Bears now own #1 overall (via Carolina).... Fields + trade downs vs Williams/Maye etc.

[sparky151]

He'd be better off with one of MJH or Nabers plus Alt than with both of the receivers. Bears need an upgrade at center as well. They can find an upgrade at WR3 in free agency at an affordable price. They also should upgrade the backup QB from Bagent while they are at it.

[Ragnarok]

If they aren't 100% certain that Fields is a franchise QB after seeing him for 3 years, then you get what you can for him and draft Caleb #1.

[Sugashane]

23 hours ago, Tugboat said:

 

I think at the end of the day, this sort of "throw so many weapons in front of him, he just can't miss" approach is not just an overload and waste of resources...It's also really telling about the confidence level underpinning that decision to hypothetically keep Fields.  It's basically just an implicit admission that he's probably not very good and is going to need massive overwhelming amounts of help to succeed.  At which point, just move on.  He's not the guy.  Not if you feel compelled to overload insanely with "weapons" like that to make him serviceable.

The only positive with that approach is when he fails in 2024 you have a hell of a trio for the rookie to come into in 2025.

[sparky151]

The downside of building out the surrounding cast for 2024 and moving on at QB in 2025 if it doesn't work is that the 2025 draft doesn't seem to have any special QBs. At least from this point a year in advance. Also a decent defense plus O-line and WR upgrades probably means the team isn't drafting top 10. 

So the Fields decision is basically now or never. One way to look at it is what if Goff and Fields were switched. Would Fields be more successful in Detroit's offense than he's been with the Bears? IMO yes, obviously so. Would he be more successful than Goff in that offense? Maybe. Would Goff be as successful on the Bears as he's been with the Lions? No way. Would he do better than Fields has done if he were in Chicago? Probably not. 

So Fields has value and would be an upgrade for numerous teams. 

 

 

[sparky151]

21 hours ago, Ragnarok said:

If they aren't 100% certain that Fields is a franchise QB after seeing him for 3 years, then you get what you can for him and draft Caleb #1.

I guess the unstated premises here are that Williams will 100% be a franchise QB. My view is that nobody is bust-proof. Also that whomever the new OC is will get more from Williams than he would with Fields and more talent around him, which could be obtained by trading pick #.

[Ragnarok]

34 minutes ago, sparky151 said:

I guess the unstated premises here are that Williams will 100% be a franchise QB. My view is that nobody is bust-proof. Also that whomever the new OC is will get more from Williams than he would with Fields and more talent around him, which could be obtained by trading pick #.

No, not at all.  No such thing as bust proof.

It's that if you don't know a guy is the guy after 3 years, you go find another guy.

[Heavy_Flow]

On 1/18/2024 at 3:45 PM, mdonnelly21 said:

The best one I've head so far and that I really like is... 

Keep Fields 

Trade down to #3: Draft Marvin Harrison Jr there. 

Then at 9 move up if you have to draft Malik Nabers if he isn't there. 

Then build your O-Line in later rounds as well as in Free Agency. 

This gives Fields 

DJ Moore, Marvin Harrison Jr AND Malik Nabers. 

That's potentially 3 bonafide #1 WRS which will help the O-Line by getting Open faster so Fields can get the ball out. 

Someone is going to be open and they will be open fast in this scenario. Lets just hope Fields gets good enough to find that guy fast enough. His reads def have to get better.

If Chicago does as you suggest, they might reach the Super Bowl next year.  If they dump Fields and take Caleb, they're virtually back to square one.  

[mdonnelly21]

6 hours ago, Heavy_Flow said:

If Chicago does as you suggest, they might reach the Super Bowl next year.  If they dump Fields and take Caleb, they're virtually back to square one.  

I really think it's going to depend on how much Fields progresses. They won't make it if he has an incremental advancement. 

Also it will depend on have fast Nabers can become a legit WR threat as a rookie. It will help that he's going to be the #2 guy facing lesser tier CBs. 

Oh yeah and lastly our C / LG needs to get better. 

[Sugashane]

20 hours ago, sparky151 said:

I guess the unstated premises here are that Williams will 100% be a franchise QB. My view is that nobody is bust-proof. Also that whomever the new OC is will get more from Williams than he would with Fields and more talent around him, which could be obtained by trading pick #.

