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

[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.