Trade out of first?

[jason]

I saw a draft where the Bears traded their first to CLE. That would take their 2nd, 3rd, 3rd, and future 2nd. At first I wasn’t sure I liked it, but looking at some players available, the idea isn’t bad.

2.01-Jonah Savaiinaea, OG, AZ - Monster. Takes Pryor’s job day one.

2.07-Jack Sawyer, DE, OSU - Temu Watt brother takes Walker’s job day one.

2.09-Wyatt Milum, OT, WV - ZERO sacks or pressures in 2024. Takes Borom’s job before the draft is over.

3.03-Tate Ratledge, OG, UGA: Has everything we thought Teven Jenkins would be. 

3.08-Andrew Mukuba, FS, TX: Google “Mukuba Stockton hit.” He starts by mid season at worst.

3.30-Cam Skattebo, RB, AZST: Gritty. Has heart. Hard to argue with production.

That’d be quite a haul and likely fill most major holes immediately.

Would you make that trade? If so, what would you do in those draft slots?

[DABEARSDABOMB]

31 minutes ago, jason said:

I saw a draft where the Bears traded their first to CLE. That would take their 2nd, 3rd, 3rd, and future 2nd. At first I wasn’t sure I liked it, but looking at some players available, the idea isn’t bad.

2.01-Jonah Savaiinaea, OG, AZ - Monster. Takes Pryor’s job day one.

2.07-Jack Sawyer, DE, OSU - Temu Watt brother takes Walker’s job day one.

2.09-Wyatt Milum, OT, WV - ZERO sacks or pressures in 2024. Takes Borom’s job before the draft is over.

3.03-Tate Ratledge, OG, UGA: Has everything we thought Teven Jenkins would be. 

3.08-Andrew Mukuba, FS, TX: Google “Mukuba Stockton hit.” He starts by mid season at worst.

3.30-Cam Skattebo, RB, AZST: Gritty. Has heart. Hard to argue with production.

That’d be quite a haul and likely fill most major holes immediately.

Would you make that trade? If so, what would you do in those draft slots?

I like trading down - big fan and I would go further down - but I'm not trading out of the first round without getting a future 1st rounder back.  But following the old Jimmy Johnson chart - moving down 8-10 spots should allow you to have a 1st plus pick up a 2nd rounder and a 3rd/4th rounder depending on how far they move back in the 1st.  I think moving down 10 spots should still give them the opportunity to get a very good olinemen (likely a guard vs. OT) or be able to take a swing at a very good interior linemen (may not be able to hit on a pass rusher that late). 

[BearFan PHX]

without knowing any specific players yet to target, a trade down this year seems like a good idea in general.

[Mongo3451]

That's how New England did it.  There is a crap ton of value in the second and third rounds for OG, TE and RB. (Very deep)

[BearFan PHX]

re: the Jimmy Johnson chart - use this one instead - it's more modern and made to fit the last 20 years of actual trades. its much closer to how the teams value the picks, because it is mathematically derived from all the trades over that period of time.

https://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart-Rich-Hill.asp

[AZ54]

41 minutes ago, DABEARSDABOMB said:

I like trading down - big fan and I would go further down - but I'm not trading out of the first round without getting a future 1st rounder back.  But following the old Jimmy Johnson chart - moving down 8-10 spots should allow you to have a 1st plus pick up a 2nd rounder and a 3rd/4th rounder depending on how far they move back in the 1st.  I think moving down 10 spots should still give them the opportunity to get a very good olinemen (likely a guard vs. OT) or be able to take a swing at a very good interior linemen (may not be able to hit on a pass rusher that late). 

I'd trade back into the 2nd Rd as proposed with this years' picks but I do agree that we'd need a future first in exchange.   

The old trade value chart has pick 10 worth 1300 and we'd be getting just 1150 in return.   Using the Rich Hill chart we have 369 value but in return we only get 348 which is still short.   Keep in mind I'm using the traditional value of next years pick is the value of one round lower and I'm grabbing a middle round value (i.e. next years 2nd is worth this years middle of the 3rd rd pick).  

