past performance helps reasonably determine what to expect from a player moving forward. do you honestly expect orlando pace to play like a HOF left tackle this year? if you do, then you adjust the value you place on him, and more importantly, what you would pay him, accordingly. but if you don't think he'll play like a HOF left tackle at any point during his tenure on your team, then you don't pay him like one just because he played at that level years ago. today, i wouldn't buy a 1990 honda accord for more than a few hundred dollars despite how well it performed during the last 19 years. why? because it's reasonable to expect that, moving forward, the car won't be as useful (and valuable) as it once was, and any money i put into it is money that i can't put into a different, better car.

do you expect albert haynesworth to play at the level he did last year for the entirety of his seven year contract? if not, then you scale down what you're willing to pay him so that it is more in line with what you expect him to produce during his seven years with you. the redskins bought albert haynesworth high. and the bears are buying jay cutler high. he's young, so they stand to get more value out of him than washington will haynesworth. but the reality is is that the bears bought cutler when his price was highest, and in so doing, sacrificed the opportunity to buy three top-end talents when their respective prices would have been lowest. that's bad asset management.

That's not what you said. You said . Now you're saying it reasonably helps?
Before you said Cutler is marginally better than Orton, now you admit that he isindeed better. You keep changing your story here.

So what is the value of Pro-bowl QB that is 25, considering that more than 1/3 of the teams are interested and that there are no others. And the price you're paying is basically a 1st rounder who may or may not be good and a sub-mediocre QB. I disagree that 1st round rookies are at their lowest value. Their value is inflated because of their status, not they're marginally better talent than 2nd rounders.

They were before the trade

Missing the playoffs 2 years in a row after the SB...

note i said securely... as in they were on the hot seat and are both now tied to JC. almost like he's a savior, wierd synergy there.

can we pick this up next week?

i'm headed home for the day, and out of town for the weekend.

Spoiler: show

...guess that wasn't really a question.

who's the bears OC/qb coach?

Ron Turner - OC
Pep Hamilton - QB Coach

Sure dude, whenever you're ready. I haven't checked since Friday afternoon either. Happy hour, then saturday, then...

i'm of the opinion that cutler is overrated, and that while he is an improvement over orton, it's not enough of an improvement to warrant the price paid for him. cutler threw for a bunch of yards, but denver was 16th in scoring. he struggles on third downs and in the red zone (when the value of the QBs play is magnified). his numbers, when broken down, get worse as the game goes on. outside of shanahan's first fifteen scripted plays, his rating was below orton's. he'll get you twelve yards on third and fifteen.

i guess i should define what i think a good QB is, and why i think cutler is overrated. first and foremost, i want a QB that is mentally tough, an intelligent player (with high interpersonal and football IQs) who acts like a second coach on the field and plays faster than he times (so to speak). i want my QB to be the hardest working player on the team and set a tone for what it is to be a professional. i'm also of the opinion that while, yes, players grow and mature, a leopard doesn't change his spots. i put as much stock in a QBs intangibles as i do his measureables. and jay cutler's measureables are off the charts. but his behavior - from as far back as vanderbilt - makes me doubt he'll ever be anything more than jeff george or drew bledsoe, guys w/ all the talent in the world but supbar mental makeups that will always hold back what their teams are able to achieve.

and re: past performance, it is relevant only insofar as it provides a baseline for what a player has done (as distinct from what they will do as a prospective member of your team).


cutler definitely has value. but again, you're only looking at his total value, not his marginal value. his marginal value is only what he brings to the table that kyle orton doesn't.

and though i disagree, i'll go with your proposition that first-rounders are overvalued (why do i think you wouldn't feel this way if every pick the bears made was as good as the urlacher pick?). but 31 other teams disagree with this, and to the extent that some of those 31 teams would want the bears' first rounder, chicago, in acquiring cutler, is foregoing what they could get in a trade for a first rounder. if, as you say, angelo is much better in the third, fourth, fifth, etc rounds than he is in the first, then trading TWO firsts is akin to trading however many seconds, thirds, fourths, fifths, etc those firsts could have gotten in draft-day deals. if chicago retains the 18th pick, what could they have reasonably expected in return if they chose to move down several times? if they moved to the late first, they'd pick up at least an additional second or third. and if they moved down again, they'd pick up at least another second or third. so by including two firsts, angelo is foregoing all the players that could have been selected with the lower-round picks that could have been acquired for dealing the first.

for chicago, i think the value of cutler was probably somewhere around a second and a third, or maybe a first and fourth or fifth.

You know another quarterback that was caught around with a bottle of Jack Daniels in his hand with his arms around woman hammered no more than 2 years ago? Kyle Orton. And he has a number of legendary pictures of his "vacations" up to Iowa University as well. So if you want to talk about "maturity" you have to go both ways.

From what i've read and heard, Cutler's leadership and the ability to be a good teammate has been praised starting from his days at Vanderbilt. So i really don't know what you're are referencing there. I've actually haven't heard anything bad about Culter until what went down weeks ago. Shanahan praised him constantly, and that's an opinion i could value. Not some assistant from the Patriots who has done nothing but run out a franchise quarterback.

