This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
definatley. As a Cutler owner last season, I was watching with much interest when the vaunted RB game fell apart with injuries. What was impressive is the defense knew they had to stop Cutler, and he still racked up stats. I'll be interested to see how a solid running game will open things up for him this year.
It's hard to say. It sounds good, but I did a study last year in the shark pool showing no correlection whatsoever between successful fantasy seasons by QBs and the quality of their defenses. I suspect the same would be true of RBs. But it's possible that Cutler's situation is different than your typical one.
so you're projecting Cutler to get essentially 180 more yards than Orton? I think he'll do a good bit better than Orton did.....
If it's that easy why didn't the Seahawks, Chiefs, Lions, Rams and Raiders have great QB performances? All of those teams had terrible defenses and many had bad RB's. Maybe he's just good.
Seahawks - Had a M*A*S*H unit for receivers, not even a close comparison when there's no one left on the fieldChiefs - Thigpen averaged 222 passing yards and 1.6 TD per game over his last 10 games. That's a pace for 3550 and 26 TD. Maybe Thigpen's just good.Lions - Played Kitna, Orlovsky, Culpepper, Stanton, and Henson at QB last year. Again, totally apples to oranges with so many guys getting hurt and having no protection from the OL.Rams - Only had two receivers with more than 25 receptions, one of which a banged up Holt. Bulger was a Pro Bowl QB in the past only a couple years removed from a 4300/24 season. This environment seems more like CHI than DEN.Raiders - Have been a Top 10 rushing team the past two years. #1 WR had only 22 catches. Again, closer to CHI than DEN in terms of environment.And I'm not saying Cutler isn't good, only that he passed way more last year to bolster his totals. I would expect numbers closer to 2007 (3500/20) than 2008 (4500/25).
Of course he got a significant boost from those things... both of them contributed to Cutler attempting 616 passes last season, compared to 467 attempts the previous year in roughly the same situation. But I don't think it matters too much what the reasons were for the high number of attempts last year... what matters is how many he'll get this year (and how he'll do with them, of course).
I agree that he was forced to pass a lot because of their awful defense but I guess my point is that not just anyone can pass with the success he did when you are totally one dimensional and everyone on the field knows what you are going to do and still can't stop it. I actually think his yardage numbers will probably come in between the ones you've posted with possibly more TD's. Cutler has averaged 7.4 ypa in his career and say he throws for 7.2 (due to lesser wr's) @ 555 attempts equates to 4000 yards. The Bears had 528 attempts last year and Orton was among the worst at keeping drives alive while Cutler was the best so I'd expect the attempts to increase due to the ability to run more plays due to longer drives. I think an uptick of 30 attempts is a reasonable assumption.
I think most people are as well. If he throws for 3800-3950 (which is where most of the high end predictions are) it is still closer to 07 than 08. The people putting him around 3300 are saying he is no better than Kyle freaking Orton, good luck with that.
Cutler's attempts got a significant boost last year and that is precisely what will fall this year. What matters now if finding that range of probable attempts and predicting his production with those attempts.The assumption is that with much better defense and special teams in Chicago will place Cutler in a much better position to increase his fantasy production per attempt. Last year Cutler completed 62% of his passes last year and average 7.3 yards per attempt which his clearly better than Orton's 58.5% and 6.4 Y/A. However, Orton's 3.9 touchdown percentage and 2.6 interception percentage compare favorably to Cutler's 4.1 and 2.9. So, despite Cutler being a much better quarterback last year, Orton was basically just as likely to throw a touchdown pass and less likely to throw an interception.So less attempts should come with more touchdowns per attempt and fewer picks per attempt. My take on the Bears is that they will be more noticeably a passing offense than most expect in the first half of games but if they ever have the lead in the second half, the three yards and a cloud of dust tendencies will take hold. So, yes, the assumption is that about 50-80 passing attempts will disappear for Cutler this year. Factoring in that reality, you are now left with Devin Hester and Earl Bennett. The rest of the receiving core will provide a solid base around 2000 yards for Cutler's production but these two receivers will determine how successful the passing game is in real life and what numbers Cutler puts up in the fantasy world. I personally think Hester will challenge 1000 yards this year while I have no idea what to expect from Bennett. If they challenge 2000 yards between them, Cutler will be golden. Most likely they will produce in the 1200-1500 yard range, which would put Cutler in solid fantasy QB land. If you think Hester will become a Joey Galloway type and Bennett will be a Cotchery type this year, you really like Cutler.If you think Hester is James Jett part two and Bennett didn't see the field last year cause he couldn't play, you won't touch Cutler.
Judging by the posts it seems most people feel this way.
I agree with your post in general, but just wanted to point out that Chicago, not Orton alone, was among the worst at keeping drives alive, and Denver, not Cutler alone, was the best. It is more than just the QB... it is also the OL, running game, receiving targets, and playcalling.
