The first 2 picks in the draft have been made and Trubisky and Fournette are now off the board. That leaves Myles Garrett there for the taking.
The phone rings and it's Tennessee. They want the #3 pick in return for their 2 #1s, picks 5 and 18.
What do you do?
What would you do?
Moderator: wab
- Mikefive
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 5192
- Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2016 9:33 pm
- Location: Valparaiso, IN, USA
- Has thanked: 342 times
- Been thanked: 278 times
Mikefive's theory: The only time you KNOW that a sports team player, coach or management member is being 100% honest is when they're NOT reciting "the company line".
Go back to leather helmets, NFL.
Go back to leather helmets, NFL.
- Mikefive
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 5192
- Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2016 9:33 pm
- Location: Valparaiso, IN, USA
- Has thanked: 342 times
- Been thanked: 278 times
I'm generally a fan of trading down, particularly this year with the way our team is constituted. But Garrett is a S-T-U-D. I'll take Garrett.
Mikefive's theory: The only time you KNOW that a sports team player, coach or management member is being 100% honest is when they're NOT reciting "the company line".
Go back to leather helmets, NFL.
Go back to leather helmets, NFL.
I said take the trade, then select Adams or Hooker with #5. With #18 look at one of the remaining top QBs or one of the other many areas of need. I'd like to say take Garrett, but there are some red flags and the Bears are really lacking talent on the roster and 2 1st round picks would be awesome!
- thunderspirit
- Head Coach
- Posts: 3864
- Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2016 12:51 pm
- Location: Greater Chicagoland, IL
- Has thanked: 619 times
- Been thanked: 616 times
Garrett's clearly the best prospect in the draft, but in my view he's not better than a #5 and #18 could be. Additionally, I'm still guaranteed to get one of my top 3 players, since neither Trubisky and Fournette are on that list. I take that trade and run.
KFFL refugee.
dplank wrote:I agree with Rich here
RichH55 wrote: Dplank is correct
- wab
- Mod
- Posts: 29880
- Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:49 pm
- Has thanked: 130 times
- Been thanked: 1995 times
Take Garrett, but this isn't a realistic scenario.
- wab
- Mod
- Posts: 29880
- Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:49 pm
- Has thanked: 130 times
- Been thanked: 1995 times
Take Garrett, but this isn't a realistic scenario.
- G08
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 20614
- Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:34 pm
- Location: Football Hell
- Has thanked: 222 times
- Been thanked: 787 times
I'd take Garrett, but I believe this scenario to not be realistic.
9 PLAYOFF APPEARANCES IN THE PAST 35 SEASONS
"Wallet white, phone is pink, case is clear, nails are clear, lips are pink – your girl LOVE 'em!"
"Wallet white, phone is pink, case is clear, nails are clear, lips are pink – your girl LOVE 'em!"
- alexwilkins
- Crafty Veteran
- Posts: 972
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 2:00 am
- Location: North Pole, AK
- Has thanked: 13 times
- Been thanked: 54 times
You always got to be a Debbie downer, huh?wab wrote:Take Garrett, but this isn't a realistic scenario.
- G08
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 20614
- Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:34 pm
- Location: Football Hell
- Has thanked: 222 times
- Been thanked: 787 times
You spelled 'realist' incorrectly...alexwilkins wrote:You always got to be a Debbie downer, huh?wab wrote:Take Garrett, but this isn't a realistic scenario.
9 PLAYOFF APPEARANCES IN THE PAST 35 SEASONS
"Wallet white, phone is pink, case is clear, nails are clear, lips are pink – your girl LOVE 'em!"
"Wallet white, phone is pink, case is clear, nails are clear, lips are pink – your girl LOVE 'em!"
- wab
- Mod
- Posts: 29880
- Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:49 pm
- Has thanked: 130 times
- Been thanked: 1995 times
Well it isn't. There's nothing Debbie Downer about it.alexwilkins wrote:You always got to be a Debbie downer, huh?wab wrote:Take Garrett, but this isn't a realistic scenario.
