Clowney Cost

[Chris Sojka]

I would rather have Ealy who I think will be a 10 sack guy and we give up nothing.

he has 12.5 sacks in 3 years at Missouri... you think he is going to be a 10 sack guy in the NFL? he had 8.5 sacks and played opposite Michael Sam all year long who dominated and drew attention away from Ealy...

 

[Chris Sojka]

I kind of view it the opposite way. If the Bears are convinced that Clowney will be a star player, its less of a risk to trade up and take Clowney, because at least the Bears will know what they are getting (to some degree). Those other draft picks might not ever pan out, especially if the 1st round picks are in the mid/late round range. I think a top 5 pick is a safer bet than two 15 picks and a 115 pick. JMO

Make no mistake about it... Clowney will be a star for the next decade where ever he plays... He is a freak and has excellent pass rushing moves...

Clowney is quite possibly one of the best defensive line prospects to come along in decades... If you didn't watch him all season long or last season then you really can't gauge how insanely talented he is...

How can we even question whether he will be a star? the question is do you think he is injury prone? and so far the answer is no.....

 

[Raskolnikov]

This is a very awkward discussion, because the OP proposed a trade up WAY WAY WAY under the actual cost of trading up. Yet, most still didn't want to do it.

If that was the cost this is an easy question? You do it!!! You do it!! You do it!!! Anybody in our draft position would be giddy at the cost proposed and do it without worry about our lack of depth, because you make up for a lot by getting 1 pick right and plugging in a starter at DE/OLB.

Clowney is absolutely going in first 3 picks, and is absolutely too high of a price for us. It isn't a discussion, the cost is much much higher

 

[rawdawg]

he has 12.5 sacks in 3 years at Missouri... you think he is going to be a 10 sack guy in the NFL? he had 8.5 sacks and played opposite Michael Sam all year long who dominated and drew attention away from Ealy...

Ezekiel Ansah had 4.5 sacks in 1 year at BYU and played opposite Kyle Van Noy all year long who dominated and drew attention away from Ansah. He almost doubled that as a rookie.

 

[Broc]

Clowney is absolutely going in first 3 picks, and is absolutely too high of a price for us. It isn't a discussion, the cost is much much higher

I wouldn't say it's an absolute lock. The first 4 teams all have major QB issues. The Rams could easily decide to pull the plug on Bradford and take a QB at 2... In which case you might see the first 4 picks all be QB's... It's unlikely but not out of the question.

 

[Pegger]

I kind of view it the opposite way. If the Bears are convinced that Clowney will be a star player, its less of a risk to trade up and take Clowney, because at least the Bears will know what they are getting (to some degree). Those other draft picks might not ever pan out, especially if the 1st round picks are in the mid/late round range. I think a top 5 pick is a safer bet than two 15 picks and a 115 pick. JMO

No draft pick is a sure thing, so I'd be more inclined to spend top dollar in free agency to get a proven performer than to get a draft choice cheaper for 4-5 years, but then have to pay more in free agency to fill the other spots in your roster.

IMO 2 15th picks are worth more than 1 top five pick becuase those 2 15th pick not only spreads the risk of failure over two players but it also has 2 rookie salaries which allow you to have more cap space to either extend/resign your own or be a player in free agency.

We clearly have different mindsets. Let's take Seattle for example. Their success was not because their top draft picks paid off, but more their non-first rounders hit. Thinking that before this season Chancellor, Sherman and Wilson were all making less than $1M/season. That allowed them to get guys like Avril, Harvin, Bennett and Chris Clemmons in free agency. Essentially having those draft picks outperform their draft spot allowed them to have additional funds to build a winner.

Looking at your logic I can't think of a time where someone who traded away quite a few picks to move up ended up having a champion contender in the years that follow. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it just hasn't been a strategy that has worked in the past.

 

[Omeletpants]

 

[Raskolnikov]

How are we discussing moving up 12 spots to #2 or #3 overall for 2 likely mid firsts and a third, which is totally unreasonable.

Real cost to move up to #5 would probably be this years first, second, and fifth plus next years first and third. Would anyone do that? no, but its a realistic cost and if you think he is the next Demarcus Ware and you had the luxury of a roster like the 49ers maybe you could do it. Obviously we can't

 

[Tjodalv]

Despite the argument about value of the picks, I just don't think the payoff of one potential stud is equal to two+ solid starters (which is what you would hope for from the two first rounders you'd be giving up); at least not on a team that is going to be completely rebuilding their D for the next few seasons. If we were one stud away from having a top notch D I could see the value in mortgaging a draft to pick up Clowney...the Bears just aren't in that position.

 

[Broc]

I just don't think the payoff of one potential stud is equal to two+ solid starters

I couldn't possibly disagree more...

So hypothetically speaking if you could have either LT or say Keith Van Horne and McMahon you'd pass on LT for the 2 "solid starters"???

Call me crazy but 1 HOF player is definitively > than 2 solid staters. Not saying Clowney is going to be the next LT or anything, but if he does live up to the hype and goes on to have a HOF career then he most certainly will be worth whatever some team gave up to get him.

 

[patg006]

So what is the tipping point to you? The added 3rd rounder?

Rory you rascal.....

Tipping point is that the bears have far more holes than just 1. They need more than a pass rusher. They need to stop the run too. And get players in the secondary, and they also need more linebacker who have a clue what gap control means.

Trading up for Clowney, a top 2-3 pick will probably cost more than two 1sts and a 3rd, probably have to throw in this year's 2nd too. St. Louis needs a make over on offense the way the bears do on defense. No doubt he could be plugged in right away and likely contribute, but with so many holes on D. I don't think its worth it.

Atlanta made a huge jump in 2011 to get up to #6 and take Julio Jones, a fantastic player. But it hurt them because their defense still sucks. They have no pass rush post John Abraham, a nice DT, one linebacker and an average safety.

They still have holes, and mortgaging your youth by setting yourself 2 years+ back isn't worth it for 1 guy.

:fap:

 

[xer0h0ur]

I am not a fan of trading up and giving away what would be for sure more than just 2 first round picks.

 

[Tjodalv]

I couldn't possibly disagree more...

So hypothetically speaking if you could have either LT or say Keith Van Horne and McMahon you'd pass on LT for the 2 "solid starters"???

Call me crazy but 1 HOF player is definitively > than 2 solid staters. Not saying Clowney is going to be the next LT or anything, but if he does live up to the hype and goes on to have a HOF career then he most certainly will be worth whatever some team gave up to get him.

If you could guarantee a HOF career, then maybe it would be worth it. But, who's to say the two 1sts we'd give up wouldn't also end up having HOF careers? In the end, the draft is a crapshoot and I'd rather have two rolls as opposed to one given the amount of turnover our D is going to experience over the next few seasons. Especially if Clowney ends up busting (not a prediction, just adding on to the hypotheticals)...then you ended up spending two 1sts and whatever else on a non-entity...talk about a franchise killer. That's basically why I'm opposed, in general, to trading up that high; it doesn't really have anything to do with the specific guy, just the positional impact and the cost.

 

[xer0h0ur]

When was the last time a team bet the farm for a draft pick and it panned out? Julio Jones? Can't say RG3 quite yet.

 

[Midway Fields]

When was the last time a team bet the farm for a draft pick and it panned out? Julio Jones? Can't say RG3 quite yet.

Phil is a innovator.

 

[xer0h0ur]

and with the 14th overall pick in the 2014 NFL Draft, the Chicago Bears take quarterback from Eastern Illinois Jimmy Garoppolo *Midway Jay has heart attack* *the internet implodes from cunting Bears fans*

 

[Midway Fields]

and with the 14th overall pick in the 2014 NFL Draft, the Chicago Bears take quarterback from Eastern Illinois Jimmy Garoppolo *Midway Jay has heart attack* *the internet implodes from cunting Bears fans*

We are scraping him up 2nd round. Believe it! That fucking release is riiiiiiiiiidiculous.

 

[hyatt151]

and with the 14th overall pick in the 2014 NFL Draft, the Chicago Bears take quarterback from Eastern Illinois Jimmy Garoppolo *Midway Jay has heart attack* *the internet implodes from cunting Bears fans*

:farley:

 

[PrideisBears]

When was the last time a team bet the farm for a draft pick and it panned out? Julio Jones? Can't say RG3 quite yet.

Just Julio Jones so far

 

[Doubledown]

stephon tuitt ‏@DOCnation_7 7h
At the University of South Florida finishing up the second half of our Mock Combine!!!!