BayRaider Posted September 12, 2018 Share Posted September 12, 2018 4 minutes ago, vikesfan89 said: Not sure if serious What's not serious...? Bears are not making the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikesfan89 Posted September 12, 2018 Share Posted September 12, 2018 2 minutes ago, BayRaider said: What's not serious...? Bears are not making the playoffs. I was more questioning the pick 29 and 32 thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BayRaider Posted September 12, 2018 Share Posted September 12, 2018 1 minute ago, vikesfan89 said: I was more questioning the pick 29 and 32 thing Saints should make the playoffs, maybe 29 is a stretch though. 20-25. Packers I think will win the Super Bowl. If it's any consolation, I have the Vikings losing to them in the NFC Championship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikesfan89 Posted September 12, 2018 Share Posted September 12, 2018 8 minutes ago, BayRaider said: Saints should make the playoffs, maybe 29 is a stretch though. 20-25. Packers I think will win the Super Bowl. If it's any consolation, I have the Vikings losing to them in the NFC Championship. How is that consolation? I just think it's hard to bank on a team winning the super bowl and another team making it far in the playoffs therefore rejecting the offer. What if the bears make the playoffs next year and have pick 20 in the next draft? Is that less likely than the Packers and saints both being in the playoffs and 1 winning the super bowl? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BayRaider Posted September 12, 2018 Share Posted September 12, 2018 11 minutes ago, vikesfan89 said: How is that consolation? I just think it's hard to bank on a team winning the super bowl and another team making it far in the playoffs therefore rejecting the offer. What if the bears make the playoffs next year and have pick 20 in the next draft? Is that less likely than the Packers and saints both being in the playoffs and 1 winning the super bowl? Not sure what youre getting at... Bears have no shot at picking 25-32 range and they have a small chance to be a Top 5-10 pick. Packers and Saints are not picking Top 5-10 under any circumstance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikesfan89 Posted September 12, 2018 Share Posted September 12, 2018 1 minute ago, BayRaider said: Not sure what youre getting at... Bears have no shot at picking 25-32 range and they have a small chance to be a Top 5-10 pick. Packers and Saints are not picking Top 5-10 under any circumstance. I wouldn't say they have no shot, especially in 2020. If Rodgers gets seriously injured again, I think they'd have a good chance of picking in the top 10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrOaktown_56 Posted September 12, 2018 Share Posted September 12, 2018 18 hours ago, N4L said: Yeah, considering that they took less than two firsts from the bears, with picks spread over multiple years, I would say its pretty safe to assume the raiders would have jumped on two firsts next year. Im still miffed we didn't trade for marcus peters, talib (although talib apparently didn't want to come here), or mack. Could have had all three guys Also I think Sunday night settled the 30 page debate in this thread: Aaron Rodgers + Green Bay's roster >>> Chicago Bears Green Bay's roster minus Aaron Rodgers <<<<< Chicago Bears Isnt it nice when debates get settled so quickly? week one and we already have the definitive answer. 8 Using point charts, the value is still about 2 1st rounders when you factor in all the picks. That's also assuming that the Bears pick around 16. If their picks are higher than that, it's far more favorable. A top 15 pick and another 1st the year after>>>>> Two picks in the mid to late 20s in the same year. IF the Bears pick is very high, that means we can leverage it for even more draft capital. Or use it to acquire a premium defensive player like Bosa, Oliver, etc. I don't think there's any chance of the Packers picking there unless Rodgers gets injured. At least with the Bears, there's a chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N4L Posted September 12, 2018 Share Posted September 12, 2018 2 hours ago, MrOaktown_56 said: A top 15 pick and another 1st the year after>>>>> Two picks in the mid to late 20s in the same year. The time value of money theory states otherwise. Teams usually devalue future picks by one round. So a first in two years is the equivalent of a second this year. Although maybe if you are the cash poor raiders, its better to split up the firsts in different years so that you don't have two players on their 5th year option at the same time Screw the draft charts.. The raiders might draft high enough to get bosa or oliver on their own Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted September 12, 2018 Share