Post draft free agency needs

For all things Chicago Bears

Moderator: wab

User avatar
Bearfacts
MVP
Posts: 1693
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 8:33 am
Location: Colorado
Has thanked: 721 times
Been thanked: 157 times

IE wrote: Wed May 18, 2022 8:17 am
Bearfacts wrote: Tue May 17, 2022 11:42 pm

But then shouldn't we also subtract every goal line carry where even if he scored the yardage was only 1 or 2 yards? How about dozens of shorter yardage runs to pick up a first down where the endeavor was only to gain a yard or two against a stacked front?

Nope. Once you get to use subjective outliers results can and often are skewed to favor those trying to make their point. You may not be doing that intentionally but the result is the same as if you are. They're all part of the same package. Good and bad.
Let me explain ... the median I've been using is the farthest you can get from subjective or cherry-picking. When you use the median you automatically eliminate all the outliers - good and bad. The median tells the most accurate story of what a player really IS. It IS the full package of data. Have you had a statistics class? No offense, but it isn't clear. If not there are resources on line (e.g. youtube) where you can freshen up. I could use that myself because I'd like to look at some other useful things to compare players, such as consistency. Standard deviations should give good insight, and I need to brush up.

I want to look at consistency more because looking at his full stats Monty seems consistent but not in a great way. He's not a boom or bust guy who will have a bad game here and there but who also has a lot of games over 5 or 6 ypc. That's where he differs from players like Forte, who had a lot more games with exceptional ypc. Monty has very few boom games and very few total bust games. The problem for Monty is even the most explosive players have some bust games. They just make up for it with more booms than busts. Monty does not.

Really the ONLY hope that he is extended is the "Nagy factor" theory (which i personally ascribe to - I just don't know how big it is). The hope that we have for Monty is Aaron Jones, who is in rare air on the all time ypc list ... although he's come back down to earth more recently so we'll see in the long run. Keep in mind these are averages and not median, so they are skewed a bit by outliers and oversell what you should expect in a given game.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/ ... career.htm
Have I? I'm an investment analyst and have been for nearly 40 years. So yes. I've used MPT Theory incorporating statistical analysis for quite awhile now and I also use and understand means, medians, correlation coefficients, and standard deviations in my work.

That said I also have a pair of eyes and my opinion concurs with that of HC "Flus" which I posted in my response to Moriarty above.

Flus gets it in much the same manner that I do and I also recall how many times Bears fans wanted to replace Matt Forte with a RB who was more like David Montgomery. I don't wish to compare Monty with Forte, Jones or any other RB. Monty is a complete package in and of himself and has shown that he can help an offense in several ways.

He can run with power and break arm tackles, he has phone booth elusiveness to make first tacklers miss, enough speed to break longer runs, he can be used as a pass receiver. I've watched enough of him to see times when it takes three guys to bring him down and rarely before he gets to the sticks or over the goal line. In his first three seasons he's averaged nearly 1250 yard per year in total offense, scored 24 times, and fumbled only 4 times in 835 touches. That's nice work for a former 3rd round pick.

If the Bears can't use him I'll bet you a buck he wouldn't remain unsigned for long once we released him.
User avatar
Bearfacts
MVP
Posts: 1693
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 8:33 am
Location: Colorado
Has thanked: 721 times
Been thanked: 157 times

dplank wrote: Wed May 18, 2022 8:45 amShrute Bucks?
Nope. Good old fashioned legal tend GW bucks. LOL
User avatar
Bearfacts
MVP
Posts: 1693
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 8:33 am
Location: Colorado
Has thanked: 721 times
Been thanked: 157 times

Grizzled wrote: Wed May 18, 2022 6:00 am
IE wrote: Tue May 17, 2022 12:30 pm

I imagine they're also highly tuned in to "cultural fit" as well. In addition to evaluating who can do WHAT they want, I'm guessing they're also heavily focused on HOW the players adopt the culture and playing mindset they want to see. I can totally see them going weaker (from our perception) in terms of skills at a position if that means eliminating someone who hasn't bought in. Poles to me is clearly a "whole is greater than a sum of the parts" guy. As is Flus.

