for display only
Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner

Archived Thread

NFL.com report about what would it take to trade for #1

bigbluewillrise : 2/10/2024 9:49 am
https://www.nfl.com/news/bears-would-need-historic-compensation-to-trade-no-1-overall-pick-in-2024-nfl-draft
Bears are clearly taking caleb with this report


We have to hope one of the other two drop or we have to take a guy in the middle rounds.

Daniel jones man nine lives
Merril Hoge is out on Caleb  
Jerz44 : 2/10/2024 10:18 am : link
That gives me serious pause.

I’m actually warming up to the JJ talk!
Three Situations Where You Would Trade For #1  
varco : 2/10/2024 10:33 am : link
First -- If you already have a "good" roster, you need one more part to put you over the top and if there is a sure fire future HOF at the top of the board. Think LT, etc.
Second -- if you have a "two-headed" QB situation, both are well regarded, and you wanted to move on from one of them, swapping him out (plus other compensation) to the team holding the #1 if your target is a position player and a sure fire star. Think Staubach and Craig Morton, back in the day.
Third - if you already have a "loaded" roster, an aging or less than optimal QB and wanted his successor now.

I just don't see the utility of trading up at the price needed if your roster is full of holes.
We are not trading up to #1,  
BleedBlue46 : 2/10/2024 11:12 am : link
But if the Bears take a massive haul of picks and decide to take the surefire pick in MHJ after robbing the Redskins blind then we could trade pick 47 and our 1st with the Cardinals to get Daniels or Maye (I prefer Daniels). It's funny everyone talks about how Daniels is so old when he is only 11 months older than CW and JJ is 14 months younger than CW. Bo Nix is about 3 years older than JJ, he's the one out of the top qbs I wouldn't touch with a 10' pole.
I don't think we'll be able to trade up a couple of spots with just  
Ira : 2/10/2024 11:16 am : link
our 2nd round pick. Qb's that are considered special usually have a big premium attached to them.
RE: I don't think we'll be able to trade up a couple of spots with just  
BleedBlue46 : 2/10/2024 11:19 am : link
In comment 16394601 Ira said:
Quote:
our 2nd round pick. Qb's that are considered special usually have a big premium attached to them.


I could see that but we have the benefit of trading up with the Cardinals and allowing them to get Nabers, Odunze or their top rated tackle. If they traded further back then they don't get that luxury.
For Bears to trade out of  
Pepe LePugh : 2/10/2024 11:25 am : link
#1, they would have to believe in Fields, OR not believe in any of the top 3, OR get offered enough to make them believe that just maybe Fields can make the leap.
As for the Giants trying to make the game changing offer, they have to compete with every other QB hungry team. The main competition is Washington, if (as I’ve seen reported) they have a clear preference for Caleb. Washington’s #2 is equivalent on trade chart to our #6 plus next year’s #1. We have two seconds , but so do the Commies. Us trading to the top spot to me is a pipe dream. Getting the second or third QB is a possibility, but still a very long shot IMO.
Imagine the Giants can get up to #1 overall  
ThomasG : 2/10/2024 11:25 am : link
by giving up #6 overall this year, 2nd rounder this year and next year's #1.
RE: Imagine the Giants can get up to #1 overall  
Anakim : 2/10/2024 11:26 am : link
In comment 16394608 ThomasG said:
Quote:
by giving up #6 overall this year, 2nd rounder this year and next year's #1.



Imagine if Margot Robbie was in my bed right now
RE: Imagine the Giants can get up to #1 overall  
BleedBlue46 : 2/10/2024 11:26 am : link
In comment 16394608 ThomasG said:
Quote:
by giving up #6 overall this year, 2nd rounder this year and next year's #1.


No chance. I bet the Redskins would trade more than that to go up 1 slot.
If I had to guess,  
Anakim : 2/10/2024 11:27 am : link
I think the Commmanders trade up to #1 for Caleb Williams and the Bears take MHJ at #2 overall.
Way too many holes in this roster  
GFAN52 : 2/10/2024 11:28 am : link
to trade away picks.
RE: RE: Imagine the Giants can get up to #1 overall  
ThomasG : 2/10/2024 11:30 am : link
In comment 16394609 Anakim said:
Quote:
In comment 16394608 ThomasG said:


Quote:


by giving up #6 overall this year, 2nd rounder this year and next year's #1.




