Zacch Pickens / DL article

For all things Chicago Bears

Moderator: wab

User avatar
dplank
Hall of Famer
Posts: 12743
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am
Has thanked: 1391 times
Been thanked: 2504 times

When we start our 3rd defensive series of the game and the DL is Booker / Pickens / Cowart / DomRob then people will understand what we're actually missing. Cause right now, that's the back half of our DL rotation. This should terrify people.
User avatar
Grizzled
Hall of Famer
Posts: 5850
Joined: Sun Dec 08, 2019 3:55 pm
Has thanked: 658 times
Been thanked: 570 times

They didn't try him at 3T last year (or too much if so) although some thought it would be his natural position.
User avatar
The Marshall Plan
Hall of Famer
Posts: 9017
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 11:47 am
Location: Parts Unknown
Has thanked: 1089 times
Been thanked: 1500 times

dplank wrote: Tue Jun 11, 2024 11:33 am When we start our 3rd defensive series of the game and the DL is Booker / Pickens / Cowart / DomRob then people will understand what we're actually missing. Cause right now, that's the back half of our DL rotation. This should terrify people.
Yeah.

I don’t understand what’s so hard to understand here.

We have Montez Sweat and then a bunch of hopefuls or no impact guys.

The need for another DE couldn’t be more obvious and especially so given that we run a Cover-2.
Image
HurricaneBear
Head Coach
Posts: 2485
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 6:56 am
Has thanked: 2501 times
Been thanked: 492 times

dplank wrote: Tue Jun 11, 2024 11:33 am When we start our 3rd defensive series of the game and the DL is Booker / Pickens / Cowart / DomRob then people will understand what we're actually missing. Cause right now, that's the back half of our DL rotation. This should terrify people.
It will be 21-0 Bears and we will all be drunk on Caleb.
User avatar
Bearfacts
Head Coach
Posts: 2169
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 8:33 am
Location: Colorado
Has thanked: 1216 times
Been thanked: 310 times

I feel pretty safe in saying Poles will not be trading Jaylon Johnson for an edge rusher. He's arguably the top shut down corner in the NFL and we just locked him up through 2027. There are other possibilities to explore if Poles believes it's needed.

Last season Flus had both Pickens and Dexter taking snaps as 1 tech DT giving Billings a break. I don't see that happening to the same extent this year unless it's part of whatever plan they have to use Dexter in multiple positions. Pickens is not built to play anywhere but the 3 tech spot. I believe we'll see Dexter there as the starter with Pickens backing him. But I do agree with the article dplank posted that he needs to show he can handle the position well enough to keep his spot beyond 2024.

We also have backup for Billings this year in Cowart and Randolph so there should be less need for either Pickens or Dexter to fill his role. I'd be surprised is Poles made any moves to add to the DL before camp begins unless he can sign someone on the cheap and from what I can tell there's not a whole lot out there to choose from. Before even considering Ngakoue I'd like to see what some of the edge guys we have can do. If anyone is gonna sign him he has a better shot at returning here than elsewhere.
cblaz11
MVP
Posts: 1327
Joined: Sat Apr 25, 2009 7:02 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 133 times

We can’t preach build through the draft then complain when we are banking on 2nd and 3rd round picks to develop into starters


quote="The Marshall Plan" post_id=385784 time=1718127136 user_id=1645]
dplank wrote: Tue Jun 11, 2024 11:33 am When we start our 3rd defensive series of the game and the DL is Booker / Pickens / Cowart / DomRob then people will understand what we're actually missing. Cause right now, that's the back half of our DL rotation. This should terrify people.
Yeah.

I don’t understand what’s so hard to understand here.

We have Montez Sweat and then a bunch of hopefuls or no impact guys.

The need for another DE couldn’t be more obvious and especially so given that we run a Cover-2.
[/quote]
User avatar
dplank
Hall of Famer
Posts: 12743
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am
Has thanked: 1391 times
Been thanked: 2504 times

cblaz11 wrote: Tue Jun 11, 2024 5:16 pm We can’t preach build through the draft then complain when we are banking on 2nd and 3rd round picks to develop into starters


quote="The Marshall Plan" post_id=385784 time=1718127136 user_id=1645]
dplank wrote: Tue Jun 11, 2024 11:33 am When we start our 3rd defensive series of the game and the DL is Booker / Pickens / Cowart / DomRob then people will understand what we're actually missing. Cause right now, that's the back half of our DL rotation. This should terrify people.
Yeah.

