Bears Q&A: Does pursuing Vic Beasley make sense? Was the Khalil Mack trade worth it? Is Taysom Hill an option at QB?

The Tribune's Brad Biggs answers your Bears questions weekly.

Would it make sense — depending on the cap situation and available money — for the Bears to go after Vic Beasley and make what is a strength into a super strength? — @fasteddy85

The Bears won't make any significant signings at outside linebacker if they have Khalil Mack and Leonard Floyd on the roster. As their contracts are currently structured, they will count nearly $40 million against the 2020 salary cap. That accounts for roughly 20% of the team's cap space. Beasley, whom the Bears bypassed in the 2015 draft when they selected wide receiver Kevin White with the seventh overall pick, went No. 8 to the Falcons. He had a breakout season in 2016 when he finished with 15 1/4 u00bd sacks for a team that reached the Super Bowl. Beasley totaled 18 sacks in the last three seasons with eight in 2019, with half of those eight in the final four games. Beasley, who will turn 28 in July, will find a team that is willing to bet on his 2016 production and pay him good money. He might not be an elite edge rusher, but he's good and certainly has been more productive than Floyd in terms of sack production. The Bears simply can't justify devoting much more cap s pace to the position. With an elite player such as Mack, they shouldn't have to either. Yes, there are some defensive questions that must be answered this offseason, but that won't take the focus off a woefully underperforming offense in 2019. That's where the Bears need to commit the bulk of their resources.

Now that the new coaching staff has been selected, what's the biggest storyline for the Bears? — @ckindra_23

Quarterback. Quarterback. Quarterback. While the kicking situation created plenty of headlines at this time a year ago, the improvement of Mitch Trubisky loomed as a far more important element to the team's prospects in 2019. Unfortunately, Trubisky regressed. The offense was a mess from the start of the season and never really got going. Look no further than the uninspiring performance in the season finale against the Vikings, who were resting their frontline players for the playoffs. Trubisky's development — or his challenger or his replacement — will be the focal point of the offseason and regular season. Can the Bears make significant offensive gains to become a contender again? The answer is going to hinge, in large part, on whether they get improved quarterback play. Simply put, there isn't a storyline that comes close to this in terms of magnitude. The actions of general manager Ryan Pace and coach Matt Nagy are going to speak much louder than any words we've al ready heard from them or will in the coming months. Let's see how their plan unfolds.

Ryan Pace has stressed his "greatest player available" philosophy for the draft during his entire tenure as general manager. Will that be the blueprint with plenty of depth at running back, wide receiver, etc., this year? Or do you think the Bears might reach for where they need help? — @zberg034

I'll start by telling you that you're going to have to look long and hard to find a general manager who doesn't talk about keeping the focus on draft grades and the best player available. This isn't some revolutionary approach that Pace talked about. The Bears said this many, many times before Pace arrived. You hear it from every other team. I believe the Bears need to take advantage of an extremely talented class of wide receivers in the draft. They need upgrades at that position. They have a critical lack of playmakers on offense. They've got Allen Robinson and that's about it when it comes to players who can consistently be counted on. Anthony Miller has flashed, but he has durability questions and struggled during the first half of the season. Tarik Cohen is coming off a season-long slump. David Montgomery showed a few flashes. They need playmakers, period. Pick a position. Nothing wrong with adding talent at wide receiver.

Was the trade for Khalil Mack really worth it? It seems to have painted the Bears into a corner in a number of ways, and to my eyes Mack hasn't been a bona fide game wrecker since the first half of the 2018 season. Given that guys like J.J. Watt, Aaron Donald and the Bosa brothers haven't been enough to lift their teams to Super Bowl titles, have the Bears oversold the value of high-profile sack artists? — David D., Rogers Park

Mack sure looked like he was worth it in the first month of 2019 when he had 4 1/4 u00bd sacks and four forced fumbles through four games. The problem is there were only four more sacks and one forced fumble the remainder of the season, and that led to some frustration from the fan base as the defense was good but lacked the big-play ability that made it so special in 2018. It's probably a little premature to say whether the deal was a good one for the Bears. What you do know is the organization traded unknown commodities — draft picks — for a known commodity, one it then had to invest in heavily. The contract Mack signed in September 2018 remains the largest deal for a defensive player in the league. The Bears swung for Mack because they believed the window to compete for a championship was open, and they liked the idea of building around a quarterback on a cost-controlled rookie contract. Keep in mind that Aaron Donald and Nick Bosa play for teams that have reached the Sup er Bowl the last two seasons. They're dominant players, and no one is going to have a top-tier defense without premier players in the front seven. The Bears have an excellent defense with Mack. I'm not sure it would be that without him.

