. Instead of concrete additions I should have described difference makers on offense who can secure a position that protects Justin Fields or allows him to operate the offense more easily.  Something like Armstead and one of the WR2 types that signed relatively early.  I do appreciate the upside that the OL signings especially have (kind of reminds me of signing Hicks back in the day, get a guy with potential to take off) but looking at the roster today is not terribly inspiring.  And yes I'm still a little hung up that the biggest contract we were willing to offer quite early in FA was for the D.