What this pick says

[Chitownhustla]

I don't understand what you're getting at.

 

Of course there will still be complaints.

 

If Glennon goes for 3500/28/10 that means Trubisky was an unnecessary pick, and a horrible trade. It will mean the Bears were 8-8 because somewhere and someone else on the team sucked. And that person who sucked likely would have been ousted by a rookie first round pick like Jamal Adams, Jonathan Allen, or Malik Hooker. That's an 8-8 team that could have been better if not for the one missing piece. And you go into 2018 with...

 

1. A worse pick than you would likely have had with a rookie QB

2. A worse situation with a QB controversy

3. Still the missing piece(s) that caused the team to be 8-8 instead of being better despite all the stats listed above

 

When taking a QB this high the Bears are more worried about building a winner for the next 10 years not just next year. IF Glennon goes off for that type of year they will be able to trade him for more then what they gave up.

[jason]

When taking a QB this high the Bears are more worried about building a winner for the next 10 years not just next year. IF Glennon goes off for that type of year they will be able to trade him for more then what they gave up.

 

Yes, but reason that out for a bit.

 

If Glennon goes off this year, and the Bears are worried about long term winning, then they can't possibly trade him because he's a sure thing. Dropping a winner in Glennon would be admitting to not caring about winning as much as putting in a high-paid rookie on whom the future of the franchise was mortgaged.

[Chitownhustla]

Yes, but reason that out for a bit.

 

If Glennon goes off this year, and the Bears are worried about long term winning, then they can't possibly trade him because he's a sure thing. Dropping a winner in Glennon would be admitting to not caring about winning as much as putting in a high-paid rookie on whom the future of the franchise was mortgaged.

 

They can trade either guy. Similar to San Deigo with Brees and Rivers.

 

I hope we have this problem.

[ASHKUM BEAR]

Cleveland would have had to give up their entire 2017 NFL draft to move from 12 to 2. Sorry, that just doesn't work. This has every indication that Pace rushed the move, offered too much based on what other teams could offer, and hindered the 2017 progress of the team as a result.

 

Cleveland could easily afford the trade based off of the STL deal last year to move from #15 to #1. They could have offered less and got it done. The STL for Goff is one to cringe, the Bears got off easy to get the guy they wanted

 

RD1-15, RD2-43, RD2-45, RD3-76, 2017 RD1, 2017 RD3

 

 

 

 

 

[Connorbear]

They can trade either guy. Similar to San Deigo with Brees and Rivers.

 

I hope we have this problem.

 

Agreed 100%

 

Peace

[AZ54]

Based on the fact that they didn't even call him when he was selected, yes.

 

We didn't leapfrog someone like we did last year. We swapped picks, there is no way you give up that to swap picks. If you have that prepared, you must know what other teams are offering, which there is no way to know.

 

This is actually wrong. We have quite a bit of evidence Cleveland was talking with numerous teams to trade up from the 12th pick. Pace sat back, let Trubisky stay off his radar as far as the league was concerned, and it is quite likely he was having discussions with Cleveland about trading back. In fact that was rumored just a few days ago. The obvious target for Cleveland in any trade up was Trubisky so if they called Pace about making a deal to trade up he had a really good idea of how much they were willing to give up to make the deal.

 

There was also quite a bit of chatter the last few weeks that Cleveland was strongly considering using the #1 overall on Trubisky. It seems pretty clear there were some in their organization who felt he was worth 3000 pts (for those who rely on the draft trade chart), and they'd have walked away from drafting Garrett in order to get him.

 

------

 

If you want to evaluate how well Pace assessed the QB market then you have two other trades up for QBs in the first round to compare. Keep in mind there is some debate about what next years picks are worth but generally carry about the same value. That's because in this day and age anyone drafting late could easily be drafting 10 positions earlier the next year. Or our case being early in the 3rd Rd, the value of next year's 3rd Rd pick could easily be worth less than this years. I used Drafttek's trade value chart.

