Keepers, Again

[Moriarty]

2 months ago, we had a thread about “what real building blocks for the future do we have?”. Wanted to revisit now that it’s offseason team building time.
viewtopic.php?t=16803

I’m looking at it from the same perspective as before:
(80%+ = there’s not many sure things in football, but yeah, this is highly likely, 40-80% = very realistic possibility, < 40% = not worth planning on. Every team has young, untested players, late round draft picks with nonzero chances of being something. But you don’t make personnel decisions based on “yeah, that 7th rounder of ours who got 30 snaps last year sure had a great 40 time, let’s pencil him in and not add anything there”.

The earliest this team can really contend and go anywhere is 2024. So consider what starting positions we can consider to be satisfactorily filled (ie, you’re not seriously seeking to upgrade) at least through that year.

LT – Jones Highly Likely
LG – Whitehair/Leatherwood/Borom/Carter/Diesch Individually, I wouldn’t give anyone a very good chance of filling this. But, collectively, I feel like there’s a pretty solid chance 1 of them can play the position well 2 yrs from now. Realistic Maybe
C - Patrick/Mustipher/Eislen/Kramer Nope
RG – Jenkins Plays great, but the durability is unnerving. Realistic Maybe
RT – Reiff Nope

WR – Mooney Injury to his wheels and a FA Realistic Maybe
WR – Claypool Hope the offseason workouts together accomplish something, bc right now, this is looking like a tire fire Realistic Maybe
WR – ESB/Velus/whatever Nope

QB - Fields Realistic Maybe

TE – Kmet He’s a FA in a year, but with the money they have and him being reliable, I see virtually no chance he goes. Highly Likely

HB – Herbert/Montgomery/Evans Hard to quantify, since the starter job is kinda shared now. Losing optimism for Herbert learning to block. Montgomery is what he is but it’s dubious whether he is him here in 2024.



DE – AQM/Robinson Nope
DE – Gipson Nope
DT – Watts/Blackson/Pennel Nope
DT – Jones Nope
MLB – Sanborn Highly Likely
WLB – Morrow/Weatherford Nope
CB – Johnson A FA who isn’t as good as his rep, but probably stays because he’s durable and decent. Could be another scenario where he wants more than he’s worth, though. Highly Likely
CB – Jones/Vildor/Blackwell/Ojemudia Nope
NB – Gordon Realistic Maybe
SS – Brisker Highly Likely
FS – Ejax Realistic Maybe

K – Santos Highly Likely
P – Gill Lots of people don’t realize he tailed off and ended the season with poor numbers across the board Realistic Maybe
LS – Scales Getting a bit old, but it is something you can do for a while Realistic Maybe





Looking at this, I wonder if I should be thinking CB more. It’s one of the few strengths in a generally bad draft.


We need DE, DE, DT, DT, WLB, CB, RT, C, WR most

And the draft is strong at DE, CB, HB
And bad at T, WR, S

The problem is that CB really needs to be early (top 50), as does DE.
And, even if you write off WR, T, FS
DT, C, WLB have to be fairly early, too.

[The Marshall Plan]

This great analysis really does display the need for a trade down.

Regarding the concern about CB. If you want to improve the play of corners, then upgrade the DL. Pressure the QB.

That's how I would attack the problem at corner. Sign guys like Ngakoue and Payne. Draft Murphy.

I do agree with your assessments about our secondary though. In terms of drafting a corner directly, let's see what the payout is on a trade down.

But I would focus the first couple of tranches of the $120M on the DL to address it.

[Rusty Trombagent]

In the "we simply cant replace 80% of the roster" point of view, i think there's a very good chance that our CB room is pretty settled right now.

i keep getting told that Flus was tanking so he could develop our young talent. We cant then jettison that talent right.

[Sugashane]

In the "we simply cant replace 80% of the roster" point of view, i think there's a very good chance that our CB room is pretty settled right now.

i keep getting told that Flus was tanking so he could develop our young talent. We cant then jettison that talent right.

And to piggyback off that, it is damn hard to evaluate DBs when the passrush in front of them is garbage.

I hope to add at least one vet on a cheap deal to push for CB2 but want to focus primarily on the trenches and getting one major weapon in the passing game. Bears' defense is going to be a far cry from 2018 regardless of how much money they throw at it this year, but just a competent defense takes a TON of pressure off Fields' shoulders.

