Offensive Line - What will it look like
Moderator: wab
- HisRoyalSweetness
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 8018
- Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 7:20 pm
- Has thanked: 102 times
- Been thanked: 2810 times
Oh and as a footnote, on Allen's second TD where Caleb threw that perfect fade #94 of the Jaguars goes completely unblocked. In his breakdown video JT O'Sullivan queried why Jenkins didn't pick him up instead of double-teaming inside, but I saw another video where a former NFL O-lineman (I can't recall who) thought it was most likely Jones who should have blocked him, leaving the outside guy unblocked.
Arise Sir Walter: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXdXRP6Hi-U
- Moriarty
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 7672
- Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 1:22 pm
- Has thanked: 524 times
- Been thanked: 996 times
My answer would be:dplank wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2024 9:59 pmMy honest direct question that you didn’t answer though is, again, when does the narrative change for you on him? Apparently starting 18 of the last 19 isn’t good enough, so what is?Arkansasbear wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2024 8:44 pm
If he plays in 85% of the games, that’s missing 2.5games a year. Hard to pay out huge dollars for someone missing that amount of time. HRS says the 10th ranked OG makes 16.5M per year. Pay him $8-11M a year with clauses for playing time that can get him to $17M.
To not factor in his missed time seems not wise to me.
Right now, he's 0/3 on having sufficiently healthy seasons.
This year, he's technically had 6/6 "starts". But it's more informative to say that he's had 2 different injuries and only played 4/6 full games*. If he continues at this rate, he'll miss his usual 5-6 games/season.
So, at this point, I don't think there's any debate to be had that health is still an issue for him.
If he should break precedent and finish the season with 11 (or more?) straight healthy games, he would finally have 1 reasonably healthy season out of 4. And a streak of 25/29 full games played.
At that point, you could start saying maybe he's got things turned around.
But he would need to get to 2 seasons in a row before I'd start having decent confidence in it.
Unfortunately, timing is such that a big decision needs to be made on him before that time will come.
* And that's calling the one with 95% of snaps 'full'. The other 2 were way, way short with 82% and 49% of the game missed. And, often that's actually even worse than missing the whole game, because you have to pull someone off the bench who hasn't gotten reps at that position during the week and you didn't make your game activation choices knowing you'd be short at G.
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.
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.
- dplank
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 13632
- Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am
- Has thanked: 1661 times
- Been thanked: 2837 times
Fair enough, although I disagree and think that you're spinning data to an uber negative take. Your logic, by your own admission, has the actual effect of throwing him away right when we went on PUP, because just by pure math/logic you've made it impossible to meet your own success criteria. This was my theory and the point I was making to Ark initially proving out to be true, that folks have simply already made their minds up, so appreciate the straight take! No hard feelings, but I think giving up on him prior to Week 1 last year is just very short sighted and overly negative. JMO.Moriarty wrote: ↑Fri Oct 18, 2024 10:00 amMy answer would be:
Right now, he's 0/3 on having sufficiently healthy seasons.
This year, he's technically had 6/6 "starts". But it's more informative to say that he's had 2 different injuries and only played 4/6 full games*. If he continues at this rate, he'll miss his usual 5-6 games/season.
So, at this point, I don't think there's any debate to be had that health is still an issue for him.
If he should break precedent and finish the season with 11 (or more?) straight healthy games, he would finally have 1 reasonably healthy season out of 4. And a streak of 25/29 full games played.
At that point, you could start saying maybe he's got things turned around.
But he would need to get to 2 seasons in a row before I'd start having decent confidence in it.
Unfortunately, timing is such that a big decision needs to be made on him before that time will come.
* And that's calling the one with 95% of snaps 'full'. The other 2 were way, way short with 82% and 49% of the game missed. And, often that's actually even worse than missing the whole game, because you have to pull someone off the bench who hasn't gotten reps at that position during the week and you didn't make your game activation choices knowing you'd be short at G.
If you really felt that way (I suspect you don't and are going to realize your criteria is flawed), then the logical play should have been to look to move him and get something for him since he literally has no chance of being resigned with the criteria you lay out here. Kinda nuts to me. But I very much appreciate the honest straight conversation even if we disagree on it, well done to both you and Lacertine!
