Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
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!
Who Got The Better Of The Jay Cutler Trade? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Toads
- Start date
Toads
Footballguy
Just PM the Moderator and request a remedy.
Just news.....especially if you are a DEN fan. 
Jason Wood
Zoo York
Given how much average fans overrate the value of draft picks, particularly first rounders, I'm not surprised by this result. Much like investing, people that vote in things like this tend to improperly account for the risks and variance that comes with yet-to-be-executed picks, and likewise undervalue the certainty that comes with a seasoned NFL starter.
I bet if you asked that exact same set of voters, "Would Jay Cutler warrant the 1st overall pick in this year's draft?" quite a few would, incorrectly, say No.
I bet if you asked that exact same set of voters, "Would Jay Cutler warrant the 1st overall pick in this year's draft?" quite a few would, incorrectly, say No.
TitusIII
Footballguy
It depends on who Denver takes with their picks. Right now, the results of this poll are a joke, imo. Considering the the usual talent available at the #22 pick(laughable, if history is any indication), the Broncos better hope the Bears tank next season.
The Broncos had to do what they had to do, but the odds of them "winning" this trade are pretty bad. Time will tell, but banking on these draft picks being better than a young stud QB is a losing proposition.
Also, has anyone been paying attention to Jerry Angelo's past first round choices when it comes to offensive, and hell, defensive talent? This was an absolute no-brainer from the Bears perspective. He is excellent at finding under-valued talent, but he is piss-poor at evaluating the best of the best.
As Wood said "Given how much average fans overrate the value of draft picks, particularly first rounders, I'm not surprised by this result. Much like investing, people that vote in things like this tend to improperly account for the risks and variance that comes with yet-to-be-executed picks, and likewise undervalue the certainty that comes with a seasoned NFL starter.
I bet if you asked that exact same set of voters, "Would Jay Cutler warrant the 1st overall pick in this year's draft?" quite a few would, incorrectly, say No."
Cutler would be the #1 pick in this 2009 draft, without question, imo...
I'm sensing more than a few sour grapes/jealous fans. But that is to be expected. Don't get me wrong, Cutler has his fair share of red-flags, but the man-love for the guy was off the charts a few months ago. Funny how things change.
The Broncos had to do what they had to do, but the odds of them "winning" this trade are pretty bad. Time will tell, but banking on these draft picks being better than a young stud QB is a losing proposition.
Also, has anyone been paying attention to Jerry Angelo's past first round choices when it comes to offensive, and hell, defensive talent? This was an absolute no-brainer from the Bears perspective. He is excellent at finding under-valued talent, but he is piss-poor at evaluating the best of the best.
As Wood said "Given how much average fans overrate the value of draft picks, particularly first rounders, I'm not surprised by this result. Much like investing, people that vote in things like this tend to improperly account for the risks and variance that comes with yet-to-be-executed picks, and likewise undervalue the certainty that comes with a seasoned NFL starter.
I bet if you asked that exact same set of voters, "Would Jay Cutler warrant the 1st overall pick in this year's draft?" quite a few would, incorrectly, say No."
Cutler would be the #1 pick in this 2009 draft, without question, imo...
I'm sensing more than a few sour grapes/jealous fans. But that is to be expected. Don't get me wrong, Cutler has his fair share of red-flags, but the man-love for the guy was off the charts a few months ago. Funny how things change.
Last edited by a moderator:
Jason Wood
Zoo York
That was what I was alluding to. People see 'two 1st and a 3rd' and immediately think, "Denver is going to grab three young, quality starters plus Orton in exchange for Cutler." And while that's certainly a potential outcome, the history of the draft would tell us that it's far more likely they will come away with much less.
Ministry of Pain
Footballguy
Chicago and it's not even close. To get excited about draft prospects especially in a weak draft class like the upcoming one is just silly. Sorry Denver fans but getting rid of a 25 year old Pro Bowl QB is not smart. You all hyped Cutler and defended him to the ends of the Earth but now many are acting like the owner is a genius for pulling this off. Chicago is now a Super Bowl cnotender, what is Denver?
