Ali G Bomaye

April 1st, 2009 at 7:17 PM ^

Why would the Lions NOT trade for Cutler? He's a much better option than any QB in the draft, and they can beat any bid for him. If they wanted to, they could probably even get him without giving up the #1 pick.

david from wyoming

April 1st, 2009 at 7:24 PM ^

There is no reason to trade for any QB since the lions don't have an OL. Get a good few picks on the OL, win 3 or 4 games next year and use a top 5 pick next year to take a QB. Denver isn't going to give up Cutler for a ham sandwich. When the lions needs to fix every spot on the field, trading away draft picks is silly.

CottonPickin M…

April 1st, 2009 at 7:59 PM ^

Do you think Cutler is worth trading the #1 pick overall? A guy who hasn't even played in a playoff game. Nor is he even .500 as a starting quarterback. IMO we should trade the 20th pick and one of our three 3rd round picks for him. Then draft Curry or Jason smith first overall.

WolerineJoe

April 2nd, 2009 at 10:55 AM ^

Have 2 third round picks. Not three. I would be happy if they traded for Jay Cutler, but it is not the biggest thing we need right now. I also would be happy if we drafted Matt Stafford. I think that he will be just as good as Jay Cutler. Really with all the options that we have I would be happy with most of the options.

heisman2

April 1st, 2009 at 8:13 PM ^

Denver doesn't want to have to pay the #1 overall pick. The Lions can trade the 20th and next years 1st round pick, but then they would have to pay Cutler and the #1 overall pick. It's a matter of whether the Lions want to pay Cutler and the #1 overall pick. That's a lot of money to dish out for a team with so many holes. BTW, I would trade the first pick in a heartbeat for Cutler. He is a proven player that has a lot of playing time left. Cutler's record doesn't matter because where do you draw the line. Rex Grossman has a better record, but he isn't better then Cutler. Jake Delhomme has a better record, he isn't better then Cutler. At least that's what the Bears and Panthers think.

CottonPickin M…

April 1st, 2009 at 8:59 PM ^

I agree about the money aspect. Your right about the fact that we do have alot of holes to fill. Paying Cutler, and the #1 pick would put an enormous hit on our salary cap. I just don't think that Cutler or Stafford are worth the first pick. BTW, Didn't Rex Grossman and Jake Delhomme take their respective teams to the Super Bowl? You may think Cutler is better than them both. But you at least have to take that into consideration.

Michigan_Mike

April 1st, 2009 at 9:40 PM ^

We could probably trade #33 and next year's first along with Stanton for Cutler. Then use #1 on Curry, #20 on Beatty and draft defense/Travis Beckum the rest of the way out.

samsoccer7

April 1st, 2009 at 10:01 PM ^

I read that Cutler is actually relatively cheap for the next 3 years, something like 1.2-1.5 mil per year because he's still on his rookie contrast. Plus, Denver already paid him some type of roster bonus, meaning his cap hit is EXTREMELY low for a player of his caliber. I really would trade the #1 pick if it means keeping #20 and the 2nd rounders b/c we need depth, not just one money sinkhole who may or may not pan out. I honestly think the "flawless" private workout of Stafford is more of a smokescreen to entice people to either trade for that spot, or to work a 3-way deal to try to get Cutler.

Tater

April 2nd, 2009 at 12:26 AM ^

The Lions could make Stafford's workout the stuff legends are made of, and inflate his draft value to a point where they can really get something for that first overall pick. I would trade the pick to someone in the division, thus guaranteeing at least two victories a year until whoever they trade the pick to gets sick of Stafford. I relaly hope the Lions are, indeed, inflating Stafford's value, thus strengthening their position at number one overall.