Chicago Bears offseason

Sosa21MVP
5-Time All-Star
Posts: 6207
Joined: Tue May 06, 2003 4:39 am
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana
x 98
x 88

Re: Chicago Bears offseason

Postby Sosa21MVP » Wed Jan 29, 2020 4:44 am

I had to do a double-take there and confirm this is indeed former IU quarterback Tre Roberson. Interesting. I didn't realize he even still played football.
0 x

User avatar
minnesotacubsfan
Superstar
Posts: 18635
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2003 2:27 pm
Location: I CANT BREATHE
x 2232
x 959

Re: Chicago Bears offseason

Postby minnesotacubsfan » Wed Jan 29, 2020 2:20 pm

Ohhh goodie; another Indiana Mr Football
0 x
Image

User avatar
rawaction
Hall of Fame
Posts: 34601
Joined: Thu May 29, 2003 11:04 pm
x 754
x 723

Re: Chicago Bears offseason

Postby rawaction » Wed Jan 29, 2020 2:27 pm

Sosa21MVP wrote:I had to do a double-take there and confirm this is indeed former IU quarterback Tre Roberson. Interesting. I didn't realize he even still played football.


Yep. Transferred from IU to Illinois St, where he took them to the FCS championship (lost to Carson Wentz, FWIW). Moved to CB for the NFL, got a tryout with the Vikings, and subsequently signed to the practice squad. I seem to remember him having a good preseason in 2017, but he was back and forth on the practice squad for a year + before going to Canada. 10 INTs in 2 years. Looks like a good tackler with decent ball skills. I've kinda lowkey followed his career because of his start at IU.
0 x

User avatar
WrigleyField 22
Superstar
Posts: 13798
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:48 pm
Location: hnderstabxcwhsg
x 2247
x 1386

Re: Chicago Bears offseason

Postby WrigleyField 22 » Wed Jan 29, 2020 2:36 pm

Wonder if they will indeed cut Amukamara and just "2019 kicker comp" the 2nd CB spot. Toliver, Roberson, Shelley, Joseph, Simmons, Crawford, Denmark.
0 x
Image

User avatar
BigbadB
Hall of Fame
Posts: 24688
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2003 2:38 am
Location: San Diego
x 22
x 165

Re: Chicago Bears offseason

Postby BigbadB » Wed Jan 29, 2020 3:20 pm

WrigleyField 22 wrote:Wonder if they will indeed cut Amukamara and just "2019 kicker comp" the 2nd CB spot. Toliver, Roberson, Shelley, Joseph, Simmons, Crawford, Denmark.


I think that's pretty much a given. Amukamura's contract off the books is one that can help them make improvements elsewhere. I think he's pretty much done at this point anyway. I would also assume they will be drafting a CB since they have 7 picks and could possibly pick up a few more before the draft.
0 x

User avatar
WrigleyField 22
Superstar
Posts: 13798
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:48 pm
Location: hnderstabxcwhsg
x 2247
x 1386

Re: Chicago Bears offseason

Postby WrigleyField 22 » Thu Jan 30, 2020 7:11 am

It appears that the conditional pick from the Howard trade will stay a 6th:

https://www.windycitygridiron.com/platf ... -ryan-pace

There's also a Raiders beat writer who reported on Twitter last week that the conditional Mack pick ended up a 7th.

So, seems they're looking at:
Rd 2 pick 11 (from LV)
Rd 2 pick 18
Rd 4 ??? (projected Amos comp)
Rd 5 pick 18
Rd 6 pick 17
Rd 6 pick 21 (from PHI)
Rd 7 pick 12 (from LV)
Rd 7 pick 19
0 x
Image

User avatar
minnesotacubsfan
Superstar
Posts: 18635
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2003 2:27 pm
Location: I CANT BREATHE
x 2232
x 959

Chicago Bears offseason

Postby minnesotacubsfan » Thu Jan 30, 2020 2:18 pm

What could we trade for a 3rd? Or better yet a 2, 6, and 7 for a 1st?
0 x
Image

User avatar
WrigleyField 22
Superstar
Posts: 13798
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:48 pm
Location: hnderstabxcwhsg
x 2247
x 1386

Re: Chicago Bears offseason

Postby WrigleyField 22 » Thu Jan 30, 2020 2:38 pm

minnesotacubsfan wrote:What could we trade for a 3rd? Or better yet a 2, 6, and 7 for a 1st?

