DABEARSDABOMB
-
Posts
6,765 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Posts posted by DABEARSDABOMB
-
-
1 minute ago, BearFan PHX said:
good analysis, it all makes sense assuming teams really want him. I think someone will, I hope two someones will.
It also hit me - it behooves Cousin(s) camp to push the Atlanta narrative as well - cause it gives him some more leverage in his negotiations with the Vikings. I do hope we see Cousin(s) resign with Minnesota sooner vs. later cause I do think that significantly strengthens the Bears leverage. I also think if I were to guess - I guess the Steeler(s) are the team that ultimately pays the price to get Field(s). I think Atlanta has more optionality given how early they pick in Rnd 1 and they could easily go McCarthy and sign a vet like Mayfield or someone else as a bridge guy. So if the price gets too high - I could see Atlanta bailing out vs. I think Pittsburgh needs to - but the Bears need to have enough leverage to get them to pay their price tag or get close to it.
-
So for the Bears to maximize value - they need 2 teams interested. I think everyone thought on paper the 2 most likely teams were Steelers & Falcons, but maybe Seahawks, Broncos, Vikings, Pats could be options as well. Some more likely than others. Bucs could fit that bill too - if they lose Mayfield. But the predominant favorites seemed to be Falcons & Steelers (this assumes Cousin's stays put).
Is it a surprise that the 2 rumors floating out there right now are Steelers want to stay put at QB and Falcons putting a lot of talk about making a run for Cousin's? I don't think that is a surprise and presume in the game of NFL off-season chess, these are teams getting word out there to try and play the leverage game and shift leverage in the favor of them (vs. the Bears). Very curious to see how it plays out - when insiders were reporting Bears could get a 1st rounder - that seemed way too high (at that point why not just draft one of the last top ranked QB's for at least a shot at a 5 year deal - with 4 years on a rookie scale). When the reports are they could barely get a 3rd - I think that is also too low - I think the high is a 2nd this year followed by a later round pick (say a 3rd or 4th this year or a 3rd next year) and on the lower end I see the inverse - you get a 3rd rounder this year but than a 2nd rounder next year (maybe some conditions applied to it).
One thing I hadn't thought of is how does Field(s) and his agent play into this. If I were Field(s), my goal is to get to a franchise that wants me and to be party to facilitate a trade. If this drags out - than the 5th year option is off the table and I run the risk of basically being a one and down guy and at risk of NOT getting a large payday in a year. I wonder if Justin and his agent are open to a Jordan Love type of extension - where a team basically gets him for 3 years at a lower cost (but it guarantees Justin one big payday to set him and his family for life - while also putting him a position, given how young he is, to get a couple massive contracts if he ultimately performs).
I would also think if you are the Bears - if Fields is open to that - it increases probabilty a team goes out and gets Justin - cause they have a bit more certainty to what they are getting in terms of locking him in for 3 years before paying him. Takes 2 to tango but I'm curious and if Justin was forward thinking there are a lot of reasons to do this.
-
2 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said:
its a good thought, the Hill chart says sliding from 9 all the way to 20 gets you a mid 2nd, but going to 15 only gets you a high 3rd. You could get JPJ that way, but I think we really need weapons for the new QB too. Maybe a WR at 15 and a center but not JPJ in the 2nd?
The Justin picks are going to be really important, I hope we are able to get value for him, but if theres only one team interested, they could well wait until we just cut him if there are no other offers.If one of top 3 wideouts are there than I’m fine staying but Thomas of LSU looks real good consolation prize.
-
4 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said:
I hate PFF, but in this case I agree with you (and them) about Bates.
I can't see us trading back from #1 unless it's to #2. I just watched some tape on Daniels and I see real problems. I don't have an opinion on Maye yet, and there are some other names to look at too, but more and more I think we will just take Caleb. But I absolutely see the problem that we are very short on picks. And you only get a haul out of pick 1 or 2. Trading 9 down to 20 you only get a 3rd rounder for the trouble. If youre all in on JPJ and hes your other first rounder, and you dont want to overdraft him, then OK, but I think we stay at #9 and take OT, WR, Bowers or a DL.
