Should we try acquiring Dwight Freeney?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by soulman

Briggs and two 3rd round picks for a first????? Maybe for a top ten pick that gets you THE guy above all others you just have to have. Remember that if you trade Briggs you'll need a pick to replace him. You're giving up a player and two 2nd day picks for one first round pick? I wouldn't do it.

Robert Mathis is a year or two younger than our current DE's. You're looking at an undersized guy who might be had for a reasonable amount to rotate with Izzy at LDE. I don't care how old he is he's still been averaging 10 sacks a year for the past 4 years coming from the LDE spot. That's equivalent to or greater than what Pep has been able to get the last two years. The guy only made $3.4 mil in the lasy year of his contract. If we signed him for one year for the same that's what we gave Meriweather for one year and I guarantee we'll get more for out money with Mathis.

Signing a guy like Mathis doesn't negate the need to draft younger talent but you can never have too many good pass rushers and we need to reduce the number of snaps both Izzy and Pep play. They wear down as the season progresses. Mathis is a role player in the rotation. A guy who can get at the QB and cause some problems.

---

Well shit, soul. Let's sign Robert Mathis and be done with the whole discussion of drafting a DE in the first round. If he can get us 10 sacks on top of the 13 we got from the interior line and the 11 that Peppers got us and the four that Izzy got, that's 38 sacks right there. That would put us in the middle of the pack, and I bet you anything that Mathis would make Peppers more effective.

If we signed Mathis, that would solve our problems with drafting a LE.

However, I want to address further what I was talking about with trading Briggs and either one or both third round picks for another first rounder. Did you even catch the part that I said we would get an additional first round pick? That means TWO first round picks. We would have as many picks as we would normally have rather than the eight picks we currently have. I call it trading quantity for quality. We have picks to play around with, so why not go that route? We may not even need to use both third round picks if we can get a late first rounder with Briggs and a single third rounder.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dagan81

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by soulman

Briggs and two 3rd round picks for a first????? Maybe for a top ten pick that gets you THE guy above all others you just have to have. Remember that if you trade Briggs you'll need a pick to replace him. You're giving up a player and two 2nd day picks for one first round pick? I wouldn't do it.

Robert Mathis is a year or two younger than our current DE's. You're looking at an undersized guy who might be had for a reasonable amount to rotate with Izzy at LDE. I don't care how old he is he's still been averaging 10 sacks a year for the past 4 years coming from the LDE spot. That's equivalent to or greater than what Pep has been able to get the last two years. The guy only made $3.4 mil in the lasy year of his contract. If we signed him for one year for the same that's what we gave Meriweather for one year and I guarantee we'll get more for out money with Mathis.

Signing a guy like Mathis doesn't negate the need to draft younger talent but you can never have too many good pass rushers and we need to reduce the number of snaps both Izzy and Pep play. They wear down as the season progresses. Mathis is a role player in the rotation. A guy who can get at the QB and cause some problems.

---

Well shit, soul. Let's sign Robert Mathis and be done with the whole discussion of drafting a DE in the first round. If he can get us 10 sacks on top of the 13 we got from the interior line and the 11 that Peppers got us and the four that Izzy got, that's 38 sacks right there. That would put us in the middle of the pack, and I bet you anything that Mathis would make Peppers more effective.

If we signed Mathis, that would solve our problems with drafting a LE.

However, I want to address further what I was talking about with trading Briggs and either one or both third round picks for another first rounder. Did you even catch the part that I said we would get an additional first round pick? That means TWO first round picks. We would have as many picks as we would normally have rather than the eight picks we currently have. I call it trading quantity for quality. We have picks to play around with, so why not go that route? We may not even need to use both third round picks if we can get a late first rounder with Briggs and a single third rounder.

---

If that's at all feasible, then that probably gets you both Adams (OT) AND Brown (OLB) or Mercilus (DE) in the 1st with still a pick left in each succeeding round. It's not all that easily dismissed, especially if Briggs continues to be a whiny distraction whose production and trade value is sure to rapidly decline soon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MPBears68

If that's at all feasible, then that probably gets you both Adams (OT) AND Brown (OLB) or Mercilus (DE) in the 1st with still a pick left in each succeeding round. It's not all that easily dismissed, especially if Briggs continues to be a whiny distraction whose production and trade value is sure to rapidly decline soon.

---

And that's exactly my point. I just wish others would see things my way. I really think that Briggs is not long for this world with the Bears.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dagan81

Well shit, soul. Let's sign Robert Mathis and be done with the whole discussion of drafting a DE in the first round. If he can get us 10 sacks on top of the 13 we got from the interior line and the 11 that Peppers got us and the four that Izzy got, that's 38 sacks right there. That would put us in the middle of the pack, and I bet you anything that Mathis would make Peppers more effective.

If we signed Mathis, that would solve our problems with drafting a LE.

However, I want to address further what I was talking about with trading Briggs and either one or both third round picks for another first rounder. Did you even catch the part that I said we would get an additional first round pick? That means TWO first round picks. We would have as many picks as we would normally have rather than the eight picks we currently have. I call it trading quantity for quality. We have picks to play around with, so why not go that route? We may not even need to use both third round picks if we can get a late first rounder with Briggs and a single third rounder.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dagan81

And that's exactly my point. I just wish others would see things my way. I really think that Briggs is not long for this world with the Bears.

---

Signing Mathis if available may solve the problem for a year or two but as all these guys get older their productivity declines. With Mathis we'd have three DE's all over the age of 30 and since we still have no idea of Corey Wootton's pass rush talents or even his ability to stay healthy we're still facing the same dilemma. We need some youth at DE. If not in this draft then soon.