I don't deal in Madden scenarios.
-
- MVP
- Posts: 1667
- Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 5:10 pm
- Has thanked: 34 times
- Been thanked: 120 times
Take the trade. Then trade the #5 down if I can.
- alexwilkins
- Crafty Veteran
- Posts: 972
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 2:00 am
- Location: North Pole, AK
- Has thanked: 13 times
- Been thanked: 54 times
How can that be when you answered his hypothetical? Why respond at all if it's that beneath you?wab wrote:Well it isn't. There's nothing Debbie Downer about it.alexwilkins wrote:You always got to be a Debbie downer, huh?wab wrote:Take Garrett, but this isn't a realistic scenario.
I don't deal in Madden scenarios.
- wab
- Mod
- Posts: 29880
- Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:49 pm
- Has thanked: 130 times
- Been thanked: 1995 times
What good does this hypothetical question do? A hypothetical question should at least be based in realism. I mean, hypothetically I could run into Kate Upton at Starbucks, and hypothetically she could give me a blowie in the bathroom. But it's not going to happen and doesn't really do me any good to think about it.alexwilkins wrote:How can that be when you answered his hypothetical? Why respond at all if it's that beneath you?wab wrote:Well it isn't. There's nothing Debbie Downer about it.alexwilkins wrote:You always got to be a Debbie downer, huh?wab wrote:Take Garrett, but this isn't a realistic scenario.
I don't deal in Madden scenarios.
- Rusty Trombagent
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 7375
- Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 11:19 am
- Location: Maine!
- Has thanked: 567 times
- Been thanked: 1000 times
Yes I would, but this isn't realistic because Starbucks is garbage and I wouldn't set foot in there.wab wrote:What good does this hypothetical question do? A hypothetical question should at least be based in realism. I mean, hypothetically I could run into Kate Upton at Starbucks, and hypothetically she could give me a blowie in the bathroom. But it's not going to happen and doesn't really do me any good to think about it.alexwilkins wrote:How can that be when you answered his hypothetical? Why respond at all if it's that beneath you?wab wrote:Well it isn't. There's nothing Debbie Downer about it.alexwilkins wrote:You always got to be a Debbie downer, huh?wab wrote:Take Garrett, but this isn't a realistic scenario.
I don't deal in Madden scenarios.
Ok, so I'd take the deal. With #5 I'd take Watson (cannot see him being available at #18, there are just too many QB needy teams). Then I'd go BPA at #18, be that S, CB or WR.
Take a look at Brad Biggs' latest Q&A at http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/fo ... story.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;, especially the 2nd, 3rd and 4th questions where he makes a LOT of sense.
"Mike Glennon’s contract makes it clear the Bears are not real committed to him beyond 2017. Let me be very clear that I am not doubting Glennon right now and suggesting he won’t pan out for the Bears. But it’s a projection by the organization and I don’t see how the Bears can put all of their eggs in one basket with Glennon. If he doesn’t perform well and the Bears do not have a young quarterback on the roster that shows real promise, I think there is a good chance a lot of offices at Halas Hall could be cleaned out. That’s just my take. The Bears need some cover when it comes to Glennon and I’m not talking about Mark Sanchez. I maintain quarterback remains their greatest need until you know and George McCaskey knows and everyone else knows the franchise’s long troubling question has been solved. The Bears waited too long to move on from Jay Cutler, a fact backed up by the reality that he remains a free agent, and they can’t do anything but make this position their No. 1 priority."
Take a look at Brad Biggs' latest Q&A at http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/fo ... story.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;, especially the 2nd, 3rd and 4th questions where he makes a LOT of sense.
