Bears offseason

davell
Superstar
Posts: 18758
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 11:55 pm
x 778
x 1015

Re: Bears offseason

Postby davell » Sun Mar 12, 2017 5:40 pm

jumbo wrote:
davell wrote:I still want to punch him in the face, but Leming made a great point, in connecting some dots.

We've not been connected to any D-Line guys, like Hankins, Poe, or Logan. Allen must have passed his team physicals, because he's got second interviews with us AND Jax too. Coincidence?

Defensive line could be where our first pick is dedicated to. Either Allen or Solomon Thomas. I wouldn't be against either. Although I think I'd prefer Thomas, to be honest.


What would you take to swap spots with Jax to give them their choice? The famous draft chart says #4 + 2nd = #3 + 4th + 5th, but I can't see that happening. The other "Browns" chart shows the difference in value to be less than any draft pick. I'd think a 4th, maybe a 3rd at most.


I hate saying it, but I just don't think we're going to have lots of leverage. I keep trying to think of scenarios where we CAN trade back......

Maybe the Jets want to pass the Jags to get Fournette? Maybe the Panthers at 8(even if its not their MO), want to pass them up for Fournette too?

Maybe Cleveland thinks they need to move from 12 to 3 to grab Trubisky? Maybe the Cardinals think the same at 13?

At any rate, trading with Cleveland would be awesome. Even if the chart prices are a bit high foir THIS draft.(think it'll be depressed with lots of talent in same value range)

Options with Cleveland, moving down to 12....33, 52, 65, 108, 142, their own picks next year, Eagles and Texans 2nds, Panthers and Patriots 4ths. That's their group of picks in the top 4 rounds over the next 2 years.

If you take a bit off full value, due to lack of interest in teams moving up....

Would you trade 3 for 12, 33, and 65? Or for 12, 52, 108, and the Browns 2nd and 3rd next year? Lots of other ways to get into the right range using their picks too. How about not even getting 12 lol? The Browns could send 33, 52, their 1st and 2nd next year, and one of the Texans or Eagles 2nds....
0 x
Additional rule: you have to have one or the other.The only exception is you have an amazing board name. davell, I'm looking at you; put up a [expletive] avatar or something if your name only sounds like somebody tried say Dave as they lapsed into a coma.

User avatar
Stannis
RIP Sulley
Posts: 44579
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 2:17 pm
Location: Winterfell
x 43
x 191

Re: Bears offseason

Postby Stannis » Sun Mar 12, 2017 5:46 pm

12, 33, and 65. That's what it would take.

Come to think of it, if they want Trubisky, that's a potential franchise QB, I WANT ALL OF THEIR PICKS. definitely more
0 x
Under the terrible burden of destiny laughing as a young man laughs...

davell
Superstar
Posts: 18758
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 11:55 pm
x 778
x 1015

Re: Bears offseason

Postby davell » Sun Mar 12, 2017 6:05 pm

Current Cap Hits....

Glennon-14
Sims-6.333
Demps-4.239
Cooper-5
Amukamara-7

Others- Wheaton(2-11, 5G), Wright(1-4, counting incentives), Banks, Jones, Compton

So, if we started off with 51.2 mill to spend, and you saved 12.5 by cutting Jay....I'm going to use Wright at 4, Wheaton at 3, and the others are minimum level guys. That's 43.6 spent. Leaving 20.1. Of which, 9.6 is the draft pool.

So, we've got a bit over 10 mill of cap space. But, have 5 mill of Royal and 5 mill of Houston to cut. Plus, a savings of 3 on Porter.

We are probably done with entertaining large FA this year. But, we've definitely got flexibility to add anything out there, if we saw fit....
0 x
Additional rule: you have to have one or the other.The only exception is you have an amazing board name. davell, I'm looking at you; put up a [expletive] avatar or something if your name only sounds like somebody tried say Dave as they lapsed into a coma.

User avatar
WrigleyField 22
Superstar
Posts: 10412
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:48 pm
Location: hnderstabxcwhsg
x 705
x 232

Re: Bears offseason

Postby WrigleyField 22 » Sun Mar 12, 2017 7:59 pm

davell wrote:Current Cap Hits....