You need to take your economic hat off thodoks. Even if you think the trade itself was lost by the Bears (eventhough its not, see my comments on the Bears ability to draft late), at the end of the day, the deal had to be made. The Bears will be better in the long run knowing that they will be in the hunt every year from this point on because they have a top 10 quarterback. That can't be discounted, yet you not only discount it, you ignore it.

nowhere did i say that kyle orton was the answer, that he was the quarterback the bears needed to build around. arguing against the cutler acquisition is not the same as arguing for kyle orton.


so this assistant knows nothing about how to evaluate quarterbacks, eh? is that your argument? tom brady and, more importantly, matt cassel, might beg to differ. and that cutler is so thin-skinned to pack up shop at the FIRST hint of adversity doesn't really speak to his mental toughness. to top it off, after the trade he specifically says, "I didn't want to get traded." this isn't exactly a testament to his razor sharp intelligence or ability to process logically.

like i said, cutler has all the measureables. million dollar body, ten cent head.


like it or not, football in the salary cap era is about business. it's about taking a long-term view and understanding how to evaluate talent, manage assets, and make sound economic and business decisions. teams that do this well (pittsburgh, indy, new england, etc) consistently contend. teams that do not (detroit, cincy, etc) consistently fail. mortgaging your future to acquire one player is bad long-term business.


*sigh*

dealing three high picks using the rationale, "well, angelo sucks in the first round anyway" is silly. dealing high picks for veterans, as a policy, is solving the wrong problem. make better first round selections. take joe flacco over chris williams. take ty warren over michael haynes. take anquan boldin over rex grossman. if angelo better identifies first-round talent, this isn't an issue.

hey team, let's just agree to disagree.

does chicago play new england this year?

But you did say he was only marginally better than Orton, and your reasoning at part to do with his maturity. He was also part of the deal which is what we're evaluating.



I'm not saying he knows nothing, but we all know Beliciek is the brains behind the Patriots success. Just look at the cast aways after they left New England. (Romeo, Weiss, Maginini, only the guy from Miami has shown anything, but it could be a fluke.) John Elway was another guy that you could have said had poor mental toughness. It's something you can't quanitify and is very dangerous to say that is the reason for not getting a guy. Again, I haven't heard a word about Cutler's "mental toughness" till now. All of a sudden he's not mentally tough after being in the league for 3 years? Not buying that for a second.



That's not something you can prove and not something to judge a trade on when a lot of people who have been around him say otherwise including Mike Shanahan.



There is nothing in the economic sector that can be compared to the value of a legit quarterback in the NFL. You can't do it. And when i've tried to explain why this would be beneficial financially to the Bears you haven't responded. Cutler has in no way affected the Bears future in a negative way. First round picks are only marginally more secure than later round picks. The Bears have enough picks this year to mitigate the picks lost. You have to look at what the Bears can do without and have plenty of to truly understand why the deal was a good one. Not to mention the extra revenue Cutler will bring the Bears just for being a decent quarterback. I guess you have to be a Bears fan to understand the last sentence.



I never said "because Angelo sucks picking first rounders its okay." It is clearly an ideology he has that more late round picks are more valuable than firsts. An ideology that is adopted by GM's across the NFL, other than Angelo. I've said that many times also.

I agree lets disagree, we're just repeating the same points now anyways

We don't play the Pats until a (hopeful) rematch of Superbowl XX.

Speaking of Econ thread, Thodoks, can I PM a question.

Looks like about 1/2 the first round is busts. And of the last 10 taken at the Bears old draft position (18), only 1 *might* be special.

And it says that many scouts are saying that this is a weak class of 1st rounders too.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/fo ... f=outbrain

Now that the realities of the Jay Cutler trade are settling in, the Bears have to come to grips with the fact they will not have a first-round draft pick in two weeks.

And they will not have one next year.

This is not, however, necessarily a portent to disaster.

You can make the argument that a first-round pick is not what it used to be. In fact, Bears general manager Jerry Angelo has.

"I have rethought their value," Angelo said. "I don't want to say I am undervaluing them. But I'm not overvaluing them [either]. You still want first-round picks, you love to have them. But I'm trying to be more realistic about them."

What will the Bears be missing? In this draft, maybe not much. NFL scouts agree this is one of the weaker draft classes they have seen in a while, and it is particularly weak at the top.

The Bears were to pick 18th in the first round. Of the last 10 players chosen with the 18th selection, four — Matt Stinchcomb, T.J. Duckett, Erasmus James and Bobby Carpenter—have been disappointments. Five— Chad Pennington, Jeff Backus, Calvin Pace, Will Smith and Leon Hall—became decent starters but not stars. Only one— Joe Flacco — looks like he might be a special player.

"Close to 50 percent of the picks in the first round are busts, and of those who are not, about half of them become rank-and-file players," Angelo said.