- wab
- Mod
- Posts: 30830
- Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:49 pm
- Has thanked: 178 times
- Been thanked: 2490 times
I keep wondering if Wright is just in a slump or if he would truly be better inside next year at guard.
- dplank
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 13632
- Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am
- Has thanked: 1661 times
- Been thanked: 2837 times
Same here. He has the strength that I like to see, but he seems to whiff too frequently for some strange reason. He certainly looks the part for a great G, but we haven't played him there yet. Tev/Bates/Wright IOL next year would be beastly tho, a lot of power.
- LacertineForest
- MVP
- Posts: 1983
- Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 12:39 pm
- Location: Madison, WI
- Has thanked: 2559 times
- Been thanked: 467 times
I will admit that until this discussion (and this board has had several about Jenkins over the last year), I assumed he was injured more this year than he actually has been and that his performance was becoming an issue. I guess the GB game last year (which I didn't even watch, thankfully - just heard a lot of talk about how he didn't play well) and the line's overall struggles to start the year made me think he was performing worse than he was. So for that alone, I am glad to have had the discussion to change that false narrative. I absolutely believe in rewarding your own, and I would like to see him stick around, too. I hope he can stay on the field and play at a high level against stiff competition, because he's exactly the kind of guy this team needs when healthy.
- Moriarty
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 7672
- Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 1:22 pm
- Has thanked: 524 times
- Been thanked: 996 times
I'm not sure what you mean by giving up on him prior to Week 1 of last year.dplank wrote: ↑Fri Oct 18, 2024 10:09 amFair enough, although I disagree and think that you're spinning data to an uber negative take. Your logic, by your own admission, has the actual effect of throwing him away right when we went on PUP, because just by pure math/logic you've made it impossible to meet your own success criteria. This was my theory and the point I was making to Ark initially proving out to be true, that folks have simply already made their minds up, so appreciate the straight take! No hard feelings, but I think giving up on him prior to Week 1 last year is just very short sighted and overly negative. JMO.Moriarty wrote: ↑Fri Oct 18, 2024 10:00 am
My answer would be:
Right now, he's 0/3 on having sufficiently healthy seasons.
This year, he's technically had 6/6 "starts". But it's more informative to say that he's had 2 different injuries and only played 4/6 full games*. If he continues at this rate, he'll miss his usual 5-6 games/season.
So, at this point, I don't think there's any debate to be had that health is still an issue for him.
If he should break precedent and finish the season with 11 (or more?) straight healthy games, he would finally have 1 reasonably healthy season out of 4. And a streak of 25/29 full games played.
At that point, you could start saying maybe he's got things turned around.
But he would need to get to 2 seasons in a row before I'd start having decent confidence in it.
Unfortunately, timing is such that a big decision needs to be made on him before that time will come.
* And that's calling the one with 95% of snaps 'full'. The other 2 were way, way short with 82% and 49% of the game missed. And, often that's actually even worse than missing the whole game, because you have to pull someone off the bench who hasn't gotten reps at that position during the week and you didn't make your game activation choices knowing you'd be short at G.
If you really felt that way (I suspect you don't and are going to realize your criteria is flawed), then the logical play should have been to look to move him and get something for him since he literally has no chance of being resigned with the criteria you lay out here. Kinda nuts to me. But I very much appreciate the honest straight conversation even if we disagree on it, well done to both you and Lacertine!
I haven't said I wanted to do that previously or here.
As for whether he has enough of a chance to change minds significantly before free agency...well, that's just the breaks. Convincing someone something's changed takes time, and there's a limited, unchangeable amount of time before the decision comes due. If we could agree with him on a 1 yr prove it deal to give him more time to prove he's able to stay healthy, I'd love to buy that extra time at a fair price. But the Tags are almost certainly going to be too high for something like that (25 or 23M). And he's probably going to get offers with decent guarantees.
