Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
FF Ninja

Was the Garoppolo trade a good or bad trade for the 49ers?

Was the Garappolo trade a good or bad trade for the 49ers?  

234 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Just Win Baby said:

This is a very good point that I have not seen mentioned before this. I agree with it, and it makes the deal better for NE, since it implies reduced long term risk at the QB position.

It doesn’t negate them though. 

If garapolo’s upside is no greater than a Cousins or whoever then yeah, risk is mitigated.

But if Garapolo is indeed in the next gen mix with Watson, Gough, etc and the Pats already had him 1. In their system already & 2. Familiar with the offense (which he undoubtedly is) then they’re trading a known commodity to introduce significant risk, and a possible / likely downgrade. And possibly a shorter term one of those replacements are older.

Plus....and admittedly this is pure speculation....maybe JimmyG gives them a hometown discount? Often backups on really really good teams do that.  Maybe not considering what others would be offering, but it’s possible. Certainly not a primary point, but just occurred to me. 

I try to look at this from a positive spin from the Pats standpoint and while I agree arguments can be made, I’m hardly convinced this deal was good for the Pats. I guess it depends on what they get for that 2.0x?  :shrug:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Deamon said:

It's a small sample size, but this guy doesn't carry near the risk that a rookie qb coming out of college does.  Jimmy has been in the league a while, and has played extremely well.  No I don't think he's automatically some top 5 QB... we don't know that yet.  But from both stats and more importantly, the eye test, he has shown an ability to be this teams franchise QB and lead the team.  His leadership and accuracy turned an awful team into a good one, in just 4 games.  I don't think there's much question that he's their guy for the next 4+ years.

It’s basically a sample size of 6 starts over 4 years. Stats look goos 68%, 10/3 (4/3 in his 4 starts with SF this year) but I’d need more data before crowning him the future . Will they make him their franchise QB, most likely yes, does that mean he actually should be one based on what we’ve seen so far?

They lost 5 games in a row by 3 points or less against playoff teams (last year/this year) with Hoyer before going to Beathard so I don’t think it’s fair to say they were awful (certainly not til they chose to go to Beathard at least) they weren’t good and clearly couldn’t close those games.

In general I agree the draft capital given up is small if they now have their QB of the future. I just think some of you should be pumping the brakes here because the sample size is too small to crown him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those that are saying the trade wasn’t good for NE, what other option did they have other than trade JG?

Tagging him wasn’t a legit option. It would have tied up too much cap money. Remember, they would have had to allocate the cap dollars to tag him when they actually applied the tag. So they would have had to have $25 million in cap space available. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Anarchy99 said:

For those that are saying the trade wasn’t good for NE, what other option did they have other than trade JG?

Tagging him wasn’t a legit option. It would have tied up too much cap money. Remember, they would have had to allocate the cap dollars to tag him when they actually applied the tag. So they would have had to have $25 million in cap space available. 

I suppose you could argue that they should have traded him for 1.12+ during the draft; but outside of that, I agree.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dr. Octopus said:

I really think you’re downplaying the value of locking in a franchise QB. You’re also kind of contradicting yourself by bringing up how much cap room SF has but then also saying how they will get him “discounted” without him having had his audition. If they wanted to make sure they “won” his services over other more established teams they would have needed to pay up.

The bottom line is the positives always outweighed the negatives and it played out even more so in reality - yet you’ve dug in your heels and can’t admit that maybe, just maybe, you were wrong.

it happens.

Your cap space point was never lost on me. I guess I could've explained it better, though. They're a rebuilding team so this coming year's cap may not be a critical issue but they very well may need that cap space in a couple years if things go well and they're competing for a championship.

I think it was one of my first posts in this thread where I said this exact scenario could play out and I saw it as too high a price to pay for peace of mind. It's not like I'm moving the goal posts or shifting my stance. I always thought this was a possible outcome and I always thought it was poor strategically. There is no new information pulling me one way that I need to dig in my heels. I'm merely stating that I thought losing draft order, losing an early second, and paying out the nose for JG was a bad long term plan by inexperienced management. Waiting a few months to enter into bidding for an unknown commodity was always the way to go, IMO. If anything, his early success proves my point that he didn't need the "invaluable" extra few months of experience with the playbook. If they followed my plan - and I have as much NFL front office experience as John Lynch, I believe - they'd have landed the same player at a lesser contract with more draft capital. 

