#1 CJ Trade

[JawnyBlaze]

2 hours ago, OldhamA said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but he's less highly thought of at Ohio St than Fields was, right?

He was available at #9.

If anyone ever thought of Fields higher than Stroud they have no business having opinions on QB prospects.  Stroud is being seriously talked about at #1, Fields never was. 

[Navy_football]

4 minutes ago, Jackie Lee said:

If the Bears were goin to drop to 9 it would probably include Burns in the trade package. 

 

That would make sense, since the Bears have enough cap to sign him long term. If Burns is worth 2 (1sts) and a 2nd, then we'd only need to give up the 9th pick and Burns to make it happen - right? 

[Carolina Cajun]

19 minutes ago, top dawg said:

That's hard to say because of Fields' slide, but when the process began (and probably into February, if not March, not to mention their entire collegiate careers), I believe that Fields absolutely was thought of higher than Stroud has ever been thought of. 

If I remember correctly he and Trevor Lawrence were 1A/1B going into the offseason after the national championship.  I think he had some stuff that threw off some teams at the combine and his pro days, also remember that some teams get enamored with random poo during the draft process (IE Zach Wilson and Sam Darnold, Make a few throws at pro day and you're gold).  

[Toomers]

3 minutes ago, Navy_football said:

That would make sense, since the Bears have enough cap to sign him long term. If Burns is worth 2 (1sts) and a 2nd, then we'd only need to give up the 9th pick and Burns to make it happen - right? 

Burns isn’t worth that anymore. He wasn’t worth it when the Panthers turned it down. 

[JawnyBlaze]

4 minutes ago, Navy_football said:

That would make sense, since the Bears have enough cap to sign him long term. If Burns is worth 2 (1sts) and a 2nd, then we'd only need to give up the 9th pick and Burns to make it happen - right? 

I’d guess two firsts and Burns is what it would actually take 

[Jackie Lee]

2 minutes ago, Navy_football said:

That would make sense, since the Bears have enough cap to sign him long term. If Burns is worth 2 (1sts) and a 2nd, then we'd only need to give up the 9th pick and Burns to make it happen - right? 

Probably also a 2 and a future 3rd or something and get 5th back. It's always some garbage on the back end like that. 

[Navy_football]

5 minutes ago, JawnyBlaze said:

I’d guess two firsts and Burns is what it would actually take 

So 4 firsts and a second?! 

Being sarcastic...

Burns was never worth what the Rams were willing to give up for him. But those 2 firsts and a second would've made it possible to move up and still have significant draft capital left over. The team drastically overvalued their guy.  

[Jackie Lee]

Here's the details from the Goff trade lol...That's a bigger jump than us and not completely overwhelming if you land your franchise guy

[Toomers]

2 minutes ago, Navy_football said:

So 4 firsts and a second?! 

Being sarcastic...

Burns was never worth what the Rams were willing to give up for him. But those 2 firsts and a second would've made it possible to move up and still have significant draft capital left over. The team drastically overvalued their guy.  

[JawnyBlaze]

1 minute ago, Navy_football said:

So 4 firsts and a second?! 

Being sarcastic...

Burns was never worth what the Rams were willing to give up for him. But those 2 firsts and a second would've made it possible to move up and still have significant draft capital left over. The team drastically overvalued their guy.  

I mean, maybe a 1st, 2nd and Burns. It’s not probably going to be an exact value of what Burns could get is in a trade for picks. Besides, the Burns trade was two future firsts, so he was worth two seconds and a third if we’re talking “value” for trading up for a player this year. 

[Navy_football]

2 minutes ago, JawnyBlaze said:

I mean, maybe a 1st, 2nd and Burns. It’s not probably going to be an exact value of what Burns could get is in a trade for picks. Besides, the Burns trade was two future firsts, so he was worth two seconds and a third if we’re talking “value” for trading up for a player this year. 

Any 1sts the team could offer would be this year's and then future ones. We could have given up the 9th pick, our second, the Ram's second, and the Ram's first next season. And still would have had a second this year, and a first next year, and 2 firsts in 2024. Along with our franchise QB (we'd hope).

[JawnyBlaze]

2 minutes ago, Navy_football said:

Any 1sts the team could offer would be this year's and then future ones. We could have given up the 9th pick, our second, the Ram's second, and the Ram's first next season. And still would have had a second this year, and a first next year, and 2 firsts in 2024. Along with our franchise QB (we'd hope).

The Ram’s first next year is worth a second, so we’d be offering a first and three seconds in value.  Not nearly enough

[Navy_football]

Just now, JawnyBlaze said:

The Ram’s first next year is worth a second, so we’d be offering a first and three seconds in value.  Not nearly enough

I agree. But that's what any team would offer, right? Unless some team with multiple firsts this year wanted to move up. Not sure about that, but generally speaking teams offer future first and second round picks. The Panthers would have had a ton of them. 

[JawnyBlaze]

Just now, Navy_football said:

I agree. But that's what any team would offer, right? Unless some team with multiple firsts this year wanted to move up. Not sure about that, but generally speaking teams offer future first and second round picks. The Panthers would have had a ton of them. 

Yea, I’m just saying it probably would have taken #9, our second this year and all the Rams picks. Maybe more.