Bears and Patriots trade in the works?

[MaineMan]

I'm sorry, but anyone wanting to give up a second for Greg Olsen is beyond help. He's a decent threat in the passing game, but nothing more. And he might be the worst blocking TE in the league. I'd draw the line at a sixth.

And anyway - why would we do this when we let Dave Thomas (as good a pass catcher and a better blocker) go for little in return last year, and let Watson walk at the end of the season?

You can draft someone like Dennis Pitta or Andrew Quarless to do the same job and pay them a fifth of what Olsen would want.

Absolutely agree with all of this. Also, the Pats already have a couple young guys on the roster from the P/S last season - Myers and Agnone - who were pretty decent receivers in college. And Crumpler was still able to get open and catch a bit the last couple years playing with lesser QBs than TFB. Not saying that we're all set by any means, but the situation is probably not perceived by BB as being so dire as to require using a 2nd-rounder for a TE either in the draft or by trade.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

Absolutely agree with all of this. Also, the Pats already have a couple young guys on the roster from the P/S last season - Myers and Agnone - who were pretty decent receivers in college. And Crumpler was still able to get open and catch a bit the last couple years playing with lesser QBs than TFB. Not saying that we're all set by any means, but the situation is probably not perceived by BB as being so dire as to require using a 2nd-rounder for a TE either in the draft or by trade.

It is not like the Pats wear out their TE on pitch and catch anyways, we can also use Levior as an extra TE as well.

If the Pats drafted Mt. Cody we could use him at TE and FB, especially on goal line and short yardage plays. Wouldn't that scare defenses into surrender!!!!!

 

[Real World]

Forte would cost a first.

Forte sucks. The team that trades for him, and gives up a (what used to be called) first day pick, is crazy.


I wouldn't mind having Olsen as a TE. I'm with most in here though, who wouldn't trade a 2nd for him. Trading a 2nd for Olsen would have to include either a 3rd coming back to the Pats this year, or a 2nd next year.

 

[everlong]

It is not like the Pats wear out their TE on pitch and catch anyways, we can also use Levior as an extra TE as well.

If the Pats drafted Mt. Cody we could use him at TE and FB, especially on goal line and short yardage plays. Wouldn't that scare defenses into surrender!!!!!

Mount Cody called and said to meet him at your usual rendezvous location.

The Fridge II

 

[Ochmed Jones]

Mount Cody called and said to meet him at your usual rendezvous location.

The Fridge II

I still have the Patriots taking Mt. Cody in my latest mock at #22.

 

[BelichickFan]

I still have the Patriots taking Mt. Cody in my latest mock at #22.

Cody is my #2 nightmare pick (behind Tebow). We re-signed Wilfork, we have nowhere to play Cody unless you want them to go to a full blown 4-3 for which we don't have the DE.

 

[Jake5]

Olsen???

I thought Crumpler was the solution to all our problems at TE!!

 

[BritPat]

Olsen???

I thought Crumpler was the solution to all our problems at TE!!

Blocker only. He weighs almost 300lbs supposedly.

 

[mgteich]

1) We haven't got enough production from the TE position.
2) Belichick has signed many free agents and has tried many routes to find a couple of productive tight ends.
3) Last years's tight ends were invisible.
============
Our solution. Let's draft a starting TE in the 4th round.
========================
I'm sure that make sense to someone.
========================
I don't know who will be the best solution for our STARTING tight end. It could very well be a fourth rounder. I just don't think that belichickl will choose to go that route.

Olsen???

I thought Crumpler was the solution to all our problems at TE!!

 

[MaineMan]

It is not like the Pats wear out their TE on pitch and catch anyways, we can also use Levior as an extra TE as well.

If the Pats drafted Mt. Cody we could use him at TE and FB, especially on goal line and short yardage plays. Wouldn't that scare defenses into surrender!!!!!

In that scenario, you could probably use 5'5"/166# Trindon Holliday as your goal-line back. He could just hide in Cody's hip pocket.

 

[MaineMan]

1) We haven't got enough production from the TE position.
2) Belichick has signed many free agents and has tried many routes to find a couple of productive tight ends.
3) Last years's tight ends were invisible.
============
Our solution. Let's draft a starting TE in the 4th round.
========================
I'm sure that make sense to someone.
========================
I don't know who will be the best solution for our STARTING tight end. It could very well be a fourth rounder. I just don't think that belichickl will choose to go that route.

I'm not sure how much "production" BB is actually looking for in a TE anymore and seriously doubt that he's trying to come up with the next Dallas Clark or Jason Witten. I think he's looking for very good blockers (both run and pass) who also know how to get open and catch when called upon (which may be relatively rarely). So, to that end, in 07-09 he's gone through at least a dozen guys, some of whom were okay receivers who he perhaps thought could be taught to block well, or guys who could block who he thought might also be able to catch a little. All of them (so far) have failed on one side or the other (and several on both). Ideally, he'd probably like to have three Alge Crumplers and he's not likely to find them in this draft, especially early.

My guess is that he again tries to find one good receiver in the middle rounds who might learn to block (Pitta, e.g.) and also takes one or two blocking TEs (very late) who might learn to catch a bit (yes, we could see six or seven different TE's - or more - for various periods in camp this year). In any case, I seriously doubt he's going to spend a 1st or a 2nd on this,

 

[DW Toys]

I still have the Patriots taking Mt. Cody in my latest mock at #22.

Cousin, I would agree and understand that pick. Cody is the ONLY player in this whole Draft that opposing NFL Teams would have to game plan differently for. In a very strong SEC with RBs like Tate and Modesty who some on this site clamor for, not one got over 100 yards rushing versus Alabama. Saban admitted the other Teams change their run philosophy. Most look at him and say Big Load but this kid blocked a few kicks at Alabama too and scouts say his has really quick feet for his size. He is only a few Big Macs away from VW in size. None of those two shop at the "extra petite" rack in Victoria Secret. Not a three down D Lineman? Is Wilfork? My idea (disclaimer-IMO) would be run VW on the outside as a tech 5 DE in some sets like he played many plays this last year.

Why? Think Ray Rice last Jan. Think of the only time we had a shot to get back into the game when we had them pinned inside the ten before the half and they walked and cut through us (VW or not) like soft butter. Say...you don't think 2010 NFL Teams will do the same if we come back with that same line-up that left the field that day?

Saban would give BB the Low and "skinny" (sorry) about this kid. Neither he nor Wilfork are Pass rushers per say, but put Vince on the outside and I guarantee he has a minimum of 5 sacks in 2010 because he is relentless. As BB says is is not Sacks it is pressures and I think Wilfork would do well. Obvious passing downs put in Wright and TBC unless we Draft a Saap or a Wooten or the like.

I say the Bears trade makes sense if you can eliminate the fact that many Mocks have us taking TE Gresham at the #22 spot. IMO you Draft Cody at #22 and (as you all know I have no problem with this Trade and Reis even said he could be a likely suspect for a Trade so don't pig pile me), swap Sanders plus a lower pick for TE Greg Olsen. Bears players and even on the Bears forum they have been calling for a veteran Safety and Sanders name has been mentioned on their end. Or, BB wants a third rounder and the Bears are desperate for a second round pick......... Swap #53 and Sanders for Greg Olsen and #75. I say a very fair Trade. I am amazed that some on this forum did not know Olsen caught 70 last year.

Now we have filled up two spots of need, not really conventionally but out Defensive YPG would decrease and our TE production would increase...... so two areas of concern lessened. Now we still have $44, #47 and #75 for some quality pick ups.

That #75 could be valuable. What could you do at #75? (disclaimer-IMO)
1- Swap #75 with Washington for Haynesworth. The price is now realistic and the D-Line would be the best in the AFC East without question. Just think of the 3-4s and 4-3 possibilities with Wilfork, Cody, Haynesworth and Warren with Wright,Pryor and hopefully a very much improved Brace as swing players.