Could/should we have traded him for something last off-season, if we're afraid to commit? Maybe. Depends on what offers you could get. But at the same time, with our OL as shaky as it's been and a rookie QB - 11 games of good play with continuity at a really cheap price is valuable. It's only when you get to 16M for maybe only 11 games of good play that gets worrisome.
Is it impossible the rest of the season could play out in a way where he'd be willing to return on a deal I'd be fine with? No. Just unlikely. The problem is that, the healthier he stays: he may be driving what I'm willing to pay up, but he's also driving up what he'll want and what other people will be willing to pay up, too. Which goes up more? We'll see what other teams are willing to put out, but I'm guessing someone else will gamble more on his health than I'm willing to.
How high are you willing to go with him?
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.
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.
- spudbear
- MVP
- Posts: 1446
- Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2020 12:32 pm
- Has thanked: 371 times
- Been thanked: 195 times
I'm hoping Wright is working through a sophomore slump. Moving him would leave a hole at RT that would need to be filled. Does Pryor have the mobility to seal the edge against speed rushers? Does rookie Amegadjie get time at RT? Move him to LT and slide Jones to RT? I suppose if Wright is effective at RG then that would be one less need for the draft.dplank wrote: ↑Fri Oct 18, 2024 12:13 pmSame here. He has the strength that I like to see, but he seems to whiff too frequently for some strange reason. He certainly looks the part for a great G, but we haven't played him there yet. Tev/Bates/Wright IOL next year would be beastly tho, a lot of power.
Seems like it has been over 30 years since the Bears have had a stable OL of guys they primarily drafted.
San Francisco has always been my favorite booing city. I don't mean the people boo louder or longer, but there is a very special intimacy. Music, that's what it is to me. One time in Kezar Stadium they gave me a standing boo.
George Halas
George Halas
- dplank
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 13632
- Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am
- Has thanked: 1661 times
- Been thanked: 2837 times
I can’t go to 20M, but certainly would do 15M and anything in between there is in the “tough call” range but I’d likely lean yes because I’m an OL freak. Plus we need more help on our OL, so losing our best player and creating another need seems like a bad idea to me.Moriarty wrote: ↑Fri Oct 18, 2024 1:42 pmI'm not sure what you mean by giving up on him prior to Week 1 of last year.dplank wrote: ↑Fri Oct 18, 2024 10:09 am
Fair enough, although I disagree and think that you're spinning data to an uber negative take. Your logic, by your own admission, has the actual effect of throwing him away right when we went on PUP, because just by pure math/logic you've made it impossible to meet your own success criteria. This was my theory and the point I was making to Ark initially proving out to be true, that folks have simply already made their minds up, so appreciate the straight take! No hard feelings, but I think giving up on him prior to Week 1 last year is just very short sighted and overly negative. JMO.
If you really felt that way (I suspect you don't and are going to realize your criteria is flawed), then the logical play should have been to look to move him and get something for him since he literally has no chance of being resigned with the criteria you lay out here. Kinda nuts to me. But I very much appreciate the honest straight conversation even if we disagree on it, well done to both you and Lacertine!
I haven't said I wanted to do that previously or here.
As for whether he has enough of a chance to change minds significantly before free agency...well, that's just the breaks. Convincing someone something's changed takes time, and there's a limited, unchangeable amount of time before the decision comes due. If we could agree with him on a 1 yr prove it deal to give him more time to prove he's able to stay healthy, I'd love to buy that extra time at a fair price. But the Tags are almost certainly going to be too high for something like that (25 or 23M). And he's probably going to get offers with decent guarantees.
Could/should we have traded him for something last off-season, if we're afraid to commit? Maybe. Depends on what offers you could get. But at the same time, with our OL as shaky as it's been and a rookie QB - 11 games of good play with continuity at a really cheap price is valuable. It's only when you get to 16M for maybe only 11 games of good play that gets worrisome.
Is it impossible the rest of the season could play out in a way where he'd be willing to return on a deal I'd be fine with? No. Just unlikely. The problem is that, the healthier he stays: he may be driving what I'm willing to pay up, but he's also driving up what he'll want and what other people will be willing to pay up, too. Which goes up more? We'll see what other teams are willing to put out, but I'm guessing someone else will gamble more on his health than I'm willing to.