Rebuilding
Rebuilding
Last edited by a moderator:
thesurfshop19
Footballguy
Jason Wood said:
A lot of people think Cutler is immature and over-rated.
A lot of people think Orton is a winner and under-rated.
If both of those statements are true, Denver is the clear winner.
If either one is true, this trade is reasonable close.
If neither is true, Chicago is the clear winner.
Only time will tell the truth, but right now I think the center is a very reasonable place to be....a good trade without a clear winner/loser.
FWIW...I also believe the average fan grossly over-rates draft picks. If Cutler were in the rookie draft, given what we know now...he's the clear #1. That's a solid argument. But what about Orton? Would he not be mid to late first round material at least? I really don't know what to think of Cutler anymore, but I do believe that Kyle Orton has been under-rated in general.
A lot of people think Orton is a winner and under-rated.
If both of those statements are true, Denver is the clear winner.
If either one is true, this trade is reasonable close.
If neither is true, Chicago is the clear winner.
Only time will tell the truth, but right now I think the center is a very reasonable place to be....a good trade without a clear winner/loser.
FWIW...I also believe the average fan grossly over-rates draft picks. If Cutler were in the rookie draft, given what we know now...he's the clear #1. That's a solid argument. But what about Orton? Would he not be mid to late first round material at least? I really don't know what to think of Cutler anymore, but I do believe that Kyle Orton has been under-rated in general.
-baller
Footballguy
I think this thing is just typical fantasy football mentality --- everybody's wound up about 'winning' trades all the time, and ripping the other guy off.
is it possible that it was just a fair trade that worked out for both parties in accordance to what the market would bear?
apparently, cutler was not working in denver, and denver wasn't too excited to keep him.
they got what they could get for him, so that's it.
it remains to be seen how everything will work out, but I still remember the sky falling when houston passed on bush to take mario williams.
I think you're going to have to give this one a couple years.
is it possible that it was just a fair trade that worked out for both parties in accordance to what the market would bear?
apparently, cutler was not working in denver, and denver wasn't too excited to keep him.
they got what they could get for him, so that's it.
it remains to be seen how everything will work out, but I still remember the sky falling when houston passed on bush to take mario williams.
I think you're going to have to give this one a couple years.
BoltzNBrew
Footballguy
Because 1,325,951 Jay Cutler threads isn't enough.T Bell said:
CletiusMaximus
Footballguy
If you were looking at this deal from a "fairness" perspective, similar to an investment bank giving an opinion on a transaction from a financial perspective, you would not only compare the value given to the value received, but also look at recent comparable transactions to do a check on market value. That may be difficult to do as there may not be a good recent market comp for a young pro-bowl QB with a friendly contract, but certainly the Matt Cassel deal is one you would look at. What other recent comparable trades are useful?Jason Wood said:
Banger
Footballguy
I agree with this. Trades have a life and often times depending on when the snapshot is taken the 'winner' can change dramatically (i.e. Eli and Vick trades).
As a Bears fan, as of right now I feel great about the trade. But there is no reason for a Denver fan to not feel great about it as well. There is a lot of potential with those draft picks, and that potential is significantly higher than Cutler by himself. Whether that potential is met, only time will tell. Good trade for both sides in what was a bad situation from the start.
-baller
Footballguy
dude........you contradicted yourself within a single sentence.the cassel deal is in no way comparable.
why would you think that?
twistd
Footballguy
Orton has the potential to be a Kerry Collins/Chad Pennington type starter. I watched Orton. I think Bronco fans are in for a rude awakening. In the right system both Pennington and Collins have been successful. I don't think Orton would go in the first round if he was in the draft this year. I think the idea that McDaniels is this system genius is over-rated. Cassell did well last year, but Moss and Welker will make a lot of guys look good. Marshall and Royal have the potential to help Orton, but I think that system has looked good because of really good talent, more than talent has looked good because of a really good system. The Broncos still have no running game, and a terrible defense. They are changing the scheme both defensively and offensively. Let's see how the Bronco fans view the trade when they win five games next year.
Jason Wood
Zoo York
A replacement level QB is worth a 1st rounder?
