D’Andre Swift is in the last year of his current contract with the Chicago Bears. The Bears can decide to either extend Swift and tie him down for the rest of his prime or let him walk, assuming they can get similar production from a cheaper player. If the Bears are looking to sign, it is going to cost more than his last contract, but how much?
What would a D’Andre Swift extension look like with the Chicago Bears?
There have been a few running backs in the same age range and skill level as Swift who have signed extensions in recent years. Comparing Swift's past three years to Josh Jacobs, Travis Etienne, Rhamondre Stevenson, Kyren Williams, and James Cook paints a strong portrait of what Swift can expect on an open market. All of these running backs signed four-year deals, besides Williams, who signed a three-year extension.
Player | Attempts | Yards | TDs | Receptions | Yards | TDs | Age | AAV |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
James Cook | 753 | 3752 | 30 | 109 | 994 | 8 | 26 | $11.5M |
Kyren Williams | 803 | 3695 | 36 | 102 | 669 | 8 | 25 | $11M |
Josh Jacobs | 768 | 3063 | 34 | 109 | 920 | 2 | 27 | $12M |
Travis Etienne | 677 | 2673 | 20 | 133 | 1022 | 7 | 26 | $12M |
Rhamondre Stevenson | 493 | 2023 | 18 | 105 | 751 | 3 | 27 | $9M |
D'Andre Swift | 705 | 3095 | 20 | 115 | 899 | 2 | 26 | ? |
Swift is clearly outproducing Stevenson, who sets a floor for Swift. Still, Swift is making $8M per year on his current deal, so Stevenson is making more than an average annual salary. Swift will be looking for at least $10M per year.
The question is how much more can he get than that. He is more impactful as a rusher than Jacobs on a per attempt basis, but Jacobs has more touchdowns and is surprisingly more efficient as a pass catcher. He is a better pass catcher than Williams, but Williams is more productive on the ground and a touch younger.
Etienne is much more efficient as a pass-catching back than Swift, and Cook clears him in almost all areas. Swift is a good running back, and his numbers are close to those of these backs, but he falls just short of them when it matters.
Swift is going to argue that he is in line with these backs, the salary is going up, and he should make $12M at a minimum, with the potential to make more. Etienne tested the market and made $12M at the same age. The Bears are going to say he is not quite as efficient as those backs, and his efficiency improved in Chicago, so he needs them as much as they need him.
They might offer Swift closer to $10M - $11M at most. This might be why Williams went with a three-year deal instead of four, so he can try to hit the market again. At only 27 years old, this makes sense for Swift as well. A three-year, $31.5M deal that averages $10.5M per year might be a good medium for both sides. Would Swift accept?
| More Bears News and Rumors |
Add us as a preferred source on Google