I'd want CLE next year's first or there'd have to be some guarantee if they want to protect a 2026 top 10 pick then they give us next years 2nd and 3rd.   On the Rich Hill chart we give 10 overall and get 34, 67, and next year's 15 overall (est).   

Overall there's a ton of value at our positions of need in Rd 2 and 3 this year.

However, I think CLE is going to be looking for some cap relief because they are $30mil over, which would more likely involve trading away a player.  The cap hit for two top 10 draft picks doesn't help that situation.   A Miles Garrett trade appears to get them just $5mil in cap space.   Why would any team trade for someone on their roster when they likely have no choice but to cut them?   Maybe there are some contract subtleties that make a Garrett trade better for CLE but I doubt it would be enough.   They've really put themselves between a rock and a hard place.  This feels like a fan's wishful thinking that they can add some elite talent this year.  I think our best bet is to just grab some popcorn and enjoy their show from afar.  Then maybe grab a good FA value signing in the aftermath.    

[BearFan PHX]

1 hour ago, AZ54 said:

I'd trade back into the 2nd Rd as proposed with this years' picks but I do agree that we'd need a future first in exchange.   

The old trade value chart has pick 10 worth 1300 and we'd be getting just 1150 in return.   Using the Rich Hill chart we have 369 value but in return we only get 348 which is still short.   Keep in mind I'm using the traditional value of next years pick is the value of one round lower and I'm grabbing a middle round value (i.e. next years 2nd is worth this years middle of the 3rd rd pick)..    

Yes, that's the right way to value a future pick for sure.
 

1 hour ago, AZ54 said:

I'd want CLE next year's first or there'd have to be some guarantee if they want to protect a 2026 top 10 pick then they give us next years 2nd and 3rd.   On the Rich Hill chart we give 10 overall and get 34, 67, and next year's 15 overall (est).   

Overall there's a ton of value at our positions of need in Rd 2 and 3 this year.

However, I think CLE is going to be looking for some cap relief because they are $30mil over, which would more likely involve trading away a player.  The cap hit for two top 10 draft picks doesn't help that situation.   A Miles Garrett trade appears to get them just $5mil in cap space.

and the plot thickens!
 

1 hour ago, AZ54 said:

Why would any team trade for someone on their roster when they likely have no choice but to cut them?   Maybe there are some contract subtleties that make a Garrett trade better for CLE but I doubt it would be enough.   They've really put themselves between a rock and a hard place.  This feels like a fan's wishful thinking that they can add some elite talent this year.  I think our best bet is to just grab some popcorn and enjoy their show from afar.  Then maybe grab a good FA value signing in the aftermath.    

I wonder if Garrett has a clause where he has to approve where he's being traded to. I would imagine that he does.

And if your analysis is correct (and it seems right to me) then better for CLE to get something rather than nothing, so who knows what draft picks it might take to get Garrett if he wants to come here.

I'm obviously engaging in that wishful fan thinking, but it is the season

[Mongo3451]

1 hour ago, BearFan PHX said:

I wonder if Garrett has a clause where he has to approve where he's being traded to. I would imagine that he does.

My thinking is that Garrett has NFL clout to not be screwed by his franchise.  The Browns would be dumb as hell to ruffle any of his feathers.  Franchise's don't want to be known as a wasteland of hope.

[BearFan PHX]

17 minutes ago, Mongo3451 said:

My thinking is that Garrett has NFL clout to not be screwed by his franchise.  The Browns would be dumb as hell to ruffle any of his feathers.  Franchise's don't want to be known as a wasteland of hope.

true, but if someone is offering 3 firsts, they arent going to trade him to us for a single first and a third for example, no matter how much Garrett hates it.

If on the other hand, he has a clause, and they NEED to trade or cut him for cap reasons, and he wants to play in Chicago, that would be different.

Im not saying any of this will happen, just saying that youre right about CLE not wanting to look bad, but only within reason?

