NFL executives offer their take on the Patriots and the trade possibilities for Jimmy Garoppolo

[Rob0729]

Eh- not sure I'd call it a fluke...they could not beat any good teams in 2008 hence no playoffs.

They only lost 5 games and one of them was the game Brady went down down against KC and Cassel had to go in with no preparation.

And in NFL history, only two teams have ever missed the playoffs with a 11-5 record and one of them are the 2008 Patriots. So yes, it was absolutely a fluke they didn't get into the playoffs.

 

[BobDigital]

I think a lot of people here under value Jimmy and over value draft picks. Don't get me wrong draft picks are great but there is a huge difference between the guy you tend to get at #4 overall and the guy you tend to get at #24.

The deal i keep going back to is the RG3 deal. I really want someone like that if the Pats trade Jimmy. While a middle round first round pick is nice I think around here we over value that pick cause the Pats pick between 24-32 every year pretty much so the guys we hope fall are in the 16-24 range and we get all hyped up for them

 

[Deus Irae]

They only lost 5 games and one of them was the game Brady went down down against KC and Cassel had to go in with no preparation.

And in NFL history, only two teams have ever missed the playoffs with a 11-5 record and one of them are the 2008 Patriots. So yes, it was absolutely a fluke they didn't get into the playoffs.

The Patriots won that game against the Chiefs, 17-10.

 

[pazrul72]

They only lost 5 games and one of them was the game Brady went down down against KC and Cassel had to go in with no preparation.

And in NFL history, only two teams have ever missed the playoffs with a 11-5 record and one of them are the 2008 Patriots. So yes, it was absolutely a fluke they didn't get into the playoffs.

Like dues said they beat KC but lost to all 5 playoff teams they played san Diego, Jets, Miami, Ravens? and Pitt absolutely curb stomped them. I remember the last one cuz it's the only game I want to that year. I am sure with Brady they win at least one of those and they are in. Now a fair number of those losses were earlier in the year and by the end of the season they looked like they could make some noise in the playoffs. However they showed some serious weaknesses against quality competition and it is fair to ask how much of that was the drop from Brady IMO

 

[patfanken]

@Rob0729 No one is saying that Jimmy G. is good enough to force Brady out of the starting role. But I think it's fair to say that he's shown enough potential to merit holding onto for at least 1 more season....and that trading him in the offseason may not be the wisest move after all. Wouldn't you agree?

I don't know how Rob would respond, but I definitely disagree. Every Econ class I took made a point of teaching to buy low and sell high. So the 4 questions that everyone needs to ask themselves BEFORE coming to a conclusion on this topic are:

1. Is there anything about Tom Brady that we've seen thus far that makes you believe that he can't play at a top level for 3 more years (including this one)?

2. Can we make the numbers work to keep JG beyond 2017?

3. When will JG's trade value be at his highest?

4. What do I think about Jacoby Brissett's potential?

The answer to the first one is a resounding NO. I think by this time we are going to have to stop thinking about TB as someone who is going to naturally regress as he reaches 40+. Whatever he does to keep up his physical abilities is working, He is NOT the normal 39 year old, and he won't be the normal 42 year old 3 years from now.

Haven't you heard how so many times the great athletes state remorsefully how they wished their physical body matched their mental capacity to play the game. Well we all know that to start Brady's MIND is his biggest weapon. It's never been about his physical prowess.....EVER. He also plays at a position where his mind is actually more important than his physical prowess.

Bottom line, as long a Brady has the motivation and mental focus to prepare for a season, he can probably play QB well enough to get a job in the NFL. So it's not great stretch to think that he CAN play at an elite level for the next 3 years. And if you believe that, then there is no way to keep JG. The "stars" (contracts) just don't align. The fact is that as long as Brady is on the team, JG is NOT going to be the best QB on the team.

2. The answer to this one is NO. ESPECIALLY given all the FA issues the team is going to have after this season. The ONLY way I can see keeping JG after the 2o17 season is to franchising him, and we will be very hard pressed after all the signing that has to be done in this off season to give JG over 22MM to be the back up QB in 2018. Does that sound like the "Patriot Way" to you? PLUS Brady's dead money issues make him very tough to get rid of, even if you wanted to go that route.

