Under No Circumstances Should We Trade a Haul for a QB/Pick

[Varking]

47 minutes ago, CPF4LIFE said:

If one of those QBs was in this class Bears are staying put and taking that guy. Lol

For sure. And if Luck was in the same class as Cam we would have drafted Luck for sure. 

[CBDellinger]

13 hours ago, USDepartmentOfSavagery said:

The problem with this line of thinking is we’re going to be in the exact same spot next year. We’re going to go something like 6-11 or 8-9 and not be in a position to draft a potential franchise QB. You do whatever you have to do if you think a franchise QB is there. Period. 

Ughhhhh this silly line of thinking again… Josh allen went 7th, Mahommes went 10th while Baker and Sam went 1 and 3 overall.  
 

draft position doesn’t guarantee you a better prospect.  Its more about good scouting and a good situation for them to land it. 

[MasterAwesome]

3 hours ago, Varking said:

They said “being honest we would have to be completely blown away” by a QB to take them at 1. Read between the lines, they are sold on him. It’s the rest of the team they need to improve around him. 

I dunno...reading between the lines, it sounds like they're saying if they were actually sold on any of these QBs, that they would take them.  If they're simply unimpressed with this crop of QBs and are opting to therefore stick with Fields, that doesn't exactly sound like a glowing endorsement unless you're looking through it with Fields-colored glasses.

Could you imagine any other team truly sold on their young, presumably franchise QB, even giving a caveat like that?  Jags with Trevor Lawrence?  Herbert with the Chargers?  Burrow?  Hurts?  The fact that it's even a question is pretty damn telling.  They didn't say no, they said they "would have to be completely blown away" which is pretty ambiguous considering we're not in the offseason and the evaluation process hasn't even truly begun.

[Varking]

3 minutes ago, MasterAwesome said:

I dunno...reading between the lines, it sounds like they're saying if they were actually sold on any of these QBs, that they would take them.  If they're simply unimpressed with this crop of QBs and are opting to therefore stick with Fields, that doesn't exactly sound like a glowing endorsement unless you're looking through it with Fields-colored glasses.

Could you imagine any other team truly sold on their young, presumably franchise QB, even giving a caveat like that?  Jags with Trevor Lawrence?  Herbert with the Chargers?  Burrow?  Hurts?  The fact that it's even a question is pretty damn telling.  They didn't say no, they said they "would have to be completely blown away" which is pretty ambiguous considering we're not in the offseason and the evaluation process hasn't even truly begun.

Any franchise who would come out and say they have no interest in drafting QB at the #1 overall pick is lessening the value of their pick in a trade. Cmon. 

[flagfootballcoach28]

3 hours ago, Carl Spackler said:

So who else is better than Fields, beside Stroud? 5'3" Bryce Young? Will "Tim Couch" Levis? 

All 3

[Varking]

Weren’t Fields advanced passing numbers in college even better than Young and Stroud? Obviously they are better than Levis and Richardson. 

[ForJimmy]

14 minutes ago, flagfootballcoach28 said:

All 3

You should really look at Fields college numbers.  That Clemson game where the LB tried to take him out and he played injured and "willed" them to a win against Lawrence and Clemson showed me he was in a top tier for college QBs.  I admit he still has work to do as a passer in the NFL, but you also have to give the man some credit.  He didn't land in an ideal landing spot and these analysts have still taken some notice in his development (though it's far from a finished product).  If we could have him for our 9th I wouldn't think twice about making that trade. 

[YourLastThought]

On 1/9/2023 at 9:40 PM, Knaakedup said:

Congratulations, you’ve won the award for dumbest post of 2023 (thus far)

 

You've been here like two days, what the hell do you know anyhow? You haven't even earned your "right to be a smart ass badge" yet. 

 

Edited January 11, 2023 by YourLastThought

[Knaakedup]

11 minutes ago, YourLastThought said:

You've been here like two days, what the hell do you know anyhow? You haven't even earned your "right to be a smart ass badge" yet. 

 

Oh really? I've been here since before it was the carolina huddle. 

[YourLastThought]

Just now, Knaakedup said:

Oh really? I've been here since before it was the carolina huddle. 

You don't post poo and your "worst post of the year" response went off with thundering cricket turds which is evidenced by how many craps you received so I took you as here for about 6 days. Unfortunately you will not be moving on to the second round either way. Better luck next year.

 

 

 

[tukafan21]

4 hours ago, Jay Roosevelt said:

Chiefs traded way up to get Mahomes. Stop cherry-picking.

They moved up 17 spots by giving up a 3rd rounder in that draft and a future 1st, in what world do you think we are moving up into the top few picks of this draft and not giving up more than double that amount of draft capital in return?

Even if you don't look at what Mahomes became, moving up from 27 to 10 at a cost of said 27th pick, a 3rd, and a future 1st to draft a QB is basically a robbery in itself, let alone giving up a haul for it.

That's the point... moving up in the draft or trading for a vet QB isn't the problem, it's what we give up in return.

If we want to move up from 9 to draft one of the top 3 QB's in this draft, I'd fully expect that to cost us our 1st this year, both 2nd's this year, our 1st next year, and likely another pick or two on top of that such as our 3rd this year and/or our 2nd next year.

Stop looking at the end result of "traded way up to get Mahomes" and look at the details to how they did that.

[Carl Spackler]

5 hours ago, flagfootballcoach28 said:

All 3

lol well I'm glad you aren't the GM

[Shocker]

6 hours ago, Varking said:

Weren’t Fields advanced passing numbers in college even better than Young and Stroud? Obviously they are better than Levis and Richardson. 

I would trade Fields if I were the Bears but question is would you trade #9 for Fields straight up?  I struggle mightily with that question personally.  Fields is good and getting better and the Bears were terrible across the board offense and defense.

I would probably make that trade personally if I was the Panthers 

Edited January 12, 2023 by Shocker

[Varking]

9 hours ago, Shocker said:

I would trade Fields if I were the Bears but question is would you trade #9 for Fields straight up?  I struggle mightily with that question personally.  Fields is good and getting better and the Bears were terrible across the board offense and defense.

I would probably make that trade personally if I was the Panthers 

I’d have no problem trading our pick for Fields. I don’t believe the Bears would accept it.