2024 NFL Offseason and Draft Thread

[Lennys Tap]

Well, if you bring in another QB and you don't want to pay Fields, you take the best offer you can get for him. If you decide it's time to move on, you can't just hold onto Fields and pay him to sit around.

It’s not as simple as that, imo - the play of Fields and the team down the stretch has complicated things a bit. If they’re on the fence as to whether to stick with Fields and pay him the two main things that tip the scales are 1) their valuation of the #1 pick vs what they can get for it and 2) their valuation of Justin Fields vs what it can bring.

The Bears will place their own values on both. Included in those valuations will be the money trading Fields will open up to adding other players. If the appetite for #1 exceeds how they value it and the appetite for Fields is less than where they value it, keep Fields, trade the pick. Other way around, do the opposite. It’s not just about a QB - it’s about what the entire roster looks like after the dust settles.

[MU82]

It’s not as simple as that, imo - the play of Fields and the team down the stretch has complicated things a bit. If they’re on the fence as to whether to stick with Fields and pay him the two main things that tip the scales are 1) their valuation of the #1 pick vs what they can get for it and 2) their valuation of Justin Fields vs what it can bring.

The Bears will place their own values on both. Included in those valuations will be the money trading Fields will open up to adding other players. If the appetite for #1 exceeds how they value it and the appetite for Fields is less than where they value it, keep Fields, trade the pick. Other way around, do the opposite. It’s not just about a QB - it’s about what the entire roster looks like after the dust settles.

I don't think the Bears can afford to think that way. They have to make the call on Fields. If they think he's the man, they can keep him, pay him and trade the pick, parlaying it into a bunch of picks to get pieces to surround Fields. If they don't think he's the man - if they think Williams or Maye or Daniels or whoever will be better - they need to trade Fields for the most they can get.

I do think it's that simple: Is Fields our guy or not?

Soon enough, Lenny, we'll find out.

[Dr. Blackheart]

I don't think the Bears can afford to think that way. They have to make the call on Fields. If they think he's the man, they can keep him, pay him and trade the pick, parlaying it into a bunch of picks to get pieces to surround Fields. If they don't think he's the man - if they think Williams or Maye or Daniels or whoever will be better - they need to trade Fields for the most they can get.

I do think it's that simple: Is Fields our guy or not?

Soon enough, Lenny, we'll find out.

The Bears have made the call on Fields but they won't play their hand till draft day.

[Pakuni]

Seven NFL GMs on Fields' trade value:

GM one: A second-round and fourth-round pick, pending a “good finish” to the season.

GM two: A second-round pick, pending a “strong finish” to the season.

GM three: A third-round pick, plus another late-round pick that could escalate one round based on performance.

GM four: One third-round pick in the 2024 draft, one fourth-round pick in the 2025 draft.

GM five: A third-round pick or a second-round draft pick for Fields, plus a late-round pick back from the Bears.

GMs six and seven had the same proposal: A third-round pick, pending the finish of this season.

Some of these proposals came with caveats. As one GM noted, “it only takes one team” to like Fields enough to give up more than others would expect. Another mentioned that the value could rise or fall based on how long the Bears hold on to Fields, reasoning that a trade lingering all the way to the doorstep of the draft could lessen his value to franchises that would want him to begin working with their staff immediately. All of the GMs said they would factor in a slight tweak to his compensation based on the next four games. None of them put his value in the realm of a first-round pick.

https://sports.yahoo.com/bears-trading-justin-fields-gms-explain-why-its-the-best-route-and-where-compensation-could-land-153257987.html

[jesmu84]

The Bears have made the call on Fields but they won't play their hand till draft day.

?

[Lennys Tap]

I don't think the Bears can afford to think that way. They have to make the call on Fields. If they think he's the man, they can keep him, pay him and trade the pick, parlaying it into a bunch of picks to get pieces to surround Fields. If they don't think he's the man - if they think Williams or Maye or Daniels or whoever will be better - they need to trade Fields for the most they can get.

I do think it's that simple: Is Fields our guy or not?

Soon enough, Lenny, we'll find out.

We disagree that it’s that simple. They’re not sure re Fields - or any of the college guys. Because it’s not clear. Again I think the decision will rest on what the TEAM looks like under either scenario. At least that’s what I hope they do. It would take as much luck out of the equation as is possible.

[DegenerateDish]

I’m just catching up here, but a 2nd or early 3rd round pick is what I would think. Probably some conditions around the pick (snaps in 2024).