[Middleguard]

I think the premise is confusing: through 2024 is specified, but thoughts are being expressed on the needs for 2023. If positions need at least a year to gel with teammates or to adjust to the NFL, or whatever, then yes, they need to be filled this year. But I think other positions might be OK for this year, but if not changed (either by identity or contract) will need someone else in 2024. I hope that those posting in this thread will make the distinction clear.

[Rusty Trombagent]

In the "we simply cant replace 80% of the roster" point of view, i think there's a very good chance that our CB room is pretty settled right now.

i keep getting told that Flus was tanking so he could develop our young talent. We cant then jettison that talent right.

And to piggyback off that, it is damn hard to evaluate DBs when the passrush in front of them is garbage.

That certainly wasnt helping at all, but beyond that, Kindle Vildor was way improved this season! He had the ankle injury in the second half that eventually landed him on IR, but he was a pleasant surprise on this team that I think a lot of people forgot?

[Middleguard]

I believe CB to be the most settled position on the team right now.

[RichH55]

Isn't this a Defensive system where its "easier" to play CB in?

DL is clearly the biggest need generally

[Moriarty]

I think the premise is confusing: through 2024 is specified, but thoughts are being expressed on the needs for 2023. If positions need at least a year to gel with teammates or to adjust to the NFL, or whatever, then yes, they need to be filled this year. But I think other positions might be OK for this year, but if not changed (either by identity or contract) will need someone else in 2024. I hope that those posting in this thread will make the distinction clear.

I don't know what you mean by that.

The premise was - do we currently have something at that position that will be here and good in the 2024 season.
And that's exactly what the comments and evaluations are directed towards.

Will AQM be here and a good starter in 2024? No
Will Gordon be here and a good starter in 2024? Maybe
Will Kmet be here and a good starter in 2024? Yes

Free Agency this year or next is relevant to likelihood of them being around in 2024.
Significant injuries now are relevant to likelihood of them being around and good in 2024.

[Sugashane]

And to piggyback off that, it is damn hard to evaluate DBs when the passrush in front of them is garbage.

That certainly wasnt helping at all, but beyond that, Kindle Vildor was way improved this season! He had the ankle injury in the second half that eventually landed him on IR, but he was a pleasant surprise on this team that I think a lot of people forgot?

Count me as guilty of that as well. I can barely even remember seeing Vildor this season. I was probably too busy bitching at the DL.

[dplank]

I would move Gordon to the Highly Likely category. I actually like him more than Brisker.

[Ditka’s dictaphone]

QB - Fields Realistic Maybe

Feel like this is a controversial take.
If Poles is not ‘all in’ on Fields then the Bears have a problem

[dplank]

QB - Fields Realistic Maybe

Feel like this is a controversial take.
If Poles is not ‘all in’ on Fields then the Bears have a problem

Yea jeez, I didn't even pick up on that one. I really don't understand what people expected from Fields given the full context of his circumstances (new offense, 2nd year QB, terrible OL, terrible WR corps). Does he need to improve as a passer? Yes. But he improved dramatically from Y1 to Y2 despite those awful circumstances, so it should be fully expected that he will continue to improve as a passer next year as he gets a 2nd year in the same offense + better surrounding talent. And it goes without saying that he is an ELITE playmaker with his legs, like literally Top 5 in the NFL.

[thunderspirit]

QB - Fields Realistic Maybe

Feel like this is a controversial take.

Only if you think Fields doesn't need to improve from where he is today.

You can think the world of him — which I do — and anticipate significant gains in the seasons to come — which I do — and still acknowledge that if he plateaus where he is now, he will need to be replaced in the near future.

I don't expect that plateau to happen, but it could (it certainly has for many other QBs before him), and to dismiss that possibility seems foolish.

[Ditka’s dictaphone]

Feel like this is a controversial take.

Only if you think Fields doesn't need to improve from where he is today.

You can think the world of him — which I do — and anticipate significant gains in the seasons to come — which I do — and still acknowledge that if he plateaus where he is now, he will need to be replaced in the near future.

I don't expect that plateau to happen, but it could (it certainly has for many other QBs before him), and to dismiss that possibility seems foolish.

