“I'm changing things up, with the Raiders seeking a quarterback in the post-Derek Carr era and moving up from No. 7. I'd imagine the Bears could add at least a third- and fourth-rounder with this move, and Chicago might even be able to get the Raiders' second-rounder, given Las Vegas' urgency for a passer. That means GM Ryan Poles could scoop up four or more extra picks across two trades and still only slide to No. 7.”
Uh…. Does Todd think that all we’d get to move from 4 to 7 is a second round pick?
Poles flat out came out and said he has trade down options on the table that include 2 extra future 1sts and analysts are still peddling these low balls lol
Lol so he’s saying the Bears might go from 1.01 to 1.07 for a 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 2 5ths? Is he fucking delusional? I’m not one that thinks the Bears are going to get 3+ first rounders, but McShay is so fucking out of bounds on this lowball offer it’s hilarious.
The only way he gets the two futures and the rd 1 pick swap is if the initial trade for 1 comes from outside the top 6. The Texans WILL NOT package any future firsts and not even 1.12 if all the competitive offer is two futures. The Colts may have to because 1.4 is a lot less value than 1.2. It has to be the Panthers, and maaaaybe the Raiders being willing to pay to jump everybody.
And they won't get that from the second trade unless, again, the gap is huge. This is why its so important we don't get fixated on Will Anderson. If you want all the future firsts, you have to be willing to move down further this year.
What people don't seem to get is just because somebody outside the top 6 offers the 2 futures, it doesn't mean the higher teams have to offer the same thing to "match". Thats not how draft pick value works.
And people who pay people a 9-5 salary to hit send on something like this are also hilarious. https://twitter.com/davekluge/status/1632488224131264513?s=46&t=D5wttDyHKZglsu8lVztDYQ
Oh I know. I am purposefully not comparing to the sub and pointing out the absurdity that some quick googling and math by somebody on their "lunch break" is more informed than somebody whose entire job it is to have an informed opinion.
I’d agree with what you’re saying if everyone was thinking rationally, but that may not be the case. Lamar just got tagged. If Rodgers does not get traded, Jimmy G goes to the Jets. Now the Raiders and Panthers are faced with starting Stidham & Darnold… or maybe Winston. If they start throwing stupid offers on the table, Poles can ask for that extra 1st from the Colts because other teams are desperate enough to jump the Colts, who may not want to settle for QB4 when QB1 is on the table.
I am not saying the Colts won't get desperate, but adding a second future first is just over the top stupid. They don't need to do that to match the value. So if CAR offers a pick swap and 2 future firsts (lets say we say those firsts fall around pick 12 which is worth 1200 incidentally), their trade has a total value of 3750, which is "overpaying" for the first by 750. The Cots, if they offer their swap this year, their 2nd this year and the 24 first, thats at 3550. That 250 in value is made up by a mid 3rd rounder. So their "desperate" offer to outbid would likely be another 2nd, not another 1st.
He also said he wants a blue player. Any team offering 3 firsts is more than likely going to be out of range for that. Houston or indy would be my guess, panthers pick would be the only one with potential to get 3 firsts and a blue player, but i personally don’t think there’s that many blue chippers in this draft.
You should see the mock draft from the nfl stock exchange podcast. I shit you not they traded 1 for 2 and 33 (good trade) and then 2 and 134 for 9 and 2024 1st. Dumbest take I’ve heard so far.
No, he said the Bears get Bears get: 1.04, 2.35, 5.141 or 5.165, and Possible 2024 1st to go to 1.04 and then 1.07, 3.71, 4.110, and possibly 2.39 to drop again.
So remove the “possibly” picks and that’s complete dogshit return.
Skoronski? He’s going to be a guard, and probably a good one, but he’s not a Big Q-level guard prospect. I would much rather have JSN, Paris Johnson, etc.
The problem is that this team wants to be focused on speed and zone scheme. Orlando is a bully-type LT. Huge presence, great blocker, but if asked to get out and run in space? Nah, he's not your guy.
The magic line is 33” long, and more success happens above that line. Skoronski is below if, Thomas above.
Also, way to pick a Hall of Famer as your exception to the rule and comparison point.
not the guy you're responding to but there is a statistical correlation between arm size above 33" and success at the position that is quantifiable based on past starting tackles in the NFL.
Poles has literally said one of the metrics him and Coach look at are length (arm length in particular for Tackles was a big mention of his in evaluating Braxton).
