I Just Want To Read
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Dec 2, 2012
- Posts:
- 1,421
- Liked Posts:
- 712
meh I think 10th overall would basically be considered 1.5 1sts. And we could fill the gap with a future 2nd.I think the "2 firsts" narrative kills the Bears in this deal. Our No. 10 pick is just too high a value compared to a team like the Commanders or Lions giving their 2 firsts. And, while I'm sure all the GMs would agree, there's going to be an optics to it that I think the Browns would tread lightly with. I feel they'll really want to be able to say "we got 2 firsts"... even, for example, if we gave our two 2nds, which is equivalent to a mid-first.
That said, the article suggests this can be a post June 1st move, which would benefit us a lot. If all goes according to plan, our next year first should be a lot less valuable that the 10 pick we hold right now.
There's just no way Lions 28th overall and next years 1st would be considered a more valuable package.