Myles Garrett?

[nc0gnet0]

The argument you are making is not an apples to apples argument considering you are comparing what Mitch did in 12 games as opposed to the 6 Williams has played. A more complete argument would be comparing each of their first six starts. That's where Williams would blow Trubisky away.

You seem confused, my argument is that you have not seen enough games from CW yet to make any "all in" moves.

 

[nc0gnet0]

You didnt define good dumbass. So basically what you are saying is a Lions fan is going to define good in the dumbest way possible to justify a stupid argument said fan made and which would run counter to what 99% of actual Bears fans and anyone with a brain thinks.

Do you get how stupid you sound?

LMAO, I get how 99% of Bears fans thought the Mack trade at the time was a good move, and Trubisky was the second coming.
I get how you thought the Claypool trade was good.
Maybe you should not lecture someone about brain dead?

 

[nc0gnet0]

That traded netted Mack, Kmet and Brisker. So in the end it was Jacobs and Arnette for 3.5 years of Mack, Kmet and Brisker. Bears win that trade easily.

Feel free to go back and draft whoever was available with those 2 firsts if you feel the Raiders made poor picks and I doubt you get equivalent value. You might get a better team in the later years but with Trubisky you still fail and a better team possible means not getting the first that allowed us to get Caleb, Moore, Wright and Stevenson and a 2025 2nd.

So again the problem still comes back to Trubisky over Mahomes.

Feel free to go back and draft whoever was available with those 2 firsts if you feel the Raiders made poor picks and I doubt you get equivalent value.

plus the extra cap, dumbass

 

[Myk]

I tend to agree with you here, but if we can find an elite DE/LT on a team that is tearing down, rebuilding, looking to move assets, I say go for it. I expect our 1st round pick will be middle of the first round, so we may miss out on any elite DE/LT. I'm sure there will be talent there. It's not like we don't need OL help as well. I keep hearing rumblings about RB (Jeanty) but that seems like a luxury pick, one we don't need.

QB: Set
RB: Set
WR: Set
TE: Set
OL: need help at all three positions, especially Center

DE: Could use an elite DE opposite Sweat
CB: Set
S: Set
LB: Set
DT: Need upgrade or depth?

ST: Set

So we're looking pretty good IMO. Did I miss anything?

I agree with your assessment without getting into any moves ahead.

If we could get a proven DE for a 1st or 2nd that's well worth it as long as they're not too old. The problem is Garrett is probably multiple 1sts plus more, plus a big contract when it comes time for us to pay.
We just lost our asses getting into that deal and again getting out of it with Mack. Why did we bother getting out of it?

It's the multiple 1sts plus more that gets me to say pass. Getting that defense at the expense of having that offense for years makes no sense.
Especially not when you consider how close it is with the draft. In the amount of future you'd invest in one player you'd have everyone drafted.

Next year could be DE, Center, OT or OG and OG. Unless you give away the DE, Center and OG for one player.

 

[remydat]

LMAO, I get how 99% of Bears fans thought the Mack trade at the time was a good move, and Trubisky was the second coming.
I get how you thought the Claypool trade was good.
Maybe you should not lecture someone about brain dead?

The Mack trade was a good move so not sure your point.

You also cried about the Sweat trade and were proven wrong. The goal is to acquire good players not worry about past mistakes. You know the past that you claim isnt relevant.

 

[remydat]

Feel free to go back and draft whoever was available with those 2 firsts if you feel the Raiders made poor picks and I doubt you get equivalent value.

plus the extra cap, dumbass

Not sure your point jackass, I already considered the extra cap when this was discussed previously.

Micah Parsons

Nah, he still traded way too much for Mack in hindsight. Then we had to give him a huge contract. That was the main reason we sucked with absolutely no hope for several years. That was the main reason we wasted any chance Justin Fields had at being successful as an nfl qb. The Bears sucked...

forum.chicitysports.com

Post 186. We still end up better off trading for Mack. The fundamental issue is we werent winning with Trubisky either way so at best you end up with a decent playoff team that goes nowhere and at worse you end up getting players that dont match up with Mack, Kmet and Bisker.

The problem with the best case scenaeio is it probably costs us a chance at Caleb, Moore, Stevenson, Wright because we get younger players instead of Mack which likely means we do try and rebuild by trading away Quan and Quinn So they are good enough for us to win enough games to prevent us from getting the 1st pick in 2023.

So unless you are going to argue not trading for Mack allows us to build a Super Bowl team it is a pointless argument. But by all means pick your players and free agents and make an argument we are Super Bowl contenders with Trusbisky.

