Watson trade up rumor

[killakrzydav]

I just saw on the herd the Bears are considering trading up to ensure the get Watson. Take it for what it's worth.

 

I view him as a mobile Winston. What's your take?

 

 

[Pixote]

I would be shocked of Watson wasn't still available when we draft at #3.

 

I have seen mention of the Bears trading up also but I just do not see it.

 

Trade down, yes, trade up, no, IMHO.

 

 

[adam]

This is posturing. They probably don't want someone jumping to #2 and taking they player we want.

[BearFan PHX]

If this is posturing, it's to try to get someone to trade with us, someone who wants Watson a little later and is afraid we might take him.

 

Someone who maybe has a pick around say 12 who could overreact in 2 ways to our benefit, either:

 

1) trading their 12th pick for our 3rd to take him

 

OR

 

2) Taking him #1 overall to avoid us taking him before they pick again at #12, ensuring that Garrett falls out of the #1 spot.

 

I would say this means we are less likely to take Watson at #3, if it means ANYTHING at all LOL

[Pixote]

There is a thread on this forum about the rumors of our interest in Trubisky.

 

I have also read several articles about how the Browns are likely to draft Garrett at #1 but that after doing so they are interested in trading up from their #12 spot to grab Trubisky, that he is their top QB on their draft board and they do not want to risk teams like the Jets or Jags from drafting him.

 

This makes me wonder if these rumors of the Bears' interest in Trubisky are being spread by Pace & Co. are to prompt Cleveland to trade their #12 pick plus ??? for the rights to draft Trubisky at #3?

 

Could be interesting!

 

 

 

 

[Stinger226]

There is a thread on this forum about the rumors of our interest in Trubisky.

 

I have also read several articles about how the Browns are likely to draft Garrett at #1 but that after doing so they are interested in trading up from their #12 spot to grab Trubisky, that he is their top QB on their draft board and they do not want to risk teams like the Jets or Jags from drafting him.

 

This makes me wonder if these rumors of the Bears' interest in Trubisky are being spread by Pace & Co. are to prompt Cleveland to trade their #12 pick plus ??? for the rights to draft Trubisky at #3?

 

Could be interesting!

Anything you hear now is just bullshit, what good GM is going to let the world know what players they want. That is just writers posting rumors

[adam]

Anything you hear now is just bullshit, what good GM is going to let the world know what players they want. That is just writers posting rumors

So even Stinger's message could be fake, you never know.

[Alaskan Grizzly]

There is a thread on this forum about the rumors of our interest in Trubisky.

 

I have also read several articles about how the Browns are likely to draft Garrett at #1 but that after doing so they are interested in trading up from their #12 spot to grab Trubisky, that he is their top QB on their draft board and they do not want to risk teams like the Jets or Jags from drafting him.

 

This makes me wonder if these rumors of the Bears' interest in Trubisky are being spread by Pace & Co. are to prompt Cleveland to trade their #12 pick plus ??? for the rights to draft Trubisky at #3?

 

Could be interesting!

 

I could definitely see this. Cant say I'd be the least bit surprised if the Bears went back to 12 and more picks in the second. All this makes sense.

 

In other news, I saw that Foster failed his drug test and not only that but it was "diluted". I had also read that he hadn't been healing as well as hoped from shoulder surgery earlier this year. So much for his 1st round hopes. Maybe with one of those extra #2s we'd still have a shot?

[dawhizz]

Trading up to take Watson would be dumb as hell.

[ASHKUM BEAR]

Trading up to take Watson would be dumb as hell.

I agree it would be dumb. I think it is just a journalist throwing out an idea like the whole Jimmy Garappolo story early on. I think the Bears have a high chance of taking a QB with the first pick though. It could be debated that it would be too early, but basing it off of Gil Brandts last 3-4 final mocks, I see the trend and possibility those QBs go higher than 8 or 9 as he had them slotted.

[Chitownhustla]

I just saw on the herd the Bears are considering trading up to ensure the get Watson. Take it for what it's worth.

 

I view him as a mobile Winston. What's your take?

 

I love Watson. How does his arm compare to Winston? If his arm is comparable then you are dead nuts on comparison. Pace and fox have set themselves up nicely, they dont have to take a QB at 3. If they do it only means they are sold 100% on him, which means if they are right we could be set for the next 10-12 years which we have never seen at the QB position. What would we talk about??????? We may end up missing talking about Cutler if that happened. lol

 

 

 

[BearFan PHX]

There is a thread on this forum about the rumors of our interest in Trubisky.

 

I have also read several articles about how the Browns are likely to draft Garrett at #1 but that after doing so they are interested in trading up from their #12 spot to grab Trubisky, that he is their top QB on their draft board and they do not want to risk teams like the Jets or Jags from drafting him.

 

This makes me wonder if these rumors of the Bears' interest in Trubisky are being spread by Pace & Co. are to prompt Cleveland to trade their #12 pick plus ??? for the rights to draft Trubisky at #3?

 

Could be interesting!

 

Exactly.

[ASHKUM BEAR]

Exactly.

