Page 95 of 95
Re: Bears 2024 4.0
Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2024 7:51 pm
by HearshotKDS
AshyLarrysDiaper wrote:?s=20
We doing this if Alt/Nabers/Odunze are off the board at 9? The trade value chart has it as roughly equal.
I do that in a heartbeat, I think that sets you up for something like Brian Thomas + Darius Robinson/Adisa Isaac and a 5th, versus something like Verse + Johnny Wilson if you stay at 9 and 75. Or Maybe Verse falls to 14 anyway and you get Verse + Troy Franklin/Xavier Legette + a 5th instead of settling for the 3rd round WR.
Re: Bears 2024 4.0
Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2024 7:54 pm
by HearshotKDS
TheSuzerain wrote:AshyLarrysDiaper wrote:?s=20
We doing this if Alt/Nabers/Odunze are off the board at 9? The trade value chart has it as roughly equal.
Screw the trade value chart if they're trading up for a QB.
My initial thought is we keep 75 and then we consider it.
But of course we know that in the "SAINTS TRADE UP FOR OLU FASHANU" hypothetical they are not trading up for a QB.
Re: Bears 2024 4.0
Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2024 8:07 pm
by biggestbullsfan
Re: Bears 2024 4.0
Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2024 8:16 pm
by TheSuzerain
HearshotKDS wrote:TheSuzerain wrote:AshyLarrysDiaper wrote:?s=20
We doing this if Alt/Nabers/Odunze are off the board at 9? The trade value chart has it as roughly equal.
Screw the trade value chart if they're trading up for a QB.
My initial thought is we keep 75 and then we consider it.
But of course we know that in the "SAINTS TRADE UP FOR OLU FASHANU" hypothetical they are not trading up for a QB.
Hey man I'm here to post, not read!
Re: Bears 2024 4.0
Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2024 8:25 pm
by _txchilibowl_
Betta Bulleavit wrote:_txchilibowl_ wrote:Betta Bulleavit wrote:So let’s say the top 8 picks shape out like this:
Bears - Williams
Commanders - Daniels
Broncos (via trade) - Maye
Vikings (via trade) - McCarthy
Chargers - MHJ
Giants - Bowers
Titans - Alt
Falcons - Turner
That would leave Nabors, Odunze, Fashanu, Latu and Verse all on the board at 9. Where do you go?
There's zero chance that Bowers goes ahead of Nabers imo. Would be shocking.
It’s definitely a hypothetical scenario but you’re probably right. So let’s swap positions with Nabors going to the Giants and Bowers being on the board. Do you consider drafting any of those guys at 9?
Verse all day. I think he's the best EDGE in the draft.
Re: Bears 2024 4.0
Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2024 8:27 pm
by AshyLarrysDiaper
TheSuzerain wrote:HearshotKDS wrote:TheSuzerain wrote:Screw the trade value chart if they're trading up for a QB.
My initial thought is we keep 75 and then we consider it.
But of course we know that in the "SAINTS TRADE UP FOR OLU FASHANU" hypothetical they are not trading up for a QB.
Hey man I'm here to post, not read!
If McCarthy is there at 9 (doubtful) I’d agree that you can throw the trade value chart out the window. I just don’t see Penix or Nix giving us that kind of leverage.
Re: Bears 2024 4.0
Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2024 8:34 pm
by biggestbullsfan
Where else did Fields want to play?
"The Steelers were one of four teams on Fields' radar prior to the start of free agency, along with the Vikings, Raiders and Falcons, a source familiar with Fields' thinking said," ESPN's Brooke Pryor wrote on Friday.
According to the report, Fields "thought highly of Tomlin," who hasn't coached worse than a .500 season with the Steelers in 17 seasons as their head coach. There, he will play understudy to Russell Wilson but have the chance to learn and develop further.
The Vikings lost Kirk Cousins in free agency, opening up their starting quarterback spot this offseason. It makes sense he wasn't traded there considering the Bears would then have to face Fields twice per year.
Fields' former offensive coordinator, Luke Getsy, is now the offensive coordinator for the Raiders. They're still in search of a new signal caller, despite having added Gardner Minshew this offseason. Some thought Getsy's presence would mean crossing the Raiders off the list since that duo didn't perform up to standard together last season.
