What if they have 3 first round picks in 2024 because of trades and the top team doesn’t need a qb
OT: Bears & NFL Talk 93
- Thread starter No Fun Shogun
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
- Status
What if they have 3 first round picks in 2024 because of trades and the top team doesn’t need a qb
I think the top teams not needing an elite QB prospect is a very small needle to thread.
Having 3 first round picks in 2024 is possible but unlikely.
Having the best trade package to move up is also not a given. Or in other words, would you also trade a 2025 1st as well? At what point is this hypothetical trade package too depleting?
You combine those three happenings, and I think we're in "not realistic" territory.
Plus it’s so hard to predict who will be bad. Start with naming the worst team in each division next season. Won’t know til after free agency and the draft. And even then it’s a crapshoot. Who pedicted that 3-7 worst teams would have been Den, LA, AZ, LV and Ind?
Teams like Car, Atl, NYG and Sea were expected to be bad but were not bottom 5.
Can’t sit here and think you’d be in the draft spot for a top 2 pick. Especially if the plan is to make moves in free agency. Might hit or might miss but won’t know.
Someone else might implode next season like those 5 clubs did with veteran QBs.
clydesdale line
Connor BeJesus
- Jan 10, 2012
- 25,794
- 24,870
Kaners Bald Spot
Registered User
No Fun Shogun
34-38-61-10-13-15
That is a shockingly good business hire. Zero complaints there, and if anything deserves extra kudos for the Bears to be able to convince him to basically lose power to go from a power five commissionership to a franchise presidency.
I'm not sure how popular these opinions are, but I think I would give serious consideration to both of these...
1. See if you can bring in either Harbaugh or Payton. This is more about those two I think being absolutely excellent coaches than anything else, but I'm also not sold on Eberflus (yes, I know the roster was a disaster this year).
2. Really explore trading Fields if the FO thinks there's a star QB in this draft. I've been a Fields proponent and would certainly not be considering this had we not got the #1 pick. But, if the Bears think there is a stud QB in the draft and aren't sold on Fields, I think it's a move they should make. Again, yes, I know the WR and OL were brutal at times this season, but at the end of the day Fields has not shown enough as a passer for me to be sold on him. Yes, he's maybe the most explosive playmaker in the league at his position, with his legs, but how viable that is long term remains to be seen.
I'm more sold on idea #1 than #2, but I would certainly hope the Bears are open to both.
1. See if you can bring in either Harbaugh or Payton. This is more about those two I think being absolutely excellent coaches than anything else, but I'm also not sold on Eberflus (yes, I know the roster was a disaster this year).
2. Really explore trading Fields if the FO thinks there's a star QB in this draft. I've been a Fields proponent and would certainly not be considering this had we not got the #1 pick. But, if the Bears think there is a stud QB in the draft and aren't sold on Fields, I think it's a move they should make. Again, yes, I know the WR and OL were brutal at times this season, but at the end of the day Fields has not shown enough as a passer for me to be sold on him. Yes, he's maybe the most explosive playmaker in the league at his position, with his legs, but how viable that is long term remains to be seen.
I'm more sold on idea #1 than #2, but I would certainly hope the Bears are open to both.
No Fun Shogun
34-38-61-10-13-15
If the Bears had a domed stadium, I wonder if we would've been in consideration to host a neutral AFC title game if it came to that. Chicago is basically halfway between Buffalo and Kansas City, after all.
I cannot help but laugh at some of you self proclaimed experts.
There are 2 QB’s rated highly and we are to dump our starter (who has shown skill and leadership) who is easily a higher level NFL player.
Is he a top 4 or franchise player? I don’t think so but there is time. I do think that today I can’t name 10 current QB’s that are a better and long term.
So while many of you are sprouting wood seeing NFL superstardom for guys who have never taken a snap I want to mention.(Manuel, Ponder, Trubisky, Wilson, Winston, Haskins, Locker, Mayfield, Bortles, Rosen, Gabbeart and Bradford) the many top 1/2 of rd 1 picks over the last several years (some picked 1 thru 5 in their draft).
You want to move fields to bring in a guy who at this point is 50/50 to fit next to those names.
There are 2 QB’s rated highly and we are to dump our starter (who has shown skill and leadership) who is easily a higher level NFL player.
Is he a top 4 or franchise player? I don’t think so but there is time. I do think that today I can’t name 10 current QB’s that are a better and long term.
So while many of you are sprouting wood seeing NFL superstardom for guys who have never taken a snap I want to mention.(Manuel, Ponder, Trubisky, Wilson, Winston, Haskins, Locker, Mayfield, Bortles, Rosen, Gabbeart and Bradford) the many top 1/2 of rd 1 picks over the last several years (some picked 1 thru 5 in their draft).
You want to move fields to bring in a guy who at this point is 50/50 to fit next to those names.
Poles is going to evaluate the three QBs a the top of the draft and he is going to end up believing the same thing as I do: none of Young/Stroud/Levis is a better long term talent than Justin Fields. One could argue that if Fields was in this draft, he'll be #1 QB in this draft.