Sometimes there is a fine line between a guy with a chip on his shoulder and one with an attitude (rightfully or not). I'm super-curious about their approach to building culture, weeding guys out who they feel won't fit & the makeup of this team going into the season. I'm thinking there might be quite a bit more change... maybe on the currently-assumed depth chart if not the faces.
This is what I find very interesting about the Pettis signing. Shanahan says that he tried and tried to give Pettis opportunities to step up and he failed, which is why he was cut. So hopefully, now in his 5th (?) year, he'll come to Jesus, play hard and adjust to what Flux and Poles are preaching.
I think we can be pretty certain that if he doesn't and he dogs it he won't last long with this coaching staff. If we can believe Flus I'd say "Accountability" just road into town and he is definitely the impatient sort.
User avatar
Moriarty
Hall of Famer
Posts: 6806
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 1:22 pm
Has thanked: 384 times
Been thanked: 688 times

Bearfacts wrote: Wed May 18, 2022 8:37 am Here’s what Eberflus said about Montgomery at the NFL owners’ meetings: “Yeah, talk about motor and mean. Serious. A pro. Worker. And, yeah, he’s going to be exciting to work with, and he’s going to fit right in.
Meaningless twaddle.
Come on, how long have you been following sports?
Nagy said nice things about Mitch, too, long past the point where he meant any of it.
Bearfacts wrote: Wed May 18, 2022 8:37 am OK, then how 'bout I just leave you with this. Then you and "Flus" can discuss him because you haven't convinced me.
That's ok. But let me ask you this - if meaningful statistics, properly assembled, from a good sized sample don't convince you, what exactly would?
What, specifically, would be sufficient for you to say "ok, I don't want David Montgomery on this team taking up significant salary cap space"?
Bearfacts wrote: Wed May 18, 2022 8:37 am You and I can debate Monty 'til Mick Jagger and Paul McCartney finally hang it up and quit touring but this is the guy along with Poles who'll have the most say in whether or not he's extended. I already made one "buck bet" on it. Wanna be my second?
Bet on what?
"DM gets a significant extension"
"Giving DM a significant extension will be dumb move if they do it"
"Giving DM a significant extension, if he performs like his historical averages, will be dumb move if they do it"
"If you had to decide this now, instead of a season later, giving DM a significant extension would be a dumb move"
"In aggregate over 3 years, DM isn't what you want in a starting RB"

They're all different.
3-5 are opinions and already settled as far as I'm concerned and there's nothing to bet on.
2 has a little uncertainty to it, but is still opinion based. If you think what he's done so far is good, then he may be lousy again, and you'll still like it.

The only one that's objective is the first one and that's not what I'm arguing. He very well could perform like he always has and they extend him. All GMs, and especially Bear GMs, have done tons of stupid things over the years. Poles doesn't have nearly enough of a track record for me to think I know what's going through his head on most things.
To put it another way, I'm not making predications on Poles' behavior. I'm giving statistically based critiques of Montgomery's performance and value.
1999-2002: Mouth Off Sports Forum (RIP)
2002-2014: KFFL (RIP)
2014-2016: USAToday Fantasy Sports Forum (RIP)

Hello, my name is Moriarty. I have come to kill your website, prepare to die.
User avatar
Bearfacts
MVP
Posts: 1693
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 8:33 am
Location: Colorado
Has thanked: 721 times
Been thanked: 157 times

