dasox24
-
Posts
6,977 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Posts posted by dasox24
-
-
2 hours ago, Kyyle23 said:
Very solid. Good depth and can be a spot starter in a pinch, but more importantly, a good special teams guy.
-
A lot of OTs are very comfortable on one side and have trouble moving to the other. Sure, there are guys who have done it. But several Pro Bowl OTs (Taylor Lewan and Mitchell Schwartz are recent examples) have said they could never play the other side. There is so much mechanically that goes into pass sets (the initial leg kick, feet positioning, hand positioning, how you punch, etc). It all becomes an exact mirror when you switch sides of the line, and that's not necessarily easy to do when you've been doing it one way for years. I recall one player liken it to trying to throw the ball with your non-dominant hand.
I think that's one reason why we may steer away from guys who only play (or want to play) LT. Braxton Jones might not feel comfortable, or play at his best, on the right side of the line. So we can't just sign/trade for a LT, and immediately say "well, we'll just put Braxton at RT." Just something to keep in mind. With that said, I could be totally wrong and maybe Braxton would have no issue moving to the right side. It just depends on the player.
-
The more I read about Walker, the more I realize he's likely to play as much (or more) at 3T than he is at DE, even though everyone listed him as a DE when the signing was first reported. He was most productive at 3T and LE for the Titans last year (3.5 sacks at each position; 10 pressures from LE and 8 pressures from 3T). Shout out to Adam Jahns for pulling that info.
I like the position versatility a lot. I didn't love the signing at first, but I understand why they did it. And I can't really complain when we need at least 4-5 new DL.
-
2 hours ago, Chisoxfn said:
Monty is a good dude and relatively durable. But he is the very definition of a JAG. They need to find better and shouldn't tie up money in that position for that sort of player. At this point - I'd rather go a Bijan Robinson or high upside RB and take a chance there (especially if they can get multiple picks) and really elevate the skill position spots vs. a Monty who just hasn't been 3 dimensional enough.
Now if they decide to defer - fine - but they better still use a late round pick on a back, cause Ebner isn't it.
I think it totally depends on how free agency plays out. I don't anticipate Monty having a huge market at the start of free agency. My expectation is the Bears will make moves on other free agents to start, and take a wait-and-see approach with Monty. If they close on some bigger deals and/or with players at positions of greater need, then Monty walks. If they don't close some of those deals, then they consider bringing Monty back as long as it's on reasonable terms. If another team offers him more than we want to allocate at RB, then best of luck to him elsewhere.
My ideal scenario is we add multiple picks by trading back, and then utilize one of those picks on a RB. Potentially Gibbs in the 2nd round, or any number of quality guys in the 3rd or 4th.
-
1 hour ago, Kyyle23 said:
Pretty sure if Monty goes they are gonna let Herbert start and draft a guy that hopefully can be the next in line. Seems to be a bears constant, and it has worked
This would be my preference. Spend money elsewhere. Unless you have an absolute game changer at RB, they're very replaceable.
-
1 hour ago, scs787 said:
I was really starting to want Barkley, so I'm pretty bummed he got tagged. I really think a good pass catching back will help Justin and the offense. Aaron Jones might be a cap casualty and if he hits the market, that's my guy.
Haven't really looked at the RBs in the draft yet.
Aaron Jones restructured his contract a couple weeks ago, so he's staying in Green Bay. But the good news if you're looking for a RB is the draft class is deep, and the FA market is still solid even without the top-end guys. I'd be happy if Monty comes back, but on a deal that's easy to get out of before it expires. Like a 3 year deal, but if we cut him after Year 1 or Year 2, the amount of dead money is low.
-
Jerry is penny-wise, pound-foolish. He never understands the big picture, or that you need to spend money to make money.
Heck, one of his sons owns a company called "Frugal Pay" - I mean, you can't make this stuff up. There's never been a more apt business name to describe its owner(s).
-
1
-
-
17 hours ago, scs787 said:
Here's a little poll question...
Let's say Indy doesn't want to give up 3 1st rounders, but they'll give you 2 and your choice of any player on their roster. Who would you take?
A. DeForest Buckner
B. Michael Pittman Jr.
C. Quentin Nelson
Would you take 2 of the above and #4?
Buckner gets brought up a lot, but I'm not so sure I wouldn't choose Pittman over Buckner. Nelson would be really nice as well as you could either try and move Whitehair back inside or just move on.
I think the Whitehair experiment at Center is not happening again. Ideally we're able to move on from him this offseason; he's just not he same player he was a few years ago.
