Its interesting to see in here that nearly every Pats fan in the pool (in addition to CCouch) is in here saying every QB needy team should pay through the nose for Garappolo. At the same time, none of you are saying the Pats should hold onto him. Brady may well be done in a year or 2. As you all realize, the Pats won't be getting any early 1st round draft picks while Brady is playing and will be hard pressed to find one when he is gone. If you really think Garap is the best QB short of Brady, you ought to be pushing to keep him for yourselves. The fact that you are all shouting to other teams 'trade for him, trade for him' rings a little bit hollow.
This is a lot like the manning/luck situation. The Colts couldn't keep manning and draft luck - they'd have had too much money tied up under the cap on two qbs. They couldn't trade manning because his salary and dead money would have crippled them under the cap as well. So they ended up releasing him.
But there are some big differences too. Obviously, Jimmy G isn't as highly regarded as Luck as a prospect. And for this year, he's a lot cheaper. Also, Brady is older than manning was, but appears to still be going strong, unlike manning who had just missed a full season with a neck injury.
So the Patriots have a few choices. Trading or releasing Brady isn't really an option - it might end up being the right choice in hindsight but the value he provides to the Patriots organization as a whole is more than any other player or the value that he'd provide to any other team.
They could keep Jimmy G for a year, but then they wouldn't own his rights next off season. This has the most value if Brady gets hurt or retires next off season, but he's clearly indicated that that's not his plan and the pats are in no hurry to force him to retire.
This would also allow them to keep Jimmy G, with the intent of franchising him the next off season if Brady announces 2018 will be his last year. It would be expensive, but reasonable in that specific case.
Or they could trade him now and get what they can for him. For that to make sense, they'd have to her more in value than what he's worth as a backup and as Brady retirement insurance. So there's a floor on the trade talks where they simply keep him if they don't get an offer they like.
So the value they get from trading him needs to be enough that it justifies letting him go - which means no low ball offers - and there are several qbs needy teams that are interested. The other qbs in free agency are pretty ugly - Romo is older with serious health issues, cutler is older with serious ability issues, tyrod might be the prize but he might not make it out if buffalo. The qbs in the draft are not that highly regarded either. So there's good conditions for a bidding war.
If he's a better prospect than trubisky, though, that doesn't mean you should spend the pick you'd have used on trubisky for Jimmy G. You get five relatively cheap years of Trubisky for the price of two. You get to cut ties faster if he's a bust, but I'd still rather have 5 cheap years than 2 if they're equal prospects. There's a case to be made that Jimmy G is a better prospect and that his experience adds value, but it really depends who's asking. And that is where kyle Shanahan's previous interest in him - and Cleveland's extra picks - could make a bidding war.
It feels like the floor on what the pats would take to trade him is a second and the ceiling is an early first. It seems like an early first is unlikely, but possible. The Browns can beat any offer by the 49ers with the 12th pick, which is why that's the logical hope. But that might not be possible, nor their best fit. IMO, if the pats could get a 2019 first from a bottom feeding team, they could be in position to get a franchise QB if that team stays bad. And then they could draft their Brady successor in a stronger class and without killing their cap.
