Ty21 Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 3 hours ago, Madmike90 said: Potentially in a super limited role...even as mostly a decoy he could open some things up. Yep, it’s lucky it’s so early in the week. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ty21 Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 For anyone still apprehensive about the trade (since I was and am now optimistic), would you prefer the packers had instead attained him and made their offense functional again? They’re ****ed for the rest of the season and Rodgers is gonna have a miserable go of it in maybe his final year. That’s worth a 2nd by itself. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZBearsFan Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 32 minutes ago, Ty21 said: For anyone still apprehensive about the trade (since I was and am now optimistic), would you prefer the packers had instead attained him and made their offense functional again? They’re ****ed for the rest of the season and Rodgers is gonna have a miserable go of it in maybe his final year. That’s worth a 2nd by itself. I’m kinda surprised there are people taking issue with this move. If we drafted a guy at pick 40 or wherever our 2nd round pick was gonna be this year and his performance mirrored that of Claypool to this point in his career (60 catch, 860 yard seasons) would people be disappointed with that? That’s legitimate starting NFL WR production. 860 receiving yards would have ranked as follows amongst WRs: 2021: 31st 2020: 30th 2019: 31st 2018: 24th 2017: 23rd Claypool doesn’t need to turn into the next Mike Evans to make this trade worthwhile IMO - he just needs to be what he has been already. If he progresses beyond what he’s been already (he’s only 24) then the value on the deal only gets better. If Claypool and Mooney become 2021 Claypool and Diontae Johnson then we’ll be in really good shape. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chisoxguy7 Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 A second for Claypool seems reasonable, seeing as KC just gave up a third and a sixth for Toney, a player several tiers lower. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEAR FACE DOWN ARROW Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 Having dug into this guy (my research is up to the highest Youtubeing standards) I"m both glad the Bears got him and also feel the cost was a little high. That said, I'd rather Poles do this, which itslef seems a tacit admission that he didn't do enough on O in the offseason, than stick to the plan no matter what. I'm hoping this means they see what Fields is doing, and like where that projects, and are going to try and build around him. Speakind of that plan... generally I'm a fan (offensive deficiencies aside) and am frankly OK with Poles getting normal to low value in these trades. It's easy to point to the outliers like Von Miller and Jamal Adams and expect everything to be a first, but there's no reason to believe that Poles isn't doing proper diligence and getting what he feels is acceptable. My only issue with this is it's hard to see "Claypool" and not make Primus references, which is confusing both my Bears' fan neighbor and my wife, who both were kind of enough to text me about this and also didn't raise any issues with all the Wynona references. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nads786 Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 9 hours ago, chisoxguy7 said: A second for Claypool seems reasonable, seeing as KC just gave up a third and a sixth for Toney, a player several tiers lower. I think a huge piece of this is also how you plan on using Claypool. The fit for the offense could make him much more valuable to us vs. the Steelers. The best outcome is what the Patriots did trading a 2nd for a Dolphin's kick returner and Wes turning into a stud WR. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abstract_thought Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 12 hours ago, AZBearsFan said: If he’s the same 60 catch, 860 yard WR he was his first 2 years playing with a dead arm Roethlisberger before he got saddled with Mitch and Pickett this year who's also a RZ asset and a strong run blocker isn’t that worth a 2nd round pick? I sure think so. No, because he only has 1 year left on his rookie deal. And the Bears don’t have a track record that says, “this guy will be better in Chicago.” Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZBearsFan Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 9 minutes ago, abstract_thought said: No, because he only has 1 year left on his rookie deal. Who cares? We have $120M in cap room. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 20 hours ago, brownie man said: We’ll find out if it works, but that’s a big price when you could’ve had George Pickens for a 2nd. That's my line of thinking as well. Not saying the Steelers would have been willing to deal Claypool if they didn't get Pickens, but the Bears could have walked away with both Claypool and Pickens with two SRPs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malak1 Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 This is, in fact, a vote of confidence for Fields. We are all in agreement with that, right? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dll2000 Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 39 minutes ago, CWood21 said: That's my line of thinking as well. Not saying the Steelers would have been willing to deal Claypool if they didn't get Pickens, but the Bears could have walked away with both Claypool and Pickens with two SRPs. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sugashane Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 21 hours ago, brownie man said: I’m glad you did something but Poles moves are super concerning We’ll find out if it works, but that’s a big price when you could’ve had George Pickens for a 2nd. I do real time drafts and post them on here, and I had Claypool AND Pickens... then both went to PIT. lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskieBear Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 Hoge and Jahns did a great job of breaking this trade down and everything it means/encompasses on their most recent podcast Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskieBear Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 12 hours ago, Ty21 said: For anyone still apprehensive about the trade (since I was and am now optimistic), would you prefer the packers had instead attained him and made their offense functional again? They’re ****ed for the rest of the season and Rodgers is gonna have a miserable go of it in maybe his final year. That’s worth a 2nd by itself. If the packers make this trade, everyone says "they finally listened to Rodgers and got him a WR weapon" Bears make this trade and its "an overpay for a slightly above mediocre receiver who is going to be a FA after next year, they should have just kept the pick and drafted a stud WR that will put up at least 800+ yards in the 2nd round of the draft" Mind you, these are the same people that said Poles didn't do enough to help JF before the season started. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ty21 Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 13 minutes ago, HuskieBear said: If the packers make this trade, everyone says "they finally listened to Rodgers and got him a WR weapon" Bears make this trade and its "an overpay for a slightly above mediocre receiver who is going to be a FA after next year, they should have just kept the pick and drafted a stud WR that will put up at least 800+ yards in the 2nd round of the draft" Mind you, these are the same people that said Poles didn't do enough to help JF before the season started. I agree with you but at the same time, I figure Claypool’s ceiling would’ve been much higher in GB with a HOF qb throwing to him. Rodgers is the guy that elevates bad receivers and makes average ones good. Maybe not this year so much though lol In Chicago his shortcomings will be more on display and will meet more scorn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.