- Joined:
- Apr 17, 2010
- Posts:
- 36,653
- Liked Posts:
- 32,916
- Joined:
- Aug 21, 2012
- Posts:
- 9,290
- Liked Posts:
- 5,122
- Location:
- Albuquerque, NM
Humility is a good thing to see in a rookie.
- Joined:
- Apr 17, 2010
- Posts:
- 36,653
- Liked Posts:
- 32,916
Dejo
Godfather of FTO
- Joined:
- Apr 4, 2011
- Posts:
- 16,507
- Liked Posts:
- 19,641
My favorite teams
- Joined:
- Aug 17, 2011
- Posts:
- 42,676
- Liked Posts:
- 22,233
- Location:
- Palatine, IL
My favorite teams
True but also more issues. Claypool's value was clearly a 2 and this regime wasn't ready to add players like Ridley which they've now shown a few times. Maybe in another year, they'll be willing to roll more dice. Maybe not.
- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2012
- Posts:
- 58,846
- Liked Posts:
- 36,323
If Ridley plays well enough to sign a long term deal the 5th becomes a 2nd rounder.
In any event your initial post did not say you prefer Ridley due to the trade comp as if it had I would not have said anything.
You referenced injuries which is weird as Ridley is clearly the bigger risk hence why despite being a better player thus far he went for less comp.
dabears70
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Dec 31, 2013
- Posts:
- 34,827
- Liked Posts:
- 10,519
- Location:
- Orlando
My favorite teams
Did you get Ridley in the 3rd or 4th? By going off the players i'm guessing the 4th with of course Ekeler, Jacobs and Olave in the top 3 then Fields and Moore.
I'd go into a FFB season with that team but would probably pick up another TE in case Njoku is inconsistent again. I'd trade a WR (D.Johnson or T.Locket) for another legit RB as well.
- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2012
- Posts:
- 58,846
- Liked Posts:
- 36,323
Just to go into Ridley vs Claypool in more detail. I would say he is more talented technically but Claypool is more talented physically.
They had similar yardage numbers their first 2 years in the league. Difference is Ridley blew up his 3rd year playing with a HoF QB while Claypool split his 3rd year playing with a rookie and a QB who was barely averaging 150 yards passing.
Not to mention Ridley blew up in his age 26 season and Claypool is only 25 this year as Ridley was a 24 year old rookie while Claypool was 22 as a rookie.
What is also odd to me is Bears fans complaining about how Claypool is a bit of a diva or has character concerns yet they are banging the table for a player who refused to play for his team and then got suspended for gambling. Not sure how those are not character concerns.
All of this is why Ridley went for less initially. He hasnt played for almost 2 years. No one knows where he is at physically and more importantly mentally and it is strange to just assume he can pick up where he left off. We saw Josh Gordon get suspended as one of the best WRs in the NFL but was never the same after that long a layoff.
I would not have minded taking a flyer on Ridley but nor do I mind doing so with Claypool. I suspect Poles opted for Claypool because he wanted a higher floor even if Claypool may never reach his ceiling.
They had similar yardage numbers their first 2 years in the league. Difference is Ridley blew up his 3rd year playing with a HoF QB while Claypool split his 3rd year playing with a rookie and a QB who was barely averaging 150 yards passing.
Not to mention Ridley blew up in his age 26 season and Claypool is only 25 this year as Ridley was a 24 year old rookie while Claypool was 22 as a rookie.
What is also odd to me is Bears fans complaining about how Claypool is a bit of a diva or has character concerns yet they are banging the table for a player who refused to play for his team and then got suspended for gambling. Not sure how those are not character concerns.
All of this is why Ridley went for less initially. He hasnt played for almost 2 years. No one knows where he is at physically and more importantly mentally and it is strange to just assume he can pick up where he left off. We saw Josh Gordon get suspended as one of the best WRs in the NFL but was never the same after that long a layoff.
I would not have minded taking a flyer on Ridley but nor do I mind doing so with Claypool. I suspect Poles opted for Claypool because he wanted a higher floor even if Claypool may never reach his ceiling.
Rise
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Aug 21, 2012
- Posts:
- 8,206
- Liked Posts:
- 7,587
- Location:
- Mom's Basement
Because Claypool isn’t close to as talented. It was about more than those last few games of last season. The Steelers took the Bears overpay because they knew the pick would be higher, Poles knew this as well.
Yes the trade was won before a game has been played unless a tragedy or a miracle happen.
- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2012
- Posts:
- 58,846
- Liked Posts:
- 36,323
I think you assume there is only one end game here. The big win is Claypool plays well enough to earn a long term deal. That is obvious.
However at the time Poles only had one NFL starting caliber WR on the roster ie Mooney. The trade was also about giving Fields NFL caliber starting WRs so he can learn to throw on time and with anticipation which he was struggling to do because he didnt trust a WR group that was made up of mostly 5th and 6th WRs outside of Mooney.