2, 6, and 7 isn't getting a 1sr rounder, even a late one.

If anything I could see Pace trading down with one of the seconds, but of course it will all depend how the board falls. If he trades up this year, its probably done with futur year assets, yet again.
0 x
Image

User avatar
minnesotacubsfan
Superstar
Posts: 18635
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2003 2:27 pm
Location: I CANT BREATHE
x 2232
x 959

Chicago Bears offseason

Postby minnesotacubsfan » Thu Jan 30, 2020 2:58 pm

WrigleyField 22 wrote:
minnesotacubsfan wrote:What could we trade for a 3rd? Or better yet a 2, 6, and 7 for a 1st?

2, 6, and 7 isn't getting a 1sr rounder, even a late one.

If anything I could see Pace trading down with one of the seconds, but of course it will all depend how the board falls. If he trades up this year, its probably done with futur year assets, yet again.


That doesnt make sense, if we cant trade up why trade even further down (leaving only 1 2nd rd pick)?


You’re probably right about not getting back into the 1st rd, but maybe a team like Miami who has 3 1st rd picks could use depth players if they don’t see someone they like late in the 1st. Probably not since Miami is a team that needs all the talent they can get...but
0 x
Image

Chocolate Milk
5-Time All-Star
Posts: 6657
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 2:25 pm
Location: At the Planetarium with Some Ladies
x 306
x 201

Re: Chicago Bears offseason

Postby Chocolate Milk » Thu Jan 30, 2020 3:04 pm

I could see Pace packaging the second rounders to jump into the back half of the first round.
0 x

User avatar
jersey cubs fan
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 61628
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 6:38 pm
Location: Hoboken squat cobbler
x 3249
x 11409

Re: Chicago Bears offseason

Postby jersey cubs fan » Thu Jan 30, 2020 3:07 pm

minnesotacubsfan wrote:That doesnt make sense, if we cant trade up why trade even further down (leaving only 1 2nd rd pick)?

Because they have a need at multiple positions, but limited picks, including only 3 in the top four rounds. So if you theoretically trade down from the 2nd into the 3rd and pick up a 4th and now instead of 3 picks in the first four rounds you have 4 picks in the first four rounds.
0 x
longhotsummer wrote:I realize now, any opposing viewpoint, will not be tolerated.

User avatar
WrigleyField 22
Superstar
Posts: 13798
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:48 pm
Location: hnderstabxcwhsg
x 2247
x 1386

Re: Chicago Bears offseason

Postby WrigleyField 22 » Thu Jan 30, 2020 3:08 pm

Chocolate Milk wrote:I could see Pace packaging the second rounders to jump into the back half of the first round.

Yea, if there's something getting them back in the first it's both 2nds.
0 x
Image

User avatar
minnesotacubsfan
Superstar
Posts: 18635
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2003 2:27 pm
Location: I CANT BREATHE
x 2232
x 959

Re: Chicago Bears offseason

Postby minnesotacubsfan » Thu Jan 30, 2020 3:15 pm

jersey cubs fan wrote:
minnesotacubsfan wrote:That doesnt make sense, if we cant trade up why trade even further down (leaving only 1 2nd rd pick)?

Because they have a need at multiple positions, but limited picks, including only 3 in the top four rounds. So if you theoretically trade down from the 2nd into the 3rd and pick up a 4th and now instead of 3 picks in the first four rounds you have 4 picks in the first four rounds.



Ok. I guess thats a move I wouldn’t make. I would rather have both 2nds considering we have no 1st round picks, with the idea that the first 2nd rounder is my 1st (Im likely picking a pos of need for an athlete who fell out of the first who fits that need). Since we have multiple needs, there should be someone who fits that mold. The 2nd 2nd rounder would, in effect, be my 2nd rd talent pick - or if I got lucky another 1st rd level talent who fell.

