Would You Trade the #4 Pick for Justin Fields?

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Just now, Defjamz26 said:

No.

 

Ive been on record as saying that Fields will be good eventually. But to spend the number 4 overall pick to get him when he hasn’t yet reached his potential and there are QBs available that can be just as good or better, would be risky.

 

Id trade a pick in the 20s for him though. #4 overall is too much though.

This is exactly why bears won’t trade him. They wouldn’t get that much value on return. 

[Gigc]

9 minutes ago, philba101 said:

Yes, you would have to pay Fields sooner. The trade off would be possibly skipping the two years that it typically takes a drafted QB to develop. We know that Fields can play on the NFL level. We don't know this about any of the draftees yet. If you draft a QB and then after 2-3 years you realize he is a miss, then you will be back to square one again.

hear what you're sayin, but some would argue that Fields really hasn't developed THAT much at this point. He played well this year, but still has a lot of work to do as a passer, I think.

[philba101]

23 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

No.

 

Ive been on record as saying that Fields will be good eventually. But to spend the number 4 overall pick to get him when he hasn’t yet reached his potential and there are QBs available that can be just as good or better, would be risky.

 

Id trade a pick in the 20s for him though. #4 overall is too much though.

Let's say the Bears load up with Fields and he balls out and takes them to a Super Bowl like Hurts did with the Eagles. Then they wouldn't dream of dealing him for a mere #4 pick. See how things can change so quickly. How many people were predicting before the season started that Hurts would have an MVP-caliber season and take his team to the Super Bowl? Not many, the Eagles would laugh now if someone offered them the #4 pick for Hurts.

[philba101]

9 minutes ago, Gigc said:

hear what you're sayin, but some would argue that Fields really hasn't developed THAT much at this point. He played well this year, but still has a lot of work to do as a passer, I think.

It is a valid point. The Colts would have to determine if someone like Steichen could develop Fields to the level like he did with Hurts.

[csmopar]

29 minutes ago, DougDew said:

BTW, did anybody read the Fields quotes talking about how his body "slows down" in the cold, or something like that.  Says he likes domed stadiums.

 

This was a day or two before the new JF trade chatter started again.

Which means even if he gets a team to January, they’ll likely lose

25 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

It took him 3 years though to really stand out.

Same with Manning….

[philba101]

Just now, csmopar said:

Which means even if he gets a team to January, they’ll likely lose

Yes, KC, Buffalo, and Cincy all have outdoor venues; in that case you would need home-field advantage to win.

[richard pallo]

10 minutes ago, philba101 said:

It is a valid point. The Colts would have to determine if someone like Steichen could develop Fields to the level like he did with Hurts.

I would like Steichen’s chances better than Flus or whoever the OC is.

 

 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

2 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

I would like Steichen’s chances better than Flus or whoever the OC is.

 

 

Bears should of been looking for a offensive coach. I have no idea who their OC is.

[DougDew]

24 minutes ago, csmopar said:

Which means even if he gets a team to January, they’ll likely lose

Same with Manning….

Yes.  And what's the optics here?  If Fields actually said that, he's sort of saying that he doesn't want to play in CHI and would prefer to play somewhere else.  

 

So if you are CHI, why would you want to build around a QB that appears to not have his heart in it with his current team.

 

I'm not saying that JF meant to say that, but a team having to deal with a QB who might not be All In would be a reason to move on from him.

[Stephen]

4 hours ago, philba101 said:

Would you trade the #4 pick for Justin Fields? According to recent reports. Multiple NFL general managers came away from the recent Pro Bowl weekend believing the Bears are open to dealing QB Justin Fields. Fields will be entering his 3rd-year of a 4-year rookie contract that also has a 5th-year option. There is a lot of speculation that none of the QB's at the top of this draft are elite and will likely need a couple years to adjust to the NFL. Fields already has a couple years experience as an NFL player. He could potentially hit the ground running on the Colts and new coach Steichen could utilize and mold him much like he did with Jalen Hurts in Philadelphia. The Colts have already shown that they want to shorten the window of returning to competitive relevancy by convincing their new coach to largely keep the entire defensive staff in place. Would a young explosive QB with a couple years of experience shorten that window even more?

No absolutely no

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

2 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Yes.  And what's the optics here?  If Fields actually said that, he's sort of saying that he doesn't want to play in CHI and would prefer to play somewhere else.  

 

So if you are CHI, why would you want to build around a QB that appears to not have his heart in it with his current team.

 

I'm not saying that JF meant to say that, but a team having to deal with a QB who might not be All In would be a reason to move on from him.

He did say it. Here is the podcast. I listened to it a couple days ago. He is a great kid. I don’t think Chicago has to worry about him mentally.

