adam

Pace is definitely plugging the holes in the roster, and with a few more moves, we will be looking good after the draft. To me, these are the positions that still need an upgrade: 1. #2 WR (Wilson) - Not sold on Wilson just yet. This position has to be filled in the draft. Cooper/White might be there at #7. 2. RT (Mills) - One of the worst tackles in football. Needs to be addressed in the draft early. 3. S (Mundy/Vereen) - Rolle will get one side, but we need another upgrade over Mundy/Vereen via the draft. 4. DE (Jenkins) - We need another starting 3-4DE, I don't see Jenkins coming to start, but more as a rotational guy. With less 3-4 teams (I believe), we might be able to get on the later rounds. 5. C (Garza) - Aging vet and no DLP on roster. Wiz or Grasu? It would be awesome to get Wisniewski and turn this into a strength and take it off as a need in the draft. 6. CB (Jennings/Ball) - Jennings and Fuller are smaller CBs, so we need some bigger guys and an eventual replacement for Jennings. I think we are on the cusp of BPA for the entire draft.

Actually had a really solid season in 2013 with 14 PD in 15 games. 14 PD would've led the Bears that year. At 30, he is clearly a depth signing and brought in as competition. He also becomes are biggest CB at 6'2".

I agree. Also, there are so many moving pieces/elements to a team that even one or two "problems" can derail the entire system. Before last season there was true optimism about this team for a number of reasons even though we still had some reservations about the defensive side of the ball. Those reservations seem validated by us signing 5 defensive free agents (McPhee, McDonald, Rolle, Mason, Jenkins) who all could start or at least contribute from Day One. So if we pick up 2-3 more impact defensive players in the draft, it is essentially an entirely new defense than we ran out there last year.

The restructuring was from last year: http://espn.go.com/chicago/nfl/story/_/id/...act-reports-say

Jason, That is a pretty crazy list and you probably could go on and on with Bass and Washington somehow in the mix. I honestly see this as a good thing as Pace is giving the coaching staff a lot of options.

Yeah and the restructuring can't go back in time and charge the team $1 million in 2014. Here is the report from the exact day last year lol: http://espn.go.com/chicago/nfl/story/_/id/...act-reports-say

Definitely just a depth signing, but even if it improves the bottom half of our roster, it is still an improvement. Also, at his age and with new coaching, he might be able to improve.

The Raiders were horrible, so I can understand why someone would not want to return there (and they may be in LA in 2016). Definitely some uncertainty there. Also, based on PFF ratings Hudson was the #3 Center and an upgrade over Wiz. The Raiders are paying Hudson $8.9 a year, and if we can get Wiz for less than half of that, we would be getting a steal.

I don't mind any of these signings. Rolle was brought in for his leadership which the locker room was completely devoid of last year. He also buys us another year or two to draft a replacement. Since we can't replace the entire roster in one offseason, we have to find some players that are upgrades and can bridge to the next draft. Sure these are not long term solutions, but they are definitely upgrades. McDonald is only 30, so he has a few good years left in him, so I wouldn't lump Rolle and McDonald into the same type of signing. Rolle was brought in for leadership and McDonald was brought in for his familiarity with the defense. None of the signings outside of McPhee have been huge impact deals, but most of them have improved the roster, and that is all we can ask for at this point. McPhee, Royal, Rolle, Foster, McDonald, and Jenkins will all be at least minor upgrades at their positions. If we can add 1x more FA signing (Wisniewski please), a few other league minimum guys, and 3-4 more upgrades in the draft, then we will have turned over 12-15 roster spots in one offseason with potentially 8-9 starters. TLDR: I like the plan

I am glad this deal finally got done and he didn't stiff us for SD. This will be a solid addition with a lot of upside. I just thought the vet minimum signings would cost little against the cap because they would essentially be pushing another minimum contract off the cap (when we cut the other guy without guarantees.

He is speaking for the Jets I would assume.