Ooh, #12 and next years #1 would be just right for me. #3=2200, #12=1200 the future 1st would be generous on us to put at 1000pts.

[Mongo3451]

I love Watson. How does his arm compare to Winston? If his arm is comparable then you are dead nuts on comparison. Pace and fox have set themselves up nicely, they dont have to take a QB at 3. If they do it only means they are sold 100% on him, which means if they are right we could be set for the next 10-12 years which we have never seen at the QB position. What would we talk about??????? We may end up missing talking about Cutler if that happened. lol

Winston has an elite arm. Watson, not so much. He gets it done with intangibles...

[bradjock]

Winston has an elite arm. Watson, not so much. He gets it done with intangibles...

 

Not to mention that Winston is 2 inches taller and is said to have a wider frame.

[BearFan PHX]

Ooh, #12 and next years #1 would be just right for me. #3=2200, #12=1200 the future 1st would be generous on us to put at 1000pts.

 

yeah that would be insanely great, but I think the more likely scenario, if it happened at all, would be more lower picks this year, that we could package to move back into the 1st round.

 

But yeah wow. Thatd be great for us, not so great for cleveland!

[bradjock]

I would be shocked of Watson wasn't still available when we draft at #3.

 

I have seen mention of the Bears trading up also but I just do not see it.

 

Trade down, yes, trade up, no, IMHO.

 

I'm not so sure. Only because they were saying the EXACT same thing about Wentz and Goff last year at this time. A couple weeks before the draft, it was assumed Wentz and/or Goff would be available when the Bears drafted at #11.

 

I buy the Nolan Nawrocki draft guide each year. His evaluating numbers have Trubisky and Watson just a hair off from where he had Goff and Wentz.

 

I don't see a team selling the farm to trade up to get one of those guys, but I wouldn't be surprised to see them go way earlier than expected.

[Stinger226]

I'm not so sure. Only because they were saying the EXACT same thing about Wentz and Goff last year at this time. A couple weeks before the draft, it was assumed Wentz and/or Goff would be available when the Bears drafted at #11.

 

I buy the Nolan Nawrocki draft guide each year. His evaluating numbers have Trubisky and Watson just a hair off from where he had Goff and Wentz.

 

I don't see a team selling the farm to trade up to get one of those guys, but I wouldn't be surprised to see them go way earlier than expected.

I think he is one of the better experts for the draft. Not always right but very consistent.

[killakrzydav]

Watson is ten pounds lighter than Jameis and two inches shorter. I believe their atm strength is similar. Both have extraordinary moxie yet Imo James is superior as a leader of men.

 

I might be the original Watson at three bandwagon poster and still want him at the same slot. If we could trade down and still get him great but there is zero chance that he'd last to twelve.

[BearFan2000]

Didn't hear the report on the heard, but trading up from #3 for Watson or any of the QBs would be asinine. However if they are referring to trading up from #36 that makes more sense. Or some combination of trading down from #3 and using the extra picks as ammunition to move into the back half of round one makes sense too.

[Stinger226]

Watson is ten pounds lighter than Jameis and two inches shorter. I believe their atm strength is similar. Both have extraordinary moxie yet Imo James is superior as a leader of men.

 

I might be the original Watson at three bandwagon poster and still want him at the same slot. If we could trade down and still get him great but there is zero chance that he'd last to twelve.

the two most important things for a true franchise QB is love of football and the desire to be the best he can be. It helps to have all of the rest, but without the first two, probably just good not great.

The question is who has that desire? Time will tell

[AZ54]

I think this QB draft class is better than last years and compared to many recent years offers a decent pool to choose from. Minus of course the sure fire QB in an Andrew Luck type. Next year Sam Darnold looks to fill that elite draft spot but behind him I see lots of QBs with question marks no different than this year's group.

 

#1 Goff: spread offense QB, not ready to start and while he can be very accurate he fades a lot under pressure. Plus physically he was pretty skinny. He basically lost his rookie year and the long term outlook is unknown. Trubisky is more accurate, better TD:INT ration (5:1 vs. 3.3:1), better QB rating, and much better on the run (both running and throwing).

 

#2 Wentz: Physical tools but level of competition he played against didn't come close to comparison against any of the top 5 QBs this year. Played well initially then once teams learned the new Eagles offense things got tougher. I still like his long term outlook.

 

#26 Lynch: Physical tools but again poor traits from spread offense and lower level of competition. Started to show some signs of getting it late in the year but remains a work in progress.

 

#51 Hackenburg: I'd take any of the 2017 top 5 QBs ahead of him. (Here's where someone throws out Prescott but this is more about likely draft position of this year's QBs)

 

Mix and match Watson, Trubisky, Mahomes, Webb, and Kizer among any of last year's top 4. I get all the questions regarding each of the QBs, and I have my criticisms and concerns for each as well. QB value in the NFL says 4 of them go in Rd 1. I also think much of the fretting over the concerns for each QB this year is related to the struggles of last year's QBs.

 

2015: I can go back to all the criticisms of Winston (INTs) and Mariota (spread offense and those QBs never work out in the NFL) and they both went 1/2. Behind them it was Grayson at #75.

