All Activity
This stream auto-updates
- Past hour
-
Great piece! Pace has done a pretty good job. If he wants to be great, he has to make the next jump on fitting the right pieces into place to replace departing veterans while 3 peating over the Patriots each time.
-
It all depends on who they sign and the best we would get is a late 3rd.
- Today
-
Would we get a comp pick if we just let him walk after the 2 years?
-
Nice piece of work there!
-
If he doesn't have a huge year, or even if he does, it will tough to pay 2x Edge rusher over $40M a year (once Mack's $26M per year kicks in), which is what they will pay for Floyd's 5th year option next year. He could even be a trade candidate. I hope he excels as that would be a good problem to have after a SB victory.
-
-- CAUTION LONG THREAD -- I took a look at the Bears cap situation for the next few years. I keep seeing things about the Bears being in cap hell next year, and that really is not the case. The Bears don't have to pay Trubisky big bucks until his 6th year in the league, so it looks like we can keep virtually the same roster for the next 3 years without too much trouble or turnover. The media paints it like we are in dire straits after this season. With a few key guys resigned each year, we should only expect to lose 2-3 starters per year in this next 3-year window. Similar to how we lost Howard and Amos this year and replaced with Montgomery and HHCD. With that said, I looked at some of the higher priced and aging players to see where the Bears will most likely look to shed salary through cuts, trades, or free agency. Next offseason will be one of the most interesting in the next few. Mack's contract doubles and Whitehair will be a pending FA. The Bears have over $16M right now and I assume they will carry some over to next year while locking up at least Whitehair, and maybe even Jackson or Cohen before they hit their last contract year. Looking to next offseason, the top 5 salary savings could come from the following: 2020 Offseason (next yr) 1. Amukamara ($10M cap hit or $1M dead money for 2020) - saves $9M 2. Long ($9.6M cap hit or $1.5M dead money for 2020) - saves $8.1M 3. Trevathan (UFA) - saves $7.6M 4. Daniel (UFA) - saves $6M 5. Gabriel (6.5M cap hit or 2M dead money for 2020) - saves $4M That would be $35M in savings, but the team would need to replace a starting RG, CB, LB, and WR, and a backup QB. Amukamara, Trevathan, and Daniel seem to be the most likely to depart (almost $23M). Long will come down to performance and health. I threw Gabriel in there as the team seems to have signed a few guys to do what he did last year (Hall/Patterson) and drafted Ridley. $35M plus the carryover cap would easily be enough to absorb Mack's increase, extend Whitehair, and even Jackson or Cohen with room to spare. If the Bears value HHCD over any of the guys listed, there is potential to sign him as well, though that would probably push Cohen's contract extension to the next year. I have seen some concern about the cap crunch for next offseason as it looks like we are $27M over the cap for next year. That is complete BS, that counts all players signed (not top-51), doesn't take into account the annual cap increase (projected for another $10M), and assumes all current contracts will stay the same. If you take the top 51 salaries, add $10M to the cap, and carry over $6M from the cap this year, we would be under the cap with no other mods. So you can trade Whitehair's deal for Amukamara, and would then gave the remaining savings for other transactions. ---------------------------------------------------- In two years, Trubisky is on his 5th-year option, and Jackson and Cohen, if not already extended, would be due some hefty extensions. The good news is some huge contracts would be coming off the books or would be reworked to lower cap hits. Robinson and Floyd alone would save $28M and another $15M could come from Burton, Patterson, and Skrine. Again, not that we need to shed that much salary and then have to replace another starting WR, LB, TE, and CB, but we can if need be. After a repeat SB win, some of these guys may be looking for huge paydays. 