Stinger226 Posted March 12, 2015 Report Share Posted March 12, 2015 Michael Gehlken @UTgehlken 1h1 hour ago Tom Telesco said "door is still open" for Eddie Royal to return to Chargers. Nothing official between WR, Bears. I would say a hangup in most contracts is guaranteed money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted March 12, 2015 Report Share Posted March 12, 2015 I would say a hangup in most contracts is guaranteed money. Just seen a tweet where Royal told chargers he is signing with the bears. from a charger beat guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradjock Posted March 12, 2015 Report Share Posted March 12, 2015 Just seen a tweet where Royal told chargers he is signing with the bears. from a charger beat guy Brad Biggs says his source confirmed Royal signed a 3 year deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scs787 Posted March 12, 2015 Author Report Share Posted March 12, 2015 Yup, looks official now. Very nice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wesson44 Posted March 12, 2015 Report Share Posted March 12, 2015 How we have a real slot guy!! http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2392084...ts-and-reaction Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TerraTor Posted March 12, 2015 Report Share Posted March 12, 2015 How we have a real slot guy!! http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2392084...ts-and-reaction If only we had a real Quarterback. .. haha I had too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradjock Posted March 12, 2015 Report Share Posted March 12, 2015 How we have a real slot guy!! http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2392084...ts-and-reaction Nice! Depending on the $$$ I'll say good move. He's better than Hartline, and Hartline got 2 years 6 million. I'll guess 3 years 10 million? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted March 12, 2015 Report Share Posted March 12, 2015 I am really excited over Royal. Everyone talked about Keenan Allen on SD, but Royal had comparable yards, more TDs, and a better yards per catch: Keenan Allen - 77/783, 4 TD Eddie Royal - 62/778, 7 TD and look how close Royal's stats were to Marshall's last year: Brandon Marshall - 61/721, 8 TD Even if we just get 60/700 from Royal, and get 40/500 from another WR (Wilson/rookie/FA), that would be a comparable replacement for Marshall in previous seasons (in terms of raw numbers). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mongo3451 Posted March 12, 2015 Report Share Posted March 12, 2015 We have so many needs, what ever player is at 7 would be welcome. ON a good team Jeffery is a #2 and hopefully we become that. We have to see how FA shakes out to see which way we go in the first round. I would like to move down and grab some extra picks. With a high pick you take the best player. Would be wise to the the 3rd best OLB after just spending 40 mil for one? or the top WR? (julio Jones type) Don't over think it. We have 6 picks to go BPA with. That's how the good teams do it. We gotta start somewhere. Let the GM and coach Magee the statement that all positions are subject to upgrade at all times... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted March 12, 2015 Report Share Posted March 12, 2015 Love the Eddie Royal signing. He's a perfect compliment to Alshon, and the type of WR we needed last year. Give me a guy who can get open all day over a guy who runs poor routes but has physical traits. You just can't guard those pinball guys. Best route runner I ever saw was Marvin Harrison; you couldn't tell what he was going to do or which way he was going to cut. Every.single.route looked the exact same. I wouldn't mind seeing another slot-type guy signed. I wonder what Wes Welker and his concussions would require for a signing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scs787 Posted March 12, 2015 Author Report Share Posted March 12, 2015 Don't over think it. We have 6 picks to go BPA with. That's how the good teams do it. We gotta start somewhere. Let the GM and coach Magee the statement that all positions are subject to upgrade at all times... Pace's line before talking about going BPA often goes over looked. He said something to the extent of "You'd like to be able to get to the point in free agency where you could go BPA" IMO going straight up BPA with holes on your team is silly. What if BPA never matches your hole? Do you just ignore it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mongo3451 Posted March 12, 2015 Report Share Posted March 12, 2015 Pace's line before talking about going BPA often goes over looked. He said something to the extent of "You'd like to be able to get to the point in free agency where you could go BPA" IMO going straight up BPA with holes on your team is silly. What if BPA never matches your hole? Do you just ignore it? Drafting is philosophical to me. Mine is to draft the best football player available. I do this because teams that draft for current needs tend to be cyclically behind the curve. My preference would be to draft proactively instead of reactively. It takes a year or two in most cases to develop players. It’s painful to think of waiting a few years to clean up your talent pool via the draft, but that’s how a strong nucleus is built. If you have an overly strong LB corps, don’t think that doesn’t carry over to other areas. You asked a question alluding to BPA being possibly redundant to a position you don’t need. I would argue the only time that really applies is when you have your franchise QB early in their career. You always need good players for the future. I would also counter that nothing is absolute and sometimes you need to deviate to do what is best. Again, that deviation may come with a future price, so I get right back to the plan. I do like using FA to fill glaring holes, because you are getting an NFL experienced player. But if we have too many to fill, so be it. Rookies are not generally going to help that anyway. This can be chicken v egg debate… Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted March 12, 2015 Report Share Posted March 12, 2015 I hope Pace holds a similar philosophy! Drafting is philosophical to me. Mine is to draft the best football player available. I do this because teams that draft for current needs tend to be cyclically behind the curve. My preference would be to draft proactively instead of reactively. It takes a year or two in most cases to develop players. It’s painful to think of waiting a few years to clean up your talent pool via the draft, but that’s how a strong nucleus is built. If you have an overly strong LB corps, don’t think that doesn’t carry over to other areas. You asked a question alluding to BPA being possibly redundant to a position you don’t need. I would argue the only time that really applies is when you have your