We are short on picks for sure. Worth it for Sweat, but we need more picks. Maybe we will spend next years 2nd to move our 3rd up into round 2. We still need too many things though.I think Bears might be able to move back from 9 to 15 and get a 2nd for their trouble - for sure if one of the final qbs is there (a bunch of teams will be looking to move up to get one and maybe a team needing defense moves up to get top db or something like that.
Bears than grab next tier of wideouts and double dip on another later in draft (maybe Rice?)
-
27 minutes ago, AZ54 said:
Bills are negative $40mil in cap space, the worst in the NFL. That's after trading Bates. They ate $4mil in dead money, Bears pay Bates $4m/yr ea 2024/25. This is exactly what we've been paying Lucas Patrick the last 2 seasons.
Patrick PFF grade = 50
Bates PFF grade = 78
That's one heck of an upgrade. Of course that's assuming he's our starting Center. Even as OG depth he's more than good enough to challenge Davis and at $4mil/yr this is a really good deal for us.
Giving up a 5th Rd pick in a draft where we need a lot of picks to build depth screams trade down. That is of course just my dumb opinion. A team doesn't know for sure they can trade back from 9 until draft day, and really only when they are on the clock, so that means the most likely trade back is from #1. Poles has a better feel for the level of interest and a sense of the value he might get now that the combine week is over. I don't think that's imminent either but my spidey sense still says watch for Washington.
As Phx said, Bates allows us room to draft a rookie and give him a year to learn, especially key if you want to move someone like Barton from OG to C. This is supposed to be a really good IOL draft. Don't get too fixated on the big names at Center. We have a lot of needs and Poles is big on value. Trading back and drafting Powers-Johnson in Rd 1 as many mocks have done doesn't scream value and now I'd guess that's completely off the table. Van Pran's stock is falling after a poor combine, he's likely day 3 now. There are better IOL options and from what I've read that goes well into Rd 3.
I agree this is a good draft to find a center and doesn’t have to be super early - Bears just don’t have any picks. Bates is clearly an upgrade over the depth Bears had previously and is under a fair deal for 2 years.
Now if I knew the Bears got a 2nd and 3rd for Fields I would be more happy with this. Get another 2nd for sliding down 5 spots or so if the top 3 wideouts and Alt are gone.
-
And I should be clear - Bates is a very good back up linemen so I will admit that and who knows maybe he ends up being a surprisingly good center.
I suspect Bears know what they will ultimately get for Justin if they are dealing a 5th already.
-
I have nothing against Bates - he is a good depth olineman and might be a passable starter but I’m not giving up a pick for him. Period. Especially when Bears have so few picks already.
Missing the 6th rounder for the worthless Feeney acquisition. Don’t get me wrong - 6th rounder probably won’t hit but I’d still keep it for depth.
-
9 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said:
So here is Sports Illustrated confirming that Williams opted not to visit the Bears tomorrow, and to wait on his physical until after his pro day.
And this is normal. Team visits are usually later. Williams not participating in physicals during the combine was the curveball.
I dont think it's a very big deal, and I dont think it will prevent Poles from trading Fields either. The simple fact is that Fields really isn't very good, and we are going to need a new QB this year even if Caleb Williams gets hit by a bus and never plays in the NFL.
I would easily take Maye or Daniels over Fields.
https://www.si.com/nfl/bears/news/caleb-williams-reportedly-delays-bears-plans-for-physicalI think that is exactly it - It also sounded like the Bears were the ones who adjusted the schedule - vs. Caleb not being willing to do so. I presume it is more - Bears were being aggressive to make sure THEY did all their homework in advance, now that they have finished their first initial blitz - they are starting to feel pretty good and put their foot off the gas on Caleb slightly as he has been passing all of their initial tests.
-
Total legend and from what it sounds like just a great individual as well. RIP and nothing but loves and prayers to his family and friends.
-
Williams is not visiting with the Bears this week - he is visiting with them right after his pro day. Williams did meet with Bears at the combine. I think originally Poles wanted to have his meeting later this week - the presumption now is, Bears heard more than enough to answer their questions and decided to wait and tackle around the pro day which is the more traditional timing.
