I want a plan that allows Poles to draft one blue chip OL - one of those picks that everybody agrees is a safe investment of first round draft capitol. That's where #9 is penciled in.
So if they sign a high-priced RT, you want them to take an interior lineman at 9 over a DL?
We've got too many WR's for some people but I love it.
I would feel exactly the same only moreso if we had too many good, versatile OL.
I want to hear everyone else here moaning and groaning because we have so many good OL they can't find enough snaps for them all.
It's not rocket science.
There is a GM named Poles
Who has a clear set of goals
He’s rebuilt his team
So Bears’ fans can dream
Of winning some more Super Bowls
pus wrote: ↑Mon Mar 13, 2023 11:14 am
I want the best damn OL in the league.
WR and OL is not the same. You can't rotate your RG or your LT. If the Bears sign a RT, chances are you are over-drafting a guard/center, or your 9th overall pick is going to be sitting on the bench for the duration of someone's contract.
pus wrote: ↑Mon Mar 13, 2023 11:14 am
I want the best damn OL in the league.
So do we all.
But Carolina's already in that conversation, and they still had to give up the farm to move up in the draft. That's on the strength of a line built of a single first-rounder, plus a second and third they drafted themselves and another second and third they signed as free agents. Poles can build the line without pretending that it's our only priority.
So much road and so few places, so much friendliness and so little intimacy, so much flavour and so little taste.
Friendship is better than fighting, but fighting is more useful.
pus wrote: ↑Mon Mar 13, 2023 11:14 am
I want the best damn OL in the league.
WR and OL is not the same. You can't rotate your RG or your LT. If the Bears sign a RT, chances are you are over-drafting a guard/center, or your 9th overall pick is going to be sitting on the bench for the duration of someone's contract.
I'll believe that when I see it. 17 games is a long time to stay healthy when you play every down. I want the best damn OL in the league, especially when we get to the playoffs. That means solid depth everywhere on that line.
There is a GM named Poles
Who has a clear set of goals
He’s rebuilt his team
So Bears’ fans can dream
Of winning some more Super Bowls
G08 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 13, 2023 10:22 am
Let's take this a step further... would you trade #9 and #53 to move up to #5 knowing that Seattle may be interested in him?
I don't think I would, but I'd bet almost anything Poles wouldn't.
If this all shakes out that he wasn't racing and just left an accident he was not directly involved in, I would say yea. But I do feel his stock may rise some at that point and may not be there at 9. There are other teams that m,ay come to the same conclusion and take a flyer on this kid before Poles has a chance.
G08 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 13, 2023 10:22 am
Let's take this a step further... would you trade #9 and #53 to move up to #5 knowing that Seattle may be interested in him?
I don't think I would, but I'd bet almost anything Poles wouldn't.
I was thinking about a very similar scenario G08. But I don't think you have to move up to 5, I think we are going to see 2 QB's, then Anderson, then Wilson + 2 more QB's in some order. Which puts Carter available at 7. So my thought was...if this happens, would you trade up from 9 to 7 to ensure getting Carter? HELL YES I WOULD.
I don't think I would, but I'd bet almost anything Poles wouldn't.
I was thinking about a very similar scenario G08. But I don't think you have to move up to 5, I think we are going to see 2 QB's, then Anderson, then Wilson + 2 more QB's in some order. Which puts Carter available at 7. So my thought was...if this happens, would you trade up from 9 to 7 to ensure getting Carter? HELL YES I WOULD.
I was thinking about a very similar scenario G08. But I don't think you have to move up to 5, I think we are going to see 2 QB's, then Anderson, then Wilson + 2 more QB's in some order. Which puts Carter available at 7. So my thought was...if this happens, would you trade up from 9 to 7 to ensure getting Carter? HELL YES I WOULD.
I don't think I would, but I'd bet almost anything Poles wouldn't.
I was thinking about a very similar scenario G08. But I don't think you have to move up to 5, I think we are going to see 2 QB's, then Anderson, then Wilson + 2 more QB's in some order. Which puts Carter available at 7. So my thought was...if this happens, would you trade up from 9 to 7 to ensure getting Carter? HELL YES I WOULD.
The incremental cost to move up is a late 3rd rounder according to the draft points schedule.
Lions signed Sutton. Even though they probably still need a CB it is now less of a need for them and they're definitely going to pick Carter if he's there. So now if the Bears want Carter it is trade back to 5 with Seahawks.
I think Carter is off the table and we're looking at Paris Johnson. Which is great - and IMO a better answer than OBJ, Glinch or McGary.
But that means paying or even overpaying for Dre'mont Jones is sort of a must-do.
2023 Chicago Bears... emerging from a long hibernation, and hungry!
IE wrote: ↑Mon Mar 13, 2023 4:46 pm
Lions signed Sutton. Even though they probably still need a CB it is now less of a need for them and they're definitely going to pick Carter if he's there. So now if the Bears want Carter it is trade back to 5 with Seahawks.
I think Carter is off the table and we're looking at Paris Johnson. Which is great - and IMO a better answer than OBJ, Glinch or McGary.
But that means paying or even overpaying for Dre'mont Jones is sort of a must-do.
Yea Lions getting a CB hurts our chances here. Up to 5 if we must!!
G08 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 13, 2023 10:22 am
Let's take this a step further... would you trade #9 and #53 to move up to #5 knowing that Seattle may be interested in him?
Absolutely not.
My mother's love was inexplicably linked to kickball.
Carter isn't the only DL in the draft and it is entirely possible Poles likes some other guy like Kancy or Breese as or nearly as much. And if he can get one of those guys with yet another trade down I'm OK with it.
I wouldn't complain but I'm not sure I'd like trading back up to 5. I could rationalize it simply because taking that two-trade road to get Carter, DJ Moore and a likely very high '24 first would be worth it. BUT... would it be AS worth it as trading down, getting Breese or Kancy, getting yet another 3rd rounder for maybe a decent TE in addition to DJ and the high '24? I don't know. Losing a 3rd from trading up vs getting a 3rd from trading down is a two-player swing on a team that needs to build quality depth. 3rd rounders can & should be core players.
I think I'd prefer Carter but giving up effectively two 3rd rounders to ensure getting him is a high price. I'd want Poles to have conviction that Carter was that much better than Breese. Oftentimes those things turn out not to be the case, and the hype leading up to the draft for the few players who bubble up doesn't match their production or value over average vs other really good players who don't get the same hype for whatever reason.
2023 Chicago Bears... emerging from a long hibernation, and hungry!
