Would you trade OUT of the first?

[jason]

Just thinking outside the box here. There are a few teams that may want to jump into the QB sweepstakes at #11. Teams that could need QBs:

 

Browns - Will draft QB at #2

Cowboys - May draft QB at #4

Niners - #7

Eagles - #13 (recent 2yr deal with Bradford)

Rams - #15

Texans - #22

Chiefs - #28 (maybe)

Broncos - #31 (maybe)

 

So let's say only the Browns pick a QB at #2. The Bears #11 is worth 1250. The prime target here is the Rams. They have the two picks in the 2nd round worth 920. If they also threw in their 3rd (210), that would be a decent compromise. The Bears lose in the points, but the compromise is pretty good for the value.

 

In this scenario the Bears have three 2nd rounders, and two 3rd rounders. I see great value in the draft in those rounds. Imagine the Bears come away with the following:

 

2(41) Robert Nkemdiche, DE, Miss

2(43) Vadal Alexander, OG, LSU

2(45) Jaylon Smith, ILB, ND

3(72) Jayron Kearse, SS, Clemson

3(76) Scooby Wright, ILB, Arizona

 

I think I'd be OK with that trade off. No, I'd be ecstatic with that. Huge athleticism, size boost. And watch out for 2017 when a full speed Jaylon Smith gets back to full speed.

[DABEARSDABOMB]

I will continue to say, if Wentz is there @ 11 and Pace is as high on him as some insiders have reported, I'm not doing anything but selecting Wentz. I happen to be of the opinion if one of the top QB's is there when we pick, if Pace is high on said player, we will be selecting a QB and I fully expect us to pick a QB within the first 4 rounds.

 

All this said, except for in rare situations, I am always a proponent of a trade down in the 1st round (presuming you get fair value for the trade down). Just like I am fully in favor of moving Alshon (if he didn't want to be here) for 2 1st's or even a 1st and a future 2nd.

[Stinger226]

I will continue to say, if Wentz is there @ 11 and Pace is as high on him as some insiders have reported, I'm not doing anything but selecting Wentz. I happen to be of the opinion if one of the top QB's is there when we pick, if Pace is high on said player, we will be selecting a QB and I fully expect us to pick a QB within the first 4 rounds.

 

All this said, except for in rare situations, I am always a proponent of a trade down in the 1st round (presuming you get fair value for the trade down). Just like I am fully in favor of moving Alshon (if he didn't want to be here) for 2 1st's or even a 1st and a future 2nd.

Wentz will not be there, but that would create a great trade scenario if he was.

[Stinger226]

Just thinking outside the box here. There are a few teams that may want to jump into the QB sweepstakes at #11. Teams that could need QBs:

 

Browns - Will draft QB at #2

Cowboys - May draft QB at #4

Niners - #7

Eagles - #13 (recent 2yr deal with Bradford)

Rams - #15

Texans - #22

Chiefs - #28 (maybe)

Broncos - #31 (maybe)

 

So let's say only the Browns pick a QB at #2. The Bears #11 is worth 1250. The prime target here is the Rams. They have the two picks in the 2nd round worth 920. If they also threw in their 3rd (210), that would be a decent compromise. The Bears lose in the points, but the compromise is pretty good for the value.

 

In this scenario the Bears have three 2nd rounders, and two 3rd rounders. I see great value in the draft in those rounds. Imagine the Bears come away with the following:

 

2(41) Robert Nkemdiche, DE, Miss

2(43) Vadal Alexander, OG, LSU

2(45) Jaylon Smith, ILB, ND

3(72) Jayron Kearse, SS, Clemson

3(76) Scooby Wright, ILB, Arizona

 

I think I'd be OK with that trade off. No, I'd be ecstatic with that. Huge athleticism, size boost. And watch out for 2017 when a full speed Jaylon Smith gets back to full speed.

Why would you not get their first back? 1/one of the seconds and maybe a 4th. You have to get their first in any deal and that would be a perfect place to draft Ragland.

[Alaskan Grizzly]

Just thinking outside the box here. There are a few teams that may want to jump into the QB sweepstakes at #11. Teams that could need QBs:

 

Eagles - #13 (recent 2yr deal with Bradford)

Rams - #15

Texans - #22

Chiefs - #28 (maybe)

Broncos - #31 (maybe)

 

If all these teams are possibly in the "QB market" I have a slightly used model I'd be willing to let them look at in exchange for their 1st round pick.

 

Hell if a deal could be made with Denver for Osweiller, color me sold.

[jason]

Why would you not get their first back? 1/one of the seconds and maybe a 4th. You have to get their first in any deal and that would be a perfect place to draft Ragland.

