Bears release TE Trey Burton

G08 · Mon Apr 20, 2020 3:37 pm

wab wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2020 3:33 pm I can't believe they really did it.

It makes me wonder if they're going to kick the tires on Brycen Hopkins, honestly.

Yogi da Bear · Mon Apr 20, 2020 3:59 pm

I'm very surprised. I thought no way given the amount of dead cap space. My kid thinks he's still injured and that's why it was done. Shows that once again, Pace is not at all hesitant to walk away from his mistakes. I like that. Wish he wouldn't make them in the first place though. But every GM does.

I've said it before, harped on it in fact, but what is wrong with Nall at H-Back. Same size as Burton (6'2", 237) and he's faster (40: 4.58 to 4.62, Shuttle: 4.16 to 4.32, Cone: 6.95 to 7.14). He's got great hands and he's harder to bring down. I just don't get not letting him get a shot at the position. Boggles my mind.

Just don't get it.

RichH55 · Mon Apr 20, 2020 11:48 pm

The Cooler King wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2020 10:33 am
RichH55 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2020 8:21 am Graham is also 34 - and part of the argument he is a good signing is that he will be "healthier" this year (He played games true, but apparently not at 100%)

Also - checking notes - We are expecting bigger plays out of him going from some scrub like Aaron Rodgers to the powerhouse QBs we have? Ok.

I do think you have to look at every aspect (Though guaranteed money - and money in years 1 and 2 - more so Year 1 - matter the most)

And I think people were saying look at the market when Eifert was reported as like 2 years 15 million

When in reality its not that unless he's basically a Pro Bowler and healthy

Downside matters too (and upside - but bear with me)

You pay Graham $9 million no matter what - You locked in all the downside
The Olsen and Eifert structures are hardly the norm. The norm is that you pay full price for the downside. That's not some uniquely Graham-contract thing.

There would be zero relief if we signed Eifert, he spent most the year on the IR and thus we were only on the hook for his 3.5m. Sure it would be better than if Graham got hurt and we were on the hook for a much larger number, but with how big that hole was, I don't think they could role the dice on a guy like Eifert and his history (versus the fact that this is a violent sport in which every play is a role of the dice, but those odds are at least easier to handle).

So they both are and aren't the market? (Eifert and Olsen?)

Again - people are conflating good reasons that the signing made sense (or more so reasons - Pace needing a TE, maybe being on the hot seat, whiffing on Burton and Shaheen and the importance of the TE in the Offense, etc. etc. (MOSTLY FAIR POINTS). And conflating that with because we had such a need it's not an Overpay.

That is not how that works though

I mean when Graham is getting more than a Jack Doyle type *Doyle signed before FA yes - you can see the overpay

Heck his last contract was for 3 years, 30 million, 11 million guaranteed - When he was a more valued commodity

AND apparently he was "dinged" up in Seattle too: https://www.espn.com/blog/seattle-seaha ... production

(Money Quote:
"We had to manage him the whole year," Carroll said. "He just kept hanging in there. He played in every game and didn’t miss any time, but he wasn’t at his best. You can see him now. But that’s what great athletes, great performers and great competitors do. They find a way. Jimmy did that most admirably, and I know how grateful he feels now that he made it through that and we handled it the way we did. He survived it, and now he is really moving up.""

RichH55 · Mon Apr 20, 2020 11:57 pm

The Grizzly One wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2020 8:55 am Rich, I initially felt the same way. But seeing what the other options were, I'm OK with it.

Is there another TE deal you preferred?

This is a fair question

Let me say a few things
1) Lets see how the OJ Howard situation works out (If he goes for something close to reasonable then I'd prefer him)
2) I am NOT an Eric Ebron guy (younger, yes, bigger year more recently - yes - Just don't see him as a that - though I at least get the argument)

So on that level I totally get it - and get the "OK with it" (I count myself as in that crowd)

However - how often do you get backed into a corner and feel you HAVE to do something - and the thing you have to do is a smart market based contract?

The saying isn't Desperate times call for cool, calm, collected reasonable decisions

Can I ask this of you - If the Bears weren't there - needy - Does Jimmy Graham get this contract from another team this offseason ? (My two cents are clearly - I don't think so)

If you think his numbers were down over the last few years and that Rodgers TE history lends itself to playing better here and that his greatest ability is availabiluty- MIght I suggest "INCENTIVES"?!?!