 

[nc0gnet0]

Not sure your point jackass, I already considered the extra cap when this was discussed previously.

Micah Parsons

Nah, he still traded way too much for Mack in hindsight. Then we had to give him a huge contract. That was the main reason we sucked with absolutely no hope for several years. That was the main reason we wasted any chance Justin Fields had at being successful as an nfl qb. The Bears sucked...

forum.chicitysports.com

Post 186. We still end up better off trading for Mack. The fundamental issue is we werent winning with Trubisky either way so at best you end up with a decent playoff team that goes nowhere and at worse you end up getting players that dont match up with Mack, Kmet and Bisker.

The problem with the best case scenaeio is it probably costs us a chance at Caleb, Moore, Stevenson, Wright because we get younger players instead of Mack which likely means we do try and rebuild by trading away Quan and Quinn So they are good enough for us to win enough games to prevent us from getting the 1st pick in 2023.

So unless you are going to argue not trading for Mack allows us to build a Super Bowl team it is a pointless argument. But by all means pick your players and free agents and make an argument we are Super Bowl contenders with Trusbisky.

You traded away 2 firsts and a third, paid a huge salary, and got a net sum of 0 playoff wins.
All the other ifs, nuts, and butts are pure hypothetical bullshit on your part. Nice try, now take another "L" and walk away.
Nobody has a clue how it would have played out if they didn't make the trade, they could have just as easily traded down with those firsts and acquired even more draft capital. But one thing is for sure, it didn't play out very well when they did make the trade.

 

[gobullschi]

So blow it all to win once or twice and then nothing because you don't build a team around the #1 QB? Smart move.

None of those picks you talk about are making up for 2 1st rounders. That's no replacement OT for 2 years, that's no center for 2 years, that's an injury to the #1 QB and no super bowl because of it.
LOL, no single guard or center taken simply means none were worth it. Again you getting the best out of nothing is nothing and that's what you want to give Williams. No thank you.
You've made it clear what you want and it's not an offense or a QB.

On the contrary, I’m actually a BIG believer in building the best offensive line possible. It helps the run game, which in turn, helps the pass game.

Here is PFF’s list of the Top 15 Guards - where 10/15 were drafted in the 2nd or later.

1. Chris Lindstrom - 1st Round
2. Joe Thuney - 3rd Round
3. Sam Cosmi - 2nd Round
4. Tyler Smith - 1st Round
5. Quinn Meinerz - 3rd Round
6. Kevin Zeitler - 1st Round
7. Zach Martin - 1st Round
8. Joel Bitonio - 2nd Round
9. Wyatt Teller - 5th Round
10. Robert Hunt - 2nd Round
11. Quentin Nelson - 1st Round
12. Kevin Dotson - 4th Round
13. Trey Smith - 6th Round
14. Isaac Seumalo - 3rd Round
15. Landon Dickerson - 2nd Round

Why can’t Ryan Poles and Ian Cunningham shore up the interior offensive line without using a 1st?

 

[remydat]

You traded away 2 firsts and a third, paid a huge salary, and got a net sum of 0 playoff wins.
All the other ifs, nuts, and butts are pure hypothetical bullshit on your part. Nice try, now take another "L" and walk away.
Nobody has a clue how it would have played out if they didn't make the trade, they could have just as easily traded down with those firsts and acquired even more draft capital. But one thing is for sure, it didn't play out very well when they did make the trade.

This is the dumbest argument you could make. Either make an argument as to why the alternative would have been better or it is just you being a whiny cunt.

Mack did the job he was traded to do. Trubisky did not do the job he was drafted for so it was a draft failure.

By this stupid ass logic, every single move the Lions have made in the Super Bowl era was garbage because they didnt win shit. Should never have drafted Sanders because it didnt lead to a title. Should never have drafted CJ because it didnt lead to a title.

It is the height of stupidity to judge trades on the basis of team success but draft picks on the basis of how the player performed unless we talking a true all in move which the Mack trade never was.

Further we got a 2nd back from the Raiders and another one when we traded Mack so it was Mack, Kmet and Brisker for Jacobs, Arnette, Edwards.

So since you dont want to talk about alternatives the Bears side of that trade was vastly better. Mack was the best player involved in that trade and Kmet and Brisker are much better than Arnette and Edwards and still with the Bears. By contrast, no one on the Raiders side is even left on the team and 2 of them are out of the league.

