tukafan21

I think you're conflating "one favorite" with "higher ranked" in your arguments on this. Sure, maybe some people are arguing there is only "one guy" that they are okay with, but I think most of us, such as myself, understand the team may be okay with either of two of the QB's. The difference is that many of us don't think it's worth adding say a 2nd round pick to take someone we're okay with, as opposed to taking the guy we prefer over the other, even if only by a slim margin. This is the most important position in sports, even if it's the slimmest of margins we have between two guys, I'm not okay with risking the Texans taking that guy we prefer instead of just taking that guy ourselves at #1. Take specific player arguments out of it, if someone were to say you could have the QB you prefer or a QB you'd be okay with and a 2nd round pick, I'm not sure how anyone can say they're okay with taking your second choice at QB. Again, if this was about any other position on the field, then yes, trading back is the right call, but it's not, it's about QB, and you just have to go with your top ranked guy in a situation like this.

I also just feel the need to reiterate, that I don't think the Texans are even interested in this based on them not having already made a trade with the Bears. Once the Bears had this framework of a trade in place, there is basically a 100% chance they then called the Texans and said, "hey, we have a deal in place to trade the #1 to a QB needy team, but if you'd like to do a pick swap for your 2nd rounder (or maybe more), so you can pick the QB your prefer, we'll do that deal with you." As they then could have taken that #2 overall pick and offered it to us for a pretty similar trade, likely the same one except for the 2025 2nd rounder. If the Texans didn't make the trade then, it means they don't have much interest in moving up to #1 when they can keep all their picks and end up with one of the top 2 guys anyways. To me that is the sticking point in all of this that makes this such a moot argument, as we're not trading down to #4 after all this, just not happening. So if the Texans didn't trade with the Bears, they're sure as hell not trading with us now.

Yes, perfectly logical if they are a literal and complete tie as to which QB they'd prefer, but it's not logical in the slightest to think they can't find a way to separate them and have a preference. And yes, I realize they may be comfortable with either, but in the end, these guys are two very different players, to the point where the staff will be able to have one ranked over the other. Once you have a preference, I just see no legitimate reasoning to allowing another team to dictate which one we take when it's about the QB position. To me, that's what it all comes down to in the end, it's the most important position in all of sports and we have the chance now to pick the one we prefer, you make the pick yourself.

And that Bears QB didn't get his 5th year option picked up and has played for 3 teams in the past 3 years. And that 49ers QB likely just lost his job to the last pick in the draft. I think that's what you're missing here, nobody is upset with what we gave up for the #1 pick to draft a QB, it's that the QB's in this draft aren't enough of "can't miss prospects" to give up that much for them, particularly with what could be a historically strong QB draft class next year.

I think what people also seem to be forgetting is that if the Texans really only wanted one of the QB's, there is basically a 100% certainty that they'd have already made the trade with the Bears. There is no way the Bears made this trade without first re-checking with the Texans to try and swap, as trading down twice would have been the best thing for them, they'd still have been able to send that #2 overall pick to us for almost the same trade. We probably could have kept that 2025 2nd rounder, but still sent them everything else, and they likely would have gotten the equivalent, if not more, than that from the Texans to move down.

You can also look at it the other way around and I think it makes the idea of trading back to #2 look insane. If we had the #2 pick and were comfortable with two of the QB's, but we preferred one over the other, there wouldn't be a single person who has any issue with giving up a 2nd round pick to make the swap and take the guy we prefer. So why would we do the opposite to then let the other team decide. They'd have to have some sort of 1000% certainty that the Texans would be taking the QB we didn't prefer, and even then, I'd be very skeptical that it would play out that way. Because as I've said in the other threads, if the Texans felt we weren't taking the guy they wanted, they'd never make the trade with us, so fi they were to want to swap, to me, it says it means they think we're taking the guy they want.

