The Bears trade down to 9! Roster turnover/Offseason Thread
- jersey cubs fan
- Inner-Circle HOF
- Posts: 64647
- Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 6:38 pm
- Location: Hoboken squat cobbler
- x 4106
- x 15282
The Bears trade down to 9! Roster turnover/Offseason Thread
Let the games have the game threads. The bears pay the bear tax. The churn is on.
Out with the old and in with other peoples old.
The claypool trade is the type of thing I’ve wanted them to do. Hope he sticks.
Out with the old and in with other peoples old.
The claypool trade is the type of thing I’ve wanted them to do. Hope he sticks.
7 x
longhotsummer wrote:I realize now, any opposing viewpoint, will not be tolerated.
-
- All-Star
- Posts: 1758
- Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 10:46 pm
- Location: Bridgeport, IL
- x 648
- x 297
Re: Bears roster turnover
Not sure I love giving up a 2nd rounder (per Schefter) but it's gotta be the Ravens pick, and he sure has the tools to be good.
0 x
- UMFan83
- Inner-Circle HOF
- Posts: 87816
- Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2003 8:42 pm
- Location: Southport Ave
- x 4963
- x 8195
- Contact:
Re: Bears roster turnover
Ugh...now they are saying it is the Bears 2nd rounder. Not as great
0 x
Win it for Fred
- David
- Inner-Circle HOF
- Posts: 64121
- Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2003 12:33 am
- Location: Chicago
- x 13358
- x 7346
Re: Bears roster turnover
While I much preferred it being the Baltimore pick, particularly given the upcoming FA list, I'm more than OK with a bit of an overpay (and re-allocating resources toward offense) for a guy whose profile fits Justin well and who is still very young.
Maybe we can get lucky and have the Ravens stumble around a bit. NFL can be nuts.
Maybe we can get lucky and have the Ravens stumble around a bit. NFL can be nuts.
1 x
- UMFan83
- Inner-Circle HOF
- Posts: 87816
- Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2003 8:42 pm
- Location: Southport Ave
- x 4963
- x 8195
- Contact:
Re: Bears roster turnover
David wrote:https://twitter.com/JosinaAnderson/status/1587502660172894209?s=20&t=CweBWjF4PFacDN7uci-tjg
I bet the Packers were also offering a 2nd which is why the Bears had to offer their 2nd rounder to get it done.
2 x
Win it for Fred
- SpongeWorthy
- Superstar
- Posts: 13724
- Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 12:47 am
- x 232
- x 546
Re: Bears roster turnover
UMFan83 wrote:Ugh...now they are saying it is the Bears 2nd rounder. Not as great
pretty wild overpay imo
1 x
- UMFan83
- Inner-Circle HOF
- Posts: 87816
- Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2003 8:42 pm
- Location: Southport Ave
- x 4963
- x 8195
- Contact:
Re: Bears roster turnover
David wrote:While I much preferred it being the Baltimore pick, particularly given the upcoming FA list, I'm more than OK with a bit of an overpay (and re-allocating resources toward offense) for a guy whose profile fits Justin well and who is still very young.
Maybe we can get lucky and have the Ravens stumble around a bit. NFL can be nuts.
there's some value to locking in your big WR move right now. You get him in now, he learns the system and develops rapport with Fields. And now in the offseason you don't *have* to use a 1st on a WR, though you can, and you don't have to worry about the thin WR market as much.
3 x
Win it for Fred
- jersey cubs fan
- Inner-Circle HOF
- Posts: 64647
- Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 6:38 pm
- Location: Hoboken squat cobbler
- x 4106
- x 15282
Re: Bears roster turnover
god I hope the packers end up picking one pick before this bears/Steelers pickUMFan83 wrote:David wrote:https://twitter.com/JosinaAnderson/status/1587502660172894209?s=20&t=CweBWjF4PFacDN7uci-tjg
I bet the Packers were also offering a 2nd which is why the Bears had to offer their 2nd rounder to get it done.
0 x
longhotsummer wrote:I realize now, any opposing viewpoint, will not be tolerated.
Re: Bears roster turnover
Dunno if it’s an overpay or not but I dig how willing this admin is to mix it up and be bold.
Very interested to see how Fields and him gel. Mooney has been great and dependable but I don’t think has the tools to ever be a 1, but can be a great 2 receiver.
Very interested to see how Fields and him gel. Mooney has been great and dependable but I don’t think has the tools to ever be a 1, but can be a great 2 receiver.
1 x