 

2014: Blake Bortles #3 overall, Manziel #22, Bridgewater #32, Carr #36 (the best of the bunch), JimmyG #62

 

2013: EJ Manuel #16, Geno Smith #39, Mike Glennon #73 (we'll see how that turns out soon enough), Matt Barkley #98

 

2012: Luck #1, Griffin #2, Tannehill #8 (been a big long term project), Brandon Weeden #22, Osweiller #57

 

 

 

 

[Stinger226]

I think this QB draft class is better than last years and compared to many recent years offers a decent pool to choose from. Minus of course the sure fire QB in an Andrew Luck type. Next year Sam Darnold looks to fill that elite draft spot but behind him I see lots of QBs with question marks no different than this year's group.

 

#1 Goff: spread offense QB, not ready to start and while he can be very accurate he fades a lot under pressure. Plus physically he was pretty skinny. He basically lost his rookie year and the long term outlook is unknown. Trubisky is more accurate, better TD:INT ration (5:1 vs. 3.3:1), better QB rating, and much better on the run (both running and throwing).

 

#2 Wentz: Physical tools but level of competition he played against didn't come close to comparison against any of the top 5 QBs this year. Played well initially then once teams learned the new Eagles offense things got tougher. I still like his long term outlook.

 

#26 Lynch: Physical tools but again poor traits from spread offense and lower level of competition. Started to show some signs of getting it late in the year but remains a work in progress.

 

#51 Hackenburg: I'd take any of the 2017 top 5 QBs ahead of him. (Here's where someone throws out Prescott but this is more about likely draft position of this year's QBs)

 

Mix and match Watson, Trubisky, Mahomes, Webb, and Kizer among any of last year's top 4. I get all the questions regarding each of the QBs, and I have my criticisms and concerns for each as well. QB value in the NFL says 4 of them go in Rd 1. I also think much of the fretting over the concerns for each QB this year is related to the struggles of last year's QBs.

 

2015: I can go back to all the criticisms of Winston (INTs) and Mariota (spread offense and those QBs never work out in the NFL) and they both went 1/2. Behind them it was Grayson at #75.

 

2014: Blake Bortles #3 overall, Manziel #22, Bridgewater #32, Carr #36 (the best of the bunch), JimmyG #62

 

2013: EJ Manuel #16, Geno Smith #39, Mike Glennon #73 (we'll see how that turns out soon enough), Matt Barkley #98

 

2012: Luck #1, Griffin #2, Tannehill #8 (been a big long term project), Brandon Weeden #22, Osweiller #57

the problem is you get to look back and see how the rest turned out, you do not have that luxury in the current group. I think this group is more comparable to 2013 or 14, not with the Winston and Mariota, or Wentz-Pescott group

[AZ54]

the problem is you get to look back and see how the rest turned out, you do not have that luxury in the current group. I think this group is more comparable to 2013 or 14, not with the Winston and Mariota, or Wentz-Pescott group

 

Of course I can see how players turned out but I'm really making that post regarding all the comments (in general) that I recall for these QBs, both in the media and here, leading up to their draft. It's not a perfect lens for seeing everything, and I'm just not doing the work to put up a bunch of links to back it up because I'm busy.

 

At times we definitely weren't in the QB market and that naturally reduced the tension in how people think about drafting or even rating a QB. I don't recall many here who were in favor or Mariota (spread QB, Oregon QBs suck, etc.). It seemed about half the board hated Winston and when he was drafted there were a ton of concerns about his INTs, much less his maturity, even among draft experts. I know I didn't like Bortles despite his measurable talent because he was inaccurate and inconsistent and it was easy to find similar concerns in the media.

 

The media were stunned when Philly gave up the farm to move up and draft Wentz. Absolutely not worth it they said.

 

Tannehill was a very good athlete but little more than that as a QB when he was drafted 8th overall.

 

--------------

 

Bottom line for me is that what I see in these QBs evaluations against the QBs in recent NFL draft history it indicates there will be at least 3 QBs taken in the 1st Rd, and likely 4. History also says that usually at least one QB from each draft becomes a legitimate starter in the NFL. If Pace thinks he knows who that future starter is then he'll have to draft that player in Rd 1, or sit back and hope he gets lucky in the 2nd Rd like the Raiders did.

 

How many recent drafts have had 4 QBs chosen in Rd 1?

 

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/agents-t...likely-to-fail/

 

This is an easy article to write by the way because anyone who is breathing knows the vast majority of NFL QBs fail to become a good starter. I've shown in other threads that history also says your best odds of drafting a starting QB will be among the QBs drafted in Rd1.

 

FWIW Trubisky is still my favorite QB in this draft. If Pace thinks he can be a legit starter, even at the level of Andy Dalton, then I don't care if he takes him #3. If last year's draft was repeated (knowing rookie performance) there is zero chance Dallas takes Elliot over Prescott at #4.

[killakrzydav]

Am I the only person here that feels like Luck is the most over rated qb in the league?. Dude has been shit garbage for what seems like years now. Why does he get a pass?