Moriarty wrote: Wed May 18, 2022 9:58 am
Bearfacts wrote: Wed May 18, 2022 8:37 am Here’s what Eberflus said about Montgomery at the NFL owners’ meetings: “Yeah, talk about motor and mean. Serious. A pro. Worker. And, yeah, he’s going to be exciting to work with, and he’s going to fit right in.
Meaningless twaddle.
Come on, how long have you been following sports?
Nagy said nice things about Mitch, too, long past the point where he meant any of it.
Bearfacts wrote: Wed May 18, 2022 8:37 am OK, then how 'bout I just leave you with this. Then you and "Flus" can discuss him because you haven't convinced me.
That's ok. But let me ask you this - if meaningful statistics, properly assembled, from a good sized sample don't convince you, what exactly would?
What, specifically, would be sufficient for you to say "ok, I don't want David Montgomery on this team taking up significant salary cap space"?
Bearfacts wrote: Wed May 18, 2022 8:37 am You and I can debate Monty 'til Mick Jagger and Paul McCartney finally hang it up and quit touring but this is the guy along with Poles who'll have the most say in whether or not he's extended. I already made one "buck bet" on it. Wanna be my second?
Bet on what?
"DM gets a significant extension"
"Giving DM a significant extension will be dumb move if they do it"
"Giving DM a significant extension, if he performs like his historical averages, will be dumb move if they do it"
"If you had to decide this now, instead of a season later, giving DM a significant extension would be a dumb move"
"In aggregate over 3 years, DM isn't what you want in a starting RB"

They're all different.
3-5 are opinions and already settled as far as I'm concerned and there's nothing to bet on.
2 has a little uncertainty to it, but is still opinion based. If you think what he's done so far is good, then he may be lousy again, and you'll still like it.

The only one that's objective is the first one and that's not what I'm arguing. He very well could perform like he always has and they extend him. All GMs, and especially Bear GMs, have done tons of stupid things over the years. Poles doesn't have nearly enough of a track record for me to think I know what's going through his head on most things.
To put it another way, I'm not making predications on Poles' behavior. I'm giving statistically based critiques of Montgomery's performance and value.
Once you start tearing down what I post I walk brother. We don't see most of this the same way. Not even close.

It's like negotiations. Whenever there is no common ground little or nothing can be accomplished.

I'm done with these kind of circular debates. They're a waste of my time and yours. The only way we'll ever know which one of us chose the correct perspective is to wait for the season to begin and then wait even more. I'm not exactly ignorant of coaches hyperbole but I'm not immune to it either. If you are well then that's you.

All of this posting is more or less based on conjecture and personal opinion. Let's see what happens once the rubber meets the road.

Very soon I'll have a major move on my hands to deal with so my time posting here grows short and I don't want to spend it haggling with you or anyone else over personal opinions. We each have our own and until proven wrong I'll be holding to my own. :toast:
HurricaneBear
Head Coach
Posts: 2165
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 6:56 am
Has thanked: 1852 times
Been thanked: 350 times

Everyone on this board likes to watch Monty play. Everyone is going to enjoy watching him next season.

Why would ever pay him? I've asked that before and I will ask again. Why would you pay a running back? ANY running back.

Monty's great. He's probably going to have a good year. Let someone else pay him for 2023 as he starts to decline like pretty much every running back does. Maybe it's not 2023. But it's going to happen. The hits will catch up, the mileage will catch up.

Running back is also the easiest position to replace. Are we going to draft another Monty? Probably not. Can we find 2 or 3 backs to platoon and get similar production for a fraction of the cost of Monty's next contract? Absolutely. Hell, we have had more issues replacing kickers than backs.

You want to get great backs on their rookie contract and then move on. Stock your line with talent and let them pave the way for whoever you chose to hand the ball to. How many backs who get big second contracts live up to them? How'd all AP's talent work for the Vikings? Zeke Elliot and the Cowboys? Walter had 1 ring in all those amazing seasons. Weren't most of those teams pretty damn shitty despite him being the greatest of all time? How about Barry Sanders?

After all the evidence it's not worth it to pay running backs, why should the Bears pay Monty? What makes him SO essential for Fields development that we CANT lose him? Why is he more important than spending money next season on a premier OL talent or two, or a WR or two? Why is he more important than another pass rusher or 3T? What makes a running back, any running back, more important to spend money on than those positions? Please someone explain that to me.
User avatar
wab
Mod
Posts: 29805
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:49 pm
Has thanked: 127 times
Been thanked: 1956 times

This thread has gotten silly.
User avatar
southdakbearfan
Head Coach
Posts: 4600
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 11:23 pm
Location: South Dakota
Has thanked: 763 times
Been thanked: 328 times

HurricaneBear wrote: Wed May 18, 2022 10:37 am Everyone on this board likes to watch Monty play. Everyone is going to enjoy watching him next season.

Why would ever pay him? I've asked that before and I will ask again. Why would you pay a running back? ANY running back.

Monty's great. He's probably going to have a good year. Let someone else pay him for 2023 as he starts to decline like pretty much every running back does. Maybe it's not 2023. But it's going to happen. The hits will catch up, the mileage will catch up.

Running back is also the easiest position to replace. Are we going to draft another Monty? Probably not. Can we find 2 or 3 backs to platoon and get similar production for a fraction of the cost of Monty's next contract? Absolutely. Hell, we have had more issues replacing kickers than backs.

You want to get great backs on their rookie contract and then move on. Stock your line with talent and let them pave the way for whoever you chose to hand the ball to. How many backs who get big second contracts live up to them? How'd all AP's talent work for the Vikings? Zeke Elliot and the Cowboys? Walter had 1 ring in all those amazing seasons. Weren't most of those teams pretty damn shitty despite him being the greatest of all time? How about Barry Sanders?

After all the evidence it's not worth it to pay running backs, why should the Bears pay Monty? What makes him SO essential for Fields development that we CANT lose him? Why is he more important than spending money next season on a premier OL talent or two, or a WR or two? Why is he more important than another pass rusher or 3T? What makes a running back, any running back, more important to spend money on than those positions? Please someone explain that to me.
Yes, running back is easy to replace. The question becomes do the bears like Monty enough to offer him a moderate 3-4 year extension while they have a ton of cap space which would be an easy contract to get out of after a year or two, or do they want to use up a portion of the future draft capital to try to fill a hole, that they already can fill internally, therefore using that draft capital on another hole. Or do they like they others on the team already to replace Monty with them?

Resources and allocation. Signing Monty would not stop any other potential free agent signing with the amount of cap room they will have. Not signing him, if they are unsure about Herbert and the others, eats up a draft pick.
User avatar
dplank
Hall of Famer
Posts: 12025
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am
Has thanked: 1201 times
Been thanked: 2138 times

While RB has been devalued league wide, folks here have taken that sentiment too far. Good RB's help your team win games and contrary to the thinking around here you can't just plug in any old RB and get good play. While paying top end money for a RB seems like a bad move, middling money for a good RB isn't a bad move and has minimal impact on your cap.
User avatar
IE
Hall of Famer
Posts: 12500
Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2008 8:46 am
Location: Plymouth, MI
Has thanked: 523 times
Been thanked: 700 times
Contact:

HurricaneBear wrote: Wed May 18, 2022 10:37 am Why would you pay a running back? ANY running back.
This is the right answer. Even Taylor. Or Henry. Or McCaffrey. Nope. I'm talking about the big bucks it takes to re-sign a guy like that. All too often, they become less impactful like Zeke or Saquon, and there you are paying them like they're difference makers.

