Would Boldin be a waste?

[Ed Hochuli 3:16]

I'm one of the guys willing to draft WR in Rd 1 (Maclin) but I also would like to add Boldin but don't want to give up our 1st Rd pick. The difference for me is the $8-10 milllion/yr salary Boldin wants. It's not that he's not worth the salary that Berrian got, he is. But giving up a 1st rd pick plus giving up all that cap space when we have so many needs is not something I favor. In particular if we added Boldin I really want to use #18 on Oline in a strong draft for 1st Rd OTs.

 

Bottom line is the old economics idea of opportunity cost. It's not necessarily what it costs to get Boldin but what I lose the opportunity to add when I do that.

 

If I were to simply draft Maclin I would not have a WR as capable as Boldin, at least not at the start but I will also have enough extra money available to get the best FA FS on the market.

 

Breaks down like this:

 

Boldin + 2nd Rd Oline IS NOT GREATER THAN Maclin + 2nd Rd Oline + best FA FS

I respectfully disagree. To get a guy who is proven like Boldin + Loadholt/Robinson/Tupou is greater then Maclin (an unproven guy who could be the product of a system where running routes doesn't matter who I truly believe will be a bust) + Loadholt/Robinson/Tupou + Atowge.

 

Boldin immediately adds us 2 wins in what looks like an easy schedule next year (Rams, Browns, Seahawks, 49ers, Bengals, Lions x2) and 2 more wins gets us into the playoffs. He is not only a solid or a good WR, but a great one. He put up great stats with bad QB's without a solid other WR (before Fitzgerald), so he'll do that here, too.

 

Plus, Atogwe will most likely get franchised or just get a flat out deal with St Louis.

[bradjock]

I respectfully disagree. To get a guy who is proven like Boldin + Loadholt/Robinson/Tupou is greater then Maclin (an unproven guy who could be the product of a system where running routes doesn't matter who I truly believe will be a bust) + Loadholt/Robinson/Tupou + Atowge.

 

Boldin immediately adds us 2 wins in what looks like an easy schedule next year (Rams, Browns, Seahawks, 49ers, Bengals, Lions x2) and 2 more wins gets us into the playoffs. He is not only a solid or a good WR, but a great one. He put up great stats with bad QB's without a solid other WR (before Fitzgerald), so he'll do that here, too.

 

Plus, Atogwe will most likely get franchised or just get a flat out deal with St Louis.

 

So we don't get Atogwe, but what about T.J. Housh? Hypothetically, let's say we devote all of the 25 million we have available in FA this season and get Housh. Wouldn't you rather have Housh, and our #1 and #2 or #3 over Boldin? You look at their stats from this past season and they're not far off:

 

Boldin: 1039 yards, 89 catches, 11 TD's

Housh: 904 yards, 94 catches, 4 TD's

 

I wouldn't mind giving up the picks, and I don't mind spending the money. But when you're doing both, you're essentially giving up 3 very good players for the price of one.

[Ed Hochuli 3:16]

So we don't get Atogwe, but what about T.J. Housh? Hypothetically, let's say we devote all of the 25 million we have available in FA this season and get Housh. Wouldn't you rather have Housh, and our #1 and #2 or #3 over Boldin? You look at their stats from this past season and they're not far off:

 

Boldin: 1039 yards, 89 catches, 11 TD's

Housh: 904 yards, 94 catches, 4 TD's

 

I wouldn't mind giving up the picks, and I don't mind spending the money. But when you're doing both, you're essentially giving up 3 very good players for the price of one.

I'd still probably take Boldin. He's 3 years younger then Houshmanzadeh.

 

I don't get your last statement- giving up 3 very good players for 1. Are you saying that if we kept our 3 picks and picked up Housh, that that would be the smart move because our 3 picks will be great? I think we all agree that our first 3 draft picks WILL NOT all be great and there will be atleast 1 crappy player.

[bowlingtwig]

I'd still probably take Boldin. He's 3 years younger then Houshmanzadeh.

 

I don't get your last statement- giving up 3 very good players for 1. Are you saying that if we kept our 3 picks and picked up Housh, that that would be the smart move because our 3 picks will be great? I think we all agree that our first 3 draft picks WILL NOT all be great and there will be atleast 1 crappy player.

 

 

I agree with Brian. I would rather have Boldin because he is 3 years younger and I personally think he would perform better in Chicago than Housh would.

[bradjock]

I'd still probably take Boldin. He's 3 years younger then Houshmanzadeh.

 

All things being equal, I'd much rather have Boldin. Hell, the guy's fearless. But things are not equal, and acquiring him will cost two high draft picks PLUS a ton of cap space. If we just needed one player to fix this team, I'd say do it. But we have multiple holes to fill.

 

I don't get your last statement- giving up 3 very good players for 1. Are you saying that if we kept our 3 picks and picked up Housh, that that would be the smart move because our 3 picks will be great? I think we all agree that our first 3 draft picks WILL NOT all be great and there will be atleast 1 crappy player.

 

I can't guarantee our draft picks will be great any more then you can guarantee Boldin won't become Mushin Muhammed if he joined this team. How's Boldin going to react when Orton can't get him the ball?