Glennon-14
Sims-6.333
Demps-4.239
Cooper-5
Amukamara-7

Others- Wheaton(2-11, 5G), Wright(1-4, counting incentives), Banks, Jones, Compton

So, if we started off with 51.2 mill to spend, and you saved 12.5 by cutting Jay....I'm going to use Wright at 4, Wheaton at 3, and the others are minimum level guys. That's 43.6 spent. Leaving 20.1. Of which, 9.6 is the draft pool.

So, we've got a bit over 10 mill of cap space. But, have 5 mill of Royal and 5 mill of Houston to cut. Plus, a savings of 3 on Porter.

We are probably done with entertaining large FA this year. But, we've definitely got flexibility to add anything out there, if we saw fit....

At this point you have to keep Houston. Even if they still bring back Acho at a small salary, they don't have the depth there. Maybe that changes after the draft.

Last year, they left quite a bit unspent going into Training Camp and then were able to sweep in quickly and sign Sitton to a big deal after 53 man cuts. Could see something like that again, or you just roll forward cap.

FYI- I'm getting closer to 15 or 16 pre-draft pool. You're 3M hold for Wheaton seems low if 2/11 is accurate though.
Last edited by WrigleyField 22 on Sun Mar 12, 2017 8:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
0 x
Image

CaliforniaRaisin
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 86603
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2003 2:20 pm
Location: Pasadena, CA
x 227
x 685

Re: Bears offseason

Postby CaliforniaRaisin » Sun Mar 12, 2017 8:03 pm

WrigleyField 22 wrote:
davell wrote:Am I missing anyone?

QB Glennon(3-45, 18G, 14M Cap Hit)
WR Wheaton(2-?) Wright(1-4)
TE Sims(3-18, 10G)
OT Compton
LB Jones
CB Amukamara(1-7, 7G, 7M Cap Hit) Cooper(3-?) Banks
S Demps(3-13.5)

I'm unsure of cap hits on some of these guys. At any rate, I'd venture to say we still have 10-15 mill or so, plus the rookie pool.

QB- From where we were, versus now? Same, I guess? Maybe a bit better, since Jay is so injury-prone? Personally, I do think Glennon has more upside than Hoyer anyway. Do we address QB early in the draft? I honestly have no clue.

TE- The Sims signing is the worst signing so far. WTF? Seriously, he gets paid like Doyle and Bennett? No idea why. But, I'd venture to say we obviously like him and maybe even to the extent we don't draft a TE, based on what we gave him. Hopefully, we still take advantage of such a loaded class....I guess he's not even a blocking TE, so this is hard to compare to Paulsen....

WR- We're definitely worse. Losing Alshon hurts. I don't know why we didn't grab Pryor. Supposedly there are character issues. Individually, I like the Wheaton and Wright signings. But, this puts way too much stock in Meredith and White, IMO. If you add Patterson and/or a pick to this mix, I guess its possible they become a serviceable group altogether. Still, its hard to say they're giving Glennon a great shot....

CB- We're better. Not as good as we could be, but we're better. Cooper really intrigues me. I could even see him sliding over to Safety, if needed. Prince is solid. Just hope he stays healthy.

S- The Demps contract is good. Not sure why we didn't grab Swearinger or Harmon though, since they're obviously much younger. Still, Demps improves the group by a good bit.

So, the team is improved. Not by as much as it could have been. But, there's going to be a massive amount of cap space next year too and there's still more FA signings and the draft, to go.....

That said, what are we currently? Over/Under 5.5? I'd flip a coin.

Biggest Needs as of Now?

QB- Although I'd be extremely surprised to see us take one at 3. Relatively surprised at 36. My guess is we wind up with Peterman or Kaaya in the 3rd or 4th and take one in the 1st next year.

WR- This is a larger need than it had been. I'll be surprised if its not addressed further this off season. But, it could just be via FA.

TE- I still think we need an upgrade here. But spending that amount on Sims makes me wonder if Pace thinks of this as an area of need.

OT- We sniffed around Wagner and Okung. So, its on the radar. Depending on how we finish off FA, I could see a 2nd or 3rd being spent here.

