- Thread starter
- #1
BearsWillWin
Well-Known Member
For a second rounder.
Wtf are we doing?? Talk about a complete overpay.
Hell if they wanted to make a trade with someone,shouldve went bigger.......
Who though? Jeudy? Is he better? Probably not.
This move benefits Fields and Mooney as well. Defenses have someone they actually have to be somewhat worried about.
Yes, I don't think the Bears should've been the team to make that move, however.He worth a 2nd rounder?
Yeah, seems like they were in "tank" move or at least "not this year" mentalityYes, I don't think the Bears should've been the team to make that move, however.
Thanks captain obvious. No one is questioning why we made the trade just the amount we gave up. Keep up.
I think I would rather haveJJ......maybe Cooks....
And we just basically traded Roquan for Chase.....not so sure thats an even trade.
Yeah, seems like they were in "tank" move or at least "not this year" mentality
Cooks is 29....Claypool is 24. If you're a rebuilding team that's looking to build something for the future....which one makes more sense?
We gave up a guy with 9 games left on his contract for a guy with a full year and 9 games still on his contract and also picked up a 5th. Positionally speaking Roquan is a better LB than Claypool is a WR but in the broader sense it's not really a bad deal at all.
it was the bears!Anyone know which of the two 2nd rounders we traded? If it was the Ravens pick, that's not as bad. One positive that I'm not reading here (aside from him being an obvious upgrade to anyone WR on the roster not named Mooney), is that this could very well lessen the likelihood of Poles taking a WR with the 1st pick next year. In fact, if Claypool pans out, which we should all hope to be the case, I'd almost lay some coin down on us not taking one.
gave up an early 2nd rd pick to write a big ass contract to your new WR.
Who apparently is being a problem child.