I don’t understand what’s so hard to understand here.

We have Montez Sweat and then a bunch of hopefuls or no impact guys.

The need for another DE couldn’t be more obvious and especially so given that we run a Cover-2.
[/quote]

That back 4 list isn’t full of 2nd and 3rd round picks. One 3rd in Pickens, then three late rounders (two of which we already know suck). So you are blatantly misframing it.
User avatar
Bearfacts
Head Coach
Posts: 2169
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 8:33 am
Location: Colorado
Has thanked: 1216 times
Been thanked: 310 times

Go back in time and look up where some of the best DL to ever play the game were drafted. One Bear whose going into the HOF this year is Mongo. A 3rd round pick. Richard Dent was an 8th round pick. IMHO quite a few of them began their careers as "hopefuls". We can't restock every unit at once. Last year both the OL and the DL got boosts in FA and the draft. I'm willing to see what those players are capable of. Next years draft is loaded with DL talent and we have 3 picks in rounds one and two. He'll fix it then.
User avatar
Moriarty
Hall of Famer
Posts: 7188
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 1:22 pm
Has thanked: 434 times
Been thanked: 824 times

cblaz11 wrote: Tue Jun 11, 2024 5:16 pm We can’t preach build through the draft then complain when we are banking on 2nd and 3rd round picks to develop into starters
Trying to draft starters & wanting them to earn starting jobs is one thing.
Counting on them to start, because there aren't any other eggs or baskets, even though they haven't shown you very much so far, is another.


Kyler Gordon had a rocky first year. In the second, he found his groove.
Adam Shaheen had a disappointing rookie season. And the disappointment never ended.

It's a coin flip as to whether those guys are going to be useful or not.
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
The Marshall Plan
Hall of Famer
Posts: 9017
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 11:47 am
Location: Parts Unknown
Has thanked: 1089 times
Been thanked: 1500 times

Bearfacts wrote: Tue Jun 11, 2024 1:21 pm I feel pretty safe in saying Poles will not be trading Jaylon Johnson for an edge rusher. He's arguably the top shut down corner in the NFL and we just locked him up through 2027. There are other possibilities to explore if Poles believes it's needed.
I do not believe Poles trades JJ either. Nevertheless I don't think it's a bad idea. Trading away from a position of depth to fill a shortcoming on what I think is a more important area.

Using the contract AAV as a value guide we can get a stud DE at $20M per year.

Given the choice of having the best pass rush in the league v having the best secondary I take the best pass rush every time especially given the base defense that we run.

Just for reference, but this illustrates the importance of the front four generating the pass rush in a Cover-2.

https://footballadvantage.com/cover-2-d ... gle%20play.
Image
cblaz11
MVP
Posts: 1327
Joined: Sat Apr 25, 2009 7:02 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 133 times

TMP, you have to stop talking about this defense like we’re the Lovie Smith Tampa 2…this, is not that defense. I’d argue that we ran cover 3 almost as much as we ran cover 2.

It doesn’t matter what defense you’re running in the back end, it comes down to what you’re doing to generate pass rush..and that is where Flus is similar to Lovie. He has shown in the past that he wants to generate a pass rush with his 4 down linemen. Cover 2, cover 1, cover 3, and quarters..doesn’t matter…

That said, something changed last year with Flus. We started seeing him actually go away from the cover 2 and run primarily cover 3 while actually bringing pass rushers from different spots. I believe that as a driving reason for our improvement as teams didn’t expect the adjustment…this year they will be prepared. I think the reason for the adjustment is because he saw the talent we had at CB and realized they can handle the increased pressure from 2 to 1/3.
User avatar
The Marshall Plan
Hall of Famer
Posts: 9017
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 11:47 am
Location: Parts Unknown
Has thanked: 1089 times
Been thanked: 1500 times

cblaz11 wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2024 5:23 am TMP, you have to stop talking about this defense like we’re the Lovie Smith Tampa 2…this, is not that defense. I’d argue that we ran cover 3 almost as much as we ran cover 2.

