BearFan PHX

I'm sure someone else must have noted it earlier, but I was just making a roster spreadsheet for the game tonight, and I saw that 6 drafted rookies made the squad, which is pretty good. Good for Angelo! WR Juaquin Iglesias, WR Johnny Knox, OG Lance Lewis, DT Jarron Gilbert, S Al Afalava, CB DJ Moore Go Bears tonight.

Does anyone give our Adrian Peterson any thought for #2? I've always liked the guy - he is a journeyman and he never stops working. he always looks good in preseason, but he never seems to be able to get it done when it counts. I think before the injury to KJ, the writing was on the wall that he wasn't gonna make the cut this year. Now, who knows? Positives include keeping him on Special Teams, which will make us over the top strong since they'd likely already found a replacement for his loss, and as a RB, having a guy who really knows the system and does a great job pass blocking for protection. He is the opposite of Garrett Wolfe too, if you're looking for certain matchups in any given week. Still, I admit his days could be numbered. I like the guy a lot - great motor and heart, but if there was something flashier available, I'd probably go for that. SO, do we look outside for RB, or go with Peterson?

nfo, Great analysis. It's posts like that that keep me coming back here. Playing Clue with the roster - great.

Orton was more than a throw in. If one assumes that this real life, NFL experienced Jay Cutler, if hypothetically thrown into the draft (don't ask how) would be the consensus #1 pick (and he clearly would be) then you can assign a trade value chart number to him. If you then subtract out the value of this year's 1st rounder, and also next year's which we traded to Denver, you are left with enough "points' to trade even-up for a low first round pick. That means that Orton got valued as a first rounder in this deal. So he was clearly more than a throw in. He isn't a top tier guy, but he's in the best 32. A starting NFL QB is worth something, even if he isn't that great.

Thanks! Nice job with the internet sleuthing!

I don't think that's true. I think they play man, and blitz too. But for the purposes of this discussion, it doesn't matter - here's why: If you're right, we still aren't playing 40%+ "cover 2," and my point was just that when they call us a "cover 2" defense, they don't really mean the coverage at all, the label really means one gappers on the DL. Now I THINK I remember Lovie saying 30 to 40 % ZONE, but if you are right, then I would love to see the link, and would be very grateful to learn something! I'll try to look for it too.

Thanks for that article. It was nice to hear some details i didn't previously know. I'd like to point out that while that is an excellent description of the Cover 2 (and cover 3) zone defense, that we only play zone 30% to 40% of the time. The label "Tampa Cover 2" has been loosely applied now to the entire one gap system. We run a "tampa 2" but that doesnt mean we're always in zone, it really just means that we run a one gap system, whatever the coverage behind it.

Thanks VERY much for the stats! I am totally on board with Cutler (I was already) and this does help alleviate some of my concerns. it certainly does show that he can play well anywhere. I'm not sure whether it answers the question of his 4th quarter heroics tho. I'd love to see stats on that home vs. away for 4th quarter only, but I understand that those aren't easy to find. I'm not arguing with the premise, and you've certainly pushed the ball down the field in proving it, but I don't see 4th quarter proof yet, well only by implication let's say. Still, thanks - and GO BEARS! GO CUTLER!

I'm very happy to have Cutler aboard. I think he's a real QB, and can win games for us. I thionk we got him at a bargain too. BUT that said... I am skeptical about 4th quarter stats for Denver teams. Denver is at high elevation, and opposing teams' conditioning breaks down at the end of the game. Elway did it too. Show me stats of Cutler on the road vs. home, and if they are consistent, then I'll be very happy to accept the premise.

Yeah I didn't take offense to Dungy's comments at ALL, you've got to hear them first hand - they were not overly critical, they were fairhanded, like he was saying "on one hand there's this, but on the other theres that" As for Cutler being mature, was McMahon?

Actually, Dungy said it in a radio interview, and he chose his words carefully, also saying that the Bears have done their homework, and feel good about Cutler. FWIW, that's Herm Edwards and Chris Carter on NFL Live. Herm DOES remind me of Dungy a little, but it isn't Dungy. Herm and CC were discussing the radio quote of Dungy's from the prior day.

ASHKUM, I mostly lurk here, but sometimes I gotta come out of the woodwork and say something. Damn. That might be the best post ever.

