Bears sign DE Aaron Lynch to 1-yr deal

[Nanky]

At some point you are going to have to accept that the Bears have to spend money to spend money. I hate free agency for that very reason. But they can bury their cash in a coffee can in the back yard and rely on only draft picks right now.

Well, you can carry cap space over now but putting that to one side... actually, also put to one side that he's going to end up being somewhere between 34th and 40th of all edge rushers...

The main issue I have is that this is a one year deal rather than, say, a 3 year year deal. 3 years, $18m with salaries of 3,6,6 and a 3m signing bonus. Just give me something!

I see your point, I'd like at least a 2 year deal . . . some protection for the Bears in case he lights the world on fire. If he's a flop after year 1 can be cut with basically no cap issues either.

[Mikefive]

At some point you are going to have to accept that the Bears have to spend money to spend money. I hate free agency for that very reason. But they can bury their cash in a coffee can in the back yard and rely on only draft picks right now.

Not really. The Bears still have something like or approaching 30 roster openings. I'd like to see the current number of players under contract at present.

[Mikefive]

Kind of weird that this is my favorite signing.

Why?? He hasn't proven ANYTHING yet. He has the physical tools. What makes you think he is going to make the leap with the Bears?

You seem angry this evening.

I'm not angry. I'm sorry. I don't like having my buttons pushed over sensitive issues.

I'm sincerely curious. The guy had 1.5 sacks last year, and has yet to show any promise so far. Do you think he could flourish under Fangio?

He was beginning to look like an all pro linebacker under Fangio. When Vic left the wheels fell off. He was asked to do too much at that point.

I’m hoping his growth resumes.

Seems like there's reason for hope.

[VA_Mountain_Bear]

This FA period was very weak on edge rushers. Of the ones available Lynch has among the highest upside. Perhaps when the 49ers switched to 4-3 and he was asked to be a DE it didn't fit his skill set (Like when we drafted Shae for 4-3 DE and he was better suited to OLB in 3-4). Is he a sure thing? No way. But his best years were in this exact system, so for a 1 year deal when we need depth and to spend $...it makes a lot of sense. I think he is going to be a pleasant surprise myself.

[G08]

This FA period was very weak on edge rushers. Of the ones available Lynch has among the highest upside. Perhaps when the 49ers switched to 4-3 and he was asked to be a DE it didn't fit his skill set (Like when we drafted Shae for 4-3 DE and he was better suited to OLB in 3-4). Is he a sure thing? No way. But his best years were in this exact system, so for a 1 year deal when we need depth and to spend $...it makes a lot of sense. I think he is going to be a pleasant surprise myself.

If he comes in motivated and in shape this is a great get. Problem is that he's had an issue with this since he was in college.

[sturf]

It's a weak market and this is just a 1 year rental to me. They need somebody because they want to win games this year, but don't want to make a long term commitment in a weak market. They'll draft somebody this year and again next year. Lynch has the motivation of knowing he will be a free agent again next year.

[crueltyabc]

We're assuming that Pace wouldn't take a chance on a longer deal but it seems more likely that Lynch didn't want to be locked into a 3 year deal because he's expecting to make some plays and get paid next year. From a player's perspective, a 1 year deal is better than a 3 year deal without more guaranteed money...

[VA_Mountain_Bear]

We're assuming that Pace wouldn't take a chance on a longer deal but it seems more likely that Lynch didn't want to be locked into a 3 year deal because he's expecting to make some plays and get paid next year. From a player's perspective, a 1 year deal is better than a 3 year deal without more guaranteed money...

Good points sir.

[malk]

We're assuming that Pace wouldn't take a chance on a longer deal but it seems more likely that Lynch didn't want to be locked into a 3 year deal because he's expecting to make some plays and get paid next year. From a player's perspective, a 1 year deal is better than a 3 year deal without more guaranteed money...

Absolutely but how much leverage does he have? The only reason we're ok with this is the Fangio connection and we've got the only one of him.

Maybe he was in more demand than I thought but there's got to be some willingness to bluff from our side?

Pace: 3 years $18m.
Lynch's agent: 1 year $6m, final offer.
Pace: Okay, fuckity bye.
Lynch's agent: Now about that 3 year deal...

