PFF: Bears should trade up for Justin Fields

[jerkstore]

I'm guessing you are speaking more in generalities and less about the specific example in this thread, but if you miss on a trade of 3 1sts, a 2nd, a 3rd, and a 5th/6th for 1 player - youve crippled your franchise for 5 years...

-It’s really two firsts, because one is just the pick swap.

-How many of those picks would have eventually been spent on less promising QB prospects?

-With all of the one year FA deals this year and the lack of a normal scouting season maybe we feel OK about giving up the 2/3/6?

 

[HearshotKDS]

-It’s really two firsts, because one is just the pick swap.

-How many of those picks would have eventually been spent on less promising QB prospects?

-With all of the one year FA deals this year and the lack of a normal scouting season maybe we feel OK about giving up the 2/3/6?

No you dont discount the"Swapped pick" for the price of the player, thats only for the price of the trade up. You still have to use that pick to acquire the player.

We'll see on draft night, but I'm convinced Fields goes no lower than 3rd overall, and that the pick in question is going to be a choice between Mac Jones or Trey Lance . I think the Bears can do just as good or better than those 2 in next years draft, for less than that massive windfall of picks in the article (I do think the article is accurate that it would take a package similar to that to move up to 4). So lets say I believe Bears can get equally promising QB prospect for only a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd (assuming they still have to trade up in the draft, just not up to 4th) in next years draft, meaning the Bears "save" 2 1sts and a late round pick by waiting. That's huge. I think that cost is too prohibitive for any QB, but I would feel a lot more confident that the Bears couldnt get an equivalent prospect next year if Wilson or Fields was available at 4 - I just dont believe thats realisticaly going to happen.

Why would having 1 year FA deals this year make a team more willing to throw away draft picks, especially higher valued ones like 2nd and 3rd round picks? The scouting argument makes sense although I put little weight behind it, but i dont see the connection between 1 year FAs leading to lower your valuation on draft picks.

 

[WindyCity]

No you dont discount the"Swapped pick" for the price of the player, thats only for the price of the trade up. You still have to use that pick to acquire the player.

We'll see on draft night, but I'm convinced Fields goes no lower than 3rd overall, and that the pick in question is going to be a choice between Mac Jones or Trey Lance . I think the Bears can do just as good or better than those 2 in next years draft, for less than that massive windfall of picks in the article (I do think the article is accurate that it would take a package similar to that to move up to 4). So lets say I believe Bears can get equally promising QB prospect for only a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd (assuming they still have to trade up in the draft, just not up to 4th) in next years draft, meaning the Bears "save" 2 1sts and a late round pick by waiting. That's huge. I think that cost is too prohibitive for any QB, but I would feel a lot more confident that the Bears couldnt get an equivalent prospect next year if Wilson or Fields was available at 4 - I just dont believe thats realisticaly going to happen.

Why would having 1 year FA deals this year make a team more willing to throw away draft picks, especially higher valued ones like 2nd and 3rd round picks? The scouting argument makes sense although I put little weight behind it, but i dont see the connection between 1 year FAs leading to lower your valuation on draft picks.

You are assuming that the guys in charge are still here to make the pick next year.

 

[msadows]

You are assuming that the guys in charge are still here to make the pick next year.

Ryan Pace will get promoted to President after a 7-10 season.

Visor Guy will become GM/HC.

 

[WindyCity]

I am fine making a big move for a QB. You have to have one, who cares the cost.

Just have a better plan,

-Let them actually sit for an extend period of time. I think Dalton can likely accomplish that.

-Invest in the OL. Good OT play, good depth, a reliable run game. Have some actual training wheels to ease them in.

-Keep the offense simple. Run the Mitch offense for a year or two and do not do this big 202 thing again when half the offense cannot run it.

 

[HearshotKDS]

You are assuming that the guys in charge are still here to make the pick next year.

I'm hoping they are not, but I think this ownership group tends to delay in the face of difficult decision making, and if this team goes 8-9 next year that might not be enough to force their hand in to making changes. But I do realize the manager may be working on a timeline that the fanbase isn't - im suggesting what I think should be done not necessarily what I believe will be done.

 

[jerkstore]

No you dont discount the"Swapped pick" for the price of the player, thats only for the price of the trade up. You still have to use that pick to acquire the player.

We'll see on draft night, but I'm convinced Fields goes no lower than 3rd overall, and that the pick in question is going to be a choice between Mac Jones or Trey Lance . I think the Bears can do just as good or better than those 2 in next years draft, for less than that massive windfall of picks in the article (I do think the article is accurate that it would take a package similar to that to move up to 4). So lets say I believe Bears can get equally promising QB prospect for only a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd (assuming they still have to trade up in the draft, just not up to 4th) in next years draft, meaning the Bears "save" 2 1sts and a late round pick by waiting. That's huge. I think that cost is too prohibitive for any QB, but I would feel a lot more confident that the Bears couldnt get an equivalent prospect next year if Wilson or Fields was available at 4 - I just dont believe thats realisticaly going to happen.

Why would having 1 year FA deals this year make a team more willing to throw away draft picks, especially higher valued ones like 2nd and 3rd round picks? The scouting argument makes sense although I put little weight behind it, but i dont see the connection between 1 year FAs leading to lower your valuation on draft picks.

No, I get you on the price of the player thing, I t’s just when I see an article that says “3 firsts...” it sounds like won’t have another first rounder until ‘25.

I agree with Fields likely going #3 and I wouldn’t go bonkers for Lance or Jones either, but either would be worth considering in a more modest trade up if they were to fall.

Next year could still be a good QB draft. Off the top of my head I can think of Howell, Crumb, Daniels, and Penix as likely first rounders. So yeah, no reason to go nuts if Fields is gone at 3. I was more referring to taking one of the tier two QB’s with our 2nd or 3rd. I just don’t see those options panning out.

With the 1 year FA’s I just wonder if the larger player pool next year will give us more options than normal to fill our roster gaps.