franchise QB early in their career. You always need good players for the future. I would also counter that nothing is absolute and sometimes you need to deviate to do what is best. Again, that deviation may come with a future price, so I get right back to the plan. I do like using FA to fill glaring holes, because you are getting an NFL experienced player. But if we have too many to fill, so be it. Rookies are not generally going to help that anyway. This can be chicken v egg debate… Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scs787 Posted March 12, 2015 Author Report Share Posted March 12, 2015 I still swear he said something about Free Agency allowing him to go BPA, but oh well. BPA is all relative to the FO anyway. They could sell any pick as their BPA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scs787 Posted March 12, 2015 Author Report Share Posted March 12, 2015 Brad Biggs @BradBiggs 22m22 minutes ago #Bears WR Eddie Royal 3-yr deal: $15 million total value with $10 million guaranteed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASHKUM BEAR Posted March 12, 2015 Report Share Posted March 12, 2015 Who's Best Player? And who determines the rankings? What if every year when we draft, a WR is the best player available at the time. Do you keep selecting WRs because Kiper has that player as his BPA at our pick? You have to use need in the approach also. The draft is a crap shoot anyhow, a guy may excel in college and crumble in the pros. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scs787 Posted March 12, 2015 Author Report Share Posted March 12, 2015 Somewhat of a larger commitment than I expected for Royal. Fairly clear they expect him to produce well. He's the #2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradjock Posted March 13, 2015 Report Share Posted March 13, 2015 Somewhat of a larger commitment than I expected for Royal. Fairly clear they expect him to produce well. He's the #2. Somewhat? I don't know about you, but I was expecting 3 years, 10 million max. Royal's never had a 1000 yard season. And while he's the #2, everyone agrees he's best utilized as a #3 WR. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZ54 Posted March 13, 2015 Report Share Posted March 13, 2015 I still swear he said something about Free Agency allowing him to go BPA, but oh well. BPA is all relative to the FO anyway. They could sell any pick as their BPA. He said "in an ideal world you fill your needs via FA so you can always take BPA in the draft". I think Pace knows you can't have a glaring hole somewhere on the roster and ignore when the draft comes around. That said, I like what he's doing in FA this offseason as he seems to be addressing every need. We'll see if they all work out, haven't seen or heard anything about Wisniewski lately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted March 13, 2015 Report Share Posted March 13, 2015 Pace's line before talking about going BPA often goes over looked. He said something to the extent of "You'd like to be able to get to the point in free agency where you could go BPA" IMO going straight up BPA with holes on your team is silly. What if BPA never matches your hole? Do you just ignore it? last year SF drafted Bolander, LB was not an area of need with two all pro LBs in the middle. Willis and Navorro got hurt and now Willis is retiring. I would say what was BPA yesterday turned out right in the end. good teams take BPA and people with 5-11 takes area of need players, there must be a reason that matters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daventry Posted March 13, 2015 Report Share Posted March 13, 2015 I am excited about the coming year.....and will be more excited when Cutler leaves. BTW, I am coming home in July for two weeks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted March 13, 2015 Report Share Posted March 13, 2015 Probably $1mil more than I expected. Maclin averaged $11, and T. Smith averaged $8 per year. Maclin and Smith both have only had 1 year over 1k. Smith only had 49 receptions last year. So there is some risk there too. Maclin paid as a top 5 WR? Looking at those contracts, Royal's was probably inflated by $1mil. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scs787 Posted March 13, 2015 Author Report Share Posted March 13, 2015 last year SF drafted Bolander, LB was not an area of need with two all pro LBs in the middle. Willis and Navorro got hurt and now Willis is retiring. I would say what was BPA yesterday turned out right in the end. good teams take BPA and people with 5-11 takes area of need players, there must be a reason that matters. The difference being Borland was the 49ers 4th pick, and the 49ers were fresh off a 12-4 season. Meaning they didn't really have holes to fill. They went with Jimmy Ward in the 1st round, a guy that many here had us drafting in the 2nd, or as this article I'm reading now says "this could be considered a bit of a reach in some circles". But ya, you're right, good teams take BPA...The Bears right now are still not a good team. They need to add a CB, at least 1 impact DLineman, and depending on what happens with Foster/Parker, an ILB and safety. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASHKUM BEAR Posted March 13, 2015 Report Share Posted March 13, 2015 The difference being Borland was the 49ers 4th pick, and the 49ers were fresh off a 12-4 season. Meaning they didn't really have holes to fill. They went with Jimmy Ward in the 1st round, a guy that many here had us drafting in the 2nd, or as this article I'm reading now says "this could be considered a bit of a reach in some circles". But ya, you're right, good teams take BPA...The Bears right now are still not a good team. They need to add a CB, at least 1 impact DLineman, and depending on what happens with Foster/Parker, an ILB and safety. SF had the most picks last year also with 12, which helps when you have been good. The Bears haven't had all of their picks since like 2009 and have been bad nearly the whole time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZ54 Posted March 13, 2015 Report Share Posted March 13, 2015 Probably $1mil more than I expected. Maclin averaged $11, and T. Smith averaged $8 per year. Maclin and Smith both have only had 1 year over 1k. Smith only had 49 receptions last year. So there is some risk there too. Maclin paid as a top 5 WR? Looking at those contracts, Royal's was probably inflated by $1mil. You always over-pay in the early days of FA. It is the way it always will be with so many teams fighting to fill key spots on their rosters. I've just learned to expect it and accept it. In the late stages of FA you make up for it a bit with some good bargains like DeLaPuente was for us last year. Ideally long term we aren't so reliant on FAs to fill key positions for us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.