Hypothetical Offseason Trades

[BEAR FACE DOWN ARROW]

I think the leagues opinion of poles is really going to determine how much value the bears get in trade.

Worst case scenario teams collude a bit and sit back and keep their offers low knowing a trade will happen one way or another and they don't want to be on everyone's radar for a huge over pay.  Best case scenario no GM feels like they have a handle on what the bears will do and offers get silly. 

 

[Sugashane]

17 hours ago, dll2000 said:

To Bears:  7, 38, 2024 1 and 2.

Raiders: 1

Take it or leave it?

 

This one for me

 

11 hours ago, CBears019 said:

I have a hard time seeing Houston give 2 and 12 to move up one spot.  Desperation can make teams do crazy things, but i just feel that’s too much.

 

Agreed but it is at least the initial offer,  then hassle from there.  Idk if a 3rd or 4th might have to be added to them but that is still a hell of a win. 

[Sugashane]

25 minutes ago, RunningVaccs said:

I think the leagues opinion of poles is really going to determine how much value the bears get in trade.

Worst case scenario teams collude a bit and sit back and keep their offers low knowing a trade will happen one way or another and they don't want to be on everyone's radar for a huge over pay.  Best case scenario no GM feels like they have a handle on what the bears will do and offers get silly. 

 

I think GMs are too greedy to collude like that. Ones that have their guy like KC, BUF, PHI, wouldn't care because they have zero interest. But most bottom 10 teams know they need a QB and don't want to risk someone stabbing them in the back to get the 1st pick for cheaper. The collusion only works if they aren't competing against each other imo. 

[AZBearsFan]

13 minutes ago, Sugashane said:

I think GMs are too greedy to collude like that. Ones that have their guy like KC, BUF, PHI, wouldn't care because they have zero interest. But most bottom 10 teams know they need a QB and don't want to risk someone stabbing them in the back to get the 1st pick for cheaper. The collusion only works if they aren't competing against each other imo. 

I think the only two ways we can get “bad”value in a trade down from 1 is if the entirety of the league thinks none of this year’s prospects is a potential franchise QB, or if HOU signs or trades for a top veteran on the market and then doesn’t themselves trade down pre-draft to a QB-needy team. Both scenarios IMO are seemingly pretty unlikely.

[dll2000]

13 hours ago, Bowler1215 said:

Funny they'd come out and say that, especially with a division rival picking right behind us.  Are they really high on Young, or are they trying to get Houston to move into our spot for him?  Houston as more ammo to move up(2 firsts this year and next year)  Both teams need a QB, we're willing to trade down.  Why tell everyone their going to try to move into our spot?  Then again, does that possibly drive the price up for other teams to get our pick?

A buddy of mine at work suggested the we trade back with Houston, get both 2 and 12, then trade down to 4 with Indy, giving us their 2nd and 1st next year.  Ideally, we'd all like that.  Realistically, I doubt that happens. 

We wouldn’t likely get both 2 and 12, but a double trade down in first is a sweet possibility.

Hard to get done on draft day due to pressures and time constraints, but if you can accomplish one trade pre draft that becomes a very real possibility.

[dll2000]

It would be cool to give Houston Young for whatever they will give then move to 2 and give someone Stroud for whatever they will give for him.

Edited January 12, 2023 by dll2000

[HuskieBear]

I keep thinking about a DHop trade - we obviously have the money to pay him currently and in the future. What a true, #1 WR can do for a young QB is limitless. JF1's biggest comps are Hurts and Allen, and those teams went out and got him Brown and Diggs, and both QBs took off. Now, Hop is older, more expensive, and comes with some concerns (little injuries, sussy), but the value he would add to not only the team whole team, but JF1 would be MASSIVE

I have no problem trading our 2nd (baltimore's) this year to get him if that's what it takes. Would prefer something like our 4th this year and a conditional next year, but i could live with the 2nd considering we might be able to trade down from #1 to grab some more picks.

I expect two new OL starters next year. BJ70 should improve with a full nfl offseason. Jenkins with an offseason knowing he's a G now should help him. 