This is not directed at you, but I find it funny how people are insisting the Pats could have franchised him and traded him "just like Cassel." Cassel had played 15.5 games in a season and gone 11-5 in the NFL. He had trade value. Nobody wants to sign a total unknown QB for a 1-year $23.5M salary, much less trade for the right to do so. Granted the Chiefs decided to ink him to a huge (at the time) 6-year contract, but without any game experience there's no way someone was trading to give JG a comparable 6-year deal. JG and Cassel are apples and oranges. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Concept Coop said:

I suppose you could argue that they should have traded him for 1.12+ during the draft; but outside of that, I agree.  

Was that actually on the table or just a rumor?

I think this was unequivocally a great trade for NE and wouldn't be surprised if it was the best offer they actually received all year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, jeaton6 said:

It’s basically a sample size of 6 starts over 4 years. Stats look goos 68%, 10/3 (4/3 in his 4 starts with SF this year) but I’d need more data before crowning him the future . Will they make him their franchise QB, most likely yes, does that mean he actually should be one based on what we’ve seen so far?

They lost 5 games in a row by 3 points or less against playoff teams (last year/this year) with Hoyer before going to Beathard so I don’t think it’s fair to say they were awful (certainly not til they chose to go to Beathard at least) they weren’t good and clearly couldn’t close those games.

In general I agree the draft capital given up is small if they now have their QB of the future. I just think some of you should be pumping the brakes here because the sample size is too small to crown him.

A "Franchise QB" is often a pretty subjective term.  Could the 32nd best qb in the league be a franchise qb?  Does he have to be top 5?  Personally I call a franchise QB one that you can build a team around, has enough talent and youth and leadership to be your long term starter, string together multiple winning seasons, etc.   I really think the odds are heavily in favour that JG can and will hit all those points.  The odds of him hitting those points over the 3rd best QB in the draft or the FA's that are out there this year (Cousins is the only one that could be debatable here), are very high.  You pretty much have Jimmy and Kirk in a class of their own, then a bunch of players who have shown they can't be Franchise QBs.  To get one of those two in a year that 10 teams will be on the hunt looking for one, is a huge score for SF. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jeaton6 said:

I didn’t realize that a 4 game sample size was enough to anoint a guy a franchise QB/player. 

FF Ninja may be throwing around a lot of assumptions here but the true believers are doing the same here as well. 

He started two games with the Pats and played in some preseason games and has always looked good so it’s more than just that. Like I said these 4-7 games doesn’t guarantee that his success continues but it helps in the evaluation process. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FF Ninja said:

Your cap space point was never lost on me. I guess I could've explained it better, though. They're a rebuilding team so this coming year's cap may not be a critical issue but they very well may need that cap space in a couple years if things go well and they're competing for a championship.

I think it was one of my first posts in this thread where I said this exact scenario could play out and I saw it as too high a price to pay for peace of mind. It's not like I'm moving the goal posts or shifting my stance. I always thought this was a possible outcome and I always thought it was poor strategically. There is no new information pulling me one way that I need to dig in my heels. I'm merely stating that I thought losing draft order, losing an early second, and paying out the nose for JG was a bad long term plan by inexperienced management. Waiting a few months to enter into bidding for an unknown commodity was always the way to go, IMO. If anything, his early success proves my point that he didn't need the "invaluable" extra few months of experience with the playbook. If they followed my plan - and I have as much NFL front office experience as John Lynch, I believe - they'd have landed the same player at a lesser contract with more draft capital. 

This is not directed at you, but I find it funny how people are insisting the Pats could have franchised him and traded him "just like Cassel." Cassel had played 15.5 games in a season and gone 11-5 in the NFL. He had trade value. Nobody wants to sign a total unknown QB for a 1-year $23.5M salary, much less trade for the right to do so. Granted the Chiefs decided to ink him to a huge (at the time) 6-year contract, but without any game experience there's no way someone was trading to give JG a comparable 6-year deal. JG and Cassel are apples and oranges. 

