The massive cost of trading Garappolo

[Nehalem]

How many 40+ year old QB's have won a Super Bowl?

Edit: Manning was the oldest to win a Super Bowl title at 39..and we all know that he didn't win the Super Bowl, he was carried by the Bronco's defense mainly.

And the second oldest to win a Super Bowl is this guy named Tom Brady, also at age 39. Might be a bit relevant to the discussion

 

[Oswlek]

It might be helpful to lay out the possible "Keep JG" scenarios, since people who make that suggestion usually stick to vague generalities.

#1 - Keep Jimmy for one year and then either tag and trade or let him walk.

This is the simplest option and the easiest to actualize. This maintains a superior backup QB position, gives JB another year to develop toward the #2 option, and provides one more year of longer-term protection in the event of a career ending injury to Brady.... all at a potentially significant cost to draft capital for a player unlikely to see the field.

The following scenarios all deal with keeping Jimmy past next year.

#2 - Brady's Patriot tenure ends after 2018, one way or another.

Insurance against a disaster is one thing, but if you start talking about the loss of a long-term starter, then you've moved on to more orchestrated hypotheticals; you aren't preparing for a possible end, you are planning for a certain one.

Sure, Brady being cut or traded seems unlikely, but the only other scenarios are even less so.

#3 - Jimmy is perfectly willing to sign an extension to ride the pine at a significant discount.

#4 - Jimmy is perfectly willing to sign an extension to ride the pine and NE is willing to give him a starter's contract to do so.

Does anyone really consider either of these worth making roster decisions around?

If people want to say that Jimmy's potential and Brady's age make it worth paying an enormous premium to keep JG around for another just-in-case year, so be it. I disagree, but fair enough. It's the other nonsense and nebulous arguments that lack self-awareness that I don't think add much to the conversation.

 

[archstanton543]

#1 - Keep Jimmy for one year and then either tag and trade and let him walk.

The QB tag number is $20 mil. What team is going to want to rent a QB for one year at that price? They're going to trade Jimmy G. and if they don't they're not going to tag and trade him. They'll just let him walk if the trade price this off season isn't right.

 

[Oswlek]

The QB tag number is $20 mil. What team is going to want to rent a QB for one year at that price? They're going to trade Jimmy G. and if they don't they're not going to tag and trade him. They'll just let him walk if the trade price this off season isn't right.

No one, which is why any team that makes the deal would only do so if they were able to work out an extension beforehand.

This is besides the point because taking tag-and-trade off the table only strengthens the point I was making and really wasn't worth quibbling over in the context of my comment.

 

[AzPatsFan]

I don't start with that implicit agreement. Well, I would agree that its safe to say he is competent, but the rest of you r post seems to imply he is a sure thing stud.
Many QBs have had as much of more college stardom and failed.
Many QBs have been taken much higher and failed.
Many QBs have quick releases and fail. Its a small piece of the formula, and the decision making that precedes it often overrides it.
Other than Brady there is no evidence being a QB on a BB team leads to being any better of a QB than being anywhere else. Theoretically it makes sense, but then you would have to say every player who ever plays for BB responds to him, absorbs the message, and is better, which just isn't true.


This is minimal especially compared to the reward for trading him.


This is not the cost of trading Jimmy G, this is the 'cost' of his contract expiring before Brady is done.


This does not make sense to me. We aren't changing our offense because we trade the backup QB.


This makes even less sense to me. We aren't changing our defense because we trade the backup QB.

It should be obious that we are talking 3 different cases short term being the quest for Lomabrdi #6 in 2017 only. The changes to the Offense and Defense only apply long term to a new franchsie QB like an ELI or a Rothlesberger or a Matty Ice. Or even a Bledsoe.

Then long term you need to modify the Offense and Defense to build not just a winning club but a legitimate Super Bowl winner.
Bledsoe had a Curtis Martin and Hawg Hannah drive blocking on his 96 Contender as the foundation of a running game. But not a powerful Defense, it had aged, and they got crushed like Atlanta.
In summary if you have a long ball thrower like Eli or even Matty Iice, that scores on quick downfield throws. Then you need to have the Julio Jones and or the deep guys that invariably seem to show up on the Giant roster. Forget about the Edelmens, Welkers Amendolas, etc, They don't fit.

