Recent Packer trades / Cutler - money matters

[packers11]

Good article...

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/2009/04/monday-money-matters-29/


Monday Money Matters

The Jay Cutler trade, as any big trade in sports, brought out instant analysis from all circles. As with grading team drafts the day after, these evaluations are meaningless and unfair and usually require three years to properly judge, although I understand the public craving for such immediate and instant gratification. Certainly in this case, the Bears are going to look like short-term winners, settling their most important position with an elite talent (although not yet an elite quarterback), while the position remains a question mark in Denver. However, as we all know, this trade cannot be adequately evaluated for years and years as we track the development of the picks acquired by the Broncos and the career of Cutler.

I was involved in a couple of such trades that looked like immediate losers for the Packers but now appear in a different light. In successive years, we traded Mike McKenzie and Javon Walker to New Orleans and Denver for second-round picks that turned into Nick Collins and Greg Jennings, respectively. At first blush, the trades looked one-sided for the Saints and Broncos, who acquired proven veterans while we got rookies from Bethune-Cookman and Western Michigan. The instant analysis of those trades certainly did not favor Green Bay.

Today, McKenzie is out of the league, recently released by the Saints. Walker lasted two seasons with the Broncos and caught 15 balls for the Raiders last season while collecting $13M. Collins was in the Pro Bowl a couple months ago, and Jennings may be a top 10 receiver in the NFL (he has 133 receptions the last two seasons compared to Walker’s 41). A bit different look for these trades today, no? …

What we can evaluate instantly, however, is the financial impact of the Cutler trade. From a cash perspective, the clear short-term loser is the Broncos. They have already paid Cutler the $12.16M in guaranteed bonus money and, with the price of those two No. 1 picks in the equation, the Broncos will pay approximately $5M more over the next two years than the Bears. That assumes, however, that Cutler continues to play under his existing contract, a contract that’s very reasonable these two years prior to hitting the massive escalators in 2011.

The Broncos also are losers in the Cap comparison of the trade as well. Due primarily to the acceleration of the unamortized portion ($4.7M) of Cutler’s substantial option bonus he received in his rookie contract three years ago, the Broncos are negative $5M on the Cap due to this trade when adding up projected Cap numbers for the picks, Orton and the charge left behind from Cutler’s acceleration.

Again, this picture could change with the negotiation of a new contract for Cutler, which, to this point, has not appeared as an issue. With the stunning package of compensation given to Cutler in the trade, it’s reasonable to expect a blockbuster contract in the next year as well. I’m sure agent Bus Cook will look at Cutler’s new rival quarterback – Aaron Rodgers, who replaced another client of his, Brett Favre, in Green Bay — as a starting point. Rodgers received an $11M average and $20M guarantee in October.

That’s how it looks from a financial perspective, a much more quantifiable analysis than from a personnel perspective. However, like all aspects of evaluating this trade, let’s check back in a couple of years.

[Dabaddestbear]

Good article...

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/2009/04/monday-money-matters-29/


Monday Money Matters

The Jay Cutler trade, as any big trade in sports, brought out instant analysis from all circles. As with grading team drafts the day after, these evaluations are meaningless and unfair and usually require three years to properly judge, although I understand the public craving for such immediate and instant gratification. Certainly in this case, the Bears are going to look like short-term winners, settling their most important position with an elite talent (although not yet an elite quarterback), while the position remains a question mark in Denver. However, as we all know, this trade cannot be adequately evaluated for years and years as we track the development of the picks acquired by the Broncos and the career of Cutler.

I was involved in a couple of such trades that looked like immediate losers for the Packers but now appear in a different light. In successive years, we traded Mike McKenzie and Javon Walker to New Orleans and Denver for second-round picks that turned into Nick Collins and Greg Jennings, respectively. At first blush, the trades looked one-sided for the Saints and Broncos, who acquired proven veterans while we got rookies from Bethune-Cookman and Western Michigan. The instant analysis of those trades certainly did not favor Green Bay.

Today, McKenzie is out of the league, recently released by the Saints. Walker lasted two seasons with the Broncos and caught 15 balls for the Raiders last season while collecting $13M. Collins was in the Pro Bowl a couple months ago, and Jennings may be a top 10 receiver in the NFL (he has 133 receptions the last two seasons compared to Walker’s 41). A bit different look for these trades today, no? …

What we can evaluate instantly, however, is the financial impact of the Cutler trade. From a cash perspective, the clear short-term loser is the Broncos. They have already paid Cutler the $12.16M in guaranteed bonus money and, with the price of those two No. 1 picks in the equation, the Broncos will pay approximately $5M more over the next two years than the Bears. That assumes, however, that Cutler continues to play under his existing contract, a contract that’s very reasonable these two years prior to hitting the massive escalators in 2011.