2021 Offseason 1. Robinson (UFA) - saves $15M 2. Floyd (UFA) - saves $13.2M 3. Burton ($8.85M cap hit or $1.75M dead money for 2021) - saves $7.1M 4. Patterson (UFA) - saves $5.75M 5. Skrine $6.1M cap hit or $3.3M dead money for 2021) - saves $2.8M Skrine's contract is really odd, the lowest dead money is $3.3M, then it goes to no guarantee or contract after year 3. Of all the current contracts, this one is one of the most prohibitive for a non-elite player on the roster. --------------------------------------------------- I know it is crazy to think out this far (3 offseasons from now), but even with Trubisky due his $30M+ contract, only having Daniels, Miller, Nichols, and maybe Wims to resign (as potential starters) doesn't seem too bad. With annual cap increases, absorbing $20M+ of new money for Mitch in 3 years, doesn't seem like a huge problem, especially after a 3-peat. The cap increases of at least $10M per year would alone absorb Mitch's pay increase while allowing the Bears to resign the other guys to second contracts. 2022 Offseason 1. Leno (UFA) - saves $9.9M 2. Massie ($9.4M cap hit or $1.3M dead money for 2022) - saves $8.1M The Bears can restructure, extend, or let both of their bookends go. I assume they won't let both go in the same offseason, and Leno could easily be extended by then if he plays well. Massie is the most likely cap casualty at this point. --------------------------------------------------- The Bears are really in a good place cap-wise, they have the flexibility to retain pretty much every starter and key sub minus 2-3 a year for the foreseeable future while extending key contributors to long term deals.
-
I even think saying he is Mariota is underselling him a little, but definitely a closer comp than freaking Blake Bortles.
-
Here is another one: I love how he uses PFF to support his argument. Talk about cherry picking numbers. Pretty funny to look at Trubisky's first two years vs some of the current HOFers: Rodgers (first 3 seasons): 35-59, 59.3%, 329 yds, 1 TD, 1 INT Brees (first 2 seasons): 335-553, 60.5%, 3505 yds, 18 TD, 16 INT Brady (first 2 seasons): 265-416, 63.2%, 2843 yds, 18 TD, 12 INT Again, hard to pass judgment so early. Crazy to think that Trubisky is playing better going into Year 3 than all 3 of these guys were going into their 3rd years (even though not all were starters yet). I don't want to belabor the point, just interesting to see how others view Trubisky without really watching him play.
-
Pure garbage analysis. They offer no stats just plain observation and a lot of college level drivel. Who are these guys? The one interesting thing they bring up was the below average Wonderlic scores. The one other thing similar to them was they both threw/have thrown to Allen Robinson. For me, Trubiskys more like Mariota than anyone. I still think it’s too early to say Trubisky is like a flameout that is Bortles. Although wouldn't it be interesting to see Bortles with that LA offense?
-
Worthless analysis. They say he is as inaccurate as Bortles yet just in 15sec of looking at their stats Trubisky completed in his second season and first year of new offense 66.6% of his passes while Bortles has never exceeded 60.3% in 5 seasons. Again it's a few negative plays that standout in people's minds because, especially in this case, I think that's what they want to see to back up their view of what Trubisky is. It's not even worth arguing about especially if they can't even look at some basic data. We all know the glass is half full with Trubisky it's just a question of if you think the arrow is going up or staying flat.
-
Trubisky compared to Bortles?: So what do you think?
- Yesterday
- Last week
-
I'm just saying when you look through their individual game stats almost all QBs are inconsistent. Then there is Drew Brees. Trubisky just needs to hit on two or three more intermediate/deep passes per game and that goes away. It's those missed big play opportunities that stand out (at least to me) and often the players he targeted were open. With him in the second year of this offense and play calls and reading the defense reportedly coming more naturally for him I'm hopeful he'll be more focused on his throwing mechanics. When he has his body all lined up he can fit the ball into some very tight windows even with players on the move. If he wants to be a legit franchise QB those are the plays he has to make.
-
FWIW, Im the guy that added the word "inconsistent" to this thread, and I saw him play some VERY impressive games, and then he had some poor ones too. That's to be expected with a young QB, his first year in the offense. I dont think he is doomed to be inconsistent, I am very optimistic about his future. Last year, he looked young. But when the light was on, he looked top 5. I expect more consistency this year, and Im a big fan.