 

 

 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

 

[ProblChld32]

5 hours ago, philba101 said:

Would you trade the #4 pick for Justin Fields? According to recent reports. Multiple NFL general managers came away from the recent Pro Bowl weekend believing the Bears are open to dealing QB Justin Fields. Fields will be entering his 3rd-year of a 4-year rookie contract that also has a 5th-year option. There is a lot of speculation that none of the QB's at the top of this draft are elite and will likely need a couple years to adjust to the NFL. Fields already has a couple years experience as an NFL player. He could potentially hit the ground running on the Colts and new coach Steichen could utilize and mold him much like he did with Jalen Hurts in Philadelphia. The Colts have already shown that they want to shorten the window of returning to competitive relevancy by convincing their new coach to largely keep the entire defensive staff in place. Would a young explosive QB with a couple years of experience shorten that window even more?

No, Fields hasn’t shown that he has the ability to process reads and make accurate passes. He often has to rely on his athleticism to get himself out of jams. I don’t think he’s going to be a Top 10 QB in this league so why waste a top 5 draft pick on him?

[richard pallo]

19 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Yes.  And what's the optics here?  If Fields actually said that, he's sort of saying that he doesn't want to play in CHI and would prefer to play somewhere else.  

 

So if you are CHI, why would you want to build around a QB that appears to not have his heart in it with his current team.

 

I'm not saying that JF meant to say that, but a team having to deal with a QB who might not be All In would be a reason to move on from him.

All in has nothing to do with it.  I’m sure he’s giving his all.  He just prefers a dome.  No big deal.  You’re reading way to much into a comment that is probably the way most players feel.  

15 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

 

Come on over!

[NewColtsFan]

25 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Yes.  And what's the optics here?  If Fields actually said that, he's sort of saying that he doesn't want to play in CHI and would prefer to play somewhere else.  

 

So if you are CHI, why would you want to build around a QB that appears to not have his heart in it with his current team.

 

I'm not saying that JF meant to say that, but a team having to deal with a QB who might not be All In would be a reason to move on from him.

Chicago is openly talking about leaving Soldier Field soon and building a domed stadium in the suburbs.   I take his comment in that context.  That he’d love to play in a dome for Chicago and not play for some other team.

[Moosejawcolt]

1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Hurts wasn't even that good his 1st 2 years is my point. You are not even giving Fields a chance. Put Fields on Philly and they make the playoffs at worse with that roster and coaching. 

what is it about him that shows any ability to be an NFL qb? He is ultra athletic, but shows no eagerness to throw the ball and resorts to running. I don't seem them trading out as i don't believe there will be takers. I have them picking Carter and i dont see the Fields trade. They go with  him and  they will be picking early again next year. The coach and GM may know this,  so to save their jobs maybe they trade him and say go for a guy like Levi. IT would give the  coach and the GM more life. I think if they stick with Fields, the GM and Flus know they are dead men walking and wont be back in 2024.

[Moosejawcolt]

38 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

All in has nothing to do with it.  I’m sure he’s giving his all.  He just prefers a dome.  No big deal.  You’re reading way to much into a comment that is probably the way most players feel.  

Come on over!

Trust me by the time they get a dome and a  new stadium, Fields will be lucky to be in the league. I will preface this.  I dont think that Fields is the answer and Ballard apparently liked  him which even cements the fact that he is not a good evaluator. Now if Striechen looks at him and says yes I can mold him into a star then go ahead because  I trust Streichen in evaluating a qb based on his history. The most I would give up would be say a 2nd rounder and that maybe even to much. Trust me there will not be a lot of takers with regards to Fields but Ballard has a history of over paying ala Buckner and Wentz.

[2006Coltsbestever]

38 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

what is it about him that shows any ability to be an NFL qb? He is ultra athletic, but shows no eagerness to throw the ball and resorts to running. I don't seem them trading out as i don't believe there will be takers. I have them picking Carter and i dont see the Fields trade. They go with  him and  they will be picking early again next year. The coach and GM may know this,  so to save their jobs maybe they trade him and say go for a guy like Levi. IT would give the  coach and the GM more life. I think if they stick with Fields, the GM and Flus know they are dead men walking and wont be back in 2024.

I just like the fact he has been in the league for a couple of years. If it was up to me I would take Young.

[07dleigh]

I would. I don't personally think any of the top draft guys have the ceiling Fields does... do they? I admittedly have only ever watched much of Young, I feel like he has the IT factor and would love to have him, but I still think Fields is better.

 

Those pointing to Fields' passing stats... please acknowledge the dumpster fire that is the Chicago Bears and their offensive planning. 

[esmort]

2 hours ago, philba101 said:

Let's say the Bears would part with Fields for our 35th pick. Can you imagine what Steichen could do with Fields as far as designed runs would go? This would take a lot of pressure off of our line until it can improve. Plus, are teams going to stack the box as much against Taylor if they know the QB can run too? This would also setup some great opportunities for our receivers with play-action.

 

If the Colts could get Fields for 35 I would be tempted to do it and double dip by still taking a QB at #4.  Hedge my bets.  Fields flames out we have a shot at a top QB in 2024 and our guy from 2023 .... three chances to hit.

[Moosejawcolt]

8 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I just like the fact he has been in the league for a couple of years. If it was up to me I would take Young.