If the past Superbowl showed anything, the Defense with such a team need a Nascar 2007 DL to obtain quick 3 and outs or they get picked over and plucked like a chicken. In 2007 the Giants had Strahan and his company, dubbed Nascar, to provide an overpowering pass rush. This past SB LI, Atlanta had the beginnings of a Nascar, but wore out after 2.5 quarters. Than they got methodically crushed.

If he is the long term solution, Garrapolo offers the possibility to NOT HAVE TO MODIFY the team and change players, if he is the long term successor. It is affirmed because in Belichicks own words, "They are hard to tell apart".

You can keep the methodical dink and dunk and score. Your Defense can be prudent, and conservative, keeping everything in front of them, knowing they won't wear out because BB can afford to have good or the best depth/rotation in the League, and the Offense will provide them with long rest periods. And you don't need very expensive Superstars, just good players and you can afford ample quantities of them.

 

[Hammer of Thor]

The QB tag number is $20 mil. What team is going to want to rent a QB for one year at that price? They're going to trade Jimmy G. and if they don't they're not going to tag and trade him. They'll just let him walk if the trade price this off season isn't right.

They tagged and traded Matt Cassel. The franchise tag was $14.651M out of $123M salary cap - 11.9%. The 2017 QB tag is estimated to be $21.395 out of an expected $165M - 13.0%. So the QB tag has gotten a tad more expensive over time, but not egregiously so.

Of course the return was much less than what we're talking about for Jimmy G now - pick #34, and I would expect something similar if Jimmy G were tagged and traded next year.

 

[AzPatsFan]

Brady turns 41 in August of 2018. Garoppolo will he a free agent in March of 2018. How are you proposing that the Patriots keep Garoppolo around long enough to decide if they want him or 41 year old Brady playing in 2018?

Any body who thinks the value for Polo derives from his one remaining year of low salaries is NOT USING HIS BRAIN. Any team trading high picks, would NEVER do it without having the player signed or agreed to sign a long term agreement at the time or even before the deal was done.

So what is the difference with Garrapolo value in 2017 or 2018. Both come with high price tags immediately to the acquiring club. The only difference is the poorer performing clubs would have to pay even more to have him come to them when he is free to choose where he goes.

The only way to avoid that is to trade for him at the conclusion of the 2017 season, with the Pats, same as 2017. So BB can get his 2017 SBLII is essentially free with insurance. And the same as Cassell in 2009, who netted only a 2nd, because BB found a home for a beloved player like Vrabel to sing his Sayonara season while being paid big bucks, and BB would not be forced to cut him.

Where did this false idea spread that Garrapolo is more valuable to trade picks for, in 2017 vs 2018? For the poor teams it may be even be more more expensive.

If you were Garrapolo would you chose to go to the Browns versus the Broncos or Texans? Don't be daft. The Browns would have to make a more attractive deal.

 

[AzPatsFan]

How are you comparing what Brissett is or isn't, and what Garropolo is or isn't?

Your insurance and longevity argument assumes a great deal, as Jimmy was knocked out of play in less than 2 games after working as a backup for how many years? Brissett, as a boot rookie, played the same number of games and stayed on the field with an injury when the Pats needed him that placed him on IR after Brady's return. If Jimmy is good for 1.5 of every 4 games, that is little insurance of anything. We have no real idea of his durability, so he is a huge question mark.

As for Brissett, some major personalities, like Parcells, think the world of his play, and Parcells for all his faults is not awful in judging talent. With an actual year with the playbook and a second preseason, are you betting against him? How long did Brady have before he stepped in as starter?

Jimmy is either fool's gold, in which case trading him is a plus for the Pats, or he is the second coming of Tom Brady, which will be realized potentially years down the road and/or by forcing Brady out in deference to this career backup. If Jimmy is as good as you believe him to be, then the Pats will have to pay him handsomely to keep him around until Brady's career expires. Absent Brady's arms and legs falling off next year, I am not sure this Armageddon scenario has legs.

The Pats have been and always will be next man up. Belichick follows a cost-benefit assessment for every paid player on the roster. If he can get a crop of future starters for a player likely walking one year later, then I see that as smart business and adios Jimmy. If there is no such opportunity, then Jimmy stays and earns a comp pick, provided the Pats don't view him as the cost-effective option before free agency.

This notion the Pats cannot live without some Jimmy seems to overlook the reality that for all but 1.5 games, they have done just that. Many of the so called heir apparents have passed into the light over the years (Cassel, Hoyer, Mallett, etc.), and the Patriots war machine has somehow thundered on in their absence. Trying to exalt JAG's departure to a calamity assumes far more than the evidence supports.