Some of the problems with first-rounders, as Angelo sees it:

•Expectations are unrealistically high. If a first-round pick is anything less than All-Pro, he often is labeled a "bust."

•They are paid an inordinate amount of money that many never justify. There is talk of a rookie wage scale being part of the next collective bargaining agreement, and that would address this issue.

•A large percentage of first-rounders are juniors, and many of them are not ready to play in the NFL. This year as many as 17 underclassmen could be taken in the first round — more than half of the selections.

•With the way coaches and schemes change so frequently, first-round picks often are obsolete by the time they figure out what they are doing.

•There is a large group of players, maybe 25, who could be considered late first-rounders or early second-rounders. There isn't much difference between the best and the worst in the group, and the ones picked in the second round will be more affordable and face lower expectations.

•Injuries that can't be predicted can derail the careers of first-round draft picks. It has happened to the Bears repeatedly.

Chris Williams never missed a game in college, but he had almost his entire rookie season wiped out by a back injury. Rex Grossman had no health issues at Florida, but he was injured three times in his first three seasons. And the worst part was he had two leg injuries that took away his mobility and made him a lesser player.

Marc Colombo didn't have any medical issues of note at Boston College, but he started only seven games in four years for the Bears because of a horrific knee injury.

When you consider all the factors, first-round picks might not be all they are cracked up to be.

Cutler insurance: While most Chicagoans were high-fiving, chest-bumping and making strange, high-pitched noises April 2, the Bears quietly were working to sign Orlando Pace as protection for Cutler's blind side.

After John Tait decided to retire and John St. Clair bolted for the Browns, the Bears' offensive line suddenly had gaping holes.

Now the Bears' offensive line looks as solid as it has in a number of years. In addition to Pace, the Bears have added tackle Kevin Shaffer, a 29-year-old five-year starter who likely will be a backup and Frank Omiyale, an up-and-comer who is expected to start at left guard.

Pace is a superior player to St. Clair, who played left tackle last season. Williams, the new right tackle, has the potential to be a better player than Tait. And Shaffer is better than any backup on the roster last season, as well as better than St. Clair.

St. Clair allowed 9.75 sacks last season, according to Stats, Inc. Pace allowed two. He shut out Miami's Joey Porter and Atlanta's John Abraham, who combined for 34 sacks in 2008.

Pace remains a superior pass protector with quick feet. But two front-office men said he no longer is a very good run blocker because his lower-body strength has fallen off.

That's where Omiyale comes in. If he starts next to Pace, Omiyale can help the run game because he is bigger and more physical than Josh Beekman, the 2008 starter.

The other issue with Pace is durability. Over the last three seasons he has missed 25 games with triceps, shoulder and knee injuries. That's what makes Shaffer valuable.

As a starter on the right side for the Browns last year, Shaffer allowed 4.5 sacks. Tait allowed six for the Bears.

Tank rolls on: After two uneventful seasons in Dallas, Tank Johnson walked off the field in Philadelphia at the conclusion of the Cowboys' last game of the season, a 44-6 spanking by the Eagles.

But that didn't quell his spirits. "I'm a free agent, baby!" he yelled.

It may have been the most foolish thing he had done since the Bears cut him.

Being a free agent wasn't so exciting for Johnson, as there was minimal interest in his services. He ended up signing a one-year deal last week with the Bengals for the veteran minimum of $620,000. He received a signing bonus of $25,000 and can collect a workout bonus of $25,000.

It was a no-lose deal for Cincinnati, as the Bengals can cut their losses without taking a big financial hit if Johnson doesn't work out.

The Bengals believe Johnson can help them. He didn't do much for the Cowboys, in part because he was out of position as a nose tackle in a 3-4 front. But with Cincinnati, the plan is to try him at three technique in a four-man front.

Bengals defensive coordinator Mike Zimmer studied tape of Johnson playing the three technique in Chicago (Johnson played both the nose and three technique for the Bears) and liked what he saw.

"We're hoping we get the guy we saw in Chicago on the field," Zimmer said. "I had La'Roi Glover when I was in Dallas. Hopefully, he can kind of be like Glover."

The Bengals' incumbent three technique is Pat Sims. At 320 pounds, Sims is powerful, but he doesn't have the quickness and ability to rush the passer that Johnson has.

Before signing Johnson, Bengals coach Marvin Lewis made some phone calls to Halas Hall. And Zimmer spoke with Johnson's teammates and coaches in Dallas. The reviews were positive.

Then the Bengals met with Johnson.

"I told him what I expected of him, how I expected him to act, what I think we might have going here," Zimmer said. "I want to find out if he can improve our pass rush up the middle. We felt like it was worth the risk."

Going to training camp on Monday. I'm psyched!

2 points at half time, cutler tosses 4 interceptions, urlacher out for the year, and now heading into a game with the Steelers.

Things might be getting ugly around Chicago...

Injuries aside, I hope things get uglier for Chicago. I'll make it up to you guys next year.