Banger
Footballguy
Not a chance IMO. Teams don't look for 20th+ upside with their 1st round QB picks. I think you are severely over rating Orton. He's a bottom 1/3 maybe bottom 1/4 QB and not a difference maker by any stretch.
Last edited by a moderator:
flufhed
Footballguy
I am sure I am not the first person to say this, but I have not been following the Jay Cutler threads, but in my opinion this was a horrible trade FOR BOTH TEAMS.
Denver traded a franchise, pro-bowl QB in his prime. I don't care what they got back. Franchise QBs are so hard to find. hen you get one, you ride that horse for as long as possible.
And Chicago got rid of way too much in draft picks, but almost more importantly, a good young QB that fit perfectly with that team. Kyle Orton was perfect for Chicago, and you can win games with a guy like Orton with a good running game and defense.
I think both teams lost.
Denver traded a franchise, pro-bowl QB in his prime. I don't care what they got back. Franchise QBs are so hard to find. hen you get one, you ride that horse for as long as possible.
And Chicago got rid of way too much in draft picks, but almost more importantly, a good young QB that fit perfectly with that team. Kyle Orton was perfect for Chicago, and you can win games with a guy like Orton with a good running game and defense.
I think both teams lost.
What's his record as a starter?????????If he's a starting caliber NFL QB, he's a first round QB, isn't he?A replacement level QB is worth a 1st rounder?
Or are you saying he's not a starting caliber QB? If not, isn't he at least at the top of the backup/fill-in tier? Aren't those guys still worth a high second?
FWIW...I agreed with the premise that draft picks in general are over-rated.
Banger
Footballguy
what was Grossman's '06 record?What's his record as a starter?????????If he's a starting caliber NFL QB, he's a first round QB, isn't he?A replacement level QB is worth a 1st rounder?
Or are you saying he's not a starting caliber QB? If not, isn't he at least at the top of the backup/fill-in tier? Aren't those guys still worth a high second?
FWIW...I agreed with the premise that draft picks in general are over-rated.
It's impossible to value things objectively especially at this point with the careers of the players involved a complete unknown. Value is in the eye of the beholder. As a Bear fan I'm still dumbfounded and flabbergasted about this. IF Cutler performs as I believe he will I would have been happy with the Bears giving up twice as much as they gave. We're one of the worst franchises in the league at drafting first round talent. The 90s drafts actually caused me physical pain. Giving up first round picks is almost a relief. I haven't posted about this subject yet because it took me a couple of days to believe it actually happened. I kept thinking I was going to wake up with spooged-on underwear. Basically, I'm thrilled. I think a lot of Bears fans would echo that sentiment. To Bears fans this guy is basically the Messiah. If your franchise has had an above average QB in the last 60 years you wouldn't understand.
Now the Broncos. They don't fully understand the pain of not having a franchise QB. Sid Luckman had been retired for 10 years before the Broncos ever played a football game. They've had their Elway. Cutler wasn't as important to them. From their point of view they got pretty good value from a player that wasn't working out. Because value is subjective NFL trades aren't a zero-sum game. Both sides can claim victory, certainly before any of the traded players have played a snap for their new teams.
Now the Broncos. They don't fully understand the pain of not having a franchise QB. Sid Luckman had been retired for 10 years before the Broncos ever played a football game. They've had their Elway. Cutler wasn't as important to them. From their point of view they got pretty good value from a player that wasn't working out. Because value is subjective NFL trades aren't a zero-sum game. Both sides can claim victory, certainly before any of the traded players have played a snap for their new teams.
Last edited by a moderator:
TitusIII
Footballguy
This Bears fan would have given up three first rounders for the chance at a franchise QB. It's a gamble, but the odds of any one of those picks equaling Cutler, or being anything more than average, with Angelo picking were slim to none.