Fields is still dirt cheap next year, if a team picks up the fifth year option, they still wouldn’t have to commit long term dollars any time soon.

As Pakuni says, it only takes one team.

[Lennys Tap]

Seven NFL GMs on Fields' trade value:

GM one: A second-round and fourth-round pick, pending a “good finish” to the season.

GM two: A second-round pick, pending a “strong finish” to the season.

GM three: A third-round pick, plus another late-round pick that could escalate one round based on performance.

GM four: One third-round pick in the 2024 draft, one fourth-round pick in the 2025 draft.

GM five: A third-round pick or a second-round draft pick for Fields, plus a late-round pick back from the Bears.

GMs six and seven had the same proposal: A third-round pick, pending the finish of this season.

Some of these proposals came with caveats. As one GM noted, “it only takes one team” to like Fields enough to give up more than others would expect. Another mentioned that the value could rise or fall based on how long the Bears hold on to Fields, reasoning that a trade lingering all the way to the doorstep of the draft could lessen his value to franchises that would want him to begin working with their staff immediately. All of the GMs said they would factor in a slight tweak to his compensation based on the next four games. None of them put his value in the realm of a first-round pick.

https://sports.yahoo.com/bears-trading-justin-fields-gms-explain-why-its-the-best-route-and-where-compensation-could-land-153257987.html

Yeah. The idea that the BEST the Bears can get for him is a 4th or 5th rounder is ridiculous. Several would give more, one might give considerably more. The Bears are in a perfect “wait and see” position on both the #1 pick and Fields.

[MU82]

Yeah. The idea that the BEST the Bears can get for him is a 4th or 5th rounder is ridiculous. Several would give more, one might give considerably more. The Bears are in a perfect “wait and see” position on both the #1 pick and Fields.

As the article says, it's probably best for the Bears to not wait too long.

I haven't put any draft-pick value on Fields, because I don't know beyond thinking it will not be a first-rounder. To me, it's the least important part of the equation, with the most important part being simply if the Bears prefer Fields or one of the rookies. I know you disagree with that part ... and it's OK for friends to disagree on silly sports stuff!

[Jockey]

We disagree that it’s that simple. They’re not sure re Fields - or any of the college guys. Because it’s not clear. Again I think the decision will rest on what the TEAM looks like under either scenario. At least that’s what I hope they do. It would take as much luck out of the equation as is possible.

After 3 years of practice and games, they better know on Fields. If not, they are just the same old Bears.

[WhiteTrash]

We disagree that it’s that simple. They’re not sure re Fields - or any of the college guys. Because it’s not clear. Again I think the decision will rest on what the TEAM looks like under either scenario. At least that’s what I hope they do. It would take as much luck out of the equation as is possible.

The critical decision upon which all the other dominos fall is a belief that Fields will not only be as good but significantly better that Williams or Maye.  If Fields projects to be only about as good as Williams or Maye, then it is a no brainer to go with the much less expensive option of a drafted QB.

This opportunity will not come again for a long time as the Bears will have a last place schedule again and would be unlikely to get a top 5 pick next year. While factually correct, the Bears have a coupe of years before having to commit big time to Fields, the options to replace him will be fewer and less attractive at that point.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Actually if Williams or Maye projects to be no better than Fields, you hang onto the known quantity. He's not going to get Lamar Jackson type money and these days you can work with contracts to get them to work anyway.

[WhiteTrash]

After 3 years of practice and games, they better know on Fields. If not, they are just the same old Bears.

This situation is classic same old Bears. All statistical data points indicate Fields is not a great or very good QB. There seems to be a "gut feeling" belief in some fans and media that Fields will suddenly "turn a corner" and become great.

Reminds me of a certain coach who (myself included) saw as a hard worker, good guy, had all the tools to be a great head coach and just need a little more time to "turn the corner"

[WhiteTrash]

Actually if Williams or Maye projects to be no better than Fields, you hang onto the known quantity. He's not going to get Lamar Jackson type money and these days you can work with contracts to get them to work anyway.

I follow your logic. You are in the small minority that feels that way. Every "expert", ex-GM, and  the like place way more value on the massive salary cap savings. Plus, the consensus seems to be that based upon Fields 3 years that his ceiling seems to becoming clear and Williams and Maye have a potentially higher ceiling.

If the Bears goal is to simply win the Central, then you stick with the known commodity, Fields. 

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

I follow your logic. You are in the small minority that feels that way. Every "expert", ex-GM, and  the like place way more value on the massive salary cap savings. Plus, the consensus seems to be that based upon Fields 3 years that his ceiling seems to becoming clear and Williams and Maye have a potentially higher ceiling.