You’re stuck with 4-7’s after that, but they have 6 picks in those rounds. Id go quantity at that point
1 x
Image

User avatar
minnesotacubsfan
Superstar
Posts: 18635
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2003 2:27 pm
Location: I CANT BREATHE
x 2232
x 959

Re: Chicago Bears offseason

Postby minnesotacubsfan » Thu Jan 30, 2020 3:16 pm

WrigleyField 22 wrote:
Chocolate Milk wrote:I could see Pace packaging the second rounders to jump into the back half of the first round.

Yea, if there's something getting them back in the first it's both 2nds.



Would it be just the 2nds or 2nds +? I don’t know pick values too well.
0 x
Image

User avatar
jersey cubs fan
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 61628
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 6:38 pm
Location: Hoboken squat cobbler
x 3249
x 11409

Re: Chicago Bears offseason

Postby jersey cubs fan » Thu Jan 30, 2020 3:19 pm

minnesotacubsfan wrote:
jersey cubs fan wrote:
minnesotacubsfan wrote:That doesnt make sense, if we cant trade up why trade even further down (leaving only 1 2nd rd pick)?

Because they have a need at multiple positions, but limited picks, including only 3 in the top four rounds. So if you theoretically trade down from the 2nd into the 3rd and pick up a 4th and now instead of 3 picks in the first four rounds you have 4 picks in the first four rounds.



Ok. I guess thats a move I wouldn’t make. I would rather have both 2nds considering we have no 1st round picks, with the idea that the first 2nd rounder is my 1st (Im likely picking a pos of need for an athlete who fell out of the first who fits that need). Since we have multiple needs, there should be someone who fits that mold. The 2nd 2nd rounder would, in effect, be my 2nd rd talent pick - or if I got lucky another 1st rd level talent who fell.

You’re stuck with 4-7’s after that, but they have 6 picks in those rounds. Id go quantity at that point

If you stay in the 2nd you have to go BPA, regardless of position. The bulk of the value in the higher picks is the opportunity to take BPA, not guys you think can fill a certain need, like Adam Shaheen.
0 x
longhotsummer wrote:I realize now, any opposing viewpoint, will not be tolerated.

User avatar
jersey cubs fan
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 61628
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 6:38 pm
Location: Hoboken squat cobbler
x 3249
x 11409

Re: Chicago Bears offseason

Postby jersey cubs fan » Thu Jan 30, 2020 3:20 pm

minnesotacubsfan wrote:
WrigleyField 22 wrote:
Chocolate Milk wrote:I could see Pace packaging the second rounders to jump into the back half of the first round.

Yea, if there's something getting them back in the first it's both 2nds.



Would it be just the 2nds or 2nds +? I don’t know pick values too well.

Depends on how high up in the 1st, but the two 2nds should get you into the 1st all by themselves.
0 x
longhotsummer wrote:I realize now, any opposing viewpoint, will not be tolerated.

User avatar
minnesotacubsfan
Superstar
Posts: 18635
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2003 2:27 pm
Location: I CANT BREATHE
x 2232
x 959

Re: Chicago Bears offseason

Postby minnesotacubsfan » Thu Jan 30, 2020 3:41 pm

jersey cubs fan wrote:
minnesotacubsfan wrote:
jersey cubs fan wrote:Because they have a need at multiple positions, but limited picks, including only 3 in the top four rounds. So if you theoretically trade down from the 2nd into the 3rd and pick up a 4th and now instead of 3 picks in the first four rounds you have 4 picks in the first four rounds.



Ok. I guess thats a move I wouldn’t make. I would rather have both 2nds considering we have no 1st round picks, with the idea that the first 2nd rounder is my 1st (Im likely picking a pos of need for an athlete who fell out of the first who fits that need). Since we have multiple needs, there should be someone who fits that mold. The 2nd 2nd rounder would, in effect, be my 2nd rd talent pick - or if I got lucky another 1st rd level talent who fell.