Jason Wood
Zoo York
I'm saying that the Bears W-L record with him in the lineup isn't the metric we, or GMs, should be using to evaluate his value. I'm also saying that, yes, he's at best a league average NFL starter and quite likely is far below that. The "what's a quality backup worth?" argument is an interesting one but I think age and cost go into play there. You wouldn't use a mid 1st round pick on someone you viewed as ideally suited as a backup. GMs are willing to account for the possibility that a QB drafted in the 1st round ends up a backup, so that it's not a total wash, but if you knew a player's baseline was "NFL backup" I don't think you would use a 1st rounder on him, no.What's his record as a starter?????????If he's a starting caliber NFL QB, he's a first round QB, isn't he?A replacement level QB is worth a 1st rounder?
Or are you saying he's not a starting caliber QB? If not, isn't he at least at the top of the backup/fill-in tier? Aren't those guys still worth a high second?
FWIW...I agreed with the premise that draft picks in general are over-rated.
bcr8f
Footballguy
And I can say both teams won. Orton played well in the cold and Cutler could end up being better as the Bears build the team around him and Forte.
CletiusMaximus
Footballguy
Its not a contradiction to say there are no good recent comparable deals, but that you should still consider the KC-Pats trade in this analysis. There are never exact comparables in any transaction, so you look at the closest deals you can find and then make adjustments. It is false to say it is "in no way comparable" in that it is a trade for a young starting QB in the NFL, so it is a starting point.My point is that everyone is comparing the value of draft picks against the value of a player, which is fine, but is also imperfect and involves projection and speculation as to future unknowns. A different but equally valid way to analyze the fairness of a deal is to see where other teams have set the market in terms of a player for draft pick trade.dude........you contradicted yourself within a single sentence.
the cassel deal is in no way comparable.
why would you think that?
The general point I'm trying to make is that Orton is a commodity of pretty strong value, not a mere "throw-in". The whole argument about Cutler's value (#1 pick) is not entirely valid unless you assign a value to Orton as well. Mid second for a young QB many think is backup? Mid first for one some think is at least a decent starter? High second for a guy whose apparent floor is as a top-notch backup/fill-in starter seems an appropriate floor to me (at least at the QB position).Forget Orton and throw a high second into this deal. Two (assumed low) firsts, a high second, and a third? For a malcontented QB Denver had no choice but to trade?I'm saying that the Bears W-L record with him in the lineup isn't the metric we, or GMs, should be using to evaluate his value. I'm also saying that, yes, he's at best a league average NFL starter and quite likely is far below that. The "what's a quality backup worth?" argument is an interesting one but I think age and cost go into play there. You wouldn't use a mid 1st round pick on someone you viewed as ideally suited as a backup. GMs are willing to account for the possibility that a QB drafted in the 1st round ends up a backup, so that it's not a total wash, but if you knew a player's baseline was "NFL backup" I don't think you would use a 1st rounder on him, no.What's his record as a starter?????????If he's a starting caliber NFL QB, he's a first round QB, isn't he?A replacement level QB is worth a 1st rounder?
Or are you saying he's not a starting caliber QB? If not, isn't he at least at the top of the backup/fill-in tier? Aren't those guys still worth a high second?
FWIW...I agreed with the premise that draft picks in general are over-rated.
Cutler may be worth the #1, but he is NOT without some risk.
This trade seems fair to me, too close to declare a winner at this time.
Jason Wood
Zoo York
Sure, well hindsight will tell the tale obviously. If Orton starts and plays well for Denver, it will be hard not to say this deal made sense for them particularly because, as you noted, they really had no choice but to trade Cutler after a certain point. But I suspect Orton won't play well [if he plays] and then McDaniels and Sanders better hope they hit home runs with all those draft choices, or else.The general point I'm trying to make is that Orton is a commodity of pretty strong value, not a mere "throw-in". The whole argument about Cutler's value (#1 pick) is not entirely valid unless you assign a value to Orton as well. Mid second for a young QB many think is backup? Mid first for one some think is at least a decent starter? High second for a guy whose apparent floor is as a top-notch backup/fill-in starter seems an appropriate floor to me (at least at the QB position).Forget Orton and throw a high second into this deal. Two (assumed low) firsts, a high second, and a third? For a malcontented QB Denver had no choice but to trade?I'm saying that the Bears W-L record with him in the lineup isn't the metric we, or GMs, should be using to evaluate his value. I'm also saying that, yes, he's at best a league average NFL starter and quite likely is far below that. The "what's a quality backup worth?" argument is an interesting one but I think age and cost go into play there. You wouldn't use a mid 1st round pick on someone you viewed as ideally suited as a backup. GMs are willing to account for the possibility that a QB drafted in the 1st round ends up a backup, so that it's not a total wash, but if you knew a player's baseline was "NFL backup" I don't think you would use a 1st rounder on him, no.What's his record as a starter?????????If he's a starting caliber NFL QB, he's a first round QB, isn't he?A replacement level QB is worth a 1st rounder?
