The Chicago Bears are on the clock! OFFSEASON OPEN THREAD!

[BearFan PHX]

Allocating salary cap $ to players is the most costly thing a team can do, so it makes a pretty good metric to judge how important a player or position is to teams.

Looking at Average Annual Value of contracts takes everything in the contract into account, and then averages it across the length of the deal. it's a good way to compare apples to apples so to speak, and even out effects from years with signing bonuses and cap front-loading etc.

The top 15 AAV are ALL QBs. 17 of the top 20 are QBs.

Some starting QBs are playing on their rookie deals, and won't even show up on the list, so even players like Kirk Cousins, Derek Carr, Daniel Jones, Deshaun Watson, Russell Wilson and Kyler Murray are more highly paid than any non QB in the league.

The top 4 paid players in the league in 2024 are each QBs making over $50 Million dollars AAV.

The top 5 paid non QBs are:

Nick Bosa             $34M   (16th)
Aaron Donald       $32M   (18th)
Tyreek Hill            $30M   (19th)
TJ Watt                 $28M   (21st)
Davante Adams   $28M   (22nd)

The top 5 paid offensive linemen are:

Laremy Tunsil       $25M    (25th)
Andrew Thomas   $24M   (36th)
Trent Williams       $23M   (40th)
David Bakhtiari     $23M    (41st)
Chris Lindstrom    $21M    (51st)

The top 5 paid Bears are:

Montez Sweat     $25M     (29th)
DJ Moore             $21M     (50th)
Trem. Edmunds   $18M     (78th)
Cole Kmet            $13M     (169th)
Nate Davis           $10M     (202nd)

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/rankings/average/
 

[jason]

4 hours ago, BearFan PHX said:

for sure. anyone who has watched teams get picked in gym knows this instinctively. It's obvious, and we agree.

But not all positions are equally important to winning championships.

That said, the weakest link on any team is an issue, and football is the ultimate team sport. So every position matters. And as I've said before, I agree with you that the offensive line is extremely important to a football team's success.

But I think you can more reliably find good offensive linemen, especially interior players, in the second round than you can reliably find championship QBs there, with the possible exception of left offensive tackle.

There is a reason that the best QBs get paid more $ than any other position by far. General Managers know this truth about the importance of the position and what a dominant one is worth.

Right defensive end is one of the most important positions on the defense, because they are the anti QB. They rush the QB to stop him from being able to throw. Their importance is a reflection of the QBs importance.

And of course then, to your point, the left offensive tackle is important because he blocks the DE who is trying to stop the QB. Again, all worth directly relative to the importance of the QB position.

Now it is also true that we have seen difference makers at every position in football history. You wouldnt normally think of safety as a position from which you can dominate the outcome of a game, but Ronnie Lott, Ed Reed and Troy Palumalu have shown otherwise. So real generational difference makers can come at any position.

But even when they do, at the height of their powers, they are not the most highly paid players in the league. That distinction always goes to a QB. And that value, expressed here as salary cap %, relates directly to effect on winning.

So if you think there's a hall of Fame QB available in the draft, you pay almost any price to get him.

And I do think the Bears roster building is far enough along to support a Caleb Williams, and I also think we will put more on the OL this offseason to make that even more true.

It isnt a true choice between a top rookie QB *OR* an offensive line. i think we can have both. And I think every metric and study shows that the top QB is the most important thing in football. Not the only important thing, but the most important.

 

I won’t reply individually to each point, but it really comes down to percentages and finances in my mind.

A QB at #1 means guaranteed holes elsewhere and a 50/50 coin flip success rate. It also means financially burdening the franchise with one player in such a way that virtually guarantees flaws elsewhere.

It reminds me of going to the arcade with my kids. They spend all their money on those huge games. Sometimes those games are awesome, with great game length, amazing graphics, etc. And other times they die in very short order.

Meanwhile I’m playing twice as long for a third of the money because I’m playing the classics and having a blast. 

If they pick the right game, their experience is fun. IF. In general, however, my strategy provides more consistent success.

[BearFan PHX]

50 minutes ago, jason said:

I won’t reply individually to each point, but it really comes down to percentages and finances in my mind.

A QB at #1 means guaranteed holes elsewhere and a 50/50 coin flip success rate. It also means financially burdening the franchise with one player in such a way that virtually guarantees flaws elsewhere.

It reminds me of going to the arcade with my kids. They spend all their money on those huge games. Sometimes those games are awesome, with great game length, amazing graphics, etc. And other times they die in very short order.

Meanwhile I’m playing twice as long for a third of the money because I’m playing the classics and having a blast. 

If they pick the right game, their experience is fun. IF. In general, however, my strategy provides more consistent success.

I see the basis of our disagreement, and we dont have to agree. that's cool.

I think getting that stud QB is the hardest thing to do, and i think there are lots of ways to build a roster too. So I dont agree that drafting Caleb would automatically mean other flaws, especially since every draft pick is a gamble.

Also, a rookie QB isnt a financial burden for at least 4 years, and at that point you can decide if you have the real deal worth paying or not.