[DABEARSDABOMB]

They will get a 1st and a future 2nd is my guess - but I could see them getting 2 1sts. 3 is way too much in my opinion and I stick to all is too rich for the Bears given the other needs at play. 

[BearFan PHX]

26 minutes ago, DABEARSDABOMB said:

They will get a 1st and a future 2nd is my guess - but I could see them getting 2 1sts. 3 is way too much in my opinion and I stick to all is too rich for the Bears given the other needs at play. 

If he only costs a first and a future 2nd, id do that deal easily.

We could spend that first on an edge rusher this year anyway.

[ASHKUM BEAR]

15 hours ago, BearFan PHX said:

If he only costs a first and a future 2nd, id do that deal easily.

We could spend that first on an edge rusher this year anyway.

Exactly, we wasted more 2nds on worse things and who would you rather have in the first this year.. Garrett or Carter?   A defense front 4 with Garrett/Sweat and Dexter/Billings would be tough to block. 

I'd be willing to do 1st and 2nd this year (so we have our 2nd next year)  if the Bears add FA Trey Smith to the oline. We can still draft a DT and IOL with our 2nd and 3rd and pray Braxton Jones/Kiran Amagejae can hold down the LT.  I believe coaching will improve our protection and help Caleb make quicker throws. 

[BearFan PHX]

13 minutes ago, ASHKUM BEAR said:

Exactly, we wasted more 2nds on worse things and who would you rather have in the first this year.. Garrett or Carter?   A defense front 4 with Garrett/Sweat and Dexter/Billings would be tough to block. 

I'd be willing to do 1st and 2nd this year (so we have our 2nd next year)  if the Bears add FA Trey Smith to the oline. We can still draft a DT and IOL with our 2nd and 3rd and pray Braxton Jones/Kiran Amagejae can hold down the LT.  I believe coaching will improve our protection and help Caleb make quicker throws. 

Assuming we can make it work under the cap, which it looks like we should (getting a bargain because CLE paid the guaranteed money) Id be all for it.

I also expect IOL players to be signed in free agency, although we should also be drafting some as well.

[Stinger226]

They're not trading assets to get a star, that's something teams do when they're one player away.

They're a few must take players if they fall to them. Harmon, Carter, Banks and Campbell. If they're not there, a move back 5-10 spots and get an extra top 50 pick would be ideal. 

I would love Campbell and make him a center and draft a guard and tackle. 2 DL players and fill in with a RB and WR.

I think Campbell would be a all pro center type. It would be great to grow with Caleb. As a LT, he called all the line plays for LSU. Great football IQ.

 

[ASHKUM BEAR]

7 hours ago, Stinger226 said:

They're not trading assets to get a star, that's something teams do when they're one player away.

They're a few must take players if they fall to them. Harmon, Carter, Banks and Campbell. If they're not there, a move back 5-10 spots and get an extra top 50 pick would be ideal. 

I would love Campbell and make him a center and draft a guard and tackle. 2 DL players and fill in with a RB and WR.

I think Campbell would be a all pro center type. It would be great to grow with Caleb. As a LT, he called all the line plays for LSU. Great football IQ.

 

Spending a top 10 pick on a center is not smart football.  QB, LT, DE, CB, WR, and DT are prime positions and that is where you use high picks.  If Campbell is drafted for LT, it is a great move. At center, not so much regardless of our need. 

The NFC North will not be the same, except for maybe GB and we possibly beat them twice with just coaching. Detroit lost 7 coaches, Minny will most likely lose their QB.  The Bears could be there to take the division and having Garrett at DE compared to a rookie like Pierce could make it 1 player away.  The offseason doesn't mean they ignore the oline.  They will spend cap and draft there too.  Just because he is an option, doesn't mean it will happen.  It only means you call the Browns and see what the cost is and for the right price you buy.

[ASHKUM BEAR]

Bears trade pick 10 to KC for 32, 64, 66, and 96. I didn't look up the trade chart values.  My picks are also way out there. 