"The only good sabermetrician is a dead one." --Andrew Jackson, 1776.
I have to admit its getting better...it can't get no worse - The Beatles (On the Cubs)
- UMFan83
- Inner-Circle HOF
- Posts: 87816
- Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2003 8:42 pm
- Location: Southport Ave
- x 4963
- x 8195
- Contact:
Re: Bears roster turnover
It's kind of crazy though. Claypool was the 49th overall pick in 2020. He's been good but hasn't become a star (though has the ability to become one) and he's 1.5 years from FA. How often do you see someone in a situation like that traded for a better pick than the one used to select them? Definitely a win-win deal for both sides. Steelers have to be thrilled.
0 x
Win it for Fred
- pitchcs
- All-Star
- Posts: 3999
- Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 4:22 am
- Location: A block from Wrigley
- x 16
- x 52
- Contact:
Re: Bears roster turnover
SpongeWorthy wrote:UMFan83 wrote:Ugh...now they are saying it is the Bears 2nd rounder. Not as great
pretty wild overpay imo
Agreed, unfortunately.
0 x
- WrigleyField 22
- Superstar
- Posts: 18932
- Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:48 pm
- Location: This is the Bad Place
- x 7594
- x 3476
- Contact:
Re: Bears roster turnover
Objectively a steep price, but I'm okay with it.
Poles hasn't fleeced anyone in any deal, but when you look at the context of all the trades together, I like the direction.
Poles hasn't fleeced anyone in any deal, but when you look at the context of all the trades together, I like the direction.
2 x

Re: Bears roster turnover
May be a slight overpay, but he has the tools to be a guy. He also had Big Ben’s corpse, Mitch and Picketts throwing to him his whole career. As mentioned with the weak WR FA market seems like a decent move and doesn’t box you in to forcing some draft pick/FA/other trade (where maybe you have to give up more given the WR market) in the offseason. Like I’d rather give up a second for him than a first for Jeudy or Higgins (just two of the guys that seem to be rumored to be moved).
Last edited by Cubswin11 on Tue Nov 01, 2022 6:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
3 x
Screw Pitchers
- Old Style
- Superstar
- Posts: 11502
- Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2006 4:57 pm
- Location: Bedford, TX
- x 9323
- x 1292
Re: Bears roster turnover
It also keeps him from going to the Packers which is nice.
1 x
"I'm sorry, folks outside of SEC country, but a few facts are incontrovertible. They smoke better barbecue than you. Their women are prettier than your women. They play football better than your schools play football." - Andy Staples, SI
- bukie
- Hall of Fame
- Posts: 20157
- Joined: Sat May 31, 2003 4:17 am
- Location: Mokena, IL
- x 50
- x 3168
- Contact:
Re: Bears roster turnover
Old Style wrote:It also keeps him from going to the Packers which is nice.
First solid defensive play by the Bears franchise in 2 weeks.
8 x
The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was to convince the world he didn't exist.
-
- All-Star
- Posts: 1758
- Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 10:46 pm
- Location: Bridgeport, IL
- x 648
- x 297
Re: Bears roster turnover
Cubswin11 wrote:May be a slight overpay, but he has the tools to be a guy. He also had Big Ben’s corpse, Mitch and Picketts throwing to him his whole career.
I think this is an underrated consideration. If Fields can dial up some good deep balls - which I do think is still a strength of his - Claypool has the size and speed to make plays. Those 3 QBs in Pittsburgh (considering Ben's late-career limitations) don't have nearly the tools that Fields has
5 x
-
- 5-Time All-Star
- Posts: 7372
- Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 8:13 pm
- x 17
- x 639
- WrigleyField 22
- Superstar
- Posts: 18932
- Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:48 pm
- Location: This is the Bad Place
- x 7594
- x 3476
- Contact:
Re: Bears roster turnover
Cubswin11 wrote:May be a slight overpay, but he has the tools to be a guy. He also had Big Ben’s corpse, Mitch and Picketts throwing to him his whole career. As mentioned with the weak WR FA market seems like a decent move and doesn’t box you in to forcing some draft pick/FA/other trade (where maybe you have to give up more given the WR market) in the offseason. Like I’d rather give up a second for him than a first for Jeudy or Higgins (just two of the guys that seem to be rumored to be moved).
Definitely an overpay, and really not slight either.
But I'll take thr past 24 hours 10 times out 10 for where the Bears are and need to be. It's a lot, but better than sitting still would have been.
Excited to watch the back 9 games now that Fields has another solid weapon. Line still suspect, but I think options open up.
0 x

-
- 5-Time All-Star
- Posts: 7372
- Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 8:13 pm
- x 17
- x 639
Re: Bears roster turnover
I like what this does for the draft. It basically makes the first round pick either DL or a trade back to fill multiple holes and I don't have a problem with either option.
4 x
- bukie
- Hall of Fame
- Posts: 20157
- Joined: Sat May 31, 2003 4:17 am
- Location: Mokena, IL
- x 50
- x 3168
- Contact:
Re: Bears roster turnover
David wrote:https://twitter.com/RobDemovsky/status/1587513183941656576?s=20&t=CweBWjF4PFacDN7uci-tjg
inject it into my veins
He may own the Bears, but he doesn't own any NFL WRs.
6 x
The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was to convince the world he didn't exist.
- UMFan83
- Inner-Circle HOF
- Posts: 87816
- Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2003 8:42 pm
- Location: Southport Ave
- x 4963
- x 8195
- Contact:
Re: Bears roster turnover
Less relevant now after the Claypool trade, but the Jags are trading for Ridley
Looks like a 2024 2nd rounder and a pick that based on incentives can be as high as a 5th rounder in 2023.
Looks like a 2024 2nd rounder and a pick that based on incentives can be as high as a 5th rounder in 2023.
1 x
Win it for Fred
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], SouthSideRyan, Thurman Merman and 6 guests