Chicago Bears offseason

[WrigleyField 22]

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.

[minnesotacubsfan]

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

[Chocolate Milk]

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

[jersey cubs fan]

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.

[WrigleyField 22]

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.

[minnesotacubsfan]

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

[minnesotacubsfan]

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.

[jersey cubs fan]

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.

[jersey cubs fan]

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.

[minnesotacubsfan]

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.

[Splendid Splinter]

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.

[WrigleyField 22]

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

[UMFan83]

 

 

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

[minnesotacubsfan]

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

[WrigleyField 22]

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:

[minnesotacubsfan]

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.

[Chocolate Milk]

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.

[WrigleyField 22]

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.

[David]

[WrigleyField 22]

In before Kyle doom boners.

 

This would be a good thing (assuming the guarantees aren't crazy)

Edited January 30, 2020 by WrigleyField 22

[Splendid Splinter]

Yeah, Pace's history with trading down in the 2nd have resulted in a 2nd and 4th rounder, but all of his trade downs have been 5-8 picks later IIRC. I think you could get a 3rd if it was 10 picks difference which is why I picked Baltimore as the example.

 

Another option would be trading for a later 2nd and a future 3rd. Although I'm not sure how often that has happened. I believe the value of a future pick is 1 round later so a future 3rd = this years 4th rounder.

[Brian]

bring Greg Olsen home

[minnesotacubsfan]

bring Greg Olsen home

 

 

At age 35? If hes cheap, I guess

[Butterscup]

i'll take him on a vet minimum deal with a TE taken in the 2nd but no need to waste a bunch of cap space on olsen

[jersey cubs fan]

bring Greg Olsen home

To New Jersey?