DL- There's solid guys available in FA. We're linked to Jonathan Allen. I'm sure this is still being addressed.

CB- Great draft class, feel confident we'll draft a guy. I doubt its at 3 now though.

S- Yeah, this isn't a strong area of the team. But, unless Adams or Hooker is a Bear, I doubt we use anything earlier than a 4th to address the spot. Maybe not at all.

In order, I'd list the needs as.....QB, WR, OT, CB, DL, TE, and S.

You didn't mention OLB, which as of now we need to keep Houston for depth, where most thought he would be cut. At the very least we need to be resigning Acho, but I would think its a position to watch.

I'm thinking about Solomon Thomas at 3. I know a lot of people are thinking if him as a Justin Smith DE if he adds 10 pounds, but I think he could stay where he is now and move around as a UTIL type front 7 guy.

No idea where to estimate our cap depth until we know Cooper's and Wheaton's deals. Keep in mind though, our draft pool is pretty large at 10M, and we're not going to spend right up to the cap limit. Royal is probably a goner at this point at $5M, but that probably just gets us the buffer space, all else being equal.


Greg Gabriel said on Twitter the Bears will cut Royal and the only question is timing because of his surgery.
0 x

davell
Superstar
Posts: 18758
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 11:55 pm
x 778
x 1015

Re: Bears offseason

Postby davell » Sun Mar 12, 2017 8:07 pm

WrigleyField 22 wrote:
davell wrote:Current Cap Hits....

Glennon-14
Sims-6.333
Demps-4.239
Cooper-5
Amukamara-7

Others- Wheaton(2-11, 5G), Wright(1-4, counting incentives), Banks, Jones, Compton

So, if we started off with 51.2 mill to spend, and you saved 12.5 by cutting Jay....I'm going to use Wright at 4, Wheaton at 3, and the others are minimum level guys. That's 43.6 spent. Leaving 20.1. Of which, 9.6 is the draft pool.

So, we've got a bit over 10 mill of cap space. But, have 5 mill of Royal and 5 mill of Houston to cut. Plus, a savings of 3 on Porter.

We are probably done with entertaining large FA this year. But, we've definitely got flexibility to add anything out there, if we saw fit....

At this point you have to keep Houston. Even if they still bring back Acho at a small salary, they don't have the depth there. Maybe that changes after the draft.

Last year, they left quite a bit unspent going into Training Camp and then were able to sweep in quickly and sign Sitton to a big deal after 53 man cuts. Could see something like that again, or you just roll forward cap.



I just keep seeing Hankins and Logan sitting there, thinking we get involved. I think you can get one of them, keep Houston if you don't draft over him, and still have a solid amount of emergency money, for a Sitton type of move.
0 x
Additional rule: you have to have one or the other.The only exception is you have an amazing board name. davell, I'm looking at you; put up a [expletive] avatar or something if your name only sounds like somebody tried say Dave as they lapsed into a coma.

User avatar
WrigleyField 22
Superstar
Posts: 10412
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:48 pm
Location: hnderstabxcwhsg
x 705
x 232

Re: Bears offseason

Postby WrigleyField 22 » Sun Mar 12, 2017 8:24 pm

davell wrote:
WrigleyField 22 wrote:
davell wrote:Current Cap Hits....

Glennon-14
Sims-6.333
Demps-4.239
Cooper-5
Amukamara-7

Others- Wheaton(2-11, 5G), Wright(1-4, counting incentives), Banks, Jones, Compton

So, if we started off with 51.2 mill to spend, and you saved 12.5 by cutting Jay....I'm going to use Wright at 4, Wheaton at 3, and the others are minimum level guys. That's 43.6 spent. Leaving 20.1. Of which, 9.6 is the draft pool.

So, we've got a bit over 10 mill of cap space. But, have 5 mill of Royal and 5 mill of Houston to cut. Plus, a savings of 3 on Porter.

We are probably done with entertaining large FA this year. But, we've definitely got flexibility to add anything out there, if we saw fit....

At this point you have to keep Houston. Even if they still bring back Acho at a small salary, they don't have the depth there. Maybe that changes after the draft.