2-Swap #75 for a WR like a Steve Smith (yes I know he is not said to be on the block but the Panthers will go even more run this year with a young QB and they are desperate for picks) At 31 he is still valid as a NE WR. His locker room presence, passion for the game, bravado and game breaking ability would be a great compliment to Moss.

3-Swap the Pick for Adam Carriker. Was miscast as a DT by the Rams. Added 20 lbs to his frame and got hurt. He is only 25 and his best position may be Tech 5 DE. It's funny three or four other Teams want him but on our forum he rots. Had a decent rookie year until dinged. Now healthy.

4-LenDale White anyone? Better than any RB we have now. Only 26. 1,100 yard rusher a couple years ago. A between the tackles runner who can catch. Is Maroney a 1,100 Runner? Can he run between the tackles?...just sayin.

5-Swap #75 to go lower in round three for a couple more picks. Cleveland could move up with #85 and #92 or AZ with #88 and #89 and send them back our fourth?

6-SD can't keep both WRs. Now that the price on WR is set this week. How about Floyd for #75?

So the Bears trade can help dictate our Draft to the good.

DW Toys

 

[mgteich]

Why would the patriots want to have a TE who catches 60 passes a year. Fans would rather have another blocking TE to join Crumpler. I'm sure if we try, we find a TE who will catch fewer passes than the 29 Watson caught last year (and fewer than 404 yards).


Season Team Receiving Rushing Fumbles
G GS Rec Yds Avg Lng TD Att Yds Avg Lng TD FUM Lost
2009 Chicago Bears 16 15 60 612 10.2 41 8 -- -- -- -- -- -- --
2008 Chicago Bears 16 7 54 574 10.6 52 5 -- -- -- -- -- 2 2
2007 Chicago Bears 14 4 39 391 10.0 31 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- --
TOTAL 153 1,577 10.3 52 15 0 0 0.0 0 0 2 2

Cousin, I would agree and understand that pick. Cody is the ONLY player in this whole Draft that opposing NFL Teams would have to game plan differently for. In a very strong SEC with RBs like Tate and Modesty who some on this site clamor for, not one got over 100 yards rushing versus Alabama. Saban admitted the other Teams change their run philosophy. Most look at him and say Big Load but this kid blocked a few kicks at Alabama too and scouts say his has really quick feet for his size. He is only a few Big Macs away from VW in size. None of those two shop at the "extra petite" rack in Victoria Secret. Not a three down D Lineman? Is Wilfork? My idea (disclaimer-IMO) would be run VW on the outside as a tech 5 DE in some sets like he played many plays this last year.

Why? Think Ray Rice last Jan. Think of the only time we had a shot to get back into the game when we had them pinned inside the ten before the half and they walked and cut through us (VW or not) like soft butter. Say...you don't think 2010 NFL Teams will do the same if we come back with that same line-up that left the field that day?

Saban would give BB the Low and "skinny" (sorry) about this kid. Neither he nor Wilfork are Pass rushers per say, but put Vince on the outside and I guarantee he has a minimum of 5 sacks in 2010 because he is relentless. As BB says is is not Sacks it is pressures and I think Wilfork would do well. Obvious passing downs put in Wright and TBC unless we Draft a Saap or a Wooten or the like.

I say the Bears trade makes sense if you can eliminate the fact that some have us taking Gresham at the #22 spot. IMO you Draft Cody and as you all know I have no problem with this Trade and Reis even said he could be a likely suspect for a Trade so don't pig pile me, but swap Sanders plus a lower pick for TE Greg Olsen. I am amazed that some on this forum did not know Olsen caught 70 last year.

Now we have filled up two spots of need, not really conventionally but out Defensive YPG would decrease and our TE production would increase...... so two areas of concern lessened.
DW Toys

 

[BritPat]

DW - the Pats have no use for a pass-catching TE based on what we've done with the position since 2007.

