tom444
Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2015
- Messages
- 8,800
- Reaction score
- 2,825
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.I like most of what you wrote. It is well thought out and put together, so please don't take this the wrong way when I only respond to the one thing I disagree with. Having said that....
No team is going to give the Patriots the bounty of picks they want for a 1-year trial at Garoppolo's current deal. Then they will have the problem in 1 year where they have to franchise him right away (or lose him to UFA).
Any team interested in trading for Garoppolo would have to have worked out a deal with him in advance. They would need some protection of their own.
I found the reality of that sentence hilarious.Brissett and JG could ironically be Brady's off spring age wise, and at their age, they got hurt.
Thoughts? Angry comments?
DW Toys
In the end there can be only one reason to keep JG on the roster for this season. Just ONE! And that is the belief within the FO that Tom Brady will NOT play for the Patriots past the 2017 season. It's that simple, folks.
The "franchise theory" doesn't hold water by any stretch of the imagination. Besides the kid wants to PLAY, not to sit another 2 years. No, JG is playing his last season for the Pats UNLESS Brady is a goner after this season. And do you really believe that Brady won't be the best QB the Pats could put on the field for the 2018 season.
Now I know the fact that Brady might be "willing" to play 5 or 6 more years, is VERY speculative. But I DO know that by any reasonable expectation based on his last 3 seasons of play' Tom Brady being able to play at at top 10 level for the next 2 season is about a sure a bet as you can make today.
If there are those who would keep JG on the roster this season purely as insurance for a team looking to win one more superbowl, then I would opine that you are wasting a valuable asset, 3 years in the making, for nothing. IF Brissett isn't your cup of tea, then I would suggest Ryan Fitzpatrick as a quality back up, who might thrive in that role..
As for Cleveland giving us a reasonable offer, I don't see how they cannot give one worthwhile. They simply have TOO many picks over the next 2 seasons to build long term success and they know it. Something like the 12th, 52nd and a conditiional pick in 2018 that would likely end up a 2nd but possibly a first should do the trick. To the Browns Garapolo would be cheap at the price.
Ergo, my strong belief is that IF JG is on the roster come September than we will be watching Tom Brady's last season as te Pats QB. There is simply no other possible explanation.
I just don't think the logic makes much sense. Is he a franchise QB of the future or not? If you believe he is, then you condition the trade on signing him to a long term deal. If you don't believe he is a franchise QB, then why would you trade all those picks? You'll never have more leverage because he is probably eager to play.I was thinking about this a bit and I'm not so sure because there's risk in both.
On the one hand, you risk having to franchise him for a year, or else you might lose him.
On the other hand, you could sign him to a really large extension without even seeing him (Brock Osweiler).
So let's say you are planning on giving him a similar deal to Brock (4 years, $72M, $37M guaranteed). If you give it to him right after trading for him, you're potentially stuck with a bunch of dead money if it doesn't work out. Not only did you lose your draft pick, you're killing your cap situation and might have to do a similar deal that the Texans did.
Alternatively, let's say you wait a year. If he sucks, at least you're free moving forward. If he's good, you could franchise him ($21M this year, should go up a bit next year). You probably need to give him a bigger deal than Brock's at that point. It might be 4 years, $85M, with $45M guaranteed or something.
But you still have that cheap year to balance it out to a 5-year, $86M deal with $45M guaranteed. Your average per year would still balance out similarly, your guaranteed money might be more, but you feel a lot better about it.
In my mind, the first scenario carries significantly more risk. In the second, your costs go up but balancing with that first cheap year makes it not much more really.
I just don't think the logic makes much sense. Is he a franchise QB of the future or not? If you believe he is, then you condition the trade on signing him to a long term deal. If you don't believe he is a franchise QB, then why would you trade all those picks? You'll never have more leverage because he is probably eager to play.