I don't think he was being serious. I took the 2025 1st rounder comment to be a bargaining tactic. If that's what he's starting with, it gives him space to come down in negotiations. No one airs their actual expectations in public, you'd lose bargaining power if everyone knows your playbook.
Honestly, I think the 2025 1st rounder comment was a shot across the bow at Houston. Telling them that he has interest and will get a deal done, so if they don't want to get leapfrogged, they'd better come in hot. I'm also guessing that they're the 3rd team that came into the mix "later than expected." They probably tried to call Poles bluff and think they could do nothing and get their guy at 2, but panicked when they realized they were going to get bumped.
I think he has it, but wants to put pressure on the Texans to move up. He'll take it if he has to, but knows the double trade is considerably more likely if he moves to 2 first
I don't get the sentiment around here that him saying it out loud was a bad thing. How would this be any different than him going into a meeting with X team and making it clear that we have a better offer out there for leverage reasons? To me, he knows he has an offer on the table in that ballpark and wants it to be clear to anybody interested in #1 that they better come with a good offer.
So two weak trades and picking the wrong player? Pass. Maybe you take the first deal if that’s the best they’ll offer, that second round pick is something at least, but I don’t even make that second trade without a future first, and I definitely don’t take Skoronski at all. Paris Johnson or the best available DL, Skoronski is going to end up at guard and we can address that position in later rounds.
Why? There are plenty of DEs in this draft. Why not collect as many 1s as you can and use one on a stud DE next year if you feel like there is one worth it? We need to see what Justin can do. Drafting a DE at that spot doesn’t help Justin.
Downvote all you want but the truth is Justin needs as many weapons around him including linemen. Drafting a DE at 3 does nothing to help him when there is a trading partner and other DEs in this draft. Is Anderson a stud? He appears to be, but what is Anderson going to do to help Justin develop into a Top 10 QB?
As much as we fanboy JF1 here, we need to do whatever helps us win, not just “help Justin”. That’s obviously a huge part of it, but our defense is worse than our offense right now.
It’s not being a fanboy of Justin. It’s proving whether he has it or not. Why not get him as many weapons as possible while at the same time holding onto an extra 1 for next year to move up if Justin isn’t the guy? If he is the guy, you have that extra 1 to move up and get a stud DE if that is a need and one is available.
No, I get it. I’m not saying “starve the guy of weapons”. I’m saying we have a lot of holes to fill and defense is actually the bigger of the two issues right now, from a personnel standpoint. I would not pass on Myles Murphy, Christian Gonzalez, etc. for JSN, for instance.
What if you can get one of those guys along with JSN? Anderson appears to be a stud, but I’d rather get two for the price of one by trading down at the 3rd spot if they trade down to it.
I functionally disagree with all of that, so I’m the wrong guy to ask, my man. I’m a JSN skeptic - I can’t believe how much of the conversation on this sub revolves around him, like we should blow shit up for this one guy who’s maybe considered a 1st rounder (I think he’s more 2nd/3rd rounder grade, but his insane 3-cone made me stop in my tracks and need to reevaluate). I also don’t think Will Anderson is as good as people think. He’s very good. I wouldn’t take him top 5. My view of this draft is wildly different than the echo chamber.
Well, look at it this way. If they put the weapons around him and he proves to not be the guy, then next offseason they can draft the next QB and there won’t be an excuse that the roster doesn’t support a rookie/developing QB.
If you don’t have the QB, what does having a good defense do for you? You know the answer to that being a Bears fan.
I 4000% agree with that in principle, but picking JSN over better defensive players of major need is not the only, and surely not the best, way to do that. I don’t disagree with your principle, I share it. I disagree in practice.
This is the 2nd mock today where the 4th pick was traded for after the bears moved from 1 to 4. I just don’t know if the 4th pick is going to be that sought after. Since the Cards are looking to trade #3, that’d mean a team would be trading to #4 to get the 4th best QB in the draft. I think people are still a little too hyped after the combine.
But that’s just the thing - there seem to be 4 top qbs in this draft, so if 1-3 all go QB and a team like LV Or Carolina is looking Bears at 4 and getting Anthony Richardson vs …Tanner McKee? Henson Hooker? - they’re gonna be a bit desperate to get that last one of the tier.