If the Bears goal is to simply win the Central, then you stick with the known commodity, Fields. 

You're the one who stated "If Fields projects to be only about as good as Williams or Maye..." so my comments were completely within that limitation.

IMO if they decide to start over, they are going to project that Williams or Maye will be better than Fields. Why start over otherwise?

[Uncle Rico]

You're the one who stated "If Fields projects to be only about as good as Williams or Maye..." so my comments were completely within that limitation.

IMO if they decide to start over, they are going to project that Williams or Maye will be better than Fields. Why start over otherwise?

It’s year 3 of playing for Fields.  If we look strictly at passing stats and ignore the threat he poses with his legs, there’s nothing to suggest he’s going to turn the corner as a passer.

We can make a lot of excuses for him but at some point, you have to show more as a passer in today’s league.  He gets comped to Lamar a lot and Lamar showed far more as a passer by year 3 than Fields has.

The excuses about a lack of pass catchers doesn’t hold water either.  Lamar’s primary receivers in year 3 were Hollywood Brown and Mark Andrews.  DJ Moore and Cole Kmet have been better than those 2.

He is what he is at this point, an inconsistent QB that hasn’t shown he’s going to make a leap to become a legit top-10 type QB.  I’m absolutely drafting Williams or Maye over him

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

And that is 100% legit. I was simply commenting based on the context set by White Trash.

[Uncle Rico]

And that is 100% legit. I was simply commenting based on the context set by White Trash.

Yeah, that’s why I posted that.  After thinking about it, the Bears will look foolish passing on Williams or Maye if they think they’re better than Fields and keep him because of feelings.

If he torches the Packers this weekend, they will 100% bring him back.  I hate to give Colin Cowherd any credit but when the Bills gave an extension to Ryan Fitzpatrick based on one month of play, he said that’s what bad organizations do, give contracts on feelings because the Bills were desperate for a franchise QB.  He was gone a year later.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Well, for the Bears' sake, they should have already made that decision. If they have decided to move on, they should start Bagent on Sunday instead. Because if you start Fields, and he is worth more than I think he is, they can't risk him getting injured.

[Uncle Rico]

Well, for the Bears' sake, they should have already made that decision. If they have decided to move on, they should start Bagent on Sunday instead. Because if you start Fields, and he is worth more than I think he is, they can't risk him getting injured.

Not playing him also signals his time in Chicago is done and you lose some leverage, too.

[WhiteTrash]

You're the one who stated "If Fields projects to be only about as good as Williams or Maye..." so my comments were completely within that limitation.

IMO if they decide to start over, they are going to project that Williams or Maye will be better than Fields. Why start over otherwise?

I get where you are coming from. I should not have move the goal posts by including the potential upside but you included the potential downside. I should have been more clear, the "experts" (I tend to agree with) are saying if Williams or Maye turn out to be only as good as Fields, you take the rookie and trade Fields.

I think most agree the potential upside with Maye or Williams is higher than Fields and if drafting was an exact science, Fields would be gone. The bird in hand theory is the only reason the Bears have a hard decision.

[WhiteTrash]

Not playing him also signals his time in Chicago is done and you lose some leverage, too.

100% agree. The risk/reward equation favors playing Fields. IMHO, I don't think the Bears have made up their mind yet. Who knows, maybe they interview Williams and he's a head case, maybe Maye falls down the stairs and tears up his shoulder. 

[Pakuni]

Not playing him also signals his time in Chicago is done and you lose some leverage, too.

I don't think the Bears are going to be able to keep this a big secret. The NFL is a pretty small, incestuous world, and people talk.

[DegenerateDish]

Yeah, that’s why I posted that.  After thinking about it, the Bears will look foolish passing on Williams or Maye if they think they’re better than Fields and keep him because of feelings.

If he torches the Packers this weekend, they will 100% bring him back.  I hate to give Colin Cowherd any credit but when the Bills gave an extension to Ryan Fitzpatrick based on one month of play, he said that’s what bad organizations do, give contracts on feelings because the Bills were desperate for a franchise QB.  He was gone a year later.

There couldn’t be a worse opponent for the Bears this weekend. Every outcome will be tied to emotion because “it’s the Packers”. I hope this game ends in a 17-17 tie.

[Uncle Rico]

I don't think the Bears are going to be able to keep this a big secret. The NFL is a pretty small, incestuous world, and people talk.

No, but I think optics still matter somewhat