How high are you willing to go with him?
As for why I said you already decided before Week 1 last year, it wasn’t an attack line I was just running out your logic. Which honestly you just re-confirmed. You said that he wouldn’t have enough time to change your mind, right? So it’s settled then , no matter what he does there isn’t enough time for you. Even if he played the next 13 games last year after return from PUP and all 17 this year. That means you’ve given up on him as a Bear, how can it not? Help me understand
- Arkansasbear
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 5672
- Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2020 10:41 am
- Has thanked: 584 times
- Been thanked: 950 times
Wasn't trying to dodge your question, but wasn't overly clear with what I was saying. There had been talk that Trev said they might visit his contract at the time of the bye. So the contract detail I put out there reflect what I think they should do now. Because despite starting all 6 games thus far when he misses a large part of two of those games,. not it doesn't make my concerns go away. If he finishes off the year and doesn't miss time other than a snap here and there, it would likely shift my opinion. That to me is where the rubber hits the road for him and Bears. Seems like it could play out 1 of three ways (there is a fourth, but I don't think it likely):dplank wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2024 9:59 pmMy honest direct question that you didn’t answer though is, again, when does the narrative change for you on him? Apparently starting 18 of the last 19 isn’t good enough, so what is?Arkansasbear wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2024 8:44 pm
If he plays in 85% of the games, that’s missing 2.5games a year. Hard to pay out huge dollars for someone missing that amount of time. HRS says the 10th ranked OG makes 16.5M per year. Pay him $8-11M a year with clauses for playing time that can get him to $17M.
To not factor in his missed time seems not wise to me.
1. Work out a contract during the bye that somewhat is based upon the injury concern - he gets a very solid base salary that can rise to top 10 money based on playing time. Heck, you could even have it worded so that once he has a year that he hits those marks it increase future years as he will have shown his availability.
2. Wait until after the season and work out a contract and Trev plays lights out and doesn't miss any time - Worst case for the Bears as they will need to pay a lot.
3. Wait until after the season and he misses significant time - Worst case for him as his value and leverage drop and he makes less money.
4. Pay him a ton of money over the break on a contract that doesn't have protections for missing time. (Just don't see this one),
Are you now of the opinion that his injury history has been "cured" and shouldn't factor into the contract? I want him to be here his whole career. But until he proves he will be out there I have a hard time justifying a contract that reflects what he does on the field when he is out there. Guy is great and want him to get paid. My proposal allows that to happen if he does what he needs to do. Again the number I throw out there for base and max I acknowledge aren't rooted in sound NFL contract principles and may need to go up or down. Just using them to outline a plan.
Hell I like guys that are willing to bet on themselves. We need more Rod Tidwells.
- dplank
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 13632
- Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am
- Has thanked: 1661 times
- Been thanked: 2837 times
I believe his injury history was overblown to begin with, so I’m not sure “cured” is how I would put it. I’m not ignoring it, his availability has been well below average over his tenure. But most of that was in his first two years, not his last two years. And he was drafted with a known injury, which isn’t his fault and IMO is what placed this stigma on him to begin with. Recency matters a whole lot to me, it’s a FAR better way to project his future, and my opinion is that most Bears fans aren’t letting go of the past. It’s more emotional than rational.
None of this guarantees his health going forward. Personally I’d let the season play out then aggressively pursue resigning him. But I’m happy to see the season play out first, so I think we see it about the same except for his value. We just did this with Fields right? Market speaks? I’m betting the market will speak loudly for Tev.
None of this guarantees his health going forward. Personally I’d let the season play out then aggressively pursue resigning him. But I’m happy to see the season play out first, so I think we see it about the same except for his value. We just did this with Fields right? Market speaks? I’m betting the market will speak loudly for Tev.
- Arkansasbear
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 5672
- Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2020 10:41 am
- Has thanked: 584 times
- Been thanked: 950 times
I couldn’t think of a word to where put cured it was the best I could come up with.
