Hypothetical scenario (that's still possible)

[TheMostInterestingMan]

2 minutes ago, Lurk21 said:

I had that thought sentiment  too until I wondered I Indy got involved. All it takes is for a leak of Indy wanting to move up to 1 and Houston trying to block that. Apparently  Indy called Chicago  too and offered Pittman n etc. Houston has to have their head on the swivel. This is why the Chicago GM said we wanted to control the draft. 

That’s the only way it’s possible but I think that still doesn’t work out logically. Because Houston would know we aren’t going to drop that many spots and miss out on a QB. Unless we had Levis has out top prospect, trading with Indy could mean we miss out on Young, Stroud AND Richardson. 

[TheMostInterestingMan]

Just now, mrcompletely11 said:

There's a world they could have traded 3x and still be in the top 10 

 

Down to 2. Then to 5 then to 9. God knows what draft capital that would have netted.  The bears panicked for some reason 

Yep. We actually did really well giving up what we did to have our choice of the QBs. It hurts giving up the haul we did and initially I didn’t really like it, but I’ve definitely come around. Bears lost a ton of value. Could have probably doubled their war chest and just threw that opportunity away.

[ForJimmy]

3 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

There's a world they could have traded 3x and still be in the top 10 

 

Down to 2. Then to 5 then to 9. God knows what draft capital that would have netted.  The bears panicked for some reason 

They wanted a young establish player before FA. I think DJ Moore was the most important part of the trade to them. The chances of a rookie WR being as good as him are slim plus there wasn’t many good ones available in FA as we all witnessed. I’m not saying it was the right move, but I think it’s why they did it early.

[Lurk21]

4 minutes ago, TheMostInterestingMan said:

That’s the only way it’s possible but I think that still doesn’t work out logically. Because Houston would know we aren’t going to drop that many spots and miss out on a QB. Unless we had Levis has out top prospect, trading with Indy could mean we miss out on Young, Stroud AND Richardson. 

Possibly but being that they are in the same division... the threat would make Houston front office think at least. As others have stated, Houston  front office isn't that well renowned  to make good decisions!

[ForJimmy]

14 minutes ago, TheMostInterestingMan said:

I just think it’s an illogical move for Chicago to make. If we truly have BY as the best QB in the draft, even marginally so, it’s unwise for us to pass up on him to add an extra pick. And if we don’t, then Chicago gets their guy anyway without giving up extra assets. There’s just no way it makes sense to do. It would be awesome but it just won’t happen.

The chances if it happening are slim. There is also a chance a team could trade with us and jump them for Young. That’s probably where the we are ok with taking AR in a trade down rumors are coming from. A future first might be worth it for them to ensure they get their franchise QB. Again it’s not likely, but interesting still.

[t96]

I could theoretically see us maybe slightly preferring Young but liking Stroud pretty much the same, taking Young 1st and then Houston panics as they thought we’d take Stroud and while they’re on the clock at #2, trade us that pick and quite a bit more for Young, then we still get Stroud who we like as much as Young but pick up some valuable draft ammo too, whether a 2nd rounder, #12 or 2024 1st I don’t know. Still think it’s not gonna happen and we just take our guy at 1.

[mrcompletely11]

10 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

They wanted a young establish player before FA. I think DJ Moore was the most important part of the trade to them. The chances of a rookie WR being as good as him are slim plus there wasn’t many good ones available in FA as we all witnessed. I’m not saying it was the right move, but I think it’s why they did it early.

Then that's short sighted.  Extremely short sighted

[poundaway]

17 minutes ago, TheMostInterestingMan said:

Yep. We actually did really well giving up what we did to have our choice of the QBs. It hurts giving up the haul we did and initially I didn’t really like it, but I’ve definitely come around. Bears lost a ton of value. Could have probably doubled their war chest and just threw that opportunity away.

We gave up DJ Moore,  the  2nd rounder that we got for CMC, plus a 2024 1st and the 2025 2nd for this one pick.  DJ and CMC for a QB with a reasonable chance to bust.  It is unlikely that Young, Stroud and Richardson will all be franchise. 

[ForJimmy]

6 minutes ago, poundaway said:

We gave up DJ Moore,  the  2nd rounder that we got for CMC, plus a 2024 1st and the 2025 2nd for this one pick.  DJ and CMC for a QB with a reasonable chance to bust.  It is unlikely that Young, Stroud and Richardson will all be franchise. 

That’s not all we got from that CMC trade. It’s why we still have a 3rd. Also he was taking up a lot of future cap space and couldn’t stay healthy. We needed to move on from him and give him a chance to compete like we did. LAC isn’t wanting to pay Ekler, the Giants are scared to give Barkley a long contract. Paying RBs big money over a lot of years isn’t the best idea.

[TheMostInterestingMan]

7 minutes ago, poundaway said:

We gave up DJ Moore,  the  2nd rounder that we got for CMC, plus a 2024 1st and the 2025 2nd for this one pick.  DJ and CMC for a QB with a reasonable chance to bust.  It is unlikely that Young, Stroud and Richardson will all be franchise. 

I agree. Like I said, initially I didn’t like the trade. I’m always one very hesitant to give up resources for any individual player. But we were always going to move up for a QB this year. That was expected. So to move up and have the opportunity to pick out the one we like best for what we gave up, I’m happy with it.

Like compare it to what the Browns gave up for Watson. Or compare it to the farm that was sold for RG3. 
 

Giving up tons of assets to move in for a player is never fun for me. I feel like my friends that are much more casual get really excited over these kinds of deals while I’m typically in agony. But like I said we were always going to give up assets to move up. This was just expected. So to get our choice of all the prospects for what we parted with, I feel we ultimately did well in terms of value 

[mrcompletely11]

Just now, TheMostInterestingMan said:

I agree. Like I said, initially I didn’t like the trade. I’m always one very hesitant to give up resources for any individual player. But we were always going to move up for a QB this year. That was expected. So to move up and have the opportunity to pick out the one we like best for what we gave up, I’m happy with it.

Like compare it to what the Browns gave up for Watson. Or compare it to the farm that was sold for RG3. 
 

Giving up tons of assets to move in for a player is never fun for me. I feel like my friends that are much more casual get really excited over these kinds of deals while I’m typically in agony. But like I said we were always going to give up assets to move up. This was just expected. So to get our choice of all the prospects for what we parted with, I feel we ultimately did well in terms of value 

Paying him after year 3 was velcro shoes stupid

[CamWhoaaCam]

If Houston really wanted Young the trade would have been made by now.

 

We traded for #1 for a reason. There is a QB the staff fell in love with and desperately wanted him. I think Young is the pick based on the rumors.

[poundaway]

2 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

That’s not all we got from that CMC trade. It’s why we still have a 3rd. Also he was taking up a lot of future cap space and couldn’t stay healthy. We needed to move on from him and give him a chance to compete like we did. LAC isn’t wanting to pay Ekler, the Giants are scared to give Barkley a long contract. Paying RBs big money over a lot of years isn’t the best idea.

Its true we got other lower picks, but the 2nd was the biggest one. 

It is true that  CMC will be 12M a year 2023-25 for the 9ers.    But we just ate 26M in deadcap for CMC and paid Sanders ~6M a year a year to replace him.  There some savings for sure, but nothing earth shattering.

I also agree that paying big money to RB's is not a good plan.

But I still contend that a big part of our compensation for CMC went toward this new QB.  We paid a lot for this pick.

[Stumpy]

2 hours ago, ForJimmy said:

I think DJ Moore was the most important part of the trade to them. The chances of a rookie WR being as good as him are slim

lmao

There have been multiple rookie WRs better than DJ every single year of his career.