I see a guy who - even accounting for FA - should have gotten like 5 million guaranteed with a host of incentives get 9 million and very little prove it type motivation

The Cooler King · Tue Apr 21, 2020 12:48 am

RichH55 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2020 11:48 pm
The Cooler King wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2020 10:33 am
The Olsen and Eifert structures are hardly the norm. The norm is that you pay full price for the downside. That's not some uniquely Graham-contract thing.

There would be zero relief if we signed Eifert, he spent most the year on the IR and thus we were only on the hook for his 3.5m. Sure it would be better than if Graham got hurt and we were on the hook for a much larger number, but with how big that hole was, I don't think they could role the dice on a guy like Eifert and his history (versus the fact that this is a violent sport in which every play is a role of the dice, but those odds are at least easier to handle).

So they both are and aren't the market? (Eifert and Olsen?)

Everyone who signs a deal is part of the market, collectively. Not sure your point. There's well established reasons that the market for a Graham is going to be higher than that of and injury prone guy, like Eifert's market. Now we could go debate when it's smart to "agree" to certain market conditions verse exploiting other market conditions you feel are undervaluing guys. So for example, paying less for "injury history" verse paying premium for history if health, or just the age old "paying for past performance" issue. But just in the black and white of what the market Bears, I think Grahams deal is definitely better than I initially thought.

At the end of the day I guess most FA signings are bad values. The best values are rookie deals and matched up against those all FA signings will fail for best value. But looking at Grahams deal against the market for TEs and really all FA, and I don't think it's a bad number in that context.

Tue Apr 21, 2020 8:49 am

Yogi da Bear wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2020 3:59 pm I'm very surprised. I thought no way given the amount of dead cap space. My kid thinks he's still injured and that's why it was done. Shows that once again, Pace is not at all hesitant to walk away from his mistakes. I like that. Wish he wouldn't make them in the first place though. But every GM does.

I've said it before, harped on it in fact, but what is wrong with Nall at H-Back. Same size as Burton (6'2", 237) and he's faster (40: 4.58 to 4.62, Shuttle: 4.16 to 4.32, Cone: 6.95 to 7.14). He's got great hands and he's harder to bring down. I just don't get not letting him get a shot at the position. Boggles my mind.

Just don't get it.

Well, he might now.

RichH55 · Tue Apr 21, 2020 10:51 am

The Cooler King wrote: ↑Tue Apr 21, 2020 12:48 am
RichH55 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2020 11:48 pm

So they both are and aren't the market? (Eifert and Olsen?)

Everyone who signs a deal is part of the market, collectively. Not sure your point. There's well established reasons that the market for a Graham is going to be higher than that of and injury prone guy, like Eifert's market. Now we could go debate when it's smart to "agree" to certain market conditions verse exploiting other market conditions you feel are undervaluing guys. So for example, paying less for "injury history" verse paying premium for history if health, or just the age old "paying for past performance" issue. But just in the black and white of what the market Bears, I think Grahams deal is definitely better than I initially thought.

At the end of the day I guess most FA signings are bad values. The best values are rookie deals and matched up against those all FA signings will fail for best value. But looking at Grahams deal against the market for TEs and really all FA, and I don't think it's a bad number in that context.

(Getting these numbers from OverTheCap)

Graham will have the 6th Highest Average Salary for TE - In the league (Goes up to 5th if he only plays 1 year - Basically making exactly what Travis Kelce and Zach Ertz make)

His fully guaranteed money is 14th - though 9 of those guys make less than him a year (Most Rookie deals are cheaper but more fully guaranteed)

All this while I'm not really certain Jason Witten isn't the right comp (Older, not the athlete he was, competent and plays in games)

Darren Weller contract much more friendly to Raiders than the Graham deal - and I prefer Weller by quite a margin (Again Weller wasn't a true FA when he signed his deal

We should probably remember the old paraphrased Shaq quote too: 34 ain't 24

AZ_Bearfan · Tue Apr 21, 2020 11:05 am

Graham says right now he's the fastest and healthiest he's been in years. If that's not total PR bullshit, we may actually have a stud TE. I would love nothing more than to take Graham and Spriggs off the Pack and watch them reverse their narratives. Plus, Rodgers is a prick and these two probably hate the Packers almost as much as we do. Spriggs for sure.

dplank · Tue Apr 21, 2020 12:44 pm

Haven't seen this discussed here (maybe missed it), but was reading last night how we can up to 4M of cap space back if Burton signs with another team. That would explain the timing, give him the best chance to sign with another team so we get that cap relief next year.