So by logical conclusion you don’t think

Braxton Jones
Jack Sanborn
Jaquan Brisker
Cairo Santos
Jaylon Johnson
and Cole Kmet

Need to improve.

Again - it’s a bad take

We haven’t got any players more secure on this roster than Justin Fields in my opinion

They can all be upgraded.

[thunderspirit]

That's not really a logical conclusion, and certainly not anything I said.

But you do you.

[Ditka’s dictaphone]

That's not really a logical conclusion, and certainly not anything I said.

But you do you.

I think it’s a bad take because there is no player on this roster more secure than Fields.

You disagree because he needs to improve.

How’s that for a logical conclusion?

Now my questions for you are

“which players on this roster are more secure than Fields?”
“Which players on this roster don’t need to improve?”

[Moriarty]

Only if you think Fields doesn't need to improve from where he is today.

You can think the world of him — which I do — and anticipate significant gains in the seasons to come — which I do — and still acknowledge that if he plateaus where he is now, he will need to be replaced in the near future.

I don't expect that plateau to happen, but it could (it certainly has for many other QBs before him), and to dismiss that possibility seems foolish.

So by logical conclusion you don’t think

Braxton Jones
Jack Sanborn
Jaquan Brisker
Cairo Santos
Jaylon Johnson
and Cole Kmet

Need to improve.

Again - it’s a bad take

We haven’t got any players more secure on this roster than Justin Fields in my opinion

They can all be upgraded.

You're mixing all sorts of things that are and aren't part of the exercise here together.

Whether or not someone could be or can't be much better isn't the criteria here.
Whether you are disappointed or not with a pick relative to their draft slot isn't the criteria here.
Whether someone is better or worse than the last guy (or 10 guys) to play the position isn't the criteria here.
Whether they are just still on the roster or still starting is not the entire criteria.


The question is:
Will they be a quality starter* for the Chicago Bears through the end of 2024
Period.
That's it.

Consider primarily age, injury potential (or current injury), contract status, current ability, and the odds of further improvement.
Put a percent on it.
If your percent is 100, slap yourself until delusionality passes or you forget what you were doing.
Then categorize based on percent.


Cairo Santos is under contract for a while. He hit 91% of his FGs this year. He's 90% for his 3 yrs with the Bears. He's a stud. Even with kickers being a bit more variable than other positions and an off year on XPs (first time he's ever been low on XPs or short FGs in his career), I'll put him comfortably at 90% to meet the criteria.

Kyler Gordon is a R2 corner. Plenty of R2 corners flop. He had a bumpy first year playing inside, which he may or may not continue to do. Maybe competent pass rush will help. I'd give him about 60% shot at making it to being a quality starter.

Trevis Gipson is a R5 edge who showed some flashes in rotational relief. Then, when his chance to start came, he was not at all up to the task. Yeah, lack of talent around you never makes a guy look good, but.... At this point, I'd give him maybe 10% to become a good starter soon. Probably too generous.

For Fields, I won't name a %, because it's such an emotionally charged topic, any number will drive some people berserk. But consider that the hit rate on early QBs starts at maybe around 30%. Now, ask yourself, if there is 0 improvement from here and he's a flat line the rest of his career, is he already a quality QB that you remain happy with for the rest of his career and don't look to upgrade until he gets old and drops off? Of course not. So ask yourself what are the odds of him getting there? Then ask yourself "Am I being really biased in that assessment because I want it so bad? Would I assign those odds if he were on another team? Do other non-Bears fans see it the same way?" Then revise your answer to be more realistic. Somewhere within 40-80% should be the result.


* Not the kind of fringe/stopgap starter, like Morrow or Mustipher or Justin Jones, where you can live with it temporarily, and maybe even win with it, with enough talent around them, but you're always thinking about opportunity to upgrade that slot. And not the kind of starter where you're tolerating it because they're inexperienced and you're hoping for improvement.

[malk]

Only if you think Fields doesn't need to improve from where he is today.

You can think the world of him — which I do — and anticipate significant gains in the seasons to come — which I do — and still acknowledge that if he plateaus where he is now, he will need to be replaced in the near future.

I don't expect that plateau to happen, but it could (it certainly has for many other QBs before him), and to dismiss that possibility seems foolish.

So by logical conclusion you don’t think

Braxton Jones
Jack Sanborn
Jaquan Brisker
Cairo Santos
Jaylon Johnson
and Cole Kmet

Need to improve.

