TJ to Jets trade question

[Ed Hochuli 3:16]

Did the Bears trade last year's pick they received from NYJ for Jones to SD for their 2nd 3rd round pick this year, or did they trade that pick they got from NYJ to SD and got SD's 3rd and maybe a 4th rounder of last year's draft?

[LT2_3]

Did the Bears trade last year's pick they received from NYJ for Jones to SD for their 2nd 3rd round pick this year, or did they trade that pick they got from NYJ to SD and got SD's 3rd and maybe a 4th rounder of last year's draft?

 

The Bears swapped their original 2nd rounder (63) for the Jets 2nd rounder (37) for T Jones.

 

Then we traded (37) for (62) and (93) + a 2008 3rd rounder from SD.

 

That's why we have 2 3rd rounders this year.

[Ed Hochuli 3:16]

So it's like whoever we take with our 2nd 3rd rounder this year is actually who we got for TJ in a way?

[Pixote]

So it's like whoever we take with our 2nd 3rd rounder this year is actually who we got for TJ in a way?

 

I look at it as we got Dan Bazuin (pick 62), Garrett Wolfe (pick 93) and ?????? (2008 3rd from SDC).

 

Time will tell if that was a good deal. Too early to evaluate.

[BearFan PHX]

I look at it as we got Dan Bazuin (pick 62), Garrett Wolfe (pick 93) and ?????? (2008 3rd from SDC).

 

Time will tell if that was a good deal. Too early to evaluate.

 

Well, we can evaluate one part of the deal, and that was that we were not going to be able to keep TJ anyway.

 

With benson on the book, and impossible to cut as a cap casualty, TJ threatened a holdout before the 2006-2007 season. Angelo negotiated that if TJ played unselfishly for the 2006-2007 season, then we would trade or release him prior to this last year.

 

Angelo needs to be able to make those sorts of promises, and then follow through on them, or we will be in much worse shape via Free Agents and cap management.

 

I think that at the beginning of this season (2007-2008) everyone in the fron office would have taken TJ over Benson if the decision was simply to choose between them for the same cost. The problem was that Benson's cap hit was too much to take, and you could not afford to sign TJ to a new deal and keep Benson on the books. In other words, the decision was made the year they drafted Benson, and at that point, we didn't know what TJ was, or for that matter what Benson would become.

 

So you may freely question the decision to draft Benson, but you must remember that TJ was not well defined yet at that point, and benson's college career looked fantastic. But you can't look at the TJ trade as a choice between TJ and Benson in early 2007. Ity wasn't. By then, the decision had already been made a year earlier prior to the 06-07 season.

 

That we got anything for someone who was not coming back at all is a great thing. That is a good trade.

[Connorbear]

Well, we can evaluate one part of the deal, and that was that we were not going to be able to keep TJ anyway.

 

With benson on the book, and impossible to cut as a cap casualty, TJ threatened a holdout before the 2006-2007 season. Angelo negotiated that if TJ played unselfishly for the 2006-2007 season, then we would trade or release him prior to this last year.

 

Angelo needs to be able to make those sorts of promises, and then follow through on them, or we will be in much worse shape via Free Agents and cap management.

 

I think that at the beginning of this season (2007-2008) everyone in the fron office would have taken TJ over Benson if the decision was simply to choose between them for the same cost. The problem was that Benson's cap hit was too much to take, and you could not afford to sign TJ to a new deal and keep Benson on the books. In other words, the decision was made the year they drafted Benson, and at that point, we didn't know what TJ was, or for that matter what Benson would become.

 

So you may freely question the decision to draft Benson, but you must remember that TJ was not well defined yet at that point, and benson's college career looked fantastic. But you can't look at the TJ trade as a choice between TJ and Benson in early 2007. Ity wasn't. By then, the decision had already been made a year earlier prior to the 06-07 season.

 

That we got anything for someone who was not coming back at all is a great thing. That is a good trade.

Great analysis - thank you.

 

Peace

[Pixote]

So you may freely question the decision to draft Benson, but you must remember that TJ was not well defined yet at that point, and benson's college career looked fantastic. But you can't look at the TJ trade as a choice between TJ and Benson in early 2007. Ity wasn't. By then, the decision had already been made a year earlier prior to the 06-07 season.

