Were the Bears to trade for Wilson, are you prepared to lose Hicks and Fuller?

BearDownTexas

Well-known member
762
509
68
I think if you want a chance in hell of landing someone like Russell Wilson, you gotta be prepared to give up something you don't want to give up. And we all know how pace likes to give shit away....
 

Adipost

CCS Donator
Donator
8,370
9,423
70
Cutting both starting tackles means you MUST hit on an OT prospect in the draft. There is no margin for error. The loss of Fuller is a huge, huge blow to the secondary. You cannot afford another injury to Johnson, or the defense is completely cooked.

For Watson, It’s a no brainer. Wilson, on the other hand, is 32 years old. He’s been hit a ton throughout his career and relies on his mobility to manufacture many of his game changing splash plays. The mobility is huge because it offsets most of his deficiencies in regards to making the proper reads. It’s a bit trickier to try and rebuild the team with him. You simply don’t have as much time.

All that being said, yes, you still take the trade off. Keeping a defense or offense together is nearly impossible anyways, there are just too many moving parts. But a great QB, alone, can keep an offense afloat.
 

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
43,282
20,840
135
As Iueyedoc says, Wilson only costs 19m because the 13 million a year for 3 years in SB was already paid so the Seahawks would have to eat that hence his dead cap to the Seahawks would be 39 million if they took it all this year.

So you cut Massie, Graham, Skrine (already cut) and restructure Fuller and Hicks and you get to about 35 million in cap. That covers Wilson and either signing ARob, another WR or an OL. If they really wanted to, they could convert 15 million of Wilson's base salary to SB which gets him paid 15m upfront and reduces his cap hit for 2021 to 9 million. That would create an additional 10 million in cap space while increasing his cap hit for 2022 and 2023 to 29m and 32m when we would have 100 million or more in cap space before taking his salary into account.

In short, they can easily make it work.
 

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
43,282
20,840
135
Trading Mack would COST you 11 mil instead of SAVING 11 mil.

No it won't. The 11.5 million is if you cut him as he would cost 38.1m to cut and 26.6m to keep. However, he costs about 22m in cap to trade because 16 million or so of his guarantee is his 2021 salary not a SB. Thus, that salary would now be assumed by his new team and thus not count against the Bears cap. So he would save 5 million or so in a trade.
 

Bust

Well-known member
2,606
1,642
70
Why would anyone trade for Hicks when he about to be a cap cut
 

circusboy666

Well-known member
901
551
68
I feel we have nothing to lose with going in at all costs for Wilson or Watson. It’s the only shot with this regime/front office to have a chance and it’s time to pay whatever the price is.
 

Starion

CCS Donator
Donator
3,193
1,795
70
hicks and fuller would sting man

I strongly agree...BUT the more I think about it, it's worth it for Wilson/Watson because:
1) Obviously = cap $$ for known good QB
2) Forces the trade of these guys while they still hold value = more picks now (much needed)


Many are also talking about trading these guys to make cap $ for ARob, which is even less sensible than a top flight QB IMHO.
Easier to draft several WRs now than a QB.

*edit - further reading looks like Hicks might not offer much if any trade value, unless multiple teams are interested and must bid for him. Wouldn't expect too much, but this would need to happen before ARob is obvious. By then he might be dangled out there for trade also, which if so keeps teams from calling Bears' bluff if Hicks is a must drop for cap $.
The order of these things playing out is pretty important here.
 
Last edited:

jtreal3

Well-known member
2,389
1,579
70
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Bears
fuck hicks and fuller. I would slice off Grimson's cock and fedex it in a pickled bubble wrap (so as to PRESERVE IT) to Ryan Pace DIRECTLY, if it would convince him to land Welson.
Are you @Grimson ex girl or some girl he just banged and dumped or something?

I mean...that's some hardcore shit you talkin
 

TL1961

Well-known member
26,289
13,102
105
I think if you want a chance in hell of landing someone like Russell Wilson, you gotta be prepared to give up something you don't want to give up. And we all know how pace likes to give shit away....
What has he given away?
 

BEARZOMBIE

Well-known member
10,763
8,248
75
As Iueyedoc says, Wilson only costs 19m because the 13 million a year for 3 years in SB was already paid so the Seahawks would have to eat that hence his dead cap to the Seahawks would be 39 million if they took it all this year.