CHI has averaged 537 passing attempts the past three seasons with a 6.0 ypa. If we guesstimat that the Bears will pass 5% and split the difference in ypa with what they have done (6.0) with what Cutler has done (7.4) . . .563 * 6.7 = 3772 yardsUsing the same logic, CHI has posted a 3.8% TD per pass rate and Cutler has thown a TD on 4.4% of his passes. Splitting the difference at 4.1% . . .563 * 4.1% = 23 TD passesObviously that's a fair amount lower than what he did in DEN last year . . . but one could certainly argue that if we did a similar extrapolation with Orton that his stock would go up.
I don't disagree with that but a QB with a very good arm, that's very accurate and can put the ball in small windows which Cutler can and Orton can't (or not nearly as well) go a long way to picking up 1st downs and moving the chains. Last year on 3rd down Orton had a better % than D. Anderson, Orlovsky, J. Russell, S. Wallace and R. Fitzpatrick. That's some pretty nasty company. To me the QB is the most important player on the field and great QB's can still be productive with mediocre wr's, banged up lines, etc. whereas lousy QB's need everything to be in place to be productive. I don't view Cutler as a great QB yet and that's just because he hasn't played long enough but he certainly has the ability to be great IMO whereas Orton is a below average QB that may not be in the NFL 3-4 years from now.
As I posted above I think great QB's can overcome a lot and you're averaging Chicago's QB's over the last few years vs. Cutler. You're talking about Grossman/Orton who in my opinion have been among the worst starting QB's in the league and were starting by default where I view Cutler as one of the top 5 talents in the league. I could be off base with my predictions as a move like this (a young, very successful QB changes teams) never occurs but I think you can throw out a lot of the stats under Orton/Grossman because it's like comparing a VW Bug vs. a Mercedes.I just think back to Favre in some of those years with the Packers where he had awful lines, terrible no name wr's, TE's that would drop everything in sight and he still was extremely productive. Now before everyone goes nuts, I'm not saying he's Favre but I'm drawing a parrallel that very good QB's can overcome obstacles and elevate the play of mediocre players. The Bears paid a pretty penny to get Cutler for a reason and it's not to marginally improve the productivity of their lousy QB position. Now I don't think that they are suddenly going to start slinging it all over the field and become the Rams of a few years back but I do think they'll use their new shiny toy....
How does the current crop of CHI receiving options compare to that of say the 06 Patriots. Certainly Tom Brady has shown as good or better skills than Cutler, no?That team featured Reche Caldwell, Troy Brown, Doug Gabriel, and Chad Jackson at WR, Ben Watson at TE, and Kevin Faulk as the receiving threat out of the backfield.That group and the other puzzle pieces amassed 3400/25 in the passing game.As for Orton, how do you review the early success he had before he got hurt last year? He put up 1777/10 in the first half of the season last year . . .
The '06 Pats had one of the worst wrs in as long as I can remember. On a scale of 0-10 I'd probably put them at .5 (and that's due to Faulk otherwise they were a 0) while the Bears are no great shakes they do have a nice option out of the backfield, nice TE's and their WR's are unproven but could be decent (or at least better than Caldwell and crew). I'd probably rank them a 2 of 10. I don't know the schedule the Pats played but knowing them they have a tough schedule every year and I'm sure the Bears schedule wasn't nearly as tough.What are we arguing here? Are you arguing that Orton is a good QB or better than Cutler? So Orton was on pace for 3500 and 20 and I'm predicting that Cutler a better QB will throw for about 4000 and 25. I don't think that's earth shattering.
I'm not really arguing anything other than the obvious . . . Orton should do better in DEN than he did in CHI, Cutler should do worse in CHI, and it is possible to have a great QB and still not light the world on fire.The debate really involves the magnitude that things will change. IMO, Cutler will be a marginal QB1 fantasy wise and Orton should be a decent QB2 fantasy wise (and perhaps not that far apart), but overall I don't see either one being a difference maker in fantasy circles next year.
Great stuff as usual DY. I realize that these guys are from various eras so comparing today's stats with Tarketon's stats with Cutler's on a yard by yard comparison doesn't make a lot of sense. Cutler in his 3rd year threw for 4526-25 which blows every comparison out of the water but I'd be curious to see how they ranked against their peers at the time of the trade/free agent signing. I don't know if this is available or if you have the desire to dig it up but I think it would be a more relevant comparison to know that while George's 3520/28 pales in comparison to 4526/25 George may have been the #3 ranked QB at that time while Cutler was the #5 ranked at the time of his trade in '08. Aside from that it seems the pretty mixed on the results...some improved quite a bit and others regressed quite a bit. I definitely think Cutler will regress on the yards but I think the TD's should be pretty similar.