Imagine if Margot Robbie was in my bed right now


Feels like that would cost more
RE: RE: Imagine the Giants can get up to #1 overall  
ThomasG : 2/10/2024 11:31 am : link
In comment 16394610 BleedBlue46 said:
Quote:
In comment 16394608 ThomasG said:


Quote:


by giving up #6 overall this year, 2nd rounder this year and next year's #1.



No chance. I bet the Redskins would trade more than that to go up 1 slot.


No, I don't.
In case you're wondering  
WillieYoung : 2/10/2024 11:33 am : link
why no mock drafts have us taking a QB in round 1, the guys who get paid to do mock drafts, unlike BBI, actually listen to what the coach and GM say.
RE: In case you're wondering  
BigBlueShock : 2/10/2024 11:36 am : link
In comment 16394616 WillieYoung said:
Quote:
why no mock drafts have us taking a QB in round 1, the guys who get paid to do mock drafts, unlike BBI, actually listen to what the coach and GM say.

Uh, what?
RE: Imagine the Giants can get up to #1 overall  
BlueVinnie : 2/10/2024 11:42 am : link
In comment 16394608 ThomasG said:
Quote:
by giving up #6 overall this year, 2nd rounder this year and next year's #1.

If that was all it would take to move up to #1, I'd do it in a minute. However, I think the price tag is higher than that.
RE: RE: Imagine the Giants can get up to #1 overall  
ThomasG : 2/10/2024 11:51 am : link
In comment 16394620 BlueVinnie said:
Quote:
In comment 16394608 ThomasG said:


Quote:


by giving up #6 overall this year, 2nd rounder this year and next year's #1.


If that was all it would take to move up to #1, I'd do it in a minute. However, I think the price tag is higher than that.


Maybe. But I think this gets Schoen well into the conversation.
RE: If I had to guess,  
Chris684 : 2/10/2024 11:59 am : link
In comment 16394611 Anakim said:
Quote:
I think the Commmanders trade up to #1 for Caleb Williams and the Bears take MHJ at #2 overall.


This.
 
SFGFNCGiantsFan : 2/10/2024 12:20 pm : link
I don’t see Chicago passing on Caleb.
RE: If I had to guess,  
Pepe LePugh : 2/10/2024 1:08 pm : link
In comment 16394611 Anakim said:
Quote:
I think the Commmanders trade up to #1 for Caleb Williams and the Bears take MHJ at #2 overall.

Or at this point da Bears trade down again and still get a blue chip weapon, plus more picks. I actually see this as Giants best bet if they’re hoping for one of the premier QBs.
RE: In case you're wondering  
Scooter185 : 2/10/2024 1:16 pm : link
In comment 16394616 WillieYoung said:
Quote:
why no mock drafts have us taking a QB in round 1, the guys who get paid to do mock drafts, unlike BBI, actually listen to what the coach and GM say.


Mock drafts are about as meaningful as posts on BBI
RE: …  
nygiantfan : 2/10/2024 1:38 pm : link
In comment 16394645 SFGFNCGiantsFan said:
Quote:
I don’t see Chicago passing on Caleb.


Yes, that is what seem to be gaining a lot of favor in the NFL news reports as of late. Caleb or one of the other two guys-Daniels or Maye.
RE: We are not trading up to #1,  
giantstock : 2/10/2024 4:30 pm : link
In comment 16394600 BleedBlue46 said:
Quote:
But if the Bears take a massive haul of picks and decide to take the surefire pick in MHJ after robbing the Redskins blind then we could trade pick 47 and our 1st with the Cardinals to get Daniels or Maye (I prefer Daniels). It's funny everyone talks about how Daniels is so old when he is only 11 months older than CW and JJ is 14 months younger than CW. Bo Nix is about 3 years older than JJ, he's the one out of the top qbs I wouldn't touch with a 10' pole.


The context of your post is not an expected reality nor is what Thmas G is posting. I've had prior posts back and forth with Thoams G imo he wears the Blue Shades tight.

We have to consider that the only chance The Bears make this trade is that they don't value any of the top 3 QB's as a superstar. The chance that that is reality is slim-to-none.

Thus for anything you offer them, they'd have to be incredibly ignorant to to trade out of that top spot (ofc it could happen but you can't count on ignorance of the top spots unless its Resume Dave Gettleman). This only happens if they don't think any of the 3 are super or that they cab fall and still get one of the suppsoed super 3 because they value them as close.

