The Ravens are 4-4, Lamar Jackson is headed to injured reserve after undergoing thumb surgery on his throwing hand, and suddenly Baltimore has a much bigger problem than anyone could have imagined even just a few days ago. 

Jackson had already missed three games with a high-ankle sprain before returning Sunday against Buffalo, only to injure his thumb on his first play back. Backup Tyler Huntley also left that game with a toe injury; undrafted rookie Joe Fagnano was pressed into action and looked like, well, an undrafted rookie who had taken exactly zero reps with the first team. And with the NFL trade deadline approaching, Baltimore has to decide whether to stick with its current QB room or find help elsewhere.

The Ravens could look to trade for an experienced quarterback. But there's another option worth considering: a younger, largely unproven backup whose upside -- and familiarity with Baltimore's offense -- could make him an appealing target. And that brings us to Bears backup Tyson Bagent.

According to Pro Football Talk, Baltimore could explore trading for Bagent, although acquiring him "won't be cheap." How expensive? Chicago Tribune reporter Brad Biggs suggested back in February that it could take a second-round pick, or equivalent compensation, to convince the Bears to make a deal. That wasn't a reported asking price, but it tells you something about how Chicago values its backup quarterback.

And if you're Baltimore, that's where things get complicated. Because while Bagent might give the Ravens their best chance to remain competitive until Jackson returns -- assuming he returns this season -- we're still talking about a former undrafted free agent with six career starts, three touchdown passes and nine interceptions.

So how much is that worth? And what does history tell us about teams trading valuable draft picks for largely unproven quarterbacks?

The answers are … interesting.

Why Bagent makes sense for Baltimore

There's an obvious reason Bagent's name has surfaced in connection with the Ravens, and it goes beyond their suddenly depleted quarterback room. Offensive coordinator Declan Doyle spent last season in Chicago in the same role, where he worked directly with Bagent.

And Doyle wasn't shy about how he felt about the quarterback.

"Tyson is no-nonsense," Doyle said during training camp in 2025. "He's businesslike. Football's really important to him."

That familiarity matters. Doyle knows what Bagent does well, where he struggles and, perhaps most importantly, what he can reasonably be asked to do. And because Doyle helped implement Ben Johnson's offense in Chicago before bringing elements of that system to Baltimore -- including pre-snap motion, play-action and formation versatility -- Bagent would arrive with some familiarity with the concepts and expectations.

That doesn't mean Bagent will suddenly play like Jackson. And the Ravens wouldn't ask him to. They need somebody who can execute what's being asked, protect the football and give Baltimore a chance to win while Jackson recovers.

But what should the Ravens be willing to give up for that?

What history says about trading for unproven quarterbacks

We went back through quarterback trades dating to 2007, focusing on players who had started 10 or fewer NFL games before another team acquired them. We looked at their performance before the trade, what their new teams gave up and, most importantly, what happened after they arrived.

And there have been some clear successes, starting with Matt Schaub.

Houston sent Atlanta two second-round picks and swapped first-round selections in 2007 for Schaub, who had started just twice in three seasons with the Falcons. He became Houston's starter for seven seasons, throwing for more than 23,000 yards and helping the Texans reach the playoffs twice.

A decade later, San Francisco sent New England a second-rounder for Jimmy Garoppolo, who also had just two NFL starts. The trade came at the 2017 deadline, and Garoppolo went 5-0 after taking over as the starter for a 1-10 team that finished 6-10. He eventually went 38-17 as the 49ers' starter and helped them reach the Super Bowl.

Schaub and Garoppolo, it turns out, are the exceptions.

Indianapolis traded former first-round receiver Phillip Dorsett to New England for Jacoby Brissett in 2017. Brissett started 30 games for the Colts, with 31 touchdowns and 13 interceptions. Dallas, meanwhile, gave up a fourth-rounder for Trey Lance in 2023 to serve as Dak Prescott's backup. The former No. 3 overall pick started just once for the Cowboys before leaving in free agency.

Then there's Joshua Dobbs, who was traded three times. Jacksonville gave up a fifth-rounder for him in 2019 and never started him. Arizona traded for him in 2023, got eight starts and a 1-7 record, then sent him to Minnesota, where he briefly became one of the NFL's best stories before eventually losing his starting job.