RichH55 · Tue Apr 21, 2020 12:53 pm

AZ_Bearfan wrote: ↑Tue Apr 21, 2020 11:05 am Graham says right now he's the fastest and healthiest he's been in years. If that's not total PR bullshit, we may actually have a stud TE. I would love nothing more than to take Graham and Spriggs off the Pack and watch them reverse their narratives. Plus, Rodgers is a prick and these two probably hate the Packers almost as much as we do. Spriggs for sure.

Thank god the new CBA has that rule about lying/puffery in press conferences!

RichH55 · Tue Apr 21, 2020 12:56 pm

dplank wrote: ↑Tue Apr 21, 2020 12:44 pm Haven't seen this discussed here (maybe missed it), but was reading last night how we can up to 4M of cap space back if Burton signs with another team. That would explain the timing, give him the best chance to sign with another team so we get that cap relief next year.

DPlank - I brought this up when I mentioned the offsets (that's what they do)

I'm still not sure why they did it now - though they clearly always intended to cut Burton this offseason it seems (hence Graham overpay)

Only things I can think of are :
1) Maybe they wanted to cut him even later in the process - but that 100 K workout bonus acted as a de facto deadline
2) Maybe they didn't cut him earlier because they wanted him to be further along the rehab process(*)

(*) Otherwise you cut him before FA even starts when teams have their full allotment of available cap and pent up energy

dplank · Tue Apr 21, 2020 1:02 pm

yea, that makes a lot of sense....

Yogi da Bear · Tue Apr 21, 2020 4:08 pm

Except you lose a lot of negotiating leverage:

First, if other teams know we released Burton, they realize how desperately we would be seeking a TE. The competition would suddenly be much greater for every TE we pursued as other teams tried to drive the price up on us. Ever been to an auction? As it stood, TE was a need but not an absolute, imperative necessity it would have been if we released Burton.

Second, the prospects we would be pursuing would also realize how desperate we were. If you thought the Graham signing was high now, imagine how much more he could have extorted if we didn't have Burton.

At least that's the only thing I can figure.

Of course, my kid still says that he doesn't believe that Burton is healthy. Maybe we tried to hold him as long as possible to see if he was on the road to being healthier. Remember the Cameron Meredith situation?

In support of my kid's contention--https://twitter.com/patrickfinley/statu ... 9258977287

RichH55 · Wed Apr 22, 2020 9:02 am

Jimmy Graham got a No-Trade clause

I think his agent had already gotten the Bears have no leverage memo

Yogi da Bear · Wed Apr 22, 2020 5:25 pm

RichH55 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 22, 2020 9:02 am Jimmy Graham got a No-Trade clause

I think his agent had already gotten the Bears have no leverage memo

So I guess we go with the Cameron Meredith Scenario then--that Burton's injured and isn't getting better--which my kid believes and has some support for.

Would have thought you'd want to stay away from that one.

dplank · Wed Apr 22, 2020 5:54 pm

Colts just signed Burton. Nice. Our cap situation just got a little better, wonder how much (not reported yet)

HisRoyalSweetness · Wed Apr 22, 2020 6:03 pm

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300000 ... 1year-deal

NFL Network Insider Ian Rapoport reported it's a one-year deal for the league minimum. Burton is guaranteed to make $4 million from his Chicago contract regardless.

G08 · Wed Apr 22, 2020 6:19 pm

I believe league minimum is $806,000 for his experience. He had offsets in his contract so that's another chunk of change off our books.

BR0D1E86 · Wed Apr 22, 2020 8:32 pm

Yogi da Bear wrote: ↑Wed Apr 22, 2020 5:25 pm
RichH55 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 22, 2020 9:02 am Jimmy Graham got a No-Trade clause

I think his agent had already gotten the Bears have no leverage memo
So I guess we go with the Cameron Meredith Scenario then--that Burton's injured and isn't getting better--which my kid believes and has some support for.