The Falcons were the team most attached to Fields this offseason, as he's a Georgia native. League sources told NBC Sports Chicago's Josh Schrock the Falcons checked in with the Bears about Fields around the NFL Combine. In the end, they were able to persuade Cousins to make the lateral from Minnesota to Atlanta.
Re: Bears 2024 4.0
Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2024 8:45 pm
by CROBulls
AshyLarrysDiaper wrote:?s=20
We doing this if Alt/Nabers/Odunze are off the board at 9? The trade value chart has it as roughly equal.
You still dont do it. Why, because they are trading for QB. You robbed them off more in that case. So no our #75 included is must.
Re: Bears 2024 4.0
Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2024 8:47 pm
by nomorezorro
AshyLarrysDiaper wrote:?s=20
We doing this if Alt/Nabers/Odunze are off the board at 9? The trade value chart has it as roughly equal.
i would be all for this, but i feel like it's only a trade the front office would make if they had a slightly peculiar player graded as a "blue chip."
all signals are that they expect a prospect they value a lot to be available at 9, and if you take them at their word, they don't seem to expect that player to last all too much longer after our current slot (hence them downplaying questions about trading down). if their evaluations are similar to public evaluations, then they're probably targeting someone from the nabers/odunze/alt/turner class of player, and i don't think they'd risk all of them coming off the board by 14 just to move up on day two. but if they've got, like, verse or fautanu or fuaga as a blue chipper, then maybe they'd be willing to slide down.
Re: Bears 2024 4.0
Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2024 8:49 pm
by panthermark
AshyLarrysDiaper wrote:?s=20
We doing this if Alt/Nabers/Odunze are off the board at 9? The trade value chart has it as roughly equal.
Maybe, just depends on how the FO feels about Tuner/Verse/Latu/BTjr/BMII One of those guys will be there at #14.
Re: Bears 2024 4.0
Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2024 9:02 pm
by JockItch43
Hilarious take considering CW has been elite since he stepped on the field as a true freshman and JD wasn't even projected to be a first round pick before his one breakout season on a loaded team.
Caleb would have been the 1st overall pick last year while JD would have been a 3rd rounder.. all while being an older player no less. Put JD on last year's USC team and we aren't even talking about him like this. Put CW on that loaded LSU team with those weapons and that line he's collecting his second straight Heisman.
At this point, the media has run out of things to talk about on the subject and are continuing to try to generate controversy and "hot takes" to get people talking.
Re: Bears 2024 4.0
Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2024 9:04 pm
by JockItch43
_txchilibowl_ wrote:Betta Bulleavit wrote:_txchilibowl_ wrote:
There's zero chance that Bowers goes ahead of Nabers imo. Would be shocking.
It’s definitely a hypothetical scenario but you’re probably right. So let’s swap positions with Nabors going to the Giants and Bowers being on the board. Do you consider drafting any of those guys at 9?
Verse all day. I think he's the best EDGE in the draft.
Would be a waste of draft capital to draft Verse at 9 in my opinion. I think you have to trade back if he's the target.
Re: Bears 2024 4.0
Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2024 9:34 pm
by fleet
JockItch43 wrote:Hilarious take considering CW has been elite since he stepped on the field as a true freshman and JD wasn't even projected to be a first round pick before his one breakout season on a loaded team.
…….. Put JD on last year's USC team and we aren't even talking about him like this. Put CW on that loaded LSU team with those weapons and that line he's collecting his second straight Heisman.
At this point, the media has run out of things to talk about on the subject and are continuing to try to generate controversy and "hot takes" to get people talking.
Undeniable points. It’s perfectly fair to argue the merits for taking Daniels. But Orlovsky doesn’t make a full argument for some reason. More like a hot take. I don’t know how the rest of the conversation went.
In general Orlovsky giving Poles scouting tips is quite a laughable thing, as if Poles doesn’t know how to watch film. Also laughable after Orlovsky had Fields as the MVP last season. But he has a platform, and is not afraid to use it
Re: Bears 2024 4.0
Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2024 9:46 pm
by Charlesareed
biggestbullsfan wrote:Where else did Fields want to play?
"The Steelers were one of four teams on Fields' radar prior to the start of free agency, along with the Vikings, Raiders and Falcons, a source familiar with Fields' thinking said," ESPN's Brooke Pryor wrote on Friday.