3. Unfortunately his highest trade value is going to be after THIS season. You won't get half that value if you wait until after the 2017 season for 2 reasons. First you will only have a matter of days to put a trade together before you'd have to franchise him or let him go. So you lose a LOT of leverage. Second, any GM will not want to give us the farm AND have to pay Jimmy big bucks.

If you trade him THIS year, giving us a high first plus multiple picks in the future will be a LOT easier to sell to his owner and fans if you get a full year to assess JG before you have to pay him over $2oMM/yr as a starter.

So it's not now or never to trade, but it is if you want to MAXIMIZE the asset.

4. The reason most people want to keep JG is to protect us if Brady DOES hit the 40 year old wall, and we need to move on from Brady. But I ask, what about Jacoby Brissett. He and JG are different physically, as well as where they are in their development as NFL QB's. but BOTH have shown that "the moment" isn't too big. They both have shown that they have good leadership skills as well as being smart students of the game.

So given that no one can tell the future, trading JG after this season DOES involve some risk. BUT, having JG on the roster for 3 more years after this season, does mitigate a good deal of that risk. Brady didn't come into this league with a great arm and quick release. He worked to get those things added to his arsenal. JB doesn't have the quick release Jimmy has, nor does he nearly have the command of the offense. But given what we know about JB's work ethic and dedication to the game, (and having Brady as a mentor), who is to say he won't be JG's equal....in 2 years time. Again, yes it is a risk, but you have to admit JB's presence mitigates that risk to some degree.

BOTTOM LINE - When you consider the answers to these 4 questions, it is hard to conclude that keeping JG beyond this season is the best strategy for the long term interests of the team. Ideally, in another era, we would be able to keep both and just wait for Brady to hit the wall, whenever. But with the cap and short rookie contracts, it just doesn't make sense.

But thanks for asking.

 

[aluminum seats]

I don't know how Rob would respond, but I definitely disagree. Every Econ class I took made a point of teaching to buy low and sell high. So the 4 questions that everyone needs to ask themselves BEFORE coming to a conclusion on this topic are:

1. Is there anything about Tom Brady that we've seen thus far that makes you believe that he can't play at a top level for 3 more years (including this one)?

2. Can we make the numbers work to keep JG beyond 2017?

3. When will JG's trade value be at his highest?

4. What do I think about Jacoby Brissett's potential?

The answer to the first one is a resounding NO. I think by this time we are going to have to stop thinking about TB as someone who is going to naturally regress as he reaches 40+. Whatever he does to keep up his physical abilities is working, He is NOT the normal 39 year old, and he won't be the normal 42 year old 3 years from now.

Haven't you heard how so many times the great athletes state remorsefully how they wished their physical body matched their mental capacity to play the game. Well we all know that to start Brady's MIND is his biggest weapon. It's never been about his physical prowess.....EVER. He also plays at a position where his mind is actually more important than his physical prowess.

Bottom line, as long a Brady has the motivation and mental focus to prepare for a season, he can probably play QB well enough to get a job in the NFL. So it's not great stretch to think that he CAN play at an elite level for the next 3 years. And if you believe that, then there is no way to keep JG. The "stars" (contracts) just don't align. The fact is that as long as Brady is on the team, JG is NOT going to be the best QB on the team.

2. The answer to this one is NO. ESPECIALLY given all the FA issues the team is going to have after this season. The ONLY way I can see keeping JG after the 2o17 season is to franchising him, and we will be very hard pressed after all the signing that has to be done in this off season to give JG over 22MM to be the back up QB in 2018. Does that sound like the "Patriot Way" to you? PLUS Brady's dead money issues make him very tough to get rid of, even if you wanted to go that route.

3. Unfortunately his highest trade value is going to be after THIS season. You won't get half that value if you wait until after the 2017 season for 2 reasons. First you will only have a matter of days to put a trade together before you'd have to franchise him or let him go. So you lose a LOT of leverage. Second, any GM will not want to give us the farm AND have to pay Jimmy big bucks.

If you trade him THIS year, giving us a high first plus multiple picks in the future will be a LOT easier to sell to his owner and fans if you get a full year to assess JG before you have to pay him over $2oMM/yr as a starter.

So it's not now or never to trade, but it is if you want to MAXIMIZE the asset.