It doesn’t matter what defense you’re running in the back end, it comes down to what you’re doing to generate pass rush..and that is where Flus is similar to Lovie. He has shown in the past that he wants to generate a pass rush with his 4 down linemen. Cover 2, cover 1, cover 3, and quarters..doesn’t matter…

That said, something changed last year with Flus. We started seeing him actually go away from the cover 2 and run primarily cover 3 while actually bringing pass rushers from different spots. I believe that as a driving reason for our improvement as teams didn’t expect the adjustment…this year they will be prepared. I think the reason for the adjustment is because he saw the talent we had at CB and realized they can handle the increased pressure from 2 to 1/3.
Ok you’re correct. This is not the pure Tampa 2 but at the same time we play either 2 or 3 defenders deep. The front four still has to get home in either system or it doesn’t work.

I would argue that our improvement in the second half of last year was getting Montez Sweat. Everything got better when he showed up. Please check out when we started generating turnovers en masse. It was right around that New Orleans game and then forward.

I still say that if I could trade JJ for a DE of equal cost and ability I would do it. I’d rather have the pass rush and our secondary is deeper to where we can reallocate players.
Image
User avatar
dplank
Hall of Famer
Posts: 12743
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am
Has thanked: 1391 times
Been thanked: 2504 times

I wouldn’t trade JJ, he’s too good. And I agree with Bearfacts point that Poles can’t fix everything all at once. I’d just like to improve our depth so we don’t fall off a cliff when we rotate.

Moriarty made the best point so far, it’s one thing to draft and roster those guys, it’s another to pencil them in as key contributors because you don’t have anyone else. Asking one guy like that to develop in rotation is fine, asking that of 4 guys? That’s too hard to hide/cover with your established talent.

One vet addition will have a strong impact to this unit IMO. It wouldn’t cost a ton, patch it up for this season, then draft into the position next year.
cblaz11
MVP
Posts: 1327
Joined: Sat Apr 25, 2009 7:02 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 133 times

The Marshall Plan wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2024 7:13 am
cblaz11 wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2024 5:23 am TMP, you have to stop talking about this defense like we’re the Lovie Smith Tampa 2…this, is not that defense. I’d argue that we ran cover 3 almost as much as we ran cover 2.

It doesn’t matter what defense you’re running in the back end, it comes down to what you’re doing to generate pass rush..and that is where Flus is similar to Lovie. He has shown in the past that he wants to generate a pass rush with his 4 down linemen. Cover 2, cover 1, cover 3, and quarters..doesn’t matter…

That said, something changed last year with Flus. We started seeing him actually go away from the cover 2 and run primarily cover 3 while actually bringing pass rushers from different spots. I believe that as a driving reason for our improvement as teams didn’t expect the adjustment…this year they will be prepared. I think the reason for the adjustment is because he saw the talent we had at CB and realized they can handle the increased pressure from 2 to 1/3.
Ok you’re correct. This is not the pure Tampa 2 but at the same time we play either 2 or 3 defenders deep. The front four still has to get home in either system or it doesn’t work.

I would argue that our improvement in the second half of last year was getting Montez Sweat. Everything got better when he showed up. Please check out when we started generating turnovers en masse. It was right around that New Orleans game and then forward.

I still say that if I could trade JJ for a DE of equal cost and ability I would do it. I’d rather have the pass rush and our secondary is deeper to where we can reallocate players.
I agree that Sweat helped for sure..I’m curious if our improvement also coincided with Flus taking over play calling. Again though, while Sweat helped, I stand firm in thinking it was primarily because of our change in philosophy. IE, Flus started trusting his guys to cover and throwing more at the QB.

I agree on DE being more important then corner, but the talking point of trading JJ right now is so far from reality I cringe. It’s not even close to a possibility. That said, I want JJ and a trade for DE, which I believe is I’ll happen before the deadline. It doesn’t have to be one or the other.