You’re stuck with 4-7’s after that, but they have 6 picks in those rounds. Id go quantity at that point

If you stay in the 2nd you have to go BPA, regardless of position. The bulk of the value in the higher picks is the opportunity to take BPA, not guys you think can fill a certain need, like Adam Shaheen.



Even so, it doesn’t make a ton of sense to draft yourself out of the best picks by trading away a 2nd. And if you desperately need a TE and there are 3 TEs sitting there when your pick comes up, any of which grade out around your pick (some better some worse), you’d rather draft a position you’re strong in who grades a tick better? I’m assuming that by the time the Bears picks come into play, the athletes who truly are better are off the board and the talent level is much closer across positions in the 2nd.


Shaheen was a reach, and I’m certainly not advocating Pace do that.
0 x
Image

User avatar
Splendid Splinter
All-Star
Posts: 2346
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 6:30 am
x 8615
x 216

Re: Chicago Bears offseason

Postby Splendid Splinter » Thu Jan 30, 2020 4:24 pm

Which one would you rather have?

Rd 2 pick 11 (from LV)
Rd 2 pick 18
Rd 4 ??? (projected Amos comp)- which is after 4th round so pick 33+ depending on how many comp picks
Rd 5 pick 18
Rd 6 pick 17
Rd 6 pick 21 (from PHI)
Rd 7 pick 12 (from LV)
Rd 7 pick 19

Or let's say trade the Bears 2nd for Ravens 2nd and 3rd so it looks like this

Rd 2 pick 11 (from LV)
Rd 2 pick 28
Rd 3 pick 28
Rd 4 ??? (projected Amos comp)
Rd 5 pick 18
Rd 6 pick 17
Rd 6 pick 21 (from PHI)
Rd 7 pick 12 (from LV)
Rd 7 pick 19


They traded down 10 picks in the 2nd to gain a 3rd which Bears don't have. Another trade that could work is Houston's 2nd (pick 25) and their 1st 4th rounder (pick 5). This is just an example of what trading the Bears 2nd pick could look like. You could trade both 2nd to get to the low 20s of the 1st. Could trade the Raiders 2nd instead of the Bears as it got more value. Of course, this only works if a team is willing to trade.
1 x

User avatar
WrigleyField 22
Superstar
Posts: 13798
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:48 pm
Location: hnderstabxcwhsg
x 2247
x 1386

Re: Chicago Bears offseason

Postby WrigleyField 22 » Thu Jan 30, 2020 4:29 pm

jersey cubs fan wrote:
minnesotacubsfan wrote:
jersey cubs fan wrote:Because they have a need at multiple positions, but limited picks, including only 3 in the top four rounds. So if you theoretically trade down from the 2nd into the 3rd and pick up a 4th and now instead of 3 picks in the first four rounds you have 4 picks in the first four rounds.



Ok. I guess thats a move I wouldn’t make. I would rather have both 2nds considering we have no 1st round picks, with the idea that the first 2nd rounder is my 1st (Im likely picking a pos of need for an athlete who fell out of the first who fits that need). Since we have multiple needs, there should be someone who fits that mold. The 2nd 2nd rounder would, in effect, be my 2nd rd talent pick - or if I got lucky another 1st rd level talent who fell.

You’re stuck with 4-7’s after that, but they have 6 picks in those rounds. Id go quantity at that point

If you stay in the 2nd you have to go BPA, regardless of position. The bulk of the value in the higher picks is the opportunity to take BPA, not guys you think can fill a certain need, like Adam Shaheen.