With the Bears needing to fill substantial needs this offseason, could they look to trade Khalil Mack and recoup the kind of draft pick haul they gave up to acquire him? Those picks could be used to improve the team in many areas. — Russ M., Darien

There were a couple questions this week about the possibility of the Bears shopping Mack. You learn to never say never when it comes to the NFL, but I have a hard time envisioning that happening. Yes, the Bears have needs to fill on the roster, but trade away Mack and there's another giant hole on the roster. A proven edge rusher would immediately become the second-greatest need after solving the quarterback issue and would really stress the front seven and secondary. Two more years into the prime of his career since being acquired, Mack would probably not bring as much in return as the Raiders got for him in September 2018. The Bears have a strength right now with their defense. Trading Mack would probably make their defense middle of the road. While his production didn't match the contract this past season, the amount of attention he commanded on a weekly basis from opponents certainly did, and that is unlikely to change in 2020.

I was shocked at how bad the offense was as a whole this past year. To me, it seems like the offensive line would be the biggest place of concern (besides quarterback) heading into next season. Was the lack of production in the run game related more to the O-line's personnel issues or coaching? The fact that they fired the offensive coordinator, who was in charge of the run game, and the O-line coach, it would almost seem that it was a coaching issue. But then there's the fact they switched Cody Whitehair and James Daniels halfway through the season along with Kyle Long being injured … that make it seem like it was an O-line issue. — Petrie P., Whiting, Ind.

I don't disagree with much of what you're saying, but keep in mind that when you say something is the No. 2 concern behind the quarterback, it's a secondary concern behind what is the single most important position in the game. Until the Bears can resolve their very long-running issue at quarterback, everything else is a secondary concern. A better quarterback last season would have made an offensive line that didn't play particularly well look better. I thought the pass blocking was decent. Could it have been better? Sure. Did it create insurmountable obstacles for the quarterback? Absolutely not. It's all interconnected, and the running game issues were a combination of line play, scheme, coaching and the running backs. There were games the Bears really didn't even try to run the ball. The opener against the Packers and the Saints game are perfect examples. The Bears need to be more productive when they run the ball, and that's no secret. We'll see whether coachi ng changes and a potential new right guard can iron out some things. The Bears sure hope so.

Is there a viable scenario in which the Bears become contenders in 2020, or are there too many pieces of the puzzle missing? From the top of my head, they need major upgrades (personnel or performance-wise) at offensive line, quarterback, tight end, defensive back, wide receiver, defensive line ... need I go on? — @gongimenez

Sure, the Bears can contend in 2020. They've got the core of the team that won the NFC North in 2018 still in place, and they need to bounce back from an 8-8 season, not 4-12. They need to be much more productive offensively, and the defense will have to be more opportunistic. Yes, they've got some roster needs, but as I've laid out already, the Bears certainly are tight in terms of salary cap space. I'd list the quarterback position as the greatest need for, using your term, a major upgrade. Tight end and wide receiver need help too, and you're right, they need to have a better season on the offensive line. I'm not as concerned about the defensive backfield or the defensive line. Sure, they have to determine what they are going to do with cornerback Prince Amukamara and find some depth — hopefully young talent — to supplement the position. Good teams always are working to cultivate talent on the defensive line, but the Bears have been good there. If they make the right moves and have some players poised for bounce-back seasons, there is no reason to think they can't compete in the division, at least from the start of the season. They're absolutely going to require much better and more consistent quarterback play.

What do you think of Taysom Hill as a potential backup/competition option at quarterback for the Bears? What would pursuing him as a restricted free agent look like? — @james23white

The Saints would love to keep Hill, who has been a multidimensional weapon for them, but he's a restricted free agent. That means the Bears, or another team, will have to place a value on him that is higher than the Saints are willing to pay him. I'd imagine the Saints place a first- or second-round tender on Hill as an RFA. That means a team signing him to an offer sheet has to fork over the corresponding draft pick if the Saints choose not to match the deal. The Bears don't have a first-round pick, so they won't be able to consider him as an option if the Saints go that route. Would the Bears consider signing Hill to the kind of contract he wants and shipping a second-round pick to New Orleans for him? I suppose that's a possibility, but only if they view him as a guy to build around. Hill will turn 30 this summer and he's got a limited body of work in the NFL as a passer — 13 attempts total in his career. Seems like a stretch to me that general manager Ryan Pace w ould want to invest heavily to acquire Hill. I think the Bears will be more focused on adding a quarterback with significant experience. There's no doubt Hill has value, though, and he's exciting to watch.

