PDA

View Full Version : What would Jay Cutler be worth to the Jets?


TT Gator
03-16-2009, 11:48 PM
I'm sure many of you have heard about the drama in Denver. It looks like now Cutler is asking to be traded. I think it is beyond the point of repair and Jay will be wearing a new jersey by the time the draft is over. Although I have more faith in Clemens(or whoever wins the job this offseason) then most other people seem to, Cutler would obviously be an improvement. He threw for over 4,000 yards last year as well as 25 TDs and was 2nd in completions in the NFL. My question is assuming NY wants him(I don't know why they wouldn't) what should the Jets offer for him? Also what's the furthest they should go? I belive NY needs their first round pick to get one of the elite WRs in this draft and have that position covered for along time to come. I'm not againest offering our 2nd round pick. Honestly I wouldn't mind giving them our 2nd and 3rd round picks this year or the 2nd with an early pick next year because management did an amazing job this free agency with beefing up our defence and I think other than the question marks at QB and WR we have a very good team with alot of depth. Should we give up an early and late pick this draft, an early pick this year another one next, should we offer a player and a pick, or a couple players?

katnip
03-19-2009, 07:44 PM
I'm no expert.. But I'd assume a 1st, 2nd, and mid rounder.

jetvilma51
03-19-2009, 08:07 PM
i heard it would be like this years first and next years second. and i wouldnt mind that

BroadwayJoe10
03-19-2009, 11:18 PM
My first born..

TT Gator
03-20-2009, 03:11 AM
My first born..

From what I hear on McDaniels i'd say he'd take that trade. I'm just afraid it's going to become a trade auction with teams offering up more and more. Then if we even get him we'll lose half our picks this year and next. Then he's gotta stay healthy and he won't have any big time targets next year other than Cotchery(assuming WRs go as fast as many are predicting). Too bad Favre didn't stay another year so we could pick up a speedster receiver this year and an elite signal caller in next years draft(which will be loaded with them). I like Cutler but this trade has potential to kill a teams draft prospects for a couple years to come. With Jones, Ellis, Faneca, and Coleman all over 30 we're going to need to use some early picks the next 2 years in preperation for when they leave. At the very least at DE and RB with Washington a free agent next year and Coleman and Ellis being are starting ends.

The Great Jonathan Vilma
03-27-2009, 01:52 PM
I sure hope that comment of not wanting to trade for him because 'we need our first to get a WR' was a joke. You take a proven, still young QB over a high bust position like WR anyday. Plus, as history shows, first round WRs have a relatively high bust factor, and as last year showed, can drop considerably. I don't see any issue with drafting a WR in the 2nd round, as all that would be available at 17 have weaknesses and wouldn't have a experienced QB throwing to them anyway....

I get the '3 year rule for WRs', but you take a QB when you can get one because not having one, or having to draft and the have him bust can cost a team 3-4 years, and that is only assuming you can address it in the next go around. You can work around not having a dominant WR, and while you can do it without a dominant QB, your chances are success are far lower.

derza222
03-27-2009, 02:28 PM
I sure hope that comment of not wanting to trade for him because 'we need our first to get a WR' was a joke. You take a proven, still young QB over a high bust position like WR anyday. Plus, as history shows, first round WRs have a relatively high bust factor, and as last year showed, can drop considerably. I don't see any issue with drafting a WR in the 2nd round, as all that would be available at 17 have weaknesses and wouldn't have a experienced QB throwing to them anyway....

I get the '3 year rule for WRs', but you take a QB when you can get one because not having one, or having to draft and the have him bust can cost a team 3-4 years, and that is only assuming you can address it in the next go around. You can work around not having a dominant WR, and while you can do it without a dominant QB, your chances are success are far lower.

While I do agree that we shouldn't lock ourselves into drafting a WR in the first, and I'm sure we won't, I do have some questions. While Cutler has definitely shown some things, can we really call him a proven young QB? He hasn't put up those numbers over an incredibly extended period. He's clearly got some warts, otherwise why would Denver trade him? Look at the Bengals with Chad Johnson last year, when a guy's under contract you can easily just stand your ground. Now that didn't work to well for them, but the Broncos wouldn't be entertaining offers if they didn't have some issues with Cutler.

I see Cutler as an incredibly talented guy, but there are definitely some issues. He's not well liked, even in our own locker room, which could cause some problems. He also forces a lot of throws which leads to interceptions, and also isn't a great fit for the kind of ball-control offense we want to run. I'm not sold he has the right mentality for it. Plus, the weapons he had at his disposal in Denver were considerably better than whatever he'll have here. I don't see him putting up near the numbers here that he did there, and I doubt NY is going to take that well and I don't think he's the type to take the criticism well either. So it's not like we're bringing in a magic fix to the quarterback situation, he's going to bring some major faults here with him. I think we all know that, but it doesn't get talked about quite enough.

Last year guys dropped more due to lack of talent at the position than the bust factor IMO. We'll see this year... But who do you see being available at 52 that you're comfortable with? I've got to say the pickings are pretty slim there...for WR I think the late first/early second range is probably the best combination of value and talent level, but there could be a real dearth of talent at the position if we just wait till our second round pick to get a guy. And while I get what you're saying about not having an experienced QB throwing to them, they're all pro QB's I'd assume whoever we put out there is going to throw a catchable ball. So much more of it is protection and ability to go through reads IMO, and the read aspect actually may be in favor of the guys on our roster because they're more experienced in the system.

The last comment also kind of confuses me a little. I guess the word that throws me a little is "dominant". How can a QB really be dominant? And how many really elite-level QB's are there out there? Not going to try to come up with a list but there can't be more than ten in the NFL. So much of what they do relies on the players around them, it's kind of tough to see how dominant a QB would be with supporting casts of varying levels. With a WR at least you can see the dominance if they're getting open all the time or catching everything thrown their way or getting tons of YAC. I see the need for a comptent QB as being greater than that for a competent WR, but plenty of teams in the NFL have gotten by and had some real success without a dominant, elite-level quarterback because of the supporting cast they're able to put around a player talented enough to make necessary throws and comfortable enough in the scheme to go through their reads nad make the right decision.