Week 12: Bears @ Jets 12 CST on FOX

[Soul]

The jury is still out on Poles, but he will really have to nail this upcoming draft and free agency period because the Bears have next to nothing outside of RB, QB, and S. They basically need 15-18 starting players.

Or a 2 year window of rebuild so he doesn't have to hit on all these picks/FA's, which seems nearly impossible. Someone isn't going to perform even though the college resume is solid or the FA acquisition makes sense.

 

Was thinking about the upcoming offseason, while the Bears appear to have a bounty of resources to drastically change/improve their roster it's not idiot proof. This is the facet I'm concerned about; there's a possibility Poles may still horsefeathers it up. I'm not expecting every highly drafted player or FA signing to work however, I am expecting marked improvement on both sides of the ball along with beating the Packers.

 

That's a more realistic expectation. They are starting from zip, so being competitive - maybe even a low-seed playoff contender - would be enough to call Poles' offseason a success provided he's still set up with resources/picks to further improve the following year.

 

Yeah, beating the Packers would be such a boost for this franchise.

[Tryptamine]

Frankly I'm just amazed at how many competitive games they've played considering the dumpster fire of talent on both sides of the ball. I knew it was bad, but yesterday really cemented the fact that, if not for Fields, this is pretty easily the worst team in football.

[Bertz]

I think when looking at trade down scenarios, I'd probably go with one of two options at the more extreme end of things.

 

1. Move down only 1-2 spots. You don't gain a ton, for example the Bears gave up a 3rd, a 5th, and a next year 3rd when they traded up for Trubisky. But they are essentially free picks, as you are trading down while still essentially guaranteed the #1 non-QB on your board

 

2. Trade down 10+ spots, and add multiple future 1sts.

Given the crazy amount of cap space the team has, I'd lean towards this scenario. Something like the Dolphins 49ers trade for Trey Lance. They moved down 9 spots, picked up a current year 3rd, and firsts in each of the next two years. This type of deal has a chance to be felt for half a decade

 

I don't love the middle ground of 5ish spots, what right now looks like it would most likely be a Panthers trade. Feels like losing an opportunity at the most elite young players while not getting back a stupid amount of draft capital is a worst of all worlds scenario.

[Tryptamine]

In a perfect world you trade back only a couple spots so one of Carter/Anderson is still there. To move anything beyond that would take a significant haul, as in a couple 1sts and a couple early day 2 picks for me to even consider it.

[Tim]

I want the Herschel Walker trade.

 

LB Jesse Solomon

LB David Howard

CB Issiac Holt

DE Alex Stewart

Minnesota's 1st round pick in 1990

Minnesota's 2nd round pick in 1990

Minnesota's 6th round pick in 1990

Minnesota's 1st round pick in 1991 (conditional on cutting Solomon)

Minnesota's 2nd round pick in 1991 (conditional on cutting Howard)

Minnesota's 1st round pick in 1992 (conditional on cutting Holt)

Minnesota's 2nd round pick in 1992 (condition met by trading away Nelson)

Minnesota's 3rd round pick in 1992 (conditional on cutting Stewart)

[minnesotacubsfan]

i dont think that trade will ever happen again

[UMFan83]

I think when looking at trade down scenarios, I'd probably go with one of two options at the more extreme end of things.

 

1. Move down only 1-2 spots. You don't gain a ton, for example the Bears gave up a 3rd, a 5th, and a next year 3rd when they traded up for Trubisky. But they are essentially free picks, as you are trading down while still essentially guaranteed the #1 non-QB on your board

 

2. Trade down 10+ spots, and add multiple future 1sts.

Given the crazy amount of cap space the team has, I'd lean towards this scenario. Something like the Dolphins 49ers trade for Trey Lance. They moved down 9 spots, picked up a current year 3rd, and firsts in each of the next two years. This type of deal has a chance to be felt for half a decade

 

I don't love the middle ground of 5ish spots, what right now looks like it would most likely be a Panthers trade. Feels like losing an opportunity at the most elite young players while not getting back a stupid amount of draft capital is a worst of all worlds scenario.

 

Definitely number 2. We need help everywhere and the ability to have a top 3 pick when we don't need a QB in a year with high profile top of the draft QBs is an absolute blessing we have to take advantage of. Would be fantastic to get an elite stud like Anderson but seems more valuable to be in a situation where you get an extra mid round pick this year and then get 2 first round picks each of the next 2 years.