 

I didn't make it clear that I was proposing a trade with a team that didn't want to give up s first. Hence, the Bears are out of the first.

[bradjock]

Generally I love the idea, but it depends on where that line in the sand is. That line being the difference between guys you think who will be great (the way we felt about Kevin White) vs. guys who we just think will be really good NFL players (like Vic Beasley who was drafted right after White.) On a side note, I still wish Leonard Williams would have made it past the Jets so the Bears could take him at #7.

 

It seems there is a glut of talent where guys all fall in a similar spot. So I vote yes to the trade down.

[ASHKUM BEAR]

If the draft fell with your scenerio, that would be nice. Nkimdiche and Smith were both top 5 prospects early in the college season.

[scs787]

Unless Jack, Buckner, or Ramsey fell, I would be open to this.

[adam]

This is what I said awhile back about trading back:

 

How about Houston? They were a great defensive team with no QB. They are at 22, which may be too far for us, but looking at the Draft Value chart, we could get a pretty good haul for moving down from 11 to 22:

 

Bears 11 (1250) = Texans 22 (780), 52 (380), 120 (54), 159 (27.8)~1241.8

 

That would be the Bears 1st, for the Texans 1st, 2nd, 4th, and 5th rounders, which would give us a 1st, 2x 2nd's, a 3rd, 2x 4th's, 2x 5th's, 3x 6th's and a 7th. We could then take a 5th and a 6th and move back into the 4th making that 7 picks in the first 4 rounds. That would be ridiculous.

[AZ54]

Just thinking outside the box here. There are a few teams that may want to jump into the QB sweepstakes at #11. Teams that could need QBs:

 

Browns - Will draft QB at #2

Cowboys - May draft QB at #4

Niners - #7

Eagles - #13 (recent 2yr deal with Bradford)

Rams - #15

Texans - #22

Chiefs - #28 (maybe)

Broncos - #31 (maybe)

 

So let's say only the Browns pick a QB at #2. The Bears #11 is worth 1250. The prime target here is the Rams. They have the two picks in the 2nd round worth 920. If they also threw in their 3rd (210), that would be a decent compromise. The Bears lose in the points, but the compromise is pretty good for the value.

 

In this scenario the Bears have three 2nd rounders, and two 3rd rounders. I see great value in the draft in those rounds. Imagine the Bears come away with the following:

 

2(41) Robert Nkemdiche, DE, Miss

2(43) Vadal Alexander, OG, LSU

2(45) Jaylon Smith, ILB, ND

3(72) Jayron Kearse, SS, Clemson

3(76) Scooby Wright, ILB, Arizona

 

I think I'd be OK with that trade off. No, I'd be ecstatic with that. Huge athleticism, size boost. And watch out for 2017 when a full speed Jaylon Smith gets back to full speed.

 

 

I prefer to trade back in the 1st Rd but not out of the 1st Rd. Values might be relatively the same with players but I prefer to be in a spot where we get the player who fits our scheme and needs best.

[jason]

This is what I said awhile back about trading back:

 

How about Houston? They were a great defensive team with no QB. They are at 22, which may be too far for us, but looking at the Draft Value chart, we could get a pretty good haul for moving down from 11 to 22:

 

Bears 11 (1250) = Texans 22 (780), 52 (380), 120 (54), 159 (27.8)~1241.8

 

That would be the Bears 1st, for the Texans 1st, 2nd, 4th, and 5th rounders, which would give us a 1st, 2x 2nd's, a 3rd, 2x 4th's, 2x 5th's, 3x 6th's and a 7th. We could then take a 5th and a 6th and move back into the 4th making that 7 picks in the first 4 rounds. That would be ridiculous.

 

I remember you saying that, but I was more thinking about bunching up picks in the 2nd and 3rd, which is where I believe the talent and depth is at in this draft.

[ASHKUM BEAR]

This is what I said awhile back about trading back:

 

How about Houston? They were a great defensive team with no QB. They are at 22, which may be too far for us, but looking at the Draft Value chart, we could get a pretty good haul for moving down from 11 to 22:

 

Bears 11 (1250) = Texans 22 (780), 52 (380), 120 (54), 159 (27.8)~1241.8

 

That would be the Bears 1st, for the Texans 1st, 2nd, 4th, and 5th rounders, which would give us a 1st, 2x 2nd's, a 3rd, 2x 4th's, 2x 5th's, 3x 6th's and a 7th. We could then take a 5th and a 6th and move back into the 4th making that 7 picks in the first 4 rounds. That would be ridiculous.