I think it makes much more sense that these one year deals are part of Pace's MO. He's bad at free agency.

[Pagan]

We're assuming that Pace wouldn't take a chance on a longer deal but it seems more likely that Lynch didn't want to be locked into a 3 year deal because he's expecting to make some plays and get paid next year. From a player's perspective, a 1 year deal is better than a 3 year deal without more guaranteed money...

Absolutely but how much leverage does he have? The only reason we're ok with this is the Fangio connection and we've got the only one of him.

Maybe he was in more demand than I thought but there's got to be some willingness to bluff from our side?

Pace: 3 years $18m.
Lynch's agent: 1 year $6m, final offer.
Pace: Okay, fuckity bye.
Lynch's agent: Now about that 3 year deal...

I think it makes much more sense that these one year deals are part of Pace's MO. He's bad at free agency.

1) We have zero idea how negotiations go.

2) 1 Year deals are actually a very smart way to Free Agency.

3) You either disagree/don't understand the 1 year FA contract philosophy & are defaulting to simply saying Pace is bad at it, as if it were a fact instead of an opinion.

I often agree with your stances, but I feel you're off base on this one.

[malk]

We're assuming that Pace wouldn't take a chance on a longer deal but it seems more likely that Lynch didn't want to be locked into a 3 year deal because he's expecting to make some plays and get paid next year. From a player's perspective, a 1 year deal is better than a 3 year deal without more guaranteed money...

Absolutely but how much leverage does he have? The only reason we're ok with this is the Fangio connection and we've got the only one of him.

Maybe he was in more demand than I thought but there's got to be some willingness to bluff from our side?

Pace: 3 years $18m.
Lynch's agent: 1 year $6m, final offer.
Pace: Okay, fuckity bye.
Lynch's agent: Now about that 3 year deal...

I think it makes much more sense that these one year deals are part of Pace's MO. He's bad at free agency.

1) We have zero idea how negotiations go.

2) 1 Year deals are actually a very smart way to Free Agency.

3) You either disagree/don't understand the 1 year FA contract philosophy & are defaulting to simply saying Pace is bad at it, as if it were a fact instead of an opinion.

I often agree with your stances, but I feel you're off base on this one.

I'm absolutely aware I may be way off base with this, I'm just confident I'm not. One way or another it isn't a knee jerk thing, I've given it way more thought than I should have! On your points.

1). Absolutely, I'd hoped I alluded to this with stating maybe he's in more demand than I think. But, for reasons below, I think it's mostly irrelevant.

2). You need to expand on this. My view is that they can be good when you're contending but otherwise they're almost always bad, or at least worse than a reasonable alternative. If someone argues they're not terrible that'd be one thing but to say they're very smart is something different. I'd be genuinely interested to find out why you think that?

3). I absolutely dislike any 1 year contract philosophy but to your point, this is of course opinion rather than professing fact. It's blunt opinion in these posts but I've been elucidating why I think so fairly consistently for quite some time.

I'm really happy to discuss this as I find it fascinating (whilst I'm conscious that others don't!). It'll never happen but I'd love to read an ethnography of NFL front office operations, the quality of decision making is generally quite poor which, given the demand for the roles, seems to indicate some structural issue that makes the job almost impossible. I'd love to see what those structures are and how they attempt to overcome them.

We just need to get a bunch of anthropologists to infiltrate Hard Knocks and I'm there!

[Moriarty]

I thought this was a solid depth pickup with a bit of upside...until I saw the price tag.

Holy #*%^ing $*@&!

6M as a reward for sucking? How much would he get if he were average or actually good?

Lamarr Houston put up more sacks in 5 games last year than this guy has over the last 2 yrs.

And if he does rebound after being reunited with Fangio...this crappy 1 yr deal gives the Bears nothing long-term in return for taking a chance on a reclamation project.

[Hiphopopotamos]

Jesus Christ - some of you people...

There is zero fucking incentive for Lynch to sign more than a 1yr deal if the most he’s going to get guaranteed is a signing bonus or first year salary. Why should he?

