Chicago Bears offseason

[Outshined_One]

Williams is likely already a millionaire thanks to NIL. Of course he'd come off as aloof and "not a team player" to some dumbass meatball.

[Rex Buckingham]

Also, doesn't it make sense for the superstar college QB on an average team to want to always have the ball in his hands?

[CubinNY]

I hope the Bears do their homework before they draft, that's all I'm saying. There is nothing wrong with changing plays if you have the talent to make it work. Peyton Manning is probably the pinnacle example. 

[BigbadB]

We all know that no one knows a QB better than a WR's coach's brother. 

[gflore34]

14 hours ago, raw said:

There's been a couple whispers here and there that Caleb isn't much of a team guy. But if he's good, IDK if that really matters. Aaron Rodgers wasn't a team guy for years in GB. Story came out from their OC today that he would change the play so often that they didn't remember what the play was supposed to be. I've known a couple NFL players as well and I've heard stories about star players being "unapproachable" and not very team friendly. 

In the NFL the job is to win, if Williams is good and the Bears win, he can be the most aloof, biggest dick in the world.  Results are the end all, be all, when players suck and teams lose then, all that other noise suddenly matters - he's a clubhouse cancer, he puts ketchup on hot dogs, etc.

[minnesotacubsfan]

the last aloof Cali QB the Bears drafted was Cade McNown

 

dont be Cade, Caleb

[UMFan83]

I just want to know if Caleb's teammates went to his birthday party.

[Old Style]

This return seems insane to me. I’d do the deal in a heartbeat but then again I still believe in Fields. If you turn down a deal like this and draft Williams he’d better be a sure fire HOFer. 

[mul21]

43 minutes ago, UMFan83 said:

I just want to know if Caleb's teammates went to his birthday party.

[mul21]

1 minute ago, Old Style said:

This return seems insane to me. I’d do the deal in a heartbeat but then again I still believe in Fields. If you turn down a deal like this and draft Williams he’d better be a sure fire HOFer. 

A. I don't think there's any way in hell this is a realistic trade.  It's over by probably a 1st and 2nd.

B. It would be insane to turn that down when you can go to #2 and draft Maye and still trade Fields for whatever and at that point it doesn't matter because you have all the draft picks for the next 2 years.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

2 minutes ago, Old Style said:

This return seems insane to me. I’d do the deal in a heartbeat but then again I still believe in Fields. If you turn down a deal like this and draft Williams he’d better be a sure fire HOFer. 

That's like 3x what a realistic trade haul would be.  Pure clickbait.

I'm 100% open to trading down and taking a different QB.  Trading the pick doesn't mean we aren't ditching Fields. It's over, Fields is gone.

[jersey cubs fan]

13 minutes ago, username said:

I'd love a Kingsbury hire.  Let's face it too, Poles is making this hiring decision, not Eberflus.  At least in part because if Eberflus continues to be a bad head coach, the OC has a bit of an inside track on becoming the Bears next head coach. 

It could also, of course, be Poles simply wanting to get more inside info about Caleb Williams and having zero interest in Kingsbury.  

On the surface it certainly feels like a blatant info gathering opportunity, but he is qualified for the job and should be on the list. I do think Poles will have a lot of input, but Eberflus will have input. He’s married to Flus and seemingly is simpatico with him. I think he respects him too much to just hire his replacement in front of his face. But the next OC will have the inside track for the head coaching job IF the offense begins to click but the D slips and wins don’t add up. But if the plan works, Flus will hold down the job and the OC will be on other teams’ list. 

[minnesotacubsfan]

7 minutes ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

That's like 3x what a realistic trade haul would be.  Pure clickbait.

I'm 100% open to trading down and taking a different QB.  Trading the pick doesn't mean we aren't ditching Fields. It's over, Fields is gone.

its way too much to move one spot

[We Got The Whole 9]

If you pared off a 1st and a 2nd I would still do that deal easy

[Hairyducked Idiot]

My line for getting my attention in a trade down is 3 firsts and a second, and this years first needs to be fairly high (top 10?).