I agree that he plays like has and doesn’t miss time he will have a strong market. But I also think that if he misses time his market will shrink.
I agree that he plays like has and doesn’t miss time he will have a strong market. But I also think that if he misses time his market will shrink.
-
- Head Coach
- Posts: 2742
- Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 6:56 am
- Has thanked: 3091 times
- Been thanked: 589 times
It's pretty simple, play well and stay on the field (not just start games) and the Bears will pay him. If he doesn't, someone else will pay him.
I hope he plays well and stays healthy but I won't shed a tear if he doesn't.
I hope he plays well and stays healthy but I won't shed a tear if he doesn't.
- WagonForce
- MVP
- Posts: 1031
- Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 11:57 am
- Has thanked: 80 times
- Been thanked: 67 times
I'm of the mind that if the Bears are going to achieve consistently better offensive line play than they've seen going back a long ways now, they are going to have to take some risks. Draft picks can bust, veterans with proven talent can turn into Nate Davis, and guys that have the ability and the right mentality can be betrayed by injuries.
The Bears have their QB, it's time to get (more) serious about protecting him.
If I'm Poles, I'm working hard to find a contract offer that Teven's camp will agree to and I'm trying to get there during the bye. It will probably be a bit richer than I want but this way both parties share the risk. If Teven balls out the rest of the year, he'll have left some money on the table, if he has more injury issues, the Bears will likely have paid more than they should. Even with signing Teven, I'm likely investing material capital on the offensive line in this upcoming draft.
Hopefully there's a world where the Bears can offer Teven enough security that he's not inclined to test free agency, while building in enough incentives or otherwise structure the contract to give the team some protection if he's just not durable enough for the NFL.
The Bears have their QB, it's time to get (more) serious about protecting him.
If I'm Poles, I'm working hard to find a contract offer that Teven's camp will agree to and I'm trying to get there during the bye. It will probably be a bit richer than I want but this way both parties share the risk. If Teven balls out the rest of the year, he'll have left some money on the table, if he has more injury issues, the Bears will likely have paid more than they should. Even with signing Teven, I'm likely investing material capital on the offensive line in this upcoming draft.
Hopefully there's a world where the Bears can offer Teven enough security that he's not inclined to test free agency, while building in enough incentives or otherwise structure the contract to give the team some protection if he's just not durable enough for the NFL.
- Bears Whiskey Nut
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 11673
- Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 4:06 am
- Location: Oak Park, IL
- Has thanked: 100 times
- Been thanked: 778 times
Saw an article suggesting that the Bears could get LT Cam Robinson from the Jaguars for a day two draft pick. Thoughts?
- wab
- Mod
- Posts: 30830
- Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:49 pm
- Has thanked: 178 times
- Been thanked: 2490 times
Without looking at his contract, for a day two pick, I’m inclined to say … maybe.Bears Whiskey Nut wrote: ↑Sat Oct 19, 2024 9:05 am Saw an article suggesting that the Bears could get LT Cam Robinson from the Jaguars for a day two draft pick. Thoughts?
I don’t know that he’d start immediately, but if Wright (and to a lesser extent Jones) doesn’t get it together, then he’s a solid option. But I’d imagine there are teams out there that give him an immediate path to starting.
I kind of like the makeup of the OL right now, so I’d prefer to keep it the way it is for now. But Robinson is a heck of a player.
- Heinz D.
- MVP
- Posts: 1428
- Joined: Fri May 06, 2022 4:29 pm
- Location: Tri-State area
- Has thanked: 1412 times
- Been thanked: 265 times
Was the "suggesting" something that author was speculating that's what the Bears will do, or did he hear a rumor that this might go down?Bears Whiskey Nut wrote: ↑Sat Oct 19, 2024 9:05 am Saw an article suggesting that the Bears could get LT Cam Robinson from the Jaguars for a day two draft pick. Thoughts?
My mother's love was inexplicably linked to kickball.
