**OFFICAIL** Regular Season News & Scheisse - FTO : THREAD DERAILING PROHIBITED***

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dejo

Dejo

Godfather of FTO
Joined:
Apr 4, 2011
Posts:
16,507
Liked Posts:
20,174
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Real Salt Lake
  1. Chicago Bulls
  2. Utah Jazz
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Utah Utes
Anytime23 said:
Thought he looked a little slow on that one. FIELDS REDEEMED!
Click to expand...
All good bruh, 1st round WR makes this play next year for Fields. At least Velus gets there to alligator arm it vs slowing down.
 
remydat

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
63,608
Liked Posts:
40,613
rawdawg said:
Yes, I understand how dead cap works. You changed your narrative after saying you only save 5.8Mil by cutting him (which is misleading because they can save almost 10Mil in 2023, if they want). And I'm not ignoring anything. You simply don't pay a guy more than what he's worth at age 31. That's just bad business, no matter how much cap you have. That's how you end up cutting a perfectly adequate LT (Leno) and keeping an aging TE (Graham). I understand the Bears aren't in that situation now and probably won't be again soon, but Poles has been on the job for 8 months and every single move he's made has been about weighing performance to value.

Mack- sure the Bears needed draft picks, but part of why he was traded because he wasn't worth his cap hit for what he provided.
Quinn- sure it was obvious to take the 4th over cutting him for nothing after the season, but part of why he was traded was because he wasn't worth his cap hit for what he provided.
Smith- pick wasn't an obvious need here, and Roquan obviously wasn't old like the other 2. But they already put a number on what they were willing to pay him. And part of why he was traded was because they weren't willing to pay him what he wanted based on what he provided.
Cody Whitehair at 14.1M is a top 8 cap hit for the 24th best guard in the league. Counting stats don't mean anything when he's missed 4 games out of 10.

I never once said it was easy to replace him. I said you need to. And it is much easier to replace him when you have double the amount of money as any other team in the league. Bottom line, Cody Whitehair isn't going to be a part of the next good Bears team. It's always better to cut someone a year early than a year too late.
Click to expand...

Umm no. You quoted 14.1m as if it cost nothing to cut him. Cutting him only saves you 5.8m because again even if cut him after June 1, you still would have a cap hit for 2024. So I quoted the net overall savings irrespective of the year. The simply reality is he costs 14.1m if you keep him and 8.3 if you cut him spread over 1 or 2 years. So the question is whether he is worth that 5.8m to keep or not. Yes you weight performance to value. Where we disagree is with respect to the value of Whitehair relative to his performance.

Mack - The point though is he was traded not cut. It would have been stupid to cut him.
Quinn - Again traded not cut because it would be stupid to cut him.
Smith - Sensing a theme here. Traded not cut because it would be stupid to cut him.
Whitehair - I have no problem trading him. The stupidity comes in cutting him if you can't actually get a good upgrade for him. If you cut him then sign a guy for 7 million a year who provides similar value then you would have spent 15.3m on the position when you could have just kept Whitehair for 14.1m. The next good Bears team will be as early as next year so it is entirely conceivable he is in fact part of the next good Bears team.

With 120m to spend there is simply no need to rush to cut him. If someone that is a clear upgrade is out there then by all means have at it. But cutting him only to replace him with someone that isn't an upgrade is just stupid when we have the money to afford him and when we should be aiming to be a playoff team next year. He actually only cost 10m the next 2 years for a team trading for him so it makes more sense to try and trade him even if it means keeping him until the deadline next year and absorbing the bulk of his 2023 salary just to get a better draft pick.
 
Last edited:

rawdawg

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 28, 2013
Posts:
8,013
Liked Posts:
6,460
remydat said:
Umm no. You quoted 14.1m as if it cost nothing to cut him. Cutting him only saves you 5.8m because again even if cut him after June 1, you still would have a cap hit for 2024. So I quoted the net overall savings irrespective of the year. The simply reality is he costs 14.1m if you keep him and 8.3 if you cut him spread over 1 or 2 years. So the question is whether he is worth that 5.8m to keep or not. Yes you weight performance to value. Where we disagree is with respect to the value of Whitehair relative to his performance.

Mack - The point though is he was traded not cut. It would have been stupid to cut him.
Quinn - Again traded not cut because it would be stupid to cut him.
Smith - Sensing a theme here. Traded not cut because it would be stupid to cut him.
Whitehair - I have no problem trading him. The stupidity comes in cutting him if you can't actually get a good upgrade for him. If you cut him then sign a guy for 7 million a year who provides similar value then you would have spent 15.3m on the position when you could have just kept Whitehair for 14.1m. The next good Bears team will be as early as next year so it is entirely conceivable he is in fact part of the next good Bears team.