Would have thought you'd want to stay away from that one.

He was apparently released with a failed physical designation or something like that. Not sure what that means for the team exactly, but that is what I read.

RichH55 · Wed Apr 22, 2020 9:03 pm

The process on Meredith was bad - right result

Seems like that is about the best we can expect on Burton - If Burton is a competent 2nd TE next year (not the highest bar in the world ) then Pace made a mistake

Or as he calls it "Handling the Tight End position"

Yogi da Bear · Thu Apr 23, 2020 2:06 pm

RichH55 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 22, 2020 9:03 pm The process on Meredith was bad - right result

Seems like that is about the best we can expect on Burton - If Burton is a competent 2nd TE next year (not the highest bar in the world ) then Pace made a mistake

Or as he calls it "Handling the Tight End position"

No, the Meredith situation was handled perfectly. Pace signed him to a lower tender because he wanted to buy time to determine how his rehab was going, and if it was going well, he could match whatever offer was given. Turned out that Meredith's rehab wasn't going well, so Pace refused to match New Orleans' offer and the Saints were stuck with the higher contract they offered to a player that completely fault because of his physical condition.

Same situation possibly with Burton: The Bears waited to see how his rehab progressed, and when it wasn't going as well as they liked, they dumped him before having to dole out another 100K. Burton probably wasn't going to get more than league minimum anyway if Pace released him earlier. In fact, until Burton makes the Colts' opening day roster, I don't think we're even guaranteed that minimum league offset.

I could be wrong, but from what I gather, Pace is saving about 2.5 million (with the offset) by cutting Burton and having him signed by Indy. The average TE contract is 2.04 million and a 2.5 million dollar contract would be in the Top 40 of TE contracts, so I think that he'd have to be a bit more than just a "competent" #2 TE for this to be a bad move.

So you can either take that rationale or the negotiating leverage rationale or you could just think that Pace is a complete buffoon and doesn't know WTF he's doing, a stance many here might agree with, a stance you yourself took with Meredith until you were proven wrong.

The Cooler King · Thu Apr 23, 2020 2:23 pm

Yogi da Bear wrote: ↑Thu Apr 23, 2020 2:06 pm

So you can either take that rationale or the negotiating leverage rationale or you could just think that Pace is a complete buffoon and doesn't know WTF he's doing, a stance many here might agree with, a stance you yourself took with Meredith until you were proven wrong.

Well said Yogi. People twist themselves into pretzels sometimes to justify reasoning behind moves, but save for extreme outliers with clear histories, I usually try to imagine the most logical reason for a particular move. Granted the logical response may ultimately a wrong one. And there can be varying logical answers to a problem, but when evaluating how we got from A to B, people sometimes want to take a roundabout way to get there rather than the most direct, when thats rarely the case.

RichH55 · Thu Apr 23, 2020 6:40 pm

Yogi da Bear wrote: ↑Thu Apr 23, 2020 2:06 pm
RichH55 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 22, 2020 9:03 pm The process on Meredith was bad - right result

Seems like that is about the best we can expect on Burton - If Burton is a competent 2nd TE next year (not the highest bar in the world ) then Pace made a mistake

Or as he calls it "Handling the Tight End position"
No, the Meredith situation was handled perfectly. Pace signed him to a lower tender because he wanted to buy time to determine how his rehab was going, and if it was going well, he could match whatever offer was given. Turned out that Meredith's rehab wasn't going well, so Pace refused to match New Orleans' offer and the Saints were stuck with the higher contract they offered to a player that completely fault because of his physical condition.

Same situation possibly with Burton: The Bears waited to see how his rehab progressed, and when it wasn't going as well as they liked, they dumped him before having to dole out another 100K. Burton probably wasn't going to get more than league minimum anyway if Pace released him earlier. In fact, until Burton makes the Colts' opening day roster, I don't think we're even guaranteed that minimum league offset.

I could be wrong, but from what I gather, Pace is saving about 2.5 million (with the offset) by cutting Burton and having him signed by Indy. The average TE contract is 2.04 million and a 2.5 million dollar contract would be in the Top 40 of TE contracts, so I think that he'd have to be a bit more than just a "competent" #2 TE for this to be a bad move.

