[Andrew Cooper] I don’t know how we can judge Chase Claypool with the Bears considering there was only ONE game where both he and Fields played more than 50% of the snaps. In that game, Claypool caught 5 of 6 targets before leaving with a knee injury.

18 comments

1. There’s really no point in debating this.

   Can it wait until next season?

2. Claypool would be a great #3 behind Mooney and a stud WR1.

3. Unfortunately that’s the main thing. Before leaving with an injury is a major part of Claypools game. Hated the trade when it happened, hate it even more today

4. We can’t (judge) but they will.

5. The r/nfl would think otherwise 🤡

6. We can judge it because we paid a first round pick for 1.5 years of a WR3 when we could have just had 4 more years of the guy who stole his job, AND Fields would’ve had the off-season to work with him

   It was a shit trade then and even worse now. This is just cope.

7. The correct answer is we will not know how this trade looks until next season. Doesn’t look great, but still enough time is on the clock to not make a conclusion.

   Still, morons on the internet are going to argue this to the ground. There is no nuance here lol.

8. If he only had 1 year left and we now had to re-sign him, this deal would be a massive L. Given he still has another year though, Im reserving judgement and hoping for the best.

9. We just need a group of guys, some vets and some rookies, in strong competition for that job. Even guys like Velus who now has a year under his belt. Work like hell during the off season. Maybe you make the cut, maybe you don’t.

10. When the Claypool trade was made, we were 3-5 with a good game against the Patriots and had put up 29 on a great defense in the Cowboys. We weren’t expecting to have the first overall pick, and we needed more WR talent to see what Fields could do.

    The Packers were willing to give up a second as well for Claypool. If they made that trade and it was enough to push them into the playoffs no one would bat an eye.

    There’s a lot of hindsight being 20/20 in this thread, but the trade at the time was justifiable imo, even if it was a bit of an overpay. I’m at the very least holding off final judgement until Fields and Claypool get a full offseason together.

11. I justify this trade by telling myself he would’ve gone to GB if it wasn’t for us and who knows what he could have done with Rodgers/Watson//Lazard. Besides that, it’s too early to tell – but pick 32 in the draft would’ve been amazing to have.

12. Claypool is going to be a fine addition. He already has the talent; after training with Mooney and Fields in the offseason, the chemistry will be there, too

    Everyone tripping out about giving up the second round pick for him needs to chill out. He’s better than whatever wide receiver we would’ve selected with that pick anyway.

13. I know everyone wants to trade for a WR but with Mooney and Claypool I want to draft one. Imo Claypool and Mooney are WR2s, Claypool low end and Mooney high end. Pair them with a high upside WR like JSN or Boutee and we cooking.

14. I think it’s fair to judge claypool because ability to stay on the field *is* important. It’s part of football.

15. So much this.

16. Obviously the sample size is too small to make a long term assessment.

    My issue is spending what projected to be a high second round pick just to cock block the Packers. Who cares if they got Claypool? It’s not as if the Bears were denying them a super valuable chess piece. Or even expected to be in competition with them for at least a year or two.

17. Backup seemed to have no problem hitting him

18. Can you imagine the moaning if claypool had went to GB and maybe didn’t get injured and people found out we could have made a move for him?

    It’s obvious this offense isn’t one you can just jump in and learn right away, but it’s allowed mediocre to average wrs to get open and have the chance to make plays