Are there real signs that the Bears will bring back Jordan Howard? — @tyberieus82

If Howard wasn't deemed a fit for the offense in 2018, how has that changed? He had a couple of solid games for the Eagles last season, but he missed six games, and durability is a concern for a guy who had high mileage coming out of college and was used extensively by the Bears through his first three seasons. The Bears could use another running back in the mix as competition, but they're committed to David Montgomery and hoping he has a better second season. They signed Mike Davis for $3 million last season, and it turned out they had positively no use for him, so he was cut in order to get a compensatory draft pick in April. Considering how teams can plug running backs into a system and get quality production, why turn to a player coming off an injury-plagued season who wasn't deemed a fit when he was in the system? I'm not trying to knock Howard. He was a solid back for the Bears and a terrific fifth-round draft pick by GM Ryan Pace. You can find running backs that can fill roles and produce, though, and the Bears ought to be able to get one they deem to be a better fit.

The Bears need offensive line help. Where's it coming from? — @illini8208

The Bears need to find a starting right guard. The sense I get is that while Rashaad Coward may have an opportunity to compete for a spot, the club is going to seek an upgrade. Otherwise, I'm pretty certain you will see four familiar faces in the starting lineup. The Bears have committed money to three of those starters, and with former second-round pick James Daniels going into this third season, they still believe he can be a good player. Daniels improved in the second half of the season after he moved to left guard. Left tackle Charles Leno isn't going anywhere. Cutting him would create a cap savings of only $2.9 million at a position where the Bears would have to pay top dollar to get a frontline starter — if one were available. The Bears paid right tackle Bobby Massie last offseason, so he's not going anywhere. They also paid center Cody Whitehair before last season. You can question some of the moves that have been made, but the contracts are going to keep these play ers in place at least for the 2020 season. So when you talk about help, I think you need to focus on right guard and the idea that they could add some developmental players via the draft, grooming them for roles in 2021 or beyond.

Does the Chiefs' Super Bowl afford Matt Nagy some goodwill by association? Does the Bears' brass feel justified that their decision to hire an Andy Reid disciple puts them on the right path? — @ramsin_t

Nagy is a long way removed from Kansas City at this point. What makes the Bears confident in him is the fact that he did a terrific job in 2018, leading a quick turnaround and winning Coach of the Year honors along the way. Nagy was able to keep the locker room in the right place last year when the team struggled as well. What's going on in Kansas City and what's transpired for the Chiefs the past two years shouldn't have any bearing on how the Bears feel about their coach.

At the end of the season you were pretty down on Mitch Trubisky. Have you reconsidered at all? If not, who would you bring in if you were the Bears GM? — @tmacnam

I'm not sure how one can review 2019 and look back on it any differently. The Bears had one of the worst offenses in the NFL just about any way you slice it, and the quarterback was at the core of nearly all of that. It's also hard to say Trubisky was anything more than a middle-of-the-road quarterback in 2018. Trubisky has ample playing experience, and the Bears have at least floated the idea that different players develop at different rates. That's fair, but it's also fair to question how many quarterbacks have gone from being below average through three seasons as a starter to elite performers. That's a really short list, and there's a long list of guys teams have hung on to for far too long with the idea that they might turn the corner. Ryan Pace and Matt Nagy were definitive at the end of the season that Trubisky would be the club's starter at the beginning of the 2020 season. I've taken the approach that actions will speak louder than words. We'll get a goo d idea of how they evaluated his performance and how they view his career trajectory when we see how they construct the quarterback depth chart after the new league year kicks off March 18. The Bears should get the best option that fits what Nagy wants to do at the position. Who is realistic to fill that role? That's a big question. Would they be better served trading for a player? Would they tell free agents that Trubisky will indeed be the starter when the season rolls along? A ton of variables are in place. It's a difficult spot for the Bears, because when a franchise swings and misses on the No. 2 pick in the draft, it can take some time to rebound. When that whiff comes on a quarterback, it can take longer. Keep in mind, most of the options people are throwing out there are short-term fixes, at best.

———

©2020 the Chicago Tribune

Visit the Chicago Tribune at www.chicagotribune.com

Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Tweet

Subscribe to receive free email updates: