Defensive Depth Chart Discussion

[baredown]

He played 79 defensive snaps in 2016 over 6 games. Bush played 333.

If you believe Bush showed more potential or upside than Hall in 2016, fine. I suspect you would have fallen into a definite minority there. I have yet to see anything in Bush that indicates he can become a solid NFL backup at S, let alone starter. In my mind, Hall showed enough at CB in 2016 to project to solid NFL backup, either at CB or possibly at S, if that conversion goes well. Again, the Bears kept Hall on their 53 for cutdown, even though he was injured. That doesn't sound like someone they're looking to jettison...

 

[WindyCity]

Hankins is a guy I still really want he’s a solid player and could play DE And DT for us

I think Hankins might be a waste of money considering we have 2 DLmen on the field a ton.

I do not think we should pay 3 DLmen, unless Hankins wants to come for 1 year.

 

[modo]

I think Hankins might be a waste of money considering we have 2 DLmen on the field a ton.

I do not think we should pay 3 DLmen, unless Hankins wants to come for 1 year.

Hankins wants a lot of money....I think he continually prices himself out.

 

[dennehy]

If you believe Bush showed more potential or upside than Hall in 2016, fine. I suspect you would have fallen into a definite minority there. I have yet to see anything in Bush that indicates he can become a solid NFL backup at S, let alone starter. In my mind, Hall showed enough at CB in 2016 to project to solid NFL backup, either at CB or possibly at S, if that conversion goes well. Again, the Bears kept Hall on their 53 for cutdown, even though he was injured. That doesn't sound like someone they're looking to jettison...

I never said any of that. I said that there is a very small sample size, and that Bush played a great deal more than Hall. 79 snaps isn't enough to show anything imo. I hope he's good, but there just isn't enough evidence to suggest he will be.

I think they should sign a veteran safety - there are a few out there still.

 

[Kaufman20Embalm]

I never said any of that. I said that there is a very small sample size, and that Bush played a great deal more than Hall. 79 snaps isn't enough to show anything imo. I hope he's good, but there just isn't enough evidence to suggest he will be.

I think they should sign a veteran safety - there are a few out there still.

I had hoped we would look at vaccaro to play a hybrid linebacker/safety role. I am really surprised at how the veteran safety free agent class has had virtually no movement. Especially considering it was a pretty weak safety class after the top two.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Raskolnikov]

Roches to compete with Jenkins and have a solid competition at back-up NT would appease me. Hankins might be overkill, but I don’t think championship teams think that way on d-line. Hankins upgrades the rotational depth significantly. Gives us 3 super freaks so that we usually will have at least 2 available.

He protects the #8 pick all season. These are the work horses of the team, I never feel you have over invested there.

Only a young idiot GM would leave himself thin there.

 

[rawdawg]

I think Hankins might be a waste of money considering we have 2 DLmen on the field a ton.

I do not think we should pay 3 DLmen, unless Hankins wants to come for 1 year.

I think Hankins would take a 1-year deal at this point. You don't see a lot of multi-year deals handed out in the summer.

At this point, I'd probably go bold. Go after Hankins. 1-year, 8Mil. Dangle Bullard and go after one of the Broncos edge rushers (might take separate trades). Also sign Kenny Vaccaro to a 1-year deal. He'd be the perfect 3rd safety being that he can cover the slot a bit.

DL (5)- Hicks, Goldman, Hankins, RRH, Nichols. Hankins and maybe Nichols can play NT, so I don't think you'd need a 6th lineman.
ILB (4)- Trevathan, Smith, Kwiatkoski, Iyiegbuniwe
OLB (5)- Floyd, Lynch, Ray, Acho, Fitts
CB (6/7)- Fuller, Amukamara, Callahan, Cooper, Toliver, McManis.
S (4/5)- Jackson, Amos, Vaccaro

4th S spot is a battle between Bush, DHC, and Hall. 2 losers compete with LeBlanc and Mincy for the 11th DB spot. Winners are the best combination of defensive value and special teams play.

 

[Tjodalv]

I don't get it. What's the point of spending 8 mil on Hankins for one year? Are they set to make a deep playoff run? Will he give them a discount when he becomes an UFA again the following season? There just doesn't seem to be a purpose outside of instant gratification.

 

[Raskolnikov]

Battered spouses don’t leave, why should we?

 

[Sculpt]

I think Hankins might be a waste of money considering we have 2 DLmen on the field a ton.

I do not think we should pay 3 DLmen, unless Hankins wants to come for 1 year.

What do you mean by that?

Don't we always play 3 DLmen -- DE-NT-DE?

 

[Sculpt]

Early guess... In FA, UDFA, castoffs from other teams, we might be able to improve on OLB, NT, S and CB.


DL: (6) Hicks, Goldman, Bullard, RRH, Nichols, Jenkins

- Rather sign Hankins for a year and cut Jenkins; especially if the Bears can't sign a better OLB. Imagine the front Hicks-Hankins-Goldman...