So you can either take that rationale or the negotiating leverage rationale or you could just think that Pace is a complete buffoon and doesn't know WTF he's doing, a stance many here might agree with, a stance you yourself took with Meredith until you were proven wrong.

Well firstly they cut Burton right before a workout bonus was due - that was the motivating factor in terms of the cut date - Not really the rehab progress (*)

*Corona plays a role there - it's doubtful that they had anything approaching the knowledge they'd normally have. THOUGH if you care about the Rehab progress - YOU HAVE ALL OF TRAINING CAMP AND RIGHT UNTIL WEEK 1 - So doing it now - Pretty dumb process wise if that's the argument

The Meredith process was handled badly - but he got the right result so it's better to be lucky than good (if you thought Cam was dead then don't tender him at all - if you think he was good - the 2nd tender was like an extra $1 million. So the process is flawed there

Top 40 for TE isn't that high a bar for a 2nd TE (also keep in mind someone is going to be a TE on the roster in place of Burton - so that's cap space too)

Moriarty · Thu Apr 23, 2020 7:35 pm

RichH55 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 23, 2020 6:40 pm
The Meredith process was handled badly - but he got the right result so it's better to be lucky than good (if you thought Cam was dead then don't tender him at all - if you think he was good - the 2nd tender was like an extra $1 million. So the process is flawed there

Dead on

Thu Apr 23, 2020 8:02 pm

People: Burton is an injury risk, a terrible signing, and a mistake!

*Pace releases Burton*

Same people: Pace doesn’t know what he’s doing!

The Cooler King · Thu Apr 23, 2020 9:59 pm

Moriarty wrote: ↑Thu Apr 23, 2020 7:35 pm
RichH55 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 23, 2020 6:40 pm
The Meredith process was handled badly - but he got the right result so it's better to be lucky than good (if you thought Cam was dead then don't tender him at all - if you think he was good - the 2nd tender was like an extra $1 million. So the process is flawed there
Dead on

Nope.

LT2_3 · Fri Apr 24, 2020 4:58 am

Moriarty wrote: ↑Thu Apr 23, 2020 7:35 pm
RichH55 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 23, 2020 6:40 pm
The Meredith process was handled badly - but he got the right result so it's better to be lucky than good (if you thought Cam was dead then don't tender him at all - if you think he was good - the 2nd tender was like an extra $1 million. So the process is flawed there
Dead on

Hey Mori ! Longtime no see. Rich is a buddy from another board. Seeing you guys agree is disconcerting. Do your best.

Rich - I always imagined you guys tooth and nail. Agreement does not become you. Do your best.

LT

southdakbearfan · Fri Apr 24, 2020 9:14 am

I think Pace was proven correct with Meredith.

Pace looked like he hit on burton season 1 but injuries changed that. He cut bait.

It’s a business and sometimes these business decisions have to be made.

RichH55 · Fri Apr 24, 2020 12:19 pm

wab wrote: ↑Thu Apr 23, 2020 8:02 pm People: Burton is an injury risk, a terrible signing, and a mistake!

*Pace releases Burton*

Same people: Pace doesn’t know what he’s doing!

It can be both though - The salary is a sunk cost at that point

So the question 1 is can he derive 2-2.5 million in value this season

And Question 2 is would we have better information in September (or maybe even later) - the cost to find that out $100 K. (I.E. a bunch less than the Zach Miller goodwill tour)

Moriarty · Fri Apr 24, 2020 1:17 pm

RichH55 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 24, 2020 12:19 pm
wab wrote: ↑Thu Apr 23, 2020 8:02 pm People: Burton is an injury risk, a terrible signing, and a mistake!

*Pace releases Burton*

Same people: Pace doesn’t know what he’s doing!
It can be both though - The salary is a sunk cost at that point

So the question 1 is can he derive 2-2.5 million in value this season

And Question 2 is would we have better information in September (or maybe even later) - the cost to find that out $100 K. (I.E. a bunch less than the Zach Miller goodwill tour)

Quite right

FTR, I thought the choice was decent, but the contract too rich for a 3rd string never starter.

Now, I don't understand or like the timing. Possibly a minor issue, but still inexplicable to me.

The actual cut decision? That's a separate issue and no idea. Who knows what's going on behind the scenes with him? They waited like 6 months to reveal the hip issue before. What else don't we know right now?