Miles Garrett Talk...

[Mongo3451]

Garrett wants traded.  Who would blame him?  He's 29 coming off a 14 sack season. 

Do we trade the #10 and a future pick? 

And go!

[BearFan PHX]

If Garrett is holding out, we might get him for less.

On the other hand, a huge percentage of his money came as a signing bonus. We'd have him through 2027 for $8 Million a year. That's gotta be worth something in draft capital!!

The Browns would take a huge cap hit. And he'd probably want a new deal before 2027.

[Mongo3451]

Now that I've put some thought into it, I'm out on Garrett for the following reasons.  

1) We have so many holes to fill and he's gonna cost a few picks. 

2) We are not one player away.  We need 2 OL, 2 DL, S, RB, TE and speed WR.

3) We haven't seen the Ben Johnson effect on this team.  That includes Dennis Allen.

If it were next year and these things are known.  All in!

 

[BearFan PHX]

1 hour ago, Mongo3451 said:

Now that I've put some thought into it, I'm out on Garrett for the following reasons.  

1) We have so many holes to fill and he's gonna cost a few picks. 

2) We are not one player away.  We need 2 OL, 2 DL, S, RB, TE and speed WR.

3) We haven't seen the Ben Johnson effect on this team.  That includes Dennis Allen.

If it were next year and these things are known.  All in!

 

youre probably right, but then again, no roster in the NFL is ever complete, and if Dennis Allen and Ben Johnson believe that Miles Garrett is the piece to make this a championship defense, then you have to consider it.

All in context of course that you HAVE to replace most of the OL from last year. If that can be done with free agents, and remaining draft picks, Id roll with Swift etc another year to add Garrett.

But yeah, until we can protect Caleb, nothing else can matter. Maybe we can do both.

All that said, I assume we will pass on Garrett, but if Johnson and Allen say yes, Im all for it.

[jason]

8 hours ago, Mongo3451 said:

Garrett wants traded.  Who would blame him?  He's 29 coming off a 14 sack season. 

Do we trade the #10 and a future pick? 

And go!

HELL NO

[Mongo3451]

21 minutes ago, jason said:

HELL NO

You must have read my summary reply...💪

[ASHKUM BEAR]

Small chance the Bears do, but call and see what the cost is.  We might have to face him twice a year if Detroit wants him.  He most likely goes to the Commanders.  

[DABEARSDABOMB]

42 minutes ago, jason said:

HELL NO

Double down on this. Not the right move at all. They need to get the oline settled. If he was a free agent and it was signing him to a big deal - fine, not not using significant draft capital and a ton of cap space. No way. 

[BearFan PHX]

FWIW its not a ton of cap space, hes under contract thru 2027 for $8 million a year, because most of his contract was signing bonus.

[DABEARSDABOMB]

1 hour ago, BearFan PHX said:

FWIW its not a ton of cap space, hes under contract thru 2027 for $8 million a year, because most of his contract was signing bonus.

I am presuming he is getting a new deal but I might be wrong - but If it was really just 8M it becomes intriguing - but it also means you are taking about 2 first rounders likely and that is too rich. 
 

If Bears were a year down road and Caleb was coming off a legit pro bowl, than I’d be interested. This is too soon. Also if it was the top LT in the league - I would be intrigued. 

[BearFan PHX]

1 hour ago, DABEARSDABOMB said:

I am presuming he is getting a new deal but I might be wrong - but If it was really just 8M it becomes intriguing - but it also means you are taking about 2 first rounders likely and that is too rich. 
 

If Bears were a year down road and Caleb was coming off a legit pro bowl, than I’d be interested. This is too soon. Also if it was the top LT in the league - I would be intrigued. 

Yeah thats totally fair. The trade cost for the picks is a big problem. But his salary cap space is tiny. I dont see how he can want a new deal when he just got one and is good thru 2027? And he would elevate this defense to top 5 immediately.

EDIT: Looking again, it might be closer to $20M a year, depending on how "prorated options" work, I dont really understand them. But worst case scenario it's like $16M this year, and $20M each the next 2.

Im not saying Im for it, because we absolutely need the OL revamped first 100%. But if we somehow got that done with free agency, then maybe it's a possibility?

FWIW Adam Schefter mentioned us as a likely landing spot for Garrett...

[Stinger226]

4 hours ago, BearFan PHX said:

FWIW its not a ton of cap space, hes under contract thru 2027 for $8 million a year, because most of his contract was signing bonus.

I looked at the contract on OTC and his money for the next 3 years are 19.4 mil, 20.4 and 40 mil.  His contract was all back loaded . Not sure on how the contract is structured but there dead money if  traded is 36, 21 and 11 mil and 4 mil in 2029  . I have no idea how they figure who pays what but if I had to 72 mil out for 4  years of not playing for  me, I'm not trading him . 

I seen mentioned 3 first round picks. But it's probably a mixture of 3 high picks of which is exactly what we need to fix our OL.

No way they would do that.

[AZ54]

I wouldn’t do it.  For all the reasons cited above plus it’s the best Dline draft in a decade.   We need quantity over quality right now.  

[ASHKUM BEAR]

Here is the thing to consider.  The Vikings losing Darnold, Lions losing both coordinators, and Packers who should have lost twice to us.  While the Bears add great coaching, have 65 mil in cap, and decent draft capital.  

If Garrett can catapult the D to top 3 and only costs us a 1st this year, that could go to an unproven DE anyways, why not. 

The Bears window could be next year or the following with Garrett.  The oline might be fixed with coaching and fewer pieces than we see.  

Poles has to call and see what the price is.  If it is doable and not outrageous, do it. 

[BearFan PHX]

If we can afford it, having Miles Garrett is a no brainer for any team. It seems the salary cap is very friendly for us.

The question is what it would cost in draft capital. 3 firsts is a hard no for me. Even 2 firsts is probably more than I'd want to pay.

One first is easy, because as Ashkum says, we might well spend that first this year on an edge anyway, so that's easy.

Someone will pay more draft capital than we can probably afford, so I dont see him being a Bear, but if there was some way to get him, it would be a MAJOR step toward a superbowl victory (or more than one!).