Honestly, nothing they'd actually do, and the ONLY way I'd do it is if we legitimately couldn't decide on which QB to take at #1 and are about to actually flip a coin to make the decision (which let's be real, would never happen, they'll have a way of establishing who they rank higher). At that point, I'd take #2, #12, and their 2024 1st, and nothing less, dead serious. If it were any other position on the field, I'd take their 2nd rounder and probably throw a mid round pick back at them too, but at QB, we need to be the ones to decide who we draft, not another team. It's too important of a position to not make the decision ourselves. Yes, I realize we still have holes to fill and getting a QB we still like while filling them would be good for us, but in the end, for me, it just comes down to how important the QB position is and now that we've given up too much to move up to #1, I'd rather pick the guy we'd rather have, even if it's only marginally more than the other guy.

Not gonna lie, once we made the trade I had a feeling it will be Stroud, and one of the first things I thought of is that part of Shaq restructuring his deal to stay with the team will need to include a clause of him giving up his number for us to do it LOL

Most, if not all, of those players other than Evans are likely to never hit Free Agency, and when Evans does, he's well past his prime.

There is no way they won’t be able to rank one above the other, they might be close and they might have been okay with getting either going into the draft, but they’d still have a preference in the end. In a world where picking the right QB is this necessary, you don’t risk it, you take the one you have ranked higher.

No, not when it comes to QB, it’s too important to hope they take the guy we prefer second, even if comfortable with both. You gave all this up to move up to #1, you make sure you get the guy you rank higher, no if’s, and’s, or but’s about it

I'm not a fan of giving up so much to ge too #1 and have no starting WRs on the roster for him to throw to. We'll have to get at least 2 players better than TMJ or Lavish for him, so if we take Stroud, I think we should find a way to get back into the middle of the first to take his college teammate and hope it works like for the Bengals with Burrow/Chase. Think our 2025 First plus some more could get us into the middle of the round to get him, and that would be totally worth giving up a future first in that type of situation I think.

If that was the case, then you just trade into #3 with the Cardinals who want to trade back, and get it for less. If the Colts or someone else were willing to give up something stupid for the #1 overall, then they'd have given it to the Colts, nobody is going to now go and give more for that same pick. They did this because they either already know their guy, or they know it's 1 of at worst 2 players and knew to get one of them they would have to trade into the top 2 to get them and now have time to figure out which it is. Either way it is, they don't do this trade with the intention of then trading back, not this early and not to give up DJ in the process and now need to carry his dead cap and find a new WR1.

The problem is you’re looking at those other trades in a vacuum of just the draft picks. The teams trading back weren’t taking a player at the same position as those trading up, that’s massively significant when it comes to QB. In the end, no team has a true tie as their top QB on their board. So even if the Panthers knew 100% who the Texans top guy was, and it wasn’t their own, you can’t bluff trading back to 4 there since you then wouldn’t get your guy either. There just isn’t a logical scenario I can see where we can trade back here with the Texans to 2 and still get our top guy, short of the Texans GM just getting badly played like a fool.

Jesus fuging christ, are you serious with this?!?!?!?! The 49ers didn't just trade two 1's, two 2's, and a stud WR to get that draft pick to draft a QB I'm sorry, but this is one of the dumbest things I've ever read on a message board ever. Yes, if we already had that draft pick, we could bluff our way into a pick swap for the 2nd pick. But we just traded a poo ton of assets to move up here, you don't do that to then trade back to #4 and just accept whatever player falls to you there, you just don't do it. So there is nothing to bluff the Texans with other than saying we're going to draft who they want. And if that's he case, then we're not trading them the pick because then they'd draft who we want. It really, really, really isn't that hard to understand. It's simple.... If the Texans want who we want, we wouldn't swap with them, and if they don't want who we want, they wouldn't swap with us. There is no logical way we can bluff trading it to another team after all we gave up unless the Colts are going to swap picks with us while giving us their 1st next year AND Pittman at the same time, and that's not happening either, because if they would do that, the Bears would have made that trade with them instead of us.

Is it really that hard to understand that we gave up too much in a draft that doesn't have a QB prospect that is worth said cost?

There is no better ability in sports than availability. It doesn't matter how good you are, if you aren't healthy enough to play, your skill means nothing. If we're talking about any position other than QB, then yea, maybe you take the chance on the "better player" as opposed to the one who has a lesser chance of getting hurt. But Young's lack of bulk is a significant factor that can't be ignored, particularly after giving up everything we had to give up to get here. If we just had the #1 pick from the start and could take Young without giving up future assets, then it's a little different, but we gave up far too much to take the risk on someone of his size.

