Official NFL Draft Thread - Bear Fans ONLY

msadows

msadows

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 23, 2012
Posts:
29,226
Liked Posts:
24,155
dabears70 said:
What am i missing here? Why would it of cost us Trapillo and Turner? We would of used the #39 pick that we used on Burden for Henderson and still had #41 to trade down with so it only cost us LB87 but we substitute him for Henderson.
Click to expand...

Maybe they take both luther burden and henderson there

Also we still dont know if they actually wanted henderson. They clearly wanted to trade up for someone. I love when the chicago media speculates things and makes it seem like its factual.

My guess is it was henderson, but for all we know they were trying to trade up for LB3 being scared the patriots may take him at #38 similar to rome odunze last year
 
--CyBear--

--CyBear--

Well-known member
Joined:
Jan 6, 2025
Posts:
1,284
Liked Posts:
878
Location:
Hoffman Estates
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Notre Dame Fighting Irish
dabears70 said:
What am i missing here? Why would it of cost us Trapillo and Turner? We would of used the #39 pick that we used on Burden for Henderson and still had #41 to trade down with so it only cost us LB87 but we substitute him for Henderson.
Click to expand...
So you think BJ and Poles pass on Burden falling into their lap? OK:coffee:
 
--CyBear--

--CyBear--

Well-known member
Joined:
Jan 6, 2025
Posts:
1,284
Liked Posts:
878
Location:
Hoffman Estates
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Notre Dame Fighting Irish
msadows said:
Maybe they take both luther burden and henderson there

Also we still dont know if they actually wanted henderson. They clearly wanted to trade up for someone. I love when the chicago media speculates things and makes it seem like its factual.

My guess is it was henderson, but for all we know they were trying to trade up for LB3 being scared the patriots may take him at #38 similar to rome odunze last year
Click to expand...
Exactly and hindsight is great but at the time, they also couldn't be assured that either Turner or Trapilo are there if they trade down. Burden is that bird in the hand vs 2 in the bush.

You trade down when the board evens out. That happened after Burden, not before.
 
dabears70

dabears70

Well-known member
Joined:
Dec 31, 2013
Posts:
37,740
Liked Posts:
12,096
Location:
Orlando
My favorite teams
  1. New York Mets
  1. New York Knicks
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. New York Rangers
  1. Syracuse Orange
--CyBear-- said:
So you think BJ and Poles pass on Burden falling into their lap? OK:coffee:
Click to expand...
What? This place is crazy. You said that we would of missed out on Trapillo and Turner if we took Henderson and all i asked is if i was missing something because we still could of made the same trade down at #41 whether we took LB87 or Henderson at #39 and somehow that got turned into me saying that i think BJ and Poles would of passed on Burden. Hahaha This fucking place is crazy sometimes.
 
dabears70

dabears70

Well-known member
Joined:
Dec 31, 2013
Posts:
37,740
Liked Posts:
12,096
Location:
Orlando
My favorite teams
  1. New York Mets
  1. New York Knicks
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. New York Rangers
  1. Syracuse Orange
msadows said:
Maybe they take both luther burden and henderson there

Also we still dont know if they actually wanted henderson. They clearly wanted to trade up for someone. I love when the chicago media speculates things and makes it seem like its factual.

My guess is it was henderson, but for all we know they were trying to trade up for LB3 being scared the patriots may take him at #38 similar to rome odunze last year
Click to expand...
Ummmm yeah maybe that could of happened as well. Not sure how this has anything to do with my question though?
 
remydat

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
64,952
Liked Posts:
41,744
dabears70 said:
What am i missing here? Why would it of cost us Trapillo and Turner? We would of used the #39 pick that we used on Burden for Henderson and still had #41 to trade down with so it only cost us LB87 but we substitute him for Henderson.
Click to expand...
Think point was they take Henderson at 39 and dont trade 41 and take Burden with 41.

So then then the question becomes if either Trapilo or Turner are there at 72.
 
dabears70

dabears70

Well-known member
Joined:
Dec 31, 2013
Posts:
37,740
Liked Posts:
12,096
Location:
Orlando
My favorite teams
  1. New York Mets
  1. New York Knicks
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. New York Rangers
  1. Syracuse Orange
remydat said:
Think point was they take Hendersonat 39 and dont trade 41 and take Birden with 41.

So then then the question becomes if either Trapilo or Turner are there at 72.
Click to expand...
Well if that was the point then he missed his mark by quite a bit.

Wonder if they still could of gotten Burden at #41 cause that would of been awesome but just adding more to an offense that would of already been loaded when the defense is the side of the ball that really would of needed the help.
 
msadows

msadows

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 23, 2012
Posts:
29,226
Liked Posts:
24,155
remydat said:
Think point was they take Hendersonat 39 and dont trade 41 and take Birden with 41.

So then then the question becomes if either Trapilo or Turner are there at 72.
Click to expand...

I can almost guarantee trapilo would not have been. Turner, maybe, but both of those guys went around their draft spot. If anything turner fell a bit then expected.

But yes, if they took burden and henderson its heavily unlikely they would have gotten trap/turner. Maybe they trade up for one of them from 72.

My guess is the original plan was henderson/luther. It seemed like everything we've heard thus far luther was BPA on their board, likely even over henderson, and they couldnt believe he dropped that far. I personally cant either, I fully expected the pats to take him there.
 
msadows

msadows

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 23, 2012
Posts:
29,226
Liked Posts:
24,155
dabears70 said:
Well if that was the point then he missed his mark by quite a bit.

Wonder if they still could of gotten Burden at #41 cause that would of been awesome but just adding more to an offense that would of already been loaded when the defense is the side of the ball that really would of needed the help.
Click to expand...

They should be adding more to the offense.

They have an offensive HC and a #1 overall QB. Every resource should be put into the offense this year. If caleb doesnt develop into an elite QB this team wont be great anyways. Focus on the defense in 26/27. Its not like this team is winning shit this year anyways
 
msadows

msadows

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 23, 2012
Posts:
29,226
Liked Posts:
24,155
--CyBear-- said:
You can't have both Henderson and Burden and still trade down. WTF?
Click to expand...

He clearly doesnt want the bears to have good wideouts.

He wants to get rid of DJ Moore in one thread and assumes we dont draft LB3 at #41 and trade down to still get ozzy/turner
 

TL1961

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 24, 2013
Posts:
36,113
Liked Posts:
19,948
Luke said:
nothing is ever a slam dunk in the draft but having 3 OT's selected in the top 9 was looking like a distinct possibility by draft time and if we were privy to that info, so was Poles.

Jeremiah who has NFL sources out the wazoo - final mock draft..


4 Campbell
6 Banks
7 Membou

Vegas draft eve odds...

4 Campbell -380
5 Jeanty -125, Graham +220, Tet +450
6 Jeanty +145, Membou +180. Graham +650
7 Membou +170, Warren +370, Banks +425
8 Walker +130, Williams +400, Tet +550
9 Williams +370, Graham +550, Banks +600
Click to expand...
Yes, it was of course a possibility. I read your post as implying it was a sure thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

10,949members
96,466threads
4,585,836posts
316online users

Members online NOW

No members online now.
Total: 316 (members: 1, guests: 315)
Top