But mostly, I cant see how you can prove that your strategy "provides more consistent success" - Im totally open to a statistical argument if you have one you'd like to provide, but i dont think it's a proven fact at all. But like i said, im willing to listen to what youve got?

[Stinger226]

1 hour ago, jason said:

I won’t reply individually to each point, but it really comes down to percentages and finances in my mind.

A QB at #1 means guaranteed holes elsewhere and a 50/50 coin flip success rate. It also means financially burdening the franchise with one player in such a way that virtually guarantees flaws elsewhere.

It reminds me of going to the arcade with my kids. They spend all their money on those huge games. Sometimes those games are awesome, with great game length, amazing graphics, etc. And other times they die in very short order.

Meanwhile I’m playing twice as long for a third of the money because I’m playing the classics and having a blast. 

If they pick the right game, their experience is fun. IF. In general, however, my strategy provides more consistent success.

IMO keeping Fields and getting a draft haul is more desirable than a 50/50 potential bust at # 1. I think we can still draft a QB with a lower pick and still satisfy both sided of the fence. All options could turn out well or bust , it's about the risks that Poles takes to win this year.

[Stinger226]

For people that love stats, this is a stats nerd that takes the time to dive deep.

 

[BearFan PHX]

Jordan Reid is really smart, and does a great job answering some pretty smart questions by Courtney Cronin.
 

 

[Stinger226]

1 hour ago, BearFan PHX said:

Jordan Reid is really smart, and does a great job answering some pretty smart questions by Courtney Cronin.
 

 

Seems like a pretty smart guy,  former college QB, been doing draft coverage since 2019 and is now at ESPN. Another former player ( not NFL ) with another opinion to throw into the mix. Never heard of him before, but will start following. I like to follow former QBs for advice, Chase Daniels, The Football Scout,  Dan Orlovsky, Tim Jenkins, and now Jordan Reid, all worth listening to.

[Stinger226]

Today Justin Fields was on the St Brown brothers podcast on The 33rd Team group. It will be released tomorrow on YouTube. It's an Apple podcast so I suspect if you are on Apple you can watch it today, I am not.

He tells why he unfollowed the Bears on Instagram. Anyone on Apple?

[Alaskan Grizzly]

1 hour ago, Stinger226 said:

He tells why he unfollowed the Bears on Instagram. Anyone on Apple?

From what I can tell it’s a weekly podcast.  Their last update was on 14 Feb.  Of course I’m tech impaired…so there’s that .   Looking forward to seeing it.  A lot has been made about his “unfollowing the Bears”.  Of course someone else pointed out that CJ Stroud doesn’t follow the Texans.  ??‍♂️

[BearFan PHX]

Is it possible Fields was never following their account?

I can imagine that when you talk to the coaches day to day you dont really need to follow the media department of the team.

Of all the things to love about Justin or worry about Justin, this is a nothing burger I think?

[Alaskan Grizzly]

25 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said:

Is it possible Fields was never following their account?

I can imagine that when you talk to the coaches day to day you dont really need to follow the media department of the team.

Of all the things to love about Justin or worry about Justin, this is a nothing burger I think?

Slow times in the world of the NFL.  ‘Idle minds are the Devils’ workshop.’  

[BearFan PHX]

9 minutes ago, Alaskan Grizzly said:

Slow times in the world of the NFL.  ‘Idle minds are the Devils’ workshop.’  

mm hmm

but even me, Mr Hug-gate thinks this is a nothing burger LOL

[BearFan PHX]

OK, so Justin was on Ahman Ra and Equinimeous St Browns podcast yesterday and he was asked about unfollowing the Bears.

He said that he not only unfollowed the Bears but the NFL too - he said he doesnt want to have to read about him and Caleb Williams every day when he looks at social media to relax.

Makes perfect sense. who could blame him for that?

[DABEARSDABOMB]

9 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said:

OK, so Justin was on Ahman Ra and Equinimeous St Browns podcast yesterday and he was asked about unfollowing the Bears.

He said that he not only unfollowed the Bears but the NFL too - he said he doesnt want to have to read about him and Caleb Williams every day when he looks at social media to relax.

Makes perfect sense. who could blame him for that?

If it were anyone other than Field(s) - I would be mad that the Bears passed on a QB. But I will state - the Bears have never had a more likable individual play the QB position ever.  His character traits are just off the charts special.  

[BearFan PHX]

21 minutes ago, DABEARSDABOMB said:

If it were anyone other than Field(s) - I would be mad that the Bears passed on a QB. But I will state - the Bears have never had a more likable individual play the QB position ever.  His character traits are just off the charts special.  

hes very likeable for sure.

[DABEARSDABOMB]

I am starting to waver on my initial mock - which was Williams & Rome and am pivoting to.

Williams

LT or Top Dlinemen 

Field(s) pick(s) - wideouts (I am assuming we get a late 1st or a 2nd and 3rd and than am proposing we use those to draft wideouts plus sign Samuel).  