So let's revisit when you stop being a coward and explain how the alternative would be better. Until then we got an All Pro for 3.5 years, a top 10 TE and a solid starting safety. That is a win.

 

[gobullschi]

You traded away 2 firsts and a third, paid a huge salary, and got a net sum of 0 playoff wins.
All the other ifs, nuts, and butts are pure hypothetical bullshit on your part. Nice try, now take another "L" and walk away.
Nobody has a clue how it would have played out if they didn't make the trade, they could have just as easily traded down with those firsts and acquired even more draft capital. But one thing is for sure, it didn't play out very well when they did make the trade.

Did you know that only one player lasted longer than 3 years in the NFL with the picks that the Bears traded to get Khalil Mack? That player was Josh Jacobs.

The Bears actually walked away with Khalil Mack and Cole Kmet and then flipped Khalil Mack for Jaquon Brisker.

 

[nc0gnet0]

Did you know that only one player lasted longer than 3 years in the NFL with the picks that the Bears traded to get Khalil Mack? That player was Josh Jacobs.

The Bears actually walked away with Khalil Mack and Cole Kmet and then flipped Khalil Mack for Jaquon Brisker.

Bah, the mistake you are making is assuming the Bears would have had an identical record without Mack, which we both know is wrong.
For all you know the Bears might have been able to draft Nick Bosa, or even Montez Sweat.

 

[remydat]

Bah, the mistake you are making is assuming the Bears would have had an identical record without Mack, which we both know is wrong.
For all you know the Bears might have been able to draft Nick Bosa, or even Montez Sweat.

This is what makes you a coward and hypocrite.

You traded away 2 firsts and a third, paid a huge salary, and got a net sum of 0 playoff wins.
All the other ifs, nuts, and butts are pure hypothetical bullshit on your part. Nice try, now take another "L" and walk away.
Nobody has a clue how it would have played out if they didn't make the trade, they could have just as easily traded down with those firsts and acquired even more draft capital. But one thing is for sure, it didn't play out very well when they did make the trade.

You just waved off discussing an alternative in the Bears favor by stating the above but now you want to spew hypothetical bullshit when it suits you.

I addressed the fact they may have finished with a worse record and been able to draft Sweat or even a Brian Burns in the post 186. The offset to that is again they likely never tear down the team as with guys like Burns/Sweat, keeping Roquan and using the Mack money to sign a FA they likely dont finish with the worse record in 2023 and hence dont get Caleb, Moore, Stevenson etc.

So stop being a biased coward. Cant claim hypotheticals are bullshit but then try and hang your hat on your own hypothetical bullshit. Like Jesus dude have some intellectual honesty. So again make your argument for the alternative resulting in us winning a SB or otherwise you just being a whiny cunt on another team's message board.

It is also the height of stupidity to admit that you think Mack added more wins to the Bears but then still say he wasnt worth it. So we got an All Pro that made us a playoff team, a top 10 TE and a solid starty safety while the Raiders got 2 guys out of the league and a RB who they didnt even pick up his 5th year option and he left but somehow in a non-hypothetical situation we lost? Fuck outta here. We clearly won that trade from a production standpoint.

 

[TL1961]

he has been in the past

Wtf are you talking about?

 

[nc0gnet0]

This is what makes you a coward and hypocrite.

You just waved off discussing an alternative in the Bears favor by stating the above but now you want to spew hypothetical bullshit when it suits you.

I addressed the fact they may have finished with a worse record and been able to draft Sweat or even a Brian Burns in the post 186. The offset to that is again they likely never tear down the team as with guys like Burns/Sweat, keeping Roquan and using the Mack money to sign a FA they likely dont finish with the worse record in 2023 and hence dont get Caleb, Moore, Stevenson etc.

So stop being a biased coward. Cant claim hypotheticals are bullshit but then try and hang your hat on your own hypothetical bullshit. Like Jesus dude have some intellectual honesty. So again make your argument for the alternative resulting in us winning a SB or otherwise you just being a whiny cunt on another team's message board.

It is also the height of stupidity to admit that you think Mack added more wins to the Bears but then still say he wasnt worth it. So we got an All Pro that made us a playoff team, a top 10 TE and a solid starty safety while the Raiders got 2 guys out of the league and a RB who they didnt even pick up his 5th year option and he left but somehow in a non-hypothetical situation we lost? Fuck outta here. We clearly won that trade from a production standpoint.

Dude, the reply wasn't to you, my god, what a moron.

Again, you won a net sum of zero playoff games, ergo, the trade was a fail, get that threw your stupid skull.

but yippee yahoo, you won a few more games, stuck in mediocrity.