Or are you saying he's not a starting caliber QB? If not, isn't he at least at the top of the backup/fill-in tier? Aren't those guys still worth a high second?
FWIW...I agreed with the premise that draft picks in general are over-rated.
Cutler may be worth the #1, but he is NOT without some risk.
This trade seems fair to me, too close to declare a winner at this time.
switz
Footballguy
Are you saying Cassel should be worth far less than Orton?When I look at the two players, I think it's clear that Orton is the better QB. He was drafted higher, played well in far more adverse circumstances, shows better leadership qualities and intangibles. Orton has more experience. He was a starter (and a winner) in college, instead of a backup like Cassel.Both are reportedly going to compete for a starting position on their new team, so they could be equally viewed as starters or backups.If you are looking at QBs in similar situations getting traded - these two players work for that.DEN got a steal IMO, and KC overpaid.
Banger
Footballguy
that's fine but when you are trading one of the top young QB's in the game and getting back "a top-end backup/fill-in starter it's not as great IMO. I realize there were other more valuable pieces to the puzzle (the picks) but QB is the most important position on the field and going from a pro-bowler to a backup/fill-in is a BIG drop no matter how you look at it.
switz
Footballguy
Woodsy, what makes you say this?If Orton can do what he did in the first half of last year in the windy city, with crappy WRs... why can't he do well in Mile High with Royal and Marshall?
PatsWillWin
Footballguy
I'd rather have Cutler than the picks if my team needs a QB. That being said, I was still surprised at how much Cutler went for - not because he's not worth it, but because the NFL seems to be the epitome of a buyer's market, and since it was pretty much known that Cutler was going to be traded, I was just surprised teams actually went that far. Good deal for Chicago, good deal for DEN considering the circumstances...if they were going to trade him, this was pretty much a best case scenarior.
Banger
Footballguy
At the end of the day the NFL GM's know a guy of his caliber doesn't become available so someone was going to make a nice offer despite everyone knowing that they were going to deal him. I'd imagine the Jets and a number of other teams would have/did make the same offer but they may have been in the same division and/or didn't have a decent QB to send back the other way.
True, based on the average fan's current expectations. But while some are comparing a top five QB to a scrub starter, others are comparing a good starter (8-12) to a solid starter (15-18).In the end, Cutler's floor is lower then Orton's ceiling, and Orton's floor is actually pretty high. For this reason I think those proclaiming significant victory for either franchise are nuts.
If he does what he did the other 30 or so games of his career, what makes you think he can? What makes you think Kyle Orton is capable of playing at that level for an entire season? Do you believe the ankle injury entirely explains his ineffectiveness during the 2nd half of the year?
-baller
Footballguy
what?I'm saying the cassel deal isn't comparable to the cutler deal --- where's your confusion?you'd be just as well served finding some other deal for a white male as comparison cutler, and pretending the deals are similar.apparently, the guy I was replying to seems to think that because they both played the same position their deals should be comparable.I think that's extremely misinformed, and more than a little nutty.
Banger
Footballguy
I happen to think Cutler's floor is quite a bit higher than Orton's ceiling and Orton's floor is a 2nd/3rd QB depending on how Simms plays and whether Denver drafts a QB. They really aren't in the same league in my eyes.I can understand the Bronco's wanting him to be part of a deal since they don't have a good backup QB on the roster but if they had the choice of any QB's in the league I'd have to think he'd end up about #25 on the list.