Again - it’s a bad take

We haven’t got any players more secure on this roster than Justin Fields in my opinion

They can all be upgraded.

That's not the logical conclusion from the premise, or at least from Moriarty's original premise. The players you've listed are closer to being good enough *at their position* than Fields is. And that isn't a slight on Fields but just a reflection that QB is the most important and most difficult position in football. We all (or virtually all) love Fields and he's obviously the most exciting player on our roster but he also had 60.4% completion, 5.3%:3.7% TD:INT and averaged fewer than 150 yards per game in passing. Only one game in the entire year with more than 250 yards passing.

His rushing makes up for some of that but he still needs to become at least someone who can average 200+ yards per game passing with a 2:1 TD:INT ratio. And that's bare minimum even with his amazing running game. I think he'll do it and he has a list of mitigating circumstances as long as your arm but taking that next step isn't a given even with more support.

[RichH55]

Feel like this is a controversial take.

Only if you think Fields doesn't need to improve from where he is today.

You can think the world of him — which I do — and anticipate significant gains in the seasons to come — which I do — and still acknowledge that if he plateaus where he is now, he will need to be replaced in the near future.

I don't expect that plateau to happen, but it could (it certainly has for many other QBs before him), and to dismiss that possibility seems foolish.

This is well said

[Ditka’s dictaphone]

I just don’t agree with you guys.

Fields is the future of the franchise.

The reason we were competitive in so many games, the reason we gubbed Belichick’s Patriots?
That was Justin Fields - no-one else.

[malk]

@Moriarty I like that you've set out your critieria, makes this much easier to look at rather than talking past what you actually mean.

In general I think I'd look at it a little differently. Your prediction %s are reasonable but I think I'd make groupings something like:

Blue chip difference maker.
Solid starter
Prospect (means I want them to get significant game time rather than be replaced in 2023).
Established fringe starter
Hope (means potential but I want the spot upgrading)
Hole

Those are in order of ability and you would expect some changes year to year, i.e. a fringe starter could become solid, a blue chip player could become just a solid starter. Then the two categories of prospect and hope are more likely to change more as they'll typically be younger players or ones without much tape.

Then overall I'd see our roster as:

QB: Fields - Prospect. Would already be a fringe starter and I'm hoping he'll be blue chip with a good expectation he'll at least be a very solid starter.
RB1: Herbert - solid starter. Blocking is a concern but fine to roll with at RB
RB2: Montgomery - solid starter if he's back. Otherwise a hole to fill.
WR1: Claypool - Prospect. Currently fringe starter with hope of becoming a solid starter.
WR2: Mooney - Solid starter (injury notwithstanding).
WR3: Hope perhaps for Jones but it's really a hole.
WR4-6: ESB is doing a job but there aren't really others on the roster who I'm holding any hope for or expecting fringe starter snaps from.
TE: Kmet - solid starter.
LT: Jones - Prospect. Fringe starter already, hoping for a solid starter.
LG: Whitehair - Tough one, is he still solid or down to fringe with the injuries. Might be a hole at his contract level.
C: Mustipher/Patrick - Fringe starters but Musipher might not be back and Patrick hasn't shown much, might be a hole.
RG: Jenkins - Prospect. Solid starter if healthy I think.
RT: Borom - Hope, maybe, but a hole really.

For defence:

SS: Brisker - Prospect. Currently fringe starter, expecting a solid starter.
FS: Jackson - big question mark with the injury. Possibly to fill.
CB: Johnson - Solid starter.
CB: Gordon - Prospect. By the end of the season a fringe starter, hoping for a solid starter.
NB: - Jaylon Jones - I think he played his way into Prospect for me by the end of the year, not least as it is nickle back rather than an every down position.
MLB: Sanborn - Prospect. I think he was a solid starter already but it's obviously a small sample size.
WLB: Morrow - Solid starter imo but he might not be back and some might consider only a fringe starter.
SLB: Doon't caaaare.
LDE: Hole.
3T: Jones - Fringe starter with hope of solid or rotational in a better line.
NT: Hole.
RDE: Hole.

One quick addition on the defensive line is that I have hopes that AQM, Gipson and Robinson can be a useful part of a rotation but I'm not even willing to list them as hope rather than hole on the list above.