A monster S at rd 1-32, he has speed, strength and high IQ to lead the backfield for 8-10 yrs.  Next is a move TE that is a Deebo Samuel clone  and a piece Johnson can use his creativity to exploit defenses.  For Oline-Zabel who they can develop at C, Jack Nelson a Wisconsin LT who can play anywhere across the line and a Georgia RG with plus size. Dline- Dexter's best man, the Prince at DE and  big man Walker at NT. Skateboo as our poor man RB -McCaffery.  Last a QB that can be a Taysom Hill threat and develop as a quality backup.   In FA, just get Trey Smith LG and I think we made the transition to be scary good. 

[jason]

9 hours ago, Stinger226 said:

They're not trading assets to get a star, that's something teams do when they're one player away.

They're a few must take players if they fall to them. Harmon, Carter, Banks and Campbell. If they're not there, a move back 5-10 spots and get an extra top 50 pick would be ideal. 

I would love Campbell and make him a center and draft a guard and tackle. 2 DL players and fill in with a RB and WR.

I think Campbell would be a all pro center type. It would be great to grow with Caleb. As a LT, he called all the line plays for LSU. Great football IQ.

 

Take a LT from a major college program, draft him early, and then convert him into a center?

Respectfully, that’s an atrocious idea.

[jason]

24 minutes ago, ASHKUM BEAR said:

Bears trade pick 10 to KC for 32, 64, 66, and 96. I didn't look up the trade chart values.  My picks are also way out there. 

A monster S at rd 1-32, he has speed, strength and high IQ to lead the backfield for 8-10 yrs.  Next is a move TE that is a Deebo Samuel clone  and a piece Johnson can use his creativity to exploit defenses.  For Oline-Zabel who they can develop at C, Jack Nelson a Wisconsin LT who can play anywhere across the line and a Georgia RG with plus size. Dline- Dexter's best man, the Prince at DE and  big man Walker at NT. Skateboo as our poor man RB -McCaffery.  Last a QB that can be a Taysom Hill threat and develop as a quality backup.   In FA, just get Trey Smith LG and I think we made the transition to be scary good. 

I like the thought process of this draft, but not selections.

Fannin - Bowling Green smells like Ashland to me.

Princely - Slow first step. He’s going to be a bust.

Zabel - Still smells like Ashland.

too much competition level risk that early for my tastes.

[ASHKUM BEAR]

1 hour ago, jason said:

I like the thought process of this draft, but not selections.

Fannin - Bowling Green smells like Ashland to me.

Princely - Slow first step. He’s going to be a bust.

Zabel - Still smells like Ashland.

too much competition level risk that early for my tastes.

It was a trade down mock to feel it out. I don't know much about TE Fannin other than seeing him at the top of the 2nd round and his enticing write-up. Princely's draft profile says he has great burst, but needs strength, so who knows.  Zabel is a name from the senior bowl.  Seems like a project to make him a center, so i can agree about passing.  

[AZ54]

Saw an article talking about how the Cowboys really want the best RB in the draft... Ashton Jeanty.   Jeanty is not going top 10 and Dallas sits at 12.   If I'm the Bears I'd be hyping up Jeanty as the perfect piece for Johnson's offense.   I realize we don't get much in dropping 2 spots but that's just the first trade down I'm hoping to get. 

Their proposal:  10/242 for 12/76.    That's more than 100pts in our favor on the old trade value chart and I'd do that in a heartbeat.  

https://www.si.com/nfl/bears/draft/a-bears-trade-that-would-give-the-cowboys-exactly-what-they-want-and-shake-up-the-the-nfl-draft 

[BearFan PHX]

sounds like a great idea. dropping down 2 slots to swap 242 for 76.

according to Hill:

pick #10 = 369 pts
pick # 242 = 1 pt
(370 total)

pick #12 = 347 pts
pick #76 = 61 pts
(408 total)

408 - 370 means we got 38 pts better in the deal (equivalent to pick #99)

put another way, to make the trade fair under the hill chart, we'd have to give a compensatory 3rd (from losing cunningham for example) to even it up.