Poles faced the prospect of Fields going into this year with Mooney, a mid tier FA and a rookie learning the NFL as Fields top weapons. Now he has Moore, Money and Claypool. If that helps Fields become a better NFL QB, it was worth it even if Claypool moves on as nothing is more important than Fields developing into a franchise QB.
This should be obvious as Poles passed on WRs in 2022 and elected to take Moore in lieu of another 1st round pick. He clearly prefers giving Fields vet WRs that are already acclimated to the NFL.
- Joined:
- Aug 20, 2012
- Posts:
- 12,173
- Liked Posts:
- 11,309
- Location:
- Richmond, VA
My favorite teams
Not sure if I said this the last time you caped for Claypool, but I don't fault Poles for making a trade for a WR or even making a trade for Claypool. I understood why they made the trade. But it being a second round pick, much less the first pick in the second round, is what ended up making it a mistake. yes we can argue hindsight or whatever else to lessen the blow....but it still ended up being a mistake.
Again I do not fault Poles for taking the shot, but unless Claypool overtakes Mooney as the #2 and is a weapon that can take the pressure off Moore...I don't see how we can't look at that move and not call it a mistake.
- Joined:
- Aug 17, 2011
- Posts:
- 42,676
- Liked Posts:
- 22,233
- Location:
- Palatine, IL
My favorite teams
Mooney was also dinged and not himself. I know the ankle didn't break until Nov 27 but he's talked about how he was already dealing with that foot. Obviously, we would all have liked to see more from Claypool last year but it really did all work out and heled us get DJ.
"I planned on getting surgery on my left ankle after the season, anyways," Mooney revealed.
- Joined:
- Aug 17, 2011
- Posts:
- 42,676
- Liked Posts:
- 22,233
- Location:
- Palatine, IL
My favorite teams
GM's miss. Just part of an overall picture. If this is one, it won't be the last.
- Joined:
- Aug 20, 2012
- Posts:
- 12,173
- Liked Posts:
- 11,309
- Location:
- Richmond, VA
My favorite teams
Which normally I would agree, but one of these players has proven to be a game changing back who is a top tier back on the field for multiple seasons or a draft pick who has not proven anything and has a wide range of outcomes and that is if the Bears are able to find a RB's that is worth that pick.
I personally would rather leverage a 2nd rounder into a proven commodity than wait and hope that a draft pick can turn into a top tier back.
- Joined:
- Aug 20, 2012
- Posts:
- 12,173
- Liked Posts:
- 11,309
- Location:
- Richmond, VA
My favorite teams
Not sure if you missed the part where I said I don't fault Poles.....but it still doesn't make it less of a mistake.
Angelo/Emery/Pace all had plenty of misses, do we look back and just say "oh well GM's miss"...no we look back and criticize and call them out for the mistakes. When GM's make a move, they do it with the intention to better the team. So whether we agree with the move or not, we can't fault a GM for taking their shots. But it doesn't take away when those moves turn into mistakes. If Claypool came in last year and went on a tear and became a #1 WR for the Bears where they didn't need Moore...we would be singing his praises for making such a great move. So why can't we say that at this moment, trading that 2nd is looking like a mistake?
- Joined:
- Aug 17, 2011
- Posts:
- 42,676
- Liked Posts:
- 22,233
- Location:
- Palatine, IL
My favorite teams
I agree but the standard is 'miss too often', also, compounding it with bad contracts or reducing your swings factors in. Still early with this GM to know what's luck, unluck, planned or random.
- Joined:
- Aug 20, 2012
- Posts:
- 12,173
- Liked Posts:
- 11,309
- Location:
- Richmond, VA
My favorite teams
And I hope I am wrong about Claypool and he shows he was worth that 2nd round pick this year...but I think at the end of the season when it is time for Poles to decide between Mooney and Claypool, we'll see Mooney back and Claypool getting some 1 year prove it deal from a team rebuilding
Dumpster Fire
Well-known member
- Joined:
- May 17, 2014
- Posts:
- 569
- Liked Posts:
- 1,044
The Claypool debate is stuck in the mud for now. The good thing is that there has been positive buzz around him in training camp. Week one can’t get here soon enough.
Mighty Joe Young
Living in Troll's Heads Rent-Free for Decades
- Joined:
- Feb 8, 2021
- Posts:
- 10,065
- Liked Posts:
- 8,420
My favorite teams
Yeah - I kinda bounced approaching preseason game 2. Without fields and other starters playing, the forum has just devolved into dick-measuring contests. I bowed out and will be back for the reg season.
- Joined:
- Aug 20, 2012
- Posts:
- 12,173
- Liked Posts:
- 11,309
- Location:
- Richmond, VA
My favorite teams
yeah no one gives a shit backtits