Trading back and breaking knees

[bufordht]

I've always been intrigued by the way NE seems to stockpile picks. In the end it still comes down to picking the right players, but how would y'all feel if Emery traded the fourteenth pick for and early second and a first next year?

If a team like Oakland, Cleveland, or Tampa doesn't go with a QB in the first and wants to move back up, I could see it happening.

It's been said over and over that this will be a 2 year rebuild not he defense, so why not embrace it, there will most likely be someone who drops to the early second that will fill a need at FS/LB/DT/CB/DE so they could still fill a big need. It would leave them sitting pretty next year, especially if said team tanks again, and if not they would have the power to get into the top ten if they want.

So what would the reaction be? Would someone break Emery's knees? Or would it be seen as a good move?

 

[BEARSWAGGER]

If the big board falls our way then I am all for it but only trade back like 4-5 spots for an extra 3rd rounder or something. Not all the way outta the first

 

[bufordht]

Well, the question was about getting a first next year, not trading back in general. But I suppose you could drop back four or five spots and pick up a second next year, I just don't see why a team would want to do that. The idea is that you might get a team to get up next years first if they can get a QB at 14.

 

[bearsfaninfl]

I've always been intrigued by the way NE seems to stockpile picks. In the end it still comes down to picking the right players, but how would y'all feel if Emery traded the fourteenth pick for and early second and a first next year?

If a team like Oakland, Cleveland, or Tampa doesn't go with a QB in the first and wants to move back up, I could see it happening.

It's been said over and over that this will be a 2 year rebuild not he defense, so why not embrace it, there will most likely be someone who drops to the early second that will fill a need at FS/LB/DT/CB/DE so they could still fill a big need. It would leave them sitting pretty next year, especially if said team tanks again, and if not they would have the power to get into the top ten if they want.

So what would the reaction be? Would someone break Emery's knees? Or would it be seen as a good move?

Cleveland would be the only one to make sense, and it wouldn't be for a pick next year. Their 26th pick in the first and the 3rd pick in the second for our 14th pick. By the draft chart, the numbers are close enough to make sense for both sides. Our pick valued at 1100 and their two at 1250. That would give us pick 26, 35 and 51 in the first two rounds.

I'd hate to see us do anything for future picks this year, as we just have too many holes to fill. We've got a group of free agents. The guys we do have on defense are either aging or big question marks. There's no sense in not trying to do everything possible this year.

Even with the Cleveland scenario, you could still end up on a 2 year plan, but even if you do, you can add 3 very good young players this year and get them valuable experience going into year 2. It's too much of a gamble to bank on next year's draft class, and the record of the team you trade with.

If we drafted as well as the Pats, I'd be less concerned.

 

[bigditka]

If theres value there do it...Browns have two 1st round picks dont they??

 

[ZenBear34]

i'd rather trade up and get an impact defensive player.

 

[Mitchapalooza]

Inb4omelet

Sent from Cuba

 

[bearsfaninfl]

i'd rather trade up and get an impact defensive player.

I'd be just as ok with that as I would with trading down, for the right guy.

The bottom line is that we need help on defense. If we consider trading down, I'm ok with it, simply because it gives us a few chances at an impact player. I'm ok staying at 14 for the right guy.

I'm not ok with trading into next year. I hope we get to that position eventually, but right now, we need defensive help right away.

 

[Chris Sojka]

I've always been intrigued by the way NE seems to stockpile picks. In the end it still comes down to picking the right players, but how would y'all feel if Emery traded the fourteenth pick for and early second and a first next year?

If a team like Oakland, Cleveland, or Tampa doesn't go with a QB in the first and wants to move back up, I could see it happening.

It's been said over and over that this will be a 2 year rebuild not he defense, so why not embrace it, there will most likely be someone who drops to the early second that will fill a need at FS/LB/DT/CB/DE so they could still fill a big need. It would leave them sitting pretty next year, especially if said team tanks again, and if not they would have the power to get into the top ten if they want.

So what would the reaction be? Would someone break Emery's knees? Or would it be seen as a good move?

I think the concept is brilliant...

He who prepared in the past controls the present, those who prepare in the present control the future, those that control the future prepared in the past...

None of this stuff happens by luck... GMs ultimately make decisions that alter their franchise for better or worse in the direction they choose... I can never see the harm in investing in our future...

I believe you could trade back into the mid 20s and still pick up a 1st rounder next year if that is all you were to gain.. Which isn't a bad deal at all... We have seen many teams take big leaps forward that have had multiple 1st round picks...

Chandler Jones and Donta Hightower were the patriots 1st round picks last year... their defense improved significantly since the time they were drafted and on top of being highly talented they will both be around on that defense for a long time together...

If Phil decides to trade for a later pick in the draft it would have to be for a 1st round pick next year and nothing less...

If we can still have a 1st round pick this year and somehow manage a deal that gives us 2 next year I would be very excited for that opportunity for our team given all the needs we have on defense and that fact that it will take us 2 years at least to rebuild on defense...

