Novoitus
Mitch Trubisky Fan
- Joined:
- Sep 14, 2012
- Posts:
- 3,525
- Liked Posts:
- 3,138
Windy is such a debby downer
Suggs or Wake, make offer to both. Similar stats, but Suggs slightly better stats last year but with 227 more snaps, and Suggs is a year younger.I think if the price is right they should get a proven producer.
If Cam Wake wants a chance at a ring and. 1 year deal I am in.
It is close the fucking deal time in the playoffs, the Bears need proven ass kickers over speculative potential guys.
But Wake is putting up near identical numbers on about 70% of the snaps Suggs plays. The guy the Bears will be looking for will not need to be a snap count monster, just effective when in the game. That favors Wake slightly. If you add in QB hits Wake has 44 vs Suggs 35 over the last 2 seasons so his QB pressure per snap is way above what Suggs is getting. Just sayin'Suggs or Wake, make offer to both. Similar stats, but Suggs slightly better stats last year but with 227 more snaps, and Suggs is a year younger.
2018: Suggs +1 sack, +2 games, +1 PD, plus a TD, +227 snaps
2017: Suggs +0.5 sack, +13 tackles, +3 PDs, +230 snaps
If the Bears are STILL shopping for FA edge rushers, then I'm not sure why they would offer Leonard Floyd a second contract after 2019.
You need a #3, good chance Lynch walks and I am not sure Irving is ready for that spotlight.
I would guess there is a far greater chance of the Bears re-signing Lynch than luring Suggs away from BAL or Matthews away from GB.
What do you think is more important:
Kicking the tires on a young player who 'might do better in Chicago' and can be signed long term?
Or getting a more sure thing contributor, especially as a pass rusher in the 6-11 sack range, regardless of age?
But Wake is putting up near identical numbers on about 70% of the snaps Suggs plays. The guy the Bears will be looking for will not need to be a snap count monster, just effective when in the game. That favors Wake slightly. If you add in QB hits Wake has 44 vs Suggs 35 over the last 2 seasons so his QB pressure per snap is way above what Suggs is getting. Just sayin'
Edit: just did the math and it is a QB sack/hit rate per snap of 5.30% for Wake vs 3.30% for Suggs. That is all snaps, a quick Ask Jeeves search didn't return results for player pass snap #'s.
Since we're ready to win now then i'm good with signing the older vets to one year deals that can not only bring it on the field but guys like T.Suggs is a great vocal leader that would absolutely help on the field and in the locker room.
I'm thinking Wake will definitely cost more then Suggs though and unfortunately we all know our cap situation so depending on how much more would make my choice between the two. The things that draws me to Suggs in his connection with Pagano and how much of a leader he is and how vocal he is and how he always looks like he's having so much fun out there. But if i was just going off of production and the price was the same then i would say Wake would be more productive on the field.
Agreed. Wake is more efficient per snap. Top choice at that aspect. And although 14 games last year is good, Suggs had back-to-back 16 games, with more snaps, and is a year younger. He has a durability edge. I don't know much about their characters. But I'd quickly and intensely pursue both and get one of the two.But Wake is putting up near identical numbers on about 70% of the snaps Suggs plays. The guy the Bears will be looking for will not need to be a snap count monster, just effective when in the game. That favors Wake slightly. If you add in QB hits Wake has 44 vs Suggs 35 over the last 2 seasons so his QB pressure per snap is way above what Suggs is getting. Just sayin'
Edit: just did the math and it is a QB sack/hit rate per snap of 5.30% for Wake vs 3.30% for Suggs. That is all snaps, a quick Ask Jeeves search didn't return results for player pass snap #'s.
Lynch did do well. He can produce. But, yet again he did have injury issues last year. I think Wake or Suggs would be more productive all-around. Hopefully they're in the $ range your quoting.I guess the question is would people rather have Wake on a 1 year deal or Lynch on a 3 year deal at 4/season.
I am torn, it is a good point from Rory, Lynch is only 25 and had some really high level moments where you saw what he could be.
Tough call. But if Amos and Callahan both walk, you would have the cash for Lynch if you wanted to go that way.
Lynch gives me the feeling of that guy that teases you with spurts of great play but never puts it together consistently.I guess the question is would people rather have Wake on a 1 year deal or Lynch on a 3 year deal at 4/season.
I am torn, it is a good point from Rory, Lynch is only 25 and had some really high level moments where you saw what he could be.
Tough call. But if Amos and Callahan both walk, you would have the cash for Lynch if you wanted to go that way.
Lynch gives me the feeling of that guy that teases you with spurts of great play but never puts it together consistently.