whitesoxbrian Posted April 5, 2009 Share Posted April 5, 2009 When the Bulls got Wallace, I was pumped. But not to this extent.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jenksycat Posted April 6, 2009 Share Posted April 6, 2009 QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Apr 5, 2009 -> 12:37 PM) I think the excitement level is really attached to the possibilities that Cutler gives the Bears. Chicago doesn't know what a franchise QB looks like, and now that we have one it makes us believe everything about our team will become exponentially better. I think you'll expectations become a little bit more reasonable by the time the season starts, but right now people have to realize that Jay Cutler alone is not going to win us Superbowls. The Broncos didn't even make the playoffs last year. Because they had a pop-warner defense. We have the advantage of a better D and RB over the Broncos, while they dust us in WR. If we pick up a decent WR we will be loads better than Denver was just because of the D and RB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted April 6, 2009 Share Posted April 6, 2009 QUOTE (Jenksy Cat @ Apr 6, 2009 -> 02:41 AM) Because they had a pop-warner defense. We have the advantage of a better D and RB over the Broncos, while they dust us in WR. If we pick up a decent WR we will be loads better than Denver was just because of the D and RB. The Bears also have 2(actually 3 if you count Kellen Davis) quality Tight Ends, so Cutler still has places to throw the ball besides Forte. I think Cutler will excel in a split TE formation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Chappas Posted April 6, 2009 Share Posted April 6, 2009 QUOTE (iamshack @ Apr 4, 2009 -> 09:17 AM) When his defense gives up 21 points or less, he is 13 - 1 as a starter. The reason I do not like that stat.......how many times did the defense give up more than 21 points becasue of Cutler mistakes. 1 int resulting in 7 points can result in that stat being blown. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted April 6, 2009 Share Posted April 6, 2009 QUOTE (Jenks Heat @ Apr 6, 2009 -> 09:53 AM) The reason I do not like that stat.......how many times did the defense give up more than 21 points becasue of Cutler mistakes. 1 int resulting in 7 points can result in that stat being blown. This just becomes statistical noise, you can do that with any stat. An INT that hits a WR on the hands and bounces off into a DB's hands is still an INT even if it wasn't the QB's fault. The takeaway from that stat is that Denver's defense was one of the worst in the NFL, and any QB would struggle winning with that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThunderBolt Posted April 6, 2009 Share Posted April 6, 2009 I think Boers and Bernstein were correct when they said we were all in shock. No one in this city knows what a franshise QB looksl like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted April 6, 2009 Share Posted April 6, 2009 QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Apr 6, 2009 -> 09:18 AM) I think Boers and Bernstein were correct when they said we were all in shock. No one in this city knows what a franshise QB looksl like. We know what they look like, they just don't wear Bears jersies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted April 6, 2009 Author Share Posted April 6, 2009 QUOTE (rangercal @ Apr 5, 2009 -> 12:34 PM) This is bigger than all those combined to me. You just said this was bigger than the Bears getting to the Super Bowl in 06. You are now not allowed to post in this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rangercal Posted April 6, 2009 Share Posted April 6, 2009 QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Apr 6, 2009 -> 10:49 AM) You just said this was bigger than the Bears getting to the Super Bowl in 06. You are now not allowed to post in this thread. I seriously meant bigger than all those moves combined. although, Perdue for Rodman kicked ass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wedge Posted April 6, 2009 Share Posted April 6, 2009 Not to respark the "who got the better end of the deal" but I got into this discussion with a buddy of mine (Philly fan) over the weekend. That led me to look up some articles. Some interesting facts: 1) After 5-10 years, about 44% of first round picks are out of the league entirely for one reason for another [1]. Almost 50% are starters at that point and 40% make a pro bowl. Thus, it's as likely that a first round pick busts out as they have a pro bowl season. 2) From 1992-2001, 19 quarterbacks were taken with a first round pick [2]. In a rough ranking of productivity with their drafting team from best to worst they are: Peyton Manning, McNabb, Bledsoe, Steve McNair, Culpepper, Vick, Pennington, Mirer (Seahawks, this high since he got them the walter jones pick back), Dave Brown (Giants), Kerry Collins (Panthers), Trent Dilfer (Bucs), Drunkenmiller, David Klinger (Bengals), Heath Shuler (Redskins), Couch, Akili Smith, Cade McNown, Maddox (Broncos), Leaf. I think you can safely say that 12/19 (63%) busted with their original team. Of that list, Manning and McNabb made the Pro Bowl twice in their first three years. Bledsoe, Culpepper, and Vick all made it once in their first three years. So over that period, 5/19 (26%) had a first three years close to Cutler's. I don't think there is any question of Cutler's ability. I think his only chance of "busting" in Chicago is the "head case scenario" (doesn't mesh with the city, staff, organization, etc). I think that at worst that's 5% likely. Oh, and 5% for a very bad, career altering injury. The other 90% is that he varies from an above average to pro-bowl quality QB for a 5-6 year period. Based on the above information, here is how I see the trade scenario. I will, for sake of argument, assume the Broncos use the two Bears draft picks to select a QB and a player at a different position. Ways the Broncos win: 1) Cutler busts AND they get at least one starting quality player out of the two draft picks. Based on the above math, this is ~8% (10%*(100%-50%*36%)) likely. 