Either way- you and others are proposing something that is slim-to-none.
RE: RE: We are not trading up to #1,  
BleedBlue46 : 2/10/2024 5:27 pm : link
In comment 16394764 giantstock said:
Quote:
In comment 16394600 BleedBlue46 said:


Quote:


But if the Bears take a massive haul of picks and decide to take the surefire pick in MHJ after robbing the Redskins blind then we could trade pick 47 and our 1st with the Cardinals to get Daniels or Maye (I prefer Daniels). It's funny everyone talks about how Daniels is so old when he is only 11 months older than CW and JJ is 14 months younger than CW. Bo Nix is about 3 years older than JJ, he's the one out of the top qbs I wouldn't touch with a 10' pole.



The context of your post is not an expected reality nor is what Thmas G is posting. I've had prior posts back and forth with Thoams G imo he wears the Blue Shades tight.

We have to consider that the only chance The Bears make this trade is that they don't value any of the top 3 QB's as a superstar. The chance that that is reality is slim-to-none.

Thus for anything you offer them, they'd have to be incredibly ignorant to to trade out of that top spot (ofc it could happen but you can't count on ignorance of the top spots unless its Resume Dave Gettleman). This only happens if they don't think any of the 3 are super or that they cab fall and still get one of the suppsoed super 3 because they value them as close.

Either way- you and others are proposing something that is slim-to-none.


Or they like Fields still and think they can keep building a dominant team around him. Or a combination of believing Fields plus MhJ and a haul of other picks is better than the unknown promise of CW. There are lots of factors in play here, not as simple as chalking it up to they don't value the top 3. Hell, they could like Daniels or Maye more and trade down get a lot of picks and take one of them. Time will tell, but my gut says they trade down to 2 and pick MHJ while the Commanders give them a '25 1st and 2 '24 2nds or something crazy like that.
RE: RE: …  
giantstock : 2/10/2024 5:50 pm : link
In comment 16394691 nygiantfan said:
Quote:
In comment 16394645 SFGFNCGiantsFan said:


Quote:


I don’t see Chicago passing on Caleb.



Yes, that is what seem to be gaining a lot of favor in the NFL news reports as of late. Caleb or one of the other two guys-Daniels or Maye.


IMO it's always been the reality. Nothing has changed much since the end of the season. There is little chance to expect that the Giants oculd trade up for the Bears pick. And not much-at-all chance that the bears are going to trade 1 but that has always been a very slim chance.

But to not take a Qb -- was always extremely, extremely, extremely thin.
RE: RE: RE: We are not trading up to #1,  
giantstock : 2/10/2024 6:21 pm : link
In comment 16394790 BleedBlue46 said:
Quote:
In comment 16394764 giantstock said:


Quote:


In comment 16394600 BleedBlue46 said:


Quote:


But if the Bears take a massive haul of picks and decide to take the surefire pick in MHJ after robbing the Redskins blind then we could trade pick 47 and our 1st with the Cardinals to get Daniels or Maye (I prefer Daniels). It's funny everyone talks about how Daniels is so old when he is only 11 months older than CW and JJ is 14 months younger than CW. Bo Nix is about 3 years older than JJ, he's the one out of the top qbs I wouldn't touch with a 10' pole.



The context of your post is not an expected reality nor is what Thmas G is posting. I've had prior posts back and forth with Thoams G imo he wears the Blue Shades tight.

We have to consider that the only chance The Bears make this trade is that they don't value any of the top 3 QB's as a superstar. The chance that that is reality is slim-to-none.

Thus for anything you offer them, they'd have to be incredibly ignorant to to trade out of that top spot (ofc it could happen but you can't count on ignorance of the top spots unless its Resume Dave Gettleman). This only happens if they don't think any of the 3 are super or that they cab fall and still get one of the suppsoed super 3 because they value them as close.

Either way- you and others are proposing something that is slim-to-none.



Or they like Fields still and think they can keep building a dominant team around him. Or a combination of believing Fields plus MhJ and a haul of other picks is better than the unknown promise of CW. There are lots of factors in play here, not as simple as chalking it up to they don't value the top 3. Hell, they could like Daniels or Maye more and trade down get a lot of picks and take one of them. Time will tell, but my gut says they trade down to 2 and pick MHJ while the Commanders give them a '25 1st and 2 '24 2nds or something crazy like that.