 

I want a new QB, Caleb Williams is a great qb prospect and he's right there, but it doesn't *have* to be Williams if the price is right 

[WrigleyField 22]

Lol, Infante is just trolling with that trade you guys.

[WrigleyField 22]

13 minutes ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

My line for getting my attention in a trade down is 3 firsts and a second, and this years first needs to be fairly high (top 10?).

 

I want a new QB, Caleb Williams is a great qb prospect and he's right there, but it doesn't *have* to be Williams if the price is right 

In as exact terms as I can make it, the threshold to even begin discussions is the RG3 trade plus some.  Dependent on how you value future picks that was roughly a 20% overpay on the JJ chart.  So like a 25% overpay on the JJ chart gets me listening, but even then I might need to be more like 30%. I don't think you can drop down more than to 5 or 6 and make a realistic worthwhile trade too.

 

Washington maybe is the one spot where you could take a "equal" trade if you're evals of Maye and Williams are pretty much the same. But I doubt any GM actually wants to leave that to chance rather than taking their top guy. I think they'd only trade down to 2 because they're out on both and likely would try to trade down again.

Edited January 19, 2024 by WrigleyField 22

[WrigleyField 22]

So basically something between 36+40+67 (high) and 40+67+ 2025 day 3 (low) is an actual realistic 2 for 1 swap. And again, it's only realistically being done because you're planning to trade down again. Otherwise it's likely you can get a more enticing direct trade in the 3-6 range.

 

[Old Style]

1 hour ago, minnesotacubsfan said:

its way too much to move one spot

Ryan Pace says “hold my beer.”

[jersey cubs fan]

1 hour ago, username said:

.  But I'd imagine in more cases than not, the HC decides who he wants and gets the GM's blessing.  I think in this case those roles are reversed, and for good reason.  

I think it’s more like Poles is going to have Eberflus take the lead and find his guy with input, but if he comes up with a doozy Poles may use his veto power, fire Eberflus and start over. You have to try and convince these guys Eberflus isn’t a lame duck. The head coach is making this hire 

[CubinNY]

5 minutes ago, jersey cubs fan said:

I think it’s more like Poles is going to have Eberflus take the lead and find his guy with input, but if he comes up with a doozy Poles may use his veto power, fire Eberflus and start over. You have to try and convince these guys Eberflus isn’t a lame duck. The head coach is making this hire 

Totally agree. The job here is getting the BPA. You aren't doing that if you are going over the coach's head. 

[Tryptamine]

3 hours ago, WrigleyField 22 said:

So basically something between 36+40+67 (high) and 40+67+ 2025 day 3 (low) is an actual realistic 2 for 1 swap. And again, it's only realistically being done because you're planning to trade down again. Otherwise it's likely you can get a more enticing direct trade in the 3-6 range.

 

That's in a bubble where moving 1 space is a set non varying value. Some teams may have 1 QB significantly ahead of the rest. I'm certainly not advocating that there's any realism to the Infante tweet, but I also think you can get more than what you list as the high end. 

[Tryptamine]

double

Edited January 19, 2024 by Tryptamine

[minnesotacubsfan]

32 minutes ago, Tryptamine said:

That's in a bubble where moving 1 space is a set non varying value. Some teams may have 1 QB significantly ahead of the rest. I'm certainly not advocating that there's any realism to the Infante tweet, but I also think you can get more than what you list as the high end. 

Yes. If a team views Williams as a sure bet, there may be no limit. I dont think teams follow draft pick valuation charts for trading up for a QB in the 1st as close as they would in general or later rounds, or if at all.

[WrigleyField 22]

7 hours ago, Tryptamine said:

That's in a bubble where moving 1 space is a set non varying value. Some teams may have 1 QB significantly ahead of the rest. I'm certainly not advocating that there's any realism to the Infante tweet, but I also think you can get more than what you list as the high end. 

36+40 are both pretty valuable. In the traditional method of a 1 round discount that's like saying 2 future FRP.  Realistically you might not do the full 1 round discount on a team with a top 2 pick, but it's still very strong high end value.  Maybe you can get another future pick or some pick wrangling to get a future FRP, but I'd be shocked if any team separates either Caleb or Maye that far above the other.