You forget that in the early SB wins Belichick had experienced QBs as backups. He never relied on Rohan Davey. They were former starters like Testaverde and Flutie.

 

[Nehalem]

Any body who thinks the value for Polo derives from his one remaining year of low salaries is NOT USING HIS BRAIN. Any team trading high picks, would NEVER do it without having the player signed or agreed to sign a long term agreement at the time or even before the deal was done.

If you were Garrapolo would you chose to go to the Browns versus the Broncos or Texans? Don't be daft. The Browns would have to make a more attractive deal.

I think the Texans are an excellent example of why a team would trade for JG without signing him to a longer term deal until after seeing how he does for the next year.

You can either pay him as franchise QB before seeing him play or after. If JG comes to your team and is successful in 2017 is it really like he will bolt to another team? Unlikely. In fact I think the only franchise QB to do that in recent memory is Drew Brees, who was let go due to the Chargers having Rivers and Brees being hurt.

If he stinks it up like Osweiler you can let him go. Or re-sign him for another one year prove it deal.

 

[Ivan]

All the Draftniks slather and foam at the draft picks that trading Garappolo may bring. I take the opposite view and seek to discuss the massive cost to the Patriots of trading Garappolo. Implicit itns dsicussion is the assumption that he is at least a competent starting caliber QB, based on college stardom, high draft pick selection, quick release, and post graduate football education at the Belichick post graduate NFL finishing school.

The Costs are listed in four main categories as:

Cost of Insurance short term,

Cost of acquiring a franchise QB later,

Cost of altering the team Offensively,

Cost of altering the team Defensively.

These are Costs to the Team not even addressed by most eager Draftniks. I hope to address each in depth in subsequent posts.

Yep, it's going to cost the Patriots ten minutes on the clock and the price of paying a top three pick. It's a travesty.

 

[Oswlek]

I think the Texans are an excellent example of why a team would trade for JG without signing him to a longer term deal until after seeing how he does for the next year.

There is also simple logistics. Even if a team has an extension in mind, they must have the initial cap space available to consummate a trade. So what is a non-issue this year becomes a seriously limiting one in 2018.

 

[pazrul72]

It should be obious that we are talking 3 different cases short term being the quest for Lomabrdi #6 in 2017 only. The changes to the Offense and Defense only apply long term to a new franchsie QB like an ELI or a Rothlesberger or a Matty Ice. Or even a Bledsoe.

Then long term you need to modify the Offense and Defense to build not just a winning club but a legitimate Super Bowl winner.
Bledsoe had a Curtis Martin and Hawg Hannah drive blocking on his 96 Contender as the foundation of a running game. But not a powerful Defense, it had aged, and they got crushed like Atlanta.
In summary if you have a long ball thrower like Eli or even Matty Iice, that scores on quick downfield throws. Then you need to have the Julio Jones and or the deep guys that invariably seem to show up on the Giant roster. Forget about the Edelmens, Welkers Amendolas, etc, They don't fit.

If the past Superbowl showed anything, the Defense with such a team need a Nascar 2007 DL to obtain quick 3 and outs or they get picked over and plucked like a chicken. In 2007 the Giants had Strahan and his company, dubbed Nascar, to provide an overpowering pass rush. This past SB LI, Atlanta had the beginnings of a Nascar, but wore out after 2.5 quarters. Than they got methodically crushed.

If he is the long term solution, Garrapolo offers the possibility to NOT HAVE TO MODIFY the team and change players, if he is the long term successor. It is affirmed because in Belichicks own words, "They are hard to tell apart".

You can keep the methodical dink and dunk and score. Your Defense can be prudent, and conservative, keeping everything in front of them, knowing they won't wear out because BB can afford to have good or the best depth/rotation in the League, and the Offense will provide them with long rest periods. And you don't need very expensive Superstars, just good players and you can afford ample quantities of them.

The fact that you think "hawg Hannah" was playing in 1996 tells me everything I need to know about your opinion. Good day troll

 

[Ring 6]

It should be obious that we are talking 3 different cases short term being the quest for Lomabrdi #6 in 2017 only. The changes to the Offense and Defense only apply long term to a new franchsie QB like an ELI or a Rothlesberger or a Matty Ice. Or even a Bledsoe.

Then long term you need to modify the Offense and Defense to build not just a winning club but a legitimate Super Bowl winner.
Bledsoe had a Curtis Martin and Hawg Hannah drive blocking on his 96 Contender as the foundation of a running game. But not a powerful Defense, it had aged, and they got crushed like Atlanta.
In summary if you have a long ball thrower like Eli or even Matty Iice, that scores on quick downfield throws. Then you need to have the Julio Jones and or the deep guys that invariably seem to show up on the Giant roster. Forget about the Edelmens, Welkers Amendolas, etc, They don't fit.

If the past Superbowl showed anything, the Defense with such a team need a Nascar 2007 DL to obtain quick 3 and outs or they get picked over and plucked like a chicken. In 2007 the Giants had Strahan and his company, dubbed Nascar, to provide an overpowering pass rush. This past SB LI, Atlanta had the beginnings of a Nascar, but wore out after 2.5 quarters. Than they got methodically crushed.

If he is the long term solution, Garrapolo offers the possibility to NOT HAVE TO MODIFY the team and change players, if he is the long term successor. It is affirmed because in Belichicks own words, "They are hard to tell apart".

You can keep the methodical dink and dunk and score. Your Defense can be prudent, and conservative, keeping everything in front of them, knowing they won't wear out because BB can afford to have good or the best depth/rotation in the League, and the Offense will provide them with long rest periods. And you don't need very expensive Superstars, just good players and you can afford ample quantities of them.

Ok I'm just going to say I disagree with every thing in your post and leave it at that.
Have a nice evening.

 

[moosekill]

Not quite sure why you wasted so much time typing this all out, especially based upon your completely flawed analysis on basically everything you typed. Also not sure why I read most of it, but I guess that is on me.

BB has a value placed on the backup qb position. He has been happy to go into most of the recent years with only two qb's. So he has placed an even lower value on having two back up qb's. If his trade offers exceed that value, be it the first pick in the draft or a third rounder he will make the trade, especially if he thinks that JG's value is at the highest point.

I guess if BB believes Brady will retire after next year and JG is the best option to replace him, or if he thinks he can get more for JG after next year with a franchise and trade deal then he might well keep him. Otherwise, as long as he gets a suitable offer he will be gone.

 

[deroc5050]

Lombardi is now back tracking and posturing saying the Pats are planning on keeping JG.

The issue with Cleveland, Chicago and SF is a 2nd rounder isn't necessarily enough and to them there top 3 picks are to high. So on draft day I predict that 1 of those 3 teams are going to trade down spots gain more picks then use a mid 1st and 3rd/4th rounder on JG. But it may not pan out that way, I think the Pats are perfectly content on letting this play out.

 

[AzPatsFan]

Okay, so we pay brady his 14-16 million and we franchise JG for one year at 20-22 million.

Thats 36 million for one year at the QB position.

Who do you cut on defense and offense to make room for 30% of the cap being on the QB position?

Last time I looked the Pats had 62 million in Cap room and could probably sign all for half or less of that. So you have 30+ million to devote elsewhere. The guys to cut are already gone. They are named Chandler Jones and Jamie Collins. Did you miss them in the 2016 Playoffs?

 

[AzPatsFan]

The assumption implicit in keeping JAG as insurance against a TFB injury for 2017 is that JAG can win the SB.
The last 2 SB seasons TFB made huge comebacks against the Ravens, The Seahawks and the Falcons to win.
I say that there is not another QB in the NFL good enough to engineer those comebacks, well maybe the Ravens one, but not the others.
So the point of keeping JAG so that we win the SB if Tom is injured is not a given as the Insurance argumenters and others imply.
Keeping JAG improves our odds if an injury but good QB performance is not elite.
Most importantly, is JAG robust enough to take the sacks TFB took vs Atlanta and keep on ticking???

The reason the comebacks were required in two cases were Tom Brady had turned in lousy quarters of play. Had he not comeback, people would be emphasizing his "decline".

 

[MassPats38]

You forget that in the early SB wins Belichick had experienced QBs as backups. He never relied on Rohan Davey. They were former starters like Testaverde and Flutie.

I don't forget it. Both were capable veteran QBs who cost very little (both about $800,000). Testaverde was a 46,000 yard passer and was drafted by Belichick. Flutie was a CFL legend and NFL proven QB with playoff experience known for being a fierce competitor. Both were unique players and former starters atypical of the general pool of veteran QBs.

How many former QBs have shown up on the roster from other systems, only to be discarded? How many backup QBs, like Cassel, who was on the roster with both of the aforementioned veterans, were similarly cut or allowed to leave?

I would submit that the absence of veteran QBs on the team since those two is likely attributable to (1) QBs outside the system cannot pick the offense up fast enough to deserve a roster spot and (2) there are not many veteran QBs in the NFL with sufficient familiarity with the Patriots offense, the requisite skillset, and a willingness to play for little compensation to add to the roster. Backups are not mere placeholders that you grab on the free agent market who need to understand kneel down/victory formations. They are expected to run the offense when called upon. The emergency QB is likely a better option than the veteran castoffs.

 

[AzPatsFan]

I don't forget it. Both were capable veteran QBs who cost very little (both about $800,000). Testaverde was a 46,000 yard passer and was drafted by Belichick. Flutie was a CFL legend and NFL proven QB with playoff experience known for being a fierce competitor. Both were unique players and former starters atypical of the general pool of veteran QBs.

How many former QBs have shown up on the roster from other systems, only to be discarded? How many backup QBs, like Cassel, who was on the roster with both of the aforementioned veterans, were similarly cut or allowed to leave?

I would submit that the absence of veteran QBs on the team since those two is likely attributable to (1) QBs outside the system cannot pick the offense up fast enough to deserve a roster spot and (2) there are not many veteran QBs in the NFL with sufficient familiarity with the Patriots offense, the requisite skillset, and a willingness to play for little compensation to add to the roster. Backups are not mere placeholders that you grab on the free agent market who need to understand kneel down/victory formations. They are expected to run the offense when called upon. The emergency QB is likely a better option than the veteran castoffs.

Reviewing all these never-weres illustrates just how tough it is to find a franchise QB.

Pats Fans of the Bledsoe and Brady era think its is routine. It. Is. NOT !!!! When you have a candidate You. Keep. Him.

 

[MassPats38]

Reviewing all these never-weres illustrates just how tough it is to find a franchise QB.

Pats Fans of the Bledsoe and Brady era think its is routine. It. Is. NOT !!!! When you have a candidate You. Keep. Him.

I would agree, if that QB is a true franchise QB, unique in skills and irreplaceable. Doug Hoyer did a great job in the system. So did Cassel. Feel free to review the game logs for Cassel in 2008. Curiously enough, Cassel blistered the Cardinals for 345 yards, 3 TDs and no INTs. A couple of games later, he threw consecutive 400 yards games against the Dolphins and Jets (Can JAG tout any 300 yard games, let alone a 400 yard game? And Cassel managed to stay on the field for many more games than JAG while doing that). And yet the Pats just let him leave without seeing Brady play a regular season snap in 2009. Do you believe that was an ill-advised deal after a catastrophic knee injury to Brady? What is the difference now? Is JAG better than Cassel, and if so based on what assessment because the game statistics suggest otherwise.

I expect you are reading a great deal into Belichick's commentary on JAG in response to the question "What if Brady cannot play this week?". Belichick is no dummy, so he is not going to crumble into a heap when confronted with the possibility of a player as key as Brady is to the offense sitting out. He also is an outstanding GM, and knows full well JAG may well be a bargaining chip in the offseason, so upping his trade value with an unsolicited response flattering to the player is just good business. That never happens with Belichick just before the hugely important player gets dealt (and yes, that was sarcasm - it has happened frequently in his tenure).

I expect Cassel was moved because Belichick knew where Brady was physically and was comfortable with Hoyer. Belichick will do little differently with Brady and Brissett. If he believes Brady will age 75 years in the offseason and become old man river under center, then he will ask whether Brissett's current ability with a full season with the playbook and another preseason would make him an acceptable replacement. There was more uncertainty with Brady in 2009 than there is now, and the difference in backup QBs is Brissett has actually started a game and is absolutely a more coveted prospect (3rd round) than the undrafted Brian Hoyer.

The Matt Flynn story should be your guide. Would you put a franchise in his hands after a 480 yard performance? That one game put up numbers that took JAG 2 games to match in yards. When the weight of the team was on him, he was a flash in the pan and fool's gold who turned to iron in the hands of the Seahawks. The Packers so coveted him that the signed him a year later and traded him mid-season to the Raiders.