PDA

View Full Version : What would it take for you to trade a QB?


keyser
12-15-2007, 01:51 AM
Edited to Note: This post/poll was resurrected from last December.

OK, this is mainly for fun.

We seem to find ourselves in the position of having two decent QBs - in fact, good enough that we might manage to get something by trading one of them. Obviously, it's nice to have two capable QBs and no one wants to trade one for nothing, but we'd also be stupid to turn down a Herschel Walker deal. So, the question is just what it would take for you to be willing to trade.

Just so this isn't a Schaub vs. Sage thread, just vote as if we're talking about trading the one you think is worse. And, just think of the "value" of a trade (an actual trade might involve multiple picks, or current players).

For me, it would take at least a high second-rounder, though I doubt other teams would be willing to give up that much. I say that since I think that'd be enough for us to get a good center prospect (or move up from wherever we are to secure a top-notch LT), and I think that would be of more value to us than having a strong backup QB.

Hagar
12-15-2007, 02:12 AM
According to this (http://www.houstonprofootball.com/cap.html), Sage is locked up for two more years and Matt is locked up for even longer. I'd say at least two seconds. No reason to accept anything less at this point.

Things may change over time.

buddyboy
12-15-2007, 02:37 AM
I'd want 2 second rounders.

euro-Texan
12-15-2007, 06:26 AM
I'd want 2 second rounders.

Just for fun here. We gave up 2 second rounders for Schaub. A great, but unproven QB. You cannot say that about either of our QBs

Thorn
12-15-2007, 07:33 AM
Just for fun here. We gave up 2 second rounders for Schaub. A great, but unproven QB. You cannot say that about either of our QBs


Indeed. Sage has much more proof of his skills as a QB now than Schaub did when we traded for him. I would take two second rounders AND a decent starter at a need position.

Remember, if we trade Sage away, we not only have to replace him, but get additional value in return, otherwise its a very bad move.

tsip
12-15-2007, 07:54 AM
JMO, but I wouldn't trade either QB. Both of these players have a tremendous upside and are just now getting to play on a regular basis. Both of these guys can work the pocket, read a defense, throw over the middle, make timely/good decisions, and have the respect of their team mates.

Certainly, we are going to have teams inquiring about our qbs because both have shown they can play. Sage has been injury free and accurate and has put the ball in the end zone, and--most important-has won as a starter.

Our next 2 games are going to be tough, regardless of who plays at QB. We do, however, have something 'big' on the line- win 1 game and we are no longer a losing team...win both and we are a winning team.

axman40
12-15-2007, 08:16 AM
We have much needed depth and I would not trade that away at this time.
:fans:

Scooter
12-15-2007, 08:29 AM
as others have said, i'd also want either two seconds or a mid first round. there's not a lot of good quarterbacking in the NFL right now so both guys should be able to fetch a premium if we were to offer one up.

as we're currently witnessing it's important to have strong depth and kubiak/smith are doing a fantastic job of building depth on this team so i doubt either one go, but i'm confident that if we do trade one quarterback that we could fill the hole with a young guy that kubiak could game plan and be successful with.

HJam72
12-15-2007, 08:47 AM
As stated, both of them are proven QBs. I might admit that it's worth it for a mid-first rounder, but I wouldn't actually pull that trigger unless I got a top 10 pick for it. They stay.

OzzO
12-15-2007, 11:54 AM
We're not shopping either, but if the mid-first round price is there, we'd talk.

Buffi2
12-15-2007, 12:16 PM
I think we would regret any QB trade.

It would have to be top 10 for me and even then I'd have to put some serious thought into it.

ATX
12-15-2007, 01:18 PM
A 2nd rounder would be hard to turn down, but in the end I like us having a good backup. Teams like Indy and New England are one play/injury away from turning into a really good team to an average to good team at best. If Tom Brady gets hurt tomorrow, are their chances to win the Super Bowl even close to what they are with Brady in? I'd say no and put Indy or Dallas as the front runner.

I like the fact that we don't really have a drop off when Sage comes in. Some would even argue that he is better than Schaub at this point in their careers. It's good that the QB position is not another question mark like it had been for previous 5 years.

Lucky
12-15-2007, 01:29 PM
Where's the "When Hell freezes" option in the poll?