You don't trade #12 and #33 for a guy unless you think he is a franchise QB. So if he plays like a franchise QB in 2017, 4 years and $85 million will not do it in 2018 (not to mention, you can't force him to sign a deal if he just doesn't like it there).
The franchise tag might not necessarily do it either. Even if he accepts the tag then ok, you've bought a 2nd year. Then what? Also, remember... in this hypothetical, you've given up 2 first rounders for the guy in 2017 (ok ok #33 isn't a first rounder but it's close enough)... so if he plays like a franchise QB, some other team might give up 2 first rounders for him in 2018. Sure you get some picks back but you've wasted a whole lot of time and you're right back where you started.
Great minds think alike.....I'm thinking that was the plan....... 3 and a half weeks until the draft and I still think he gets traded......Was that to expedite the learning curve while anticipating a JG trade?
You are simply guessing. Either they will get enough to trade him or they won't. There is no reason to trade between now and draft day. When Bill gets the final offer he will make a decision.At the end of the day if a trade was going to be done before the 2017 draft I think it would be done now. There's nothing to gain from waiting. The picture today is almost exactly what it will be on draft day.
The fact that BB hasn't moved by now tells me that even if he is going to trade Garoppolo, it will not be for 2017 draft assets at all. That trade would have been done by now if it was happening.
The only things left worth waiting for, besides Cleveland taking complete and utter leave of their senses that is, are things that we won't know until players report to training camp. We could still deal Jimmy G this offseason, but I suspect that if 2017 draft assets were what BB wanted in this trade he'd already be a Cleveland Brown. The offers on the table are more than generous enough to be tempting.
That tells me that BB wants more certainly, or in other words more information about all of Brissett, Garoppolo and Brady, before he pulls the trigger on any trade, and there simply isn't going to be any more certainty between now and the draft. I could be mistaken but I believe the next real data point for all 3 quarterbacks comes at training camp and not before. And I think BB will also have drafted another QB and be able to know who he has in the fold and what he expects from that player.
Which in turn tells me that if the Browns want Garoppolo they need to position themselves to deal 2018 picks for him. The timing isn't right for a trade based on the 2017 picks the Browns have hoarded
You are simply guessing. Either they will get enough to trade him or they won't. There is no reason to trade between now and draft day. When Bill gets the final offer he will make a decision.
I think
I suspect
I could be mistaken but I believe
And I think
I have a feeling.
Worry about that starting in one year.
We are in this position BECAUSE BB thinks ahead and isn't totally focused on the short term when it comes to the roster.
This is the 2nd long post by DW that to me seems reasonable and well thought out. I am worried that I may be going senile.
The Ost suggestion is creative thinking outside the box but I don't think #1 is ever gonna happen, so I'm ignoring that part.
#s 12 & 33 should happen but 2 parties need agree. I'm in the camp that JAG has little trade value to the Pats in 2018.
There is another possible explanation, which meshes with what Schefter reported. The Patriots just don't know right now and having JG on the roster in case Brady declines is valuable to them, more valuable than several draft picks due to the position and its importance.
Key words were "unchartered territory" when Schefter described the Patriots reasoning. No one has played as well as Brady at 39. Will he show signs of decline in 2017? Will it matter, and will they still replace him? Maybe they need to take another year to test JG as well.
In other words, it's complicated. Keeping JG does not mean that TB12 is gone next season. It means that is an option. If Brady has a year like 2016 and Garoppollo shows he is injury prone or has other leadership issues, hard to imagine they replace Brady. If JG appears to be a worthy successor and the Patriots aren't buying TB's long-term plans as realistic, they can go the other way.
I think they see 2017 as a key evaluation season, and nothing has been set in stone. That's essentially what Schefter reported, and I trust his sources more than anyone else.
No one is taking Schefter's report at face value. He did say they would be willing to trade JG for a huge return, which they didn't expect to get. That lines up exactly with what has played out. I think they are asking Cleveland for #1 overall plus another conditional high round pick.