The most encouraging recent example? Malik Willis.

Originally a 2022 third-round pick, Tennessee traded Willis to Green Bay for a seventh-rounder in 2024 after he'd struggled through three starts with the Titans. All Willis did for the Packers was go 2-1 in three starts, throwing six touchdowns without an interception during his time there.

Of the 10 trades we looked at, only five resulted in the quarterback starting at least eight games for his new team. Just three -- Schaub, Garoppolo and Brissett -- made 16 or more starts.

It's not an exhaustive list, but the larger point is hard to miss. Teams routinely trade for quarterbacks they believe can offer more than they've shown. Occasionally, they find a long-term starter. More often, they're giving up future draft picks for somebody who never becomes the answer.

Why the right fit can change everything

Of course, evaluating quarterbacks isn't as simple as comparing stat lines, particularly when they've barely played.

Schaub found success playing for Gary Kubiak in Houston, while Garoppolo benefited from Kyle Shanahan's offense in San Francisco. And Willis looked like a completely different quarterback when Matt LaFleur built Green Bay's game plans around what he did best.

Matt Cassel offers another example. The former seventh-rounder played well in place of an injured Tom Brady in New England in 2008, then struggled during his first season in Kansas City. But when former Patriots offensive coordinator Charlie Weis arrived in 2010, Cassel threw 27 touchdowns against seven interceptions, made the Pro Bowl and helped the Chiefs win the AFC West. He never sustained that level of success after Weis left.

None of this happens in a vacuum. Coaching, scheme and supporting cast all matter and what a quarterback accomplished in one offense doesn't necessarily tell us what he'll do in another.

Which brings us back to Doyle and Bagent.

Can the Ravens actually survive without Lamar?

We looked at this question earlier in the season when Seattle lost Sam Darnold, and the findings were revealing.

From 2015-2025, 41 teams were above .500 after losing their starting quarterback. Their backups went just 55-82, yet 24 of those teams still made the playoffs. Twelve won at least one postseason game, and four eventually won the Super Bowl.

So, yes, good teams can survive losing their starter. But there's a catch, and it's a big one.

Among those teams, 67.9% made the playoffs when the backup needed to start just one to three games. That fell to 38.5% when the replacement started at least four games, and just 16.7% when the absence stretched to seven or more starts.

Baltimore currently isn't above .500, but the point remains: Asking a backup to keep a talented team competitive for two or three weeks is one thing. Asking him to do it for two months -- or potentially the remainder of the season -- is something else entirely. Especially when the quarterback you're asking to do all this may not be on the roster right now.

And that's what makes Jackson's uncertain recovery timeline so important. The Ravens aren't necessarily looking for somebody to replace their franchise QB. They're looking for somebody who can keep the season from getting away from them before he returns.

So what's Bagent actually worth?

Based on history alone, a fourth-round pick might seem reasonable for Bagent, given that he's played so little in his career. But there's no reason for Chicago to accept such an offer when it values Bagent as Caleb Williams' backup and has him under contract through 2027.

Which means Baltimore may have to look elsewhere. One possibility is recently-benched-and-demoted-to-QB3 Jacoby Brissett, currently of the Arizona Cardinals, but for how long is up in the air. The Cards haven't indicated they're shopping him, but his experience – and his current place on the depth chart – could make him a consideration before the trade deadline.

Yes, Schaub and Garoppolo proved that teams can find legitimate starters on somebody else's bench. Both were Day 2 picks, however, while Bagent went undrafted out of Division II Shepherd University. But there are plenty of examples of teams paying for potential and getting little in return. And Baltimore's immediate need for a quarterback doesn't automatically make Bagent more valuable.

Doyle knows Bagent better than most coaches around the league, and that familiarity could give the Ravens a better chance of making this work. History says a capable backup in the right situation can keep a season alive, particularly if the starter's absence is relatively short. And, by the way, Baltimore just signed Austin Reed to its practice squad -- another quarterback who worked with Doyle in Chicago last year.

But if Chicago really wants something approaching a second-round pick, Baltimore has to decide whether it's paying for a quarterback who can help save the season -- or simply paying a premium because it's running out of options.