In your scenario, I'm probably taking Pittman, though Nelson is a close 2nd. Pittman is the youngest of the 3, and WR is the weakest crop among this year's free agent market and draftees. Buckner would have the most immediate impact as the 3T in this defense and he's an awesome player, but he's the oldest of those 3 guys, and I have faith in the Bears finding other ways to fill that hole, whether it's through free agency or the draft. Same with OG, even though Nelson would immediately become our best OL. A year ago I probably would have said Nelson. As for WR, this year's free agent class is extremely weak, and while the draft class has some solid Day 2 depth, in terms of adding a #1, Pittman would be our best bet. And that doesn't stop you from continuing to improve that position next year or the year after. If Pittman becomes your #2 because you've found a legit #1, that's fantastic. A WR group of Pittman, Mooney, and Claypool is far better than how we started last season.
-
1 hour ago, knightni said:
If the Bears stay at 2, trade down, or take Anderson or Carter?
You really can't go wrong either way, but I'd prefer a trade down as long as we're only dropping to, say, the 6-10 range. One thing we desperately need on this team is blue chip players, but we also just need a lot more talented players in general. By trading down only a handful of spots, you still get a high quality player while also picking up extra draft picks.
That said, if the trade up offers aren't good because teams aren't enamored with a player at #2 (unlikely because some GM is always going to get desperate for a QB when they feel their job security is on the line), then take Anderson or Carter. In an ideal world, we shore up the 3T spot in Free Agency (Payne) and then use the early pick on an Edge rusher.
-
I love that the NFL Trade Deadline is fun now. It wasn't that long ago where we'd see like 1-2 deals made across the entire league.
-
Damn, I got excited when Breer's report said we were giving up the Baltimore pick, and now Rapaport says it's the Bears original pick. I tend to think Rapaport is correct, but hoping he's somehow wrong.
Our original pick will likely be about 10-12 spots higher than the Ravens.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:
So how is the Claypool contract situation?
Signed through 2023 season. Cap number is only $2.1M next year.
-
With that said, crazy that the Browns got Amari Cooper for only a 5th rounder last year. $20M this year for Cooper is pretty solid, especially given the contracts that worse WRs were given in Free Agency.
-
Let's goooo. Love this trade.
-
13 minutes ago, bmags said:
Pretty solid return for an off-ball LB who wanted a massive contract. I loved Roquan, but 1) he hasn't played up to expectations this year; and 2) given #1, it's hard to justify giving him the contract he wanted. Sure, we had the Franchise Tag available, but then we'd be back in the same situation the following year.
I'm also curious to see that the Ravens, of all teams, made this trade. They love to build through the draft and they're very good at it. Since they gave up 2 draft picks for him, I think it's a given they're going to pay Roquan what he wanted. Now they have to pay Lamar and Roquan this offseason.
-
1 hour ago, bmags said:
That's what I'm hoping - that they buy the trenches this year.
I'd prioritize Jack Conklin to slide into RT and let borom/Leatherwood compete for swing g/t spots. Center unfortunately looks lean, but maybe you try to get the end of jason kelce's years, where it feels like C has a longer lifespan.
A'shawn robinson, daron payne, Javon hargrave are FA on the DT front, with Chubb/Clowney/Davenport leading the edge rushers. Hell, we may re-sign Robert quinn since he doesn't want to move.
Conklin would be a great addition. If Orlando Brown somehow becomes available (I'll have to see it to believe it), then he becomes target #1 on the OL. Of course, he'd have plenty of teams interested in him. Either way, Conklin or Brown would be very nice additions.
It's really unfortunate that the WR class is weak in both the draft and free agency. It feels like we'll have to trade for a WR, but I also think Poles is pretty adamant about building through the draft and we haven't had a full slate of draft picks in years thanks to Ryan Pace, hence not a lot of high-end young talent on this roster. I have doubts that Poles is going to make the type of trade everyone seems to want.
-
Can we not delete our own posts anymore? Why am I not seeing that as an option?
-
On 10/27/2022 at 7:35 AM, bmags said:
I think you buy the trenches, and am a bit more confident now that Mike Evan’s will be available this offseason.
I love Mike Evans, but he'll be 30 next year and on his last year of his deal. Due to how his deal was structured, cutting or trading him also only frees up $2M in cap space for the Bucs, but results in $20M in dead money.
Due to his age and the fact that you'd only have him guaranteed for 1 year, I'd give up a 7th rounder at most. But from the Bucs' perspective, why would you trade Evans for such little return if you also are only freeing $2M in cap space? Unfortunately doesn't feel like a match. The Bucs could probably get more from a team who's a Super Bowl contender and wants to add a big time WR.
-
14 minutes ago, Chisoxfn said:
Interesting - claiming him means they are going to pay him vs. waiting for him to go through waivers. Although I'm sure it is easier to waive him since Raiders are on the hook for his bonus, etc. I'm good with them taking a shot. Leatherwood was over-drafted as a FRP but a change of scenery could be a good option.
This is the kind of pickup that makes sense for a rebuilding team like the Bears. He's owed $1.3M this year and $1.9M next year. We can cut him in 2024 with $0 dead cap if needed. Small investment for a talented guy. Worth taking a chance on.
-
I've seen multiple places mention the Bears having the worst defense in the NFL. I just don't see it.
The defense was middle of the road last year. We lost Mack and Hicks, but Mack only played 6 games, and Hicks played 9. We had neither for at least half the season. We significantly upgraded the secondary. Roquan makes a big difference if he doesn't play, but I just can't see any way he sits out and doesn't get paid this year. I'm expecting him to play, and to play well.
Changing from a base 3-4 to a base 4-3. From a personnel standpoint, it really isn't that challenging for this roster. Quinn moves to DE, and has played a ton of football as a 43 DE. Gipson played DE in a 43 in college, so not like it's new to him completely. Otherwise, people have different assignments/etc. from a schematic standpoint, but these guys are pros. They'll pick it up quickly.
Is the expectation about the defense being the "worst" in the NFL purely from a statistical standpoint? I guess it's possible if the offense is horrific and can't move the ball, leaving the defense on the field all game. From a talent and coaching standpoint, no way is this defense the worst in the NFL.
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:
I read somewhere that sucks to the Blackhawks because they take the cap hit. i guess with the rebuild it doesn't matter much, but it could.
Yep, that's right. Large hit next year to the cap, but thankfully it doesn't really affect the Hawks since they're tanking. Would be a disaster if we were actually good/going for it.
-
Absolutely love Drew Gilbert, but he needs to clean up some mental lapses on the base paths - was an issue a few times this year. Otherwise, he does everything else really well and the kind of player who is loved by fans/teammates, and despised by every other fan base. He's AJ Pierzynski.
While he didn't come through at all today (which shocked me, but it felt like he was pressing to make up for getting ejected on Friday/missing Saturday's game), for his career in general, he showed up in big moments. The biggest being last year's regional - he hit a walk-off grand slam in the bottom of the 9th when Tennessee was down 3 runs. He's a guy I would never bet against. Also one of the biggest 180's you'll see in a player's personality from off the field vs. on the field. Goes from incredibly friendly, polite kid to absolute madman when he steps on the field.
-
1
-
-
On 5/4/2022 at 4:22 PM, scs787 said:
More than covid, I'm sure there's been a player who's been stuck behind some really good players that end up being really good players themselves.
I guess the question with that is why didn't he transfer sooner?
There were strong rumors that he was going to transfer after the 2018 season, but it never happened. Then he ended up transferring after the 2019 season. Word came out later that he didn't feel he'd be granted a hardship transfer waiver from the NCAA, so he would have had to sit out the 2019 season if he had transferred then. Instead, he played at USC one more year to graduate, and then at that point, he could transfer anywhere freely (without having to sit out a year) because he was a grad transfer.
-
23 hours ago, Chicago White Sox said:
A WR breaking out at 24 years of age and being a solid WR in the NFL has never happened, at least not based on the data I have access to over the past twelve or so years. Has never even happened for a +23 year old either. It’s not uncommon, it would be unprecedented. You’re also ignoring the fact that a 24 year old should be more physically developed than the 20 & 21 year olds he’s competing against. Just like in baseball, there is a reason you typically discount the production of a minor leaguer when it comes against much younger competition. Doesn’t mean things couldn’t have suddenly clicked for this kid, but there are certainly a lot of red flags.
Also, I gotta disagree that taking a 25 year old special teams player in the 3rd round when you have limited draft capital and are just beginning a multi-year rebuild makes sense. By the time our team is actually good, this dude is going to be 27 years old at minimum. The reality is they picked him over other WRs in the 3rd because they expect him to be much more than just a special teamer. Hopefully Poles is on the money here, because the lack of weapons & protection for Fields at the moment is really concerning.
I agree with concerns of age if you're talking about a 1st round pick. Those are guys you want around a very long time for sure. But this is a 3rd round pick. The hit rate is already low at this point in the draft. Let's say he pans out and he starts seeing a decline after his age 32 season. That's 7 years of good football from the guy - that's a lifetime in the NFL with how much parity exists in the league and roster turnover. I'm absolutely taking that from a 3rd round pick if it happens. And if he doesn't pan out, it's because the evaluation was wrong and then the age doesn't matter because he's gone long before he's out of his prime.
As for the point about a 24 year old dominating college players because he's more physically developed. It would be one thing if it were a lineman. Then yes, a 24 year old man is going to be bigger and stronger than a 19 year old kid. But Velus Jones is a speed guy. He wasn't dominating guys off the line of scrimmage or manhandling weaker CBs beating press coverage. His game is played from the Slot and it's about finding space. 4.3 speed is 4.3 speed. That translates to the NFL no matter how old you are.
2023 MLB Draft thread
in FutureSox Board
Posted
As a Tennessee fan, no one was more disappointed with Dollander's year than me. His command wasn't as sharp this past year, nor was his slider, but his stuff was still pretty great. He often would run into problems in the 1st inning and then would typically settle down, which made it more frustrating because once he settled in, he'd start dealing. With that said, I'm all in on Dollander if he falls to 15. If we can get the 2022 version, we're getting a Top 3 pick.