Jon_Moore said:
I remember last year at this time, and I don't know if it was in a spotlight thread or just other discussions, but among those who thought that Cutler was going to be really good, the primary discussion for dynasty purposes was whether it was going to be in 2008 or not, or whether it would be later. The main point of contention among those who were more cautious on Cutler was concerns about his supporting cast, no second receiver, offensive line questions, etc. My attitude at the time was that based on the numbers to that point (mainly his comp% and ypa by age 24), he was due for a breakout pro bowl type career, and I'd rather be early than late. If he was going to be as good as I thought, he would bring the supporting cast up. Yet, a year later, I hear about how good he had it in Denver, how great his receiving corp and offensive line was.Even though we like to think that sacks are a reflection on the offensive line, QB sack rate is probably the most consistent thing about a quarterback's statistics from year to year, while interceptions are the least consistent. I would submit that Cutler made that line look a lot better statistic wise than vice versa.So here we are again with questions about the supporting cast, and now the off-season drama and the trade. We also have another year's worth of data on Cutler. Any kind of historical comparables to the numbers Cutler has put up to this point are basically nothing but Hall of Fame guys or near-HOF guys. Favre and Montana are his two closest career path comparables going all the stats available, primarily because of similar comp% and ypa over league average at similar ages. Alot of these guys, including Montana and Favre, saw a jump in their td% as they entered ages 26-27. Cutler's td% have been good but not outstanding to this point, its the one area he has room to increase his numbers from above average to great. Now, what these other guys didn't have was a pissing match with a new coach and a trade at this age. How will this affect him? I guess I'd need a lot more evidence to conclude he is mentally incapable of handling it going forward. Having an ego that needs to be massaged isn't exactly a disqualifying characteristic for being a star qb.I say, again, he brings his supporting cast up, the Bears o-line will look like a much better pass blocking unit with Cutler there, and he'll find some receivers. What will go down dramatically is his pass attempts, as the Bears D, by default, will be to some degree better than last year. Of course, that will also lower his interceptions and the pressure to try to score on every possession despite playing on a team that is last in defensive turnovers and thus starting field position. It should also increase his TD rate if he is starting drives in better field position. I certainly wouldn't simply divide what other quarterbacks have done and what Cutler did in Denver and half it. Despite the wide range of opinions on Cutler and his personal attributes and the move to Chicago, I think the fantasy community is about right on his current ADP. He shouldn't be top 5 moving to a new team and without a bona fide star receiver like a Moss or Fitzgerald. He also shouldn't be below the top 10 based on his talent and upside to bring his teammates up.I'll join in Jon Moore's projection, with a slight tick in TD's3800 yards27 TD's14 Int's200 rush yds1 TD
Over his first two seasons working with essentially the same or similar personnel, Cutler averaged 214 passing yards and 1.4 TD per game for the Broncos. That would work out to 3424/22 over a full season.Unless the Bears take the Broncos approach and throw the ball 616 times like Denver did last year, I'm guessing that those numbers will be close to what we see from Cutler in Chicago this year. Their WR corps is as inexperienced as the Broncos was at the time . . .
Iglesias is only 6 feet tall. I like him too but he's not big.Hester led them in receiving just starting around half the games, that caught my eye.I like Rashied Davis alot. He's by far my favorite Bears WR but he's not a thoroughbred and is likely to always lose time to one. I would figure if they need a big catch, he could be (or develop into) that guy.I wasn't impressed(although barely saw him) with last year's rook WR. I was more impressed when I saw the other(Monk) playing college hoops.
Nowhere near as impressive though. Does Cutler have to be like Brady when he was younger and hit anyone he can/spread it around, instead of focusing on just one(as was alluded to earlier)? How can Cutler make that group more productive?
and he was a rookie QB and 1st year starter over that period. QB more than any other position has it's growing pains for young players.
I would agree that that is true, but given that he's changing teams/systems/players/philosophies and again working with inexperienced receivers I think the learning curve would be greater in this situation than what Cutler did in DEN.Maybe Cutler will put up big numbers again in CHI at some point. BUt I would be surprised if he hit a home run right out of the box.
Agreed.
This is a very odd post.
Revisiting old spotlight posts. A few things here:1. Forte had 57/471/0 receiving on 72 targets.
- Only 9 RBs have had 500+ receiving yards in the past 5 years (a total of 13 times - Westbrook did it 4 times and Tiki twice).
- Only 3 RBs have had 600+ receiving yards in the past 5 years (a total of 6 times - Westbrook did it 4 times).
- Only 4 RBs have had 5 or more receiving TDs in the past 5 years (a total of 6 times - Westbrook did it 3 times).
- Only 2 RBs have had 6 or more receiving TDs in the past 5 years (a total of 2 times).
I realize it's hard to draw much from what happened in Denver, since Cutler is now in a different offense... but he certainly didn't throw much to his RBs there - in 2007 and 2008, he targeted his RBs a total of 142 times for 102 receptions, 836 receiving yards, and 3 TDs. That was only 13% of Cutler's attempts, as he preferred to go downfield to his WRs. Clearly, he doesn't have the same caliber of downfield weapons in Chicago, and is now in a different offense, so perhaps he will go to his RBs more. But it's going to have to be a huge shift to come anywhere close to that projection.
Actual numbers:336 completions, 555 attempts, 3666 passing yards, 27 passing TDs, 26 interceptions, 35 sacks40 rushing attempts, 173 rushing yards, 1 rushing TDNot bad. Overestimated yards per attempt and underestimated both passing TDs and interceptions. Got very close to the attempts (passing attempts, rushing attempts, sacks), though.