There’s also the fact that Cassell was a 7th round pick that didn’t even start for his college team while Garroplo was a fairly highly rated prospect who many pundits had a late first round grade on and now had some NFL tape in preseason and regular season where he looked that part. It wasn’t a ridiculous proposition at all. In fact SF may very well have traded for him if he was Franchise Tagged by the Pats since in essence they did take a similar route anyway by trading for him with the plan to franchise tag him if they weren’t convinced to sign him long term. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to derail the thread, but I am loving what I'm seeing from him.  Snagged him off the wire of a 12 team, 3 keepers league as a potential last round keeper for next year, and am anxiously awaiting to see if SF picks up some receiving weapons for him in the offseason.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Concept Coop said:

I voted "bad trade" at the time, and was wrong.  Great trade.  

I think you were premature in both cases, lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, humpback said:

I think you were premature in both cases, lol.

Time will certainly tell. I thought it was a bad trade at the time, but think it looks great today.  It's early and 4 games isn't a big sample size - I'll certainly grant you that.  It should be fun to watch it play out.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Dr. Octopus said:

There’s also the fact that Cassell was a 7th round pick that didn’t even start for his college team while Garroplo was a fairly highly rated prospect who many pundits had a late first round grade on and now had some NFL tape in preseason and regular season where he looked that part. It wasn’t a ridiculous proposition at all. In fact SF may very well have traded for him if he was Franchise Tagged by the Pats since in essence they did take a similar route anyway by trading for him with the plan to franchise tag him if they weren’t convinced to sign him long term. 

Sure, Cassel's 7th round draft pedigree probably dinged him before he played 15.5 games while going 11-5, but GMs were falling over themselves for him after that trial season. Nobody was going to pay a total unknown $23.5M to play one season and then become a FA, even if he was a 2nd rounder. NFL experience > draft pedigree. Then again, I shouldn't say "nobody" because there are some dumb GMs out there as well as some inexperienced GMs. Plus, BB would've liked to have kept JG as a backup for this season. If he thought he could franchise and trade him, he would have gone that route.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Concept Coop said:

Time will certainly tell. I thought it was a bad trade at the time, but think it looks great today.  It's early and 4 games isn't a big sample size - I'll certainly grant you that.  It should be fun to watch it play out.  

This is the reality.   It is too early to tell if this is a great trade in the long term but it sure looks great for the 9ers right now.   And, the Patriots made the right move too.  They got what they could.  Tom isn't going anywhere for at least one more year and probably two.  

The NFL is so much more enjoyable to watch when good QBs are playing.   We should be thankful that JG is off the bench and on the field.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, FF Ninja said:

This is not directed at you, but I find it funny how people are insisting the Pats could have franchised him and traded him "just like Cassel." Cassel had played 15.5 games in a season and gone 11-5 in the NFL. He had trade value. Nobody wants to sign a total unknown QB for a 1-year $23.5M salary, much less trade for the right to do so. Granted the Chiefs decided to ink him to a huge (at the time) 6-year contract, but without any game experience there's no way someone was trading to give JG a comparable 6-year deal. JG and Cassel are apples and oranges. 

NE would absolutely have tagged and traded JG.  The two teams with the most cap space (over $110million) in 2018 also were two of the neediest in terms of QB, CLE and SF.  Both could easily absorb a big cap hit from the franchise tag and still have miles to go to get to the cap floor.  In fact, it still makes financial sense for SF to tag him and just eat the contract due to the cap floor penalties.  Even if the market dried up and they only got a fourth rounder for JG, it would have been better than getting nothing.  And SF and/or CLE could afford it.  With other entrants like ARI (could clear $14mil in cap space by dumping Palmer) and JAX ($19mil for Bortles), NE would have enough suitors to get a deal done. The comparison isn't Cassell to JG.  The comparison is that NE is willing to take the risk.  . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, johnadams said:

NE would absolutely have tagged and traded JG.  The two teams with the most cap space (over $110million) in 2018 also were two of the neediest in terms of QB, CLE and SF.  Both could easily absorb a big cap hit from the franchise tag and still have miles to go to get to the cap floor.  In fact, it still makes financial sense for SF to tag him and just eat the contract due to the cap floor penalties.  Even if the market dried up and they only got a fourth rounder for JG, it would have been better than getting nothing.  And SF and/or CLE could afford it.  With other entrants like ARI (could clear $14mil in cap space by dumping Palmer) and JAX ($19mil for Bortles), NE would have enough suitors to get a deal done. The comparison isn't Cassell to JG.  The comparison is that NE is willing to take the risk.  . 

Have you seen the market for unknown FA QBs? $23.5M for one year wasn't going to happen. That would be a huge gap up. Cleveland could work a deal with Cincy/McCarron for way less than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, FF Ninja said:

Have you seen the market for unknown FA QBs? $23.5M for one year wasn't going to happen. That would be a huge gap up. Cleveland could work a deal with Cincy/McCarron for way less than that.

CLE and SF both need to spend their cap money.  You're looking at this as a QB market issue when the real issue for both orgs is to avoid the cap floor.  This is the kind of thing that happens when you have market manipulation like cap floors.  Some entities will be overpaid and often wildly so just to make the floor.  The problem with the floor is that the franchise money is actually a bonus is some ways rather than a detriment.  I don't think this is plan A (which would be to sign him to a deal rather than let the franchise tag remain) by any stretch but is a workable plan B for franchises in their state.  In a true free market, I agree, but this isn't a true free market. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, FF Ninja said:

If SF is sitting on a bunch of cash and with a stronger need than most of those teams, why even mention them? Minnesota doesn't belong there. They are almost certainly going to roll with at least one, probably two of TB, Bradford, and Keenum next year. Odds are good Ben and Luck will be back next year... or at least good enough that those teams won't be throwing a big contract at JG. There are only three realistic high bidders: 49ers, Browns, and Jets (https://overthecap.com/salary-cap-space/). And would it be the end of the world if they ended up with Cousins instead of JG if, by some outside chance, they got outbid for JG? I'm not a Cousins fan but Shanahan really seems to like him.

But the point I was trying to make was that even if there was a bidding war, there's no way it would've approached what his contract will be now.

Given their situation, I think it would be prudent to risk the $18M on the next Brock and keep your draft capital. If he sucks, hopefully you took a shot on a QB or two in the middle rounds to groom (or drafted one with the 2.02 - and that guy, if JG pans out, might be able to net you a trade in a few years - like JG did the pats - after he's filled in as a cheap backup for a while... despite how easy it is to overlook, backup QB can be critically important). Losing all that draft capital and potentially spending top dollar on QB for the next 4 years hurts their future. That's not an opinion.

 "All that draft capital"?.  They gave up a second round pick for what could be a franchise QB.  That's it...

They won a few games and may now pick 9th instead of 3rd... OK, happens all the time in the NFL.  Thank God teams aren't tanking across the league NBA style.

You are right about one thing - spending money on a QB is NOT the way to succeed in the NFL. :loco:   A much better approach is to spend $18 million on the "next Brock" and invest the 2.02 in a backup that might net you a trade someday. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DocHolliday said:

This is the reality.   It is too early to tell if this is a great trade in the long term but it sure looks great for the 9ers right now.   And, the Patriots made the right move too.  They got what they could.  Tom isn't going anywhere for at least one more year and probably two.  

The NFL is so much more enjoyable to watch when good QBs are playing.   We should be thankful that JG is off the bench and on the field.   

JG appears to be accurate with his passes.  In the NFL a pass 12 inches off the mark is not good.  From what I've seen this dude is flat out a really solid QB.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good trade for the 49ers. You really don't know what you have until they start playing for you. He could have been another Matt Cassell. But looks like he turned out (so far) to be what they needed. 

 

Good for the Patriots, too. But what if the Packers had traded Rodgers because Favre wasn't ready to call it quits yet? Was this the kind of trade that really costs New England in two years? 