4. The reason most people want to keep JG is to protect us if Brady DOES hit the 40 year old wall, and we need to move on from Brady. But I ask, what about Jacoby Brissett. He and JG are different physically, as well as where they are in their development as NFL QB's. but BOTH have shown that "the moment" isn't too big. They both have shown that they have good leadership skills as well as being smart students of the game.

So given that no one can tell the future, trading JG after this season DOES involve some risk. BUT, having JG on the roster for 3 more years after this season, does mitigate a good deal of that risk. Brady didn't come into this league with a great arm and quick release. He worked to get those things added to his arsenal. JB doesn't have the quick release Jimmy has, nor does he nearly have the command of the offense. But given what we know about JB's work ethic and dedication to the game, (and having Brady as a mentor), who is to say he won't be JG's equal....in 2 years time. Again, yes it is a risk, but you have to admit JB's presence mitigates that risk to some degree.

BOTTOM LINE - When you consider the answers to these 4 questions, it is hard to conclude that keeping JG beyond this season is not the best strategy for the long term interests of the team. Ideally, in another era, we would be able to keep both and just wait for Brady to hit the wall, whenever. But with the cap and short rookie contracts, it just doesn't make sense.

But thanks for asking.

Thoughtful post and I agree with a lot of it, but I'm pretty sure Brissett is not the quarterback of the future for the Pats.

 

[patfanken]

Thoughtful post and I agree with a lot of it, but I'm pretty sure Brissett is not the quarterback of the future for the Pats.

He may not be, but let me ask you for more specifics on WHY you feel that way?

 

[rookBoston]

I think a lot of people are really underestimating BB's confidence in the ability of his staff to teach and groom young QB prospects into credible players. BB is on record saying that he likes to invest in young QBs, training them up, to create value for the franchise. It's expressly part of his roster strategy.

I don't buy the argument that you can't trade away a potential franchise QB, or that if you're lucky enough to have one in reserve you somehow need to desperately cling to him because they're so scarce. That's seems like one of those GM "rules" of the NFL that only applies to franchises that have no idea how to develop talent. Sure, if your franchise is just throwing darts at the draft board and hoping that through some incredible stroke of luck you get a guy that can win games for you, then of course it'll be hard to find a player who can carry your team. But mostly the reason QBs are scarce in the league is because the majority of teams just have no idea how to grow a QB, or scheme for what they do well. That's coaching and management, not an accident of tripping over previously unappreciated talent.

The fact that BB turned Hoyer, Cassell and other assorted flotsam into viable NFL QBs is a seriously impressive thing. Those guys would have been trash if they'd pursued their career anywhere other than Foxboro. Jimmy's floor was than either of those guys coming out of school, but he wasn't a finished product by any stretch-- and still isn't. If Jimmy had been drafted by the Browns, his confidence and spirit and interest in game would be completed crushed out of him, by now. In a way, he's lucky that he landed in Foxboro, where he could learn his craft at the hands of an elite coaching staff and a supportive team. And, the flip is true too... for example, I think if BB had the grooming and coaching of Ryan Tannehill instead of the series of HCs that kid's had in Miami, I think he could have been "really special".

Myself, I think BB has been planning to flip JAG all along, and then focus his attention forward on growing the next promising youngster on intricacies of the position. I think he's already got his next backup QB is already on the roster in Brissette, nose deep into the playbook. Granted, Brissette's raw, really raw. But he has some leadership intangibles that actually feel superior to JAG. They're totally different players with different strengths, but as BB would say, there are many ways to be successful at the position.

Developing players is what this staff does. At every position. If some team offers a package for Jimmy, I think BB will certainly take it, and then move on. It's just "next man up" in different clothing.

