Mike McGlinchey really improved this season

[Nelly]

Big time. Which is why I’d prefer going after Hargrave. He’s 29, but that means you should be able to get him on a 2-3 year deal. Beyond that, he’s been nothing short of consistent and can also play both DT spots. I think he’s the better player too so that helps. Give me the guy with the proven track record who also won’t require the long term commitment / risk. I think Hargrave should be able to keep his level of play up for at least 2-3 more seasons which fits the Bears window (playoffs in 2024, SB in 2025).

As for McGlinchey, I’d be in on him for around 11-12 mil per season for 2-3 years.

That certainly could be the better path. I don't think Payne would be a bad pickup necessarily but it is riskier. He wouldn't be the first and certainly wouldn't be the last to cash in and either half ass it or just not live up to expectations away from where he made his name. I'm not saying that's what will happen, just that it could.

 

[remydat]

It is more likely that Hargrave declines in his age 30-32 seasons than Payne does in his age 26-30 seasons. You pay for future production not past production.

 

[pdxbearsfan]

Players have a tendency to do that in contract years, which is one reason relying heavily upon free agency to fix your woes is risky and plenty of guys end up not playing up to big contracts given. He seems like as good a player as any to address our RT deficiency though.

I like him.

 

[Enasic]

It is more likely that Hargrave declines in his age 30-32 seasons than Payne does in his age 26-30 seasons. You pay for future production not past production.

I get this thought process but you have to at least acknowledge the risk. For four seasons, Payne never had more than 5 sacks and 7 TFL. This season he had 11.5 sacks and 18 TFL. The question is which Payne do you get? If it’s the former, you’re stuck with a terrible contract. If it’s the ladder, you have a great player. When shelling out 20-25 mil per and 50-60 mil GTD I’d prefer less risk and a proven and consistent track record. That said, I totally get taking that risk, just wouldn’t be my approach.

 

[Enasic]

It is more likely that Hargrave declines in his age 30-32 seasons than Payne does in his age 26-30 seasons. You pay for future production not past production.

Hargrave has shown no signs of slowing down and it’s pretty common for DTs to play well in their age 30-32 seasons.

 

[Da Coach]

Would be amazing to package a deal with the colts for the #1 pick that included Quentin Nelson and then sign McGlinchey to get them teamed up on the line again.

 

[pdxbearsfan]

The think with Payne is he’s going to require one of the highest defensive contracts in the NFL. When handing out those types of deals, I want to look at a sustained and consistent track record of success. That doesn’t exist with Payne. This season he doubled his previous highs in sacks and TFL. Maybe he keeps this level of play up. Maybe he doesn’t. But the track record isn’t there and he won’t have Jonathan Allen wherever he goes. It’s a riskier signing than most are willing to acknowledge. If he reverts back to his previous 4 seasons of production, could be one of the worst contracts in the league. Of course on the flip side, if he keeps this years level of play up, you have a dominant player worth the $$$. The risk is pretty substantial though. It took him 5 years and a contract year to breakout.

I agree but did hear his success this year is because they changed the way he was used. Who knows.

 

[Aesopian]

I agree but did hear his success this year is because they changed the way he was used. Who knows.

Those are the free agents you want to find good players that aren't being utilized right like Akiem Hicks with the Saints.

 

[pdxbearsfan]

Big time. Which is why I’d prefer going after Hargrave. He’s 29, but that means you should be able to get him on a 2-3 year deal. Beyond that, he’s been nothing short of consistent and can also play both DT spots. I think he’s the better player too so that helps. Give me the guy with the proven track record who also won’t require the long term commitment / risk. I think Hargrave should be able to keep his level of play up for at least 2-3 more seasons which fits the Bears window (playoffs in 2024, SB in 2025).

As for McGlinchey, I’d be in on him for around 11-12 mil per season for 2-3 years.

I prefer Hargraves over Payne for the reasons you gave and am in on McGlinchey.

 

[Enasic]

That certainly could be the better path. I don't think Payne would be a bad pickup necessarily but it is riskier. He wouldn't be the first and certainly wouldn't be the last to cash in and either half ass it or just not live up to expectations away from where he made his name. I'm not saying that's what will happen, just that it could.

That’s the rub. If he hits the market, teams will have to determine if they feel confident about him sustaining this level of play (without Allen) enough to give him 50-60 mil GTD. Would be easier to do if he had prior seasons with similar production, but he doesn’t.

 

[monkforasia]

I would rather use the draft for our rt. Either get a high second for Darnell wright or trade down to mid first to draft either Paris/Broderick/Anton.

 

[remydat]

Hargrave has shown no signs of slowing down and it’s pretty common for DTs to play well in their age 30-32 seasons.

Not undersized 3T types as the wear and tear on a 300 pound body is a lot inside.

I get this thought process but you have to at least acknowledge the risk. For four seasons, Payne never had more than 5 sacks and 7 TFL. This season he had 11.5 sacks and 18 TFL. The question is which Payne do you get? If it’s the former, you’re stuck with a terrible contract. If it’s the ladder, you have a great player. When shelling out 20-25 mil per and 50-60 mil GTD I’d prefer less risk and a proven and consistent track record. That said, I totally get taking that risk, just wouldn’t be my approach.

His sack totals at DT are fine. Few DTs get over 10 sacks. Case in point, he has more sacks over his first 5 years than Hargrave.

I probably would lnt sign him at those prices but will have to see what his market is like.

 

[bearsfan1977]

Would be amazing to package a deal with the colts for the #1 pick that included Quentin Nelson and then sign McGlinchey to get them teamed up on the line again.

I’d rather have Buckner. Nelson is a stud, but not sure what his contract looks like, and whether they want to pay that premium to the G position. They have the cap space tho.

 

[sevvy]

I'm not sure the LT of the future is currently on our roster. Wouldn't mind seeing us spending big on LT and moving Braxton Jones to RT.

 

[Payton!34]

Id stay away from Payne, I get a bad feeling about him especially with his recent comments about it all about being paid.

A five year 90 million contract is crazy!

Rather sign Hargrave