That is not the role for a big slice of the pie. They don't stay at the top of their game for long. And even the best ones get injured and become unavailable. RB is a position for the youngsters. You churn through them and platoon them and get the most out of them. And you love them on your team before you say goodbye.
Last edited by IE on Wed May 18, 2022 12:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
2023 Chicago Bears... emerging from a long hibernation, and hungry!
User avatar
IE
Hall of Famer
Posts: 12500
Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2008 8:46 am
Location: Plymouth, MI
Has thanked: 523 times
Been thanked: 700 times
Contact:

southdakbearfan wrote: Wed May 18, 2022 12:02 pm
Yes, running back is easy to replace. The question becomes do the bears like Monty enough to offer him a moderate 3-4 year extension while they have a ton of cap space which would be an easy contract to get out of after a year or two
Sure that's pragmatic. That is sort of what GB did with Jones' extension. I think it is effectively 2 years for about 10 each - a bit less maybe? Regardless, he's a guy who is at the very top of the all-time list of career ypc and averages double digit TDs in his 5 year career. Or James Conner, who got 8-9 MM a year for 2 more years I think by virtue of him putting up 18 TDs this year. I believe that's where the bar is to get any sort of extension for more than 4-5MM. And any extension has to be as short as most RB's peak years are.

If Monty is still hovering around 4 ypc or less this year, you have to let him walk. If he gets the McNagy departure bump like we all hope & gets up into the mid 4 ypc and he's healthy and gets into double digit TDs then yeah pay him a bit. None of this is about not liking Monty or wanting him gone. It is only about expecting above average performance from him to get extended (which should only happen to above-average RBs).
2023 Chicago Bears... emerging from a long hibernation, and hungry!
User avatar
HisRoyalSweetness
Hall of Famer
Posts: 5901
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 7:20 pm
Has thanked: 61 times
Been thanked: 1716 times

NFL's most underappreciated players: DK Metcalf, David Montgomery among NFC picks

Cynthia Frelund
NFL Network Analytics Expert

I wish the Bears had addressed their O-line in a way I better understood as an outsider this offseason. After finishing the 2021 season with PFF's 22nd-ranked unit, Chicago let starters James Daniels and Jason Peters walk, replacing them with journeymen Julie'n Davenport and Dakota Dozier. I will be watching this situation closely to help forecast Montgomery's fantasy value. However, his real-world value is in part shown by computer vision metrics that indicate how much contact a back deals with. Not only was Montgomery contacted before getting to top speed at the third-highest rate last season, but he also faced multiple hits on the fifth-highest percentage of rushes and runs after the catch. And yet, he managed to haul in 82.4 percent of the passes thrown to him in 2021 (with a catch rate of 78.6 percent for his career). In other words, if the O-line can step up, Montgomery could soar.

Full article: https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-s-most-und ... -nfc-picks
User avatar
dplank
Hall of Famer
Posts: 12025
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am
Has thanked: 1201 times
Been thanked: 2138 times

People need to just believe what they can plainly see when they watch him play. He doesn’t appease the stat nerds, nor does any player that played in McNagys joke of an offense.

Believe what you see with Metcalf as well, dude is a beast out there.
User avatar
Bearfacts
MVP
Posts: 1693
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 8:33 am
Location: Colorado
Has thanked: 721 times
Been thanked: 157 times

dplank wrote: Thu May 26, 2022 6:09 pm People need to just believe what they can plainly see when they watch him play. He doesn’t appease the stat nerds, nor does any player that played in McNagys joke of an offense.

Believe what you see with Metcalf as well, dude is a beast out there.
We both tend to use this same argument about Monty. Screw the stats. Watch the kid play. Get him better blocking, a better scheme, and use him more and we may end up with a faster more versatile "Beast Mode" Marshawn Lynch.
User avatar
IE
Hall of Famer
Posts: 12500
Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2008 8:46 am
Location: Plymouth, MI
Has thanked: 523 times
Been thanked: 700 times
Contact:

HisRoyalSweetness wrote: Thu May 26, 2022 5:17 pm
NFL's most underappreciated players: DK Metcalf, David Montgomery among NFC picks

Cynthia Frelund
NFL Network Analytics Expert

I wish the Bears had addressed their O-line in a way I better understood as an outsider this offseason. After finishing the 2021 season with PFF's 22nd-ranked unit, Chicago let starters James Daniels and Jason Peters walk, replacing them with journeymen Julie'n Davenport and Dakota Dozier. I will be watching this situation closely to help forecast Montgomery's fantasy value. However, his real-world value is in part shown by computer vision metrics that indicate how much contact a back deals with. Not only was Montgomery contacted before getting to top speed at the third-highest rate last season, but he also faced multiple hits on the fifth-highest percentage of rushes and runs after the catch. And yet, he managed to haul in 82.4 percent of the passes thrown to him in 2021 (with a catch rate of 78.6 percent for his career). In other words, if the O-line can step up, Montgomery could soar.