As SCS said if Jack, Buckner, or Ramsey...(and Stanley) are there, you do not trade. Otherwise 15-22 would be a sweet spot.

1-22-Will Jackson CB

2a-Vernon Butler DT

2b-Su'a Cravens LB

3-Jayron Kearse SS

3-Jaylon Smith LB(4,5,6,6 trade up)

4-Chris Westerman G

5-Tyler Erving RB

6-Tyler Johnstone OT

7-Aguayo K

[jason]

As SCS said if Jack, Buckner, or Ramsey...(and Stanley) are there, you do not trade. Otherwise 15-22 would be a sweet spot.

1-22-Will Jackson CB

2a-Vernon Butler DT

2b-Su'a Cravens LB

3-Jayron Kearse SS

3-Jaylon Smith LB(4,5,6,6 trade up)

4-Chris Westerman G

5-Tyler Erving RB

6-Tyler Johnstone OT

7-Aguayo K

 

I'd be really happy with that draft, even if I'm not a huge fan of Will Jackson. That's a lot of talent and team speed at positions of need.

[adam]

I remember you saying that, but I was more thinking about bunching up picks in the 2nd and 3rd, which is where I believe the talent and depth is at in this draft.

Jason, yeah, if there is no real value pick left at 11 (like your scenario in the other thread), then trading down and picking up some picks (or actually drafting the QB - if BPA) may be the best move.

 

 

[jason]

I will continue to say, if Wentz is there @ 11 and Pace is as high on him as some insiders have reported, I'm not doing anything but selecting Wentz. I happen to be of the opinion if one of the top QB's is there when we pick, if Pace is high on said player, we will be selecting a QB and I fully expect us to pick a QB within the first 4 rounds.

 

All this said, except for in rare situations, I am always a proponent of a trade down in the 1st round (presuming you get fair value for the trade down). Just like I am fully in favor of moving Alshon (if he didn't want to be here) for 2 1st's or even a 1st and a future 2nd.

 

I'm still shocked anyone thinks this is a good idea. A QB would do nothing for this franchise right now. It would just create a situation where a rookie would get demolished behind an iffy line while trying to come back from a deficit his deficit his porous defense created.

[scs787]

A QB would be long term, long term you have a chance to fix the line and D.

 

I was against it big time early on, but I admittedly had not seen any of Wentz. He looks like the real deal.

[Stinger226]

A QB would be long term, long term you have a chance to fix the line and D.

 

I was against it big time early on, but I admittedly had not seen any of Wentz. He looks like the real deal.

This isnt a great class for QBs, everybody blows up the prospects and hope they turn out well. There will be a few that succeed but there is no stars in this group. We are better off drafting a Prescott or a Hogan and try to develop them. We need playmakers on defense or a stud OL before we address the QB position.

[DABEARSDABOMB]

This isnt a great class for QBs, everybody blows up the prospects and hope they turn out well. There will be a few that succeed but there is no stars in this group. We are better off drafting a Prescott or a Hogan and try to develop them. We need playmakers on defense or a stud OL before we address the QB position.

People are extremely, extremely high on Wentz. I've heard a lot of people just rave about his all around skills. There obviously is the risk / unknown from the small school perspective. I am a believer, if when you pick, there is a QB on the board who you believe will be a perennial all pro type player, than you pick him, the hell with your needs. QB, more than any other position in the league, is what will ultimately allow you to win championships and have extended runs of dominance.

 

Sure, the Broncos won this year with defense and you could say the Seahawks have as well (albeit, Russell is not a bum...yes Manning was a bum by and large for the Broncos this year). Those situation where you have a Dilfer or way past his prime Manning win are few and far between the top notch / all pro type QB's. Basically put, I would never not pass up on an all pro QB (I suppose if I had just taken Andrew Luck the year before, sure, I would, but in general, if the Bears think Wentz is that guy, I'd be pissed if they went any direction but Wentz).

[scs787]

I think all this talk will be moot anyway. Can't see the Browns not taking him.

[bradjock]

I think all this talk will be moot anyway. Can't see the Browns not taking him.

 

Unless they sign RG3 and decide they'd rather use that pick to put weapons around him. Or they trade for Colin Kapernick. Granted, all this is sheer speculation at this point. I just get frustrated trying to project the draft before free agency starts. I gripe about this every year. Please pardon my bitching.

[jason]

People are extremely, extremely high on Wentz. I've heard a lot of people just rave about his all around skills. There obviously is the risk / unknown from the small school perspective. I am a believer, if when you pick, there is a QB on the board who you believe will be a perennial all pro type player, than you pick him, the hell with your needs. QB, more than any other position in the league, is what will ultimately allow you to win championships and have extended runs of dominance.