They have a stellar front office, so I'm confident they went over every scenario front to back. I think this was the rare win/win for both teams.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, irishidiot said:

JG appears to be accurate with his passes.  In the NFL a pass 12 inches off the mark is not good.  From what I've seen this dude is flat out a really solid QB.

To me it’s that combined with the poise in the pocket. 

Dude makes his reads, checks down his progressions, stays cool in the pocket & has a good mental clock + a title of that Brady-seque 6th sense for where the pressure is coming from & how much time he’s got.

Those are all the signs I look for when I’m evaluating a QB. 

Then that he’s also very accurate & can “make all the throws” as they say, and with touch when needed - that’s one hell of a complete looking QB. 

Maybe some warts will emerge in a full season. For now I’m not seeing any shame in his game. Looks rock solid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Neil Beaufort Zod said:

Good trade for the 49ers. You really don't know what you have until they start playing for you. He could have been another Matt Cassell. But looks like he turned out (so far) to be what they needed.

Good for the Patriots, too. But what if the Packers had traded Rodgers because Favre wasn't ready to call it quits yet? Was this the kind of trade that really costs New England in two years? 

They have a stellar front office, so I'm confident they went over every scenario front to back. I think this was the rare win/win for both teams.

Finding a franchise QB is difficult.  The Packers have effectively had two starting QBs for more than a quarter century.  That's crazy when you look at how teams struggle at the position. 

I get the impression NE got less than they wanted but as much as they could for JG.  Or, in other words, they were stuck with 2 QBs ready and willing to play and were forced to part ways with the younger play because Brady is the face of the franchise.  Will New England be searching for a QB in two years?  Maybe.

It will be interesting to see how they address the position in the upcoming draft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Deamon said:

A "Franchise QB" is often a pretty subjective term.  Could the 32nd best qb in the league be a franchise qb?  Does he have to be top 5?  Personally I call a franchise QB one that you can build a team around, has enough talent and youth and leadership to be your long term starter, string together multiple winning seasons, etc.   I really think the odds are heavily in favour that JG can and will hit all those points.  The odds of him hitting those points over the 3rd best QB in the draft or the FA's that are out there this year (Cousins is the only one that could be debatable here), are very high.  You pretty much have Jimmy and Kirk in a class of their own, then a bunch of players who have shown they can't be Franchise QBs.  To get one of those two in a year that 10 teams will be on the hunt looking for one, is a huge score for SF. 

No he doesnt have to be near top 5. I don’t think we know nearly enough at this point to know a team can be built around him. There are  too many examples of people looking like franchise players (RBs that show vision, explosion etc, QBs that have shown ability to be huge game changers, running, accuracy, arm strength, etc) only to #### the bed after a year or two. Those are on full year or two samples not a half a year. The jury is still out and just because he’s top 2 in a FA QB class doesn’t make him franchise worthy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Dr. Octopus said:

He started two games with the Pats and played in some preseason games and has always looked good so it’s more than just that. Like I said these 4-7 games doesn’t guarantee that his success continues but it helps in the evaluation process. 

I agree he has seen preseason time and time in 20+ regular season games in his career but has thrown less than 300 passes in a 4 year regular season career. These games help us better understand his game but certainly seems like jumping the gun annointing him a guy that’s locked in as worthy franchise QB at this point. I’d certainly want to see more before paying this guy money even at the Tyrod level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, jeaton6 said:

No he doesnt have to be near top 5. I don’t think we know nearly enough at this point to know a team can be built around him. There are  too many examples of people looking like franchise players (RBs that show vision, explosion etc, QBs that have shown ability to be huge game changers, running, accuracy, arm strength, etc) only to #### the bed after a year or two. Those are on full year or two samples not a half a year. The jury is still out and just because he’s top 2 in a FA QB class doesn’t make him franchise worthy.

Look, obviously no one knows if ANYONE is franchise worthy or not.  We all thought Goff wouldn't be after year 1.  We've thought RG3 would be after a year.  It's easy to just say 'we don't know".  However, his sample size still makes him more likely franchise worthy than Baker Mayfield. 

I don't think there's anyone out there that doesn't take JG+pick 10 over Mayfield + pick 35.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, jeaton6 said:

I agree he has seen preseason time and time in 20+ regular season games in his career but has thrown less than 300 passes in a 4 year regular season career. These games help us better understand his game but certainly seems like jumping the gun annointing him a guy that’s locked in as worthy franchise QB at this point. I’d certainly want to see more before paying this guy money even at the Tyrod level.

He was going to get more than Tyrod money this offseason even if he didn't sniff the field, so wouldn't making this trade be the only way for them to see more of him before paying him like you suggest is needed?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Concept Coop said:

Time will certainly tell. I thought it was a bad trade at the time, but think it looks great today.  It's early and 4 games isn't a big sample size - I'll certainly grant you that.  It should be fun to watch it play out.  

Yep. Really the only thing that has changed since the trade happened is that he has played well for 4 games, so IMO it's an overreaction to change opinions drastically or think this is "the trade of the decade" based on that (I know you didn't call it that). We still don't know if he's going to be their QB long term, how much they are going to pay him to be their QB long term, or how he's going to perform (again, long term).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, humpback said:

I think you were premature in both cases, lol.

I’m in the same boat as Coop, but there’s merit to this. Kaep looked like the next awesome Niners QB through a bigger sample size than Jimmy has put out there. I think Jimmy’s success is more sustainable, but we’ll see. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People saying we havent seen enough are a bit silly. He just played well with two different teams, one of which he has been with a couple months with terrible weapons.  For realz people.  He is obviously a good QB.

I would rather pay him huge money over most of the "proven" guys.  Pretty sure the 49ers feel the same way.  Also, having the franchise tag option is a nice tool for their negotiations.  I dont think JG will want to play on the tag and will sign a deal less than if he were to hit the open market.  Either way, he isnt hitting the open market and he knows it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Deamon said:

It's a small sample size, but this guy doesn't carry near the risk that a rookie qb coming out of college does.  Jimmy has been in the league a while, and has played extremely well.  No I don't think he's automatically some top 5 QB... we don't know that yet.  But from both stats and more importantly, the eye test, he has shown an ability to be this teams franchise QB and lead the team.  His leadership and accuracy turned an awful team into a good one, in just 4 games.  I don't think there's much question that he's their guy for the next 4+ years.

Agree.  Now SF can address other needs at the draft.  They spent a 2.02 pick and moved down 5-7 spots in the 1st round to secure their starting QB for the next few years, maybe longer.  That's a clear win for SF, no matter how FF Ninja tries to argue otherwise.  Sure they are going to have to pay him starting QB market rate, but they were going to do that anyway if they were in the FA market for say Kirk Cousins.  It also will be easier to attract a key free agent to SF.....now they see the team is moving in a positive direction.

Of course we don't know yet if JG an elite QB.  But you don't necessarily need a Tom Brady or Aaron Rodgers (of course it's nice to have!) for your franchise to win a lot of games and even go to the Super Bowl.  Eli Manning won 2 Super Bowls and he's a pretty mediocre NFL QB.  Alex Smith has won a lot of games for KC....and he's a mediocre NFL QB.

What matters is....Garapollo became the starting QB......San Fran started winning games.   And not just against crap opponents.....they just beat Jacksonville, an AFC playoff team.  That matters.  A lot. 

From what I seen so far, Garapollo should be an above average NFL QB.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole argument of "they coulda signed him as an UFA in the offseason for a lot cheaper" is drenched in armchair GM fantasy-talk... 

Even assuming that the 49ers were "guaranteed" to get JG in the offseason as a UFA, it's absurd to expect Lynch and Shanahan to bet their entire 49er tenures on a guy who had 3 starts his entire career.

Imagine if your career at your place of work was tied to ONE hiring decision... How much due diligence would you do? How much upfront would you be willing to pay to give it a trial run before you stake your reputation and hitch your career to the guy? The 2nd rounder was price paid for risk mitigation and control of JG's rights, which at this point seems absurdly cheap.

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/28/2017 at 4:35 PM, Concept Coop said:

Time will certainly tell. I thought it was a bad trade at the time, but think it looks great today.  It's early and 4 games isn't a big sample size - I'll certainly grant you that.  It should be fun to watch it play out.  

