Anything comments

[Stinger226]

31 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said:

Gabriel is wrong.

"the 2020 collective bargaining agreement allows for teams to exercise a fifth-year option for players drafted in the first round as an addition to the standard four-year rookie contract. Upon being exercised, the fifth-year option is fully guaranteed, and any base salary in the player's fourth year that was not fully guaranteed will become so."

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/36402907/fifth-year-option-tracker-nfl-players-2020-first-round

No one is disagreeing with that, yes its guaranteed, but if you trade him the salary goes to the team he's traded to. Look at  any 2022 contract of a player that is playing on a 5th yr option  in 2023., if traded, you are not paying his salary. ( Over The Cap website.

[Pixote]

You trade Fields now, you get??? Not a good position for the Bears to get value.

You draft a top prospect this year in the draft. Lets say for argument sake Daniels with a high first round pick. Allow Fields to play as a starter to begin the season with Daniels on the bench learning the ropes. If he has a great year, we have better options than what we have now.

1) He was signed to his fifth year option and we can negotiate a long term deal with him.

2) He was signed to a fifth year option and we can now get good value for him, much much better than what we would now get in a trade. (But why trade him if he was having a great year?)

3) He wasn't signed to a fifth year option and we can use the franchisee tag on him to allow us to negotiate a trade with another team if he refuses to sign with us. It could even be a non-exclusive tag allowing him to check his value with other teams. Quite often they find the grass (money) isn't better on the other side of the fence. 

[BearFan PHX]

7 minutes ago, Stinger226 said:

No one is disagreeing with that, yes its guaranteed, but if you trade him the salary goes to the team he's traded to. Look at  any 2022 contract of a player that is playing on a 5th yr option , if traded, you are not paying his salary. 

Look at Tua. Dolphins exercized his 5th year option (2024) this past May.

His 2024 dead cap number is the full $23 Million. That means if you trade him or cut him, the money still counts against Miami's cap.

So what youre saying is not correct.

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/miami-dolphins/tua-tagovailoa-47598/

[Stinger226]

1 minute ago, Pixote said:

You trade Fields now, you get??? Not a good position for the Bears to get value.

You draft a top prospect this year in the draft. Lets say for argument sake Daniels with a high first round pick. Allow Fields to play as a starter to begin the season with Daniels on the bench learning the ropes. If he has a great year, we have better options than what we have now.

1) He was signed to his fifth year option and we can negotiate a long term deal with him.

2) He was signed to a fifth year option and we can now get good value for him, much much better than what we would now get in a trade. (But why trade him if he was having a great year?)

3) He wasn't signed to a fifth year option and we can use the franchisee tag on him to allow us to negotiate a trade with another team if he refuses to sign with us. It could even be a non-exclusive tag allowing him to check his value with other teams. Quite often they find the grass (money) isn't better on the other side of the fence. 

Even if you trade him after picking up his 5th year option next yr. , you dont have to worry about eating his salary, it goes with the trade. The money is not a restriction. 

[Stinger226]

3 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said:

Look at Tua. Dolphins exercized his 5th year option (2024) this past May.

His 2024 dead cap number is the full $23 Million. That means if you trade him or cut him, the money still counts against Miami's cap.

So what youre saying is not correct.

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/miami-dolphins/tua-tagovailoa-47598/

I am looking at Over The Cap website and states if he is traded you have no cap hit, if you cut him you eat it all.

[BearFan PHX]

6 minutes ago, Pixote said:

You trade Fields now, you get??? Not a good position for the Bears to get value.

You draft a top prospect this year in the draft. Lets say for argument sake Daniels with a high first round pick. Allow Fields to play as a starter to begin the season with Daniels on the bench learning the ropes. If he has a great year, we have better options than what we have now.

1) He was signed to his fifth year option and we can negotiate a long term deal with him.

2) He was signed to a fifth year option and we can now get good value for him, much much better than what we would now get in a trade. (But why trade him if he was having a great year?)

3) He wasn't signed to a fifth year option and we can use the franchisee tag on him to allow us to negotiate a trade with another team if he refuses to sign with us. It could even be a non-exclusive tag allowing him to check his value with other teams. Quite often they find the grass (money) isn't better on the other side of the fence. 

1) yes, if you give him the 5th year option, thats the all in on Fields option. Didnt really need Daniels then, but cool.

2) if you take the 5th year option, but then trade him, you pay $25 Mil on the 2025 cap, right when your current new roster players are coming up to be re-signed. This isnt a great option

3) if you dont sign him, he wont play under the franchise tag. he will hold out and you lose him anyway.

So this is what Ive been saying. You can do option #1 and go all in on Fields, or you can do #3 and miss the trade value.

I dont think #2 is a good choice for the reason you say, if hes good why trade him, if hes not why pay $25M?

This is all basically what Im saying. You gotta decide if youre all in or not on Fields by May.

[BearFan PHX]

Just now, Stinger226 said:

I am looking at Over The Cap website and states if he is traded you have no cap hit, if you cut him you eat it all.

link?

