According to the sacred chart the incremental difference between Colts/Panthers trade is 450 points (1800-1350). That’s NOT 3 players, unless you’re taking players BELOW 2nd round level. Otherwise, you’re trading Anderson/Carter for ONE extra second round pick. I don’t think that’s worth it, but opinions differ.
There is a misconception that the Colts trade creates a shortage of picks. According to the sacred chart, they would owe us 1200 points 3000-1800), which makes the trade about = in points if they give us their top 3 picks in 2023. In that case, the Bears get picks 4,35,56,65,67,103,134,136,148,220. Of course, you could dilute the pick even more, but every step down is trading quality for quantity. I say the Colts trade gives a good balance.
What golden chart are you using? Link it, is it the old Johnson one? if so it's not the one used anymore, no one in the NFL uses it.
I’d like Poles to stay in the top 4 to have a shot at Anderson (even though I’m a UGA fan, I have concerns about Carter). Do we need a lot of help? Yes, no doubt about it. To me this is about being setup for a Super Bowl run and without a generational talent on D, I don’t know if we can get there. This off-season is our chance to get one as going forward are $$$ will get sucked up as we have to start to re-sign guys in a couple years (such as Fields) and we should be back further in the draft for no other reason than our improved won-loss record.
I agree, and I want this GM/HC to prioritize the OL and WR not w/throwing bodies at it like the kicker camp they had a few years ago, but w/actual quality shots in the draft and FA.
Ric, you explain this better than me because I have been trying to say the same thing. I get it, that the WR draft this year is not that good at the very top. But that doesn't mean you can't draft a quality WR. I call those guys top-tier talents. It is not wrong to expect Poles to (as you say) take quality shots at acquiring that talent. Same with the OL. And I guess some folks think I'm stupid or something and don't understand that we won't get all of that this year - and we won't get perfect. Nobody in the NFL ever gets perfect. But the good teams go all in to at least TRY to get the best talent. To take actual quality shots in the draft and FA. And I get it also that you don't let the defense rot. Sure, there will be plenty of opportunities to improve the defense in '23 and '24. My point though, is that I'm tired of the offense taking the back seat to the defense - and when the offense sucks, everyone pisses and moans about it. This isn't rocket science. If you want a great offense, then acquire great offensive players. Right?
What am I missing here?
JABF, I am quite certain Poles will draft a WR this year. Even if he somehow lands a big fish WR in FA or via a trade. As you know, most rookie WRs don't light it up first season and need a a year or two of development to shine. So he's gotta get one in the pipeline as Velus kinda looks like he's a gadget/return/#4 type of WR guy.
Poles took a ton of flak for the WR position this past season. It really wasn't fair but fans and media piss and moan regardless of what is realistic. He's gotta invest resources in the position this offseason if for no other reason than PR.
I kinda doubt that investment will involve a FRP though as there doesn't seem to be any knock-your-socks off prospects in the early draft.
This is the current NFL draft chart, the one that everyone is outdated.
I wouldn't want a teams draft pick from 2 yrs from now. Get x amount of picks in the first 2 years. A positive in net value, let alone 400 is a positive, it means you got more then you should have.
Nothing says Anderson is going to be anything, could be and should be, but People thought Solomon Tomas and Vita Vea would be great, they weren't. Shaq Lawrence hasn't done much of anything compared to his draft pick.
That being said, the Bears need to get the most picks they can, that's the point. If they can snag 3 first in the next 3 years and a few 2nd's-4th round picks this year i'm down.
1 player isn't worth the potential of 3+
Thats why you need multiple picks. You need as many shots in the first 3 rounds, specifically the first 2. Every pick is potential boom and bust, even the first 1-5.
According to the sacred chart the incremental difference between Colts/Panthers trade is 450 points (1800-1350). That’s NOT 3 players, unless you’re taking players BELOW 2nd round level. Otherwise, you’re trading Anderson/Carter for ONE extra second round pick. I don’t think that’s worth it, but opinions differ.
There is a misconception that the Colts trade creates a shortage of picks. According to the sacred chart, they would owe us 1200 points 3000-1800), which makes the trade about = in points if they give us their top 3 picks in 2023. In that case, the Bears get picks 4,35,56,65,67,103,134,136,148,220. Of course, you could dilute the pick even more, but every step down is trading quality for quantity. I say the Colts trade gives a good balance.