Trading Fields does not make sense to me, mainly because you are not going to get as much in a trade as you would the #1 pick. My opinion has been not to trade Fields and draft a QB and start this developing a young QB process all over again but to trade the pick to acquire more picks and continues to give Fields weapons so he can developed into that QB.
I know Poles will play out the Trade Fields/Draft young QB scenario but in the end he likely not to see the value in that series of moves.
Sarava
Registered User
Not sure who you're attacking here or why. But there's 3 top QB's and I wouldn't be surprised if Will Levis is one of the top 2 selected. If my team wanted a QB, my order of preference right now would be 1) Young, 2) Levis, 3) Stroud
I think Levis is definitely in the mix but watch or read any draft related material and he is placed 3rd of the 3.
I think he is the steadiest choice.
The attack is on everyone in general and it’s more opinion than attack. Everyone of the names I listed was going to be the next star based only on their college production. I don’t remember my count but it was about 1/3 of the picks.
So here is how I see (means my opinion) it.
If you draft 1 of them you have a 1/3 chance at a back up. A 1/3 chance at a starter not as good as fields at the pro game. A 1/3 chance at getting an equal or better qb than fields.
I also think past history shows draft picks (magic beans) usually have more value in trade.
They COULD get 3 high picks if they trade #1.
They likely get less for Fields.
Again it’s all our opinions but there is nothing that says those 3 top rated guys don’t end up being Chicago’s future Doug Flutie (short but dynamic in college). Vince Evans (good arm, good legs, already thinks their special) or Mitch Trubisky (above avg. all around athlete, no brain).
Also there are teams who prefer each of the 3.
If you can learn who wants whom the chance of 2 or 3 trade downs exists. Could end up with 9 or 10 picks in the 1st 3 rounds.
I apologize for rambling there. I just feel the odds based on history of highly rated QB’s are against picking a guy better than what they have now.
I would be interested to see an analysis of #1 overall QBs. Not a risk-free proposition, but I would expect they have a very good 'typical' outcome. And then obviously HOF upside.
I see 18 QB’s selected in the top 5.
(Just an opinion)
I see 3 equal +\- to fields
I see 3 I’d rather have.
I see 18 where I’d rather have fields.
So 1 in 3.
Winston, Bradford, D’Arnold, Wilson, Goff, Bortles, Mayfield, Murray and TRUBISKY and the rest were highly thought of and I’d rather have Fields.
I don't care about top 5. I care about literally #1 overall. Those are very different categories.
Trevor Lawrence
Joe Burrow
Kyler Murray
Baker Mayfield
Jared Goff
Jameis Winston
Andrew Luck
Cam Newton
Sam Bradford
Matt Stafford
Jamarcus Russell
Alex Smith
Eli Manning
Carson Palmer
David Carr
Mike Vick
Tim Crouch
Peyton Manning
12 of 18 where Fields is the guy. 3 where to me Fields is out.
That’s kind of silly. So if the edge goes 1st these guys don’t matter?
I’d say fair (more fair?) would be 1st QB.
1st QB seems reasonable too. Not going to quibble with that.
But if an Edge goes #1 overall that often means there isn't an elite QB prospect (e.g. last year's draft).
No Fun Shogun
34-38-61-10-13-15
If there was an elite QB on the board, nobody would be suggesting that the worst team in the league seriously contemplate trading down, and yet everybody is talking about the Bears doing just that.
No Fun Shogun
34-38-61-10-13-15
Sure, but if there was still an elite QB prospect on the board would we really be talking about definitely keeping Fields over them?
DisgruntledHawkFan
Blackhawk Down
Of the last 10 years, I'd go like
Generational:
Luck
Lawrence
Elite:
Burrow
RG3
Borderline Elite:
Winston (iirc the off-the-field stuff was the only knock on him)
I think if they're available, you take everyone but Winston over Fields. Most of the other QBs that have turned out well are boom-bust guys (Allen, Mahomes, Herbert) you probably don't take the risk on. Watson is probably a lateral move so you don't take him.
No Fun Shogun
34-38-61-10-13-15
I'd say an elite QB prospect, when speaking of being #1 overall-worthy or not, is a guy that's a consensus first overall, or at most tied with another QB prospect as a surefire one-two combo.
This isn't a dream QB draft scenario at the very top. If you're taking a QB first overall this year, you're drafting for need and not for the best player available, imho.
Nobody was talking about trading down when Luck or Lawrence or Burrow or even Murrary were the guys their years.
And that's not to say that no great QBs will come out of this class, or that elite QB prospects always pan out. But there's absolutely a different energy when there's a guy on the board at first overall and you are already thinking of that installment of the draft as being his draft.
Last edited:
- Status
Latest posts
-
-
Trades & Free Agency Thread: 2024-2025 - Trade Deadline Approaches- Latest: Namikaze Minato