The Broncos also are losers in the Cap comparison of the trade as well. Due primarily to the acceleration of the unamortized portion ($4.7M) of Cutler’s substantial option bonus he received in his rookie contract three years ago, the Broncos are negative $5M on the Cap due to this trade when adding up projected Cap numbers for the picks, Orton and the charge left behind from Cutler’s acceleration.

Again, this picture could change with the negotiation of a new contract for Cutler, which, to this point, has not appeared as an issue. With the stunning package of compensation given to Cutler in the trade, it’s reasonable to expect a blockbuster contract in the next year as well. I’m sure agent Bus Cook will look at Cutler’s new rival quarterback – Aaron Rodgers, who replaced another client of his, Brett Favre, in Green Bay — as a starting point. Rodgers received an $11M average and $20M guarantee in October.

That’s how it looks from a financial perspective, a much more quantifiable analysis than from a personnel perspective. However, like all aspects of evaluating this trade, let’s check back in a couple of years.
Either way, the Bears have the money and never have no problem giving it to a player that has showed he can produce. Versus giving a lot of money to number one picks that can or cannot eventually develop into anything. Also notice the trades the Packers made into good players came after the 1st round. This would seem to bode well for the Bears since we have our 2nd round picks and more to get players of equal or better quality..on top of having Cutler!
Thanks for the post, although I dont think you intended for some to take away from this what I have already did..lol.

[Spaulding]

As you had alluded to in other posts, Angelo's track record on 1st rounders hasn't been the best so potentially he's traded those "mediocre" potential draftee's for a young stud quarterback.

Personally, I think it's a win-win situation for both sides as the Bears get by far the best QB they've had in decades and with a decent defensive showing a chance to make the playoffs and more. The Broncos get multiple first rounders and a 3rd and the new coach and GM get to build the francise the way they want.

Playing devil's advocate though, what is the worth of those first rounders? If Angelo were to take the value and trade down into more picks, he potentially gave up multiple 2nd rounders, or at worst a 2nd rounder each year and a complete slew of 3rd round and below choices to add depth, rebuild the offensive and defensive lines, replace Brown, etc.

Brandt's article is that only time will tell what the value of this trade means to each franchise. For all we know Dagger, err Cutler goes mental and heads the way of Cade McNown, or he leads the Bears to the Superbowl and does what Rex couldn't do and wins the game and does an update to the SB shuffle (God help us all) :D

[Dabaddestbear]

As you had alluded to in other posts, Angelo's track record on 1st rounders hasn't been the best so potentially he's traded those "mediocre" potential draftee's for a young stud quarterback.

Personally, I think it's a win-win situation for both sides as the Bears get by far the best QB they've had in decades and with a decent defensive showing a chance to make the playoffs and more. The Broncos get multiple first rounders and a 3rd and the new coach and GM get to build the francise the way they want.

Playing devil's advocate though, what is the worth of those first rounders? If Angelo were to take the value and trade down into more picks, he potentially gave up multiple 2nd rounders, or at worst a 2nd rounder each year and a complete slew of 3rd round and below choices to add depth, rebuild the offensive and defensive lines, replace Brown, etc.

Brandt's article is that only time will tell what the value of this trade means to each franchise. For all we know Dagger, err Cutler goes mental and heads the way of Cade McNown, or he leads the Bears to the Superbowl and does what Rex couldn't do and wins the game and does an update to the SB shuffle (God help us all) :D
You made nice points, amusing and funny , yet nice points...lol.

But here is a excerpt I read in an article today in regards to the Bears trade off.



"The Bears finally have the quarterback they've longed for. If anyone thinks the Bears paid too much, let me show you the 14 men who have been first-round picks for the Bears in the last 15 drafts: John Thierry, Rashaan Salaam, Walt Harris, Curtis Enis, Cade McNown, Brian Urlacher, David Terrell, Marc Colombo, Michael Haynes, Rex Grossman, Tommie Harris, Cedric Benson, Greg Olsen, Chris Williams. Let's eliminate judging the last two, from 2007 and 2008, because they don't have enough on their résumés yet. Let's look at the other 12.

Stars: 1 (Urlacher).

Very good NFL starters: 1 (Tommie Harris).

NFL starters: 2 (Walt Harris, Marc Colombo).

Had some moments, but ultimately failed: 3 (Grossman, Thierry, Haynes).

Busts: 5 (Salaam, Enis, McNown, Terrell, Benson).