[Stinger226]

43 minutes ago, DABEARSDABOMB said:

I am starting to waver on my initial mock - which was Williams & Rome and am pivoting to.

Williams

LT or Top Dlinemen 

Field(s) pick(s) - wideouts (I am assuming we get a late 1st or a 2nd and 3rd and than am proposing we use those to draft wideouts plus sign Samuel).  

The best players at the top of the draft are (minus QB) a few OTs , WRs and one TE. There are a couple of edge players that have to be taken there because they say it's a down year for DL. I think we draft 2 of the top 15 and don't vary. JPJ is a stud but don't think anyone is drafting him in the top 15. Centers rarely go early.

[BearFan PHX]

5 hours ago, DABEARSDABOMB said:

I am starting to waver on my initial mock - which was Williams & Rome and am pivoting to.

Williams

LT or Top Dlinemen 

Field(s) pick(s) - wideouts (I am assuming we get a late 1st or a 2nd and 3rd and than am proposing we use those to draft wideouts plus sign Samuel).  

makes sense. Do you expect center and free safety in free agency? I kinda do, and maybe a DL or WR too.

And however that goes will probably affect that #9 pick.

I think we will see a free agent like OC Lloyd Cushenberry, because even JPJ is a specimen for sure, we probably wont want a rookie center to start day 1?

[ASHKUM BEAR]

2 hours ago, BearFan PHX said:

makes sense. Do you expect center and free safety in free agency? I kinda do, and maybe a DL or WR too.

And however that goes will probably affect that #9 pick.

I think we will see a free agent like OC Lloyd Cushenberry, because even JPJ is a specimen for sure, we probably wont want a rookie center to start day 1?

Olin said JPJ could start but needs a vet line and TE to help him do it.  

[DABEARSDABOMB]

4 hours ago, BearFan PHX said:

makes sense. Do you expect center and free safety in free agency? I kinda do, and maybe a DL or WR too.

And however that goes will probably affect that #9 pick.

I think we will see a free agent like OC Lloyd Cushenberry, because even JPJ is a specimen for sure, we probably wont want a rookie center to start day 1?

I think center in free agency. I don’t love drafting a rookie center and expecting him to start but I am good with drafting one in 3rd or 4th round and trying to develop. 

[BearFan PHX]

3 hours ago, ASHKUM BEAR said:

Olin said JPJ could start but needs a vet line and TE to help him do it.  

 

1 hour ago, DABEARSDABOMB said:

I think center in free agency. I don’t love drafting a rookie center and expecting him to start but I am good with drafting one in 3rd or 4th round and trying to develop. 

Im torn between both of these ideas. They each make sense.

I guess I dont want a rookie starting center day one, or at least I dont want to have assume he will be ready. If a JPJ proves hes good in camp, then great, but I wouldnt want to bet on that happening so early.

But on the other hand, I hate letting short term decisions force lesser long term outcomes. i LOVE the idea of JPJ. I dunno how thatd happen, but maybe if we got a 2nd in the package for Justin etc.

But assuming we could get JPJ at the right draft value, I wouldnt be against paying a vet a one year deal to give JPJ a chance to grow. But spending capital on the same position twice is a luxury we maybe cant afford? Or if the vet is cheap, then how good is he really gonna be for our QBs?

One thing I think Poles has done a great job of is not getting tied down to journeyman free agents long term because he needed them short term. Maybe he will surprise us with a move.

[Stinger226]

3 hours ago, DABEARSDABOMB said:

I think center in free agency. I don’t love drafting a rookie center and expecting him to start but I am good with drafting one in 3rd or 4th round and trying to develop. 

We need to build depth also, bring in a vet and draft one to develop. Doubt we get the opportunity to draft JPJ, but a few intriguing prospects. I also wouldn't mine bringing in a OG that could also play center. The better we can build depth the stronger the OL is. Example: Graham Barton/ Duke is a high level prospect that can do both. Mid second round projection. 

[DABEARSDABOMB]

Do any of the teams interested in Fields have a young center who could maybe be part of a deal? I do agree that JPJ is who I would want - I just don’t see how Bears could do it given current draft capital. 

[BearFan PHX]

3 hours ago, DABEARSDABOMB said:

Do any of the teams interested in Fields have a young center who could maybe be part of a deal? I do agree that JPJ is who I would want - I just don’t see how Bears could do it given current draft capital. 

I assume it would be with consideration they get from trading Fields?

Another scenario is to trade down the #9 pick. Not sure Im a fan of that one.

[DABEARSDABOMB]

58 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said:

I assume it would be with consideration they get from trading Fields?

Another scenario is to trade down the #9 pick. Not sure Im a fan of that one.

I think I could see moving down from 9 but only as low as your grade of blue chip talent is. If you have 15 blue chippers and a bunch in same spot and positional flexibility than go ahead and move down 4-5 spots. 
 

With that said - what do bears get if they moved from 9 to 15? How far down do they have to move where you are getting a big enough pick back. Like I’m not moving down 4 spots to get a 4th rounder.