If he sucks he’ll get cut, and if he plays awesome now he’s a FA again and can go earn big money.

The players do have some leverage - even relatively average ones like Lynch. If you haven’t noticed there aren’t a plethora of talented young edge rushers out there to pick from. And this one just so happened to have his best year under our current DC.

[UOK]

Jesus Christ - some of you people...

There is zero fucking incentive for Lynch to sign more than a 1yr deal if the most he’s going to get guaranteed is a signing bonus or first year salary. Why should he?

If he sucks he’ll get cut, and if he plays awesome now he’s a FA again and can go earn big money.

The players do have some leverage - even relatively average ones like Lynch. If you haven’t noticed there aren’t a plethora of talented young edge rushers out there to pick from. And this one just so happened to have his best year under our current DC.

These Madden GMs are so absurd. Short-sighted, poorly informed, and no open-mindedness. It's a one year contract, people. He's a young pass rusher who fills a position of need, and if he thrives under Fangio as he once did, he'll re-up with the team for a longer deal and you'll all suddenly like him and applaud the deal.

Otherwise the poo-pooers will tut every goddamn deal because it's not a $500k contract for a 30-something on his 8th leg around the league.

[Boris13c]

Jesus Christ - some of you people...

There is zero fucking incentive for Lynch to sign more than a 1yr deal if the most he’s going to get guaranteed is a signing bonus or first year salary. Why should he?

If he sucks he’ll get cut, and if he plays awesome now he’s a FA again and can go earn big money.

The players do have some leverage - even relatively average ones like Lynch. If you haven’t noticed there aren’t a plethora of talented young edge rushers out there to pick from. And this one just so happened to have his best year under our current DC.

These Madden GMs are so absurd. Short-sighted, poorly informed, and no open-mindedness. It's a one year contract, people. He's a young pass rusher who fills a position of need, and if he thrives under Fangio as he once did, he'll re-up with the team for a longer deal and you'll all suddenly like him and applaud the deal.

Otherwise the poo-pooers will tut every goddamn deal because it's not a $500k contract for a 30-something on his 8th leg around the league.

excellent points and I agree with you both

1 year deals to fill gaps via free agency seem like a smart way to go ... especially with fringe guys who might help as opposed to certified studs who can help ... I see nothing wrong with what they're doing to take a flyer on Lynch

[malk]

Jesus Christ - some of you people...

There is zero fucking incentive for Lynch to sign more than a 1yr deal if the most he’s going to get guaranteed is a signing bonus or first year salary. Why should he?

If he sucks he’ll get cut, and if he plays awesome now he’s a FA again and can go earn big money.

The players do have some leverage - even relatively average ones like Lynch. If you haven’t noticed there aren’t a plethora of talented young edge rushers out there to pick from. And this one just so happened to have his best year under our current DC.

These Madden GMs are so absurd. Short-sighted, poorly informed, and no open-mindedness. It's a one year contract, people. He's a young pass rusher who fills a position of need, and if he thrives under Fangio as he once did, he'll re-up with the team for a longer deal and you'll all suddenly like him and applaud the deal.

Otherwise the poo-pooers will tut every goddamn deal because it's not a $500k contract for a 30-something on his 8th leg around the league.

Excellent points UOK, take care. All the best.

[The Marshall Plan]

Jesus Christ - some of you people...

There is zero fucking incentive for Lynch to sign more than a 1yr deal if the most he’s going to get guaranteed is a signing bonus or first year salary. Why should he?

If he sucks he’ll get cut, and if he plays awesome now he’s a FA again and can go earn big money.

The players do have some leverage - even relatively average ones like Lynch. If you haven’t noticed there aren’t a plethora of talented young edge rushers out there to pick from. And this one just so happened to have his best year under our current DC.

These Madden GMs are so absurd. Short-sighted, poorly informed, and no open-mindedness. It's a one year contract, people. He's a young pass rusher who fills a position of need, and if he thrives under Fangio as he once did, he'll re-up with the team for a longer deal and you'll all suddenly like him and applaud the deal.

Otherwise the poo-pooers will tut every goddamn deal because it's not a $500k contract for a 30-something on his 8th leg around the league.