Looking at our pick numbers and by projecting compensatory picks, it looks like we will have the following picks: 1st - #7 2nd - #39 3rd - #71 4th - #106 (3x 3rd round compensatory picks push ours back 3) 5th - #141 (4x 4th round compensatory picks push ours back 4 - from NYJ) 6th - #180 (6x 5th round compensatory picks push ours back 6) So I agree the most likely trading partners are CLE, NO, and PHI for #7. CLE and NO have the better picks as Philly at #20 would have to basically give up their 1st-5th rounders to move up from 20 to 7, so I don't know how likely that would be. I guess if Mariotta is there at #7, they could move up and give a 1st and 2nd this year and a 1st next year to us, which would nice for us to have 2x firsts next year and 2x 2nds this year (especially if that tanked). For CLE and NO, both seem to be in play as both need impact players with the loss of Graham and Gordon. In any scenario, I would at least want to get Shelton, Collins, or Waynes, if we didn't get an Edge Rusher, Williams, White, or Cooper at #7.

For the 40 times, less than 0.20/s is not that much and can easily be within the margin of error for that short of a run (bad start, bad day, tight hammy, outdoors vs indoors). So Leshoure's is only .16/s off. Now the others that are 0.25/s and over, yeah, you definitely slow with age.

I would be interested in Adam Carriker, DE and Mikel Leshoure, RB. For the league minimum, there is very little risk, and both of these guys have experience. Carriker tweeted about the combine: He showed some promise in Washington before a knee injury derailed him.

Definitely possible. We were at 18 with a few weeks to go, then 13, then ended up with 7. I figure at worst we will end around 10 or 11, and at best 32nd. TEN, JAX, and TB will be lucky to get 3 wins WAS, OAK, and CLE are all destined for 3-5 wins NYJ, STL, SF, NO, ATL, MIN and DET will finish clumped in between 6 and 8 wins. The Jets have to play NE, BUF, and MIA for 6 of their games, with BUF stocked and Miami with Suh, they will be lucky to win 1 in their division. STL might've improved, but they still have to play SEA, ARZ, and SF for 6 games. If anything they improve by a game or two while SF falls back by that many. NO lost Graham, so I can't see them improving, and ATL was horrible last year. MIN is relatively the same team and DET lost at least 2-3 games by losing Suh/Fairley/Bush. To me that puts us somewhere between 7 and 9 wins, probably picking in the mid teens.

Wasn't he just coming in for a personal visit?

Yeah, I didn't know he had a weak arm: That kinda scares me, especially in Chicago.

or a QB prospect....

Makes sense, I would be good with it.

That would be an insane draft. I like 3 defensive players taken first (Collins fills a huge need/CB and DT hit), and still hitting the Oline with a starter, RB, WR/KR, and TE. I really like Ryan too. Top Safety, #2 C, #3 CB, #9 DT, #6 RB, #12 WR, and the #9 ILB.

Got it, I just don't know how much you can count on a 6th rounder as a starter. We tried Mills late and it didn't work out.

So #7 and 5th round pick for Cameron, #13 and a 3rd. Basically #7 for #13 and a 3rd, then a 5th for Cameron.

True, but I wouldn't say Garza has 3 years. I would love to pick up Wisniewski at Center, then that would be a very strong line. For the DLine, I really don't know what direction they are going in.

That would be a great scenario for picks, especially getting 16, 44, and 51 for 7. That seems borderline unrealistic that Houston would move up 4 slots for a 2nd rounder (that seems more like 3rd round value), but it is just a plan. Now for the picks, if we had 4 picks in the first 51 and ended up with those 4, I would be disappointed. Just using WF prospect rankings, we would end up with: (2nd OT, 9th DT, 11th best WR, 7th CB). To me, we should have all players in the top 5 or 6 at their positions, not 7th, 9th, and 11th in the 2nd round. With our defense so bad can we afford to draft 2x Offensive players in the first 4 picks, and 5 out of 8? I just don't see it. We have to draft a defensive player at every level (DLine, LB, CB, and S), and then use the last two on offense from: (OLine, WR, QB, or RB)

Yeah, if you look at all 3-4 teams around the league, at least the successful ones have that type of guy. Ratliff, Ferguson, and Sutton do not command that attention. For a drafting strategy, you have to look at Pace, Fox, Gase, and Fangio as a whole. Fangio will have input, but not as much as Pace or Fox.