- Joined:
- Aug 20, 2012
- Posts:
- 39,345
- Liked Posts:
- 52,465
IrrelevantIt does matter tho, because thats another wasted top 10 pick
IrrelevantIt does matter tho, because thats another wasted top 10 pick
People have this idea that players get paid exactly according to where the consensus opinion ranks them with their position. Kirk Cousins and Matt Stafford were once the highest paid QB's in all of football, yet nobody would have ranked them higher than Aaron Rodgers, Tom Brady, or Drew Brees at that time.I do agree with that article..............Smith is worth more to the Bears than the trade value PFF is saying. Bears still may end up paying Smith money a little north of Leonard, Warner.
Lol @ getting an 8th pick or better for roquan and also at calling 2nd and 3rd round picks meaninglessHe was the 8th pick in the draft. If they can't at least match that, there is zero point in trading him. He's worth more on the Bears roster playing at an All Pro level than whatever some meaningless 2nd round or 3rd round pick they'd get in return.
It does matter tho, because thats another wasted top 10 pick
He was the 8th pick in the draft. If they can't at least match that, there is zero point in trading him. He's worth more on the Bears roster playing at an All Pro level than whatever some meaningless 2nd round or 3rd round pick they'd get in return.
The thread title is misleading. Smith was in fact a 1st rd pick (8th over all).
If he’s trying to say that the article explains why Smith will not return a 1st round pick in a trade, I would say most fans and NFL front offices agree.
Just for perspective, what did we get for those? Draft well. Unlikely to get jack for your fails. I remember the Steelers having years of great drafts and not lose a beat when it was next guy up and they'd lose one to FAWhen the top 10 pick is Mitch Tribusky or Kevin White, then yes. That is the way to compete
You're not wrong but the issue is the contract. You can't get any value without him agreeing to an extension with the next team. That will require a trade to a team with Quan goggles.Bears are not competing this year so how is holding onto a malcontent better than trading him for a draft pick that may have a future with the Bears longer term?
Roquan was a fine pick. I preferred him to Edmunds that many here wanted. Mt quote was something like, 'If I take a LB, I just take Roquan.' There's value in taking a sure thing as well. I think my preferred option was to try and trade down a few and take Davenport due to positional need and value. McGlinchey was likely the best choice but our T didn't appear an issue at the time.There was one common denominator to all those top 10 picks (the guy who averaged 5 receptions/yr for his career, the undersized DE, the hooptie car driver, and the LBer with no position)........Pace.
the recent top 10 winning percentage isn't good to reference but it's evident that our recent GM, Pace, is 1st round challenged.
You're not wrong but the issue is the contract. You can't get any value without him agreeing to an extension with the next team. That will require a trade to a team with Quan goggles.