Last year, they left quite a bit unspent going into Training Camp and then were able to sweep in quickly and sign Sitton to a big deal after 53 man cuts. Could see something like that again, or you just roll forward cap.



I just keep seeing Hankins and Logan sitting there, thinking we get involved. I think you can get one of them, keep Houston if you don't draft over him, and still have a solid amount of emergency money, for a Sitton type of move.

Not only have we heard nothing about the Bears on those guys, but nothing even on those positions. I'm not holding my breath.
0 x
Image

davell
Superstar
Posts: 18758
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 11:55 pm
x 778
x 1015

Re: Bears offseason

Postby davell » Sun Mar 12, 2017 8:56 pm

WrigleyField 22 wrote:
davell wrote:
WrigleyField 22 wrote:At this point you have to keep Houston. Even if they still bring back Acho at a small salary, they don't have the depth there. Maybe that changes after the draft.

Last year, they left quite a bit unspent going into Training Camp and then were able to sweep in quickly and sign Sitton to a big deal after 53 man cuts. Could see something like that again, or you just roll forward cap.



I just keep seeing Hankins and Logan sitting there, thinking we get involved. I think you can get one of them, keep Houston if you don't draft over him, and still have a solid amount of emergency money, for a Sitton type of move.

Not only have we heard nothing about the Bears on those guys, but nothing even on those positions. I'm not holding my breath.


Oh, I know its wishful thinking.
0 x
Additional rule: you have to have one or the other.The only exception is you have an amazing board name. davell, I'm looking at you; put up a [expletive] avatar or something if your name only sounds like somebody tried say Dave as they lapsed into a coma.

davell
Superstar
Posts: 18758
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 11:55 pm
x 778
x 1015

Re: Bears offseason

Postby davell » Sun Mar 12, 2017 8:58 pm

WrigleyField 22 wrote:
davell wrote:
WrigleyField 22 wrote:At this point you have to keep Houston. Even if they still bring back Acho at a small salary, they don't have the depth there. Maybe that changes after the draft.

Last year, they left quite a bit unspent going into Training Camp and then were able to sweep in quickly and sign Sitton to a big deal after 53 man cuts. Could see something like that again, or you just roll forward cap.



I just keep seeing Hankins and Logan sitting there, thinking we get involved. I think you can get one of them, keep Houston if you don't draft over him, and still have a solid amount of emergency money, for a Sitton type of move.

Not only have we heard nothing about the Bears on those guys, but nothing even on those positions. I'm not holding my breath.


Double
0 x
Additional rule: you have to have one or the other.The only exception is you have an amazing board name. davell, I'm looking at you; put up a [expletive] avatar or something if your name only sounds like somebody tried say Dave as they lapsed into a coma.

We Got The Whole 9
Starter
Posts: 564
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2016 2:38 am
x 62

Re: Bears offseason

Postby We Got The Whole 9 » Sun Mar 12, 2017 9:04 pm

There's always several interesting players that get cut after the draft. Pace is sitting pretty. I think he has the flexibility to get practically anyone and right now he can just bide his time.

All told I think he got really good value so far in FA and I'm stoked for the draft.

Hooker would have a pretty nice set of players surrounding him.
0 x

User avatar
jersey cubs fan
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 54201
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 6:38 pm
Location: Hoboken squat cobbler
x 1005
x 2944

Re: Bears offseason

Postby jersey cubs fan » Sun Mar 12, 2017 10:36 pm

We Got The Whole 9 wrote:There's always several interesting players that get cut after the draft. Pace is sitting pretty. I think he has the flexibility to get practically anyone and right now he can just bide his time.

All told I think he got really good value so far in FA and I'm stoked for the draft.

Hooker would have a pretty nice set of players surrounding him.

He's got a horsefeathers roster filled with holes.

Sitting pretty is an interesting way to put it.

It's easy to maintain flexibility when you're constantly in need of everything.
1 x
longhotsummer wrote:I realize now, any opposing viewpoint, will not be tolerated.

CaliforniaRaisin
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 86603
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2003 2:20 pm
Location: Pasadena, CA
x 227
x 685

Re: Bears offseason

Postby CaliforniaRaisin » Mon Mar 13, 2017 12:22 am

jersey cubs fan wrote:
We Got The Whole 9 wrote:There's always several interesting players that get cut after the draft. Pace is sitting pretty. I think he has the flexibility to get practically anyone and right now he can just bide his time.

All told I think he got really good value so far in FA and I'm stoked for the draft.

Hooker would have a pretty nice set of players surrounding him.

He's got a horsefeathers roster filled with holes.

Sitting pretty is an interesting way to put it.

It's easy to maintain flexibility when you're constantly in need of everything.


Maybe he meant sitting pretty trying to tank for the top QB in the 2018 draft.
1 x

jumbo
Starter
Posts: 574
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2011 12:37 am
x 90
x 11

Re: Bears offseason

Postby jumbo » Mon Mar 13, 2017 9:54 am

davell wrote:Options with Cleveland, moving down to 12....33, 52, 65, 108, 142, their own picks next year, Eagles and Texans 2nds, Panthers and Patriots 4ths. That's their group of picks in the top 4 rounds over the next 2 years.

If you take a bit off full value, due to lack of interest in teams moving up....

Would you trade 3 for 12, 33, and 65? Or for 12, 52, 108, and the Browns 2nd and 3rd next year? Lots of other ways to get into the right range using their picks too. How about not even getting 12 lol? The Browns could send 33, 52, their 1st and 2nd next year, and one of the Texans or Eagles 2nds....


I would do any combination of 12+extra picks. If it was 33, 65 I would just go true BPA on 12, 33, 36, 52, 67 targeting #1 WR (maybe Corey Davis), #1 CB (lots of options), 5T, TE, QB, S.

Maybe something like
12 - WR - Davis/Williams
33 - CB - Gareon Conley
36 - 5T - Malik McDowell
52 - TE - Evan Engram
67 - S - Desmond King

OR
12 - 5T - Jon Allen
33 - WR - Curtis Samuel
36 - CB - Marlon Humphrey
52 - QB - Mahomes/Webb/Peterman
67 - TE - Jordan Leggett
0 x

jumbo
Starter
Posts: 574
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2011 12:37 am
x 90
x 11

Re: Bears offseason

Postby jumbo » Mon Mar 13, 2017 9:58 am

When I read the Rotoworld report on Cooper it made me think he would not be a starter. But the contract makes me think he is. Does Porter have experience in the slot? I don't see how they cut him with their current CB roster. They have a ton of depth guys to sort through, but not enough starter caliber talent to dump him.
0 x

User avatar
WrigleyField 22
Superstar
Posts: 10412
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:48 pm
Location: hnderstabxcwhsg
x 705
x 232

Re: Bears offseason

Postby WrigleyField 22 » Mon Mar 13, 2017 1:07 pm

If a trade down occurs I almost prefer an option with 2018 draft assets thrown in. Put yourself in a position to trade up for a QB next year.
0 x
Image

davell
Superstar
Posts: 18758
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 11:55 pm
x 778
x 1015

Re: Bears offseason

Postby davell » Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:30 pm

WrigleyField 22 wrote:If a trade down occurs I almost prefer an option with 2018 draft assets thrown in. Put yourself in a position to trade up for a QB next year.


Yeah, I agree 100%. Because if Darnold and Rosen are what they're expected to be, the cost to move up to 1 or 2 will be insanely high(if we aren't there). Luckily, there's still Allen, Browning, maybe Jackson, that all look to be 1st round types too.
0 x
Additional rule: you have to have one or the other.The only exception is you have an amazing board name. davell, I'm looking at you; put up a [expletive] avatar or something if your name only sounds like somebody tried say Dave as they lapsed into a coma.

davell
Superstar
Posts: 18758
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 11:55 pm
x 778
x 1015

Re: Bears offseason

Postby davell » Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:32 pm

jumbo wrote:
davell wrote:Options with Cleveland, moving down to 12....33, 52, 65, 108, 142, their own picks next year, Eagles and Texans 2nds, Panthers and Patriots 4ths. That's their group of picks in the top 4 rounds over the next 2 years.