Now, want to see a successful trade?

Look what the Lions got for Stafford, and the results.

That is a "successful trade".

the Rams gave up nearly the same amount for Stafford, they won a SB, that is a successful trade.

Meanwhile, the Bears posted one winning season with Mack, had a first round exit in the playoffs, then proceeded to go 8-8, 8-8, and 6-10, and you are trying to say it was a success?

the end.

*edit, also in my post I said "might" I didn't post it as fact, like your dumbass.

 

[TL1961]

This entire thread consist of bears fans, repeatedly arguing with an idiotic Lions fan, who has nothing intelligent or worthwhile to add to the forum.

Look at yourselves. Just ignore the guy.

 

[hester247]

I would be more than willing to do something huge like Myles Garrett and Wyatt Teller for Bears 2025 1st, 2025 3rd, 2026 1st and Austin Booker. I would then look to recoup late draft capital with Nate Davis and Khalil Herbert moves..likely getting 6th or 7th rd picks in return. My thought is Garrett would be modern day version of Packers getting Reggie White and makes Bears defense truly elite along with denying him going to a division rival. We plug massive hole with Teller. Bears cannot entertain using 2025 1st and both 2nds on OL you cannot go into any season especially yr2 of Caleb Williams with 3 rookie OL it just cant happen..Honestly having 2 might be asking too much.

 

[Discus fish salesman]

I would be more than willing to do something huge like Myles Garrett and Wyatt Teller for Bears 2025 1st, 2025 3rd, 2026 1st and Austin Booker. I would then look to recoup late draft capital with Nate Davis and Khalil Herbert moves..likely getting 6th or 7th rd picks in return. My thought is Garrett would be modern day version of Packers getting Reggie White and makes Bears defense truly elite along with denying him going to a division rival. We plug massive hole with Teller. Bears cannot entertain using 2025 1st and both 2nds on OL you cannot go into any season especially yr2 of Caleb Williams with 3 rookie OL it just cant happen..Honestly having 2 might be asking too much.

I'd try to get 1 of their DTs (tomlinson, harris, hurst, jefferson) too if we are going all in on a package. I think one of them could help improve the interior and the run defense

 

[UChiLAbear]

That traded netted Mack, Kmet and Brisker. So in the end it was Jacobs and Arnette for 3.5 years of Mack, Kmet and Brisker. Bears win that trade easily.

Feel free to go back and draft whoever was available with those 2 firsts if you feel the Raiders made poor picks and I doubt you get equivalent value. You might get a better team in the later years but with Trubisky you still fail and a better team possible means not getting the first that allowed us to get Caleb, Moore, Wright and Stevenson and a 2025 2nd.

So again the problem still comes back to Trubisky over Mahomes.

This is all true. My last post on this matter is, da Bears didn't go to the SB trading for Mack, which imo was the main reason to trade for him. They weren't going to the SB with or w/o Mack. Don't make the trade for him and you keep the draft picks. But you are actually agreeing with me. The problem wasn't da Bears needed another Pass Rusher, it was they needed a different QB. We are agreeing in a roundabout way. The problem wasn't the pass rush although Mack definitely made it better. Thanks...good discussion, but I can only talk about the past for a limited time, if at all. Where are da Bears now and how do they proceed to win the SB is what I want to discuss.

 

[pseudonym]

I agree with your assessment without getting into any moves ahead.

If we could get a proven DE for a 1st or 2nd that's well worth it as long as they're not too old. The problem is Garrett is probably multiple 1sts plus more, plus a big contract when it comes time for us to pay.
We just lost our asses getting into that deal and again getting out of it with Mack. Why did we bother getting out of it?

It's the multiple 1sts plus more that gets me to say pass. Getting that defense at the expense of having that offense for years makes no sense.
Especially not when you consider how close it is with the draft. In the amount of future you'd invest in one player you'd have everyone drafted.

Next year could be DE, Center, OT or OG and OG. Unless you give away the DE, Center and OG for one player.

I tend to agree. I'd rather get an elite DE in the draft, younger, and at a lower price. But if the deal is right, I'd love to get a veteran DE. IDK who would have any interest in Herbert + OL depth + 2nd though.

 

[Discus fish salesman]

I tend to agree. I'd rather get an elite DE in the draft, younger, and at a lower price. But if the deal is right, I'd love to get a veteran DE. IDK who would have any interest in Herbert + OL depth + 2nd though.

Good luck just getting an elite DE in the draft.