"Mike Glennon’s contract makes it clear the Bears are not real committed to him beyond 2017. Let me be very clear that I am not doubting Glennon right now and suggesting he won’t pan out for the Bears. But it’s a projection by the organization and I don’t see how the Bears can put all of their eggs in one basket with Glennon. If he doesn’t perform well and the Bears do not have a young quarterback on the roster that shows real promise, I think there is a good chance a lot of offices at Halas Hall could be cleaned out. That’s just my take. The Bears need some cover when it comes to Glennon and I’m not talking about Mark Sanchez. I maintain quarterback remains their greatest need until you know and George McCaskey knows and everyone else knows the franchise’s long troubling question has been solved. The Bears waited too long to move on from Jay Cutler, a fact backed up by the reality that he remains a free agent, and they can’t do anything but make this position their No. 1 priority."
Bleeding Navy and Orange!!! GO BEARS!!
- staleystarch
- Assistant Coach
- Posts: 506
- Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2017 5:08 pm
I never like trading down. Besides, the last time the Bears traded down their 1st round pick they got Michael Haynes and Rex Grossman. I'd take Garrett in a heartbeat.
"We don’t know exactly what we’re doing” -- John Fox
- mmmc_35
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 6116
- Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2012 12:25 am
- Has thanked: 105 times
- Been thanked: 98 times
What the fuck is wrong with you. Its great to think about, day dream, fantasize. I think about this ever 5 seconds. In fact found a signature gif.wab wrote:I mean, hypothetically I could run into Kate Upton at Starbucks, and hypothetically she could give me a blowie in the bathroom. But it's not going to happen and doesn't really do me any good to think about it.
- DaSuperfan
- Crafty Veteran
- Posts: 996
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 2:44 pm
- Has thanked: 3 times
- Been thanked: 9 times
I said take Garrett. Studs like him don't come around too often and if you have an opportunity to take him, you do. Pairing him with Floyd would be very entertaining to watch. Again this is a hypothetical, an unrealistic one at that and I don't see this happening at all. But stranger things have happened. Maybe Garrett's Dad will hijack his Twitter account and show him smoking some weed with a gas mask a few hours before the draft, you just never know.
Never Die Easy
- wab
- Mod
- Posts: 29880
- Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:49 pm
- Has thanked: 130 times
- Been thanked: 1995 times
I wanted to formally apologize for blowing this scenario off as improbable. Although highly unlikely, Respected folks in the media are saying that there is a scenario that would leave Garrett on the board at #3.
So. Mikefive...my apologies.
You can find me at Starbucks where I'll be waiting for Kate Upton.
So. Mikefive...my apologies.
You can find me at Starbucks where I'll be waiting for Kate Upton.
- Mikefive
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 5192
- Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2016 9:33 pm
- Location: Valparaiso, IN, USA
- Has thanked: 342 times
- Been thanked: 278 times
Accepted.wab wrote:I wanted to formally apologize for blowing this scenario off as improbable. Although highly unlikely, Respected folks in the media are saying that there is a scenario that would leave Garrett on the board at #3.
So. Mikefive...my apologies.
You can find me at Starbucks where I'll be waiting for Kate Upton.
And good luck with that.
Mikefive's theory: The only time you KNOW that a sports team player, coach or management member is being 100% honest is when they're NOT reciting "the company line".
Go back to leather helmets, NFL.
Go back to leather helmets, NFL.
- thunderspirit
- Head Coach
- Posts: 3864
- Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2016 12:51 pm
- Location: Greater Chicagoland, IL
- Has thanked: 619 times
- Been thanked: 616 times
She called, wab.Mikefive wrote:Accepted.wab wrote:I wanted to formally apologize for blowing this scenario off as improbable. Although highly unlikely, Respected folks in the media are saying that there is a scenario that would leave Garrett on the board at #3.
So. Mikefive...my apologies.
You can find me at Starbucks where I'll be waiting for Kate Upton.
And good luck with that.
Her message was, "Nothing or no-one will ever / Make me let you down / Kiss them for me -- I may be delayed / Kiss them for me -- if I am delayed."
KFFL refugee.
dplank wrote:I agree with Rich here
RichH55 wrote: Dplank is correct