No pick is bust proof but Fields is who he is at this point. He got screwed by Chicago and I see no way to argue that. I think the big thing is that if you know Fields isn't the guy then the picks used to draft him are a sunk cost, so try to get what you can out of trading him. Also Williams does look to have a significantly higher ceilign than FIelds, and as you stated (and I have as well) the 2025 QB class looks meh at best. Normally I loathe drafting a QB under one regime that is clinging to their job (I feel this is Eberflus, and would have went after Harbaugh, Johnson, Slowik in that order, greatly pushing for one of the first two). Bears did it with Tru and Fields and likely will do it again with Williams. I hate it, but the Bears aren't going to be bad enough to be a top 10 pick next year so the trade up for a lower quality prospect would be crazy IMO. So I think they have to bite the bullet and take Williams (or Maye if that's who they like more, but I'm in the Williams camp). 

I feel like the only way Fields was going to be the better option was if Poles said Eberflus was tied to Fields, so they got Greg Roman. Fields would be an upgrade over a number of QBs but I think to be at his best he needs to run an offense like Roman ran with LJ and Kaep, or maybe the Shula offense with Cam. His athleticism HAS to be the biggest threat, and then he has the arm to make any throw. But the processing has to be simple so he doesn't throw off the rhythm of the offense. 

[sparky151]

23 hours ago, Ragnarok said:

No, not at all.  No such thing as bust proof.

It's that if you don't know a guy is the guy after 3 years, you go find another guy.

Uh, 2 of the 3 other teams in the NFCN made the playoffs not following that approach. It looks like the Packers were right to be patient with Love and the Lions have resuscitated Goff's career. IMO it's still a matter of projecting Fields' ceiling. Sort of like doing the same thing with the draft prospects. But with more information available for the veteran. 

Simply changing QBs every 3 years until you hit the jackpot could leave you in purgatory for a long while. 

 

There are probably 6-10 other teams for whom Fields would be an upgrade from their current starting QB. Not all of them have early picks to add a top 3 QB prospect. I'd rather have Bo Nix than Mac Jones but they are basically the same player. Anyway, Fields would be a "franchise" qb in several other markets. Which is why he has moderate trade value. Atlanta won't give pick 8 for him but might well trade their 2nd rounder, etc. 

[Ragnarok]

58 minutes ago, sparky151 said:

Uh, 2 of the 3 other teams in the NFCN made the playoffs not following that approach. It looks like the Packers were right to be patient with Love and the Lions have resuscitated Goff's career. IMO it's still a matter of projecting Fields' ceiling. Sort of like doing the same thing with the draft prospects. But with more information available for the veteran. 

Simply changing QBs every 3 years until you hit the jackpot could leave you in purgatory for a long while. 

 

There are probably 6-10 other teams for whom Fields would be an upgrade from their current starting QB. Not all of them have early picks to add a top 3 QB prospect. I'd rather have Bo Nix than Mac Jones but they are basically the same player. Anyway, Fields would be a "franchise" qb in several other markets. Which is why he has moderate trade value. Atlanta won't give pick 8 for him but might well trade their 2nd rounder, etc. 

The Packers saw Love in practice for 3 years and felt good enough to trade a future HOFer to make room for him.

Goff took another franchise to the Super Bowl.

Very very different circumstances to Fields.

[Tugboat]

12 hours ago, Sugashane said:

No pick is bust proof but Fields is who he is at this point. He got screwed by Chicago and I see no way to argue that. I think the big thing is that if you know Fields isn't the guy then the picks used to draft him are a sunk cost, so try to get what you can out of trading him. Also Williams does look to have a significantly higher ceilign than FIelds, and as you stated (and I have as well) the 2025 QB class looks meh at best. Normally I loathe drafting a QB under one regime that is clinging to their job (I feel this is Eberflus, and would have went after Harbaugh, Johnson, Slowik in that order, greatly pushing for one of the first two). Bears did it with Tru and Fields and likely will do it again with Williams. I hate it, but the Bears aren't going to be bad enough to be a top 10 pick next year so the trade up for a lower quality prospect would be crazy IMO. So I think they have to bite the bullet and take Williams (or Maye if that's who they like more, but I'm in the Williams camp). 

I feel like the only way Fields was going to be the better option was if Poles said Eberflus was tied to Fields, so they got Greg Roman. Fields would be an upgrade over a number of QBs but I think to be at his best he needs to run an offense like Roman ran with LJ and Kaep, or maybe the Shula offense with Cam. His athleticism HAS to be the biggest threat, and then he has the arm to make any throw. But the processing has to be simple so he doesn't throw off the rhythm of the offense. 