With 120m to spend there is simply no need to rush to cut him. If someone that is a clear upgrade is out there then by all means have it. But cutting him only to replace him with someone that isn't an upgrade is just stupid when we have the money to afford him and when we should be aiming to be a playoff team next year. He actually only cost 10m the next 2 years for a team trading for him so it makes more sense to try and trade him even if it means keeping him until the deadline next year and absorbing the bulk of his 2023 salary just to get a better draft pick.
Click to expand...
Whitehair has 0 trade value. He's a guard that can't play C, that will be 32 at the end of his contract. And you keep talking about not getting an upgrade, I've mentioned several times what upgrade could be. I think Elgton Jenkins is better, despite a down year mostly at RT. I think Nate Davis is an upgrade. Isaac Seumalo. I think drafting one of the top guards would be an upgrade, maybe as soon as 2023. I'm not cutting him just to cut him. You've quoted my posts breaking down why I picked cutting Whitehair over Patrick, because it's easier to upgrade LG than C. A LT, RT, RG, C or LG can play LG. Whitehair has literally been 4 of those between college and NFL. Leatherwood as well. Jenkins has played G well after learning the position in a week and a half. If you are upgrading C, you are only doing that with a C. There's 32 options in the league, about 5-6 will be free agents. You're narrowing your options by focusing on C vs LG. And frankly, the Bears have to upgrade multiple places on the OL. And like I said, they aren't going to move on from Jones. They shouldn't move Jenkins (though, who knows with this regime). That leaves RT (obvious), LG and C.
 

rawdawg

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 28, 2013
Posts:
8,013
Liked Posts:
6,460
gobullschi said:
Passing on Will Anderson would be TOUGH.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I thought for sure the Bears would win some games down the stretch with Fields playing like he has. But they still have 3 games against playoff teams, the Jets, a Packers team they never beat, and a red hot Lions team. Now with Fields hurting, they very well could lose out or close to it. I still think I lean toward trade down. If they somehow end up at 2 and someone wants QB2, I 100% trade down. If nobody wants Levis (and sounds like NFL teams really like him) and you can't trade down, then Anderson is BPA for sure at 3 or 4. But if someone does come up for Levis, and the Bears can stay in the top 10, I probably take the trade and pick the best OT or Jordan Addison.
 
remydat

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
63,608
Liked Posts:
40,613
rawdawg said:
Whitehair has 0 trade value. He's a guard that can't play C, that will be 32 at the end of his contract. And you keep talking about not getting an upgrade, I've mentioned several times what upgrade could be. I think Elgton Jenkins is better, despite a down year mostly at RT. I think Nate Davis is an upgrade. Isaac Seumalo. I think drafting one of the top guards would be an upgrade, maybe as soon as 2023. I'm not cutting him just to cut him. You've quoted my posts breaking down why I picked cutting Whitehair over Patrick, because it's easier to upgrade LG than C. A LT, RT, RG, C or LG can play LG. Whitehair has literally been 4 of those between college and NFL. Leatherwood as well. Jenkins has played G well after learning the position in a week and a half. If you are upgrading C, you are only doing that with a C. There's 32 options in the league, about 5-6 will be free agents. You're narrowing your options by focusing on C vs LG. And frankly, the Bears have to upgrade multiple places on the OL. And like I said, they aren't going to move on from Jones. They shouldn't move Jenkins (though, who knows with this regime). That leaves RT (obvious), LG and C.
Click to expand...

Except he did play center and played it well before. His grades at C are much better than Patrick's even with the snap issues. He would have value at the deadline as a rental in the event a team sustained an injury and needed OL help. EJenkins may be an upgrade or he may not as you just admitted he had a down year as he has 16 pressures and 3 sacks albeit splitting between T and G. Davis has basically the same PFF grade as Whitehair and has 8 pressures and 1 sack compared to 6 pressures and 0 sacks for Whitehair. IS also has pretty much the same PFF grade and has 11 pressures and 1 sack. So you are proving my point. None of these guys are clear no doubt upgrades so you are basically advocating 8.3m cap hit by cutting Whitehair and then spending 8-10m on someone who isn't a clear upgrade. They are just your preferences that you have imagined are clear upgrades. It is a poor allocation of resources. You want to spend 16-18 million cutting and replacing Whitehair for players who provide similar production as Whitehair.

Now is this were you pretend the guys you mentioned are so much better than Whitehair because you have watched like 10 games from their All 22 that contradicts their PFF grades and pressure statistics? Or are you going to admit, these are just guys you like and you have no fucking clue how good they are compared to Whitehair.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

10,929members
95,674threads
4,534,873posts
155online users

Members online NOW

  • Member
  • Admin
  • Mod
  • Donor
  • HOF
Total: 155 (members: 9, guests: 146)
Top