TEXANRED
12-15-2007, 01:32 PM
I heard Atlanta was looking for a QB.

Maybe we can trade one of them for two 2nds and swap 1sts.

nunusguy
12-15-2007, 01:36 PM
How about we look at this way: one could make an argument that our 2
most valuable players, on offense at the very least if not the whole team, would be Matt & Sage. Now how much is that "back-up" QB worth ?

adam
12-15-2007, 01:41 PM
I wouldn't mind getting a 2nd rounder for Schaub.

disaacks3
12-15-2007, 01:47 PM
We have much needed depth and I would not trade that away at this time.
:fans:
Yep! Ask the Cowboys how important it was to have Steve Beurlein step in when Aikman went down years ago.

False Start
12-15-2007, 02:07 PM
I went with option 4 . I think Sage is worth that . If he continues to play the way he has his stock may rise . Just my two cents .

Thorn
12-15-2007, 02:22 PM
Just noticed I didn't vote yet, so I voted none of the options are good enough. Just remember folks, no matter your opinion of either Schaub or Sage or their status, Sage is one of the best backups in the league. If we trade him ('cause Schaub isn't going to be traded under any circumstances) we then have to get a good backup QB and then something more out of this trade. Without the something more what's the point of the trade?

Vinny
12-15-2007, 03:00 PM
Where's the "When Hell freezes" option in the poll?
no kidding...it took us 5 years to get decent quarterbacking around here and you just can't win consistently in the NFL without a decent QB.....if one guy goes down this team still has a viable offense.

Texanmike02
12-15-2007, 03:13 PM
For a team like us I think you take anything that you can get to improve your roster. You're right you need a good backup. Nobody disputes that. But given the choice between a good backup and say a starting LT? I'd take the LT in a heartbeat. I voted a 3rd but I think a 2nd rounder is more in order. There's no sense in hoarding talent at one position if you are lacking at another.

Mike

False Start
12-15-2007, 03:23 PM
IF , is the circumstance here right ? Thats why I voted #4 . A just for the hell of it type thing . I wouldn't trade either QB . Having two good Quarterbacks is something a lot of teams wish they had .

Vinny
12-15-2007, 04:38 PM
For a team like us I think you take anything that you can get to improve your roster. You're right you need a good backup. Nobody disputes that. But given the choice between a good backup and say a starting LT? I'd take the LT in a heartbeat. I voted a 3rd but I think a 2nd rounder is more in order. There's no sense in hoarding talent at one position if you are lacking at another.

Mike

you are willing to trade something that is absolutely worth something for a player that 'may' be worth something...no way I'd do that since Schaub hasn't been able to stay healthy.

Maddict5
12-15-2007, 04:40 PM
for me it would take multiple picks to even think about letting sage go... something like a 2nd and 3rd.. 1 pick for gary to find another backup, 1 for the chance we're taking that the new guy will be as good as sage

even then id be reluctanct... the last thing we need is another carolina etc situation here

dickieb
12-15-2007, 05:07 PM
I think Shane Boyd could be a great back-up for us. I just rewatched the Arizona preseason game against us. He looks like he could be really good. I think we might have three good QB's on our hands.

Hervoyel
12-15-2007, 09:43 PM
I'd trade him for a pair of 2's or a 2 and a suitable "trade up" type swap of 1's.

Say a team came to us prior to this draft and, I dunno say we're picking in the mid 20's (just for conversations sake, I have no idea where we're going to pick). Now say they wanted Sage and they offered their 2 and they had a first round pick in the 5-10 range. If they'd swap 1's along with that 2nd rounder I'd do it if there was a player I was sold on that I knew would never fall to me.

It's a situational kind of thing.

Keep in mind that yes, Schaub has indeed had a tough time staying healthy but also that it seems like almost every year there's a backup who gets a chance to look like a previously undiscovered future Pro Bowl QB. Is Sage for real? Is Sage going to be the next Scott Michell or A.j. Feeley? We don't know the answer to that and neither does anybody else.

We are deep in places but we have gaping holes at other spots. I think it would be worth it to try and get at least one player deep elsewhere. That's just me though and I can see the sense in also playing it safe and keeping the guy to backup Matt. There are positives to either approach.

b0ng
12-15-2007, 10:12 PM
Voted there's no way since there is no option for multiple draft picks.

We'd be silly to turn our nose at a Herschel Walker type deal, but I don't think anybody is going to give us their draft for Sage Rosenfels (Stranger things have happened).

I doubt we even shop Sage around at all because he is a decent backup and that is something we will want to keep for the next few years while Schaub gets acclimated to the Texans offense.

So yeah, unless there's some ridiculous deal just staring us in the face, where we can pickup at least 2 or 3 draft picks with at least one or two of those picks coming in the first two rounds, I say no trade.

ObsiWan
12-15-2007, 10:41 PM
Where's the "When Hell freezes" option in the poll?

That would be the "Even a top-10 pick is not enough" option.
We try to keep it PG-13 around here
(with only limited success)

austintexanite
12-15-2007, 10:45 PM
I would trade for a 2nd rounder, but I don't that the team will trade either of them in the offseason. Like Vinny said, it's good to have an insurance plan. I'm hoping Sage and Matt get along next year, I don't want any distractions.

thunderkyss
12-15-2007, 10:52 PM
I'm thinking we'll trade him for Ed Reed, straight up.

threetoedpete
12-16-2007, 02:00 AM
According to this (http://www.houstonprofootball.com/cap.html), Sage is locked up for two more years and Matt is locked up for even longer. I'd say at least two seconds. No reason to accept anything less at this point.

Things may change over time.

Two picks ...agreed. Compaired to what is out there... he's a plump for sure. He's locked in cheap. and he's productive.

My team I woulnd't do it. But what ever.

keyser
02-29-2008, 12:57 PM
With the recent discussions about trading Sage, I thought I'd bump this poll up from around the end of last season. At that time, almost no one was willing to part with Sage for a 3rd. Now it seems like more people are willing to go for that.

Note: if we had managed to get the Viking's 2nd round pick, it would be at #47 - basically right on the border between "top" and "bottom" of the 2nd round.

badboy
02-29-2008, 01:27 PM
With the recent discussions about trading Sage, I thought I'd bump this poll up from around the end of last season. At that time, almost no one was willing to part with Sage for a 3rd. Now it seems like more people are willing to go for that.

Note: if we had managed to get the Viking's 2nd round pick, it would be at #47 - basically right on the border between "top" and "bottom" of the 2nd round.There is a better understanding of who will be available in draft and the combine stats are in. The close we get to draft the more the opinions will fly.

swtbound07
02-29-2008, 03:16 PM
i just can't see pulling the trigger on it. Maybe next year. not right now.

4Texans
02-29-2008, 03:46 PM
It would take at least a low first round pick before I would start thinking about trading one of our QB's, and I voted that way. I would rather have 2 QB's that can start, unless you have one of the few elite QB's (Manning, Brady, etc....) in the league.

Ole Miss Texan
02-29-2008, 03:53 PM
It would take at least a low first round pick before I would start thinking about trading one of our QB's, and I voted that way. I would rather have 2 QB's that can start, unless you have one of the few elite QB's (Manning, Brady, etc....) in the league.

I like Schaub a lot and think he's going to be our long term QB. However, the thing that scares me is that we don't have a solid OL to protect him, and we don't have a solid group of RB's for him to hand the ball off to. Those are the 2 main reasons why I keep Sage. If our OL was real solid, then i'd trade him but until then your taking a HUGE gamble.

badboy
02-29-2008, 05:09 PM
I like Schaub a lot and think he's going to be our long term QB. However, the thing that scares me is that we don't have a solid OL to protect him, and we don't have a solid group of RB's for him to hand the ball off to. Those are the 2 main reasons why I keep Sage. If our OL was real solid, then i'd trade him but until then your taking a HUGE gamble.You now have Mendenhall and Anthony Collins. Do you feel better about Schaub?

Ole Miss Texan
02-29-2008, 05:13 PM
You now have Mendenhall and Anthony Collins. Do you feel better about Schaub?

Yea I feel tons better. I'm guessing Collins wouldn't be an upgrade at first but throughout the season hopefully he would solidify himself. I like Collins a lot. As do I like Mendenhall.

With recent reports of our interest in Running backs already in the league- I'm starting to feel good about the idea of getting one there so we can focus on OL and Secondary in the draft!

badboy
02-29-2008, 05:19 PM
Yea I feel tons better. I'm guessing Collins wouldn't be an upgrade at first but throughout the season hopefully he would solidify himself. I like Collins a lot. As do I like Mendenhall.

With recent reports of our interest in Running backs already in the league- I'm starting to feel good about the idea of getting one there so we can focus on OL and Secondary in the draft!
See that is why I am ok with a trade if we got a 2nd round. We still might be able to trade back from #18, get a good pick and another selection. There are so many variations. What about signing Dayne and drafting Slaton or Chris Johnson with the 2 for Sage and sign Williams at # 18? I could go on.

bah007
02-29-2008, 05:31 PM
See that is why I am ok with a trade if we got a 2nd round. We still might be able to trade back from #18, get a good pick and another selection. There are so many variations. What about signing Dayne and drafting Slaton or Chris Johnson with the 2 for Sage and sign Williams at # 18? I could go on.

I could deal with Williams in the 1st & Johnson in the 2nd.

I'd throw a fit if we drafted Slaton before the 4th though, especially if we wasted a 2nd on him. There are many better RBs available in the 2nd than Slaton.

Dallas_Texan
02-29-2008, 05:40 PM
I thought we were talking Rosenfels. For Schuab.....1st this year, 2nd next year! He's worth more now than when he was unproven.

Hervoyel
02-29-2008, 05:51 PM
i just can't see pulling the trigger on it. Maybe next year. not right now.

I think it's a balancing act and we don't have to do this immediately unless we really like the offer. Factors affecting the value of one Sage Rosenfels include the following:

His contract status makes a deal economical for a potential trade partner. Right now he can be had for two years cheap. Next year he'll be a year from renegotiation time and so a sign-and-trade will make things a little more complicated.

Right now he's coming off a nice run of games where he looked very good. Next year he may play and not do so well (lowering his value) or he may play again and have another 3-4 game stretch where he looks great (which will make his sign-and-trade deal more expensive).

If he does play that means Matt Schaub got hurt again and at that point the Texans have what is starting to appear to be a fragile QB*. This will make them less willing to part with Sage. If you are thinking of trying to aquire him right now you have to be wondering if he will even be on the market at this time next season.

Sage is not young. QB's are playing longer these days it seems (at least to me) and so maybe this isn't much of an issue but every year that goes by he gets a little older. Older is never better in the NFL so it would behoove a team seeking his services to get him as soon as possible.

There are a bunch of factors that seem to make a case for either keeping or trading him. I'm sure he wants a chance to be the starter somewhere as well and I do not think that the Texans can count on him sticking around past his current contract. Even if he never sees the field again for us he's going to get offers when he hits free agency and he's made it clear that he wants to start. If we hang on to him because supposedly you need two good QB's in this league to win (which is not in fact true**) then we need to understand that in two years time we're probably going to get nothing for him when he signs somewhere else.

I'm fine with that if the Texans want to go that route. I'm more inclined to try and get a 2 for him this year if I can. If not then keeping him works for me.

*Lets get one thing straight. If you're running around calling Matt Schaub "fragile" right now you are, in my opinion annoying, stupid background noise and nothing else. One season doesn't make anybody fragile. Michael Jordan missed most of a season early in his career and nobody ever considered him "fragile". Tons of non-fragile guys have years where they got hurt. Unless it becomes a pattern the guy isn't fragile.


**You need one who can stay healthy to win. You might be able to win with multiple good QB's but more often than not you won't.

infantrycak
02-29-2008, 06:18 PM
*Lets get one thing straight. If you're running around calling Matt Schaub "fragile" right now you are, in my opinion annoying, stupid background noise and nothing else. One season doesn't make anybody fragile. Michael Jordan missed most of a season early in his career and nobody ever considered him "fragile". Tons of non-fragile guys have years where they got hurt. Unless it becomes a pattern the guy isn't fragile.


**You need one who can stay healthy to win. You might be able to win with multiple good QB's but more often than not you won't.

Repeated for emphasis.