[minnesotacubsfan]

I think when looking at trade down scenarios, I'd probably go with one of two options at the more extreme end of things.

 

1. Move down only 1-2 spots. You don't gain a ton, for example the Bears gave up a 3rd, a 5th, and a next year 3rd when they traded up for Trubisky. But they are essentially free picks, as you are trading down while still essentially guaranteed the #1 non-QB on your board

 

2. Trade down 10+ spots, and add multiple future 1sts.

Given the crazy amount of cap space the team has, I'd lean towards this scenario. Something like the Dolphins 49ers trade for Trey Lance. They moved down 9 spots, picked up a current year 3rd, and firsts in each of the next two years. This type of deal has a chance to be felt for half a decade

 

I don't love the middle ground of 5ish spots, what right now looks like it would most likely be a Panthers trade. Feels like losing an opportunity at the most elite young players while not getting back a stupid amount of draft capital is a worst of all worlds scenario.

 

Definitely number 2. We need help everywhere and the ability to have a top 3 pick when we don't need a QB in a year with high profile top of the draft QBs is an absolute blessing we have to take advantage of. Would be fantastic to get an elite stud like Anderson but seems more valuable to be in a situation where you get an extra mid round pick this year and then get 2 first round picks each of the next 2 years.

 

I dont know if I could see Lovie passing on Anderson and if the Texans did take him #1, I would be all in on #2. You could still get a quality OT or DT at 12-20. But, if Anderson is there, I dont see how you dont take him.

[UMFan83]

i dont think that trade will ever happen again

 

ok fine how about

 

1999 1st round pick (12th overall)

1999 3rd round pick

1999 4th round pick

1999 5th round pick

1999 6th round pick

1999 7th round pick

2000 1st round pick

2000 3rd round pick

[minnesotacubsfan]

i dont think that trade will ever happen again

 

ok fine how about

 

1999 1st round pick (12th overall)

1999 3rd round pick

1999 4th round pick

1999 5th round pick

1999 6th round pick

1999 7th round pick

2000 1st round pick

2000 3rd round pick

 

 

 

is that the ryan leaf trade haul?

[WrigleyField 22]

Nope

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ricky_Williams_trade

[minnesotacubsfan]

welp, like I said, never again on both of those. those were for RB's!

 

I mean, I'd be stunned to get a haul like that and obviously it would be a fun get, but it still takes smart drafting afterwards to make it work. In the aftermath Dallas was smart, I'm not sure Washington was

[gflore34]

I think when looking at trade down scenarios, I'd probably go with one of two options at the more extreme end of things.

 

1. Move down only 1-2 spots. You don't gain a ton, for example the Bears gave up a 3rd, a 5th, and a next year 3rd when they traded up for Trubisky. But they are essentially free picks, as you are trading down while still essentially guaranteed the #1 non-QB on your board

 

2. Trade down 10+ spots, and add multiple future 1sts.

Given the crazy amount of cap space the team has, I'd lean towards this scenario. Something like the Dolphins 49ers trade for Trey Lance. They moved down 9 spots, picked up a current year 3rd, and firsts in each of the next two years. This type of deal has a chance to be felt for half a decade

 

I don't love the middle ground of 5ish spots, what right now looks like it would most likely be a Panthers trade. Feels like losing an opportunity at the most elite young players while not getting back a stupid amount of draft capital is a worst of all worlds scenario.

 

Definitely number 2. We need help everywhere and the ability to have a top 3 pick when we don't need a QB in a year with high profile top of the draft QBs is an absolute blessing we have to take advantage of. Would be fantastic to get an elite stud like Anderson but seems more valuable to be in a situation where you get an extra mid round pick this year and then get 2 first round picks each of the next 2 years.

 

I dont know if I could see Lovie passing on Anderson and if the Texans did take him #1, I would be all in on #2. You could still get a quality OT or DT at 12-20. But, if Anderson is there, I dont see how you dont take him.

 

From what I've read Anderson may a talent in the mode of an Arnold, I would think the Bears will not pass on him. Most especially if the OL is addressed in FA.

Edited November 28, 2022 by gflore34

[WrigleyField 22]

Yea if we're talking unrealistic trade expectations we could go with the very recent 49ers Trey Lance trade.

 

The best part of that one too is that it happened early on in draft process. Give Poles plenty of time to wheel and deal with extra picks in hand.