Four of the 12 became consistent NFL starters, or better. An awful, awful track record. That is why Angelo, a career scout who has too often loved draft picks more than A-Rod loves himself, wasn't very emotional talking to me about what he gave up.

"I've kind of changed about draft choices, particularly first-rounders,'' Angelo told me. "I don't have the same conviction on ones that I used to. It's the money, the totally unrealistic expectations, players coming out younger and not as experienced, players with too much time on their hands and too much money and not being grounded enough. I've become a little pragmatic about the first-round picks. They've been looked at like the Holy Grail for so long. Here, we had a chance to get a quarterback who's already shown he can play really well in the league. He's a guy with resilience; you've got to be resilient playing at Vanderbilt and succeeding John Elway. So we felt like it was a good investment for us. Time will tell.''

That's the sign of a smart general manager. I didn't think Angelo had this kind of move in him, dealing a marginal starting quarterback and three high picks, leaving his team without a first-round pick for two-straight years. But it's a gamble any smart GM would make."

[Fritz]

I would paraphrase Angelo's logic for giving up two first rounders as follows: because first rounders are so expensive, and because I do not do well picking first rounders, I might as well give them up for players with a better track record.

[Dabaddestbear]

I would paraphrase Angelo's logic for giving up two first rounders as follows: because first rounders are so expensive, and because I do not do well picking first rounders, I might as well give them up for players with a better track record.
Hey, at least he can admit to his mishaps..lol.
How is TT doing with that? :wink:

[Fritz]

Actually, TT does rather well at that. He takes responsibility for failure and tries to give credit for success to others.

It's one of his strong suits.

[Spaulding]

I would paraphrase Angelo's logic for giving up two first rounders as follows: because first rounders are so expensive, and because I do not do well picking first rounders, I might as well give them up for players with a better track record.
Hey, at least he can admit to his mishaps..lol.
How is TT doing with that? :wink:

2005 - Rogers (all signs so far point to this being a pretty good pick)
2006 - Hawk (decent player who should be better but was injured last year - should be at a minimum a solid player for years)
2007 - Harrell (bust so far but since it's been injuries and not talent holding him back there is still at least a glimmer of hope)
2008 - None (traded down for Jordy and too hard to gauge a WR in one year)

If Harrell turns things on this year, I'd take TT's recent drafts against pretty much anybody else in the league. If Harrell doesn't pan out or goes on PUP or IR then I'd still say based on Rodgers and likely two other starters that at least it's in the middle of the pack - no pun intended.

[PlantPage55]

I would paraphrase Angelo's logic for giving up two first rounders as follows: because first rounders are so expensive, and because I do not do well picking first rounders, I might as well give them up for players with a better track record.
Hey, at least he can admit to his mishaps..lol.
How is TT doing with that? :wink:

Yay! Again with the misguided, incorrect rhetoric and flat-out lying!

[Dabaddestbear]

I would paraphrase Angelo's logic for giving up two first rounders as follows: because first rounders are so expensive, and because I do not do well picking first rounders, I might as well give them up for players with a better track record.
Hey, at least he can admit to his mishaps..lol.
How is TT doing with that? :wink:

2005 - Rogers (all signs so far point to this being a pretty good pick)
2006 - Hawk (decent player who should be better but was injured last year - should be at a minimum a solid player for years)
2007 - Harrell (bust so far but since it's been injuries and not talent holding him back there is still at least a glimmer of hope)
2008 - None (traded down for Jordy and too hard to gauge a WR in one year)

If Harrell turns things on this year, I'd take TT's recent drafts against pretty much anybody else in the league. If Harrell doesn't pan out or goes on PUP or IR then I'd still say based on Rodgers and likely two other starters that at least it's in the middle of the pack - no pun intended.
uh, I referred to his mishaps, and how have he CORRECTED them or admitted to them, and you post players he drafted. I think you misunderstood my post my friend.

[sharpe1027]

I would paraphrase Angelo's logic for giving up two first rounders as follows: because first rounders are so expensive, and because I do not do well picking first rounders, I might as well give them up for players with a better track record.

Makes you wonder just how much better, if at all, he is at evaluating players already in the NFL... :shock:

[Dabaddestbear]

I would paraphrase Angelo's logic for giving up two first rounders as follows: because first rounders are so expensive, and because I do not do well picking first rounders, I might as well give them up for players with a better track record.
Hey, at least he can admit to his mishaps..lol.
How is TT doing with that? :wink:

Yay! Again with the misguided, incorrect rhetoric and flat-out lying!
Ok, you are officially the dumbest Packer fan on here. What the hell did I say or quote that could be categorized as any of the above?