I agree, but I was trying to make an apples to apples comparison. Since a lot fo the package was draft picks, I figured to convert all the "currency" into draft points. Me either, that's why Angelo got us a steal here. He didn't get a first rounder for Orton, he simply paid a LOT less than Cutler's worth. They had to sell him at a discount, given their screw up. At first blush, two first round picks seems a lot of compensation, but in doing the math, I think it's fair to say that we underpaid, and Denver really lost. Exactly. What actually happened is we simply didn't pay anywhere near what we got. I fully agree. There was an article that said Denver chose us for that exact reason. I dunno. Not this year anyway - he still has 3 years left on his deal. Thanks for the conversation nfo, whatever the value, Cutler is certainly big news for our offense.

nfo, I don't mean a rookie Cutler, I mean Cutler right now. If the league somehow said, OK Cutler isn't a Bear or a Bronco, and we'll just throw him in with the draft pool, he would automatically become the first pick. I mean, I realize it would never happen, but the point is he is worth at least 3,000 draft points. Once you give Cutler a value (and 3000 is WAY LOW) then you can figure the other draft choices from the chart, and see what's left. What's left is 640+ points. That's Orton's worth in this then. So I'm agreeing with you, Denver gave Orton value in this equal to at least the 29th pick overall. By my reckoning, I see them as having given a much higher first round pick, because I value Cutler higher than 3000 points, and i dont give as much value to our next year's first, but even with tremendously conservative numbers, it's clearly at LEAST the 29th in value for Orton. Does that make more sense? Sorry I was confusing - I wasn't talking about a rookie Cutler. The fact that we don't pay a signing bonus is just huge gravy after that.

Exactly. I the math shows anything, it's that Cutler was worth a LOT, and picks are not players. It could take many picks to find a player, when you're talking about finding franchise QBs. But I also think it shows that Denver lost something, and got what they could to get out of it: Picks to get a QB to develop, and someone to take the reigns while you find that guy - lemme ask you: wouldn't YOU just rather have Cutler? Especailly if his signing bonus is free? I think the Bears won big here.

I was just trying to say that I thought Cutler was worth a lot more than 3,000 points, but that even if he was worth only 3,000 that still made Orton worth a first rounder in this. That made me realize what a steal this was.

I responded in Pix's thread about Trade Value that we got a First Round Pick for Orton, and depending on how you value it, we may have even gotten value equivalent to better than the 2nd pick overall for him. Its amazing, but true. Angelo IS a great GM.

Pix, What a great post! There are a few more points one can make from the chart too. First off, you put a value of 3,000 points on Cutler, as a first over all pick. I would argue that a proven Pro Bowl QB is worth more than ANY ONE pick in the draft. Further, since we don't have to pay him his signing bonus, he is worth even more. So for you to put a value on him of ONLY 3,000 points is WAY low. Good! If we show that we got a great deal even if he was only worth that 3,000 - then we got an even better deal if he was worth more, which he MUST be. We gave: This years #1, pick 18, which is worth 900 points. We also gave a 3rd rounder, pick 84 (I think) which was worth 170 points. We gave next year's #1 too. They always devalue next year's picks, so to say it might be worth the 10th pick at 1300 points is WAY overkill. Again, let's use your number, but certainly, the deal was significantly sweeter for us. Had you guessed the 20th pick instead for example, you'd only be talking about 850 points. And that's without the devaluation for it being next year's draft. We also go their 5th rounder, I don't know which one it is, but the worst one is 28 points. Again, using numbers that make the deal look worse than it really is, I'll go with 28. So we end up with Orton + 900 + 170 + 1300 and then subtract 28 points for the 5th rounder. By that math, we paid Orton + 2342 If you assume that Cutler was worth 3000 points, then Orton was worth 658 points, or the 29th pick in the draft. In other words, ANGELO GOT A FIRST ROUND PICK FOR ORTON. Think of it this way: 1) Angelo trades Orton for a low FIRST round pick: #29. He's a genius GM just for that, right? 2) Angelo then packages four of our picks: The 29th he just got for Orton (640), our 18th (900), our 3rd rounder (170) and next year's first rounder (realistically anywhere from 1300 points down to 600 THEN, and even LESS now because it's a year away) for the first pick overall (3000) and a 5th rounder. If we DO make our next year's pick worth all 1300 points, then this was an even trade on points. Whatever you think it could be discounted from there is either value that Angelo took from the table (we didn't have to pay) OR means that he got even more for Orton - either way, another brilliant GM moment. 3) Angelo then turns around and picks Jay Cutler, a Pro Bowl QB with 3 years of experience with the first pick. We all know first round picks are risky. Hitting it right is SO important - another great GM move by Angelo. 4) Finally, Angelo finds a loophole that allows him to sign this first round draft pick without his Singing Bonus counting against our cap! He manages to sign the first pick overall with no signing bonus at ALL. This means you can cut him any time with no cap hit, and it means he is VERY cheap under our cap. This is GM move of epic proportions. Also, all of this assumes that Cutler is worth only 3,000 points., Anything more is ALSO value Angelo didn't have to pay. Guys. This was a MASTERFUL move. Anyone who says we overpaid is not understanding that Denver got robbed because they screwed up, and we swooped in to pick up the pieces. Pix - thanks for coming up with the idea to analyze this by draft value! I thought it was interesting to then figure Orton's worth. Wow. Angelo got a First rounder for him. And in the real world, where our next years first isn't worth anywhere near 1300 points (I thinks its worth about 500) and Orton is only worth about 400 points at BEST (high 2nd round), and No-Signing-Bonus-Cutler is worth easily more than 4500 points, Angleo got Cutler for at LEAST 2500 points less than he's worth. THAT is like creating the 2nd pick overall in the draft out of thin air, and then using it to select Cutler. WOW.