So yes, if theyd do that, we should jump on it.

[jason]

7 hours ago, ASHKUM BEAR said:

It was a trade down mock to feel it out. I don't know much about TE Fannin other than seeing him at the top of the 2nd round and his enticing write-up. Princely's draft profile says he has great burst, but needs strength, so who knows.  Zabel is a name from the senior bowl.  Seems like a project to make him a center, so i can agree about passing.  

Check this out and you tell me. Princely looks like he’s on a half second delay after every single snap. But he’s strong and builds up speed, dislodging OTs upon contact. I’m not a huge fan because dudes with that skill set have a better chance of getting swallowed whole in the NFL, where OTs resemble dancing, 300-lb monsters with butterball turkeys for fists.

 

[AZ54]

1 hour ago, jason said:

Check this out and you tell me. Princely looks like he’s on a half second delay after every single snap. But he’s strong and builds up speed, dislodging OTs upon contact. I’m not a huge fan because dudes with that skill set have a better chance of getting swallowed whole in the NFL, where OTs resemble dancing, 300-lb monsters with butterball turkeys for fists.

 

I hadn't watched any highlights on him yet.  He's not a tremendously fluid athlete and I don't like how he tries to get off blocks by bending,  twisting, turning around.  That really calls into question his upper body strength and he'll be on his butt a lot in the NFL if doesn't clean that up.  He easily gets pushed over the top of the QB on a lot of his "highlight" plays so he struggles to dip and cut back in toward the QB.   I think OTs who can get a hand on him first will win the battle consistently.  Looks more like the 3rd/4th DE in your rotation than starter material. 

James Pearce seems like the opposite... a .quick lightweight pass rusher who will likely shine in the underwear drills.  He reminds me of Leonard Floyd.  Like Floyd he'll need years to develop his body for the NFL.  

I like Nic Scourton.  He's got more of a Khalil Mack style to his game, strong man, quick, and hustles.  He's not going to be the fastest pass rusher and I'm not sure he has the ideal length you'd like to see.  Regardless I like players who love to mix it up in the trenches and he was built for that.   He's a quicker more agile version of DeMarcus Walker who could also slide inside on some 3rd and long situations.  

 

[AZ54]

The Oline gem that nobody is talking about is Josh Simmons.  I'll be watching carefully in the run up to the draft to see if he's healthy but for Oline he's my main target in a trade down.   Without the injury he'd easily be the first Oline player drafted.   In my GM fantasy world he'd start out as OG with potential to move outside and replace Braxton Jones next year.  

FWIW... as I watched highlights of numerous 1st and 2nd Rd DE prospects last night I realized a lot of them had a clips of running right around Will Campbell.  It just cemented my opinion that Campbell does not belong at OT in the NFL.  

[Stinger226]

12 hours ago, AZ54 said:

The Oline gem that nobody is talking about is Josh Simmons.  I'll be watching carefully in the run up to the draft to see if he's healthy but for Oline he's my main target in a trade down.   Without the injury he'd easily be the first Oline player drafted.   In my GM fantasy world he'd start out as OG with potential to move outside and replace Braxton Jones next year.  

FWIW... as I watched highlights of numerous 1st and 2nd Rd DE prospects last night I realized a lot of them had a clips of running right around Will Campbell.  It just cemented my opinion that Campbell does not belong at OT in the NFL.  

Campbell will definitely be moved inside. Some say his best position could be center. I like that idea but doesn't seem the #10 pick would be

to early for a center.

I like Jack Sawyer that should be available in the second round. Tough guy with an attitude. He's the player making the stink when Michigan players planted a flag on the field of that game.

Our first 3 picks can fix the OL or DL. 2 out of three will go D or O. Needs to be on the OL. Simmons and Grabel would be good choices. 

Free agency will determine those picks. Lots of people talking about a RB , we have enough talent there in the new system to not use a top 50 pick on.