Posted September 12, 2018 21 hours ago, N4L said: Also I think Sunday night settled the 30 page debate in this thread: Aaron Rodgers + Green Bay's roster >>> Chicago Bears Green Bay's roster minus Aaron Rodgers <<<<< Chicago Bears Isnt it nice when debates get settled so quickly? week one and we already have the definitive answer. I'd definitely be leery about making that assumption based on one game. Of the 294 yards of total offense, 146 of those yards came in the first two series which are largely considered scripted plays. Not trying to take anything away from what the Bears did to start the game, but they were good for the first halfish. The second half belonged to Aaron Rodgers, and the Packers. In the first half, Mitch Trubisky went 11-14 for 109 yards (7.8 YPA). In the second half, Trubisky went 12-21 for 62 yards (3.0 YPA). That's beyond miserable. He averaged 11 YPA in the first quarter alone, but only 2.8 YPA after that quarter. If I'm a Bears fan, I'm incredibly concerned by that. If Trubisky can't push the ball down the field vertically, teams are going to stack the box against Jordan Howard. You have to give credit to the Bears' D in the first half. Held the Packers to 53 yards on 27 plays including a pick-six and a fumble. They were absolutely dominant. As a Packers' fans, knowing that the Packers have historically been a really slow starting team offensively gives hope that the second half offensive explosion means they're going to get going offensively. They looked much improved defensively. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted September 12, 2018 Share Posted September 12, 2018 21 hours ago, BayRaider said: The Packers and Saints picks will be like 29 and 32. Bears 1st Rounders can be anywhere from 3-18. Probably 8-15 range. Accepting the Packers is like two early second rounders. Would of been dumb to accept. Even throwing in a 2nd, we got better value than we would of got on a Green Bay trade. Realistically speaking, the odds of the Saints and Packers picks being both in that 29-32 range are very unlikely since it'd require them both to make the NFC Championship, which doesn't seem overly likely at this point. Add on the odds of the Bears being bottom 10 seems unlikely as well. So you're talking about astronomically low odds at this point. Realistically speaking, you're probably talking about one pick of the Saints and Packers being in that 26-30 range, while the other falls in that 20-24 range while the Bears pick falls in that 10-18 range. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAF-N72EX Posted September 13, 2018 Share Posted September 13, 2018 On 9/11/2018 at 8:45 PM, N4L said: Isnt it nice when debates get settled so quickly? week one and we already have the definitive answer. Yeah, Garoppolo did look like trash didn't he? I'm glad that debate is over after week one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrOaktown_56 Posted September 13, 2018 Share Posted September 13, 2018 24 minutes ago, JustAnotherFan said: Yeah, Garoppolo did look like trash didn't he? I'm glad that debate is over after week one. He didn't play well, but neither did Carr and Stafford. I'm no Garoppolo lover, but the debate is not "over" after week one. There never was a big enough sample to draw a definitive answer in either direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAF-N72EX Posted September 13, 2018 Share Posted September 13, 2018 Just now, MrOaktown_56 said: He didn't play well, but neither did Carr and Stafford. I'm no Garoppolo lover, but the debate is not "over" after week one. There never was a big enough sample to draw a definitive answer in either direction. I know, that was the point. He called the Bears/Packers debate over after one week so I did the same with JG to show how ridiculous his statement was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrOaktown_56 Posted September 13, 2018 Share Posted September 13, 2018 Just now, JustAnotherFan said: I know, that was the point. He called the Bears/Packers debate over after one week so I did the same with JG to show how ridiculous his statement was. My b, I was lacking the context. For what its worth, I don't think the Bears/Packers is a debate as long as the Packers have a healthy Rodgers. But the Bears are closing the gap. By how much, I have no idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAF-N72EX Posted September 13, 2018 Share Posted September 13, 2018 Just now, MrOaktown_56 said: My b, I was lacking the context. For what its worth, I don't think the Bears/Packers is a debate as long as the Packers have a healthy Rodgers. But the Bears are closing the gap. By how much, I have no idea. That I can certainly agree with. Rodgers has killed us his entire career and most likely will until the day he retires. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.