[minnesotacubsfan]

Yea if we're talking unrealistic trade expectations we could go with the very recent 49ers Trey Lance trade.

 

The best part of that one too is that it happened early on in draft process. Give Poles plenty of time to wheel and deal with extra picks in hand.

 

I guess it depends on where the Bears end up. If it is #2, and there is a big demand then sure, take all the 1sts you can get. But I feel like that needs to happen in conjunction with a good FA period, ie picking up maybe Jenkins (OT) and Payne as well as some other useful pieces, especially on O.

[Tim]

I'd settle for the RGIII trade:

 

Redskins get

2011 #2 pick

 

Rams get

2011 #6 pick

2011 2nd round

2012 1st round

2013 1st round

 

Move down four spots, pick up a second round pick and two additional firsts. Funny thing is...Washington may have still won that trade. And they definitely would have won it if RGIII had stayed healthy.

[WrigleyField 22]

Yea if we're talking unrealistic trade expectations we could go with the very recent 49ers Trey Lance trade.

 

The best part of that one too is that it happened early on in draft process. Give Poles plenty of time to wheel and deal with extra picks in hand.

 

I guess it depends on where the Bears end up. If it is #2, and there is a big demand then sure, take all the 1sts you can get. But I feel like that needs to happen in conjunction with a good FA period, ie picking up maybe Jenkins (OT) and Payne as well as some other useful pieces, especially on O.

I'm of the opinion that nothing in the draft should impact how they attack FA. They need to sign at least 6 Big-ish FA deals. At least 2 on each line and then another 2 at various spots. Then fill in with depth after that.

 

Even after all of that, they'll have opportunities to upgrade at multiple spots at the draft. There wont be a position where I think you can say "there's not room" for a top flight prospect. But they'll be covered "enough" at every spot to be trying for WC/division in 2023 if they hit on those FA.

[minnesotacubsfan]

Yea if we're talking unrealistic trade expectations we could go with the very recent 49ers Trey Lance trade.

 

The best part of that one too is that it happened early on in draft process. Give Poles plenty of time to wheel and deal with extra picks in hand.

 

I guess it depends on where the Bears end up. If it is #2, and there is a big demand then sure, take all the 1sts you can get. But I feel like that needs to happen in conjunction with a good FA period, ie picking up maybe Jenkins (OT) and Payne as well as some other useful pieces, especially on O.

I'm of the opinion that nothing in the draft should impact how they attack FA. They need to sign at least 6 Big-ish FA deals. At least 2 on each line and then another 2 at various spots. Then fill in with depth after that.

 

Even after all of that, they'll have opportunities to upgrade at multiple spots at the draft. There wont be a position where I think you can say "there's not room" for a top flight prospect. But they'll be covered "enough" at every spot to be trying for WC/division in 2023 if they hit on those FA.

well, I think we agree. the FA period needs to be an active and team changing one because of how empty the team is of talent. lets hope Poles can do that

[bukie]

Same.

 

[tweet]

[/tweet]

[gflore34]

Same.

 

[tweet]

[/tweet]

 

I'm OK with this, the Bears are out of the playoffs, believe they know what they have in Mooney, remainder of the season is about seeing what they have or do not have in Jones, Jr., Harry, Claypool and Pringle. Did not mention St. Brown or Pettis because they'll be ex-Bears on Black Monday or shortly thereafter. Hope it's nothing career threatening or something that'll pour into next season.

[UMFan83]

One thing that I read today that sucks, likely top 10 pick Olu Fashanu, an OT from PSU has decided to go back to school next year. One less target in the draft.

[WrigleyField 22]

One thing that I read today that sucks, likely top 10 pick Olu Fashanu, an OT from PSU has decided to go back to school next year. One less target in the draft.

Pretty surprising. Think 2024 is gonna be another QB year early so he's gonna struggle to get top 3 and likely would be top 10 as is.

[Tim]

Woo! Go Steelers

[mias_tisg]

Steelers win. Good week for the tank. Really feeling good if the Bears lose this week. Week 18 against the Vikings scares me a little if they bench everyone so you can really only afford maybe 1 more win before that.

[WrigleyField 22]

Before this weekend I felt pretty confident they'd fall no further than 8th. Now I'd say 7th.

 

If they lose out they'll do no worse than 3rd.

 

With 4 wins I could see 5th. As low as 7th with 5 wins. Don't see them finding 3 more wins. But even at 6 wins I think it could all still work out