For reference, the trade value chart. Both 2nds gets you close to mid round value. But they won't really have anything that can get them the value of a backend 1st. So if they did both seconds to move up to the end of the first round, they could expect to get something else back too in a 2 for 2 swap.

https://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart.asp
0 x
Image

User avatar
UMFan83
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 79823
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2003 8:42 pm
Location: Southport Ave
x 3194
x 5093
Contact:

Re: Chicago Bears offseason

Postby UMFan83 » Thu Jan 30, 2020 5:09 pm

WrigleyField 22 wrote:
jersey cubs fan wrote:
minnesotacubsfan wrote:

Ok. I guess thats a move I wouldn’t make. I would rather have both 2nds considering we have no 1st round picks, with the idea that the first 2nd rounder is my 1st (Im likely picking a pos of need for an athlete who fell out of the first who fits that need). Since we have multiple needs, there should be someone who fits that mold. The 2nd 2nd rounder would, in effect, be my 2nd rd talent pick - or if I got lucky another 1st rd level talent who fell.

You’re stuck with 4-7’s after that, but they have 6 picks in those rounds. Id go quantity at that point

If you stay in the 2nd you have to go BPA, regardless of position. The bulk of the value in the higher picks is the opportunity to take BPA, not guys you think can fill a certain need, like Adam Shaheen.

For reference, the trade value chart. Both 2nds gets you close to mid round value. But they won't really have anything that can get them the value of a backend 1st. So if they did both seconds to move up to the end of the first round, they could expect to get something else back too in a 2 for 2 swap.

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


Strangely enough, those 2 seconds would get you back the 1st rounder that we traded to the Raiders for Mack
0 x
Win it for Fred

User avatar
minnesotacubsfan
Superstar
Posts: 18635
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2003 2:27 pm
Location: I CANT BREATHE
x 2232
x 959

Re: Chicago Bears offseason

Postby minnesotacubsfan » Thu Jan 30, 2020 5:17 pm

Splendid Splinter wrote:Which one would you rather have?

Rd 2 pick 11 (from LV)
Rd 2 pick 18
Rd 4 ??? (projected Amos comp)- which is after 4th round so pick 33+ depending on how many comp picks
Rd 5 pick 18
Rd 6 pick 17
Rd 6 pick 21 (from PHI)
Rd 7 pick 12 (from LV)
Rd 7 pick 19

Or let's say trade the Bears 2nd for Ravens 2nd and 3rd so it looks like this

Rd 2 pick 11 (from LV)
Rd 2 pick 28
Rd 3 pick 28
Rd 4 ??? (projected Amos comp)
Rd 5 pick 18
Rd 6 pick 17
Rd 6 pick 21 (from PHI)
Rd 7 pick 12 (from LV)
Rd 7 pick 19


They traded down 10 picks in the 2nd to gain a 3rd which Bears don't have. Another trade that could work is Houston's 2nd (pick 25) and their 1st 4th rounder (pick 5). This is just an example of what trading the Bears 2nd pick could look like. You could trade both 2nd to get to the low 20s of the 1st. Could trade the Raiders 2nd instead of the Bears as it got more value. Of course, this only works if a team is willing to trade.


I hadn't considered trading the 2nd 2nd for a later 2nd and 3rd. clearly, I'd prefer the second option but I question why the ravens would give up their only 3rd w/o gaining more then 10 spots. is that an accurate value/value proposition?

eta: no its not. The trade would make more sense between Atlanta and Baltimore according to the link above
0 x
Image

User avatar
WrigleyField 22
Superstar
Posts: 13798
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:48 pm
Location: hnderstabxcwhsg
x 2247
x 1386

Re: Chicago Bears offseason

Postby WrigleyField 22 » Thu Jan 30, 2020 5:49 pm

minnesotacubsfan wrote:
Splendid Splinter wrote:Which one would you rather have?

Rd 2 pick 11 (from LV)
Rd 2 pick 18
Rd 4 ??? (projected Amos comp)- which is after 4th round so pick 33+ depending on how many comp picks
Rd 5 pick 18
Rd 6 pick 17
Rd 6 pick 21 (from PHI)
Rd 7 pick 12 (from LV)
Rd 7 pick 19

Or let's say trade the Bears 2nd for Ravens 2nd and 3rd so it looks like this

Rd 2 pick 11 (from LV)
Rd 2 pick 28
Rd 3 pick 28
Rd 4 ??? (projected Amos comp)
Rd 5 pick 18
Rd 6 pick 17
Rd 6 pick 21 (from PHI)
Rd 7 pick 12 (from LV)
Rd 7 pick 19


They traded down 10 picks in the 2nd to gain a 3rd which Bears don't have. Another trade that could work is Houston's 2nd (pick 25) and their 1st 4th rounder (pick 5). This is just an example of what trading the Bears 2nd pick could look like. You could trade both 2nd to get to the low 20s of the 1st. Could trade the Raiders 2nd instead of the Bears as it got more value. Of course, this only works if a team is willing to trade.


