If the Bears are targeting a QB -

[PolarBear]

Any team trading from below the Bears is going to give up far more than the 3rd rounder he suggested. It is immediately cost prohibitive. You want to give up an extra 1st round pick, or two, or more? Because that's what it'd take.

The cost wasn't the point. My offer was just throwing something out there (as stated already).

The cost shouldn't be an issue for a franchise QB.

 

[didshereallysaythat]

SF have expressed interest in trading down. The issue isn't with SF taking the QB, it's with another team trading up if THEY want the QB, to SF's #2 pick, and jumping in front of the Bears.

I'm not getting what's so hard to understand about this.

Let's say the Bears are at 2.

Would you rather trade down to 3 and get a measly 3rd rounder? Or would you rather trade down to 6 and get multiple 1st rounders in return? I know what I would want. Get multiple first rounders.

 

[rawdawg]

You, like so many, assume that the Bears have THEIR guy which is one QB head and shoulders above everyone else.

Reality tells us that, with so many QBs with serious flaws in their games, the Bears probably have Mickey and Watson (possibly even Kizer) rated equally and probably much lower than other prospects. If the Bears decide to draft a QB (and that seems more and more likely as we get closer to the draft), instead of trading up for one of their choices, they can sit there at 3 or even do a slight trade down and still get one of the two, if not have the choice of either.

The assumption is made because at the QB position, you need to have A guy. It's not like all these guys are exactly the same QB. They aren't all 6'5", 230 with the same arm strength, experience, and intangibles. If the Bears have all of Watson, Trubisky and Kizer all rated equally, then they aren't doing enough homework. This is the QB position we're talking about. You can't say, "Hey, we really want Trubisky at 3, but we will be fine with Kizer at 36". That's non-committal. You can't be non-committal about the QB position. That's how you end up settling. Settling for Rex Grossman and Cade McNown in a picked over class of QBs.

 

[bearmick]

Any team trading from below the Bears is going to give up far more than the 3rd rounder he suggested. It is immediately cost prohibitive. You want to give up an extra 1st round pick, or two, or more? Because that's what it'd take.

It happens. Don't listen to Luke's certain proclamations; some teams might like one of these QBs more than Goff and Wentz. We have no idea. If the Eagles were willing to give up a ton to move up to #2 from #11 (or whatever it was), a team might very well move up from #6. The bottom line is we just don't know, therefore if there's a specific QB Pace covets, he should make sure he gets him, whatever it takes.

More that likely it won't take that, but it's not the insane concept some people seem to think it is.

 

[PolarBear]

Wow.

For the 4th time, a draft pick I threw out there. It wasn't the point.

Here is what I would be willing to give up truly - WHATEVER IT COSTS.

 

[bearmick]

Let's say the Bears are at 2.

Would you rather trade down to 3 and get a measly 3rd rounder? Or would you rather trade down to 6 and get multiple 1st rounders in return? I know what I would want. Get multiple first rounders.

That would depend. If I'm just looking to stockpile BPAs for the roster, I'd rather go to #6. If I'm targeting a specific QB I'm not taking any chances of missing him, so I wouldn't trade down at all.

So my answer is I don't know, because I don't know what John Lynch wants.

 

[rawdawg]

Let's say the Bears are at 2.

Would you rather trade down to 3 and get a measly 3rd rounder? Or would you rather trade down to 6 and get multiple 1st rounders in return? I know what I would want. Get multiple first rounders.

Oversimplified. If you pick 2 and you want Solomon Thomas or Marshon Lattimore, would you rather get an extra pick and still get the guy you want. Or would you want more picks and lose the chance to get both of the 2 guys you want?

 

[MrOuija]

The cost wasn't the point. My offer was just throwing something out there (as stated already).

The cost shouldn't be an issue for a franchise QB.

You're working backwards from the premise that one of these guys is without a doubt a franchise QB, and then claiming that any price is worth it. That's dangerous, that's how we ended up with Cutler, and lost tons of picks and years trying to justify that trade.

I like Trubisky and Watson, but neither you, me, or Pace can KNOW that they are franchise QBs worth whatever it takes. All we do know is that they are talented and that it'd take our 1 pick to draft one and find out. Once you start throwing out multiple picks the risk/reward equation skews against them.

 

[bearmick]

Sorry, I keep forgetting that SF is set at QB with Hoyer and Barkely.

So according to you, it's ridiculous to even discuss QBs at #3 (as you've been saying for weeks) because none of these guys are worth it. But at the same time you think SF are taking a QB at 2.

 

[PolarBear]

You're working backwards from the premise that one of these guys is without a doubt a franchise QB, and then claiming that any price is worth it. That's dangerous, that's how we ended up with Cutler, and lost tons of picks and years trying to justify that trade.

I like Trubisky and Watson, but neither you, me, or Pace can KNOW that they are franchise QBs worth whatever it takes. All we do know is that they are talented and that it'd take our 1 pick to draft one and find out. Once you start throwing out multiple picks the risk/reward equation skews against them.

I am not working backwards from anything. If I was calling the shots, I would do whatever I had to do, to go and get Trubisky. I think he is a franchise QB.

I don't know who Pace's guy is. I can see the reasoning if he thinks Watson is a franchise QB. If that's his guy then go and get him.

 

[MrOuija]

I am not working backwards from anything. If I was calling the shots, I would do whatever I had to do, to go and get Trubisky. I think he is a franchise QB.

I don't know who Pace's guy is. I can see the reasoning if he thinks Watson is a franchise QB. If that's his guy then go and get him.

You say you're not working backwards from the premise that Trubisky is a franchise QB, and then claim he is a franchise QB in the same paragraph. Okay...

 

[bearmick]

no, I'm saying if all these teams think that Trubs is so great and want to trade up to #2 I would wonder why Shanny doesn't see the same thing and just take Trubs himself.

You realize that not all teams' boards are the same, right? Teams have different priorities and different players ranked differently at each position. There isn't some objective set in stone BPA board that all 32 teams share and pick accordingly.

I believe the OP's point was a hypothetical, if SF want to trade down.

 

[PolarBear]

You say you're not working backwards from the premise that Trubisky is a franchise QB, and then claim he is a franchise QB in the same paragraph. Okay...

Yeah...that's right.

 

[Beast15]

Sorry, I keep forgetting that SF is set at QB with Hoyer and Barkely.

SF is waiting on Cousins next year #calledit

 

[MrOuija]

It happens. Don't listen to Luke's certain proclamations; some teams might like one of these QBs more than Goff and Wentz. We have no idea. If the Eagles were willing to give up a ton to move up to #2 from #11 (or whatever it was), a team might very well move up from #6. The bottom line is we just don't know, therefore if there's a specific QB Pace covets, he should make sure he gets him, whatever it takes.

More that likely it won't take that, but it's not the insane concept some people seem to think it is.

There is risk and then there is RISK. A team moving from 11 to 2 and paying a kings ransom to do so is the cost of moving up those 9 spots (or whatever). Giving the same kings ransom to move up 1 spot to possibly preempt a lower team makes little sense.

What if the Jets want Trubisky and Pace wanted Watson? We're then giving up 2 or 3 1st rounders to pick the same person. You can hope one of these guys is the next Rodgers, but you can't assume they are. Hope only takes 1 pick.

 

[didshereallysaythat]

One spot apart trades don't happen often for a number of reasons. Team moving up doesn't want to give up much. Team moving down might like same player. Team moving up might feel they can get same player anyway. Team moving down has better offers from teams lower down.

If there was a team out there that would most likely be the highest on Trubisky, it would probably be San Francisco anyway given their situation. If that is the case, obviously this whole thing is mute.