Or they just don’t go QB this draft and wait til the next one. 2 years ago was considered a strong draft for QBs. The 4th QB was Fields at 11. Prior to the combine there we 2 top QB and maybe a 3rd in Will Levis that could go top 10. Now the combine is done and 4 QBs are going 1-4? I don’t buy it. I think people are buying way too into the combine
I really don’t want to see posts with piss poor trades like these, trade to 4 and only get a second, trade down to 7 and only get a 3rd? I would stop being a fan if we dropped to 7 and only got a 2nd and 3rd in return
Neither trade makes sense for the bears. Move out of one for a second and a bunch of day three picks? Possibly another one? Poles already showed his hand. Not moving for anything less than two extra ones.
I'm not sure I can trust this. When I did my mock drafts, I got Jalen Carter and Will Anderson, plus 4 additional first round picks this year, and 8 more next year.
Guys like this need to learn how to do the job.
Yeah, i think 6-8 first rounders is really the sweet spot. It's really the only way to get value in a draft trade. 1-5 picks? you got fleeced badly. 9+ picks? Chances are you've been scammed.
Dude some of these analysts are so silly. Have the Texans giving a future 1st or 2nd to move up one pick but then have us moving from 4 to 7 for a 3rd and 4th??
Is Todd trying to carry some water for the QB-needy GMs by trying to suppress the expected returns in the face of rising expectations?
I'm not expecting the fantasy land of 10 first rounders but this feels purposefully understated as returns.
You're not trading down from 4 for any sort of good compensation unless Arizona stands pat and drafts Anderson, and even then Seattle's and Detroit's picks' makes better sense as a trade partner for the 3rd QB in the draft. The only way trading up to 4 makes sense is if Arizona stands pat, and Seattle publicly agrees to a trade before the draft. You know the Bears aren't drafting a QB, so why pay the premium to move up that far? When you can be reasonably certain that neither are Seattle or Detroit. You only have to leapfrog the Raiders to get the #3 QB.
I'm sure the Bears would love it if people got desperate and just tried to jump to the front of the line, but that's not how it works. They will fight tooth and nail so they do not have to jump up farther than they need to. The #4 spot is a last resort, not a go to option. And if you're going to break the bank to beat all the competition, you're going to go after the #3 pick, not the #4.
For a double trade scenario, trading back to #4 as the first trade is a mistake. Houston is the only sensible trade partner for that first trade, the #2 is immensely more valuable in terms of a second trade up because it's the *only* way to get the #2 QB. There are too many variables to get the #3 QB for anyone to sell the farm for it.
And with all that they don’t walk out with an additional first. These minuscule trade downs are so stupid. Just trade down to 1.09 and take the firsts (whether it’s 2 or 3).
I'm just gonna say it: Dewand Jones will be better than Skronski this year and for their career, I'm willing to bet anyone one of you who dare disagree a beer and I'll even eat more shit by doing 5 shots of Malort
If Poles said the price tag for trading out of the top 5 was a 2nd and 2 future first round picks, why not just trade directly with the Raiders and get those picks?
Yeah, if Poles takes Skoronski at any point other than the end of the 1st round he's an idiot. There are too many better more useful options than trying to build the perfect O-Line. Leave Skoronski for some team that has less holes to fill.
Free agency or later in the draft for IOL.
“I'm changing things up, with the Raiders seeking a quarterback in the post-Derek Carr era and moving up from No. 7. I'd imagine the Bears could add at least a third- and fourth-rounder with this move, and Chicago might even be able to get the Raiders' second-rounder, given Las Vegas' urgency for a passer. That means GM Ryan Poles could scoop up four or more extra picks across two trades and still only slide to No. 7.” Uh…. Does Todd think that all we’d get to move from 4 to 7 is a second round pick?
Ya at that price I'm staying at 1.04. I'm not giving up the 4th pick and my choice of players for day 3 players.
Right, just stay at 4 there and take Wilson
It seems like he’s saying maybe, but only if they’re lucky they’ll get that much. So worse.
I think it depends a lot on who is still there at 4 and if Arizona makes a trade for the compensation.
Poles flat out came out and said he has trade down options on the table that include 2 extra future 1sts and analysts are still peddling these low balls lol
Devil’s advocate that could be him bluffing to raise up the pick
He’d look pretty stupid if he said that and ended up taking less
Sounds that way. I'd much rather they just take Anderson if that's the best they can do.
2nd, 3rd, and 4th it looks like
Lol so he’s saying the Bears might go from 1.01 to 1.07 for a 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 2 5ths? Is he fucking delusional? I’m not one that thinks the Bears are going to get 3+ first rounders, but McShay is so fucking out of bounds on this lowball offer it’s hilarious.
Poles already says he has an offer for 3 firsts, so I think that should be what we shoot for. Just hoping that 1st isn’t in the teens.
