[Speculation] Sage to the Jets?

[nero THE zero]

Originally Posted by Joshua

I vaguely remember Sage playing the Colts this past year. I thought that game ended badly, but I must be mistaken since dale is adamant that he's the guy to take on the Colts next year in week 14.

In all seriousness, my first point would be that your hypothetical is tailormade for your viewpoint. It is also possible that Sage never sees the field and then leaves as a free agent for nothing. But accepting your hypothetical, because Sage is so turnover-prone, I really don't think he gives us that much better chance to win than some of these others. On this we will just have to agree to disagree. However, I think Sage's play last year supports my point. He went 2-4 and his turnovers were killers. I don't think Sage played significantly better than most would have given the same opportunity last year.

Well said.

I think the main issue of contention here isn't the value of the back-up QB position, as Barrett and Dale maintain, but the value of Sage himself.

[dalemurphy]

Originally Posted by nero THE zero

I can only hope that some other team's GM thinks as highly of Sage as you do.

It's only February and you've already forgetten the biggest meltdown in Texan history at the hands of the Rosencopter.

I was at the game and it almost killed me. However, I don't grade him by that ending anymore than I do his incredible comeback against Tennessee in 2007. He's a very good backup and he gives us an excellent chance to win if our starter is out. I think that is more important that a 5th round pick.

[cadams]

Originally Posted by dalemurphy

If it is week #14 and the Texans are 8-4 and playing the Indy Colts for the division lead and MSchaub is out two weeks with a cracked rib, I'll take Sage Rosenfels and you can have anybody on that list of yours plus a 5th round pick... Do you really like your situation better than starting Sage Rosenfels. Don't forget, this is Sage's 4th year in this offense, throwing to this group of receivers. That's significant!

in that scenario i wouldn't have a problem with one of those guys over sage. the fact of the matter is that they will live and die by schaub's health. please don't forget about the rosencopter and the other 3 turnovers he had against indy last year. he does have experience with the receivers, but he has been a backup his whole career for a reason. if you could get a 4th for him jump on it, because i would trade a back up player for a potential started everyday of the week

[jcp]

Originally Posted by dalemurphy

I was at the game and it almost killed me. However, I don't grade him by that ending anymore than I do his incredible comeback against Tennessee in 2007. He's a very good backup and he gives us an excellent chance to win if our starter is out. I think that is more important that a 5th round pick.

For a fifth I agree, but if we can find a team willing to part with a 3...

[dalemurphy]

Originally Posted by jcp

For a fifth I agree, but if we can find a team willing to part with a 3...

I would've done the deal for a 2nd last year. I actually got excited about a Sage trade when they picked up the guy from Jacksonville (can't remember his name)... I'd do it for a 3rd this year but only if they had a reasonable plan in place for a backup- not Craig Nall, not a late round rookie.

[barrett]

I'd do it for a 4th. Maybe even an early 5th. I just doubt Kubiak will. We likely won't see a huge short term payoff from a 2nd day pick, and Kubs is coaching for his job next year. Young potential does not do him any good.

Either way I think you'll see another QB in place ahead of time if they have any intention of dealing (like Gray last year).

[Roy P]

Originally Posted by barrett

I just doubt Kubiak will. We likely won't see a huge short term payoff from a 2nd day pick, and Kubs is coaching for his job next year. Young potential does not do him any good.

That's why we have a GM. In theory, the GM is supposed to make decisions that makes the team better for the long haul. Basically, we are under the impression that Smith works for Kubiak around here. What is the possibility that the GM fires the coach, but we keep the GM?

[Bigtinylittle]

Originally Posted by barrett

I'd do it for a 4th. Maybe even an early 5th. I just doubt Kubiak will. We likely won't see a huge short term payoff from a 2nd day pick, and Kubs is coaching for his job next year. Young potential does not do him any good.

Either way I think you'll see another QB in place ahead of time if they have any intention of dealing (like Gray last year).

I know there was a rumor last year that Minnesota offered a 3rd for Sage, and it seems like everone in town besides me accepts it as fact. Rumors get started all the time for all sorts of reasons. Sportswriters start them sometimes just to have something to write about (think Richard Justice). Agents start them just to grease the wheels for their clients. I wouldn't even be surprised if owners and GMs start false rumors. Anyway, unless I find out otherwise, I'm going to assume there's a good chance that offer was never actually made.

