Bears' draft trade is bad, even if Mitchell Trubisky ends up being good

[Elmgrovegnome]

Hard to imagine anyone being so sure about any QB with only 13 college starts, which included team losses in 3 of the last 4 games.

True, but Trubiskey was still being consider as a potential first round pick by the writers, and was rumored to be considered by a few team as a first round QB.

Pace obviously liked what he saw in Trubiskey, so what else was he supposed to do? Risk losing him by sitting at three and waiting? Try to trade back and hope nobody picks him? Especially with Cleveland having so many tradeable picks? If this pick was anything, but a QB, then I could understand the criticism. I agree that Trubiskey was drafted too high, none of the QBs in this year's draft were really worthy of a first round pick. I won't agree that Pace gave up too much to get him though. Supply for good, or even potentially good, QBs is extremely low and the demand is extremely high. How many picks would you give up to draft the next Tom Brady, or even Russell Wilson? That haul would be a mere pittance.

Then you have the media writing articles and discussing the importance of the QB, throughout the year. And they scoff at the chances of any team that doesn't have a good QB. They talk ad nauseam about the Bradys and the Rodgers. And everyone agrees. You need a good QB to win in the NFL, and if you don't get one you suck. But, it doesn't keep the media from laughing at Pace's choice. It is a choice they should fully understand.

And, in the end what do the extra picks really represent? Teams have bad drafts all the time. Often, it is only one or two great drafts that catapult them to success, surrounded by a lot of drafts full of unfulfilled potential. I recall the Rams having a lot of extra picks more than once, high ones too. What good did they do?

 

[LACHAMP46]

I recall the Rams having a lot of extra picks more than once, high ones too. What good did they do?

Did they pick wisely? That will answer your question.

 

[kurtfaulk]

the Rams having a lot of extra picks more than once, high ones too. What good did they do?

They did some good things on d.

But when your offensive coaches aren't very good all your offense picks went to waste and the result is years of 7 and 9.

.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

They did some good things on d.

But when your offensive coaches aren't very good all your offense picks went to waste and the result is years of 7 and 9.

.

Yeah, exactly 7-9. Having lots of picks doesn't equal success, unless you hit on enough of them and you can manage to sign them all in four years. If you look back at draft trades usually the team acquiring the player are the ones that make out the best. Atlanta with Julio, the Rams with Faulk, Colts with Dickerson......known commodities are players that you deem as cant miss prospects should be the Browns targets. Remember when Fisher wanted to move back to round 1 and take Zack Martin? He was a sure thing. He also loved Beckham. Those types of players have a bigger impact in the long run. If the Browns have the ammunition and can identify a few of those players then they should be trying to go get them. Maybe Trubiskey wasn't as important to them as that. But, sometimes people fall in love with the picks. Picks, picks, picks. Picks don't mean anything if you only got a bunch of average players, nor if you didn't get any real impact players. Use the draft, don't let the draft use you.