*OFFICIAL* Offseason Rumors, Signings, and Shenanigans

cameronkrazie86

cameronkrazie86

Well-known member
Joined:
May 1, 2021
Posts:
4,965
Liked Posts:
7,774
Location:
Vegas
My favorite teams
  1. Atlanta Braves
  1. Golden State Warriors
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Vegas Golden Knights
  1. Duke Blue Devils
  2. Nebraska Cornhuskers
BEARZOMBIE said:
Ok boss whatever you say lol

I’m really not high on these wrs anyways. People won’t like it but I think my fav player in the first round is Davis.
Click to expand...
I've been hoping Jordan Davis would inexplicably fall to the Bears in the 2nd round. That guy was awesome every time I watched him in college.
 

baredown

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 20, 2013
Posts:
716
Liked Posts:
616
Britbuffguy said:
The latest Mock Draft up on NFL.Com has the Bears not taking a WR until the 3rd round. I think it had them taking a Safety and a DT in the 2nd round.
Click to expand...
That particular draft is a pretty unrealistic one (5 QBs in the first 14 picks?), but the general idea for what the Bears should do in the 2nd round is sound. Namely, draft by talent and not position. The talent between #15 & #50 is alleged to be pretty equal. The Bears are firmly in rebuild mode and need to be grabbing top-end talent for the longer term, not worrying about addressing the upcoming season's biggest weakness. If the Bears deviate at all from their board's order with those picks, it should be for one of the high-value positions (QB, passrush DL, OLT, shutdown CB), not just to scratch their WR itch...
 
BaBaBlacksheep

BaBaBlacksheep

Moderator
Staff member
CCS Hall of Fame '21
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
41,580
Liked Posts:
50,688
Canth said:
Yeah, I am not a fan of the idea of trading up this year. I know a dynamic WR could really help Fields and the Bears stand a better chance of finding that guy in the 1st round. But they cannot keep giving up assets to trade up. There are too many holes on the team and very little depth.

IMO, it can make sense to trade up for the truly premium positions: QB, LT, and Pass Rushing (OLB/DE depending on system, ie a guy like Mack). But, the Bears are not in position to trade up for just a shot at a WR, especially as you can find guys that can be developed into productive starters in the 2nd and 3rd rounds.
Click to expand...


About the only way I could live with a trade up is using the two seconds to get into round one and get either a WR1 or a LT. Then trading down with that 3rd round pick to get another pick or two.

I don’t want any future picks used under any circumstances.

And I don’t want them to walk out of the draft with less than the 6 they have. If they do some moving around that’s fine.
 

bearsfan1977

Well-known member
Joined:
Mar 23, 2016
Posts:
2,986
Liked Posts:
3,163
I mean, yeah, that Pickens connection is pretty thin. But I think he would be a fantastic pick, pending how his injury has healed and if he can learn not to be an immature ass at times that cost his team.

He is an alpha WR. Watched all of his games. That comparison to Brandon Marshall is pretty spot-on. I think Fields would thrive on that and he would be a nice complement to Mooney.

Bell reminds me of Arob. Wouldn’t hate that pick in the 3rd.
 
ZOMBIE@CTESPN

ZOMBIE@CTESPN

Well-known member
Joined:
Dec 19, 2012
Posts:
18,465
Liked Posts:
16,839
Location:
MICHIGAN
Britbuffguy said:
The latest Mock Draft up on NFL.Com has the Bears not taking a WR until the 3rd round. I think it had them taking a Safety and a DT in the 2nd round.
Click to expand...
Before fa started I thought bears would go dt in both 2/3 and other 2 a lb.
 

Visionman

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 28, 2017
Posts:
7,995
Liked Posts:
4,723
baredown said:
That particular draft is a pretty unrealistic one (5 QBs in the first 14 picks?), but the general idea for what the Bears should do in the 2nd round is sound. Namely, draft by talent and not position. The talent between #15 & #50 is alleged to be pretty equal. The Bears are firmly in rebuild mode and need to be grabbing top-end talent for the longer term, not worrying about addressing the upcoming season's biggest weakness. If the Bears deviate at all from their board's order with those picks, it should be for one of the high-value positions (QB, passrush DL, OLT, shutdown CB), not just to scratch their WR itch...
Click to expand...
100% this.
 

napo55

Well-known member
Joined:
Mar 24, 2016
Posts:
2,212
Liked Posts:
1,470
baredown said:
That particular draft is a pretty unrealistic one (5 QBs in the first 14 picks?), but the general idea for what the Bears should do in the 2nd round is sound. Namely, draft by talent and not position. The talent between #15 & #50 is alleged to be pretty equal. The Bears are firmly in rebuild mode and need to be grabbing top-end talent for the longer term, not worrying about addressing the upcoming season's biggest weakness. If the Bears deviate at all from their board's order with those picks, it should be for one of the high-value positions (QB, passrush DL, OLT, shutdown CB), not just to scratch their WR itch...
Click to expand...
Nobody can argue with drafting for talent. But the most important thing is to support the development of the first round QB the Bears traded up for. If there are talented WRs and offensive linemen available, they should be the highest p;riority. The Bears may have the worst WR group in the NFL and the O line is a huge question. Failure to address thses positions pretty much guarantees Field will fail. I'm sure the new regime understands this and will draft accordingly.
 
remydat

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
59,721
Liked Posts:
38,302
The Big Grabowski said:
Future picks are valued 1 round behind—technically as the last pick of their original round—because you don't know draft position and are attributing lowest possible value to the pick.

Realistically, the Bears aren't picking at #32 next year. We see GMs gamble on that all the time. That's why I was looking at different scenarios.
Click to expand...

No they are valued 1 round behind because of the concept of time value. A first rounder today has more value because that player will get a year of development under his belt before next year's first rounder is drafted.

So using the draft value chart, with the 7th pick this year worth 1500, Bears would need to give up something like both their 2nd rounders this year and a first next year to match the value of the 7th pick. Maybe you could argue with the Giants being the ones pushing this that they may take less value and do a 2nd and 3rd this year with a 1st next year.
 
Last edited:
Bears27

Bears27

Active member
Joined:
Mar 10, 2014
Posts:
372
Liked Posts:
234
Dejo said:
https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1507423063167614995
Click to expand...
Am I the only one, that imagines a Shawshank Redemption for the CLE QB debacle?

Deshaun does his bid only to find that the outside ( shitty Cleveland ) isn't as nice as his former cage. He finds his old friend has carved "So was Baker" right next to "Manziel was here" on the wooden top of his locker. And in a spectacular change of heart – he sets on a quest to reunite with Mayfield on a beautiful Mexican beach – leaving Cleveland to draft Desmond Ridder.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

10,908members
94,230threads
4,444,356posts
331online users

Members online NOW

  • Member
  • Admin
  • Mod
  • Donor
  • HOF
Total: 331 (members: 3, guests: 328)
Top