 

[fatbeard]

i'd rather trade up and get an impact defensive player.

You could get an impact player in the back of the round if they guy is knocked for size, like Donald or Ford.

 

[doctorbear]

Trading back would cement the idea that this regime is much like the last.

LOL @ bringing up NE as an example- the most successful franchise of the past 10+ years. Bears are consistent at one thing: losing. They don't have the same ability as NE to go ahead and stockpile picks rather than pick the most talented player possible.

 

[Doubledown]

Trading back would cement the idea that this regime is much like the last.

LOL @ bringing up NE as an example- the most successful franchise of the past 10+ years. Bears are consistent at one thing: losing. They don't have the same ability as NE to go ahead and stockpile picks rather than pick the most talented player possible.

they have Brady, Belichick is supposed to be a defensive genius :roll:
for the Bears to win a SB we need a top ten defense IMO

 

[botfly10]

Defense doesn't need to 2 years to get to average or just under average. Shit, imo with just a couple key players, the D can be in the top 1/2 of the league.

But shit, even if the D can get into the 16-20 range, that should be enough to make the playoffs. And as bad as they were this season, I don't think it will take that much to accomplish. All it takes is a good DL and the Bears will make a significant jump.

 

[bufordht]

Defense doesn't need to 2 years to get to average or just under average. Shit, imo with just a couple key players, the D can be in the top 1/2 of the league.

But shit, even if the D can get into the 16-20 range, that should be enough to make the playoffs. And as bad as they were this season, I don't think it will take that much to accomplish. All it takes is a good DL and the Bears will make a significant jump.

I agree actually. It's not uncommon at all to see a couple changes plus a couple healthy guys make all the difference.

That's whee the argument is for me, is it better to sew into the future or go for it every year.

 

[jelt2359]

Trading for next year's picks makes perfect sense in terms of "getting a high pick". Problem is, the GM may not be around by next year. So most GMs don't do it. For the fans it's also kinda boring so... Doesn't happen often.

Frankly though trading back makes a lot of sense. The draft is a huge crapshoot. The more chances you get at it, the better.

 

[X]

The Bears should have a list of players they want with the 1st round pick...for example:
Mosley
Nix
Dix
Hageman
Barr
Dennard

If 5 of them are on the board when it's your pick, and you like all 5 equally...you're free to trade back to 19 or so...and pick up a 3rd (likely).

DON'T trade further back than the # remaining on your top tier picks. Or we'll end up with a Stephen Tuitt panic pick.

 

[bigditka]

If we land a top FA or two and a few of the draft picks contribute the D can have a big turnaround..im excited to see what the next few months bring you wouldn't think the D can get worse than this year

 

[bufordht]

The Bears should have a list of players they want with the 1st round pick...for example:
Mosley
Nix
Dix
Hageman
Barr
Dennard

If 5 of them are on the board when it's your pick, and you like all 5 equally...you're free to trade back to 19 or so...and pick up a 3rd (likely).

DON'T trade further back than the # remaining on your top tier picks. Or we'll end up with a Stephen Tuitt panic pick.

Obviously the chances of every one of your targets being taken in the next five picks is pretty slim. Teams do like offensive players too, so you can afford to drop back a little more than that, but I think you would have to be prepared to take a lesser prospect, obviously it's a trade off.

I like the idea of dropping to the early second, Cleveland being a great target, because there's an excellent chance that their first next year is a top ten pick. It gives you a shot at a real difference maker that you can't otherwise have.

Some have mentioned they would rather trade up, that would cost picks, it costs a lot to move up obviously. By grabbing a future first you are trading up, or at least giving yourself the power to trade up in next years draft. Basically you're turning this years first into a second tier player (assuming you don't get lucky and someone drops) and a top tier player.

Even if Cleveland would make the playoffs for the first time in a million years, you still have 2 firsts next year and you can trade up for a Clowney type of player if you want.

 

[BearFanJohn]

Defense doesn't need to 2 years to get to average or just under average. Shit, imo with just a couple key players, the D can be in the top 1/2 of the league.

But shit, even if the D can get into the 16-20 range, that should be enough to make the playoffs. And as bad as they were this season, I don't think it will take that much to accomplish. All it takes is a good DL and the Bears will make a significant jump.

I agree. If they don't have all the injuries this year they would have been mediocre or better. A good draft and a FA or two and they can be top half?

 

[PrimeTime]

One factor to consider is this year there will be a record number of underclassmen entering the draft. It's a big jump from last year which was the previous record. I've read a couple articles where people believe last year and this years draft will deplete the Senior talent for next years draft. There will still be some underclassmen talent in next years draft but some people believe the talent in next years draft will be the worst in 10 years. A lot of pundits have said the talent depth in this draft is the best there's ever been. If you believe this theory then wouldn't it make more sense to trade away picks from next years draft for more picks in this years draft?