-
First Trubisky got injured on a late hit, not by running or because he was running. He was actually laying on the ground at the time. Running like that in the open field and sliding early is far less dangerous IMO than staying in the pocket. A player could just as easily take a cheap shot on him in the pocket. If he were trying to be a RB and take on tacklers as others like Cam and Jackson have done at times...that's bad for longevity. ...and so you agree with Jackson being ranked ahead of him? What about Watson who just said last week he's starting to understand his offense (in his 3rd year) and reading defenses better? Neither of us said Trubisky is a top 10 QB. You say he is inconsistent in passing yet he has 66% completions and six games were over 70%. His comp% is ahead of Brady, Wilson, Mahomes, Goff, Mayfield, Rodgers, Jackson, Darnold, Stafford, Rosen, and Josh Allen. For comparison with the new gold standard: With Pro Bowl WR/TE/RB, and in his second year in the offense, Mahomes had just one more game (7 total) over 70% completions. Of course there are some inconsistencies in Trubisky's passing, and inconsistencies in his reading of defenses but the data in many ways shows he's solidly in the middle of the pack if not ahead of many names rated well ahead of him (Goff for sure). Yet a QB who is middle of the pack relative to his peers who is also near the top of the pack in running ranks below them? That certainly didn't hold true for Cam Newton, Jackson, Wentz, Mahomes, and Watson when they were running around. For those QBs the ability to scramble and run made them more special and moved them up in the rankings despite poor completion %. In his nearly MVP year Wentz was only completing passes at 63% and finished 2017 with just 60% completed. Moreover in 2017 he never had a single game over a 70% completion rate. FWIW he improved in his 3rd season quite a bit. National media types don't watch Bears games, not like we do. We are hyper-critical, as most fans of teams are, of our own players.
-
That will only get him so far and the media knows that. Just like Adam touched on, Trubisky didn’t really seem healed until the playoffs. He got injured because of his running. His passing is more ‘inconsistent’ and that is where he gets the critique he deserves. Its also fair to say he has yet show he can read defenses. The offensive scheme he played in last year allowed him limited reads. This year will be different. Is he along the same lines of other QBs of his peer group? Probably. But that doesn’t earn him a top 10 ranking, not yet anyhow.
-
AZ, This is my exact argument. They literally rank players with no real tangible supporting information. Is Trubisky a top 5 QB, no, but can he be? Why not? If you said he was the 8th best QB, most of his stats would back up that position. If you said top 12, same, but when you start saying he is in the bottom half of the league (16th and lower), biased views seem to come into play. Simms even said that the "arrow is pointed straight up for Trubisky in this offense" then ranks him 20th. It doesn't add up. Again, I just find it interesting that the media continues to downplay his ability but guys like Foles, Jackson, and Goff like AZ stated, and others like Mayfield and Watson are immune to the same criticism that Trubisky receives. Funny how SF doesn't take any flak for drafting like crap outside of Kittle, and paid a huge amount of money for JimmyG and have yet to see any real results. I know the injury occurred, but Trubisky didn't get a free pass from criticism for his injury which didn't seem to fully heal until the playoffs.
-
I'd say in passing both are about equal. Foles has significant limitations under pressure and Trubisky shines more often than not in those moments. Mostly I see Foles ahead of Trubisky on reading defenses and being able to make the quick decisions. However, he wasn't always that way, especially not in his 2nd season. Then there are the adhoc plays and designed read-options that a defense must account for with Trubisky on the field. Do you think Foles will provide the running threat or yards that Trubisky does? Zero chance of that. Yet the media ignores his ability to run. In support of that ignoring his running consider Lamar Jackson and his 4.7ypc versus Trubisky's 6.7ypc. Yet Jackson is ranked 15th on USA Today's list. (This is their ranking of a team's QB situation not QBs per se). So Trubisky is better at passing than Jackson completing 66.6% of his passes vs. 58.2%. Plus he is more efficient running than Jackson too. Trubisky QB rating 95.4 vs. Jackson at 84.5. And if you say that Jackson is limited in his running yards because defenses are stacking the box well then shouldn't that make it easier for him to pass? Meanwhile these same knuckleheads put Goff at #7 despite their own precaution that even after 3 seasons in the NFL he can't read defenses on his own and still has to rely on his HC calling the play. Maybe they were watching a different Superbowl than the rest of us.