OLB: (5) Floyd, Lynch, Fitts, Irving, Acho

ILB: (4) Smith, Trevathan, Kwia, Iggy (Iyiegbuniwe)

S: (4) Jackson, Amos, Hall, DHC

- Hall -- Bears must have liked Hall, when he got injured in preseason they kept Hall on 53, then set him up to come back from IR in 2017. In limited snaps in 2016 he had 1 Int, 3 PB, 9 Tackles. Seems to have some potential.

- DeAndre Houston-Carson -- In 2017 he had 10 ST tackles and 2 FF. Only had 8 snaps at S, but for a backup S, he's the best ST guy, and I still have a little hope he can show as a decent FS.

- Bush -- had 6 tackles. He can play Safety and ST, I just don't see keeping him over Hall or DHC.


CB: (6) Fuller, Prince, LeBlanc, Callahan, Cooper, McMannis

- LeBlanc had an Above Avg ranking for PFF. He's the only outside CB to show he can play there in a pinch, can play NB/DB too. Callahan got hurt, but scored an Avg ranking, I think he's decent at Nickel. Cooper got hurt, but I wasn't impressed; we hope he can be our #3 outside CB, as he has good size 6'2". McMannis is a core ST player. I could see an UDFA replace Callahan or Cooper.

Total: 25

 

[Tjodalv]

What do you mean by that?

Don't we always play 3 DLmen -- DE-NT-DE?

Fangio's primary Nickle package is a 2-4-5:

Goldman at 1-tech
Hicks at 3
Floyd OLB/RE
Lynch? OLB/LE
Trev and Smith ILBs
3 Corners
2 Safeties

And given that teams have been in their Nickle packages for 60% or so of their defensive snaps over the last several years, that means you're sitting one of Goldman, Hicks, Hankins for that much of your playing time -- as none of them provide outside pass-rush. It's either that or you're pulling Trev or Smith on passing downs in order to keep a fatass out there...which makes no sense...

 

[WindyCity]

What do you mean by that?

Don't we always play 3 DLmen -- DE-NT-DE?

65% of the time they are in nickel with only 2 DLmen on the field.

I think Bullard and RRH can handle 35% of the snaps making a combined 1.8 million.

 

[WindyCity]

I doubt Hankins would even sign here if we can’t guarantee him top 2 snaps.

 

[Raskolnikov]

It’s not about sitting them it’s about rotating them and still having 2 pro-bowl level guys shutting up the interior to protect Smith when one goes down.

Goldman has never finished a season?

He can’t play 100% of snaps and make it, we shouldn’t ask Hicks too either. Doing so in a non-playoff year was Fox ball and stupid.

When Goldman misses a game, Hicks slides over, Jenkins role increases beyond his ability, and then instead of one placeholder DE you have two and Hicks and in the games I have watched for 3 years when Goldman is down we look like shit.

Having 3 increases the odds all 3 make it to playoffs, but you kinda hope you only lose one and are good to go all year.

I’m fine with what they have at every position. Jenkins and Bullard and Harris probably improve at their roles and if rook gives us anything it’s s nice line. I’m talking about a dominating fuck you punch you in the mouth line that just gets angry if one man goes down with no drop off.

 

[Raskolnikov]

The guys we rely on for those nickel packages are overburdened. Floyd should rotate out more too imo as he also can’t finush a season.

 

[WindyCity]

It’s not about sitting them it’s about rotating them and still having 2 pro-bowl level guys shutting up the interior to protect Smith when one goes down.

Goldman has never finished a season?

He can’t play 100% of snaps and make it, we shouldn’t ask Hicks too either. Doing so in a non-playoff year was Fox ball and stupid.

When Goldman misses a game, Hicks slides over, Jenkins role increases beyond his ability, and then instead of one placeholder DE you have two and Hicks and in the games I have watched for 3 years when Goldman is down we look like shit.

Having 3 increases the odds all 3 make it to playoffs, but you kinda hope you only lose one and are good to go all year.

I’m fine with what they have at every position. Jenkins and Bullard and Harris probably improve at their roles and if rook gives us anything it’s s nice line. I’m talking about a dominating fuck you punch you in the mouth line that just gets angry if one man goes down with no drop off.

We have 3 young DL players that need reps. RRH and Bullard have flashed when they have gotten to play.

I do not see the need to moth ball their development as well as the development of Nichols to bring in someone who is going to cost real money. Jenkins barely plays.

 

[WindyCity]

Jonathan Hankins 685 snaps-2 sacks

RRH 211 snaps-2 sacks

I personally would like to see more RRH and his 500k salary.

 

[Raskolnikov]

Be serious windy, is that your value assessment? Come on man.

 

[WindyCity]

Be serious windy, is that your value assessment? Come on man.

I do not think that Hankins is that much better than RRH and Bullard to warrant paying him 16x the money and stunting the development of the younger players.

Hankins is absolutely nothing special.

I would rather save the money and see who gets cut in camp that can help at OLB or possibly OT.