By the traditional chart its a lower 2nd round pick (roughly #55). By the Rich Hill chart, which tends to value middle round picks higher, its a mid-2nd rounder.
You have repeatedly said definitively that Arizona is taking Anderson at #3. So, it doesn't really matter, right? He's off the board under either trade scenario.
According to the sacred chart the incremental difference between Colts/Panthers trade is 450 points (1800-1350). That’s NOT 3 players, unless you’re taking players BELOW 2nd round level. Otherwise, you’re trading Anderson/Carter for ONE extra second round pick. I don’t think that’s worth it, but opinions differ.
There is a misconception that the Colts trade creates a shortage of picks. According to the sacred chart, they would owe us 1200 points 3000-1800), which makes the trade about = in points if they give us their top 3 picks in 2023. In that case, the Bears get picks 4,35,56,65,67,103,134,136,148,220. Of course, you could dilute the pick even more, but every step down is trading quality for quantity. I say the Colts trade gives a good balance.
By the traditional chart its a lower 2nd round pick (roughly #55). By the Rich Hill chart, which tends to value middle round picks higher, its a mid-2nd rounder.
You have repeatedly said definitively that Arizona is taking Anderson at #3. So, it doesn't really matter, right? He's off the board under either trade scenario.
Rich Hill chart is nuts. Walter football and several others use the 2023 chart. But if Poles can find a sucker GM who will trade him with the Hill chart, that would be fabulous.
You misquoted me. Cards will take Anderson, IF they don’t trade down, which is definitely possible.
According to the sacred chart the incremental difference between Colts/Panthers trade is 450 points (1800-1350). That’s NOT 3 players, unless you’re taking players BELOW 2nd round level. Otherwise, you’re trading Anderson/Carter for ONE extra second round pick. I don’t think that’s worth it, but opinions differ.
There is a misconception that the Colts trade creates a shortage of picks. According to the sacred chart, they would owe us 1200 points 3000-1800), which makes the trade about = in points if they give us their top 3 picks in 2023. In that case, the Bears get picks 4,35,56,65,67,103,134,136,148,220. Of course, you could dilute the pick even more, but every step down is trading quality for quantity. I say the Colts trade gives a good balance.
I have to believe the chart is a valuable help in these trades but in the end if a team is really coveting that pick we have, they may give somewhat more than the chart value. It's like an auction. If the bidding goes up, well they don't stop the auction. They let the bidder pay what he is willing to pay for something he wants that badly. I hope that happens here. I hope a team wants a QB so badly in this draft that they pay us well. Overpaying the chart is okay. Or maybe we can harvest a good veteran player in the trade also. What I focus on, are the players in the first 60 or so picks. In your example above it would be those 5 picks: 4,35,56,65,67. I'm hoping that Poles can leverage some scenario like that into 5 quality starters. I'm not saying All-Pro guys but just rock solid starters that make our team better. I believe Poles should also get good players in that 60-90 pick range too. After 90 well, you can get lucky and get a great player (Braxton Jones is the poster boy for that, and so is Mooney) but it's more of a hit-and-miss thing.
You are correct. When you look at Day 2 and Day 3 trades, they adhere fairly closely to the chart. When you are talking about high-1st round moves going after what you hope is a franchise QB, there's a lot of auction mentality at play and often "overpays".
If a team (or better yet, TEAMS) fall in love with a QB prospect, yeah they will pay thru the nose to get him. I could easily see that scenario panning out with Indy and Chris Ballard who's seat is hotter than a frying pan right now. Imagine if he "cheaps out" and Houston, the Colts division rival, gets their guy instead who goes on to become a stud. Ballard is insta-fired and the Colts are buried in the division behind Lawrence and and new Houston QB for the next 15 years.
You can easily foresee how this could become a feeding frenzy no different that in a hot housing market when buyers are bidding over asking price to buy houses sight unseen.