Full article: https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-s-most-und ... -nfc-picks
Saw this. Their analysis takes their performance and then weighs that against the cost... which obviously favors rookie contract players, and they admit that. No question Monty is super-valuable on his rookie contract. But then update it to reflect $8-10MM and he'd drop precipitously on that list. That is the fundamental issue at hand. Even if he improves in a better system is there any evidence that many other players would perform as well in the new system? We're going to see this fall. I'll guess that Monty will have to look head & shoulders above Juice Herbert to earn an extension - and it can't be close. Because the cost variable has enormous weight.

If Monty turned into Lynch hell yes pay him. But....
2023 Chicago Bears... emerging from a long hibernation, and hungry!
HurricaneBear
Head Coach
Posts: 2165
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 6:56 am
Has thanked: 1852 times
Been thanked: 350 times

Bearfacts wrote: Fri May 27, 2022 2:31 am
dplank wrote: Thu May 26, 2022 6:09 pm People need to just believe what they can plainly see when they watch him play. He doesn’t appease the stat nerds, nor does any player that played in McNagys joke of an offense.

Believe what you see with Metcalf as well, dude is a beast out there.
We both tend to use this same argument about Monty. Screw the stats. Watch the kid play. Get him better blocking, a better scheme, and use him more and we may end up with a faster more versatile "Beast Mode" Marshawn Lynch.
Who doesn't like Monty?

All people has said is "dont pay a running back"

Big Difference
User avatar
dplank
Hall of Famer
Posts: 12025
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am
Has thanked: 1201 times
Been thanked: 2138 times

HurricaneBear wrote: Fri May 27, 2022 10:59 am
Bearfacts wrote: Fri May 27, 2022 2:31 am

We both tend to use this same argument about Monty. Screw the stats. Watch the kid play. Get him better blocking, a better scheme, and use him more and we may end up with a faster more versatile "Beast Mode" Marshawn Lynch.
Who doesn't like Monty?

All people has said is "dont pay a running back"

Big Difference
You need to be more specific. We're paying him now, every player gets paid - so don't pay him what? If it's 1M, you pay him. If it's 4M, you pay him. Where do you choose not to pay him? I think everyone agrees that we shouldn't pay a huge contract to a RB - that point is absolutely clear and I agree with 100%. But 7-8M? That's nothing in your overall cap, so I'd keep a good player around for that.
HurricaneBear
Head Coach
Posts: 2165
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 6:56 am
Has thanked: 1852 times
Been thanked: 350 times

dplank wrote: Fri May 27, 2022 11:03 am
HurricaneBear wrote: Fri May 27, 2022 10:59 am

Who doesn't like Monty?

All people has said is "dont pay a running back"

Big Difference
You need to be more specific. We're paying him now, every player gets paid - so don't pay him what? If it's 1M, you pay him. If it's 4M, you pay him. Where do you choose not to pay him? I think everyone agrees that we shouldn't pay a huge contract to a RB - that point is absolutely clear and I agree with 100%. But 7-8M? That's nothing in your overall cap, so I'd keep a good player around for that.
Me personally? I draft a mid to late round RB every year and bring in a few UDFAs to see if any stick and just keep churning thru backs. Especially with the scheme we are planning on running for our oline. A year here or there maybe it misses, but most years we will get average or better production. A few years we may even have a back pop off(like hopefully Monty this year), leave and net us a comp pick. So I guess I wouldnt offer any back a second contract above minimum.
User avatar
Bearfacts
MVP
Posts: 1693
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 8:33 am
Location: Colorado
Has thanked: 721 times
Been thanked: 157 times

HurricaneBear wrote: Fri May 27, 2022 10:59 am
Bearfacts wrote: Fri May 27, 2022 2:31 am

We both tend to use this same argument about Monty. Screw the stats. Watch the kid play. Get him better blocking, a better scheme, and use him more and we may end up with a faster more versatile "Beast Mode" Marshawn Lynch.
Who doesn't like Monty?