The ONLY way I could see this happening is if say Buffalo and Chicago both love the same QB and SF loves a different QB. Then you could justify SF wanting to sacrifice 1st round pick offers to move back only 1 spot so they could guarantee they get that other QB. But if they just really like a non-QB player, then they probably don't like him THAT MUCH to sacrifice the multiple 1st round selections. Atleast they shouldn't.

 

[JoJoBoxer]

After all this time, research, meetings, combines, pro days, you don't think the Bears have a qb they clearly like over the rest?

No, I don't.

Mickey - best accuracy, progresses from receiver to receiver while looking for the open man, one year wonder (Pace likes taking players with more experience, not just QBs with more experience), many of his victories came against lesser talent, doesn't seem to have had an official visit (smoke screen?), pocket presence good, played with talented offense, good but not great leadership, shotgun qb

Watson - the IT factor, poor accuracy (scouts say that accuracy does not improve from college to the pros. It makes sense since the defenses are more complex, the defenders are all better, and the windows become smaller), winner in the biggest stages, prone to eye his first receiver and pass to him, played with talented offense, great leadership, made the whole program better in college, lots of picks in all his seasons, shotgun qb, slight frame can be injury concern in the future, he makes poor decisions (mostly because he does not look at multiple receivers)

Kizer - prototypical size, much better seasons before than his last year while having much better offensive talent in those early years, terror for the defense with his legs because of his speed size combo, had some experience under center, underwhelmed in accuracy, leadership and results, not a winner seeing that he was awful with games on the line, he is a "nice guy" but in reality all of his interactions with the public may have been a QB well trained in what to say, multiple visits with the Bears

I, and most people, do not see these QBs with their above flaws (and there are more flaws) as worthy of being top 10 draft picks let alone being drafted at #3. Desperate teams are going to make desperate decisions and all of them will be drafted way before they should have.

Let's take Watson as an example since there is a huge following for him. Let's say that the Bears draft Watson at ... who cares where ... just that he is now a Bear.

He is going to be working on accuracy, decision making, working under center, complex defenses, complex offenses while getting third string reps (meaning none) and with inferior talent on offense compared to what he had (no more jump ball receiver nor best TE in the country).

Really. How is he going to get better? Yes, he can learn offenses and defenses in the QB room, but with limited reps for players due to limited time and contact, he is going to struggle. As a third string QB, he is going to get zero training from coaches because they will be busy trying to put a respectable product on the field during the season. There isn't even a minor league for him to get some live game experience.

 

[bearmick]

There is risk and then there is RISK. A team moving from 11 to 2 and paying a kings ransom to do so is the cost of moving up those 9 spots (or whatever). Giving the same kings ransom to move up 1 spot to possibly preempt a lower team makes little sense.

What if the Jets want Trubisky and Pace wanted Watson? We're then giving up 2 or 3 1st rounders to pick the same person. You can hope one of these guys is the next Rodgers, but you can't assume they are. Hope only takes 1 pick.

What? It wouldn't be the same king's ransom to move up one spot. It would take a later pick or two, as it was when the Browns moved up for Richardson.

If you're trading me a 2018 Audi and I'm giving you a 2017 Audi in return, you wouldn't expect the same cash supplement as you would if I was giving you a 2002 Ford Focus in return. It's not the same trade.

 

[iueyedoc]

Your opinion on the QB's and what teams think could definitely be very different...

We saw teams trade a heck of a lot for Jared Goff and Carson Wentz.

The argument last year was who should be the overall 1st, this year it is are they worth a 1st. A blockbuster trade up will not happen.

 

[PolarBear]

The argument last year was who should be the overall 1st, this year it is are they worth a 1st. A blockbuster trade up will not happen.

Blaine Gabbert went 10th overall. E.J Manuel 16th. Trubisky and Watson are another level to both those guys as prospects. I remember when Wentz was getting late 1st- 2nd round grades very early in the process on some sites and some people were wondering if Goff belong in the top 5.

I had a similar stance to you earlier in the process but I think it's inevitable that both these guys go in the top 10.