Again, the logic here from the Texans standpoint is just baffling. If the Texans tell us who they would take at #1 and then we're still willing to do the trade, then it means they're planning on drafting the player we won't be drafting. And if we're not taking the guy they want, they have LITERALLY ZERO reason to make a trade with us at that point, none, zilch, nada, NOTHING. Then from our side, the optics of making this trade to then say, "we don't care which of these two guys we get, we're 100% equal on both of them that we'll swap with the Texans and take whoever they don't want" would be an utterly terrible look. How do you make this trade and then just take whichever guy falls to you so that you can add a 3rd round pick instead of taking the player you prefer. If you make this trade as GM and are so torn between the 2 options that you're willing to accept either in exchange for a 3rd round draft pick, then you don't deserve to be a QB.

You have to be trolling me, right? Yes, the Bears traded a bunch of picks because they knew the 49ers weren't keeping that pick, that they weren't taking a QB and knew they'd be trading the pick, so they HAD to make the trade to get the guy they wanted. The Texans aren't stupid, they know we didn't give up everything we just gave up to then trade back down to #4 and just take whichever QB is available to us at that point. Also you just have to look at the fact that the Texans didn't make the trade with the Bears, it means they weren't offering much to make the move, because if they did, the Bears would have taken that swap and then traded down again. Which again brings me back to the super obvious point in all of this.... If we think the Texans want the player we want to draft, we'd never swap picks with them, while at the same time if the Texans don't think we're taking the player they want, they're not going to swap picks with us because there is no fear that we'll trade the pick to someone else who would then take their guy. It's just common sense, A+B=C

Yes, that might be how it normally works if you're doing a 1 position swap. However.... 1 position swaps don't happen when both teams are taking a player at the same position, particularly when that position is QB. 1 position swaps are only done because the team picking second is afraid of someone else making the trade for the draft pick ahead of them. The Texans wouldn't have that fear in this situation now, we're not trading back to #4 with the Colts now, just won't happen. So what is the reason the Texans would ever give us assets to move up 1 pick to take the player that would still be there for them at #2, while not giving up assets and getting a slightly cheaper contract for that player. It's just asinine to think the Texans will swap picks with us, there is literally zero upside for them to do that.

No, just no Because we could have moved up to #4 without giving up DJ and still ended up with whichever QB fell to that spot. We're drafting at #1 guys, just accept that

That would be even dumber Just think about it... why would the Texans tell us which player they want to take, then do the trade with us, and then still draft that player. Just logically, if we're willing to do that trade after they tell us who they want to take, then that means it's not the player we want and there is no reason for them to then give us assets to move up one spot and have to pay more on that contract at the same time. The only way it would work would be if we draft who they want and then trade that player to them for the 2nd pick, and that's not happening either.

This is going to sound weird, but........ I would have no problem offering that up, but if the Texans actually wanted to do it, then there is no way in hell we should. The Texans swapping with the Bears made sense as it would have been done so someone else couldn't swoop in and take the player they prefer. If they think we're taking the player they want, they'd want to swap picks with us still, but if they don't think we're taking the guy they want, then they'd never give up assets to then pay more money for the player they could get at #2. Basically in short, if the Texans want to do it, it's because they want to draft the same player we want. No way we gave up all those draft assets and DJ to take our second choice. And no, we can't really threaten them with, "well then we'll trade the pick to the Colts" because then we'll have given up WAY too much to move to #4 and the crapshoot of whichever QB is left.

And that was a smart decision, Fields isn't going to be a long term high end starter in this league, he's a worse passer than Lamar. I always felt the Bears should have been trading Fields and draft a new QB anyways.

I'll admit that even before seeing this I told my friends that I wouldn't mind trading back down to get some assets back. But in the end, the Bears making this trade with us means they weren't getting good offers from the Texans or Colts, as if they were okay with trading down to 9, they'd have taken one of those offers and then traded down again with us. So we're just not going to get enough assets back to make it worth trading back down at this point, you make this trade, you have to take your guy.