I See QB Rumors (2012 QB Thread: The Sixth Sense)

[NYCSkin]

Just a few questions to the forum re: the Bradford rumors...

Wasn't Jeff Fischer motivated (at least in some part) to take the Rams job because they had a perceived franchise QB in Sam Bradford? Now he wants to trade him and take a shot with a rookie QB (presumably RGIII)?

I imagine Gregg Williams would love to have Orakpo at his 4-3 end which is probably his best fit. But with Quinn and Long on their roster already--do they even need Orakpo?

I am not opposed to trading Orakpo who in my opinion is out of his natural position and seems to have plateaued. He seems to have less upside than Kerrigan. Rob Jackson could probably nearly equal Rak's production at this point. Certainly in those Geico commercials...

Leveraging Orakpo's trade value, who is part of the Skins strongest unit (LBs), to potentially improve the most critical position on the team seems like a smart and prudent strategy.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Lotus

Actually irish's claim was not about teams bettering themselves. His claim was that teams never give up a lot to get a QB. I simply pointed out that that was not true, whether such deals end up being smart or not.

As for whether giving up a lot for a QB is worth it, I agree that you must look on a case-by-case basis. I agreed with you on the argument about Eli the other day. But in Eli's case the Giants had other easy options. That is not always the case. So we might look at the Bears' acquisition of Cutler differently than we look at trading for Eli. And until we see more the jury remains out on folks like Palmer and Gabbert. If Palmer tears it up next year and the Raiders win the Super Bowl (I said IF), the Palmer trade looks a lot more respectable.

I liked (and still like) the Palmer trade for the Raiders because they didn't have a whole lot of options based on the timing of Campbell's injury, and I typically enjoy teams that error on the side of aggression. There is almost no way that Palmer is worth what the Raiders gave up for him. That was more a case of the Bengals getting to name their price.

But I don't think the Raiders were deluded into thinking they were trading for a franchise quarterback. They were trading for a guy who was still one of the NFL's top 15 passers (with the hope [but not expectation] that he could be a top 10 guy over the next three years) while knowing that the only QB under contract for them in 2012 was Terrelle Pryor at close to league minimum. I always viewed the Raiders as less concerned about winning the trade and more concerned with solidifying the position for the immediate future. But it's still the Raiders, so who knows their true intentions?

The Bears gave up picks in the Jay Cutler deal that could have become franchise quarterbacks, either Josh Freeman in 2009 (the actual pick they traded to Denver for Cutler was eventually used by Tampa for Freeman), or Tebow/Clausen/McCoy/Kafka in 2010. The real issue though is that the guy who they included in the trade for Cutler (Orton) hasn't been all that much worse than Cutler since the trade. To me, the lack of a supporting cast for Cutler is not an excuse for his play when evaluating a trade where it cost so much to get him: well of course he has a limited supporting cast, the Broncos fleeced the Bears in terms of compensation.

Point being: there are never not other options at quarterback. Never. They aren't always great options, but if you're going to give up a ton of draft pick value to get a guy you like, I think you have forfeited your right to complain about the available options. I don't mind erring on the side of aggression, just make sure you are right about it, and you better win something within three years, otherwise, you surely left better choices on the table.

[GTripp0012]

More importantly, can we list successful teams that have been built following a QB trade?

2010 Bears
2009/2011 Texans
2005/2007/2008/2010/2011 Giants
2009/2010 Jets

8-8 or worse
2009/2011 Bears
2007/2008/2010 Texans
2004/2006/2009 Giants
2011 Jets
2010 Redskins

The track record for unwanted, free agent quarterbacks (Kurt Warner, Drew Brees, Peyton Manning?) actually seems to be a lot better than the record for traded quarterbacks. It seems to me like teams spend more time overcoming their trade for QBs than winning as a result.

[irish]

Originally Posted by Lotus

Good example Alvin. Also Eli Manning, Carson Palmer, and Sanchize. Also, arguably, Kolb, Tebow, and Gabbert, depending on how one defines "franchise QB" and how one defines "giving up the farm."

The fact is, teams regularly give up a lot if it means they can land their QB guy.

Outside of Eli, there is no way the rest of the QBs you named are franchise QBs.

It just seems to me that teams that go and get a QB that actually makes a difference are already solid teams that are only a QB away from winning titles. The Redskins arent that team.

[artmonkforhallofamein07]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

Well obviously players who are still under contract with their current teams (like the projected UFA) are off limits but I wasn't sure how the new CBA was written pertaining to players released during the existing league year but after all games were completed. I'm not a moron, just seeking clarification.

I was not assuming you were I was just trying to answer your question. If Peyton was released today and the Dolphins came to terms with him today, they could sign him today. As could any other team. The Pats could go out and sign TO before the SB if they really wanted to.