QB - JF1

RB - Herbert/FA (monty, pollard, [would lowkey love saquon])

WR - Hop

WR - Mooney

WR - Claypool

TE - Kmet

LT - Jones (lets see if he can build on last year. i am cautiously optimistic)

LG - Whitehair (we don't need the cap savings to cut him and he is servicable)

C - FA (Pocic/Bradbury)

RG - Jenkins

RT - FA (McGary, Jawaan Taylor, Brown Jr [pay him enough and he might go to RT])

[HuskieBear]

The Athletic had an article where Jahns/Fishbain asked some QB needy team's writers about their thoughts on their team's interest. TEN stood out to me

"If Mike Vrabel and the Titans’ GM to be hired later decide one of these quarterbacks is the absolute future of the franchise, perhaps a bundle could be put together to jump 10 spots. Would the Bears be interested in a Derrick Henry and/or Jeffery Simmons along with picks? Are the Titans willing to blow it up to that extent? They can afford to move on from Ryan Tannehill, though it’s more likely they roll with Henry and Tannehill for one more season."

With a new GM coming in, would the Titans blow it up and go full rebuild? Henry is expensive, getting older, and seems to be banged up a lot, but i would still take him - does TN want to pay him through his year-32 season? Simmons is a STUD and is expecting to be paid, which would could absolutely do - this one seems less realistic of a trade inclusion. If it's either or, Simmons would be my preference. If it's both, i would def do that package.

Ten gets 1.1

Bears get 1.11, Henry, Simmons, 3.72

That values Henry around 2.40, which seems fair for a 29 year old RB who is making $10M+ for the next 3 years and has a ton of wear on his body, and Simmons as 1.16, which is roughly the equivalent to the Buckner trade (Buck and a new contract for 1.13)

idk, probably a pipe dream, but we have A LOT of time to talk about **** that isn't going to happen

[beardown3231]

Why would the Bears want Derrick Henry?

[StLunatic88]

3 minutes ago, HuskieBear said:

That values Henry around 2.40, which seems fair for a 29 year old RB who is making $10M+ for the next 3 years and has a ton of wear on his body, and Simmons as 1.16, which is roughly the equivalent to the Buckner trade (Buck and a new contract for 1.13)

I would have ZERO interest in Henry as part of a trade package. He is great, but he is also a ticking time bomb. Thats just what RBs in the NFL are

Now Simmons is very interesting. I would have to do extensive research on his ACL coming out of college.

[HuskieBear]

6 minutes ago, StLunatic88 said:

I would have ZERO interest in Henry as part of a trade package. He is great, but he is also a ticking time bomb. Thats just what RBs in the NFL are

Now Simmons is very interesting. I would have to do extensive research on his ACL coming out of college.

as of now, the only RBs we have on the roster are Herbert and Ebner. it doesn't matter that he's a ticking time bomb, like you said, he's great. Henry in the backfield either draws attention away from JF running ability or stacks the box against the run and opens up the passing game even more.

now, i'm noticing that the last 2 years are void years, so he's really under contract for 1/10 with dead cap hits of 4.5 then 2.2 the next two years, so that changes the equation, but as far as ticking time bombs go, i wouldn't expect the explosion to be very big.

as for simmons, his ACL hasn't affected him so far in the nfl (at least that i'm aware of). he's making $10M in his 5th year option and will be 26 at the start of next season. I would easily give him the Roquan contract. he's a game wrecker.

[StLunatic88]

23 minutes ago, HuskieBear said:

as of now, the only RBs we have on the roster are Herbert and Ebner. it doesn't matter that he's a ticking time bomb, like you said, he's great. Henry in the backfield either draws attention away from JF running ability or stacks the box against the run and opens up the passing game even more.

But RBs are the most replicable position in football. We arent Super Bowl contenders that are just one RB away from breaking through (like the Niners this year) so to waste assets on a guy who is set to decline at any moment would be a waste.

[AZBearsFan]

1 hour ago, HuskieBear said:

as for simmons, his ACL hasn't affected him so far in the nfl (at least that i'm aware of). he's making $10M in his 5th year option and will be 26 at the start of next season. I would easily give him the Roquan contract. he's a game wrecker.

Simmons is what we would hope Jalen Carter would eventually become. Landing him in a trade package would be huuuuuuuuge. 

[beardown3231]

I'd much rather have Tennessee's 2nd round pick than Henry and/or their 2nd next year. I just feel like a good DT, and aging RB and 2 picks isn't good enough to fall 11 slots

Edited January 12, 2023 by beardown3231

[Madmike90]

2 hours ago, AZBearsFan said:

Simmons is what we would hope Jalen Carter would eventually become. Landing him in a trade package would be huuuuuuuuge. 

I would love it if we got Simmons as I really believe he is one of the top 5 DTs in the entire league...that said I am not sure Tennessee move him...

If see them as being in the same boat as the Jets with Williams...they need a QB but do you really want to give away an elite piece at a primer spot to do it along with other resources? I'm not so sure.