Hard no to Young. Like i have said before. Young is so far from what Ballard has drafted in a player that I would be shocked. Just look at Ballard's drafts and good or bad, he values physical traits. I honestly,  I see Ballard meeting Young and from 20 feet away before they shake hands, Ballard has cashed out. Sure he will smile and go through all the semantics but no way i see him drafting a qb of Young's size

[2006Coltsbestever]

Just now, Moosejawcolt said:

Hard no to Young. Like i have said before. Young is so far from what Ballard has drafted in a player that I would be shocked. Just look at Ballard's drafts and good or bad, he values physical traits. I honestly,  I see Ballard meeting Young and from 20 feet away before they shake hands, Ballard has cashed out. Sure he will smile and go through all the semantics but no way i see him drafting a qb of Young's size

Size is underrated, Brees proved that to be a myth so did Allen Iverson.

[Rhodelesstraveled]

I would in a minute with JT.  

[crazycolt1]

9 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Size is underrated, Brees proved that to be a myth so did Allen Iverson.

Maybe using Brees as an example is OK but Iverson don't relate to being a football player. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 minute ago, crazycolt1 said:

Maybe using Brees as an example is OK but Iverson don't relate to being a football player. 

Almost everyone said Iverson was too short to play basketball and would suck as a pro, he said hold my beer  .

[crazycolt1]

1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Almost everyone said Iverson was too short to play basketball and would suck as a pro, he said hold my beer  .

While Iverson was a great scorer he didn't make his team mates better and never helped his team win a championship.. he was what I call a flick. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

Just now, crazycolt1 said:

While Iverson was a great scorer he didn't make his team mates better and never helped his team win a championship.. he was what I call a flick. 

He is a Hall of Famer and made the Finals, he didn't win it all that year because he ran into Shaq and Kobe. He won the East with nobody great around him. He is easily a top 40 player of all-time and that says a lot.

[Aaron86]

Here we go, Let's twist and spin what Fields is saying now. 

[crazycolt1]

Just now, 2006Coltsbestever said:

He is a Hall of Famer and made the Finals, he didn't win it all that year because he ran into Shaq and Kobe. He won the East with nobody great around him. He is easily a top 40 player of all-time and that says a lot.

He was still a flick. One dimensional scorer.  Yes he was a great shooter but didn't bring much else to his game.  

[2006Coltsbestever]

Just now, crazycolt1 said:

He was still a flick. One dimensional scorer.  Yes he was a great shooter but didn't bring much else to his game.  

IMO he was a great leader too, Philly never surrounded him with much help. He might be the quickest player I have ever seen as well. Back to football, Brees, Fran, Wilson are all short and are Hall of Famers. 

[crazycolt1]

1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

IMO he was a great leader too, Philly never surrounded him with much help. He might be the quickest player I have ever seen as well. Back to football, Brees, Fran, Wilson are all short and are Hall of Famers. 

The nfl is a whole different game now compared to what it was 20 plus years ago.  Players are bigger, stronger and faster.  That should include QBs as well. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 minute ago, crazycolt1 said:

The nfl is a whole different game now compared to what it was 20 plus years ago.  Players are bigger, stronger and faster.  That should include QBs as well. 

I agree to an extent but Jalen Hurts is 6'1 220 pound and is a top 5 QB today.

[Indyfan4life]

2 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I agree to an extent but Jalen Hurts is 6'1 220 pound and is a top 5 QB today.

This over-infatuation with height drives me crazy. 

[crazycolt1]

12 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I agree to an extent but Jalen Hurts is 6'1 220 pound and is a top 5 QB today.

Big difference between 6'1" 220 lbs than 5'10" 190 lbs. 

Just saying 

[craigerb]

59 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Maybe using Brees as an example is OK but Iverson don't relate to being a football player. 

How about Muggsy Bogues?

[esmort]

1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Size is underrated, Brees proved that to be a myth so did Allen Iverson.

 

You are picking outliers/exceptions to the rule ... it's in the same vein as saying you can get elite QBs late just look at Brady. The odds getting a high level starting QB are already not in our favor, why further stack the odds against ourselves by gambling on another variable.  Parlay bet often?

[holeymoley99]

Why would anyone trade the #4 pick in the draft for a QB that has been below average and will want a big contract sooner then anyone who is drafted ? Would make zero sense.

[richard pallo]

2 minutes ago, holeymoley99 said:

Why would anyone trade the #4 pick in the draft for a QB that has been below average and will want a big contract sooner then anyone who is drafted ? Would make zero sense.

Below average on the worst team in the league.  Hard to reach average under those circumstances.  He has improved every year which is key.  Coaching is important.  I would feel confident in Steichen bringing out his potential and maximizing his strengths.

[throwing BBZ]

8 minutes ago, holeymoley99 said:

Why would anyone trade the #4 pick in the draft for a QB that has been below average and will want a big contract sooner then anyone who is drafted ? Would make zero sense.

 

  And this is why the topic is just low level, mindless, jibber jabber.

 ZERO sense!

[Hawkeyecolt]

3 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Size is underrated, Brees proved that to be a myth so did Allen Iverson.

Brees was just over 6 Ft tall and weighed 210 lbs.  Iverson vs playing QB in the NFL is apples and oranges