Check out this article

https://www.bearstalk.com/2023/12/09/ma ... e-coverage
User avatar
dplank
Hall of Famer
Posts: 12743
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am
Has thanked: 1391 times
Been thanked: 2504 times

I saw that also blaz, I credited it a bit more to just Flus calling plays after the Williams departure. Flus just seemed a bit more aggressive, in a good way, than Williams was.
User avatar
wab
Mod
Posts: 30190
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:49 pm
Has thanked: 151 times
Been thanked: 2168 times

People forget that Flus cut his teeth under Rob Ryan. Anthony Spencer, DeMarcus Ware, and Sean Lee all had exceptional years when he was their LB coach in Dallas.
User avatar
dplank
Hall of Famer
Posts: 12743
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am
Has thanked: 1391 times
Been thanked: 2504 times

wab wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2024 10:02 am People forget that Flus cut his teeth under Rob Ryan. Anthony Spencer, DeMarcus Ware, and Sean Lee all had exceptional years when he was their LB coach in Dallas.
Anecdote alert: Rob Ryan would mistakenly write on walls instead of a white board frequently, and they literally had to come behind him every so often and repaint the walls. He was a massive idiot lol. I have all the love and respect in the world for his brother tho.
User avatar
malk
Head Coach
Posts: 3706
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 7:10 am
Has thanked: 141 times
Been thanked: 232 times

Even though it isn't a real suggestion the thought of trading JJ rather than Edmunds is absolutely baffling to me. My Madden fantasy is Edmunds and a 2nd for Crosby. Our set up then would be pretty much ideal on defence.
"I wouldn't take him for a conditional 7th. His next contract will pay him more than he could possibly contribute.".

Noted Brain Genius Malk, Summer 2018.

(2020 update, wait, was I right...)
User avatar
dplank
Hall of Famer
Posts: 12743
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am
Has thanked: 1391 times
Been thanked: 2504 times

malk wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2024 10:21 am Even though it isn't a real suggestion the thought of trading JJ rather than Edmunds is absolutely baffling to me. My Madden fantasy is Edmunds and a 2nd for Crosby. Our set up then would be pretty much ideal on defence.
Great point. I do think Edmunds is going to play a lot better this year, but he's making a TON of money for a MLB. And if we are moving on from many of the old tropes about Cover 2, maybe we should also move on from the "need a tall MLB to cover the deep middle" trope at the same time? Sanborn could man the middle quite well I think, at a fraction of that cost.
User avatar
The Marshall Plan
Hall of Famer
Posts: 9017
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 11:47 am
Location: Parts Unknown
Has thanked: 1089 times
Been thanked: 1500 times

dplank wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2024 10:10 am
wab wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2024 10:02 am People forget that Flus cut his teeth under Rob Ryan. Anthony Spencer, DeMarcus Ware, and Sean Lee all had exceptional years when he was their LB coach in Dallas.
Anecdote alert: Rob Ryan would mistakenly write on walls instead of a white board frequently, and they literally had to come behind him every so often and repaint the walls. He was a massive idiot lol. I have all the love and respect in the world for his brother tho.
I loved Rex Ryan and I always wanted him over here with us.

That defense of his was great.
Image
User avatar
The Marshall Plan
Hall of Famer
Posts: 9017
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 11:47 am
Location: Parts Unknown
Has thanked: 1089 times
Been thanked: 1500 times

malk wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2024 10:21 am Even though it isn't a real suggestion the thought of trading JJ rather than Edmunds is absolutely baffling to me. My Madden fantasy is Edmunds and a 2nd for Crosby. Our set up then would be pretty much ideal on defence.
We have two other starting quality CBs. That’s where the depth is.