Matt Ryan said it took him 2 years to fully run this offense. There is cause for optimism with Jimmy, and it looks good now. However, sam Bradford was #1 pick in draft and oofensive rookie of the year. Many voices thought Gurley was a bust coming this year. Many people thought Winston, Mariotta and Carr were going to have great years.

So I agree- time will tell. From SF perspective they didn't waste top 10 pick on the position, have plenty of cash to spend. I remember there were some who thought Ryan Leaf was better than Peyton Manning at the time.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, bigupsetter said:

Matt Ryan said it took him 2 years to fully run this offense. There is cause for optimism with Jimmy, and it looks good now. However, sam Bradford was #1 pick in draft and oofensive rookie of the year. Many voices thought Gurley was a bust coming this year. Many people thought Winston, Mariotta and Carr were going to have great years.

So I agree- time will tell. From SF perspective they didn't waste top 10 pick on the position, have plenty of cash to spend. I remember there were some who thought Ryan Leaf was better than Peyton Manning at the time.

I agree that it looks good now and time will tell, but your examples are really bad. 

Bradford's career has been derailed by injuries. We have no idea if he would have been good or bad. 

Very few people thought Gurley was a bust. His rookie year was unbelievable and you are comparing a qb to rb. 

Winston, Carr and Mariota were all known qbs with large sample sizes. All of them have had some injuries this year with Winston and Carr having serious injuries. 

I think guys like Matt Schuab, Farve,  Scott Mitchell, Matt Cassell are better comparisons and there are mixed results. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd call this a great trade in a lot of ways for both teams, and likely a lesson to all those front offices out there on how to do business.

 

1) On the  New England side:  BB did a good job in having the Heir apparent on his roster on a team that is so QB driven that all of the other BB legend gets lost on this.  However, BB could not foresee that his QB (Brady) would still be playing at a high level at his age, and trading away JG and getting a second round pick and Hoyer (essentially as he was cut from SF after the deal) as Brady's backup for 2 years (and likely drafting another QB this draft) sets them up in a kick the can down the road scenario.

2) SF: They got a guy who has had NFL level coaching with not too much wear and tear and without having to go into a bidding war.  They gave up a second rounder and now hold a pretty good first round pick to do with what they want.  

Win win on both sides, and yes, if BB thinks that brady is going to play 3 more seasons a year or 2 ago maybe he locks up JG longer term, but how can anyone be that sure of the future?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, msudaisy26 said:

I agree that it looks good now and time will tell, but your examples are really bad. 

Bradford's career has been derailed by injuries. We have no idea if he would have been good or bad. 

Very few people thought Gurley was a bust. His rookie year was unbelievable and you are comparing a qb to rb. 

Winston, Carr and Mariota were all known qbs with large sample sizes. All of them have had some injuries this year with Winston and Carr having serious injuries. 

I think guys like Matt Schuab, Farve,  Scott Mitchell, Matt Cassell are better comparisons and there are mixed results. 

Just saying hindsight is a great thing, he can be judged really when his time in SF is over. TRade looks good now, but it can change in heartbeat. Not comparing other postions, just saying with hindsight a view can change. Looking forward you can have a certain view, looking back you can have a certain view. 

If next year Jimmy, Kamara, Gurley has a bad year the current view will change on them. If Amari Cooper has a good year one thing will be said of 2017, if he has another year like 2017 another view will be taken.

Personally, I like Jimmy G trade so far.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ghostguy123 said:

If the Browns offered the 49ers the #1 pick for JG right now, would they take it?

I say no.

I agree and that says a lot.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ghostguy123 said:

If the Browns offered the 49ers the #1 pick for JG right now, would they take it?

I say no.

That’s a great point. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ghostguy123 said:

If the Browns offered the 49ers the #1 pick for JG right now, would they take it?

I say no.

I think they'd say no for sure.  They've got their guy.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/28/2017 at 0:36 PM, Concept Coop said:

I voted "bad trade" at the time, and was wrong.  Great trade.  

I voted good trade but really wasn't sure.