2) Cutler does not bust AND the Broncos get at least a starting quality QB AND the Broncos get a pro bowl quality player ~14% (90%*36%*44%). Ways the Broncos and Bears tie: 1) Cutler does not bust AND the Broncos get a pro-bowl quality QB AND the Broncos other pick busts ~14% (90%*32%*44%). You could also argue this to be a win for the Bears, since they get the pro-bowl quality QB immediate and the Broncos will have to develop him. 2) Cutler does not bust AND the Broncos get a starting quality QB and other player ~0.5% (90%*5%*10%) 3) Cutler busts AND the Broncos two picks bust ~3% (10%*63%*44%). Ways the Bears win: 1) Cutler does not bust AND the Broncos draft a bust QB ~58% (90%*63%). 2) Cutler does not bust AND the Broncos pick a starter level QB and their other pick busts ~2% (90%*5%*44%). Obviously the math is a b**** rough since the probabilities are estimated, but when you weigh the likely outcomes I think it points that the most likely scenario is that the Bears come out ahead. [1] http://bleacherreport.com/articles/74206-w...dds-for-success [2] http://sports.espn.go.com/nfldraft/story?id=1539344 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MurcieOne Posted April 7, 2009 Share Posted April 7, 2009 Cutler dude... I still cant believe we got Cutler. Awesome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted April 8, 2009 Author Share Posted April 8, 2009 QUOTE (MurcieOne @ Apr 7, 2009 -> 12:37 PM) Cutler dude... I still cant believe we got Cutler. Awesome. Yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 The way Lovie talked about Tory Holt yesterday, leads me to believe we have or are talking to him and the Bears may just sign him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 QUOTE (Brian @ Apr 8, 2009 -> 11:02 AM) The way Lovie talked about Tory Holt yesterday, leads me to believe we have or are talking to him and the Bears may just sign him. oh really? I didnt know Lovie talked yesterday. To tell! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 What did Lovie say about Holt? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Apr 8, 2009 -> 11:09 AM) What did Lovie say about Holt? Saying he had a good relationship with him and that he is one of the many receivers available they are looking at and liked working with him in St. Louis, even though they weren't on the same side of the ball. It was more of his tone and demeanor that led me to believe they are talking to Holt. Was really up, not the usual monotonous Lovie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 QUOTE (Brian @ Apr 8, 2009 -> 02:33 PM) Saying he had a good relationship with him and that he is one of the many receivers available they are looking at and liked working with him in St. Louis, even though they weren't on the same side of the ball. It was more of his tone and demeanor that led me to believe they are talking to Holt. Was really up, not the usual monotonous Lovie. DUH! *smacks head* I forgot they were together in St. Louis. That could help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Pace is now lobbying for the Bears to get Holt. The Bears offer the best QB out of the teams competing for Holt and the most familiarity. He'll be a Bear, book it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MurcieOne Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Apr 8, 2009 -> 03:40 PM) Pace is now lobbying for the Bears to get Holt. The Bears offer the best QB out of the teams competing for Holt and the most familiarity. He'll be a Bear, book it. the stars do seem aligned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rangercal Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Apr 8, 2009 -> 04:40 PM) Pace is now lobbying for the Bears to get Holt. The Bears offer the best QB out of the teams competing for Holt and the most familiarity. He'll be a Bear, book it. If this happens, I will never make fun of sticker lettered jerseys every again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Evidently John Clayton reported yesterday that Holt is waiting for offers from the Bears and Giants (already has them from Tenn and Jacksonville) before he signs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Apr 8, 2009 -> 06:49 PM) Evidently John Clayton reported yesterday that Holt is waiting for offers from the Bears and Giants (already has them from Tenn and Jacksonville) before he signs. Who do you go to if you're Holt, assuming the money is similar? NY or Chicago? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxbrian Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 Cutler > Eli Forte > Jacobs (in terms of being an all around RB) I'd probably go with Chicago but that could be my bias speaking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 QUOTE (whitesoxbrian @ Apr 8, 2009 -> 10:48 PM) Cutler > Eli Forte > Jacobs (in terms of being an all around RB) I'd probably go with Chicago but that could be my bias speaking. Is it really fair to compare Forte to Jacobs? Jacobs is a first and second down back, and he's off the field come third down. I really think you have to compare Forte and Peterson to Jacobs and Bradshaw (and last year it was Ward). Even if you do, Forte and Jacobs are such different kinds of backs that it makes it near impossible to compare them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan1 Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Apr 8, 2009 -> 11:23 PM) Is it really fair to compare Forte to Jacobs? Jacobs is a first and second down back, and he's off the field come third down. I really think you have to compare Forte and Peterson to Jacobs and Bradshaw (and last year it was Ward). Even if you do, Forte and Jacobs are such different kinds of backs that it makes it near impossible to compare them. I agree, they really aren't comparable at all. Jacobs is a big time bruiser who's goal is to run you over. Forte is an every down back who also excels as a receiver out of the backfield. Either way, Holt would be a huge addition to this team. I'd imagine the offense would look something like this: QB Cutler/Hanie/Basanez RB Forte/Peterson/Wolfe FB McKie LT Pace/Shaffer LG Omiyale/Beekman C Kreutz RG Garza/Buenning RT Williams/Shaffer WR Holt/Bennet WR Hester/Davis TE Olsen/Clark/Davis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.