You'd say "like." That's the point why it would be overall extremely silly for the Bears to bypass on taking the QB. We agree that they "like" Fields. They would have to "love Fields." The teams over the years that have sustained the most success and project to have that success are the teams that have the super QB. San Fran an anomlay in which you build without a super QB if they don't get the chance. (Though they tried).

However, The Bears don't have the 2nd pick. Or the 3rd pick etc. They have the number 1 pick. Do you seriously think that between the Owner, The GM, The coach, and all the Scouting, that overall they feel as you do that the top pick is a complete unknown (if you didn't mean Complete. Then what %? And based on what we hear -- what realistic % is "unknwon?. If so, why should teams ever trade up much for such a high unknown if it is high?)? If so much "unknwon," there should be little conviction of the QB they are taking of projected success, correct?

Anyhow, they get paid to do a job. So with the number 1 pick and you have heard about for example Caleb being so awesome, you want to put this QB group in the bucket of unknowns and you feel people that get paid for a living to make picks will feel so cautious in their job capabilities that they feel he is that much of an unknown? This is the number 1 pick. The top 3 QB's, especially two, are considered extremely strong. You can't ignore this vs "they like Fields."

IMO for any of you that do, imo you are dreaming. Adn you mention Moye and Daniels. If the Bears get them, unless they are told prior by the team they are trading with that the other team is trading MHV, then please explain why the Bears would then not take Moye or Daniels? MVH is clear cut number 1 WR isn't he? SO if the Bears don't draft him, why would they also not take one of the top QB's? Maybe extremely beyond thin that they think one WR is superior to MVH?

With the number 1 pick, the chances the Bears scouting community doesn’t believe none of the 3 are better than “Like” which you refer to with Fields, that is slim to none.
RE: RE: RE: RE: We are not trading up to #1,  
BleedBlue46 : 2/11/2024 2:49 am : link
In comment 16394810 giantstock said:
Quote:
In comment 16394790 BleedBlue46 said:


Quote:


In comment 16394764 giantstock said:


Quote:


In comment 16394600 BleedBlue46 said:


Quote:


But if the Bears take a massive haul of picks and decide to take the surefire pick in MHJ after robbing the Redskins blind then we could trade pick 47 and our 1st with the Cardinals to get Daniels or Maye (I prefer Daniels). It's funny everyone talks about how Daniels is so old when he is only 11 months older than CW and JJ is 14 months younger than CW. Bo Nix is about 3 years older than JJ, he's the one out of the top qbs I wouldn't touch with a 10' pole.



The context of your post is not an expected reality nor is what Thmas G is posting. I've had prior posts back and forth with Thoams G imo he wears the Blue Shades tight.

We have to consider that the only chance The Bears make this trade is that they don't value any of the top 3 QB's as a superstar. The chance that that is reality is slim-to-none.

Thus for anything you offer them, they'd have to be incredibly ignorant to to trade out of that top spot (ofc it could happen but you can't count on ignorance of the top spots unless its Resume Dave Gettleman). This only happens if they don't think any of the 3 are super or that they cab fall and still get one of the suppsoed super 3 because they value them as close.

Either way- you and others are proposing something that is slim-to-none.



Or they like Fields still and think they can keep building a dominant team around him. Or a combination of believing Fields plus MhJ and a haul of other picks is better than the unknown promise of CW. There are lots of factors in play here, not as simple as chalking it up to they don't value the top 3. Hell, they could like Daniels or Maye more and trade down get a lot of picks and take one of them. Time will tell, but my gut says they trade down to 2 and pick MHJ while the Commanders give them a '25 1st and 2 '24 2nds or something crazy like that.



You'd say "like." That's the point why it would be overall extremely silly for the Bears to bypass on taking the QB. We agree that they "like" Fields. They would have to "love Fields." The teams over the years that have sustained the most success and project to have that success are the teams that have the super QB. San Fran an anomlay in which you build without a super QB if they don't get the chance. (Though they tried).

However, The Bears don't have the 2nd pick. Or the 3rd pick etc. They have the number 1 pick. Do you seriously think that between the Owner, The GM, The coach, and all the Scouting, that overall they feel as you do that the top pick is a complete unknown (if you didn't mean Complete. Then what %? And based on what we hear -- what realistic % is "unknwon?. If so, why should teams ever trade up much for such a high unknown if it is high?)? If so much "unknwon," there should be little conviction of the QB they are taking of projected success, correct?