 

Sure, the Broncos won this year with defense and you could say the Seahawks have as well (albeit, Russell is not a bum...yes Manning was a bum by and large for the Broncos this year). Those situation where you have a Dilfer or way past his prime Manning win are few and far between the top notch / all pro type QB's. Basically put, I would never not pass up on an all pro QB (I suppose if I had just taken Andrew Luck the year before, sure, I would, but in general, if the Bears think Wentz is that guy, I'd be pissed if they went any direction but Wentz).

 

Bolded...I don't know if that's true. A balanced team wins more often than not. It's very rare where a SB winner just jumps on the QBs back and says, "Take us home." Of course, that's basically what happened to the Bears and Manning in 2007. Even teams that had very good offenses (e.g. New York Giants recent SB teams) relied heavily on portions of their defense to stifle the opposing offense (i.e. pass rush limiting Brady).

 

Picking a franchise QB when you have a franchise QB is sacrificing other portions of the team, and balance. Even the 85 Bears had a top 5 offense. More specifically, this team has serious flaws in multiple positions, and picking another QB would result in the old saying, "When you have two starting QBs you don't have a starting QB", as well as a losing team.

 

 

 

[bradjock]

Bolded...I don't know if that's true. A balanced team wins more often than not. It's very rare where a SB winner just jumps on the QBs back and says, "Take us home." Of course, that's basically what happened to the Bears and Manning in 2007. Even teams that had very good offenses (e.g. New York Giants recent SB teams) relied heavily on portions of their defense to stifle the opposing offense (i.e. pass rush limiting Brady).

 

Picking a franchise QB when you have a franchise QB is sacrificing other portions of the team, and balance. Even the 85 Bears had a top 5 offense. More specifically, this team has serious flaws in multiple positions, and picking another QB would result in the old saying, "When you have two starting QBs you don't have a starting QB", as well as a losing team.

 

I do agree with you on this point that Washington was stupid. Not because Washington was drafting a franchise quarterback but because they were drafting Cousins to push and back-up their franchise quarterback. Why not just sign one of those guys? Especially when the team only had 5 picks and they were already starved for young talent because they traded picks in previous years.

 

Cousins was a 4th rounder taken 102 overall. It's the Tom Brady argument. New England was brilliant for taking him in the 6th round. Nah, they got lucky. Cousin has already been benched for being bad. I suspect he's more like Nick Foles and Josh McCown. Guys who show flashes of brilliance but can't sustain it.

 

 

 

[Stinger226]

People are extremely, extremely high on Wentz. I've heard a lot of people just rave about his all around skills. There obviously is the risk / unknown from the small school perspective. I am a believer, if when you pick, there is a QB on the board who you believe will be a perennial all pro type player, than you pick him, the hell with your needs. QB, more than any other position in the league, is what will ultimately allow you to win championships and have extended runs of dominance.

 

Sure, the Broncos won this year with defense and you could say the Seahawks have as well (albeit, Russell is not a bum...yes Manning was a bum by and large for the Broncos this year). Those situation where you have a Dilfer or way past his prime Manning win are few and far between the top notch / all pro type QB's. Basically put, I would never not pass up on an all pro QB (I suppose if I had just taken Andrew Luck the year before, sure, I would, but in general, if the Bears think Wentz is that guy, I'd be pissed if they went any direction but Wentz).

All of them look good from this side of the draft, but look at the last several years, Luck is probably the only that proved anything so far. Winston and Mariota look probably doing it, but havent got there yet. Bridgewater looked good his first year and not so hot last year. the other QB that is ascending is Derek Carr, but look at all the early picks in QBs in the last few years, not a lot of winners.

[jason]

I do agree with you on this point that Washington was stupid. Not because Washington was drafting a franchise quarterback but because they were drafting Cousins to push and back-up their franchise quarterback. Why not just sign one of those guys? Especially when the team only had 5 picks and they were already starved for young talent because they traded picks in previous years.

 

Cousins was a 4th rounder taken 102 overall. It's the Tom Brady argument. New England was brilliant for taking him in the 6th round. Nah, they got lucky. Cousin has already been benched for being bad. I suspect he's more like Nick Foles and Josh McCown. Guys who show flashes of brilliance but can't sustain it.

 

Yes, New England was lucky. They did, however, what I think franchises with stable-to-great QBs should do: draft for QB later. Always. You never know when you'll hit a grand slam with a Brady in the 6th. But you don't do it early at the expense of the rest of the team.