Who got the better end of the JAY CUTLER trade?

Franchise QB trumps all. If you don't think much of Cutler that is one thing...but not too many QB's come along and have their first 3 statistical years like that...I'm just saying

Not even close, it's the Bears.

The Bears did. Drafts picks are an unproven commodity.

I agree franchise QB is the most important position. But to give up that price, alot of If's have to happen.

1. He has to continue to play well - will be in a new offense
2. He must not get a significant injury
3. He must be resigned long term (I don't think this will be a problem for the Bears)
4. He must make it to the Super Bowl

if these things happen, then the Bears got the better end of the deal. If not, then the Broncos got the better end.

The Broncos and it's not close. They get a starting QB in Orton, and 2 first round picks, and a 3rd round pick. Everyone knows Cutler>Orton. But Orton actually had a better record last year with a worse supporting cast offensively, so is Cutler so much better than Orton that the difference is 3 total picks, 2 in the 1st round? I don't think so. The Broncos are going to have 2 first round picks in each of the next 2 years, so they can rebuild their defense and pick their own guys. They're going to be able to get whoever they want on draft day.


I know Cutler's numbers were sick, but he was playing QB for a genius coach in Shanahan, with Brandon Marshall and Edde Royal. He's now going to a team whose best WR is Devin Hester, who might not even be the 3rd best WR on the broncos, his offensive line is still being built, and he's playing for a defensive coach. There's NO WAY he puts up 4500 yards and 25 TDs next year. No chance. Now lets see how Orton does now that he has some real receivers, a decent OL, and he plays in McDaniel's QB friendly offense.

Originally posted by kronik:
I agree franchise QB is the most important position. But to give up that price, alot of If's have to happen.

1. He has to continue to play well - will be in a new offense
2. He must not get a significant injury
3. He must be resigned long term (I don't think this will be a problem for the Bears)
4. He must make it to the Super Bowl

if these things happen, then the Bears got the better end of the deal. If not, then the Broncos got the better end.

I only agree with 1 and 3. Draft picks don't really guarantee much in terms of 2 and 4. Guys get injured all the time and completely f-up their development. As for a Super Bowl, never trading a draft pick policy is not known as a sure fire way to the Super Bowl.

Anyway, totally agree with #1 and #3. If, and this is a big IF...he turns out that his Denver years were his career years....stupid trade. Actually I am taking it step further, I think he needs to start playing better to really justify the trade...even a plateau would be kind of dissapointing.

And if somehow, his attitude pops up again and once again he goes public and later wants out of Chicago, then yeah bad trade.

Originally posted by danimal:

Originally posted by kronik:
I agree franchise QB is the most important position. But to give up that price, alot of If's have to happen.

1. He has to continue to play well - will be in a new offense
2. He must not get a significant injury
3. He must be resigned long term (I don't think this will be a problem for the Bears)
4. He must make it to the Super Bowl

if these things happen, then the Bears got the better end of the deal. If not, then the Broncos got the better end.

I only agree with 1 and 3. Draft picks don't really guarantee much in terms of 2 and 4. Guys get injured all the time and completely f-up their development. As for a Super Bowl, never trading a draft pick policy is not known as a sure fire way to the Super Bowl.

Anyway, totally agree with #1 and #3. If, and this is a big IF...he turns out that his Denver years were his career years....stupid trade. Actually I am taking it step further, I think he needs to start playing better to really justify the trade...even a plateau would be kind of dissapointing.

And if somehow, his attitude pops up again and once again he goes public and later wants out of Chicago, then yeah bad trade.

Yea, it's useless to argue over this because noone knows the future. But to me, if you trade away 2 1st's and a third, it means you better go DEEP in the playoffs. SO we can disagree on #4.

It will nice to see 2 or 3 years from now who got the better deal.

Orton might put up the same numbers as Cutler this year...

Originally posted by socalfan21:
Orton might put up the same numbers as Cutler this year...

I would agree, the bears don't have any WR.

Orton is a solid QB. The Bears gave up to much though. But if they win a Super Bowl it wouldn't matter.

I don't think the broncos see orton as their long term solution. I believe they will trade their two firsts for a top ten pick in order to get their future qb. Orton will start for a couple years while the youngster learns.

Ask me in a few years.

I don't think there is a better end of this trade. It makes great sense both ways. The Broncos HAD to trade Cutler and what they got in return was verrrry nice. And the Bears got a young stud QB that they have been lacking for decades.