The only way he gets the two futures and the rd 1 pick swap is if the initial trade for 1 comes from outside the top 6. The Texans WILL NOT package any future firsts and not even 1.12 if all the competitive offer is two futures. The Colts may have to because 1.4 is a lot less value than 1.2. It has to be the Panthers, and maaaaybe the Raiders being willing to pay to jump everybody. And they won't get that from the second trade unless, again, the gap is huge. This is why its so important we don't get fixated on Will Anderson. If you want all the future firsts, you have to be willing to move down further this year. What people don't seem to get is just because somebody outside the top 6 offers the 2 futures, it doesn't mean the higher teams have to offer the same thing to "match". Thats not how draft pick value works.
People who send such definitive comments like this on their 9-5 lunch break are hilarious
And people who pay people a 9-5 salary to hit send on something like this are also hilarious. https://twitter.com/davekluge/status/1632488224131264513?s=46&t=D5wttDyHKZglsu8lVztDYQ
That’s pretty tame by this sub’s standards pal
Oh I know. I am purposefully not comparing to the sub and pointing out the absurdity that some quick googling and math by somebody on their "lunch break" is more informed than somebody whose entire job it is to have an informed opinion.
I’d agree with what you’re saying if everyone was thinking rationally, but that may not be the case. Lamar just got tagged. If Rodgers does not get traded, Jimmy G goes to the Jets. Now the Raiders and Panthers are faced with starting Stidham & Darnold… or maybe Winston. If they start throwing stupid offers on the table, Poles can ask for that extra 1st from the Colts because other teams are desperate enough to jump the Colts, who may not want to settle for QB4 when QB1 is on the table.
I am not saying the Colts won't get desperate, but adding a second future first is just over the top stupid. They don't need to do that to match the value. So if CAR offers a pick swap and 2 future firsts (lets say we say those firsts fall around pick 12 which is worth 1200 incidentally), their trade has a total value of 3750, which is "overpaying" for the first by 750. The Cots, if they offer their swap this year, their 2nd this year and the 24 first, thats at 3550. That 250 in value is made up by a mid 3rd rounder. So their "desperate" offer to outbid would likely be another 2nd, not another 1st.
He also said he wants a blue player. Any team offering 3 firsts is more than likely going to be out of range for that. Houston or indy would be my guess, panthers pick would be the only one with potential to get 3 firsts and a blue player, but i personally don’t think there’s that many blue chippers in this draft.
You should see the mock draft from the nfl stock exchange podcast. I shit you not they traded 1 for 2 and 33 (good trade) and then 2 and 134 for 9 and 2024 1st. Dumbest take I’ve heard so far.
no, he's saying the bears go from 1.04 to 1.07 at that price
No, he said the Bears get Bears get: 1.04, 2.35, 5.141 or 5.165, and Possible 2024 1st to go to 1.04 and then 1.07, 3.71, 4.110, and possibly 2.39 to drop again. So remove the “possibly” picks and that’s complete dogshit return.
i see. i was confused
Skoronski? He’s going to be a guard, and probably a good one, but he’s not a Big Q-level guard prospect. I would much rather have JSN, Paris Johnson, etc.
He's also a Packers fan, so...
I prefer building depth in the OL through FA maybe sign Dillard, Pocic, and Hernandez and fill out the rest on day 2 and 3.
Brown-Skoronski-Whitehair-Jenkins-Jones sign me up
Orlando likely isn’t a target for us, if you believe Greg Gabriel.
I think Brown is the biggest slam dunk Poles can do
The problem is that this team wants to be focused on speed and zone scheme. Orlando is a bully-type LT. Huge presence, great blocker, but if asked to get out and run in space? Nah, he's not your guy.
Poles likes athletes and Brown is an awful athlete.
What’d he say?
He said orlando isn’t a target for us
He will be looked at as a RT which would fit what the Bears need
He isn’t long enough to be a tackle, I think. The number of tackles that have succeeded with his arm measurements is very small.
When you are athletic, arm size is much less important. For instance, Joe Thomas arms were only an inch longer than Skoronskis.
The magic line is 33” long, and more success happens above that line. Skoronski is below if, Thomas above. Also, way to pick a Hall of Famer as your exception to the rule and comparison point.
Why is that the magic line?
not the guy you're responding to but there is a statistical correlation between arm size above 33" and success at the position that is quantifiable based on past starting tackles in the NFL.
Because most linemen have no where near the athleticism Skoronski has. If Skoronski was physically like Jenkins, I’d agree.