WR: Hester TE: Olsen OT: Pace OG: Williams OC: Kreutz OG: Omiyale OT: Shaffer TE: Clark WR: Bennett QB: Cutler HB: Forte Big winners: Forte, Olsen, Bennett, the Defense & Williams' development under Pace Go ahead and play with the OL if you like, you know Lovie and Ron will.

Guys, we do this every year. We get impatient, while Angelo waits for value. He is a good poker player. He takes risks when he feels it's a good idea, and certainly, he has lost his share of those gambles too. But when it comes to value - be it trading down, or later round picks, Angelo has shown to be a shrewd character. Wait until camp starts, then look at the roster he built. There's no need to go out and make a big money splash if you don't believe fully in the talent that's there, and can wait for something similar at a lesser price. From the cheap lurking seats...

Whoever is playing the Lions? In all seriousness, I predicted 9-7 or 10-6 with a first round playoff loss at the beginning of the season. That's pretty much how it's been although I have been disappointed by the defense, and pleasantly surprised by the offense. it's a crime to go 10-6 and miss the playoffs though - that's just weird - when was the last time a 10-6 team didn't make the payoffs?

Theoretically, if Williams does come back later in the season to help us, at which position would you play him? I know the guy is a LT, and if you have him in camp, that's the only place you put him - you let him learn, make his mistakes etc. and become a LT. But if you get him late in the season, making a playoff run, I wonder if that's a good idea. Byt hen, you don't want to have problems protecting the QBs blind side. You don't have reps and games to spend. But Williams is a talent. I wonder if putting him in at one of the guard positions gives a boost to the running game as we round the bend? Having an OT outside of him might be like giving him training wheels. it would lessen the impact of a breakdown, or rather a schooling in NFL pass rush. You know every new OL has to learn those things under fire, and i would have started Williams at OLT at the beginning of the season if it had been my call, and he was healthy. But given the situation and timing, would you put him in at OG if we're making a serious run at the playoffs? That do you think? OLT or bust, or some kind of rookie half year OG experiment?

Don't forget to consider the scheme. I think Buddy Ryan's play design and play calling were simply on another level from what we have now. Part of it was that he was just a great DC, but part of it was that the NFL had never seen some of the pressure tactics that Ryan employed before. In 1984, many pass plays had no hot read or protection scheme for handling the blitz. They weren't able to adjust on first downs to multiple blitzers, and we did it all the time. That put the offenses into a hole, and into a passing situation, where again pressure was appropriate. Only Dan Marino's super fast release was able to balance the 1985 Bears' pressure package. Today, every pass play has both route and protection options for the QB to call at the line. That is because of the 1985 Bears' scheme.

I read this the other way - I think starting Orton and then Rex the first week and then switching it up the second is giving an advantage to Orton. Assuming they are equal in talent, then Orton looks like he developed, and Rex looks like he regressed given the change in quality of opposition. I think the staff is giving Orton the edge, but Grossman has a chance to win out IF he performs. He sure didn't last week against the 2nd string.

We have a paid scouting staff on salary. What else DO they do but scout possible talent? Just because they're looking at someone doesn't mean they want him - maybe they want to be doubly sure that they DON'T want him - you know "due diligence" and all that? Angelo has been well known for, and pretty successful at filling out the depth of the roster. Maybe this is all about looking at Simms, Ragone and Hanie for 3rd string, and next years possible QB situation? So let's not jump to conclusions just because we have guys there scouting. Until we have answers at the QB position, I think they should LOOK at everything.