I hadn't considered trading the 2nd 2nd for a later 2nd and 3rd. clearly, I'd prefer the second option but I question why the ravens would give up their only 3rd w/o gaining more then 10 spots. is that an accurate value/value proposition?

eta: no its not. The trade would make more sense between Atlanta and Baltimore according to the link above

I mean its a guideline not a catalog.

For reference the Bears traded down twice in 2016 from 41 to 49 and then 49 to 56, picking up 4th rounders in each trade. As I recall one of the trades was much richer according to the chart. But it all depends who you're trading up for. The Bears did "well" in those trades eventually selclecting Whitehair and turning those 4ths into Deon Bush and White Nick. But if you wanna use total hindsight Derrick Henry and Michael Thomas were two of the picks used between 41 and 49. :dontknow:
0 x
Image

User avatar
minnesotacubsfan
Superstar
Posts: 18635
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2003 2:27 pm
Location: I CANT BREATHE
x 2232
x 959

Re: Chicago Bears offseason

Postby minnesotacubsfan » Thu Jan 30, 2020 6:03 pm

WrigleyField 22 wrote:I mean its a guideline not a catalog.


I get that, and like I said earlier I hadn't thought that our second second rounder by itself could be traded for a later 2nd rounder AND a 3rd. I'm more commenting on how tight teams would follow that chart, of if they would. I suppose if Baltimore REALLY wanted someone we could draft with#2 2nd rounder, that trade would benefit us. I guess that's a valid argument splendid is making.
0 x
Image

Chocolate Milk
5-Time All-Star
Posts: 6657
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 2:25 pm
Location: At the Planetarium with Some Ladies
x 306
x 201

Re: Chicago Bears offseason

Postby Chocolate Milk » Thu Jan 30, 2020 6:09 pm

WrigleyField 22 wrote:Both 2nds gets you close to mid round value. But they won't really have anything that can get them the value of a backend 1st. So if they did both seconds to move up to the end of the first round, they could expect to get something else back too in a 2 for 2 swap


Maybe they do one of the 2nds from this year and trade a second from next year.

To be clear, I'm not advocating this approach, it just seems like this kinda thing is in Pace's nature.
0 x

User avatar
WrigleyField 22
Superstar
Posts: 13798
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:48 pm
Location: hnderstabxcwhsg
x 2247
x 1386

Re: Chicago Bears offseason

Postby WrigleyField 22 » Thu Jan 30, 2020 6:40 pm

minnesotacubsfan wrote:
WrigleyField 22 wrote:I mean its a guideline not a catalog.


I get that, and like I said earlier I hadn't thought that our second second rounder by itself could be traded for a later 2nd rounder AND a 3rd. I'm more commenting on how tight teams would follow that chart, of if they would. I suppose if Baltimore REALLY wanted someone we could draft with#2 2nd rounder, that trade would benefit us. I guess that's a valid argument splendid is making.

Realistically, the value chart matters less for the team trading up, they're trading for a specific player they want that they feel is worth outsized value. If Bal had their eye on a guy, they could be calling teams as early as Chicago's 43rd pick. And if teams keep rejecting their offer because they have their own guys they like, it's doubtful that Bal balks too much at a couple dozen points on the chart if that guy is still there at 50 and the deal gets done.

Baltimore is actually a great example. They overpaid in 2018 for the 32nd pick of the draft. But they weren't trading for pick 32. They were trading for Lamar Jackson. And as it worked out, it ended up being a steal.
0 x
Image


Return to “Other Sports”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests