Sam Or Cutler?
- Thread starter rfip the second
- Start date
-
To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2013
- Messages
- 29,798
I'm not, my friend. My criteria for evaluating a player just differs. You're signing Jay Cutler on January 2nd, 2014. I don't care what he did in 2008. I care what he did in 2012 and 2013 because that will most likely give me the best indication of what I should expect going forward. And in 2012 and 2013, Sam has been every bit as good as Cutler.
Getting past just that, I don't agree that Cutler was ever elite. It's my opinion but from watching him, I thought at his best in Denver...he was arguably at the tail end of the top 10. Since he's gone to Chicago, I haven't considered him a top 10 QB. He's average to above average for a starting QB. Right where I think Sam sits right now. Difference is that Sam is 26 years old. He has potential and hasn't hit his prime. Jay Cutler is 31 years old. He's near the end of his prime.
I also don't believe in giving contracts out based on what a guy has "earned" or what he "was". I believe when you give a contract out, it should be based on what the guy WILL BE. Because you're paying him for future play. Not his past play. His past play factors into your projections of his future play...but Cutler's recent past play has NOT been any better than Sam's.
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2012
- Messages
- 3,801
agree to disagree
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2013
- Messages
- 29,798
This is from the LAST TWO YEARS, and Bradford was every bit as good as Cutler.
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2012
- Messages
- 3,801
this argument is the most biased I've seen....why is the time frame 2 years? because its convenient to match your argument?
and while the ydg and tds are very close in this 2 year time frame...sam played like 6.5 games this year so its inconclusive as far as qbr yap and completion percentage are concerned
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2010
- Messages
- 6,226
- Name
- Tim
But your assertion that Sam is making elite money is flawed. At this point he MIGHT barely be in the top half of the highest paid QBs. That is not elite
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2013
- Messages
- 29,798
You know, you're right, it's best we just agree to disagree. It seems like you're dismissing things I say that don't align with your opinion. And that's fine but it doesn't make for a healthy discussion.
Using the last 2 years is far from biased, it's logical and quite normal. Especially when the two players have a similar number of attempts and completions.
And it's far from inconclusive, they have around the same sample size in terms of passes(around 800) and there is little difference between the two statistically.
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2010
- Messages
- 6,226
- Name
- Tim
Totally agree with this and to add to it the talent Cutler has played with over the past two years is superior to that which Bradford has played with.
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2013
- Messages
- 29,798
[profootballtalk.nbcsports.com]
Cutler’s deal is three years, $54 million, with year-to-year option thereafter
Posted by Mike Florio on January 2, 2014, 10:14 PM EST
The first leaked details of the Jay Cutler contract put the average value for the first three years at $18 million, with $54 million guaranteed.
The details were accurate. Per a source with knowledge of the deal, Cutler will make $54 million over the next three years, with a rolling guarantee that starts at $17.5 million upon signing, increases to $38 million on March 14, 2014, moves to $48 million in March 2015, and caps out at $54 million in March 2016.
The deal contains no signing bonus, creating a pay-as-you-go series of cap charges for the Bears, based only on his base salaries.
In 2014, Cutler will earn a base salary of $22.5 million. In 2015, the base salary is $15.5 million. In 2016, it increases to $16 million.
After 2016, the deal becomes a year-to-year, no-cap-hit proposition, with salaries of $12.5 million in 2017, $13.5 million in 2018, $17.5 million in 2019, and $19.2 million in 2020. In each of those four seasons, Cutler earns $156,250 for each game he appears on the active roster, for a maximum additional earnings of $2.5 million per year and $10 million over four.
Thus, he’ll get the full $126.7 million only if he’s on the active roster for every game from 2017 through 2020.
The contract also has an annual de-escalator of $500,000 based on participating in the offseason workout program. If he fails to show up, the base salary reduces accordingly.
It’s a real three-year, $54 million contract, with a team-held option at lower rates for each of the next four years.
Under three years of the franchise tag, Cutler would have earned more than $60 million. He therefore reduced by more than 10 percent his total haul in exchange for shedding the injury risk.
Cutler also has shifted most of the risk of poor performance, with the Bears most likely to pay him $48 million over two years.
Is it the best possible deal Cutler could have done? No. But it’s a very good deal under the circumstances, it keeps him in Chicago for the next three years at $18 million annually, and it gives the Bears the annual right thereafter to decide whether to keep him or to walk away.
Cutler’s deal is three years, $54 million, with year-to-year option thereafter
Posted by Mike Florio on January 2, 2014, 10:14 PM EST
The first leaked details of the Jay Cutler contract put the average value for the first three years at $18 million, with $54 million guaranteed.
The details were accurate. Per a source with knowledge of the deal, Cutler will make $54 million over the next three years, with a rolling guarantee that starts at $17.5 million upon signing, increases to $38 million on March 14, 2014, moves to $48 million in March 2015, and caps out at $54 million in March 2016.
The deal contains no signing bonus, creating a pay-as-you-go series of cap charges for the Bears, based only on his base salaries.
In 2014, Cutler will earn a base salary of $22.5 million. In 2015, the base salary is $15.5 million. In 2016, it increases to $16 million.
After 2016, the deal becomes a year-to-year, no-cap-hit proposition, with salaries of $12.5 million in 2017, $13.5 million in 2018, $17.5 million in 2019, and $19.2 million in 2020. In each of those four seasons, Cutler earns $156,250 for each game he appears on the active roster, for a maximum additional earnings of $2.5 million per year and $10 million over four.
Thus, he’ll get the full $126.7 million only if he’s on the active roster for every game from 2017 through 2020.
The contract also has an annual de-escalator of $500,000 based on participating in the offseason workout program. If he fails to show up, the base salary reduces accordingly.
It’s a real three-year, $54 million contract, with a team-held option at lower rates for each of the next four years.
Under three years of the franchise tag, Cutler would have earned more than $60 million. He therefore reduced by more than 10 percent his total haul in exchange for shedding the injury risk.
Cutler also has shifted most of the risk of poor performance, with the Bears most likely to pay him $48 million over two years.
Is it the best possible deal Cutler could have done? No. But it’s a very good deal under the circumstances, it keeps him in Chicago for the next three years at $18 million annually, and it gives the Bears the annual right thereafter to decide whether to keep him or to walk away.
RaminExile
Hall of Fame
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2013
- Messages
- 3,065
Sam for me over the INT machine thanks.
The Rammer
ESPN Draft Guru
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2011
- Messages
- 2,400
- Name
- Rick
Actually I didn't read the posts I just commented on the damned poll here in dis der thread. I have me a feeling your NJRamsFan from Clanram! Welcome! lol No Avenger Ram to pee in your cereal here
moklerman
Warner-phile
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2011
- Messages
- 2,185
I'm sure having a hard time understanding how you value statistics. You're valuing a yardage total from 5 years ago and discounting passer rating, completion percentage and yards per attempt from the last two years? I don't get it at all.
You're basically looking at the exact opposite of what you should be looking at. Jrry32's posted some very pertinent numbers and I agree with Blackbart that the personnel each has had to work with as paramount in any comparison.
Now, I will say that I think Trestman's system coupled with Jeffrey's emergence will certainly benefit Cutler in the coming years and his improvement this year may be what they're basing this new contract on. His 63% completion and 5.4% TD% were both strong indicators that Cutler can potentially become the QB that everyone thought his physical abilities would allow. His interception rate is still far too high but I presume that McCown's stellar play has motivated Cutler in addition to whatever focus the coaches might be giving him.
But I think Bradford's in for big things too. His 5.3% TD rate was borderline elite and his hypothetical 6.4% or higher considering the 2+ TD's that didn't count but that he actually made the play on coupled with his career best 1.5% INT rate all add up to 2014 being a big statistical year for Bradford. Stacy, Austin and Bailey will pay huge dividends and Bradford, IMO, will continue with the type of play that he showed those last 3 games. So, with lesser weapons(no one's going to argue that Marshall/Jeffrey/Forte isn't as good as the Rams have, right?) Bradford's been putting up TD's at an equitable rate to Cutler and throwing a lot fewer interceptions. That makes a strong case for Bradford doing something better than Cutler.
Rams and Gators
Legend
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2013
- Messages
- 5,808
Bottom line is it doesn't matter what Jay Cutler does. What matters is what Sam Bradford does, Sam is being paid a reasonable amount for a top 10 QB who starts 16 games per season. So far he's never put the two together, I'm opposed to drafting a QB this year, but if next year he can't combine the two then I'm looking at drafting a QB in the first round.
LesBaker
Mr. Savant
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2012
- Messages
- 17,460
- Name
- Les
Today I would take Bradford because of the age difference.
Overall Cutler has had a better career though, and certainly had a better first four years.
I don't know why the comparison, other than salary, is important. Bradford has to play QB better for the Rams regardless of how much money Jay Cutler gets paid by the Bears. If this is an argument to solidify some status for Bradford it isn't working.
Overall Cutler has had a better career though, and certainly had a better first four years.
I don't know why the comparison, other than salary, is important. Bradford has to play QB better for the Rams regardless of how much money Jay Cutler gets paid by the Bears. If this is an argument to solidify some status for Bradford it isn't working.