Trading Edmunds didn’t even occur to me BTW.
Image
User avatar
malk
Head Coach
Posts: 3706
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 7:10 am
Has thanked: 141 times
Been thanked: 232 times

dplank wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2024 10:27 am
malk wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2024 10:21 am Even though it isn't a real suggestion the thought of trading JJ rather than Edmunds is absolutely baffling to me. My Madden fantasy is Edmunds and a 2nd for Crosby. Our set up then would be pretty much ideal on defence.
Great point. I do think Edmunds is going to play a lot better this year, but he's making a TON of money for a MLB. And if we are moving on from many of the old tropes about Cover 2, maybe we should also move on from the "need a tall MLB to cover the deep middle" trope at the same time? Sanborn could man the middle quite well I think, at a fraction of that cost.
I don't want to bag on Edmunds too much, I happen to think he isn't great but the major issue is that it just isn't' a position that should command that much cap. As you say, Sanborn could do most of what he does and the change have negligible impact on wins and losses.

No one is trading for Edmunds, I absolutely meant it as being a Madden type move. It's definitely the worst thing Poles has done though, even worse than the Claypool trade imo. If that money was put towards resigning JJ and we, say, kept Morrow for depth then we could have been in the running for Burns, Hunter, Huff, Greenard etc.
"I wouldn't take him for a conditional 7th. His next contract will pay him more than he could possibly contribute.".

Noted Brain Genius Malk, Summer 2018.

(2020 update, wait, was I right...)
thefish7
Journeyman
Posts: 147
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2010 10:28 pm
Location: Hanoi, Vietnam
Has thanked: 29 times
Been thanked: 52 times

I dunno, Malk. That claypool trade ended up very very bad. Go take a look at who went with that 2023 #32 pick and he next ten guys. Several of those guys would be great on the roster and could start or play many snaps for us. Edmunds may be an overpay, but he's an FA and just costs us cap money we kind of have to spend anyway. He's cuttable cheap after 2025 (and counts 17M against the cap that year), so it's maybe an overpay, but not some kind of millstone.
User avatar
The Marshall Plan
Hall of Famer
Posts: 9017
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 11:47 am
Location: Parts Unknown
Has thanked: 1089 times
Been thanked: 1500 times

cblaz11 wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2024 9:44 am
The Marshall Plan wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2024 7:13 am

Ok you’re correct. This is not the pure Tampa 2 but at the same time we play either 2 or 3 defenders deep. The front four still has to get home in either system or it doesn’t work.

I would argue that our improvement in the second half of last year was getting Montez Sweat. Everything got better when he showed up. Please check out when we started generating turnovers en masse. It was right around that New Orleans game and then forward.

I still say that if I could trade JJ for a DE of equal cost and ability I would do it. I’d rather have the pass rush and our secondary is deeper to where we can reallocate players.
I agree that Sweat helped for sure..I’m curious if our improvement also coincided with Flus taking over play calling. Again though, while Sweat helped, I stand firm in thinking it was primarily because of our change in philosophy. IE, Flus started trusting his guys to cover and throwing more at the QB.

I agree on DE being more important then corner, but the talking point of trading JJ right now is so far from reality I cringe. It’s not even close to a possibility. That said, I want JJ and a trade for DE, which I believe is I’ll happen before the deadline. It doesn’t have to be one or the other.

Check out this article

https://www.bearstalk.com/2023/12/09/ma ... e-coverage
That was good stuff. Thanks man.

I need to think more about how the presence of Montez Sweat (or pass rush) allows for a transition from a Cover-2 to a Cover-3 or if it was just coincidence.

Based upon the article, the Cover-3 transition sounds more like it's related to confusing the opposing team versus taking advantage of an improved pass rush.

Hey Guys: Check out that article cblaz linked. Really good analysis of our trend on defense.
Image
HurricaneBear
Head Coach
Posts: 2485
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 6:56 am
Has thanked: 2501 times
Been thanked: 492 times

The Marshall Plan wrote: Thu Jun 13, 2024 3:40 am
cblaz11 wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2024 9:44 am

I agree that Sweat helped for sure..I’m curious if our improvement also coincided with Flus taking over play calling. Again though, while Sweat helped, I stand firm in thinking it was primarily because of our change in philosophy. IE, Flus started trusting his guys to cover and throwing more at the QB.

I agree on DE being more important then corner, but the talking point of trading JJ right now is so far from reality I cringe. It’s not even close to a possibility. That said, I want JJ and a trade for DE, which I believe is I’ll happen before the deadline. It doesn’t have to be one or the other.