- Bears Whiskey Nut
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 11673
- Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 4:06 am
- Location: Oak Park, IL
- Has thanked: 100 times
- Been thanked: 778 times
Speculation I think.Heinz D. wrote: ↑Sat Oct 19, 2024 10:24 amWas the "suggesting" something that author was speculating that's what the Bears will do, or did he hear a rumor that this might go down?Bears Whiskey Nut wrote: ↑Sat Oct 19, 2024 9:05 am Saw an article suggesting that the Bears could get LT Cam Robinson from the Jaguars for a day two draft pick. Thoughts?
-
- Head Coach
- Posts: 2742
- Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 6:56 am
- Has thanked: 3091 times
- Been thanked: 589 times
I don't know much about Robinson, but if he's "a heck of a player" why wouldn't the Bears pursue him? The line sorely lacks players you could describe as "a heck of a player"wab wrote: ↑Sat Oct 19, 2024 9:46 amWithout looking at his contract, for a day two pick, I’m inclined to say … maybe.Bears Whiskey Nut wrote: ↑Sat Oct 19, 2024 9:05 am Saw an article suggesting that the Bears could get LT Cam Robinson from the Jaguars for a day two draft pick. Thoughts?
I don’t know that he’d start immediately, but if Wright (and to a lesser extent Jones) doesn’t get it together, then he’s a solid option. But I’d imagine there are teams out there that give him an immediate path to starting.
I kind of like the makeup of the OL right now, so I’d prefer to keep it the way it is for now. But Robinson is a heck of a player.
- HisRoyalSweetness
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 8018
- Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 7:20 pm
- Has thanked: 102 times
- Been thanked: 2810 times
For what it's worth, PFF grades and rankings 6 weeks into the season...HurricaneBear wrote: ↑Sat Oct 19, 2024 12:52 pmI don't know much about Robinson, but if he's "a heck of a player" why wouldn't the Bears pursue him? The line sorely lacks players you could describe as "a heck of a player"wab wrote: ↑Sat Oct 19, 2024 9:46 am Without looking at his contract, for a day two pick, I’m inclined to say … maybe.
I don’t know that he’d start immediately, but if Wright (and to a lesser extent Jones) doesn’t get it together, then he’s a solid option. But I’d imagine there are teams out there that give him an immediate path to starting.
I kind of like the makeup of the OL right now, so I’d prefer to keep it the way it is for now. But Robinson is a heck of a player.
- Braxton Jones: 71.4 (26th)
- Darnell Wright: 70.4 (29th)
- Cam Robinson: 69.2 (32nd)
Arise Sir Walter: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXdXRP6Hi-U
- Moriarty
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 7672
- Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 1:22 pm
- Has thanked: 524 times
- Been thanked: 996 times
HisRoyalSweetness wrote: ↑Sat Oct 19, 2024 2:01 pmFor what it's worth, PFF grades and rankings 6 weeks into the season...HurricaneBear wrote: ↑Sat Oct 19, 2024 12:52 pm
I don't know much about Robinson, but if he's "a heck of a player" why wouldn't the Bears pursue him? The line sorely lacks players you could describe as "a heck of a player"
- Braxton Jones: 71.4 (26th)
- Darnell Wright: 70.4 (29th)
- Cam Robinson: 69.2 (32nd)
Even moreso:
The best season of Cam's career and the worst of Braxton's are pretty much equal (69).
And, (b), the Bears already spent a Day Two pick to acquire an OT they have high hopes for, but don't know what he can do yet. Why would they immediately spend another to get another?
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.
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.
- Moriarty
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 7672
- Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 1:22 pm
- Has thanked: 524 times
- Been thanked: 996 times
It depends on what you mean "not enough time" for.dplank wrote: ↑Fri Oct 18, 2024 2:49 pm As for why I said you already decided before Week 1 last year, it wasn’t an attack line I was just running out your logic. Which honestly you just re-confirmed. You said that he wouldn’t have enough time to change your mind, right? So it’s settled then , no matter what he does there isn’t enough time for you. Even if he played the next 13 games last year after return from PUP and all 17 this year. That means you’ve given up on him as a Bear, how can it not? Help me understand
I'm going to use some $ figures in this explanation, but don't get tied up in the specifics of them. I'm just pulling numbers out of my ass to show comparison.