So you cut Massie, Graham, Skrine (already cut) and restructure Fuller and Hicks and you get to about 35 million in cap. That covers Wilson and either signing ARob, another WR or an OL. If they really wanted to, they could convert 15 million of Wilson's base salary to SB which gets him paid 15m upfront and reduces his cap hit for 2021 to 9 million. That would create an additional 10 million in cap space while increasing his cap hit for 2022 and 2023 to 29m and 32m when we would have 100 million or more in cap space before taking his salary into account.

In short, they can easily make it work.

it would also help to find a team willing to take on foles contract
 

dabears70

I am Ryan Pace
24,905
5,052
105
My favorite teams
  1. New York Mets
  1. New York Knicks
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. New York Rangers
  1. Syracuse Orange
Just looking at the reality today of the cap numbers of Russell Wilson's contract, and what the Bears would have to clear this year to accommodate for it.

I think if they were to make this move the path forward is extremely clear as there are a small group of players soaking up the most available money.


Keep in mind you would have to accommodate for 35 million this year I believe for Russell Wilson.

So in addition to whatever pics you send over, I would imagine the following players would either be part of the deal or would be cut to make room:

Kyle Fuller : frees up 11 million
Akiem Hicks: frees up 10.5 million
Charles Leno Jr: frees up 6.2 million
Bobbie Massie: frees up 5.4 million


The only other player making significant money is Jimmy Graham at 7 million cap relief, but because he is a valuable target, good friend to Russell Wilson, and performed well last year I don't think he would be involved to make space.

You would have to draft your next left tackle and either draft or sign a new right tackle unless you truly feel comfortable with Alex Bars out at right.

Bilal Nichols would in step in for Hicks.

This of course does not count restructuring if it happens.

But in addition to pics I am saying if a trade does happen, be it for Wilson or the long shot Watson, losing the same four players as what we are looking at...

I've been saying for months that we should cut or trade one or two of A.Hicks, K.Mack, E.Goldman, K.Fuller or E.Jackson if it means getting us a legit starting QB and to fix the o-line and bring back or replace ARob.

Do you people really not understand that R.Wilson is not getting traded this offseason?

He's gonna be a Seahawk next year.
 
Last edited:

dabears70

I am Ryan Pace
24,905
5,052
105
My favorite teams
  1. New York Mets
  1. New York Knicks
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. New York Rangers
  1. Syracuse Orange
I like Hicks. Let Mack take his place.

I think, or at least would hope, every Bears fan is a A.Hicks fan and i get rather getting rid of Mack but DE is easier to replace then OLB is and we could already have his replacement on the team in B.Nichols.
 

dabears70

I am Ryan Pace
24,905
5,052
105
My favorite teams
  1. New York Mets
  1. New York Knicks
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. New York Rangers
  1. Syracuse Orange
The two tackles are easily replaced. You could make an argument that we should be trying to improve their level in those positions anyway.

We would miss Hicks and Fuller - both up there with the best in the league at their positions, but it would still be a no brainer for Wilson.

Two tackles aren't that easy to replace when you're up against the cap and moving around so many other parts to get that QB in here. Then also re-signing or replacing ARob to keep that QB happy.
 

MikeDitkaPolishSausage

Well-known member
5,093
3,328
70
I've been saying for months that we should cut or trade one or two of A.Hicks, K.Mack, E.Goldman, K.Fuller or E.Jackson if it means getting us a legit starting QB and to fix the o-line and bring back or replace ARob.

Do you people really not understand that R.Wilson is not getting traded this offseason?

He's gonna be a Seahawk next year.
I think everyone here understands the Wilson situation. That doesn’t mean we can’t hope for the best.
 

mceownr22

PacetheGawd
306
198
27
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Bears
As Iueyedoc says, Wilson only costs 19m because the 13 million a year for 3 years in SB was already paid so the Seahawks would have to eat that hence his dead cap to the Seahawks would be 39 million if they took it all this year.

So you cut Massie, Graham, Skrine (already cut) and restructure Fuller and Hicks and you get to about 35 million in cap. That covers Wilson and either signing ARob, another WR or an OL. If they really wanted to, they could convert 15 million of Wilson's base salary to SB which gets him paid 15m upfront and reduces his cap hit for 2021 to 9 million. That would create an additional 10 million in cap space while increasing his cap hit for 2022 and 2023 to 29m and 32m when we would have 100 million or more in cap space before taking his salary into account.

In short, they can easily make it work.


🍆
 

Top