Ive never heard of ANY money that is different if you trade than if you cut??

[Stinger226]

This the lonk with Brian Burns 5th yr option. There is a drop box that yo go to to choose, cut or trade. 

https://overthecap.com/player/brian-burns/7807

[Pixote]

4 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said:

3) if you dont sign him, he wont play under the franchise tag. he will hold out and you lose him anyway.

Almost every player says they won't play under a franchise tag contract. Then they realize the millions of dollars it will cost them to sit home on the sofa with a bowl of popcorn watching the games on TV. They wind up signing the contract and playing balls out trying to improve their negotiating position after the season is over.

This is especially the case with a rookie who hasn't gotten that huge first "non rookie" deal.

 

[BearFan PHX]

6 minutes ago, Stinger226 said:

This the lonk with Brian Burns 5th yr option. There is a drop box that yo go to to choose, cut or trade. 

https://overthecap.com/player/brian-burns/7807

hes already played his 5th season tho? He is a free agent now.

[BearFan PHX]

2 minutes ago, Pixote said:

Almost every player says they won't play under a franchise tag contract. Then they realize the millions of dollars it will cost them to sit home on the sofa with a bowl of popcorn watching the games on TV. They wind up signing the contract and playing balls out trying to improve their negotiating position after the season is over.

This is especially the case with a rookie who hasn't gotten that huge first "non rookie" deal.

 

this is true if Fields doesnt ball out.

But we arent trying to protect ourselves against that scenario.

The idea is if you think hes the man you take the 5th year option and then extend him before or during year 5.

If you think he isnt the man, you trade him now.

If you want to wait and see and he turns out to be:

1) Bad - then no problem not taking the 5th year option
2) middle - then who wants to keep him?
3) great - then you missed the chance to lock him up

[Pixote]

3 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said:

this is true if Fields doesnt ball out.

But we arent trying to protect ourselves against that scenario.

The idea is if you think hes the man you take the 5th year option and then extend him before or during year 5.

If you think he isnt the man, you trade him now.

If you want to wait and see and he turns out to be:

1) Bad - then no problem not taking the 5th year option
2) middle - then who wants to keep him?
3) great - then you missed the chance to lock him up

We disagree, so why don't we just leave it. We both walk away from this with no hard feelings. Just two Bear fans with very different opinions.

[BearFan PHX]

4 minutes ago, Pixote said:

We disagree, so why don't we just leave it. We both walk away from this with no hard feelings. Just two Bear fans with very different opinions.

Pix, Im not mad at you at all. I respect you, and weve known each other here a long time.

I thought we were debating scenarios, but I didnt detect anything personal here at all.

[BearFan PHX]

Maybe it's easier to lay it out this way:

The two scenarios that would hurt the Bears are:

1) Fields becomes a fully dimensional QB and we fail to keep him

2) Fields never becomes the man, and we lose too much to keep him around

In #1, we still have the mitigating factor of whoever our new QB is becoming great also.

If you take a high first round QB with one of our picks this year, then you do buy a 4th year to look at Fields, but you increase the chance of losing him anyway without the 5th year option being exercised.

So all Im saying, is that we kinda have to make a decision on which of those we think is going to happen before May, and functionally before the draft this year.

I dont think Poles can tread water here, but either actual decision on Fields is possible. For me, I would pass on him, but going all in on him is also a coherent strategy. It's the middle ground I'm arguing against as an actual possibility that would work.
 

[Pixote]

1 minute ago, BearFan PHX said:

Pix, Im not mad at you at all. I respect you, and weve known each other here a long time.

I thought we were debating scenarios, but I didnt detect anything personal here at all.

There was nothing personal taken. It is just I think we are at an impasse that cannot be resolved by further debating. 

If we don't sign his fifth year option, and he balls out in 2024, yes, he will have leverage in negotiations with us. But if we cannot meet his expectations, we also have leverage with any team wishing to trade for him while we hold him on a tag. In the mean time, if we drafted a QB like Daniels to be tutored during 2024, he would be ready to take over after Fields was traded or be a valuable backup (or trade bait) if Fields remained a Bear.

 

[BearFan PHX]

2 minutes ago, Pixote said:

There was nothing personal taken. It is just I think we are at an impasse that cannot be resolved by further debating. 

If we don't sign his fifth year option, and he balls out in 2024, yes, he will have leverage in negotiations with us. But if we cannot meet his expectations, we also have leverage with any team wishing to trade for him while we hold him on a tag. In the mean time, if we drafted a QB like Daniels to be tutored during 2024, he would be ready to take over after Fields was traded or be a valuable backup (or trade bait) if Fields remained a Bear.

 

we are mostly agreeing. I just dont think tagging him and trading works, because if Fields is good, we lose him, and if hes not the trade isnt worth much.

I just think we functionally have to decide if we are in or out by May. And I think that's the intention of the 5th year option in the first place - to force teams out of the middle ground.

[Stinger226]

30 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said:

hes already played his 5th season tho? He is a free agent now.