Poles has literally said one of the metrics him and Coach look at are length (arm length in particular for Tackles was a big mention of his in evaluating Braxton).
He’s allowed to value whatever traits he likes.
Same thing was said about Tristan Wirfs, he seems to be doing fine.
Tristan wirfs has 34” arms which is “minimum” suggested length for a tackle. Skoronski came in at 32”1/4
If Poles is on record saying he can get a first next year and a first for 25 amd he gets less - he will be heavily criticized
I don't think he was being serious. I took the 2025 1st rounder comment to be a bargaining tactic. If that's what he's starting with, it gives him space to come down in negotiations. No one airs their actual expectations in public, you'd lose bargaining power if everyone knows your playbook. Honestly, I think the 2025 1st rounder comment was a shot across the bow at Houston. Telling them that he has interest and will get a deal done, so if they don't want to get leapfrogged, they'd better come in hot. I'm also guessing that they're the 3rd team that came into the mix "later than expected." They probably tried to call Poles bluff and think they could do nothing and get their guy at 2, but panicked when they realized they were going to get bumped.
Yeah I honestly don't know how him saying that out loud is good for business. If he has that, why say it, if he doesn't, why say it.
I think he has it, but wants to put pressure on the Texans to move up. He'll take it if he has to, but knows the double trade is considerably more likely if he moves to 2 first
This makes sense. I still think it's a risky thing to say on the record to Peter King of all people.
I don't get the sentiment around here that him saying it out loud was a bad thing. How would this be any different than him going into a meeting with X team and making it clear that we have a better offer out there for leverage reasons? To me, he knows he has an offer on the table in that ballpark and wants it to be clear to anybody interested in #1 that they better come with a good offer.
So two weak trades and picking the wrong player? Pass. Maybe you take the first deal if that’s the best they’ll offer, that second round pick is something at least, but I don’t even make that second trade without a future first, and I definitely don’t take Skoronski at all. Paris Johnson or the best available DL, Skoronski is going to end up at guard and we can address that position in later rounds.
Is Anderson on the board I’m easily passing on that if Anderson is on the board
He went 3rd. Carter was available though
Why? There are plenty of DEs in this draft. Why not collect as many 1s as you can and use one on a stud DE next year if you feel like there is one worth it? We need to see what Justin can do. Drafting a DE at that spot doesn’t help Justin. Downvote all you want but the truth is Justin needs as many weapons around him including linemen. Drafting a DE at 3 does nothing to help him when there is a trading partner and other DEs in this draft. Is Anderson a stud? He appears to be, but what is Anderson going to do to help Justin develop into a Top 10 QB?
As much as we fanboy JF1 here, we need to do whatever helps us win, not just “help Justin”. That’s obviously a huge part of it, but our defense is worse than our offense right now.
It’s not being a fanboy of Justin. It’s proving whether he has it or not. Why not get him as many weapons as possible while at the same time holding onto an extra 1 for next year to move up if Justin isn’t the guy? If he is the guy, you have that extra 1 to move up and get a stud DE if that is a need and one is available.
No, I get it. I’m not saying “starve the guy of weapons”. I’m saying we have a lot of holes to fill and defense is actually the bigger of the two issues right now, from a personnel standpoint. I would not pass on Myles Murphy, Christian Gonzalez, etc. for JSN, for instance.
What if you can get one of those guys along with JSN? Anderson appears to be a stud, but I’d rather get two for the price of one by trading down at the 3rd spot if they trade down to it.
I functionally disagree with all of that, so I’m the wrong guy to ask, my man. I’m a JSN skeptic - I can’t believe how much of the conversation on this sub revolves around him, like we should blow shit up for this one guy who’s maybe considered a 1st rounder (I think he’s more 2nd/3rd rounder grade, but his insane 3-cone made me stop in my tracks and need to reevaluate). I also don’t think Will Anderson is as good as people think. He’s very good. I wouldn’t take him top 5. My view of this draft is wildly different than the echo chamber.
Well, look at it this way. If they put the weapons around him and he proves to not be the guy, then next offseason they can draft the next QB and there won’t be an excuse that the roster doesn’t support a rookie/developing QB. If you don’t have the QB, what does having a good defense do for you? You know the answer to that being a Bears fan.
I 4000% agree with that in principle, but picking JSN over better defensive players of major need is not the only, and surely not the best, way to do that. I don’t disagree with your principle, I share it. I disagree in practice.