 

Yeah.  This is the thing with Fields.  You know at this point, that's pretty much his ceiling.  He's a guy who, if you have an absolutely stacked roster and a very specific QB Run-oriented system with a great coordinator that dumbs the game down for him, he's got the legs and the arm talent to potentially make that work.  But it's the sort of thing that makes a lot more sense to cling to if you're a team in a "contending" window that just needs enough of a dynamic presence from the QB to make it work for a couple years before the jig is up and the stacked roster blows apart for cap reasons.  Da Bears aren't even remotely in that sort of territory.  They're a bad team full of holes everywhere.  A short-term patch job at QB doesn't make any sense for them at all.

 

That's where you just accept that that Fields is a sunk cost, move him for what you can get...and start the clock again with a new guy who looks to have a much higher ceiling (Williams/Maye).  Those are guys who might still suck, but they carry the actual "upside" of becoming a true Franchise QB.  One who can bring long-term stability to the position and your entire program if they even hit a portion of their "ceiling".  As opposed to Fields who, even proponents of keeping him, are basically implicitly admitting is a "potentially good enough" option if you can stack the deck enough in his favor.  But there's no future in that.  It's a short-term gambit.

[Tugboat]

7 hours ago, Ragnarok said:

The Packers saw Love in practice for 3 years and felt good enough to trade a future HOFer to make room for him.

Goff took another franchise to the Super Bowl.

Very very different circumstances to Fields.

 

Yeah.  Comparing a super underwhelming if not outright terrible 3 year Starter in Fields to Jordan Love's situation is just completely lacking any semblance of context.  Love had a very strong first season as a starter this year.  Prior to that, we'd barely seen any of him on the field.  Certainly not enough to go on.  And again, the first season of real evidence we've seen...started a bit shaky, but has come around awfully strong as he's settled into the role.

 

Goff is another completely wild comparison.  He's an older QB at this point, who even in his underwhelming days, has a Superbowl appearance on his resume.  He's not some guy the Lions went out and committed to because they were enthralled with his play anyway.  He's the guy they kinda just ended up with when trading Stafford...and he's happened to be "just enough" to take an otherwise extremely talented roster in the right insulating sort of scheme, to an NFC championship game where they very likely just get run over and start to ask the exact same questions the Rams did, about whether Goff is actually good enough to get a team over the hump.

[Epyon]

I'd push back against the narrative that the team would be better off next year with Fields, vs with Caleb. 

Even accounting for rookie struggles (of which they basically all have), I'd say the hypothetical Caleb version of the team gets at least close to (within a game or two of) the same record, with a higher ceiling on win total. Caleb will undoubtedly throw some cringe INTs, or have some bad fumbles...but has anyone been paying attention to "fourth quarter Fields" this year?  We're already losing games for those kinds of issues this year with Fields, but without the potential upside that a threatening passing game really brings.  And look, the bar isn't exactly set up on top of Everest here, 60,000 fans were chanting Justin's name because he threw for like 250 yards, in a game this this year.

[DoctorJET]

On 1/1/2024 at 7:00 AM, HTTRDynasty said:

If I were the GM in Chicago, I would trade Fields to the highest bidder and draft my QB1. Unless I’m sure I have a bonafide top 5 QB in this league, I am drafting a blue-chip QB prospect at every opportunity. When you factor in the 5 years of cost control you have with a rookie QB vs. the 2 years you have remaining with Fields, it’s really a no-brainer to me regardless of how well Fields has played lately.

I think it’s too early to predict compensation at this point. It really depends on who finishes where. For example, if the Patriots win next week, the Cardinals move up into the top 3. That puts Washington in a very advantageous position if both Chicago and Arizona really want MHJ… they’d have to give up less compensation if Chicago wants to ensure they can draft MHJ. 
 

I do think Fields would probably command a second or two thirds if they decide to trade him, but that depends on the roster landscape a few months from now and who is in desperate need of a QB1 and won’t be able to draft or sign one. 
 

I think the real trade value is in the #2 pick. Chicago is going to take a new QB. I think plenty of teams would be willing to trade up and grab Daniel's or Maye. Washington's new GM says he is going to build through the draft. If there is a trading partner in the Top 10 where Washington can grab one of the Top 2 OT's but pick up additional picks this year and next, I'd jump all over that deal in a heartbeat. And if that happens, I would also consider using one of those newfound picks on Justin Fields.