 

That we got anything for someone who was not coming back at all is a great thing. That is a good trade.

 

Excellent points, great post!!

[nfoligno]

You can argue though the mistake was already made.

 

I agree that if we told TJ we would trade him, we had to try our best to do so. At the same time, I think the mistake came when we made promises to him. We did the same w/ Briggs, and where are we now. In a situation where we are most likely going to lose him for nothing. Rosenarce made the comment that it isn't often a player like Briggs hits the open market. I agree. The reason is because teams are not so willing to kneel down to a player (and his agent's) threats.

 

Walter Jones threatened holdouts every year, and I believe three times Seattle tagged him. He never held out.

 

NE's Asanti Jones said he was going to hold out. He didn't.

 

It just doesn't happen. It is something players always threaten, but never follow through on. briggs and TJ bluffed, and Angelo blinked.

 

We may not have seen the end of this either. Two high profile players have gotten away w/ this. What happens when Harris is a FA. What about Hester and others. Will they threaten to holdout? Will Angelo tell them to play nice for one year and we will let them go?

[Connorbear]

We may not have seen the end of this either. Two high profile players have gotten away w/ this. What happens when Harris is a FA. What about Hester and others. Will they threaten to holdout? Will Angelo tell them to play nice for one year and we will let them go?

While I agree that Angelo should not be making these promises, I would argue that we just didn't let TJ go. We traded him and got fairly good value in my opinion. Further, Lance will be a high end FA and unless we sign a high end FA as well we will most likely be getting a 3rd round pick for him.

 

Peace

[nfoligno]

First, we may well disagree on the value we got for TJ, but regardless, that isn't the point. If we did indeed make promises, then we put ourselves behind the eightball when it came to negotiations. Further, even if we came away w/ a great deal, it doesn't alter my opinion of the agreement made in the first place.

 

Second, w/ regard to the 3rd round pick for Briggs, I assume you are talking about compensation picks. Those are not as simple as saying, we lost a stud, so we get back a 1st day pick. Someone can correct me if I am wrong, but I believe we are not even eligible unless we lose more FAs than we sign. How many FAs are we going to lose this year? After Briggs, who do we have? Berrian, Rex and Ayenbedajo. Do you think we won't sign as many, or more, FAs than that? Heck, we may not even lose all of them.

 

Have we gotten a compensation pick since Angelo has been in charge? We have lost some pretty good FAs. Parrish and Colvin both come to mind. I am not saying they are equal, but did we even get a 7th round pick in comp for them? I don't think so, and the reason is, we didn't lose that many FAs, and signed more than we lost.

 

I think there is a very good chance we once again will see more FAs signed to the team in the offseason than we lose. If that happens, then we lose Briggs for squat.

[Connorbear]

First, we may well disagree on the value we got for TJ, but regardless, that isn't the point. If we did indeed make promises, then we put ourselves behind the eightball when it came to negotiations. Further, even if we came away w/ a great deal, it doesn't alter my opinion of the agreement made in the first place.

 

Second, w/ regard to the 3rd round pick for Briggs, I assume you are talking about compensation picks. Those are not as simple as saying, we lost a stud, so we get back a 1st day pick. Someone can correct me if I am wrong, but I believe we are not even eligible unless we lose more FAs than we sign. How many FAs are we going to lose this year? After Briggs, who do we have? Berrian, Rex and Ayenbedajo. Do you think we won't sign as many, or more, FAs than that? Heck, we may not even lose all of them.

 

Have we gotten a compensation pick since Angelo has been in charge? We have lost some pretty good FAs. Parrish and Colvin both come to mind. I am not saying they are equal, but did we even get a 7th round pick in comp for them? I don't think so, and the reason is, we didn't lose that many FAs, and signed more than we lost.

 

I think there is a very good chance we once again will see more FAs signed to the team in the offseason than we lose. If that happens, then we lose Briggs for squat.