-
totally agree. I think he will do very well this year. I think sooner or later he will be a top 5 QB.
-
It's very fair to say Trubisky is inconsistent. It is also unfair to not recognize that he is ascending. I don't give a shit what people say, Trubisky is both. But, he meets the eye test. He'll be alright.
-
Exactly. And with the five sources I cited, they were pretty consistent. Granted USA Today was a bit tilted to the negative but still... I think it safe to say that those that wrote the respective articles; understanding subjective views as they are, are based on observations they made separate from one another. And believe me when I say Chris Simms is probably not a great authority on grading great QBs; his dad maybe ... but not Chris. They probably all looked at how all 32 starting QB's have done and/or will do on their respective teams. We look at Trubisky and agree he's better (or potentially could be) than a loonnnnnnnggggg list of not so good QBs in Chicago. So yes, I get the perception of a "consensus hate". Perhaps a better question to ask is how would the QB's listed ahead of Trubisky perform in the offense he's currently in? I think it safe to say that Foles would probably do pretty well, given Philly's offense is almost identical to it. On that level, I would think Trubisky might still weigh out to where he is currently. NYC said Trubisky was "inconsistent" and I think that hurts him a lot. Is it fair? Maybe not. We have yet to see how he performs in year 2 of this offense.
-
amen. Stats aside, you ask yourself, if it was just for one year, this coming season, would you rather have Trubisky or X? And I dont think there are 14 QBs in the league Id pick before Trubisky for just 2020. He might not be top 10, but he's probably hanging around that threshold. And if you widen it out to mean the next few years, Ill take Trubisky. Sure if a young Brady was available for the same price yada yada, but he isnt, and Trubisky is no slouch. He wasnt bad last year either, he was inconsistent. ANd that will change as he grows. He definitely showed times where he was a top 5 QB.
-
My only problem with Simms' rankings is there are rookies on his list.BWTBS Mitch has yet to prove he is a consistent franchise QB!
-
Great point and a very likely scenario. We should at the very least go deep into the playoffs making our first near the end of the first round, and the Raiders are the Raiders and will likely suck making their 2nd about like having a low 1st.
-
Grizz, The point of contention I have is that there is a clear media biased against Trubisky regardless of how well he plays. Simms said he was the 20th best QB going into this season, and there literally is nothing that supports that position. PFF ranks him low, and as you can see by the rankings, USA Today is completely out of whack as well. There are a million ways to "rank" the players. Just take this scenario for example with the couple of guys in front of him on Simms list. If you had to pick Trubisky or any of the guys from 15-19 for performance in 2019, who would you pick? Goff looked like crap without Gurley and with Kupp coming back from the knee injury, I can't see Goff outproducing Trubisky this year, especially if Trubisky improves even just a little bit. How about Carr? There is potential for a complete train wreck in Oakland and he wasn't that good to begin with. Mayfield, maybe, but his numbers were worse than Trubisky's last year. Foles in Jacksonville? This guy has never played even average outside of Philly, so nothing would point to him doing that in Jacksonville who is devoid of talent on the offense. Then Cousins, you could make a case for Cousins just because of his receivers, but straight up, with all things equal Trubisky should have the edge. Here is some info about QBR: https://www.espn.com/blog/statsinfo/post/_/id/123701/how-is-total-qbr-calculated-we-explain-our-quarterback-rating Everyone is entitled to their opinion and all the rankings are subjective, I get that, but there seems to be a consensus hate on Trubisky in the national media for whatever reason. He can't help that the Bears traded up to draft him, and he was picked before Mahomes. Nothing you can do about that now, and he shouldn't be penalized for it. I just think it is a fascinating phenomenon.
-
looking for baby swing chair . + . , ) % - ,