I did read and understand your proposed trade scenario. If we can trade Briggs and a third round pick for a first that would allow us to replace him I could live with that but I don't think you'd find anyone would bite. If they were interested in a LB why wouldn't they just use the pick they'd trade for a much younger one with more years ahead of him and whose contract will be a hell of a lot less than Briggs wants.

Seeing things your way requires the belief that you could actually get more for Briggs than most teams would feel he's worth. Briggs is a better player with the Bears than he's likely to be elsewhere because the system features his pursuit and tackling abilities and he plays next to a future HOF LB. If we did get someone to take that deal it would probably be a team looking for a vet presence to push them over the top defensively just like we could use a guy like Mathis. There's a big difference though. If Mathis is a FA all he costs us is his salary.

I don't think you realize just how valuable high draft picks are now that there is a rookie pay scale. That's exactly why the Bears wanted a guy with a draft background as a GM. It's a lot cheaper to draft guys than sign them in FA when they're looking for deals like Briggs wants. I don't say you're wrong for thinking about is but in reality the only way that trade is likely is in Madden 2012. Just sayin'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by soulman

Signing Mathis if available may solve the problem for a year or two but as all these guys get older their productivity declines. With Mathis we'd have three DE's all over the age of 30 and since we still have no idea of Corey Wootton's pass rush talents or even his ability to stay healthy we're still facing the same dilemma. We need some youth at DE. If not in this draft then soon.

I did read and understand your proposed trade scenario. If we can trade Briggs and a third round pick for a first that would allow us to replace him I could live with that but I don't think you'd find anyone would bite. If they were interested in a LB why wouldn't they just use the pick they'd trade for a much younger one with more years ahead of him and whose contract will be a hell of a lot less than Briggs wants.

Seeing things your way requires the belief that you could actually get more for Briggs than most teams would feel he's worth. Briggs is a better player with the Bears than he's likely to be elsewhere because the system features his pursuit and tackling abilities and he plays next to a future HOF LB. If we did get someone to take that deal it would probably be a team looking for a vet presence to push them over the top defensively just like we could use a guy like Mathis. There's a big difference though. If Mathis is a FA all he costs us is his salary.

I don't think you realize just how valuable high draft picks are now that there is a rookie pay scale. That's exactly why the Bears wanted a guy with a draft background as a GM. It's a lot cheaper to draft guys than sign them in FA when they're looking for deals like Briggs wants. I don't say you're wrong for thinking about is but in reality the only way that trade is likely is in Madden 2012. Just sayin'.

---

What about Madden 11? That's as recently as I've gotten with the whole Madden series! lol :laughing-019:

I think Briggs would do fine in a more conventional man coverage system. In his early years, he was called upon to rush the passer more than he is now. Perhaps he still has a little of that left in his tank, but I don't know. I don't agree or disagree with anything that you have said simply because I think, in this scenario, anything can happen. Somewhere out there, there will be a team who is desperate enough to bite and ask for a trade for a Lance Briggs and maybe one or so third rounders. Personally, I think it would require one third rounder, but that's just me. I don't think Mike Adams will go in the top fifteen, but I do think he can be had at our slot. If we can get a draft pick in the late first round, perhaps we still have a shot at Whitney Mercilus. But again, it's all speculative, and, as you said, would work out on Madden 2012.

Have you read my thread about a Briggs for Umenyiora trade? If that were possible we negate the need for Mathis although Osi would be a damn sight more costly. There are some DE's that have looked pretty good at the Senior Bowl that may slide into the second where we can pick on up like we did Paea. But if we trade Briggs we may need that choice to replace him.

As it stands now the NFP mock has us taking Adams but I think they're stretching it a bit. After his work in the Senior Bowl I doubt he lasts until we pick. The other three LT's are all ranked to go by the tenth pick so Adams if that happens Adams is all that's left and you know what happens when a run on a position starts. Somebody is likely to panic and draft because the quality falls off after him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by soulman

Have you read my thread about a Briggs for Umenyiora trade? If that were possible we negate the need for Mathis although Osi would be a damn sight more costly. There are some DE's that have looked pretty good at the Senior Bowl that may slide into the second where we can pick on up like we did Paea. But if we trade Briggs we may need that choice to replace him.

As it stands now the NFP mock has us taking Adams but I think they're stretching it a bit. After his work in the Senior Bowl I doubt he lasts until we pick. The other three LT's are all ranked to go by the tenth pick so Adams if that happens Adams is all that's left and you know what happens when a run on a position starts. Somebody is likely to panic and draft because the quality falls off after him.

---

Once again, another football mock draft service has the Bears taking Michael Floyd in the first round of the draft (Walter Football). But that same service has Mike Adams going at the 22nd pick to DETROIT of all teams. Now, that's pretty shitty. I would much rather have Adams than Floyd. I have the worst feeling that the Bears are not going to secure either a LT or a LDE in the first round and instead will go after a lush for a WR.

I did, in fact, recently read your thread on the Briggs for Umenyiora trade, and I have to say that I'm totally against it. While Umenyiora is the superior pass rusher to Mathis (he had 9 sacks in 9 games compared to Mathis's 9.5 sacks in 16 contests), he's injured often, and I just don't have any use for taking a risk at something like that.

By the way, soul: did Melvin Ingram have a big Senior Bowl or something? I didn't keep up with the action, but he is now being projected to go on WF to the Buffalo Bills. What's up with that, and unless he had a big time at the Senior Bowl, why the sudden increase in his stock?