I realize that compensatory picks are a give and take. See the link below that kind of explains how they are determined. I disagree that we will sign more FAs than we lose this yr. I see Briggs and Brendan as gone and see us bringing in maybe 2 mid tier free agents (would love us to go after someone like Faneca - just don't see it happening). Further, it is also the value of the FA. I simply do not believe we will sign anyone of Briggs caliber. He is one of the top 5 FA on the market. You are probably right we will not get a 3rd for him based on what we bring in but I definately see us getting some compensation.

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17486531/

 

Peace

[LT2_3]

So it's like whoever we take with our 2nd 3rd rounder this year is actually who we got for TJ in a way?

 

What we got for Jones will be Wolfe and whomever we take with our 2nd 3rd rounder this year.

 

Bauzin is really just putting us back in the 2nd round where we started.

[nfoligno]

When it comes to value, I think it only factors (again) if you sign less then you lose. If we signed 5 FAs, I don't think (think is an admitted key word) it matters if they are equal talent to Briggs or not.

 

You think we will sign just two players?

 

RB - I can absolutely see us signing a RB. No clue whether it would be a guy like Fargas or Chris Brown, but I can easily see us adding a RB. That player could well come through the draft too, but do not count out a FA RB.

 

WR - We are quite thin at WR, especially if we lose Berrian. Whether we keep Berrian, or let him go, I would not be surprised at all to see us sign another veteran WR.

 

OL - I think it a near lock we will sign at least one FA OL. We all love the idea of drafting multiple OL (or at least I think most do) but I am not sure how many OL Angelo will draft. I think Miller is gone, and will be sooner rather than later due to his roster bonus. While I didn't think so earlier, I think Metcalf stands a decent chance for release. That move would actually cost us $400k against the cap, but he really proved worthless last year, and I am not sure we will continue to waste a roster spot. This is in addition to Brown.

 

DL - Walker is gone IMHO. I simply do not see any way we justify keeping him when he is due a big roster bonus. We had so many issues at DT this year, it would not shock me if we added another veteran, as we tried when we traded for Walker.

 

LB - Briggs is gone, and as you even said, so is likely Ayenbedajo. While the plan is for one of our two younger LBs to step up, I think it also very possible we could see a veteran added. Not a big name or anything, but at least one that may improve our depth, which was not great even before the loss of Briggs.

 

CB - Will RMJ still have a spot? From what I could tell from Lt2's info, cutting him will save about $2m. He seems to be in a roster free fall, and I think a good chance he could be on his way out. Sure seems like he has fallen to no better than 4th on the depth chart, and is a bit expensive for that position. Will we sign a veteran? You can say we draft a CB, but if we do, that is one less draft pick that may have gone to our offensive replacements, improving the chance we sign another FA elsewhere.

 

S - Another area I think there is a pretty decent chance we add a veteran.

 

IMHO, we sign more FAs than most realize. It may not seem so, because we often bring in guys who mostly round out the depth chart, are fillers, or simply not big names, but I think regardless, we end up signing more than most realize. I said this before, but I do not believe we have before (under Angelo) received a comp pick. While it is possible, I simply would not assume we get a 3rd or 4th round pick if we let Briggs go, as we may well not be due any comp picks once again.

[Pixote]

I said this before, but I do not believe we have before (under Angelo) received a comp pick.

 

From what I found out at a site called Fantasy Football Today (fftoday.com) on a referred page to the NFL Draft Tracker the only compensatory picks we have received (going back to 1995) was in 2003 when we received 3 - a 5th, 6th, & 7th.

[LT2_3]

When it comes to value, I think it only factors (again) if you sign less then you lose. If we signed 5 FAs, I don't think (think is an admitted key word) it matters if they are equal talent to Briggs or not.

 

........

 

IMHO, we sign more FAs than most realize. It may not seem so, because we often bring in guys who mostly round out the depth chart, are fillers, or simply not big names, but I think regardless, we end up signing more than most realize. I said this before, but I do not believe we have before (under Angelo) received a comp pick. While it is possible, I simply would not assume we get a 3rd or 4th round pick if we let Briggs go, as we may well not be due any comp picks once again.

 

No Nfo, that's not how it works. If we lost Briggs to FA and signed 5 scrubs, we'd still get a 3rd. It's based on both contract size and performance. And I should point out that the FAs signed also have to make the team. And udfas don't count either.

 

I will admit that signing Faneca would mostly cancel out losing Briggs in that equation.

 

However, look for Briggs to sign a 7 year $63 million deal with $25 million guaranteed. If we signed Faneca to a 5 yr $35 mil contract and Briggs went to the probowl and Faneca didn't then we'd still get something. Probably a 4th.

 

Because this is something that is tough to figure out and isn't published, I've been tracking this issue somewhat for the past 5 years. You really only have to count guys that get contracts that are at the league average for their position and better. I could map it out for you in detail, but don't really have the time.

[Connorbear]

No Nfo, that's not how it works. If we lost Briggs to FA and signed 5 scrubs, we'd still get a 3rd. It's based on both contract size and performance. And I should point out that the FAs signed also have to make the team. And udfas don't count either.

 

I will admit that signing Faneca would mostly cancel out losing Briggs in that equation.

 

However, look for Briggs to sign a 7 year $63 million deal with $25 million guaranteed. If we signed Faneca to a 5 yr $35 mil contract and Briggs went to the probowl and Faneca didn't then we'd still get something. Probably a 4th.

 

Because this is something that is tough to figure out and isn't published, I've been tracking this issue somewhat for the past 5 years. You really only have to count guys that get contracts that are at the league average for their position and better. I could map it out for you in detail, but don't really have the time.

Thanks LT2_3. I knew it was something that but was't sure.

 

Peace

[LT2_3]

The main reason we haven't received many compensatory picks is that we haven't had many players leave that would even qualify.

 

In FA 2001, we lost Todd Perry and Casey Wiegmann, and signed Brad Maynard and got a 6th in 2002

 

In FA 2002, we lost James Allen, Walt Harris, and Tony Parrish and signed Mike Caldwell and got a 5th, 6th, and 7th in 2003. This kinda proves that not every free agents signing counts.

 

In FA 2003, we lost Colvin and signed Kordell Stewart and Des Clark and got nothing in 2004. We didn't get anything primarily because Colvin blew out his hip and missed 14 games. He finished the season with 3 solo tackles, 2 assisted tackles, 2 sacks, and 0 passes defensed. Had he gone to the probowl, we would have gotten something.

[BearFan PHX]

I think the mistake came when we made promises to him. We did the same w/ Briggs, and where are we now. In a situation where we are most likely going to lose him for nothing. Rosenarce made the comment that it isn't often a player like Briggs hits the open market. I agree. The reason is because teams are not so willing to kneel down to a player (and his agent's) threats.

 

We may not have seen the end of this either. Two high profile players have gotten away w/ this. What happens when Harris is a FA. What about Hester and others. Will they threaten to holdout? Will Angelo tell them to play nice for one year and we will let them go?

 

You don't understand. You are arguing that Angelo was afraid of a holdout, and so he made the "just one more year, please" weak comeback?

 

This is not the case. Its more complicated than that.

 

When you have a player making more money at the same position, with a contract that won't end for several more years, everyone KNOWS that the team has already made a decision to make the change. Even if TJ had been willing to play here for his fair market value, and I'm betting he WOULD have, we simply couldn't afford to pay both him and Benson what they are worth. You can't carry two starting caliber HBs under the cap at market value.

 

So, even though we found out that it was a poor decision, we made the commitment when we drafted Benson that he would be the starter within a couple years. Finanically. And this is the only reason TJ wanted out anyway - he wants to start, and he wants his payday.

 

This is reasonable given a #4 pick overall, no?

 

When the writing is on the wall like that, and the decision to go with Benson is already far past the decision point, and Benson is flagging, you ask yourself - can I get TJ to play one more year while we develop Benson? That's all that was possible anyway. So Angelo did that in a gentlemanly way. Now I don't think he did it that way because he's weak. he had no problem tagging Briggs when Briggs wouldn't accept a similar offer. No, he did it because it makes for better relationships with Free Agents and players down the road AND he gets what he wants - another year of TJ, and the chance to get some draft value for him after that - the best move possible.