 

I can predict that one of those picks we'd be giving up would likely cost us losing a stud player. If we'd have given up our #1 and #3 in 2004, that'd have cost us Tommie Harris & Bernard Berrian. For every Dan Bazuin, there's a Greg Olsen, Devin Hester, Matt Forte, and Charles TIllman. It's tough to comment on Chris Williams, but he was good enough that we named him our starting LT, who we hope will solidify the position for years to come.

 

So at the very least, including whoever else we could sign in free agency, Boldin will cost us two damn good players. Considering Boldin's production won't be nearly the same as if he'd joined this team, we're much better off not putting all our eggs in one basket. We're in need of a DE, FS, WR, QB, and o-line help. Through free agency and the draft, we ought to be able to upgrade every one of those positions. Making a deal for Boldin would severely limit the areas of the team we can improve.

[jason]

Just curious. Are you comparing Moose w/ Boldin?

 

No question our offense failed this year, but I don't think that minimizes our need for a WR. The key is, we need more than just one WR, regaredless how good. We need to drastically upgrade our OL too.

 

That has been my issue all along w/ the idea of adding Boldin. I would absolutely love to see him in a Bears uniform, but if adding him comes at the expense of being capable of upgrading other aspects of the offense, I am not sure if it is worth it.

 

Still, I do believe adding a WR like Boldin could have a dramatic effect on our offense. In our offense, Hester is our #1 WR by default. IMHO, if we were to add Boldin, Hester is dramatically upgraded as well. Further, w/ a greater passing attack, it is harder for defenses to (a) stack the box and ( blitz the QB.

 

But again, it comes back to our ability to make other necessary upgrades. That brings it back to what it would take to get him. If we could get him w/o giving up our 1st, and we could use that 1st round pick on OL, I think the 1-2 punch would create a huge boost to our offense.

 

Bingo. You nailed it right there. End of thread.

[nfoligno]

No, not all three picks will be great, but there is a good chance one is.

 

Would you rather have Tommie Harris and TJ or Boldin? Just using one example.

 

I also have to throw this out there. Everyone is saying Boldin is a proven stud, and under the impression it is automatic we get the same WR who now wears a red jersey, but I think history has shown that FAs or veterans you trade for may be proven for one team, but are yet unproven for another. Sure, Boldin is more proven than a draft pick, but I do not think it is such a set in stone issue that he would be an equal stud for us.

 

Our offense is so different, in terms of system and talent, than what he has in Az, that you have to wonder exactly what his impact will be. Not saying Boldin would be a bust for the bears. Just saying I think fans need to temper expectations a tad.

 

To me, it is simply an easy decision. If Boldin costs anything close to what Roy Williams cost, I would rather have Hous. Sure, I think Boldin is better, not to mention younger, but the cost (in picks) is simply too great for a team w/ so many other needs.

 

I'd still probably take Boldin. He's 3 years younger then Houshmanzadeh.

 

I don't get your last statement- giving up 3 very good players for 1. Are you saying that if we kept our 3 picks and picked up Housh, that that would be the smart move because our 3 picks will be great? I think we all agree that our first 3 draft picks WILL NOT all be great and there will be atleast 1 crappy player.

[Ed Hochuli 3:16]

No, not all three picks will be great, but there is a good chance one is.

 

Would you rather have Tommie Harris and TJ or Boldin? Just using one example.

 

I also have to throw this out there. Everyone is saying Boldin is a proven stud, and under the impression it is automatic we get the same WR who now wears a red jersey, but I think history has shown that FAs or veterans you trade for may be proven for one team, but are yet unproven for another. Sure, Boldin is more proven than a draft pick, but I do not think it is such a set in stone issue that he would be an equal stud for us.

 

Our offense is so different, in terms of system and talent, than what he has in Az, that you have to wonder exactly what his impact will be. Not saying Boldin would be a bust for the bears. Just saying I think fans need to temper expectations a tad.

 

To me, it is simply an easy decision. If Boldin costs anything close to what Roy Williams cost, I would rather have Hous. Sure, I think Boldin is better, not to mention younger, but the cost (in picks) is simply too great for a team w/ so many other needs.

Boldin put up great numbers before the Cardinals had Warner, Breaston, and Fitzgerald, so I don't think that's a problem. He was already with an inept offense like the Bears and produced big time.

[danimal99]

Mistake? Hardly. Moose threw 2 of his teammates under the bus and he was the one continually dropping the ball. Screw him.

 

Peace

 

Remember Moose played with two broken hands.

[nfoligno]

Yea, I realize that in one season, he put up the stats (minus the TDs) w/o Fitz and Warner. But my point is, FAs are not the sure thing fans make them out to be. FAs have a pretty high bust factor too. Just look at the history of all the big contract FAs, and how few really propelled their teams to the big game.

 

I think Boldin would be great. My point is only that he is not a sure thing just because he is previously proven.

 

Boldin put up great numbers before the Cardinals had Warner, Breaston, and Fitzgerald, so I don't think that's a problem. He was already with an inept offense like the Bears and produced big time.