If you take a bit off full value, due to lack of interest in teams moving up....

Would you trade 3 for 12, 33, and 65? Or for 12, 52, 108, and the Browns 2nd and 3rd next year? Lots of other ways to get into the right range using their picks too. How about not even getting 12 lol? The Browns could send 33, 52, their 1st and 2nd next year, and one of the Texans or Eagles 2nds....


I would do any combination of 12+extra picks. If it was 33, 65 I would just go true BPA on 12, 33, 36, 52, 67 targeting #1 WR (maybe Corey Davis), #1 CB (lots of options), 5T, TE, QB, S.

Maybe something like
12 - WR - Davis/Williams
33 - CB - Gareon Conley
36 - 5T - Malik McDowell
52 - TE - Evan Engram
67 - S - Desmond King

OR
12 - 5T - Jon Allen
33 - WR - Curtis Samuel
36 - CB - Marlon Humphrey
52 - QB - Mahomes/Webb/Peterman
67 - TE - Jordan Leggett


If we wound up with your 2nd group, I'd be happy as horsefeathers. But I don't see Humphrey making it out of the 1st, or Mahomes either.
0 x
Additional rule: you have to have one or the other.The only exception is you have an amazing board name. davell, I'm looking at you; put up a [expletive] avatar or something if your name only sounds like somebody tried say Dave as they lapsed into a coma.

User avatar
minnesotacubsfan
Superstar
Posts: 14047
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2003 2:27 pm
Location: da Salish Sea
x 135
x 188

Bears offseason

Postby minnesotacubsfan » Mon Mar 13, 2017 6:42 pm

WrigleyField 22 wrote:If a trade down occurs I almost prefer an option with 2018 draft assets thrown in. Put yourself in a position to trade up for a QB next year.


Hahahahaha

We might have the first pick next year as it is
0 x
Image

User avatar
WrigleyField 22
Superstar
Posts: 10412
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:48 pm
Location: hnderstabxcwhsg
x 705
x 232

Re: Bears offseason

Postby WrigleyField 22 » Mon Mar 13, 2017 7:18 pm

minnesotacubsfan wrote:
WrigleyField 22 wrote:If a trade down occurs I almost prefer an option with 2018 draft assets thrown in. Put yourself in a position to trade up for a QB next year.


Hahahahaha

We might have the first pick next year as it is

Nah, Cleveland is still way worse still. They'll have the number 1 pick already having taken their QB (as presumed by the trade down scenario being discussed) and we'll have to jump someone like Jax at number 2 to get our guy (they will have realized Bortles isn't the future).
0 x
Image

User avatar
WrigleyField 22
Superstar
Posts: 10412
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:48 pm
Location: hnderstabxcwhsg
x 705
x 232

Re: Bears offseason

Postby WrigleyField 22 » Mon Mar 13, 2017 7:21 pm

Or, since Cleveland likes the NBA trades lets get some 2018 pick swap option in this deal (no idea if legal)
0 x
Image

davell
Superstar
Posts: 18758
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 11:55 pm
x 778
x 1015

Re: Bears offseason

Postby davell » Mon Mar 13, 2017 9:20 pm

I think the Saints could potentially be a good trade down candidate for us. They're riding Brees and trying to win in his last years....They're after defense. Trade 3 for 11, a 3rd this year, and their 1st next year.....It'd get the Saints the impact guy they want and still gives them the 32nd and 43rd picks to add more defense this year. For a better chance immediately.

Gives us an extra 3rd this year and what likely amounts to a 10-20 range 1st next year.....

If that doesn't work, the Saints have 11, 32, and 43.....Maybe there's other options too. Hell, maybe the Saints trade 32, 43, and their 1st AND 2nd next year to have both 3 and 11.....

Anyway, Pace has the relationship with Loomis. I'd love to do a deal.
0 x
Additional rule: you have to have one or the other.The only exception is you have an amazing board name. davell, I'm looking at you; put up a [expletive] avatar or something if your name only sounds like somebody tried say Dave as they lapsed into a coma.