All people has said is "dont pay a running back"

Big Difference
True in the first regard but the debate is really whether or not to pay him not whether or not we like him.

I'll just leave it with this. We have given a second contract to any top shelf RB we've ever had whose career and production justified it.

I don't think any of us aren't thinking that an extension has to be earned and that Monty will need to do that this year in order for that to happen so I'm content to wait it out and see what happens. But that doesn't change the fact that all that is there with him isn't explained by his stats alone because to many details aren't covered by stats.

It's not my call anyway so I'm also content to let it be Poles call.
User avatar
Bearfacts
MVP
Posts: 1693
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 8:33 am
Location: Colorado
Has thanked: 721 times
Been thanked: 157 times

Not sure just where to put this one but here seems best.

The one guy who has the most say in the caliber of the WR group has offered his own opinion.

In a recent interview with Bleacher Report, Justin Fields was asked about this wide receiver group and this is what he had to say:


“We don’t have an Odell [Beckham Jr.] or a Cooper Kupp on our team, but at the end of the day I think if everybody is on their P’s and Q’s, and we’re on top of everything and not making mistakes, the players we have right now are good enough,” he told Bleacher Report in an exclusive interview. “The front office thinks that, too. The fans outside of the facility, they don’t know what’s going on at practice. Just because we don’t have a big-name guy, doesn’t mean those guys aren’t talented. I have plenty of confidence in myself and my teammates that we’re going to get the job done.”
HurricaneBear
Head Coach
Posts: 2165
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 6:56 am
Has thanked: 1852 times
Been thanked: 350 times

If Fields takes a few steps forward like we all hope he does, and Getsy truly runs what they've been saying, I agree with Fields 100%. There is enough talent to win with. Mooney if put in the right positions can be dangerous. Pringle isn't a pro bowler but he can play football. Kmet has his flaws but hes a solid NFL tight end with room to grow. The running back room has alot of talent. If Jones or one of the other WR can step up and be another useful piece, this offense could be a solid group. Only time will tell but this young group has alot of hidden potential imo
User avatar
Bearfacts
MVP
Posts: 1693
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 8:33 am
Location: Colorado
Has thanked: 721 times
Been thanked: 157 times

What I get out of this and the point Fields is trying to make is that while we aren't fielding a group of All Pro WR or even one All Pro WR those WR we do have aren't exactly lacking in talent. Also part of the reason we signed who we did is Pringle and Eq St B are also very good blockers which for a run oriented team is meaningful as well. Hell, even Mooney can and does block.

But this is what stands out to me as well.

“We don’t have an Odell [Beckham Jr.] or a Cooper Kupp on our team, but at the end of the day I think if everybody is on their P’s and Q’s, and we’re on top of everything and not making mistakes, the players we have right now are good enough,”

Great team work and top shelf execution within the scheme can overcome a lack of star power. I experienced that for years on a fastpitch softball team I played on. We were limited as to who we could have on the team. Our company who sponsored us limited us to only company employees or close relatives of those employees.

We won back to back city championships against better teams by outplaying them as a team. We then moved to an even higher ranked league with even better competition and won that league 3 out of 4 years the exact same way. Great teamwork can trump great talent if the lesser team all pulls in the same direction and the more talented team doesn't.