According to the report, Fields "thought highly of Tomlin," who hasn't coached worse than a .500 season with the Steelers in 17 seasons as their head coach. There, he will play understudy to Russell Wilson but have the chance to learn and develop further.
The Vikings lost Kirk Cousins in free agency, opening up their starting quarterback spot this offseason. It makes sense he wasn't traded there considering the Bears would then have to face Fields twice per year.
Fields' former offensive coordinator, Luke Getsy, is now the offensive coordinator for the Raiders. They're still in search of a new signal caller, despite having added Gardner Minshew this offseason. Some thought Getsy's presence would mean crossing the Raiders off the list since that duo didn't perform up to standard together last season.
The Falcons were the team most attached to Fields this offseason, as he's a Georgia native. League sources told NBC Sports Chicago's Josh Schrock the Falcons checked in with the Bears about Fields around the NFL Combine. In the end, they were able to persuade Cousins to make the lateral from Minnesota to Atlanta.
This leads me to think when was fields approached by poles about where he’d wanna go like had he went to fields say before the month of march started then the raiders or falcons were the best trade partners considering what they were offering both pitss & atl were better teams for fields but yeah had he approached fields earlier he still could’ve done right by him and gotten a little more in the trade
Re: Bears 2024 4.0
Posted: Sat Mar 30, 2024 1:14 am
by _txchilibowl_
JockItch43 wrote:_txchilibowl_ wrote:Betta Bulleavit wrote:It’s definitely a hypothetical scenario but you’re probably right. So let’s swap positions with Nabors going to the Giants and Bowers being on the board. Do you consider drafting any of those guys at 9?
Verse all day. I think he's the best EDGE in the draft.
Would be a waste of draft capital to draft Verse at 9 in my opinion. I think you have to trade back if he's the target.
He'll be gone by pick 13 imo so unless you want to thread the needle trading back you might have to take him at #9. I think there are more than a few teams that prefer him to Dallas Turner.
Re: Bears 2024 4.0
Posted: Sat Mar 30, 2024 1:23 am
by Chicago-Bull-E
Verse at 9 isn’t a reach. Darnell Wright at 10 last year, that was a larger reach FYI.
We’ve been staring at the same mock drafts for months. Poles doesn’t get to reload his mock draft simulator if someone take Verse before him after he’s traded back. There are 32 teams with 32 very different boards. Some probably have Verse in their top 10, others probably don’t have him in the top 20. Trading back so it matches your favorite mock draft isn’t realistic.
If he trades back, it’s because he values the compensation he’s getting back more than a specific player, and is willing to pick from a crop of players that are left over when he’s up again.
Re: Bears 2024 4.0
Posted: Sat Mar 30, 2024 1:47 am
by NecessaryEvil
Re: Bears 2024 4.0
Posted: Sat Mar 30, 2024 1:49 am
by NecessaryEvil
Re: Bears 2024 4.0
Posted: Sat Mar 30, 2024 3:31 am
by dice
Re: Bears 2024 4.0
Posted: Sat Mar 30, 2024 3:34 am
by dice
biggestbullsfan wrote:Where else did Fields want to play?
"The Steelers were one of four teams on Fields' radar prior to the start of free agency, along with the Vikings, Raiders and Falcons, a source familiar with Fields' thinking said," ESPN's Brooke Pryor wrote on Friday.
According to the report, Fields "thought highly of Tomlin," who hasn't coached worse than a .500 season with the Steelers in 17 seasons as their head coach. There, he will play understudy to Russell Wilson but have the chance to learn and develop further.
The Vikings lost Kirk Cousins in free agency, opening up their starting quarterback spot this offseason. It makes sense he wasn't traded there considering the Bears would then have to face Fields twice per year.
Fields' former offensive coordinator, Luke Getsy, is now the offensive coordinator for the Raiders. They're still in search of a new signal caller, despite having added Gardner Minshew this offseason. Some thought Getsy's presence would mean crossing the Raiders off the list since that duo didn't perform up to standard together last season.
The Falcons were the team most attached to Fields this offseason, as he's a Georgia native. League sources told NBC Sports Chicago's Josh Schrock the Falcons checked in with the Bears about Fields around the NFL Combine. In the end, they were able to persuade Cousins to make the lateral from Minnesota to Atlanta.
it would have been an incredible error by poles to allow fields to have input on his destination. the league doesn't even value him as a starter!