Is Charles Tillman the best value for the Bears in 2014?

SB Nation is taking a look at the NFL’s most notable underachievers, the players who failed to live up to big expectations in 2013, and exploring whether or not they can turn things around in 2014.

To understand the dilemma of the Charles Tillman contract, we need to look at the other sport called football. In that sport, when discussing why he left legend Landon Donovan off the USMNT’s World Cup, coach Jurgen Klinsmann revealed an interesting American sports tendency.

“This always happens in America,” Klinsmann told New York Times Magazine. “Kobe Bryant, for example - why does he get a two-year contract extension for $50 million? Because of what he is going to do in the next two years for the Lakers? Of course not. Of course not. He gets it because of what he has done before. It makes no sense. Why do you pay for what has already happened?”

Tillman has been inarguably an outstanding player for the Chicago Bears, and that’s why fans of the team were so excited that the Bears brought him back to the Windy City out of free agency. But at $3.5 million for this year, and as someone who will be expected to still play at an elite level, is Tillman getting paid for what already happened or what he can realistically do this fall?

Tillman has been a solid player since he first got to the league in 2003, but he’s become a star in the twilight of his career. He made the Pro Bowl in 2011 and 2012, forcing 10 fumbles and scoring three touchdowns in the latter. Those fumbles — he’s forced 42 in his career — are no coincidence. Tillman trademarked the “Peanut Punch,” in which he deliberately looks to punch the ball out of opponents’ arms nearly every time he makes a tackle.

It’s possible that Tillman was the NFL’s most valuable defender in 2012, keeping a struggling Bears offense afloat by turning defense into offense. It got to the point where Bears fans felt better about scoring points when Tillman was on the field than when the offense was on the field.

But in 2013, Tillman regressed. He still forced three fumbles and intercepted three passes, and he was solid when he was on the field, but injuries forced him to sit out for half of the season. Consequently, the Bears’ defense struggled, and the unit that had so often saved the team was the one responsible for keeping it out of the playoffs.

Now, Tillman comes back for his 12th NFL season to be “the guy” across from Tim Jennings while the Bears wait for first round draft pick Kyle Fuller to develop and take his spot. But the question isn’t whether Chicago should have passed on Tillman to start Fuller; it’s whether there was better value to be found elsewhere, rather than just taking a legacy player.

The Bears are no stranger to this kind of decision. They made the right call in letting Brian Urlacher go, even when some fans thought he “deserved better” for what he had done. Is doing the opposite with Tillman also the right decision? If he can stay healthy, Tillman is in a better place now than Urlacher was at the time of his retirement, but there’s certainly an argument to be made that Tillman won’t provide the best value for what he’s getting.

The Bears’ defensive drop-off between 2012 and 2013 was incredible. The unit that ranked first in Football Outsiders’ weighted defense metric in 2012 ranked 31st in the league in 2013. The rush defense was more of a problem than the pass defense, but the pass defense still saw a drop-off, going from first to 17th in the league. Combine the generally bad defense with 14 fewer turnovers forced, and it’s easy to see why the Bears were home for the playoffs again.

Chicago used the draft to upgrade its defense, and the additions of Fuller, defensive tackles Ego Ferguson and Will Sutton and safety Brock Vereen should pay off in the long run, but the Bears need some veterans to ease the rookies’ learning curves this year. And in order to right the ship — or at least, make sure it doesn’t sink — Tillman needs to be a solid starter and play in more than eight games.

Had the Bears gone a different direction and signed a couple younger, cheaper, solid journeyman corners to provide more depth at the position, there would have been less pressure riding on one particular player to stay healthy and hold down the fort in his old age. Tillman is certainly capable of doing that, but he Bears’ all-in approach could be potentially dangerous down the road.

The short answer is absolutely. If Tillman stays healthy, he may not be the same player we saw in 2012, but he can still be productive, even in his old age. He’s still, tactically, a very solid player, and he brings a game-changing ability to force turnovers unlike almost any other player in the NFL.

But the question is whether the Bears gambled too much on hoping Tillman’s body can hold up for him to play at that level.

This offseason, Chicago had two choices: Pay Tillman enough to bring him back and hope he can do enough to hold over the Bears’ defense until he passes the torch to Fuller, or bring in a couple other guys who might not provide Tillman’s flash, but can provide depth to make sure one injury doesn’t send the defense into panic mode? The Bears chose the former. We’ll see if the gamble pays off.