Exactly. I love situations like this. It all depends on the psychology of the players. If Lynch wants to reform himself, turn his career around, work hard and produce, then he'll get paid big time hopefully by us. There's millions of dollars worth of future earnings incentive. If Fangio endorses this guy, which I'm assuming he does, then the odds are in our favor that this guy will work out.

[Pagan]

We're assuming that Pace wouldn't take a chance on a longer deal but it seems more likely that Lynch didn't want to be locked into a 3 year deal because he's expecting to make some plays and get paid next year. From a player's perspective, a 1 year deal is better than a 3 year deal without more guaranteed money...

Absolutely but how much leverage does he have? The only reason we're ok with this is the Fangio connection and we've got the only one of him.

Maybe he was in more demand than I thought but there's got to be some willingness to bluff from our side?

Pace: 3 years $18m.
Lynch's agent: 1 year $6m, final offer.
Pace: Okay, fuckity bye.
Lynch's agent: Now about that 3 year deal...

I think it makes much more sense that these one year deals are part of Pace's MO. He's bad at free agency.

1) We have zero idea how negotiations go.

2) 1 Year deals are actually a very smart way to Free Agency.

3) You either disagree/don't understand the 1 year FA contract philosophy & are defaulting to simply saying Pace is bad at it, as if it were a fact instead of an opinion.

I often agree with your stances, but I feel you're off base on this one.

I'm absolutely aware I may be way off base with this, I'm just confident I'm not. One way or another it isn't a knee jerk thing, I've given it way more thought than I should have! On your points.

1). Absolutely, I'd hoped I alluded to this with stating maybe he's in more demand than I think. But, for reasons below, I think it's mostly irrelevant.

2). You need to expand on this. My view is that they can be good when you're contending but otherwise they're almost always bad, or at least worse than a reasonable alternative. If someone argues they're not terrible that'd be one thing but to say they're very smart is something different. I'd be genuinely interested to find out why you think that?

3). I absolutely dislike any 1 year contract philosophy but to your point, this is of course opinion rather than professing fact. It's blunt opinion in these posts but I've been elucidating why I think so fairly consistently for quite some time.

I'm really happy to discuss this as I find it fascinating (whilst I'm conscious that others don't!). It'll never happen but I'd love to read an ethnography of NFL front office operations, the quality of decision making is generally quite poor which, given the demand for the roles, seems to indicate some structural issue that makes the job almost impossible. I'd love to see what those structures are and how they attempt to overcome them.

We just need to get a bunch of anthropologists to infiltrate Hard Knocks and I'm there!

Alright.

#2) {Normal FA Contracts vs 1 Year Contracts}

Starting with the premise that MOST FA players prove to fall between [complete bust----average skill player] = generally speaking, the FA market is a player friendly market. They tend to win these deals.
Like a home loan, the longer the contract the better for the banker (player). Due to the fact that most teams are overpaying for a FA's services.
Thus a teams mantra is to "always build through the draft"

*The 1 year FA deal.
As I believe was mentioned earlier, 1 year contracts often benefit the player & team.

Players with something to prove, recovering from an injury, coming off of a down year due to system change Ect... Will often sign a 1 year discount FA contract that is team friendly.
These players are betting on themselves, if they work out the team usually signs the player to a long term deal.

They usually don't work out the best= so the teams that sign them are simply in a position to roll the bargain dice again.

*The biggest benefit to this?
It's a stall tactic that keeps the Bears more competitive than they deserve to be otherwise = it gives the team time to draft its future playmakers.

[alexwilkins]

I'd bet this thread is longer than the conversation between Pace and Fangio about signing this man lol.

[cblaz11]

My understanding is that this is a heavily incentive laden deal. Which is great for us...this kids got all the talent in the world but has shown problems with motivation.

1. He does well, he gets up to 6 million bucks
2. He's back with the D.C. who he had success with
3. Very low risk for us, we cut him and we pay basically nothing
4. He's only 25. If he shows he can put it together, he could earn a longer term deal with us and be a part of our defense for years.