Check out this article

https://www.bearstalk.com/2023/12/09/ma ... e-coverage
That was good stuff. Thanks man.

I need to think more about how the presence of Montez Sweat (or pass rush) allows for a transition from a Cover-2 to a Cover-3 or if it was just coincidence.

Based upon the article, the Cover-3 transition sounds more like it's related to confusing the opposing team versus taking advantage of an improved pass rush.

Hey Guys: Check out that article cblaz linked. Really good analysis of our trend on defense.
If it helps, I swear I remember reading an article saying Flus was going away from the cover 2 to another defense when he was with Indy. It may have been to the cover 3. Sorry I don't remember more than that. I did read it somewhere on here. I'm not good with the search feature and couldn't find it. Maybe whoever posts it remembers?

Edit - googled it, and while not the same article it does go into him starting to move away from the cover 2 and indy. I only really skimmed thru this quick

https://www.stampedeblue.com/2020/10/2/ ... -2-defense
User avatar
malk
Head Coach
Posts: 3706
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 7:10 am
Has thanked: 141 times
Been thanked: 232 times

thefish7 wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2024 8:49 pm I dunno, Malk. That claypool trade ended up very very bad. Go take a look at who went with that 2023 #32 pick and he next ten guys. Several of those guys would be great on the roster and could start or play many snaps for us. Edmunds may be an overpay, but he's an FA and just costs us cap money we kind of have to spend anyway. He's cuttable cheap after 2025 (and counts 17M against the cap that year), so it's maybe an overpay, but not some kind of millstone.
Saying it was definitely the worst thing is hyperbolic but I do think it was the worst. A 2nd round pick is a shot at a good player the same way as $18m per year is a shot at a good player (more if you factor in the amount spent on an alternative).

Obviously he should have done neither but you can't win them all. I guess my main beef if that the Claypool trade was ok in principle, i.e. if it had worked out. There's definitely an argument that trading a 2nd for a player that close to the end of a contract, with a few question marks... but receivers are valuable. For Edmunds I simply don't like that he thinks that an off ball linebacker is worth that much. Even if Edmunds plays exactly as he hoped it's a bad contract imo.

And just because nothing goes without saying, I'm not calling for us to axe Poles or anything, he's obviously doing well. I just hope that he improves from some of these mistakes.
"I wouldn't take him for a conditional 7th. His next contract will pay him more than he could possibly contribute.".

Noted Brain Genius Malk, Summer 2018.

(2020 update, wait, was I right...)
User avatar
dplank
Hall of Famer
Posts: 12743
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am
Has thanked: 1391 times
Been thanked: 2504 times

malk wrote: Thu Jun 13, 2024 6:21 am
thefish7 wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2024 8:49 pm I dunno, Malk. That claypool trade ended up very very bad. Go take a look at who went with that 2023 #32 pick and he next ten guys. Several of those guys would be great on the roster and could start or play many snaps for us. Edmunds may be an overpay, but he's an FA and just costs us cap money we kind of have to spend anyway. He's cuttable cheap after 2025 (and counts 17M against the cap that year), so it's maybe an overpay, but not some kind of millstone.
Saying it was definitely the worst thing is hyperbolic but I do think it was the worst. A 2nd round pick is a shot at a good player the same way as $18m per year is a shot at a good player (more if you factor in the amount spent on an alternative).

Obviously he should have done neither but you can't win them all. I guess my main beef if that the Claypool trade was ok in principle, i.e. if it had worked out. There's definitely an argument that trading a 2nd for a player that close to the end of a contract, with a few question marks... but receivers are valuable. For Edmunds I simply don't like that he thinks that an off ball linebacker is worth that much. Even if Edmunds plays exactly as he hoped it's a bad contract imo.

And just because nothing goes without saying, I'm not calling for us to axe Poles or anything, he's obviously doing well. I just hope that he improves from some of these mistakes.
Interesting POV here, I'm curious how you viewed Urlacher's value to those great defenses under Lovie?
User avatar
malk
Head Coach
Posts: 3706
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 7:10 am
Has thanked: 141 times
Been thanked: 232 times

dplank wrote: Thu Jun 13, 2024 8:17 am
malk wrote: Thu Jun 13, 2024 6:21 am

Saying it was definitely the worst thing is hyperbolic but I do think it was the worst. A 2nd round pick is a shot at a good player the same way as $18m per year is a shot at a good player (more if you factor in the amount spent on an alternative).