I will ignore your post and move on to the Packer fans that actually talk football instead of just spouting out nonsense like they have turrets syndrome. :?

[Dabaddestbear]

I would paraphrase Angelo's logic for giving up two first rounders as follows: because first rounders are so expensive, and because I do not do well picking first rounders, I might as well give them up for players with a better track record.

Makes you wonder just how much better, if at all, he is at evaluating players already in the NFL... :shock:
He is good in comparison to the going rate of other GMs for the later rounds. But I always hold my breath during the first round when he is picking.

[PlantPage55]

What the hell did I say or quote that could be categorized as any of the above?


Every year, an article comes out in which Ted Thompson goes through his draft after the season and that's where he admits mistakes and talks about things that he wishes he did better or addressed.

Listen, you're the one who comes in here and has the audacity (dictionary.com, just in case) to say that you evidently know more about the Packers than we do, just because you have a difference of opinion. Expect to be treated like the arrogant SOB that you act like.

[Zool]

2005 - Rogers (all signs so far point to this being a pretty good pick)
2006 - Hawk (decent player who should be better but was injured last year - should be at a minimum a solid player for years)
2007 - Harrell (bust so far but since it's been injuries and not talent holding him back there is still at least a glimmer of hope)
2008 - None (traded down for Jordy and too hard to gauge a WR in one year.

I realize this wasnt what DaBear was gettin at, but it got me thinking about Thompsons Seattle 1st round picks.

2000 - Shaun Alexander 19th
2000 - Chris McIntosh 22nd
2001 - Koren Robinson 9th
2001 - Steve Hutchinson 17th
2002 - Jerramy Stevens 28th
2003 - Marcus Trufant 11th
2004 - Marcus Tubbs 23rd

The draft really is a crap shoot.

[Dabaddestbear]

What the hell did I say or quote that could be categorized as any of the above?


Every year, an article comes out in which Ted Thompson goes through his draft after the season and that's where he admits mistakes and talks about things that he wishes he did better or addressed.

Listen, you're the one who comes in here and has the audacity (dictionary.com, just in case) to say that you evidently know more about the Packers than we do, just because you have a difference of opinion. Expect to be treated like the arrogant SOB that you act like.
I think you mistake my confidence for arrogance.
But you, just like the other brainiac still have not pointed out where TT has admitted his mistakes not by just saying something, but by showing something that reveals that they have learned from their mistakes. So until you find some info on that then we can debate THAT issue, if not, then you are lumped into that category of a rival fan that just screams something for the sake of being heard.

And do you really think it bothers me how I am treated on a message board online? lol. Blast away, I enjoy seeing small minds going to work to defame me. :wink:

[Dabaddestbear]

2005 - Rogers (all signs so far point to this being a pretty good pick)
2006 - Hawk (decent player who should be better but was injured last year - should be at a minimum a solid player for years)
2007 - Harrell (bust so far but since it's been injuries and not talent holding him back there is still at least a glimmer of hope)
2008 - None (traded down for Jordy and too hard to gauge a WR in one year.

I realize this wasnt what DaBear was gettin at, but it got me thinking about Thompsons Seattle 1st round picks.

2000 - Shaun Alexander 19th
2000 - Chris McIntosh 22nd
2001 - Koren Robinson 9th
2001 - Steve Hutchinson 17th
2002 - Jerramy Stevens 28th
2003 - Marcus Trufant 11th
2004 - Marcus Tubbs 23rd

The draft really is a crap shoot.
Thats pretty much what I have been trying to get at though in most of my post defending the trade for a few picks..lol.

[SnakeLH2006]

I would paraphrase Angelo's logic for giving up two first rounders as follows: because first rounders are so expensive, and because I do not do well picking first rounders, I might as well give them up for players with a better track record.
Hey, at least he can admit to his mishaps..lol.
How is TT doing with that? :wink:

Snake's going out on a limb here :roll: but methinks that Fritz is a pretty solid poster. Smart, funny, concise, and logical over a much longer period of time (not just randomly appearing with sporadic rants and outtakes when a "big trade" goes down)...Just sayin...

Back to topic: TT might not have a great draft record for top picks, and Snake is not debating that, but one thing is true....it's hard to say I've seen anyone in the history of forum posters with an uglier avatar. Now you might come back with that's just a farce of AJ Hawk and your deluded hatred of the Pack, then again, stats will show that 94% of avid forum posters associate the poster's avatar to their likeness. By all logic, you, sir, then, are one ugly ass bastard.

Snake's Take:

Based on your solid posting over the last week, yes, the Bears still suck, and you shame all fruitful and fun Bears fans I know.