I personally think that these days Sage's stock has fallen below his real talent level. It's interesting how much difference a year makes. A year ago many fans were saying that we wasted a couple of draft choices and a lot of cap space on Schaub and that Sage could easily handle the starter position. Some of those same people no longer even want him as a BACKUP.

I agree he played about as poor a quarter last year as any I have ever seen. I also think he played three good quarters in that same game. Sage is neither as bad as he looked at times last year or as good as he appeared to be to many fans two years ago. But he's a cheap and fairly reliable backup. Those who cite his win-loss record last year should think about what kind of record they expect from a backup QB who is playing on a team with the league's twenty seventh best defense.

I just don't see him being traded for a low draft choice.

[barrett]

Originally Posted by Roy P

That's why we have a GM. In theory, the GM is supposed to make decisions that makes the team better for the long haul. Basically, we are under the impression that Smith works for Kubiak around here. What is the possibility that the GM fires the coach, but we keep the GM?

you got to let the guy buy his groceries.

It's his sink or swim year, so I bet he doesn't get over ridden on small decisions like that.

[nero THE zero]

10/21/07: L vs. TEN (10-6)
10/28/07: L @ SD (11-5)
11/04/07: W @ OAK (4-12)
12/02/07: L @ TEN (10-6)
12/09/07: W vs. TB (9-7)
12/13/07: W vs. DEN (7-9)
12/23/07: L @ IND (13-3)
12/30/07: W vs. JAC (11-5)

10/05/08: L vs. IND (12-4)
11/02/08: L @ MIN (10-6)
11/09/08: L vs. BAL (11-5)
11/16/08: L @ IND (12-4)
11/23/08: W @ CLE (4-12)
12/01/08: W @ JAC (5-11)

A lot of people place a high value on Sage because of Matt's inability to stay on the field and the perception that Sage plays well when Matt goes down. But, that doesn't really seem to be the case. In games that Sage has played a significant role, the team went 6-8. They went 4-0 against teams with losing records and 2-8 against teams with winning records. That's also 2-8 against playoff teams.

I'm not a huge proponent of placing a W-L value on QBs, but I think this puts some serious perspective on Sage's actual value to the team versus his perceived value.

[barrett]

you explained it perfectly in your post. Every loss is to a 10+ win team. We generally lose to those teams anyways. almost all of the teams he beat are average or bad. Again, generally how we play with Schaub. So by your own stats we don't face a big let down when Sage comes on the field.

I think Sage is nowhere near Schaub as a QB, and I think the more he plays the more his returns diminish because he takes so many chances that the more a team prepares for him the more they will take advantage of him. This is what makes him a bad full-time starter. But as a last minute spot starter, or reliever, there are almost no backups I'd rather have. He will move the ball and give us a chance to win. If you guys think any old scrap heap vet accomplishes the same, we will simply have to disagree. Especially since he is 4 years in the offense.

But the bottom line is if there are so many equal or greater backup QBs in the NFL, then why would any team oblige you in your trade scenario and give up a pick for him? Why not just sign Jeff Garcia or someone else. Your argument is flawed if you say on the one hand we can get a pick for him, and on the other he is instantly replaced with no effort.

[Joshua]

Originally Posted by barrett

But the bottom line is if there are so many equal or greater backup QBs in the NFL, then why would any team oblige you in your trade scenario and give up a pick for him? Why not just sign Jeff Garcia or someone else. Your argument is flawed if you say on the one hand we can get a pick for him, and on the other he is instantly replaced with no effort.

First, I think you're right that no one will offer much for him. However, to address your point, where I think you somewhat go wrong here is the assumption that both the Texans and the team they are trading with are looking for a backup QB. If that were the case, I agree with your point. However, I think most are operating under the assumption that the team trading for Sage view him as a potential starter. That's where the difference in value comes in.

[barrett]

Originally Posted by Joshua

First, I think you're right that no one will offer much for him. However, to address your point, where I think you somewhat go wrong here is the assumption that both the Texans and the team they are trading with are looking for a backup QB. If that were the case, I agree with your point. However, I think most are operating under the assumption that the team trading for Sage view him as a potential starter. That's where the difference in value comes in.

Further up the page Nero already stated that the argument is about how valuable sage is, not how valuable a backup QB is.

I just don't see any team offering enough to make it worth getting rid of him. I think his value is greater to us than any other team since he has been in our system for 4 years and we often need a backup to come in.

As for other teams, I don't think any are looking at the off-season thinking, "If only we can pry Sage Rosenfels away from the Texans..."