Not trying to state you were a moron bud, just making sure what I wrote was understandable.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by NYCSkin

Just a few questions to the forum re: the Bradford rumors...

Wasn't Jeff Fischer motivated (at least in some part) to take the Rams job because they had a perceived franchise QB in Sam Bradford? Now he wants to trade him and take a shot with a rookie QB (presumably RGIII)?

I imagine Gregg Williams would love to have Orakpo at his 4-3 end which is probably his best fit. But with Quinn and Long on their roster already--do they even need Orakpo?

I am not opposed to trading Orakpo who in my opinion is out of his natural position and seems to have plateaued. He seems to have less upside than Kerrigan. Rob Jackson could probably nearly equal Rak's production at this point. Certainly in those Geico commercials...

Leveraging Orakpo's trade value, who is part of the Skins strongest unit (LBs), to potentially improve the most critical position on the team seems like a smart and prudent strategy.

More than anything he wants stability, even if it's a rookie. I still think though RG3 ends up in Miami.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by irish

Outside of Eli, there is no way the rest of the QBs you named are franchise QBs.

It just seems to me that teams that go and get a QB that actually makes a difference are already solid teams that are only a QB away from winning titles. The Redskins arent that team.

You may think those guys aren't franchise QB's. That's fair enough. But their teams do or they would not have paid the high prices. Heck, Sanchez's coach called him "Sanchize" so we know that at least at one time an NFL coach had a perception different from yours.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

More than anything he wants stability, even if it's a rookie. I still think though RG3 ends up in Miami.

You think they are going to leapfrog up to #2 or #4 for him? Steep price to say the least. Anything on the Denver front about moving up as well?

[Higskin]

The Super Bowl match up is a bit telling about what it takes to get to there.

Defensively: Both teams have horrendous defenses, ranked virtually at the bottom of the barrel, #27 & #31. The run defenses are in the bottom half and pass defenses in the bottom 4.

Offensively: Both teams had pathetic run game stats in the regular season ranked in the bottom half, Giants #31.

So how did these two teams get to the Super Bowl? What stands out about them? Both are in the top 5 in passing, #2 & #3. That's where they both stand apart from other teams. Yeah, there's more to passing numbers than just the QB, but that's where it begins and ends.

We get caught up in alot of other areas of need on this team, but QB is the most important position on the field.

Heck, the Skins had a better defense than either team but that's not this years SuperBowl theme or Pittsburgh and SF would be there.

If you think a QB like Luck or Bradford gets you "over" at that position, you do whatever it takes to get one of them.

Shanny himself has said on more than one occassion recently, that this team is close. Yeah, obviously, we're in need of a franchise QB.

Glad to hear there's a trade like that in the plans.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by Higskin

Defensively: Both teams have horrendous defenses, ranked virtually at the bottom of the barrel, #27 & #31. The run defenses are in the bottom half and pass defenses in the bottom 4.

The stats for the Giants defense is a bit misleading. Remember they had tons of injuries at the beginning of the season on the defensive side of the ball. They have Tuck and Osi back and they are destroying QBs with that 4 man rush. It lets them do more things with their defense than what they could do before.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by artmonkforhallofamein07

I was not assuming you were I was just trying to answer your question. If Peyton was released today and the Dolphins came to terms with him today, they could sign him today. As could any other team. The Pats could go out and sign TO before the SB if they really wanted to.

Not trying to state you were a moron bud, just making sure what I wrote was understandable.

No worries.. Early symptoms of football withdrawal.

[artmonkforhallofamein07]

I hear ya

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

You think they are going to leapfrog up to #2 or #4 for him? Steep price to say the least. Anything on the Denver front about moving up as well?

3 or 4. Nothing on Denver

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

3 or 4. Nothing on Denver

I somewhat hopes it happens just so I can see the meltdown happen with some Skins fans. It's somewhat entertaining to watch them proclaim the franchise being setback 5-10 years if we don't get X player. Some of these guys are potentially setting themselves up for a huge letdown in terms of acquiring RGIII.

If Mike and company don't think RGIII is worth trading up for, I don't want them to do it. Hell if they don't like him for the #6 pick I don't want them to do it. The ONLY thing I would be pissed at is if they drafted a Richardson at the #6 or any TE before the 6th round. The more I think about it, going OT in first and QB in second would be the most ideal really. (all Luck scenarios aside)

[Higskin]

I'm very surprised that if a healthy Peyton became available, that we wouldn't at least kick the tires but I guess that might be because he would want to stay out of the NFCE, where his brother plays.

I wouldn't be surprised that over some dinner table, his name came up. Or at least when Shanny & Allen's player acquisition plans A-Z were laid out to the owners.