On a late Saturday evening, the Chicago Bears made a decisive move regarding their quarterback lineup. They traded Justin Fields to the Pittsburgh Steelers. This trade involved a conditional sixth-round pick that could turn into a fourth-rounder if Fields plays over half of the Steelers’ offensive snaps next season.
The decision has sparked a lot of discussions. Many are wondering why the Bears received so little in return for Fields. Despite his struggles with consistency, Fields has shown moments of brilliance and has become a top rushing threat among quarterbacks. At just 25 years old, it’s surprising that there wasn’t a bigger market for him.
ESPN reported that the Bears had hoped for a trade return similar to what Sam Darnold brought in when he was traded to Carolina in 2021. However, they had to settle for just a conditional Day 3 pick. Meanwhile, the Steelers managed to get more for Kenny Pickett than the Bears did for Fields, even though Pickett has shown less potential outside of preseason games.
Two main factors contributed to this outcome. First, the contracts of the players involved. The market viewed both Fields and Pickett as backup quarterbacks. Fields has one year left on his rookie contract, paying him about $3.2 million for the 2024 season. Pickett, on the other hand, has two more years at a total of $4.6 million. Acquiring a backup with two cheap years left is more appealing than one with just a single year.
Second, the timing of the trade played a crucial role. The Bears had several opportunities to trade Fields, such as before free agency or during the draft. However, they chose to trade him at a time when most teams had already settled their quarterback situations, thus reducing his market value.
In essence, the Bears traded Fields at a point when his value was at its lowest during the offseason. This decision has left many questioning the strategy behind the move.