If they trade Fields after they pick up his option then those rules apply. 

[ASHKUM BEAR]

14 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said:

we are mostly agreeing. I just dont think tagging him and trading works, because if Fields is good, we lose him, and if hes not the trade isnt worth much.

I just think we functionally have to decide if we are in or out by May. And I think that's the intention of the 5th year option in the first place - to force teams out of the middle ground.

I think they do go with the 5th year option. Fields may want a long term extension but that hasn't been earned.  He will not like a rookie drafted behind him either but that forces him to do his best.

[BearFan PHX]

45 minutes ago, Stinger226 said:

If they trade Fields after they pick up his option then those rules apply. 

the link you provided was for a player drafted in 2019. He had a 5 year deal, not a 5th year option.

The new 5th year option rules came into effect in 2020.

EDIT - I researched, and the rule was adopted 2018, so I was wrong about your example not applying.

Now the question is whether that site has the rule right or not regarding trades. I still think Im right about that, but the rule IS older than I thought. On further research, i was wrong about that.

[adam]

I think Poles whiffed hard on the WR corps. Mooney is not the same player since injury, he is borderline practice squad material at this point. Scott is a younger Mooney who can do anything Mooney can but is probably more of a WR4, then at WR4 you have Velus or ESB? The drop off from Moore to Mooney is too big. WR2 needs to be a stud or at least a compliment to Moore. Mooney is neither.

Then for TE they went with Tonyan and he has been one of the most disappointing players this year with a huge drop today.

 

[Stinger226]

5 hours ago, BearFan PHX said:

the link you provided was for a player drafted in 2019. He had a 5 year deal, not a 5th year option.

The new 5th year option rules came into effect in 2020.

EDIT - I researched, and the rule was adopted 2018, so I was wrong about your example not applying.

Now the question is whether that site has the rule right or not regarding trades. I still think Im right about that, but the rule IS older than I thought. On further research, i was wrong about that.

This is his fifth yr option yr. i very well cant show the difference on a future option next yr. 
The website is only in real time.  Im showing you what happening if a 5th yr option player would have been traded in his yr. If cut, the club eats it, if traded his salary is transferred to the new team.

So in Justin's case you have to place the option on him by May in 2024. In 2025 if the rookie is doing well and you decide to trade Justin , you dont eat any cap.

[Stinger226]

31 minutes ago, adam said:

I think Poles whiffed hard on the WR corps. Mooney is not the same player since injury, he is borderline practice squad material at this point. Scott is a younger Mooney who can do anything Mooney can but is probably more of a WR4, then at WR4 you have Velus or ESB? The drop off from Moore to Mooney is too big. WR2 needs to be a stud or at least a compliment to Moore. Mooney is neither.

Then for TE they went with Tonyan and he has been one of the most disappointing players this year with a huge drop today.

 

i think you are right about Mooney, after the injury last yr he hasnt been the same. Poles expected him to regain the form he had before the injury and he didnt. He had Claypool and neither of them worked out. Drafted Scott and he hasnt been productive. He dropped the ball in the WR room and will add some more in the draft . Tonyan is a bust, if he caught that deep pass, we would probably be celebrating instead of searchng for answers why we lost.

[BearFan PHX]

10 minutes ago, Stinger226 said:

if the rookie is doing well and you decide to trade Justin , you dont eat any cap.

i think this is wrong. You showed me one cap tracker that looks like youre right, I saw the other one that says otherwise.

To my understanding guaranteed money is always recoupable against the cap when you cut or trade a player.

The site you showed seems to indicate that a cut would be different from a trade. That would be the only time under the CBA that that distinction applied to any money of any kind.

So I still think it would count against the cap.

[Bears4Ever_34]

Kind of crazy to think WR has gone from what we thought would be a position of strength this year, back to being an incredible weakness. Moore, Mooney, and Claypool, on paper, looked like a potential top 10 core heading into this season. Claypool is gone and can't play anymore, and I'm not sure Mooney is that far behind him after today. The guy looks like Allen Robinson his last year in Chicago. Quitting on plays, dropping passes, lackadaisical effort. 

DJ moore appears to be the only legit receiver on this roster. Mooney, Scott, Velus, and St. Brown are very close to not being NFL players. We need to take a WR in the 1st round.

[Bears4Ever_34]

50 minutes ago, Stinger226 said:

i think you are right about Mooney, after the injury last yr he hasnt been the same. Poles expected him to regain the form he had before the injury and he didnt. He had Claypool and neither of them worked out. Drafted Scott and he hasnt been productive. He dropped the ball in the WR room and will add some more in the draft . Tonyan is a bust, if he caught that deep pass, we would probably be celebrating instead of searchng for answers why we lost.

 

 

Makes me nervous about his ability to scout offensive skill position players. Jones Jr is a certified bust, but Tyler Scott and Roschon Johnson have both had pretty underwhelming rookie seasons. The Claypool trade will go down as an all time bad decision, and Tonyan, while not a costly signing, has been a complete nonfactor.