POLL: Would you like to see the Bears trade down for extra draft picks?

Discussion in 'Chicago Bears' started by JustAnotherBearsFan99, Apr 13, 2014.

?

Would like to see the Bears trade down for extra draft picks?

  1. Yes, if they can find a trade partner.

    14 vote(s)
    46.7%
  2. No, pick at #14.

    16 vote(s)
    53.3%
  1. JustAnotherBearsFan99

    JustAnotherBearsFan99
    Expand Collapse
    Assistant Head Coach
    SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    May 21, 2012
    Messages:
    13,534
    Likes Received:
    4,309
    ßearz ßuckz:
    5,650ß
    Please Register or Log in to Remove this Advertisement!
    Here's an interesting article about how Bill Belichick trades up and down in the draft. Last year he ended up with 4 extra draft picks by trading down. If we could find a trade partner, should we trade down?

    [​IMG]

     
  2. Grizzblue

    Grizzblue
    Expand Collapse
    Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2012
    Messages:
    2,335
    Likes Received:
    619
    ßearz ßuckz:
    518ß
    Not unless we got a crazy good offer and we had a plan for a player to help us with the pick we moved down for. No JA trade downs just to try to spread out the gamble of top picks. Maybe if they are absolutely sold on Jernigan, Pryor or Fuller an were confident we could get the guy wherever we moved down to.

    But no, we will have a good player available to us at 14....no need to get cute.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. riczaj01

    riczaj01
    Expand Collapse
    DaBears Ditka
    SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    25,206
    Likes Received:
    4,192
    ßearz ßuckz:
    4,506ß
    hell yes, the strength of this draft is in it's depth, way to many people are over valuing anything the bears could possibly get at 14, there are NO future greats at 14, but all are REALLY, but the same could be said for the players in the latter 1/2 of the 1st also. It's also why it will be next to impossible to trade unless someone REALLY falls, ie top 3 qb, or stop 8 talent.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. Bearsinhouston

    Bearsinhouston
    Expand Collapse
    Assistant Head Coach
    DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    10,918
    Likes Received:
    2,863
    ßearz ßuckz:
    5,236ß
    Not our first pick, but yes to 2nd or third (or both) picks
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. Grizzblue

    Grizzblue
    Expand Collapse
    Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2012
    Messages:
    2,335
    Likes Received:
    619
    ßearz ßuckz:
    518ß

    Would be more likely and maybe useful to move on our 2nd or 3rd pick. Can maybe net another later one if we don't have anyone that we like at the specific place we are drafting.
     
  6. Bearsinhouston

    Bearsinhouston
    Expand Collapse
    Assistant Head Coach
    DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    10,918
    Likes Received:
    2,863
    ßearz ßuckz:
    5,236ß
    yeah. that's what I'm thinking. Use the 14 on an impact player. We won't see a pick that high for a while. There are lots of players in the tier below the top tier. Get as many of those as you can.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. BSBEARS

    BSBEARS
    Expand Collapse
    Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2014
    Messages:
    3,967
    Likes Received:
    1,250
    ßearz ßuckz:
    3,304ß
    That can be said about round 1 as well, right now its the fan base that is hooked on Donald, we have no idea where Emery and the Bears are with all the players and if they rate anyone that much higher or lower than us as fans do. They have much better data to make a more informed decision.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. jackiejokeman

    jackiejokeman
    Expand Collapse
    Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2013
    Messages:
    2,034
    Likes Received:
    205
    ßearz ßuckz:
    933ß
    Trading down has worked so well for us in the past ...

    ummm ... how did we get Alshon Jeffery ?
     
  9. dachuckster

    dachuckster
    Expand Collapse
    Pro-Bowler
    SuperFan

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,820
    Likes Received:
    837
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,566ß
    Just for speculation ... let's say there is an unexpected run on defensive players in picks 6-12 and a top 10 offensive player falls our way. Do we take an offensive player that we may not be able to immediately use or do we try to play "Let's Make a Deal"?
     
  10. soulman

    soulman
    Expand Collapse
    Coordinator
    SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    8,901
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    ßearz ßuckz:
    4,938ß
    Not if we can draft a guy who can come in and play day one and make an impact and there are guys who will be on the board at #14 who can do that.

    Comparing this to Belichick isn't a true comparison. He's almost always trading picks at the back end of the first round where there is very little difference between most of those guys and the next player on the board. He also bends his defenses around the guys he has playing with variations of both 3-4 and 4-3 schemes so his picks are usually not rooted in only one scheme or the other.

    One other huge consideration is that when you're winning AFC titles and SBs with the horses he has his focus may be less on immediate starters than it is on adding youth and depth to phase in the following year or two. That's how he keeps his defense from aging right out from under him. He doesn't do that when he needs an impact player.

    I don't disagree with the basic idea of it but for us it's not time. We're short a couple of impact players and we need to take advantage of this pick while we still have one in this choice of a spot. So unless ALL of the top guys we could make immediate use of are gone no, I would not trade back. We have depth and now we need impact.
     
    • Like Like x 1

Share This Page