If you read Breer's piece closely you can see it mentions that somewhere. I will notate - part of this is speculation. Basically put - it implied that the Bears have been super aggressive with Caleb and his camp all off-season thus far and so far every box has been checked, so much so that the Bears are comfortable easing off a bit and I presume will refocus on other off-season items.
-
24 minutes ago, adam said:
If this is true, against what Albert Breer just put out this morning, then there is no way they will draft him. Poles can't wait that long to make a decision. They still may draft a QB, but it won't be Williams.
It isn't true. Breer isn't making it up, Biggs isn't making it up, etc. And if it were true - every talking head on ESPN would be talking all about it.
-
1 hour ago, Stinger226 said:
Listening to the SCORE this morning and he blew the visit off . It's now supposed to be until the end of March. Free agency will be almost over by then. Not being able to trade Justin this week going to change the story line. Look for the first pick traded this week.
The top rated CB going into the Combine did the physical and they found a Johnson fracture in his leg. I have no idea what that is but it will affect his draft position.
Where are you reading this? All I saw was reports about him visiting with Bears at combine (he met with them and later there was also a meeting with Caleb's team). All reports are that those conversations went very well.
-
I would love Rome or Nabers at 9 - but Alt would be my first choice at 9. Highly unlikely but dang is he going to be a monster lt.
-
35 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said:
hopefully not to us - I've had my fill of Pittsburgh WRs for a while.
I worry about the Steelers off field stuff but I would be fine with Diontae and a pick for Justin
-
I’m sick of the Caleb is a prick narrative. Instead here are some examples of how he is a good dude:
-
2 hours ago, Pixote said:
Good Grief, I Sure Hope You Are Right!
Question, does it matter if the QB has the quickest release of all 32 starting QBs if in turn he takes more time than any of the 32 starting QBs to decide who to throw to? Can the athleticism that allowed him to evade, like a magician, college defensive pass rushers to give him time to play hero ball, the vast majority of whom will never see an NFL field without buying a ticket, translate well against the likes of elite NFL sack demons? Or will he be another Fran Tarkenton (who never won a SB)?
And yes, he played hero ball out of necessity. Habits are hard to break. Surely we have the QB guru to help him develop those amazing skills? That amazing athleticism. But let me ask one more question. How many times have we declared all our QB needed was a QB Whisperer to work with him in the offseason to correct mistakes in his footwork, arm motion, etc... And how many times did they fail?
I guess I am a bit snake bit, ready for the next sure fire QB to wear a Bears Uni to disappoint us.
All of that said, Again I say, I will be excited if we draft Williams so that he can prove my concerns were just that of an old Bears' fan who cannot shake the memories of seasons past.
There was a deep dive done a week or so ago…I got to find the link. It talked about how long Williams held the ball and how the analytics person was very concerned.
He than broke it down to how often he holds to pass and how much time he creates. It turns out the most comparable college player to Williams from TTT and effective scramble time was Aaron Rodgers.
Both Rodgers and Williams had an ability over multiple seasons to move around in and around the pocket and buy far more time to make down field passing plays.
When they took splits further they realized Williams standard deviaition is extreme - he has tons of plays with low TTT but than when he does scramble he buys more time than anyone to throw. It goes back to - he isn’t fields. Who had similar TTT but standard deviaition was extremely high TTT and it was a lot of unforced rushes and created pressures.
Williams might bust but I really only see him busting due to injury. I think he is going to be a solid NFL starter with high end upside. Not going to say he is the next Mahomes or Brady cause well that just isn’t fair.
And this stupid stuff about his dad. Have you seen his dad in front of the media on all the combine stuff this weekend? I haven’t seen him all over tv or anything just some nasty media people doing what they do…kind of like that nasty report a few years ago that implied Fields was lazy.
His dad is involved and engaged but he isn’t this dope a lot on here make him out to be. The Lavar Ball comps are nuts - that guy was everywhere and anywhere overstepping his son. Carl is the opposite - he is engaged but behind the scenes and doing what he thinks is best for his son. Never have I got this view it is all about Carl - with Lavar it was always all about him.
That toxicity is from teams trying to do anything to push a narrative to get what they want. Like all this no Bears talk - guarantee that was from other teams in draft pushing a bias to see if they could make it a thing. When you here Caleb talk - you don’t here one drop of it. He just wants to be a top pick and be great. Is he arrogant - yes but so is every all time great qb.