I have to believe the chart is a valuable help in these trades but in the end if a team is really coveting that pick we have, they may give somewhat more than the chart value. It's like an auction. If the bidding goes up, well they don't stop the auction. They let the bidder pay what he is willing to pay for something he wants that badly. I hope that happens here. I hope a team wants a QB so badly in this draft that they pay us well. Overpaying the chart is okay. Or maybe we can harvest a good veteran player in the trade also. What I focus on, are the players in the first 60 or so picks. In your example above it would be those 5 picks: 4,35,56,65,67. I'm hoping that Poles can leverage some scenario like that into 5 quality starters. I'm not saying All-Pro guys but just rock solid starters that make our team better. I believe Poles should also get good players in that 60-90 pick range too. After 90 well, you can get lucky and get a great player (Braxton Jones is the poster boy for that, and so is Mooney) but it's more of a hit-and-miss thing.
You are correct. When you look at Day 2 and Day 3 trades, they adhere fairly closely to the chart. When you are talking about high-1st round moves going after what you hope is a franchise QB, there's a lot of auction mentality at play and often "overpays".
If a team (or better yet, TEAMS) fall in love with a QB prospect, yeah they will pay thru the nose to get him. I could easily see that scenario panning out with Indy and Chris Ballard who's seat is hotter than a frying pan right now. Imagine if he "cheaps out" and Houston, the Colts division rival, gets their guy instead who goes on to become a stud. Ballard is insta-fired and the Colts are buried in the division behind Lawrence and and new Houston QB for the next 15 years.
You can easily foresee how this could become a feeding frenzy no different that in a hot housing market when buyers are bidding over asking price to buy houses sight unseen.
And this is why I want Poles to hold out for THREE first round picks, if he trades outside the top-5. 49ers set the precedent and that wasn’t for #1. If they won’t pony up the picks, then do the Colts deal.
You are correct. When you look at Day 2 and Day 3 trades, they adhere fairly closely to the chart. When you are talking about high-1st round moves going after what you hope is a franchise QB, there's a lot of auction mentality at play and often "overpays".
If a team (or better yet, TEAMS) fall in love with a QB prospect, yeah they will pay thru the nose to get him. I could easily see that scenario panning out with Indy and Chris Ballard who's seat is hotter than a frying pan right now. Imagine if he "cheaps out" and Houston, the Colts division rival, gets their guy instead who goes on to become a stud. Ballard is insta-fired and the Colts are buried in the division behind Lawrence and and new Houston QB for the next 15 years.
You can easily foresee how this could become a feeding frenzy no different that in a hot housing market when buyers are bidding over asking price to buy houses sight unseen.
And this is why I want Poles to hold out for THREE first round picks, if he trades outside the top-5. 49ers set the precedent and that wasn’t for #1. If they won’t pony up the picks, then do the Colts deal.
This is why I was hoping for as high a draft pick as possible. When we had a shot at #1 the last few weeks of the season especially.
I DGAF about "losers mentality" (most late-2022 Bears players aren't gonna be here in September anyway) or winning meaningless games in December (that's what cost the Jets Trevor Lawrence). It was a freakin' teardown year for crying out loud!
And this is why I want Poles to hold out for THREE first round picks, if he trades outside the top-5. 49ers set the precedent and that wasn’t for #1. If they won’t pony up the picks, then do the Colts deal.
This is why I was hoping for as high a draft pick as possible. When we had a shot at #1 the last few weeks of the season especially.
I DGAF about "losers mentality" (most late-2022 Bears players aren't gonna be here in September anyway) or winning meaningless games in December (that's what cost the Jets Trevor Lawrence). It was a freakin' teardown year for crying out loud!
I was rooting for Vikings to beat the Bears. I know that is the rational thing, but it still felt kinda weird. I was watching the Texans game 90% of the time, and just flipping back to Bears during commercials. It was amazing miraculous that Texans won. Among other things during their final drive, they converted on 4th and 20.
This is why I was hoping for as high a draft pick as possible. When we had a shot at #1 the last few weeks of the season especially.
I DGAF about "losers mentality" (most late-2022 Bears players aren't gonna be here in September anyway) or winning meaningless games in December (that's what cost the Jets Trevor Lawrence). It was a freakin' teardown year for crying out loud!
I was rooting for Vikings to beat the Bears. I know that is the rational thing, but it still felt kinda weird. I was watching the Texans game 90% of the time, and just flipping back to Bears during commercials. It was amazing miraculous that Texans won. Among other things during their final drive, they converted on 4th and 20.