 

[IllegalContact]

I don't know how Rob would respond, but I definitely disagree. Every Econ class I took made a point of teaching to buy low and sell high. So the 4 questions that everyone needs to ask themselves BEFORE coming to a conclusion on this topic are:

1. Is there anything about Tom Brady that we've seen thus far that makes you believe that he can't play at a top level for 3 more years (including this one)?

yes....it's called what happened to manning after he threw for 5500 yards and 55 TD's

2. Can we make the numbers work to keep JG beyond 2017?

who knows.......it would depend on where Brady is at at the end of the 2017 season......it would appear to be workable on the assumption that 2018 would be Brady's last year

3. When will JG's trade value be at his highest?

probably after 2016 season..........but there's value in keeping him even if it means getting less after the 2017 season...paying for assurances for a year and potentially beyond

4. What do I think about Jacoby Brissett's potential?

meh......he was OK......but slow release and questionable throwing mechanics...I think he has a career as a solid backup, but that's about it

The answer to the first one is a resounding NO. I think by this time we are going to have to stop thinking about TB as someone who is going to naturally regress as he reaches 40+. Whatever he does to keep up his physical abilities is working, He is NOT the normal 39 year old, and he won't be the normal 42 year old 3 years from now.

Haven't you heard how so many times the great athletes state remorsefully how they wished their physical body matched their mental capacity to play the game. Well we all know that to start Brady's MIND is his biggest weapon. It's never been about his physical prowess.....EVER. He also plays at a position where his mind is actually more important than his physical prowess.

Bottom line, as long a Brady has the motivation and mental focus to prepare for a season, he can probably play QB well enough to get a job in the NFL. So it's not great stretch to think that he CAN play at an elite level for the next 3 years. And if you believe that, then there is no way to keep JG. The "stars" (contracts) just don't align. The fact is that as long as Brady is on the team, JG is NOT going to be the best QB on the team.

2. The answer to this one is NO. ESPECIALLY given all the FA issues the team is going to have after this season. The ONLY way I can see keeping JG after the 2o17 season is to franchising him, and we will be very hard pressed after all the signing that has to be done in this off season to give JG over 22MM to be the back up QB in 2018. Does that sound like the "Patriot Way" to you? PLUS Brady's dead money issues make him very tough to get rid of, even if you wanted to go that route.

3. Unfortunately his highest trade value is going to be after THIS season. You won't get half that value if you wait until after the 2017 season for 2 reasons. First you will only have a matter of days to put a trade together before you'd have to franchise him or let him go. So you lose a LOT of leverage. Second, any GM will not want to give us the farm AND have to pay Jimmy big bucks.

If you trade him THIS year, giving us a high first plus multiple picks in the future will be a LOT easier to sell to his owner and fans if you get a full year to assess JG before you have to pay him over $2oMM/yr as a starter.

So it's not now or never to trade, but it is if you want to MAXIMIZE the asset.

4. The reason most people want to keep JG is to protect us if Brady DOES hit the 40 year old wall, and we need to move on from Brady. But I ask, what about Jacoby Brissett. He and JG are different physically, as well as where they are in their development as NFL QB's. but BOTH have shown that "the moment" isn't too big. They both have shown that they have good leadership skills as well as being smart students of the game.

So given that no one can tell the future, trading JG after this season DOES involve some risk. BUT, having JG on the roster for 3 more years after this season, does mitigate a good deal of that risk. Brady didn't come into this league with a great arm and quick release. He worked to get those things added to his arsenal. JB doesn't have the quick release Jimmy has, nor does he nearly have the command of the offense. But given what we know about JB's work ethic and dedication to the game, (and having Brady as a mentor), who is to say he won't be JG's equal....in 2 years time. Again, yes it is a risk, but you have to admit JB's presence mitigates that risk to some degree.

BOTTOM LINE - When you consider the answers to these 4 questions, it is hard to conclude that keeping JG beyond this season is not the best strategy for the long term interests of the team. Ideally, in another era, we would be able to keep both and just wait for Brady to hit the wall, whenever. But with the cap and short rookie contracts, it just doesn't make sense.

But thanks for asking.

draft picks are a crapshoot.......their value in this instance are overrated......especially if you wind up without a decent QB

 

[Deus Irae]

The fact that BB turned Hoyer, Cassell and other assorted flotsam into viable NFL QBs is a seriously impressive thing.

Not really. He missed on

Bishop (inherited, but couldn't coach him up)
Davey
Kingsbury
O'Connell
Mallett

so there is no "other assorted flotsam".

 

[BradyFTW!]

Not really. He missed on

Bishop (inherited, but couldn't coach him up)
Davey
Kingsbury
O'Connell
Mallett

so there is no "other assorted flotsam".

To frame it a little differently, he chose 8 total quarterbacks (Davey, Kingsburg, O'Connell, Mallett, Garoppolo, Hoyer, Cassel and Brady), invested very little draft capital overall to get them, and ended up batting .500 on turning them into viable NFL QBs who are at least capable of being credible stopgap starters. Assuming that Garoppolo falls into the latter group.

It's not perfect by any stretch, but I think it's fair to say it's a notable accomplishment.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Like dues said they beat KC but lost to all 5 playoff teams they played san Diego, Jets, Miami, Ravens? and Pitt absolutely curb stomped them. I remember the last one cuz it's the only game I want to that year. I am sure with Brady they win at least one of those and they are in. Now a fair number of those losses were earlier in the year and by the end of the season they looked like they could make some noise in the playoffs. However they showed some serious weaknesses against quality competition and it is fair to ask how much of that was the drop from Brady IMO

They did annihilate the Cardinals, who ended up playing in the Super Bowl, so that's the one playoff team they beat. They also split against Miami, for whatever that's worth. Still, I think it's fair to say that they generally lost to good teams and beat bad teams, and were lucky enough to play a lot of bad teams. If Brady stays healthy, I think going 16-0 again is near 50/50 proposition based on the talent of that team and ease of schedule. I also think it's fair to say that Garoppolo showed more in 6 quarters than Cassel did in 16 games.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

1. Is there anything about Tom Brady that we've seen thus far that makes you believe that he can't play at a top level for 3 more years (including this one)?

You're treating this as a binary point when it isn't. It's all probabilities and likelihoods (and guesstimates).

 

[aluminum seats]

He may not be, but let me ask you for more specifics on WHY you feel that way?

Totally fair question, and I'll answer with something that really isn't fair, because if it's not subjective, it's based on so many little things that it might as well be subjective--like the Malcolm Gladwell Blink idea.

When I look at QBs, unlike most other positions, there's simply a sense I get watching them play. It's not based on nothing--you look at mechanics, arm strength, physical measurables--but there is something else that comes into play that I can't quite put my finger on, that I don't see in Brissett. If I intellectually try to force it--maybe I see a bit of Ben R in him, and that guy's won Super Bowls--I can fool myself a little, but that's what it feels like, trying to convince myself. Just don't see it with this guy. For what it's worth, very much didn't see it/feel it with Mallett, Hoyer, and most of these other guys. JG I think may have it. Possibly, anyway.

See? Totally unfair and perfectly valid to rip this post to shreds. But there it is.

 

[bbobbo]

Totally fair question, and I'll answer with something that really isn't fair, because if it's not subjective, it's based on so many little things that it might as well be subjective--like the Malcolm Gladwell Blink idea.

When I look at QBs, unlike most other positions, there's simply a sense I get watching them play. It's not based on nothing--you look at mechanics, arm strength, physical measurables--but there is something else that comes into play that I can't quite put my finger on, that I don't see in Brissett. If I intellectually try to force it--maybe I see a bit of Ben R in him, and that guy's won Super Bowls--I can fool myself a little, but that's what it feels like, trying to convince myself. Just don't see it with this guy. For what it's worth, very much didn't see it/feel it with Mallett, Hoyer, and most of these other guys. JG I think may have it. Possibly, anyway.

See? Totally unfair and perfectly valid to rip this post to shreds. But there it is.

 

[IllegalContact]

To frame it a little differently, he chose 8 total quarterbacks (Davey, Kingsburg, O'Connell, Mallett, Garoppolo, Hoyer, Cassel and Brady), invested very little draft capital overall to get them, and ended up batting .500 on turning them into viable NFL QBs who are at least capable of being credible stopgap starters. Assuming that Garoppolo falls into the latter group.

It's not perfect by any stretch, but I think it's fair to say it's a notable accomplishment.

depends on your definition of 'viable NFL QB'

Garoppolo, even with his small data set has eclipsed all of them.....he is the only one who poses a legitimate possibility to take the team far into the playoffs

 

[patfanken]

You're treating this as a binary point when it isn't. It's all probabilities and likelihoods (and guesstimates).

Well all predictions of future events are "probabilities, likelihoods, and guesstimates". I had hoped I made that clear in my post. Maybe if I make a direct comparison it would help. Brett Farve is another elite QB who had a spectacular season at the age of 40 directing a new offense on a new team. His next year at 41 wasn't nearly as good. But any comparisons on the way Brady prepares for a season and Farve aren't even close. So if Brett Farve can excell at 40, I have to be believe it's likely Brady can do as well at 42. And remember, even at the end, scrambling was a big part of Farve's game, it has never been part of Brady's.

Bottom Line, Farve was a physically gifted QB who excelled into his 40. Brady, who takes, way better care of his body, and is on a better team, where he has intimate knowledge of the system, is likely to perform better, and longer. Farve is just an example that a QB CAN play well at 40. Brady is just an example of WHY paying into his 40's is not only possible but likely, (as long as his iron will is there)

 

[Deus Irae]

To frame it a little differently, he chose 8 total quarterbacks (Davey, Kingsburg, O'Connell, Mallett, Garoppolo, Hoyer, Cassel and Brady), invested very little draft capital overall to get them, and ended up batting .500 on turning them into viable NFL QBs who are at least capable of being credible stopgap starters. Assuming that Garoppolo falls into the latter group.

It's not perfect by any stretch, but I think it's fair to say it's a notable accomplishment.

You're overrating the return, and minimizing the investment, IMO. They are, essentially, 1 for 8 in the develop and flip department, with significant whiffs on O'Connell and Mallett. Hoyer qualifies as a member of the "developed without bringing back trade returns" club.

That's not notable. It's disappointing. Outside of Brady, this team has been more successful with QB conversion projects than with QBs.

 

[pazrul72]

Totally fair question, and I'll answer with something that really isn't fair, because if it's not subjective, it's based on so many little things that it might as well be subjective--like the Malcolm Gladwell Blink idea.

When I look at QBs, unlike most other positions, there's simply a sense I get watching them play. It's not based on nothing--you look at mechanics, arm strength, physical measurables--but there is something else that comes into play that I can't quite put my finger on, that I don't see in Brissett. If I intellectually try to force it--maybe I see a bit of Ben R in him, and that guy's won Super Bowls--I can fool myself a little, but that's what it feels like, trying to convince myself. Just don't see it with this guy. For what it's worth, very much didn't see it/feel it with Mallett, Hoyer, and most of these other guys. JG I think may have it. Possibly, anyway.

See? Totally unfair and perfectly valid to rip this post to shreds. t there it is.

The proverbial IT. You can't describe it or explain it you just know it when you see it. For me it's the right play when it matters the most.

The first time I knew Jimmy had it was that 3rd and 14 throw in the 4th of the Arizona game to Amendola. That was as big boy a throw as you will get in the NFL. I would guess 70% of NFL QB's couldn't make it. After that I knew he could be a top 10ish franchise QB some team is gonna spend big time draft picks on. My starting price would be a top 15 pick and see where the bidding goes from there. Less than that and we have the best back up in the league for another year and a half. I think a fair deal might be a #1 this year and a 4th next that can become say a third with Jimmy taking 50% of the snaps, a second for 80%, or a first with 80% and playoffs...or something along those lines so both teams accept some of the risk that Jimmy is just awesome with the patriot weapons.

I disagree that Brisket doesn't have IT. From my point of view he is doing a ton of the little things right. His team mates seem to genuinely enjoy playing for him and thats the kind of leader you need your QB to be, the kind guys would run thru a brick wall for. He didn't make a ton of flashy plays but he didn't make any stupid mistakes (besides the fumble) either. IMO it's a lot easier to teach someone how to do the right things then it is to unlearn doing the wrong things and from all accounts he is a motivated smart open to coaching guy so I am excited to see where he will be in 2-3 years.

 

[ALP]

answer this question yall:

Brady at current level for 4 years after this one, OR
GAR at a top 10 starting QB level for 10 years?

the only unknown in the first 1 is can he last that long, or can he last longer?
the unkonwns in the 2nd one are can GAR be a top 10 QB consistently? year after year w/ film on him? will he want to stay in NE? will he want top QB money and hinder our roster? will he be able to handle injuries? can he handle weak weapons/receivers round him? is he a good leader? is he clutch?

to me, there are just too many unknowns in the 2nd scenario, I love Gar, but gimme Brady until the end, be it bitter or be it sweet

you simply do not get rid of the GOAT for an unknown, you. just. dont.