Last edited by a moderator:
Scooby1974
Footballguy
He might not have Marshall for a while, he has to learn a new system, and he has a noodle arm that can't take advantage of Marshall/Royals deep threat type play. Royal might be playing the "Welker" role and catching those 5 yard slants all season while Marshall goes hungry and slips on more McDonald's bags.
How high do you believe Orton's floor is? I'd say it's career backup/fill in type QB. Outside of a handful of games in his entire career, he's done nothing to suggest he's more than that. It's possible that he could be more than that as well, but it's also possible that the 4-5 games are an abberation and the other 30 games are a more accurate sample of what he's capable of producing consistently.
We agree on his floor...but apparently disagree on what a fill-in type QB is worth. What is Cutler's floor? Many seem to think his floor is as a perrenial pro-bowler. I think his floor is actually quite a bit lower then that.
IN the end, it's all academic at this point. I'm simply pointing out that there are strong arguments that can be made for both teams on "who won".
switz
Footballguy
I'll answer the questions backwards...Yes, I believe the ankle injury and treatment for it had a huge impact on the second half of the season.Why do I think he's capable of playing that way for an entire season? Well, I believe between his rookie season, where he showed flashes of great play, and lots of moxie, and last season he progressed a ton as a QB. The way he played the first half showed no signs of trailing off, until the injury. Which do you expect the modern day Kyle Orton to be like most - the healthy or injured last season Orton, or the rookie Orton? I would guess, if he's healthy, he'll be most like the healthy version from last year.30 games in his career, 15 as a rookie, in which he performed better than many 1st round picks who went on to be studs. Then 3 games at the end of '07 in which he improved each game, then the first 7 of '08 in which he looked pretty good. When he came back he looked terrible, but he honestly should not even have been playing. I would wonder why anyone would think otherwise? Do you believe not being able to plant for throws had no impact? Do you believe the first half was an aberration, and he really learned nothing over 3 seasons? I believe that type of thinking is rather ludicrous and illogical.From any sane point of view, his situation, as far as offensive cast goes, has only improved - and not just slightly, tremendously. It's hard to see a legitimate argument for his failure. I don't think Orton is a franchise QB, they are very rare IMO, but I think he can play at a high enough level for a team to win, and I tihnk he even could play well enough for a good team to win a Super Bowl. He is not a detriment to a team.
Banger
Footballguy
If Orton is the QB of the Broncos last year they probably have the same record as the Chiefs as opposed to competing for the division. Yes, he could do what Rex did in '06 if the Bears had the defense they did back then but that doesn't mean he's a good QB IMO.
Last edited by a moderator:
switz
Footballguy
If he could, while injured, lead the Bears to 9-7, I'm pretty sure he could, when healthy, take Denver to 3 or 4 more wins.I believe Cutler is the better QB, from an individual talent standpoint. But I don't think his impact on the team is equal to his talent edge over Orton. Winning and losing is all about team, and Cutler didn't make that team that much better than they are with Orton in his place.
Banger
Footballguy
are you saying that Orton could have led Denver to an 11 or 12 win season last year? or 3 or 4 more than KC?
Last edited by a moderator:
switz
Footballguy
Banger
Footballguy
wow, better than Campbell or McCown? That's some top notch company. In all seriousness, I couldn't disagree more with your take on Orton ESPECIALLY thinking that he could have won more than Cutler on that team. Cutler was throwing for 300+ 2+ Td's out of necessity due to their horrid defense and Orton would have done better? Cutler probably made the defense look better than most QB's because he was able to pick up tons of 3rd downs, keep drives alive, score points and keep the defense off the field. Unless Orton can play some serious defense I don't see a way on the planet that he could have outperformed what Cutler did last year.
Last edited by a moderator:
Hey switz,So are you asserting that Orton is a superior team mate/team leader compared to Cutler - that his "intangibles" are superior to Cutler? Given what I've seen from Maurile Tremblay on Cutler's partying and etc., I'm willing to consider the argument that Orton is more mature (though I don't know how he has comported himself in Chicago) and thus better able to lead a team - where/when did you see Cutler's lack of "intangibles" fail the Broncos during 2008?