 

This team has also decided that they only want Briggs back at a certain price, and it isn't the value of tagging him again, or what he will make in the open market. So it stands to reason that we would try similar moves with him. We ended up having to tag him, but if he goes, its because we didn't want to tie up so much money in him. We all bitched that Briggs (a 3rd rounder) could NEVER fill the shoes of Rosie Colvin. Now Briggs and his attitude are indispensable? Give me a break. The guy's stats are overhyped by his role in the cover 2, and we can get another guy to play for him without killing our cap on LBers.

 

You see this as the team losing guys they want to keep. I see it as the team making mature decisions not to overpay for talent, and staying cap healthy.

 

The one problem here is that Angelo guessed wrong in 2005 that Benson would be better than he has turned out to be, and secondarily, perhaps that TJ would not turn out to have been as good as he was. Based on the data at the time, it was a good play. It didn't turn out that way though. That's too bad, and fair to criticize him for. The rest is just a result of that decision though, not more errors.

 

The real truth is that Benson, even having failed to live up to his potential, would be FINE if we had an OL that could run block. He'd get his 1,300 yards, which is really all you were going to get from TJ anyway.

 

The real problem in all of this is that the risk on the OL DIDN'T pay off, and they got old a little faster than we hoped. We didn't feel that revamping the OL last year on the heels of a Super Bowl loss was the way to go - we opted instead to continue the run with what we had that was working. Had Angleo given up, and revamped the OL, you would have been screaming about rebuilding when we should have been trying to get to the next level.

 

Had the OL stayed good, and Rex progressed, the running game would have been fine, and we might even have had the offensive rhythm to make Hester and Wolfe look good as situational role players to counter the kind of things that New England does. It was a good play, it was like betting big with three queens - a good move, but not a guarantee. The other guy just drew his straight is all, and the right play didn't pay off.

 

Angelo is making good decisions, they just didn't pan out. Its fair to criticize him for it, but its hindsight, and at the time, they were sound moves.

 

However, to say that he mishandled TJ, or was weak in the face of a threatened holdout is to misunderstand the situation he was in, and the move he had to make.

[bradjock]

No Nfo, that's not how it works. If we lost Briggs to FA and signed 5 scrubs, we'd still get a 3rd. It's based on both contract size and performance. And I should point out that the FAs signed also have to make the team. And udfas don't count either.

 

I will admit that signing Faneca would mostly cancel out losing Briggs in that equation.

 

However, look for Briggs to sign a 7 year $63 million deal with $25 million guaranteed. If we signed Faneca to a 5 yr $35 mil contract and Briggs went to the probowl and Faneca didn't then we'd still get something. Probably a 4th.

 

Because this is something that is tough to figure out and isn't published, I've been tracking this issue somewhat for the past 5 years. You really only have to count guys that get contracts that are at the league average for their position and better. I could map it out for you in detail, but don't really have the time.

 

Great insight as always!!! Thanks.

[nfoligno]

Okay, I went back and re-read what I wrote. I never intended to mean scrubs. I know/knew they were not really a factor. Value does matter, but I didn't think it had to be even.

 

For example, I think we will sign a player of similar caliber as Faneca, as you mentioned. If we sign Faneca, while Briggs is signed for more, I wasn't under the impression we would receive a comp pick for Briggs as if we had not signed Faneca.

 

Then, what happens if you sign a couple FAs. For example, what if we sign Faneca, Hamlin and maybe Fargas while losing Briggs, Rex and Ayenbedajo (Berrian tagged). While Faneca may not equal Briggs, the three FAs signed may equal or be greater than those we lost.

 

My main point was, and still is, that I do not believe we can simply say Briggs is going to net us a 3rd, or even a 4th round pick. While it is possible, it seems like every year fans talk about why we should get a comp pick of this value or that, and we come away w/ squat. Maybe we don't sign jack in FA, while letting Briggs, Berrian and Rex all walk and sign significant deals. Maybe we come away w/ a trio of extra 3rd and 4th round picks. I doubt it, but maybe. My point is, I do not think we can say today that when we let Briggs walk, we are not totally letting him walk for nothing because we will get a 3rd round comp pick for him. The system is simply FAR too iffy for us to say that. We could get as high as a 3rd, or as low as nothing. I just do not think we can "count" on it one way or the other.