The Chicago Bears radically changed the trajectory of the offseason by trading away their No. 1 draft pick, but the club’s most suitable prospect remains the same.
Jalen Carter — a 3-technique defensive tackle and potential generational talent out of Georgia who is also a perfect fit for Chicago’s defense — probably isn’t attainable for the Bears at No. 9 overall. But general manager Ryan Poles has a war chest of assets at his disposal that make a move back up into the top five selections of this year’s NFL Draft feasible in any number of ways.
That was the premise of a trade proposal from ESPN’s Bill Barnewell on Wednesday, April 19, when he pitched a deal between the Bears and the Seattle Seahawks to swap places in the first round. The draft day trade would see Chicago acquire pick Nos. 5 and 83 from Seattle in return for pick Nos. 9 and 53 this year as well as a third-rounder in 2024.
Jalen Carter Among Top Prospects in 2023 NFL Draft Class
Carter has recently dealt with off-field legal issues. He pleaded no-contest to misdemeanor charges of reckless driving and racing in March stemming from a car crash in January in which one of his college teammates and a member of the Georgia recruiting staff were killed, according to ESPN.
Conditioning concerns have also became a red flag in Carter’s pre-draft process after he hosted a pro day, during which he was unable to finish position drills due, at least in part, to having gained nine pounds since the NFL Combine.
All of that acknowledged, Mel Kiper Jr. of ESPN still rates Carter as the top overall prospect in the 2023 draft class due to his track record of collegiate dominance and the assumed talent ceiling that accompanies his rare skill set.
Barnwell laid out the argument for why the Bears should pursue a trade with the Seahawks for the No. 5 pick and then use it to draft Carter:
The Bears have four of the top 64 picks in this year’s draft, so they have flexibility to move wherever they want. What if Poles wants to move back up for the difference-maker his team desperately needs on the line of scrimmage?
Remember what the [Indianapolis] Colts did in 2020 to help get the most out of Matt Eberflus‘ defense. They traded a first-round pick for interior disrupter DeForest Buckner, who has 24.5 sacks in three seasons since the move from San Francisco.
Here, the Bears would move back up to add Jalen Carter, who could be a target for the [Detroit] Lions and [Las Vegas] Raiders before Chicago’s current pick. Carter is not going to single-handedly turn Chicago into a great defense, but Poles will need to add that kind of talent somewhere along the way. Having Carter would be a much-needed building block, and the Bears would still hold on to picks Nos. 61 and 64.
Bears Indicated They Won’t Let Carter Slip Past Them at No. 9
According to an April 13 report from Matt Miller of ESPN, the Bears “highly value” Carter and don’t intend to let him fall below their current first-round selection at No. 9. It stands to reason then that Chicago would be willing to move up four spots to draft Carter if the franchise is already a lock to select him 9th overall should he fall that far.
Miller also noted in his article that the Seahawks may be interested in Carter, which could drive the price of the pick up too high for the Bears. Another option for Chicago to secure Carter is to attempt a trade up to No. 3 with the Arizona Cardinals, the only team in selecting in the top four that is not believed to be seriously considering a quarterback. The problem with that proposal is there are a handful of franchises that may look to jump into 3rd to secure their signal-caller of the future, which means an even higher trade price for Poles and company than the Seahawks’ pick at No. 5.
Carter is unquestionably a risky prospect, but he could also be a Pro Bowl-caliber anchor for the Bears’ defense for the next decade. Chicago needs to avoid getting gouged on the price, but if the team can procure Carter at No. 5 for the cost Barnwell laid out Wednesday, it is an opportunity on which the Bears can’t afford to pass.
0 Comments