What this means for how to attach the off season I'll have to think more on!

[Ditka’s dictaphone]

If you put all our roster up for trade, Fields will get the most offers by far.

The others? *shrugs*

[Moriarty]

If you put all our roster up for trade, Fields will get the most offers by far.

The others? *shrugs*

That's great

But, again, not what we're talking about here


If you want to make a "Rank the Bears according to trade value" thread, go right ahead.
(I don't know why anyone would care, since the teardown is pretty done, and there isn't much to trade anymore. But knock yourself out.)

[IE]

I reject the notion that the Bears can't go anywhere until '24. I see them as 10 game winners, in the playoffs, and if JF1 plays like he's shown he CAN they'll be playing beyond wild card round next season. Poles isn't only rebuilding through the draft but is buying playoff ready talent in the trenches that are going to make a world of difference. Not in '24 - in '23.

Calling JF1 a *maybe* appears so overly cautious and like some sort of reputation-protecting CYA that it tanks the entire analysis, IMO. JF1 is one of the few of the surest-thing young QBs in the league. He and Trev... who is leading a team a few years ahead on the rebuild (even though the Bears should catch up fast- like next year).

[Ditka’s dictaphone]

Someone will bump this thread in 2024 and once of us will look like a total muppet.

I hope it’s not me.


I just don’t see how Fields is a “realistic maybe” when you’re discussing “Keepers,again”.

Fields is a DEFINITE starter in 2024, he’s our only ‘difference maker’, he’s a blue-chip player.
He’s the most exciting QB in the NFC.
He’s the reason we’ve gone from scoring about 14 points per game to 25-35 points per game despite losing weapons.

Ranking likelihood that players will be solid starters for the Bears in 2024? Fields is our number 1.
He’s the only player on this roster right now that I have any confidence in being a solid starter in 2024.

Barring some ridiculous scenario in his private life unrelated to football he will continue to be our most important starter.

[wab]

If you put all our roster up for trade, Fields will get the most offers by far.

The others? *shrugs*

This has absolutely nothing to do with anything, and doesn’t even matter when it comes to the philosophy behind building an NFL roster.

[dplank]

Feel like this is a controversial take.

Only if you think Fields doesn't need to improve from where he is today.

You can think the world of him — which I do — and anticipate significant gains in the seasons to come — which I do — and still acknowledge that if he plateaus where he is now, he will need to be replaced in the near future.

I don't expect that plateau to happen, but it could (it certainly has for many other QBs before him), and to dismiss that possibility seems foolish.

Excuse me....but how do you take that statement on Fields and NOT apply it to Braxton Jones again? DD did not misunderstand anything, he called out a massive inconsistency here. If Braxton Jones plateaus where he is right now, he is NOT a quality NFL LT. He would make for an excellent NYC doorman or matador maybe, he's really good at letting people go through him on their way to the QB. Do you think Braxton Jones is good enough as he is right now with no improvement? Yikes.

I won't mix arguments and dive into why I disagree on Fields outlook (I do, very very much). But the logic here is brutally bad, and DD is 100% right calling that out.

[Rusty Trombagent]

Only if you think Fields doesn't need to improve from where he is today.

You can think the world of him — which I do — and anticipate significant gains in the seasons to come — which I do — and still acknowledge that if he plateaus where he is now, he will need to be replaced in the near future.

I don't expect that plateau to happen, but it could (it certainly has for many other QBs before him), and to dismiss that possibility seems foolish.

Excuse me....but how do you take that statement on Fields and NOT apply it to Braxton Jones again? DD did not misunderstand anything, he called out a massive inconsistency here. If Braxton Jones plateaus where he is right now, he is NOT a quality NFL LT. He would make for an excellent NYC doorman or matador maybe, he's really good at letting people go through him on their way to the QB. Do you think Braxton Jones is good enough as he is right now with no improvement? Yikes.

I won't mix arguments and dive into why I disagree on Fields outlook (I do, very very much). But the logic here is brutally bad, and DD is 100% right calling that out.

I think the argument is that Braxton is closer to where he needs to be as a first year player than Fields is as a second year player.

[Ditka’s dictaphone]

I think the argument is that Braxton is closer to where he needs to be as a first year player than Fields is as a second year player.

Not very objective, pure speculation.