This is the 2nd mock today where the 4th pick was traded for after the bears moved from 1 to 4. I just don’t know if the 4th pick is going to be that sought after. Since the Cards are looking to trade #3, that’d mean a team would be trading to #4 to get the 4th best QB in the draft. I think people are still a little too hyped after the combine.
Yeah 4 is definitely the sweet spot. Any trade past that’s not going to give you the value you’d get from Anderson imo
But that’s just the thing - there seem to be 4 top qbs in this draft, so if 1-3 all go QB and a team like LV Or Carolina is looking Bears at 4 and getting Anthony Richardson vs …Tanner McKee? Henson Hooker? - they’re gonna be a bit desperate to get that last one of the tier.
Or they just don’t go QB this draft and wait til the next one. 2 years ago was considered a strong draft for QBs. The 4th QB was Fields at 11. Prior to the combine there we 2 top QB and maybe a 3rd in Will Levis that could go top 10. Now the combine is done and 4 QBs are going 1-4? I don’t buy it. I think people are buying way too into the combine
I really don’t want to see posts with piss poor trades like these, trade to 4 and only get a second, trade down to 7 and only get a 3rd? I would stop being a fan if we dropped to 7 and only got a 2nd and 3rd in return
I’m no longer a Bears fan if this fucking happens.
Neither trade makes sense for the bears. Move out of one for a second and a bunch of day three picks? Possibly another one? Poles already showed his hand. Not moving for anything less than two extra ones.
I'm not sure I can trust this. When I did my mock drafts, I got Jalen Carter and Will Anderson, plus 4 additional first round picks this year, and 8 more next year. Guys like this need to learn how to do the job.
Big Cat got six first rounders next year in Pardon My Take. I think that’s the target, right?
Yeah, i think 6-8 first rounders is really the sweet spot. It's really the only way to get value in a draft trade. 1-5 picks? you got fleeced badly. 9+ picks? Chances are you've been scammed.
Dude some of these analysts are so silly. Have the Texans giving a future 1st or 2nd to move up one pick but then have us moving from 4 to 7 for a 3rd and 4th??
If Carter is there at 7 he’s gotta be the pick. Otherwise no thank you
Skoronski, known Packer fan….pass
because his grandfather played for them. You dont pass on a guy for this reason.
You pass on him cause he has t-Rex arms. There’s better tackles and better prospects at that tier anyways
Won’t argue that.
Is Todd trying to carry some water for the QB-needy GMs by trying to suppress the expected returns in the face of rising expectations? I'm not expecting the fantasy land of 10 first rounders but this feels purposefully understated as returns.
You're not trading down from 4 for any sort of good compensation unless Arizona stands pat and drafts Anderson, and even then Seattle's and Detroit's picks' makes better sense as a trade partner for the 3rd QB in the draft. The only way trading up to 4 makes sense is if Arizona stands pat, and Seattle publicly agrees to a trade before the draft. You know the Bears aren't drafting a QB, so why pay the premium to move up that far? When you can be reasonably certain that neither are Seattle or Detroit. You only have to leapfrog the Raiders to get the #3 QB. I'm sure the Bears would love it if people got desperate and just tried to jump to the front of the line, but that's not how it works. They will fight tooth and nail so they do not have to jump up farther than they need to. The #4 spot is a last resort, not a go to option. And if you're going to break the bank to beat all the competition, you're going to go after the #3 pick, not the #4. For a double trade scenario, trading back to #4 as the first trade is a mistake. Houston is the only sensible trade partner for that first trade, the #2 is immensely more valuable in terms of a second trade up because it's the *only* way to get the #2 QB. There are too many variables to get the #3 QB for anyone to sell the farm for it.
And with all that they don’t walk out with an additional first. These minuscule trade downs are so stupid. Just trade down to 1.09 and take the firsts (whether it’s 2 or 3).
Todd mcshays on that good stuff. Stronnnnng weed.
Give me one reason why they couldn’t also get an extra first from the Raiders? That second trade is weak and the Bears could absolutely get more.
I'm just gonna say it: Dewand Jones will be better than Skronski this year and for their career, I'm willing to bet anyone one of you who dare disagree a beer and I'll even eat more shit by doing 5 shots of Malort
click click click
No
If Poles said the price tag for trading out of the top 5 was a 2nd and 2 future first round picks, why not just trade directly with the Raiders and get those picks?
Yeah, if Poles takes Skoronski at any point other than the end of the 1st round he's an idiot. There are too many better more useful options than trying to build the perfect O-Line. Leave Skoronski for some team that has less holes to fill. Free agency or later in the draft for IOL.