JMHO
User avatar
Moriarty
Hall of Famer
Posts: 6806
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 1:22 pm
Has thanked: 384 times
Been thanked: 688 times

https://heavy.com/sports/chicago-bears/ ... ontgomery/

‘Alarm Bells’ Sounding Around Montgomery, Insider Says
ESPN insider Dan Graziano visited the Bears’ camp in Lake Forest, Illinois a few weeks before their first preseason game, and he came away feeling as though Montgomery will really have to impress the new regime if he wants to stick around beyond the 2022 season.

The running back’s recent work on special teams, as reported by Kevin Fishbain and Adam Jahns of The Athletic, is bit of an eyebrow-raiser, Graziano says.
1999-2002: Mouth Off Sports Forum (RIP)
2002-2014: KFFL (RIP)
2014-2016: USAToday Fantasy Sports Forum (RIP)

Hello, my name is Moriarty. I have come to kill your website, prepare to die.
User avatar
wulfy
MVP
Posts: 1550
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2020 5:51 pm
Has thanked: 128 times
Been thanked: 271 times
Contact:

I disagree with Dan Graziano's assessment.
RichH55
Hall of Famer
Posts: 7942
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 4:23 pm
Has thanked: 511 times
Been thanked: 598 times

dplank wrote: Fri May 27, 2022 11:03 am
HurricaneBear wrote: Fri May 27, 2022 10:59 am

Who doesn't like Monty?

All people has said is "dont pay a running back"

Big Difference
You need to be more specific. We're paying him now, every player gets paid - so don't pay him what?
This seems like it just doesn't understand how contracts work. Or is willfully missing peoples points?

No one ever- ever- is suggesting the guys should play for free.

But signing a market level deal with a HB in FA v. Rookie Contracts? If you can't see the massive difference there then I dont know what to tell you
User avatar
dplank
Hall of Famer
Posts: 12025
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am
Has thanked: 1201 times
Been thanked: 2138 times

wulfy wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 9:22 am I disagree with Dan Graziano's assessment.
Me too, particularly after watching Herbert go down so easy last week. A slight breeze could knock that guy down, WTF?
RichH55
Hall of Famer
Posts: 7942
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 4:23 pm
Has thanked: 511 times
Been thanked: 598 times

wulfy wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 9:22 am I disagree with Dan Graziano's assessment.
Ditto
User avatar
crueltyabc
Hall of Famer
Posts: 5119
Joined: Mon May 04, 2009 7:36 pm
Location: Dallas TX
Has thanked: 79 times
Been thanked: 226 times

The tone of the statement makes it sound like Montgomery might end up on the street if he doesn't please Poles by playing special teams. If the Bears don't want to sign him to a long term deal, he will find a meager one elsewhere. Teams don't want to pay crazy money for a vet RB but there is still SOME interest. Probably he gets paid $5-6m AAV by someone. Is it the Bears? I dunno. Do I think any of this should be framed as "alarm bells"? No.
xyt in the discord chats
User avatar
wulfy
MVP
Posts: 1550
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2020 5:51 pm
Has thanked: 128 times
Been thanked: 271 times
Contact:

A player will take an lesser deal with another team vs with their current team due to the "respect" aspect.

$$ = Respect in the NFL (and really anywhere, to be honest)
User avatar
Moriarty
Hall of Famer
Posts: 6806
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 1:22 pm
Has thanked: 384 times
Been thanked: 688 times

crueltyabc wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 10:58 am The tone of the statement makes it sound like Montgomery might end up on the street if he doesn't please Poles by playing special teams.
I don't think that's precisely what they're saying.

He's implying that the Bears are interested in seeing if he's willing and capable on ST, because they aren't sold on him being the FT solo starter, either this year and/or going forward. They want to see if he has ST value, if he's going to be considered for a backup or shared backfield load.
1999-2002: Mouth Off Sports Forum (RIP)
2002-2014: KFFL (RIP)
2014-2016: USAToday Fantasy Sports Forum (RIP)

Hello, my name is Moriarty. I have come to kill your website, prepare to die.
Post Reply