[nero THE zero]

Originally Posted by barrett

Further up the page Nero already stated that the argument is about how valuable sage is, not how valuable a backup QB is.

I just don't see any team offering enough to make it worth getting rid of him. I think his value is greater to us than any other team since he has been in our system for 4 years and we often need a backup to come in.

As for other teams, I don't think any are looking at the off-season thinking, "If only we can pry Sage Rosenfels away from the Texans..."

There's always teams that will place a different value on a player than you will. There's a balance of need and perceived value that you have to take into account. We have a starting QB and his name is Matt Schaub. We have a back-up QB who has flashed the ability to be a good player. Obviously, after this season, Sage's value will not be nearly as high as it was after the 2007 season. But, that's not to say that there's not a team out there without a starting QB (Jets, Chiefs, Vikings, etc.) that thinks they could take a veteran player who has flashed with other teams into their starting guy.

Remember, my premise isn't necessarily that Sage is a bad player. I think that due to his Thursday night game, his near comeback against the Tacks, and being in the position that affords him to be the most popular guy in town he is . He's simply not untradeable he is overvalued by some. But the job he does as our back-up QB can be done by many other veteran retreads. Do you not think that a Kyle Boller couldn't come in here and throw 3 picks in a loss to double digit wins teams whilst looking like the second coming of Joe Montana against the 4 win Browns?

I don't think that a team would give up a high pick for him. But, if the Jets came calling with a fourth or fifth round pick I think it's a no-brainer. Fact is, what Sage has done for us isn't inrreplacable and if you can get a decent pick for him you take it. Building a good team often entails taking commodities (re: decent back-up players with trade potential) and dealing them.

[jppaul]

I would trade Sage for a 4th but I don't think I would go for a 5th for several reasons. He may be a turnover machine but he is a better backup than most, Schuab is a good QB but is fragile, Sage knows the system and has actually won some games for us, the 5th round has not been all that profitable for us as far as finding diamonds in the rough. For the foregoing I say keep him for another year.

[barrett]

Originally Posted by nero THE zero

There's always teams that will place a different value on a player than you will. There's a balance of need and perceived value that you have to take into account. We have a starting QB and his name is Matt Schaub. We have a back-up QB who has flashed the ability to be a good player. Obviously, after this season, Sage's value will not be nearly as high as it was after the 2007 season. But, that's not to say that there's not a team out there without a starting QB (Jets, Chiefs, Vikings, etc.) that thinks they could take a veteran player who has flashed with other teams into their starting guy.

Remember, my premise isn't necessarily that Sage is a bad player. I think that due to his Thursday night game, his near comeback against the Tacks, and being in the position that affords him to be the most popular guy in town he is . He's simply not untradeable he is overvalued by some. But the job he does as our back-up QB can be done by many other veteran retreads. Do you not think that a Kyle Boller couldn't come in here and throw 3 picks in a loss to double digit wins teams whilst looking like the second coming of Joe Montana against the 4 win Browns?

I don't think that a team would give up a high pick for him. But, if the Jets came calling with a fourth or fifth round pick I think it's a no-brainer. Fact is, what Sage has done for us isn't inrreplacable and if you can get a decent pick for him you take it. Building a good team often entails taking commodities (re: decent back-up players with trade potential) and dealing them.

No Boller could not come in and do it. He could not win on a winning team. A rookie QB who completed 50% of his passes (Flacco) looked good on a team Boller was terrible with. Troy Smith looked better than Boller when he played. You are dreaming if you think Boller plays anywhere near the level of Sage or any other decent NFL backup.

As for the Jets coming to offer a 4th or a 5th, it will never happen. They only gave up a 4th for Brett Favre. The shine is way off of Sage from where it was in 2007. We'd be luck to get a 6th right now. He is worth more on our team than he is off of it right now.

[nero THE zero]

Originally Posted by barrett

No Boller could not come in and do it. He could not win on a winning team. A rookie QB who completed 50% of his passes (Flacco) looked good on a team Boller was terrible with. Troy Smith looked better than Boller when he played. You are dreaming if you think Boller plays anywhere near the level of Sage or any other decent NFL backup.

As for the Jets coming to offer a 4th or a 5th, it will never happen. They only gave up a 4th for Brett Favre. The shine is way off of Sage from where it was in 2007. We'd be luck to get a 6th right now. He is worth more on our team than he is off of it right now.

746 1,311 56.9% 45 44
351 562 62.5% 30 29
511 913 56% 35 30
558 941 59.3% 33 34

Markedly different players. Don't know what I was thining.