Your opinion, whilst worthwhile and interesting, has little chance of ever matching reality based on the facts we have at hand. Trading a second, even including a player, is an absolute waste of resources because we do not utilise the position enough to make it worth such a high price.

I'd rather have #53 and a solid reserve Safety like Sanders, than #75, a TE that can't block, and us still having to address the TE position, as well as the Safety position with the hole you open up. As for throwing away a third round pick on a fat, injured bust like Carriker - wowser. Offer them a 7th.

Folks, please listen to me. The Pats do not use TE's in the passing game. They want TE's that can block first, and catch passes second. You DO NOT spend second round picks on players to be used in that way, whether they be in the Draft, or for established players.

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

Forte sucks. The team that trades for him, and gives up a (what used to be called) first day pick, is crazy.

Agreed. For as big as he is, Forte is soft.

 

[HEY BRO! WHAT UP?]

I still have the Patriots taking Mt. Cody in my latest mock at #22.

That would be a nightmare pick for the Pats. If they took him, then what was the point of re-signing Wilfork?

 

[DW Toys]

DW - the Pats have no use for a pass-catching TE based on what we've done with the position since 2007.

Your opinion, whilst worthwhile and interesting, has little chance of ever matching reality based on the facts we have at hand. Trading a second, even including a player, is an absolute waste of resources because we do not utilise the position enough to make it worth such a high price.

I'd rather have #53 and a solid reserve Safety like Sanders, than #75, a TE that can't block, and us still having to address the TE position, as well as the Safety position with the hole you open up. As for throwing away a third round pick on a fat, injured bust like Carriker - wowser. Offer them a 7th.

Folks, please listen to me. The Pats do not use TE's in the passing game. They want TE's that can block first, and catch passes second. You DO NOT spend second round picks on players to be used in that way, whether they be in the Draft, or for established players.

Think Fauria and Jermain Wiggins. We would want at least one on our roster that can catch. One of of the top reasons the Pats win the 01 SB IMO is Wiggins with his spectacular year end finish. So no...I would have to disagree with you. Christian Fauria contributed with many spectacular catches in our SB years. If you have a TE that cannot catch, you become more versatile. Watch the receptions if we can get a TE to contribute. I will say it right now that slow old Crumpler catches more than the 29 that Watson caught this year.

And as far as blockers we have addressed that blocking TE situation with Crumpler although as said he will out catch Watson.

Safety hole? I hope not. Chung has to step up. I would sacrifice a backup Saftey for a TE who is young and reliable with 70 catches last year plus another pick in my scenario.

There are four or five GM's in this league who would disagree with you that Carriker is a bust and in a 3-4 he would be outstanding.(see Jimmy Hasslet his former coach now trying to pry him to the skins)

That valuable resource you mention that we have, will be traded, although no way should it be because of our thirteen holes, to yet another year.
DW Toys

 

[tuckeverlasting]

That would be a nightmare pick for the Pats. If they took him, then what was the point of re-signing Wilfork?

you can move wilfork to seymour's spot and with cody, no one gets on our linebackers. i've been thinking this might happen for quite a while now. with a rush linebacker at 44 (hughes, etc.) lookout.

 

[patfanken]

No thanks. I also heard the Bears were having getting offers no more than around a #5.

The BEST I would do for Olson is our #2 (2c) for Olson and the Bears' #3.

Thats exactly what I was thinking when I read the initial post. With top #1 WRs like Marshal, and Holmes going for 2nd and 5th respectfully, a decent receiving TE should get no better than a fifth, so exchanging the last #2 for the Bear's #3 and Olsen is a fair deal.

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

i don't think the bears will trade him he was their leading receiver.

Mike Martz is installing his offense and he doesn't use the TE much, so the time to for da Bears to trade the guy is now, since he will never have stats like that again