 

KC grabbed #10 worth 1300pts. They gave up #27 680pts, next year's first which we can assume is worth the same but since it is next year it has a bit lower value, and then added in #91 worth 136pts. Total given up for their QB 1496. Overpayment of 15%

 

Texans went from #25 to #12 worth 1200pts. #25 = 720pts plus next years first so again assume similar draft position of 720pts minus small next year discount. Total given up for their QB 1440pts. Overpayment of 20%

 

Bears bought a pick worth 2600pts. We gave up #3 2200pts, 3rd Rd x2 255x2 = 560pts. #111 worth 72pts. In total we spent 2832pts. Overpayment of 9%

 

So yes, we overspent to get our QB but the market as established by those other trades shows that our deal fits in very well.

 

 

Some history on big trades for QBs: Here they devalue next year's picks more than I have. Yet if you do that then our 2018 pick we gave up brings our deal pretty close to face value.

 

http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2015/4/30/8383...anation-history

 

Take the Robert Griffin III trade. The St. Louis Rams owned the No. 2 overall pick (worth 2600 points) in the 2012 NFL Draft, the slot most expected the Baylor quarterback to come off the board. However, the Rams drafted Sam Bradford just two years earlier and did not feel compelled to give up on him so quickly.

 

Washington, desperate for a signal caller, sent St. Louis the sixth overall pick in the same draft (1600 points), their second-round pick (520 points) and two future first-rounders. While picks later years are devalued, those two selections ultimately combined for more than 3,300 points.

[Stinger226]

Cleveland would have had to give up their entire 2017 NFL draft to move from 12 to 2. Sorry, that just doesn't work.

 

This has every indication that Pace rushed the move, offered too much based on what other teams could offer, and hindered the 2017 progress of the team as a result.

I think they offered a 3 and a 4 to move up and had to throw in next years pick to get him. . I read on twtter 4 teams called the 49ers. No one knows what happened and we,never will.

 

I didn't like this at but understand why they did. Everybody is praising SF but at the end of draft they wont have qb for the future. We simply don't know how this turbs out for 2 to 3 years. 2 years ago Pace tried to trade up for mariota, he would have got slammed for what he would have had to give but now that would have looked like a great pick.

 

[Alaskan Grizzly]

I think they offered a 3 and a 4 to move up and had to throw in next years pick to get him. . I read on twtter 4 teams called the 49ers. No one knows what happened and we,never will.

 

I didn't like this at but understand why they did. Everybody is praising SF but at the end of draft they wont have qb for the future. We simply don't know how this turbs out for 2 to 3 years. 2 years ago Pace tried to trade up for mariota, he would have got slammed for what he would have had to give but now that would have looked like a great pick.

 

For all we know Lynch could have sent those tweets.

 

With the regard of Pace trying to move up for Mariotta a few years ago, a large chip in that deal was Cutler. No one wanted that, let alone Tennessee.

 

But as far as San Fran not having a QB of the future, there are still Kaaya, Webb and Kizer on the board. All relatively capable QBs. Especially for a team with Kyle Shannahan as coach.

[jason]

For all we know Lynch could have sent those tweets.

 

With the regard of Pace trying to move up for Mariotta a few years ago, a large chip in that deal was Cutler. No one wanted that, let alone Tennessee.

 

But as far as San Fran not having a QB of the future, there are still Kaaya, Webb and Kizer on the board. All relatively capable QBs. Especially for a team with Kyle Shannahan as coach.

 

Bingo. Beat me to it.

 

With the combo of Solomon Thomas and Reuben Foster, and the extra Bears' 3rd, it wouldn't be surprising for them to take a significant step forward.

 

[bowlingtwig]

I think it was the shock of it and it was completely unexpected. I don't remember a single mock with us drafting Trubisky. So as the time passes and I see what others paid (multiple firsts) it is not as bad as it initially looked, but it has to work.

Completely agree with this statement. I was floored last night. Not on getting trubisky. More on what it took. But as the night progressed and we saw what Houston and kc gave up I'm feeling much better. I know ppl will say that Houston is a QB away from competing deep in playoffs and I agree. But let's look at that just a little deeper. The traded there 2nd and osweiller to Cleveland in what was a money dump and now trade away next yrs 1st to Cleveland as well so they can take Watson. So essentially they have no picks til the 3rd Rd. With all that in mind Houston is betting everything on Watson. If he fails Houston is beyond screwed.