[Mikefive]

My understanding is that this is a heavily incentive laden deal. Which is great for us...this kids got all the talent in the world but has shown problems with motivation.

1. He does well, he gets up to 6 million bucks
2. He's back with the D.C. who he had success with
3. Very low risk for us, we cut him and we pay basically nothing
4. He's only 25. If he shows he can put it together, he could earn a longer term deal with us and be a part of our defense for years.

All I--and I think others--saw was 1-year $6M. It would be interesting and perhaps telling to see the complete contract terms for sure.

[malk]

My understanding is that this is a heavily incentive laden deal. Which is great for us...this kids got all the talent in the world but has shown problems with motivation.

1. He does well, he gets up to 6 million bucks
2. He's back with the D.C. who he had success with
3. Very low risk for us, we cut him and we pay basically nothing
4. He's only 25. If he shows he can put it together, he could earn a longer term deal with us and be a part of our defense for years.

All I--and I think others--saw was 1-year $6M. It would be interesting and perhaps telling to see the complete contract terms for sure.

Yup, if it's incentive ladden then it'd change my opinion. I'd still prefer to give more up front to secure extra years at a lower rate if they do break out but perhaps I'm flogging a dead horse with that.

[Middleguard]

Yup, if it's incentive ladden then it'd change my opinion. I'd still prefer to give more up front to secure extra years at a lower rate if they do break out but perhaps I'm flogging a dead horse with that.

Usually, I feel that I'm one of the few that gets what you're going on about (but once per contract is probably enough, because I'll understand and those that don't, won't). But incentives are not what you usually talk about, and this comment I don't understand.

If a one-year rental has an incentive laden contract, then it seems to me to create a double-whammy. If he has a breakout season, then he gets paid more than expected in addition to becoming more difficult to secure long term.

[malk]

Yup, if it's incentive ladden then it'd change my opinion. I'd still prefer to give more up front to secure extra years at a lower rate if they do break out but perhaps I'm flogging a dead horse with that.

Usually, I feel that I'm one of the few that gets what you're going on about (but once per contract is probably enough, because I'll understand and those that don't, won't). But incentives are not what you usually talk about, and this comment I don't understand.

If a one-year rental has an incentive laden contract, then it seems to me to create a double-whammy. If he has a breakout season, then he gets paid more than expected in addition to becoming more difficult to secure long term.

Just less downside risk. I hated the deal if it was $6m to an unproven player with no team upside. If it's a $2m deal that required $4m in incentives to get him to sign then, I don't like it as I don't like one year deals for non contenders, but I don't hate it.

[Nanky]

"$4M, one-year contract, $1.25M guaranteed. $2.2M base salary, $1.25M signing bonus, $500,000 per-game roster bonuses, $50,000 workout bonus." In order to receive the $500,000 per game roster bonus is based on $31,250/game he is on the 46-man gameday roster.

That sounds much better than the $6M that had been circulating.

[Adipost]

Aaron Lynch’s college strength and conditioning coach after the 49ers drafted him, LMAO...

"Thought an organization with 5 Super Bowl titles would have a stricter draft criteria. Clearly, integrity & character are not a priority,"

[Rusty Trombagent]

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Richie]

Aaron Lynch’s college strength and conditioning coach after the 49ers drafted him, LMAO...

"Thought an organization with 5 Super Bowl titles would have a stricter draft criteria. Clearly, integrity & character are not a priority,"

Jeez... lol

You have to do a lot to make a coach say something like that about a kid getting ready to enter the league.

Hopefully he has been humbled.

[The Marshall Plan]

Aaron Lynch’s college strength and conditioning coach after the 49ers drafted him, LMAO...

"Thought an organization with 5 Super Bowl titles would have a stricter draft criteria. Clearly, integrity & character are not a priority,"

Jeez... lol

You have to do a lot to make a coach say something like that about a kid getting ready to enter the league.

Hopefully he has been humbled.

OK that made me laugh. Normally coach commentary about a player of theirs entering the draft is full of such flowery bullshit you would think the player was a saint. Good to see honesty for a change.

[cblaz11]

He was up to 300lbs with the 49ers...there's no way we could have given him a multi year deal.

300lbs....wow