User avatar
jersey cubs fan
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 54201
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 6:38 pm
Location: Hoboken squat cobbler
x 1005
x 2944

Re: Bears offseason

Postby jersey cubs fan » Mon Mar 13, 2017 9:26 pm

davell wrote:I think the Saints could potentially be a good trade down candidate for us. They're riding Brees and trying to win in his last years....They're after defense. Trade 3 for 11, a 3rd this year, and their 1st next year.....It'd get the Saints the impact guy they want and still gives them the 32nd and 43rd picks to add more defense this year. For a better chance immediately.

Gives us an extra 3rd this year and what likely amounts to a 10-20 range 1st next year.....

If that doesn't work, the Saints have 11, 32, and 43.....Maybe there's other options too. Hell, maybe the Saints trade 32, 43, and their 1st AND 2nd next year to have both 3 and 11.....

Anyway, Pace has the relationship with Loomis. I'd love to do a deal.

wait, dropping down 8 spots this year, from 3 to 11, only nets them a 3rd and a likely late 1st next year? That seems soft.
0 x
longhotsummer wrote:I realize now, any opposing viewpoint, will not be tolerated.

User avatar
WrigleyField 22
Superstar
Posts: 10412
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:48 pm
Location: hnderstabxcwhsg
x 705
x 232

Re: Bears offseason

Postby WrigleyField 22 » Mon Mar 13, 2017 9:37 pm

jersey cubs fan wrote:
davell wrote:I think the Saints could potentially be a good trade down candidate for us. They're riding Brees and trying to win in his last years....They're after defense. Trade 3 for 11, a 3rd this year, and their 1st next year.....It'd get the Saints the impact guy they want and still gives them the 32nd and 43rd picks to add more defense this year. For a better chance immediately.

Gives us an extra 3rd this year and what likely amounts to a 10-20 range 1st next year.....

If that doesn't work, the Saints have 11, 32, and 43.....Maybe there's other options too. Hell, maybe the Saints trade 32, 43, and their 1st AND 2nd next year to have both 3 and 11.....

Anyway, Pace has the relationship with Loomis. I'd love to do a deal.

wait, dropping down 8 spots this year, from 3 to 11, only nets them a 3rd and a likely late 1st next year? That seems soft.

Yea, thats probably a little light, though I wouldn't necessarily quite expect "full" vale based on the trade chart (950 point difference). Even on a more conservative/analytic trade board its light. Maybe #43 and #76 and we include #67 (with the 2018 first still). That at least gets you in range of the trade chart, and if you really think the drop from 3 to 11 isnt that large this year, that's fair.
0 x
Image

davell
Superstar
Posts: 18758
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 11:55 pm
x 778
x 1015

Re: Bears offseason

Postby davell » Mon Mar 13, 2017 9:56 pm

It may be light. Its really hard to gauge value of future picks. The rule of thumb is the value of a pick drops a rounds worth of points. But, from where? Is the Saints 2018 1st worth pick 11 of the 2nd round currently?

The Saints have 11, 32, 43, 76, and 103.....Plus, their picks next year.

3=2200

Saints picks are worth 1,250, 590, 470, 210, and 78.....

So, I'm guessing their 1st and 2nd next year are valued at 625 and 235.


In THIS draft, I doubt there's going to be full value needed to trade though, due to lack of teams wanting to go up. After Garnett, I think there's a group of guys probably valued the same. 11 seems like a spot we'd have lots of flexibility.....Howard, Williams, and Davis are options there. Allen could conceivably drop there. Bolles or Ramcyzk. Humphrey. Hell, maybe even Hooker drops due to his injury.
0 x
Additional rule: you have to have one or the other.The only exception is you have an amazing board name. davell, I'm looking at you; put up a [expletive] avatar or something if your name only sounds like somebody tried say Dave as they lapsed into a coma.

User avatar
WrigleyField 22
Superstar
Posts: 10412
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:48 pm
Location: hnderstabxcwhsg
x 705
x 232

Re: Bears offseason

Postby WrigleyField 22 » Tue Mar 14, 2017 12:59 am



This would make S pretty crowded and CB a bit less so.
0 x
Image


Return to “Other Sports”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests