Would you trade Garoppolo to the Cowboys?

[Brady6]

May be

It is actually a near certainty unless you expect that the team is going to extend him while he is still a backup QB because he did really well against the Chiefs in a blowout loss.

http://patscap.com/garoppolo.html#garoppolo

 

[Brady6]

No the Draftnik fools would want to eliminate useless Backup QBs, and draft a Flavor of the day, like a stone hand WR who can run 4.4; or an OL that is only 275 Lbs; or a RB who is slow but makes up for it by being 380 Lbs.

I would have taken Trai Turner at #62 and we would have a starting all pro level OG for a decade. Instead we have backup QB who may or may not be the next starting QB of the team.

 

[frongi]

GAP is the Patriots only backup QB. There's a huge risk/reward issue here.

Bryant's deal is up at the end of the year.

As for Murray, he's running behind a tremendous line and he's still putting the ball on the ground way too often, and we know how well that goes over with coach Bill Belichick.

I can definitely see why people would be against trading the team's only backup QB, especially for those two particular players.

Not having a backup qb would obviously be an issue, but a low cost move could be made to bring in a backup qb. the chance that brady goes down and JG leads us to a super bowl that another backup couldn't is much lower than the increased chance of winning a super bowl in the next few years with martin.

He played well in KC limitedly and played well in Chicago limitedly as well as the preseason.

Also he just LOOKS right.

By your logic you should never draft a QB #1 overall cause he has not proven anything in a real nfl game. In fact every player who has any nfl experience is worth more than every draft pick.

I am not bashing on you I am just saying all we can do is try to assess his value by the limited information we have. Right now I'd say it looks pretty high. A lot of QBs were taken in front of him that look to be bust already. If you could trade Garoppolo and get a top 10 pick to use on a QB how comfortable would you feel that the guy you get would be better than him? I would not be so sure. I think i would stay with Garapollo from what i have seen.

That is a completely erroneous extrapolation of my logic. I would really like to know how you got there. I said that a rookie qb selected in the second round with no experience is not worth a first round pick. I said that someone who has proven to be a stud at his position (all of murray, martin, and bryant) are worth more than said qb.

How is that equivalent to saying every player with experience is worth more than a draft pick? How is that saying to never take a QB #1 overall? Those are rhetorical questions. Please don't try to answer because there is no answer that makes any sense, other than admitting I didn't say either of those things or anything equivalent to them.

He hasn't had a real chance to shine yet.

Martin has had the chance, and he has been shining.

You are the Insane one.

Only 55% of 2nd round picks, ever play. That is the average success rate for all teams for the past decade. But after a TC, you can tell who the keepers are, and Polo has already passed the test.

He appears to be a raw keeper, just like Brady appeared to be, as a TC rookie, and that caused Belichick to carry 4 QBs, a very, very, unusual situation.

He has already outplayed a couple of first rounders, so his value is already a First plus more. But the Pats will need a successor to Brady relatively soon, and QB candidates are hard to find.

First of all, he has not done anything in a true game situation (ie other than garbage time). he has yet to outplay anyone. Second, outplaying a first round bust does not make someone worth a first rounder. By that logic, colt mccoy is now worth a first round pick. Third, one TC is not a good indicator of if someone is a keeper or not. if it was, every qb who has been a bust would have been cut after his first TC.

I appreciate you calling me insane for no reason though. Now I know I should put you on ignore. I don't know what I'll do without your unsourced stats, but I'll have to find a way to manage.

Dallas trading any of those for a rookie day two pick who has yet to play a *meaningful* snap would be insanity. Or highway robbery on our part. Whichever of the two tickles your fancy.

Want to be friends? We may not agree on everything in the future, but at least we know we are both rational.

How has outplayed anyone? He has thrown 10 passes all in garbage time of blowouts. He has not passed any test because he has not had a test.

You are overhyping a player that you know very little about. He has a long way to go and many question marks unanswered. Zach Martin has actually passed the test with an A++ so I would make that trade in a minute without thinking twice. I think you and others forget Garopollo is not even signed through the season we are slated to need a QB to replace Brady.

Agreed, and thank you for the defense. Can't believe how outnumbered we are here.

 

[AzPatsFan]

I would have taken Trai Turner at #62 and we would have a starting all pro level OG for a decade. Instead we have backup QB who may or may not be the next starting QB of the team.

Quod est Demonstratum. !!!!

 

[rochrist]

... if Kurt Warner can play well in his 40s Tom Brady certainly can too.

Considering that Kurt Warner retired at the age of 38, I'm not sure what you're trying to prove.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Quod est Demonstratum. !!!!

[PEDANT]QED = quod erat demonstrandum, "that which was to be demonstrated."[/PEDANT]

 

[AzPatsFan]

[PEDANT]QED = quod erat demonstrandum, "that which was to be demonstrated."[/PEDANT]

I prefer "Thus it is demonstrated". Q. E. D.

Thanks, ctpatsfan77. It is nice to know that all classical education has not disappeared.

 

[Brady6]

Considering that Kurt Warner retired at the age of 38, I'm not sure what you're trying to prove.

That is your response? Your argument is so weak that all you can do is focus on one sentence in a three paragraph post in which I got a players retirement age wrong by a year or two.

 

[Brady6]

Quod est Demonstratum. !!!!

Cool phrase but I'm not exactly sure how it fits as a response to my post.

 

[Marinlik]

That is your response? Your argument is so weak that all you can do is focus on one sentence in a three paragraph post in which I got a players retirement age wrong by a year or two.

When you are so close to 40, 2 years is quite a big difference.

 

[patchick]

My reason for trading Garopollo is that my belief has always been that the best time to draft Brady’s heir apparent is the 2016 draft

OK, but my reasons for NOT trading him, at least not lightly, have nothing to do with him becoming Brady's eventual successor. As I wrote earlier:

IMO he has two separate values:
1. The sole backup QB on a playoff-bound team halfway into its season
2. The long-term promising young backup to a 37-year-old QB

A competent backup can make or break a game, or a season. Last season the Packers were 6-3 with Aaron Rodgers, but 2-4-1 without him because all they had at the position was Scott Tolzien.

 

[Oswlek]

People are still complaining about using a 2nd round pick on Gops? Really?

 

[condon84]

This thread reminds me of those wacky "Trade Mallet to XYZ team".

Back then, Fitzgerald and a first round pick was the going price.

 

[patchick]

People are still complaining about using a 2nd round pick on Gops? Really?

I was fine with the pick at the time, and I still am. But IMO fans who objected to the position choice should still feel that way, as Gropp remains a quarterback. The squirrely thing would be to say :

"No WAY should they waste #62 on any QB! RIDICULOUS!! Unless, you know, he actually turns out to be a good player, in which case nevermind."

 

[Oswlek]

I was fine with the pick at the time, and I still am. But IMO fans who objected to the position choice should still feel that way, as Gropp remains a quarterback. The squirrely thing would be to say :

"No WAY should they waste #62 on any QB! RIDICULOUS!! Unless, you know, he actually turns out to be a good player, in which case nevermind."

Ha!

What gets me is how many self-professed draft experts are bothered by JG's selection. I barely watch college at all and even I knew that NE was going to take a QB in the first three rounds. Hell, when Bridgewater started slipping, I prepared myself for a first round QB, let alone at #62 where success rates aren't nearly at the inflated perception Pats fans seem to have.

When your backup blows, your starter is 37 and middling vets cost $4mm a year, investing even a relatively high pick in a QB is a no brainer.

 

[Deus Irae]

Ha!

What gets me is how many self-professed draft experts are bothered by JG's selection. I barely watch college at all and even I knew that NE was going to take a QB in the first three rounds. Hell, when Bridgewater started slipping, I prepared myself for a first round QB, let alone at #62 where success aren't nearly at the inflated perception Pats fans seem to have.

When your backup blows, your starter is 37 and middling vets cost $4mm a year, investing even a relatively high pick in a QB is a no brainer.

It was a terrible pick. Calling others "self professed experts" when you're grading the pick as a "no brainer" yourself, is the height of irony, btw.

 

[patchick]

It was a terrible pick. Calling others "self professed experts" when you're grading the pick as a "no brainer" yourself, is the height of irony, btw.

I believe that in the past 24 hours you've said that Gropp was "a terrible pick" at #62 overall...and that you wouldn't trade him for a 1st rounder. Football's a complicated business, eh?

 

[Deus Irae]

I believe that in the past 24 hours you've said that Gropp was "a terrible pick" at #62 overall...and that you wouldn't trade him for a 1st rounder. Football's a complicated business, eh?

Indeed, it is. FTR, while I like what JAG has shown so far, I'd have said the same about Mallett, in terms of the trade, because of the overall circumstances. And I'm sure you know just how little I liked Mallet.

The Patriots last 2 drafts have had two terrible second round picks that were terrible for reasons that have nothing at all to do with the specific player taken. First (NFL) world problems...

 

[rochrist]

That is your response? Your argument is so weak that all you can do is focus on one sentence in a three paragraph post in which I got a players retirement age wrong by a year or two.

Eh. It isn't worth it to argue over that wall of text. You didn't prove anything. Neither did I. I'm not going to change your mind. You're certainly not going to change mine. I just thought it was amusing that you chose to use 'If Kurt Warner can play well into his 40s...' as a talking point when he was done at 38. Which is pretty damn close to TB's age you might notice.

 

[Brady6]

Eh. It isn't worth it to argue over that wall of text. You didn't prove anything. Neither did I. I'm not going to change your mind. You're certainly not going to change mine. I just thought it was amusing that you chose to use 'If Kurt Warner can play well into his 40s...' as a talking point when he was done at 38. Which is pretty damn close to TB's age you might notice.

It's hardly a wall of text. I am not sure what exactly "your mind" is. Do you really think that between now and the end of 2017 Jimmy Garopollo will give us a better chance to win then Brady? You seem to think that Brady will not be here but what has Brady done to merit this thinking? Has his play diminished, is his cap number higher then his worth to the team? Garopollo is never going to be good enough to justify pushing arguably the best QB ever out the door early, so I do not understand your position at all.