There is our 3T, had 7 sacks,16 QB Hits, and 12 TFLs for the Bengals last year.

Just now, DABEARSDABOMB said:

There is our 3T, had 7 sacks,16 QB Hits, and 12 TFLs for the Bengals last year.

Scratch that as a high draft need.  I forget these things leak before the actual date of 3/16.

This one surprised me. At first glance, less about the player, I don't love the allocation of resources here but they do have cap space so will see what the rest looks like. And to a point you made, this was a position they were going to need to handle in the draft, so creates extra flexibility from that standpoint.  I was curious how Bears would react with some of the rush of FA olineman resigning with their team right before free agency opened.  

I like this, he was one of the players we talked about filling this need for us.  More money than I wanted but it's always more money than I wanted.  It likely means Nichols is on his way to another team.  If the money is right I'm still interested in re-signing Hicks.  

Solid signing.  We needed a 3T and got a good one.  It's still a draft item position.

So much for sitting on the sideline and waiting for Tier2/3 to fall to you.  Whenever you do a deal like this in the first 2hr of FA you went hard after that target.  Hard enough to get everyone else to back off negotiations quickly.  I expected this more for an Oline position.

I thought he would have one (tier one) signing but surprised it wasn't Oline. I don't for see any more fat contracts.

6 hours ago, AZ54 said:

I like this, he was one of the players we talked about filling this need for us.  More money than I wanted but it's always more money than I wanted.  It likely means Nichols is on his way to another team.  If the money is right I'm still interested in re-signing Hicks.  

I love this signing. The key to the new defense is up the middle. The savings from Mack and Goldman easily cover this cap hit. Technically, the original cap space + Cohen's savings are still left. 

I love it too!!

I see some people on social media talking about overpaying. Ogunjobi now has the 13th highest AAV for an IDL, however, he is only making 250K more than DJ Reader and 500K more than Javon Hargrave. So to me, this is very much inside the market value and not an overpay with a ton of years. This is a 3 year deal, but will probably have an easy out after year 2. 

Buckner vs Ogunjobi

Snaps 844 v 724
Hurry 8 v 9
KD 11 v 7
Sacks 7 v 7 
Pressures 27 v 24
TFL 10 v 12
Tackles 68 v 48

Ogunjobi pretty much matched Buckner's output in 2021 with 120 fewer snaps. On a per snap basis, the only category Buckner has the lead in is total tackles. 

Poles added a core player, which is going to cost more. Most  signings are looked at temporary, this one is not. 

We have 6 draft picks that hopefully can turn into 8, New England was notorious for trading down. 2 will have to be WRs, 2 OL, CB, SS , Edge, and  LB.  Ideally, A QB prospect, A speed TE,  more LBers, and a DL. We simply don't have enough draft picks.

Question : Wou!d you be okay with passing up an ideal prospect, to trade down for extra picks?  Example, Zion Johnson at 39 . 

No. Fill the immediate need if that player is at the top of his positional board when we select.

Unless we have two glaring needs ranked similar and can reasonably target the second player with the next election

The problem with that is we never really know who's atop their board real time.

The crap made up rankings by the gurus may not match our brass and we'll be like damn what's Pace doing.

 

3 hours ago, Stinger226 said:

Poles added a core player, which is going to cost more. Most  signings are looked at temporary, this one is not. 

We have 6 draft picks that hopefully can turn into 8, New England was notorious for trading down. 2 will have to be WRs, 2 OL, CB, SS , Edge, and  LB.  Ideally, A QB prospect, A speed TE,  more LBers, and a DL. We simply don't have enough draft picks.

Question : Wou!d you be okay with passing up an ideal prospect, to trade down for extra picks?  Example, Zion Johnson at 39 . 

Roster construction is super challenging because there are no guarantees in the draft that a player is going to be there when you pick.

I would say if the player you have on the board is there at your pick and there are no other players rated the same, you pick that player. If you have multiple players with the same grade when you pick, that's when you try to move back as you assume you can still get one of those graded players at a later slot.

A high hill to climb in the draft But it worked last year for both Bears and KC. There will absolutely be a good WR at 39, hopefully who they like will be there. I would take the player at 39 and trade back with 48 or 71, or both. I have been doing a ton of mock drafts and these names keep poping up. Christian Watson, Alex Pierce, Pickens, and Sky Moore. I would take any of them.

On 3/16/2022 at 9:55 PM, adam said:

Roster construction is super challenging because there are no guarantees in the draft that a player is going to be there when you pick.

I would say if the player you have on the board is there at your pick and there are no other players rated the same, you pick that player. If you have multiple players with the same grade when you pick, that's when you try to move back as you assume you can still get one of those graded players at a later slot.

This.  Moving up or down in the draft has to be purposeful and thought out (given sometimes you don't have a lot of time to decide).  I do prefer trading back and adding picks but at the same time I don't want to see us do it just to do. that and accumulate picks if we can stay put and add a piece that will help our team going forward.  This is exactly how you need to approach trading back or trading up.  It all comes down to who's on your board as your pick nears.  Being aware of who other teams might be targeting ahead of you to decide if you can move back and still get someone you've targeted.  

This deal just fell through.  He failed his physical.  

 

 

Uhm…that sucks. How did that happen?  

Wow.  

They already signed another guy, Justin Jones, played for the Chargers. Production wasn't special but young, 25. Still need another guy. Matt Loaninis. Is available, good production., played with Washington. Also Jarran Reed, Quinton Jefferson, Solomon Thomas, was the third pick in the draft Trubisky was un.

59 minutes ago, AZ54 said:

This deal just fell through.  He failed his physical.  

 

 

Sorry to see this happen. Glad we found out now. They signed Jones right away so he had a backup plan ready.  I assume that opens up some money for a few other players.

Peace

 

Seems like Ogunjobi just edged out Stallworth from Indi. Then we find out he's not healthy, and having missed on Stallworth in the meantime, we have to sign Jones.

And in signing Jones so much cheaper, did we miss out on another top FA signing as they all already went?

So is that a mistake by Poles for not knowing that Ogun might fail his physical? Is this the kind of thing that GMs who are more plugged in and can make phone calls usually know?

Might the idea that he had surgery mean that if the two were equally rated, then you go with the one without the question mark? Or maybe Stallworth sucks and Eberflus has first hand knowledge of that? Still we might have signed a WR or OL with our one big FA.

Making a big splash on a guy you cant sign is a bad move by Poles.

8 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said:

Making a big splash on a guy you cant sign is a bad move by Poles.

Yup. Considering he said he’d slow roll it into the later days of FA (for which he mainly has) this signing was the big “splash” at the beginning. However, I am not yet deterred by Poles.  Ill chalk it up to beginners un-luck.  Fool me once and all that. 

Two words - Pernell McPhee. Pace signed him with a known issue and it bit us in the ass. I have no issues with Poles backing away from the signing. Use the money on a LT or a WR. 

Peace