ATXtexanfan
02-29-2008, 06:24 PM
multiple picks is the only option, hell, used to be good dt's are going for 3rd and 5th rd picks, a qb capable of starting for a lot of teams is in high demand

Nighthawk
02-29-2008, 08:13 PM
*Lets get one thing straight. If you're running around calling Matt Schaub "fragile" right now you are, in my opinion annoying, stupid background noise and nothing else. One season doesn't make anybody fragile. Michael Jordan missed most of a season early in his career and nobody ever considered him "fragile". Tons of non-fragile guys have years where they got hurt. Unless it becomes a pattern the guy isn't fragile.


**You need one who can stay healthy to win. You might be able to win with multiple good QB's but more often than not you won't.

Let's get one thing straight, anyone who's running around blabbing about Schaub being not-fragile has his head in a bucket. Schaub has 1 season set up as a starter and he spent most of it on the bench while Rosenfels took most of the hits and won most of the games. This isn't an encouraging situation. I would not trade Rosenfels unless we got an extraordinary offer., multiple picks, a 32-42 2nd and a useful player, or similar. We can't afford to gamble on Schaub without Rosenfels there ready to play.

swtbound07
02-29-2008, 09:03 PM
when did i say schaub was fragile? You quoted me...but i didn't. All i said was i didn't think this was a good year to trade sage.

beerlover
02-29-2008, 09:10 PM
Schaub's injurys, IMO, where due to him trying to do too much. thats not a negative its just a statement he lacked the missing playmakers/protection to support him.

threetoedpete
02-29-2008, 09:16 PM
multiple picks is the only option, hell, used to be good dt's are going for 3rd and 5th rd picks, a qb capable of starting for a lot of teams is in high demand

greed both threes and a two in '09

Hervoyel
02-29-2008, 09:53 PM
Let's get one thing straight, anyone who's running around blabbing about Schaub being not-fragile has his head in a bucket. Schaub has 1 season set up as a starter and he spent most of it on the bench while Rosenfels took most of the hits and won most of the games. This isn't an encouraging situation. I would not trade Rosenfels unless we got an extraordinary offer., multiple picks, a 32-42 2nd and a useful player, or similar. We can't afford to gamble on Schaub without Rosenfels there ready to play.


A single season is too small a sample to conclude that he's fragile. It's also yet to be proven that he's not. I'm in the "we need more info" camp on this. Having said that I need to know the following....

1. How does Schaub finish the season 4-7 as the starter yet spend most of it on the bench? I'm just trying to understand man.

2. How does Sage finish 4-1 as a starter and take most of the hits and win most of the games? Again help me with the math please.

Hervoyel
02-29-2008, 09:55 PM
when did i say schaub was fragile? You quoted me...but i didn't. All i said was i didn't think this was a good year to trade sage.

You didn't. Your post started my train of thought, nothing more. I tend to go off on tangents, my bad.

beerlover
02-29-2008, 10:28 PM
the hits Schaub receives are direct, crippling type layouts. toughness is not the issue, he's plenty tough to get up after some of those, its why is he in that position to start with? who has his back & comes to his aid either when the play is breaking down or after he gets broken down :ouch:

swtbound07
02-29-2008, 10:38 PM
You didn't. Your post started my train of thought, nothing more. I tend to go off on tangents, my bad.

no problem..i just wanted to make sure you didn't think i thought that, because im way on the other side of that particular fence.

Blu
02-29-2008, 10:46 PM
High 2nd min
But a top 10 forsure!

DocBar
03-01-2008, 12:29 AM
I would be very cautious trading Sage this year. I'm less concerned with Schaub being "fragile" than I am about him coming off of shoulder surgery. I believe Schaub will start throwing in late March or early April, but will that be enough time to evaluate his shoulder? I know it's his non-throwing arm but shoulder injuries can be tricky.

CloakNNNdagger
03-01-2008, 12:42 AM
I would be very cautious trading Sage this year. I'm less concerned with Schaub being "fragile" than I am about him coming off of shoulder surgery. I believe Schaub will start throwing in late March or early April, but will that be enough time to evaluate his shoulder? I know it's his non-throwing arm but shoulder injuries can be tricky.


Exactly..............something I brought up when people were expecting his return before the end of the season.