Obviously he should have done neither but you can't win them all. I guess my main beef if that the Claypool trade was ok in principle, i.e. if it had worked out. There's definitely an argument that trading a 2nd for a player that close to the end of a contract, with a few question marks... but receivers are valuable. For Edmunds I simply don't like that he thinks that an off ball linebacker is worth that much. Even if Edmunds plays exactly as he hoped it's a bad contract imo.

And just because nothing goes without saying, I'm not calling for us to axe Poles or anything, he's obviously doing well. I just hope that he improves from some of these mistakes.
Interesting POV here, I'm curious how you viewed Urlacher's value to those great defenses under Lovie?
Always possible that there's some confirmation bias or other here but I think a) MLB was more important to that defence and b) Urlacher was a generational talent, genuinely worthy of his 1st ballot HoF status so that skews the value here. You do get recent examples as well though, Shaq Leonard forcing 17 fumbles in 4 years made him a different kind of proposition (though it always struck me as a bizarre, ongoing anomaly, such a pity the injury hit him).

But the other major thing with Urlacher was the relative value. Only a couple of years where he took up more than 8% of the cap and mostly around 5-7%. Edmunds was already at 6.3% last year, up to 8.7% this coming year (higher than Urlacher ever commanded) before back to 6.7% next year. That's too much for what he does for me, and I thought he had a poor year overall. 4 right place right time interceptions, fine. Coverage, better than average but not stellar. But 10.3% missed tackles is shameful for any middle linebacker and even that might be generous given only 69 of his 113 tackles were solo. I haven't checked the tap but you'd think that most of the misses were on solo attempts so the percentage might be a lot higher if you take away the plays where the attacker is well covered by more than one defender and/or when he falls on a pile.

Maybe he's bringing more to our defence than I understand, I'm literally just a guy here. But he didn't pass the eye test and the stats aren't great either so I think he's a top 10 linebacker paid like a top 3 one, and that discrepancy is cap space is close to $10m a year. Oof.
"I wouldn't take him for a conditional 7th. His next contract will pay him more than he could possibly contribute.".

Noted Brain Genius Malk, Summer 2018.

(2020 update, wait, was I right...)
User avatar
dplank
Hall of Famer
Posts: 12743
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am
Has thanked: 1391 times
Been thanked: 2504 times

Yea I get it and agree in part with this. He simply didn't perform to expectations last season. That said, I think he's going to be really good this year - he's a REALLY good player and I think needed a year to adjust to this defense and will take off this year. He started coming on the last quarter of the season.

I also find it mildly amusing / kinda frustrating that Roquan went from a guy that was always dissed by the national media when he was here, to suddenly being seen as the #1 or #2 ILB in football after he moved to the Ravens. He's the same guy, I watched a good amount of Ravens football and he's the same guy he was in Chicago. So much of these individual rankings are artificially skewed by team results, it's pretty darn annoying.

So I think if the team performs well, and Edmunds plays better, that we could see his ranking shoot way up - for whatever that's worth lol.
RichH55
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8352
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 4:23 pm
Has thanked: 552 times
Been thanked: 655 times

dplank wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2024 10:27 am
malk wrote: Wed Jun 12, 2024 10:21 am Even though it isn't a real suggestion the thought of trading JJ rather than Edmunds is absolutely baffling to me. My Madden fantasy is Edmunds and a 2nd for Crosby. Our set up then would be pretty much ideal on defence.
Great point. I do think Edmunds is going to play a lot better this year, but he's making a TON of money for a MLB. And if we are moving on from many of the old tropes about Cover 2, maybe we should also move on from the "need a tall MLB to cover the deep middle" trope at the same time? Sanborn could man the middle quite well I think, at a fraction of that cost.
Edmunds would be one guy potentially on the chopping block when we get to that point Cap Wise.

It's just the nature of playing a "non-premium" position
Post Reply