-
30 minutes ago, Pixote said:
The draft is heavy with amazing talent at WR. Draft one!
The draft is crazy good with DL day-one starters. Draft one!
There are very few rookie centers that can start day one. Chances are we will not be in a position to get one if we draft Caleb and don't trade down. That FA center from Denver might be big $$$, but it would be worth it to have him anchor the line while we develop a prospect.
We CANNOT continue to allow defenses to kill our QB!
I agree with you.
-
Not that it matters as it is one combine, but from my eye Bo Nix did not look like an NFL starter.
McCarthy has tools tools tools and Penix can fling it. Tennessee qb has a hell of an arm.
Rome is clearly a top 10 pick and Legette sure looks the part. One of my favorite 2nd tier wideouts. Such a good wide out crop.
-
I think I am leaning to drafting Turner at 9 , signing Mike Evans, and drafting another wideout in 3rd round. Use pick you get for Fields on oline and another pick on safety.
I would be open to signing one of the running backs to a deal to help Caleb. Barkley or Ekler (banged up but so good as a receiver).
I presume they can get Evans for big money but without a ton of years and even after taking Turner they should have cap space for a free agent oline or dlinemen plus maybe grab a safety? -
4 hours ago, Pixote said:
Yep, you're right. My mistake.
Enis also was a long hold out though.
-
-
1 hour ago, adam said:
Florio thinks that if Fields doesn't get traded soon that the Bears have positioned themselves for Fields to "ask" for a trade. Then if they get less in return, they can point the finger at the lack of leverage. So we will see. I hope it is nothing less than a 2nd rounder in 2024.
I do agree - Bears should drive up leverage now - but bird in the hand by later this week is the right move and right thing across all paths. Especially if we are getting a 2nd - push the price up from there - see if you can get an extra 2nd or a 3rd rounder this year.
-
Just now, adam said:
I was under the impression that it was the Bears swapping picks and getting a 2nd:
Bears get #8, #43
Falcons get #9, FieldsSo the Bears move up one slot basically assuring they would get one of the top 3 WRs, Bowers, or Alt, assuming 3 QBs go in the top 7. If they were at #9, there is a chance that 3 QBs, top 3 WRs, Bowers and Alt are gone. Then it would more than likely be Edge or DT.
Yeah - and I'll be honest, I have no issue with this deal. I also don't have an issue if Bears than opt to move down a few spots from 8 (to a team wanting a QB) and pick up another 2nd round pick. Given the wideout and oline depth in this draft - I would love to have 2 picks in 2nd round to address those spots.
-
37 minutes ago, Pixote said:
Crap. I miss read the post. I thought it was Justin and OUR 2nd from next year for Atlanta's 2024 first Rd pick. If you're saying, we get Atlanta's 2025 2nd in addition to their 2024 1st for Justin, Hell, yes! I'd love that trade.
Oh - I misread it the other way and was still good - but yes - I agree with you - getting 8 and a 2nd rounder for Fields is ridiculously good (but I don't see that happening in a million years). Getting 8 for Fields would be incredible in and of itself (and I'll be honest - I see zero scenario that is realistic).
Now a scenario where Bears get 2nd rounder this year and than a conditional 1st next year (or no worse than 2nd). Say if he makes the pro bowl it becomes a 1st (or throws X TD's or whatever it is) and if he doesn't, than we get a 2nd...that seems like solid value.
Bears Sign JJ - 4yr 76M deal
in Bearstalk
Posted
My question is - if you were Poles, would you think about trading Johnson. I suspect probability of that happening is low - seems very clear that Poles wants JJ to stick around and JJ wants to be here, so its just a matter of getting the economics to work out.
With that said - if you were the Bears, seeing that Poles seems to have an eye for DB talent - would you be open to trading JJ. For me - if I could get a 1st rounder plus another pick (not like a 2nd rounder or anything - maybe a future 3rd) - than I would at least consider it (I presume FRP would be back end) - than deploy the cap space on dline.
JJ is a really good DB though so I have zero issue giving him his 4yr 80-90M deal.