Let's suppose hypothetically that everyone agreed at the conclusion of the season that, if Teven was absolutely no more of an injury risk going forward than any other 26ish year old lineman, that he deserves 18M/yr with 50% guaranteed. But, if you believe he comes with more injury risk than some OTs, his value would go down from there.
Now, if he stayed totally healthy over the next 11 games, would I be confident that he's absolutely no more of an injury risk going forward than any other 26ish year old lineman? No, I wouldn't.
If he'd have been totally healthy over the whole 17 game season (which he hasn't), would I have been confident that he's absolutely no more of an injury risk going forward than any other 26ish year old lineman? No, I wouldn't.
So, is there enough time for him to erase any injury concerns and make me willing to pay his full "no injury concerns" value? No.
Does that mean I've given up on him as a Bear? No.
It just means what I'm willing to give him is reduced from 100% of 18M. How reduced? That still fluctuates (potentially quite a bit), based upon his health (and performance, but at least performance level is more accurately established - although not totally, since this has been a bit of a down year for him and this is the system he's playing in on that next contract).
And it does open up the door to other people being less concerned about his health than I am. Suppose I think health concern drops his value from 18 to 12 (or maybe less guaranteed, but AAV is simpler to talk about), but someone else only thinks the risk level should take it from 18 to 16...then he'd be signing with them and not me. If the other interested parties think it should go 18 to 12 as well (or lower), then it's not a problem. (Or if he wants to decide before hitting the market, then you're 'bidding' against what he & his agent think he's worth, instead of other teams.)
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.
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.
- dplank
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 13632
- Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am
- Has thanked: 1661 times
- Been thanked: 2837 times
Thx, I understand now. I mistook your comments about being unable to move past the injury narrative as being unwilling to resign him to an extension. I generally agree with what you’ve laid out here, although I still think your POV on when you move on from the past injuries is still too harsh.
-
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 8839
- Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 4:23 pm
- Has thanked: 630 times
- Been thanked: 738 times
Yeah. I agree. Do NOT think Cam is a "Heckuva Player". He's got talent mind you, and legit feet. I don't think he's ever really put it together though.HurricaneBear wrote: ↑Sat Oct 19, 2024 12:52 pmI don't know much about Robinson, but if he's "a heck of a player" why wouldn't the Bears pursue him? The line sorely lacks players you could describe as "a heck of a player"wab wrote: ↑Sat Oct 19, 2024 9:46 am
Without looking at his contract, for a day two pick, I’m inclined to say … maybe.
I don’t know that he’d start immediately, but if Wright (and to a lesser extent Jones) doesn’t get it together, then he’s a solid option. But I’d imagine there are teams out there that give him an immediate path to starting.
I kind of like the makeup of the OL right now, so I’d prefer to keep it the way it is for now. But Robinson is a heck of a player.
- Rusty Trombagent
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 7874
- Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 11:19 am
- Location: Maine!
- Has thanked: 705 times
- Been thanked: 1352 times
- HisRoyalSweetness
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 8018
- Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 7:20 pm
- Has thanked: 102 times
- Been thanked: 2810 times
A look at Amegadjie's first outing:
Too much of a positive spin in my opinion.
For those interested, PFF have given him an initial 49.8 grade.
Too much of a positive spin in my opinion.
For those interested, PFF have given him an initial 49.8 grade.
Arise Sir Walter: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXdXRP6Hi-U
- Ditka’s dictaphone
- Head Coach
- Posts: 4497
- Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2021 12:33 pm
- Has thanked: 1023 times
- Been thanked: 1044 times
To answer the question of the thread:
It will look like a poorly coached uncoordinated porous penalty machine
It will look like a poorly coached uncoordinated porous penalty machine
(26/09/2023) Winner of the inaugural
-
- Head Coach
- Posts: 2742
- Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 6:56 am
- Has thanked: 3091 times
- Been thanked: 589 times
A Chicago Bears classic!Ditka’s dictaphone wrote: ↑Tue Oct 29, 2024 1:49 am To answer the question of the thread:
It will look like a poorly coached uncoordinated porous penalty machine