Anyhow, they get paid to do a job. So with the number 1 pick and you have heard about for example Caleb being so awesome, you want to put this QB group in the bucket of unknowns and you feel people that get paid for a living to make picks will feel so cautious in their job capabilities that they feel he is that much of an unknown? This is the number 1 pick. The top 3 QB's, especially two, are considered extremely strong. You can't ignore this vs "they like Fields."

IMO for any of you that do, imo you are dreaming. Adn you mention Moye and Daniels. If the Bears get them, unless they are told prior by the team they are trading with that the other team is trading MHV, then please explain why the Bears would then not take Moye or Daniels? MVH is clear cut number 1 WR isn't he? SO if the Bears don't draft him, why would they also not take one of the top QB's? Maybe extremely beyond thin that they think one WR is superior to MVH?

With the number 1 pick, the chances the Bears scouting community doesn’t believe none of the 3 are better than “Like” which you refer to with Fields, that is slim to none.


When I said they like Fields I meant they feel better with him MHJ and a boatload of picks than CW. I am not sold on CW as a generational talent. I see him as a high ceiling low floor player and I'd prefer Daniels tbh. These are just hypotheticals, I also think Fields is a solid qb and had shown great improvement. It's a tough decision, but if I was Poles I would trade down to pick 2 and take MHJ or Daniels depending on how much they like Fields. This is assuming the Commanders trade something along the lines of this years first next years first and 2 2nd round picks for CW.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: We are not trading up to #1,  
giantstock : 2/11/2024 11:38 pm : link
In comment 16394969 BleedBlue46 said:
Quote:
In comment 16394810 giantstock said:


Quote:


In comment 16394790 BleedBlue46 said:


Q




When I said they like Fields I meant they feel better with him MHJ and a boatload of picks than CW. I am not sold on CW as a generational talent. I see him as a high ceiling low floor player and I'd prefer Daniels tbh. These are just hypotheticals, I also think Fields is a solid qb and had shown great improvement. It's a tough decision, but if I was Poles I would trade down to pick 2 and take MHJ or Daniels depending on how much they like Fields. This is assuming the Commanders trade something along the lines of this years first next years first and 2 2nd round picks for CW.


TTrying to baseline our conversation.

Maybe we are coming at this with different meanings? I'm not sure how to throw around the word "generational." IS Joe Burrow "generational?" CJ Stroud can we say now he is "generational?" What's the delineation between "generational" or just outside of that? What about Josh Allen? With Lamar Jackson? As of right now he isn't. But how many playoff games does he need to win over the next 6+ years in order to be identified as "generational?

Harbaugh is a helluva coach but he and his staff also blew this along with Lamar. Less incompetent coaching - and make no mistake this was also significant coaching incompetency - how are we viewing LJ today with coaching competency during that game? We give Fields benefit of the doubt for poor coaching. So, playoffs is win or go home. The HC and OC staff for Ravens deserves an F grade for that critical playoff game that haunts LJ's legacy. So, how much is Lamar being penalized because of this pretty awful performance by his staff and how much does that push down his "generational" tag?

Mostly, I'll use the word "super." The names I've given above are "super." Fields can never be that. I don't believe Caleb needs to be "generational" for him being picked 1 by the Bears. Just depends on your definition, but what's your baseline?



RE: Merril Hoge is out on Caleb  
Carl in CT : 2/12/2024 8:09 am : link
In comment 16394570 Jerz44 said:
Quote:
That gives me serious pause.

I’m actually warming up to the JJ talk!


We already have a better QB than anyone in the draft
RE: Three Situations Where You Would Trade For #1  
Carl in CT : 2/12/2024 8:11 am : link
In comment 16394581 varco said:
Quote:
First -- If you already have a "good" roster, you need one more part to put you over the top and if there is a sure fire future HOF at the top of the board. Think LT, etc.
Second -- if you have a "two-headed" QB situation, both are well regarded, and you wanted to move on from one of them, swapping him out (plus other compensation) to the team holding the #1 if your target is a position player and a sure fire star. Think Staubach and Craig Morton, back in the day.
Third - if you already have a "loaded" roster, an aging or less than optimal QB and wanted his successor now.

I just don't see the utility of trading up at the price needed if your roster is full of holes.


Agree 100%. Can’t think QB with the worst OL in the last 25 years. I know injuries but pressures and sacks given up
Back to the Corner