BearFan PHX

I suspect we will sign some IOL starters in free agency, and draft talent at those positions to develop, and have a year to build muscle in the weight room. If that IS the plan, then trading down makes sense because you dont need to draft players higher to pay for the extra value of being more ready to start right away?

Ok so just being clear - Im keeping Kmet this year too. Im just saying, if someone offered a good value in trade, that I could use, say to help the OL, and if johnson was saying Kmet didnt have the skill set he needed, that youd have to look at it. But yes, my money is on that Kmet will be a Bear this year, but maybe not next year depending on his performance in 2025.

totally agree. thats where Im at too. I just think you gotta think about what else you could get for $10M in cap space plus whatever value youd get in trade.

well first off I wasnt saying he should be cut, but it is worth noting that you save $10M off the cap if you trade him - thats a lot of money. But what I said was they will probably keep him this year to see what they can get out of him before they make that decision. I dont know what skill set BJ requires in a TE, so it was worth noting. Im not saying Kmet is bad, but $10M plus a decent trade offer is worth considering, because Im not sure his worth is equivalent to all of that? But again, I predict we keep him this year, but he might be ont he block next year depending on how he plays for us this year with targets.

just a finer point - to save that $10M, the trade (or cut) must be designated as a post June 1st move. For anyone researching the cap situation. Still feel the same though. He gets a year tryout with BJ. Probably. If someone offers enough in trade, or BJ doesnt think he has the skills he needs, then it could go the other way. But my money is on him being here at least this year.

I agree. This is why i think they give him one more year to prove himself before thinking about that $10M. I could be wrong, but that's my guess. But the way his contract is set up, they can cut him any year now and gain $10M in cap space.

He is assisting Jason McKie coaching high school football I guess. I think that story is still being written, I wouldnt be surprised if he does get more into coaching.

I dont think we will make a big splash in free agency for a WR either, but I do think there are questions about Kmet. We can cut him any year int he next three and instantly save $10M off of the cap. I dont think Kmet sucks, but I dont think he is worth $10M. That said, they may give him a year under Johnson and see what they can make of him. Certainly he wasnt targeted much last year at all, so it's hard to judge if he is a $5M TE, a $10M Te or a $15M TE. My guess is you could replace him with someone better for the money at $10M, but I also think he will get a prove it year this year. But until he does prove it, I dont know if you can count on him to be a top 3 receiver for us? I do expect us to find a speedy slot type guy though, but probably not the most expensive one.

exactly, one of the points Olin made (regarding Davis) was that if you pay a vet big money, you expect more than just production on the field, you gotta sign someone who will be a leader in the locker room too. And of course Davis was neither.

Olin Kreutz was on TTNL tonight, and said some really good things about Roushar, and what it takes to make an OL work in general. In short, Kreutz has some connection to Roushar, I think he played under him somewhere, and he said he was very similar in approach and temperament to Harry Heistand, which I think is a very good thing. Seems like we are going to be looking for players on the OL that have attitude. Finally.

so you dont need to trade for free agents, you just need to (over) pay for them?

hahahaha perfect

I read an article that the director of pro personnel would likely be elevated to asst GM.

Poles definitely signs mid and low level free agents to fill holes that he may well draft as well. Big money free agents not counting in this of course.

well just jump in!

A big money signing may well affect our draft plans, but i can tell you now that every year football teams fill all their holes with decent free agents so that they dont have to reach in the draft, but when good players drop to their pick in higher rounds, they pick them anyway, even if they just signed a free agent for the same position. Obviously this doesnt apply to $20 million dollar a year free agents, just as late round picks can go to any position, but first through 4th or 5th round, we take good players. The reason you fill holes with free agents is so you can go some form of best player available, and if you dont land the players you were targeting, you dont have to reach on that position. But if the player you wanted is available, you draft him even if you just signed a mid tier free agent for the same position. Often the vet wins the job in camp, but the rookie can displace them during the year. All or at least most teams do this. We do this every year.

yup.

Yeah, but the rest of the line was a sieve! Fangio is a hell of a DC. We need a better OL than KC has (Smith excepted)

I think we can all see how important the offensive line is. Even if you have decent line that holds up most of the year, when you get to the big games and face the tough defenses, you have to be able to give your QB time no matter who they are. And conversely, how important a good pass rush is too. Everything happens in the lines, and we suck on both sides.

right. These teams need wins, and they dont care what color someone is if they can help them win games. That goes for players and coaches. Given that there are no real physical requirements to be a coach, it stands to reason that you would have the same percentage of coaches, GMs etc of color that there are in the general population, and we are close to that. As to why there are more black players in the league by percentage than there are black people in the general population, I have no answers. Only that the top athletes seem to be more likely to be black. it should be said that we are speaking of the top athletes, and of any given average white guy or black guy, it will not always be the case at all. Plenty of women can beat plenty of men (like me) in physical competition for example, but when it comes to the best athletes, they never will. But what everyone should want, what MLK spoke eloquently about, is a meritocracy. The best players play, the best coaches coach. And I do not doubt in the NFL that that is the case, given how much each team wants to win. It's more of a cultural or political narrative at this point in the NFL, than an actual issue that I can see. Should the league require 73% of the players be white, 14% be black, asians be 6.4%, and 50.5% be female? What if there arent enough females that want to play in the NFL who are good enough? What do you do then? Force some to play anyway? It's a bad way of thinking. I understand why some people are seduced by the idea of equity, but equality and equity are not the same thing. Equality of opportunity is a no brainer, we should always strive for that. And then results of competition should be meritocritous. Equity on the other hand, the engineering of outcomes despite the facts on the ground, is some collectivist anti American stuff we should all recoil from, once we see it for what it is.

sounds like a great idea. dropping down 2 slots to swap 242 for 76. according to Hill: pick #10 = 369 pts pick # 242 = 1 pt (370 total) pick #12 = 347 pts pick #76 = 61 pts (408 total) 408 - 370 means we got 38 pts better in the deal (equivalent to pick #99) put another way, to make the trade fair under the hill chart, we'd have to give a compensatory 3rd (from losing cunningham for example) to even it up. So yes, if theyd do that, we should jump on it.

yes i agree

The Bears have been constituted as an outside zone blocking line, and we had lighter more agile athletes. Ben Johnson ran all kinds of schemes in Detroit, and outside zone was only one of them. I think he likes bigger bodies. And I agree about the weight room and the strength and conditioning coach. We have been like a resort of a football team. So let me ask a question that will not be popular at this moment. Poles was an OL, but we didnt make them lift, and we didn't demand the "HITS" principles from anyone. If Poles had been a WR, I might understand, but since he played a position where discipline and effort are so central - how did he let the culture get to where it was?! it's not a good sign. Can we win with this staff if Poles serves them and their vision well? Sure. But I dont see Poles providing any leadership back in the other direction to the coaches.

I totally agree about free agents. there are so many misses. I was just thinking more about the last thing you said, that you would prefer not to roll with the guys from last year, and through the draft is better if you pick the right guys. And i guess we only have so many draft picks each year plays into the analysis too. So yeah, now im not surprised

Assuming we can make it work under the cap, which it looks like we should (getting a bargain because CLE paid the guaranteed money) Id be all for it. I also expect IOL players to be signed in free agency, although we should also be drafting some as well.