4 hours ago, ghostguy123 said:

If the Browns offered the 49ers the #1 pick for JG right now, would they take it?

I say no.

Agreed. Lynch might just have a clue. Shanny does too.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Deamon said:

I think they'd say no for sure.  They've got their guy.

So maybe Jimmy G was worth the 1st and 4th after all? 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, msudaisy26 said:

I agree that it looks good now and time will tell, but your examples are really bad. 

Bradford's career has been derailed by injuries. We have no idea if he would have been good or bad. 

Very few people thought Gurley was a bust. His rookie year was unbelievable and you are comparing a qb to rb. 

Winston, Carr and Mariota were all known qbs with large sample sizes. All of them have had some injuries this year with Winston and Carr having serious injuries. 

I think guys like Matt Schuab, Farve,  Scott Mitchell, Matt Cassell are better comparisons and there are mixed results. 

Bradford has not performed like #1 draft pick, reason is why is regardless

Many people were saying his rookie year might be a fluke, perhaps bust was my term

Aside from Carr last year, the 3 of them have no great years, You didnt even say Mariotta is playing for a TE loving, WR killingcoach who should have been fired when the words 'exotic smashmouth' crossed his lips.

and no those guys Cassell, Schaub  Mitchell aren't my comparisons as I wasn't comparing them. I was saying views change year by year. The guys who won this year with Gurley are singing different tune now. With Mariotta, Winston, Carr more was expected this year, but next year if any of them throw 32TD+ and 8 INT, its gonna be a different tune next year. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, bigupsetter said:

Bradford has not performed like #1 draft pick, reason is why is regardless

Many people were saying his rookie year might be a fluke, perhaps bust was my term

Aside from Carr last year, the 3 of them have no great years, You didnt even say Mariotta is playing for a TE loving, WR killingcoach who should have been fired when the words 'exotic smashmouth' crossed his lips.

and no those guys Cassell, Schaub  Mitchell aren't my comparisons as I wasn't comparing them. I was saying views change year by year. The guys who won this year with Gurley are singing different tune now. With Mariotta, Winston, Carr more was expected this year, but next year if any of them throw 32TD+ and 8 INT, its gonna be a different tune next year. 

This was difficult to read/understand.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Deamon said:

This was difficult to read/understand.

He is comparing fantasy stats to real football worth. It doesn't work. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, ghostguy123 said:

So if he 49ers would not trade JG for pick #1, ipso facto, doesnt that pretty much prove it was a hell of a trade?

Nope, because they could have had him for free instead of giving up a draft pick,  and signed him for 5 million a year less so 3 years from now they could use that extra cap space to continue their dynasty and everyone in the league already pinkie swore that they wouldn't try to sign JG. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, msudaisy26 said:

Nope, because they could have had him for free instead of giving up a draft pick,  and signed him for 5 million a year less so 3 years from now they could use that extra cap space to continue their dynasty and everyone in the league already pinkie swore that they wouldn't try to sign JG. 

:lmao:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/29/2017 at 10:44 AM, fightingillini said:

Agree.  Now SF can address other needs at the draft.  They spent a 2.02 pick and moved down 5-7 spots in the 1st round to secure their starting QB for the next few years, maybe longer.  That's a clear win for SF, no matter how FF Ninja tries to argue otherwise.  Sure they are going to have to pay him starting QB market rate, but they were going to do that anyway if they were in the FA market for say Kirk Cousins.  It also will be easier to attract a key free agent to SF.....now they see the team is moving in a positive direction.

Of course we don't know yet if JG an elite QB.  But you don't necessarily need a Tom Brady or Aaron Rodgers (of course it's nice to have!) for your franchise to win a lot of games and even go to the Super Bowl.  Eli Manning won 2 Super Bowls and he's a pretty mediocre NFL QB.  Alex Smith has won a lot of games for KC....and he's a mediocre NFL QB.

What matters is....Garapollo became the starting QB......San Fran started winning games.   And not just against crap opponents.....they just beat Jacksonville, an AFC playoff team.  That matters.  A lot. 

From what I seen so far, Garapollo should be an above average NFL QB.

Yeah.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.