Content Post Idle thoughts - Jimmy G, Cam and Stiddy

[moosekill]

Rookie QBs with any potential often struggle in their first year but they almost always show progress going into year two. It may take them more than a year to become great but you want to see progression at least. Brady in particular took a massive step forward from year one to year two. He had “it”. Stidham didn’t do any of that. He regressed. He lost his job to freaking Hoyer. He was bad in each and every single one of his appearances on the field last season against defenses that weren’t really trying anymore.

The idea that what the Stid lovers wanted to see- a 4th round draft pick QB somehow is entitled to start even one game in the NFL without doing one thing to show he deserves it- that’s really strange to me.

So wait, you don't like Stidham?? Huh, who would have guessed.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

Because the scenario where they don’t want to trade him is where they want him to start.
They will eventually get a comp 3rd anyway so they have very little to lose.
Jimmy on the other hand has everything to lose.
Sitting out a year at 30 after only having played 1 full year in his life.
24 million
his reputation and if he does what you suggest and goes out on the field intending to play like crap he may lose any chance to ever start again.

If the 49ers don’t want to trade him BY FAR his best option is to go out on a very good team and have a great year and make other teams fight to get him.
I don’t see what advantage there is any other approach unless the goal is to pout and “show them” by ruining their season and his own career.

The comp 3rd is far from guaranteed. In the best case scenario for them that JG signs elsewhere for a great deal, they still may not get the 3rd if they sign FA's. They could realistically get nothing if so, vs having a guaranteed 2nd or 3rd rounder, that is a big big difference. Neither side has very strong leverage here or the ability to dictate what happens, and yes Jimmy's best option COULD be to stay and play his heart out if he decides . But we're talking in the scenario JG does decide to force a trade/ release there's a very good chance he gets what he wants.

 

[RIpats88]

The comp 3rd is far from guaranteed. In the best case scenario for them that JG signs elsewhere for a great deal, they still may not get the 3rd if they sign FA's. They could realistically get nothing if so, vs having a guaranteed 2nd or 3rd rounder, that is a big big difference. Neither side has very strong leverage here or the ability to dictate what happens. But if JG does decide to force a trade/ release there's still a very good IMO chance he gets what he wants.

if Jimmy G loses his job in training camp, during the season (which is at least a 50-50 probability) or gets injured again he is looking at a Trubisky/Winston/Cam newton type deal next year.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

if Jimmy G loses his job in training camp, during the season (which is at least a 50-50 probability) or gets injured again he is looking at a Trubisky/Winston/Cam newton type deal next year.

Agreed, no matter what sf is telling jg his job security is far from stable now even for this year. 3 first rounders is more than your average succession plan

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Ignoring all that stuff, would you give up 3 #1s for Mac Jones/Justin Fields or 5#1s for Deshaun Watson?

Hell no. But you have to understand, most of my experience w/drafts has been to disabuse myself of the media frenzy of "how to package picks to trade up." Many years -- well, in the last 20 -- I've watched my team trade down to stockpile value. And every team does that sometimes, I just watched a team that did it a lot, and succeeded that way.

I think that behavior was greatly incentivized by being in a successful position - there is, of course, the difference in starting position, aggravated by periodic league raids on our draft stock. But even more importantly, we were in a position to parlay patience + known success into later year value. Even if our coach didn't "Win now!" he wasn't going to lose his job the next year. So some coach GM under win-now pressure was always happy to buy us two cheeseburgers tomorrow for a cheeseburger today.

So all this packaging of multiple year picks strikes me as doubling down on a crapshoot. Draft day is just a huge load of variables. Can't avoid it, that's where good new players come from, not to mention temporarily affordable contracts. But doubling, tripling, and quintupling down to get that one superman? Not for me.

Unless Bill & co. do it. Yeah, I'm still one of them.

I do love to watch it though, especially being old enough to remember Ricky "Cautionary Tale" Williams, who managed to do this to two teams. That's gotta be some kinda record.

 

[upstater1]

Hell no. But you have to understand, most of my experience w/drafts has been to disabuse myself of the media frenzy of "how to package picks to trade up." Many years -- well, in the last 20 -- I've watched my team trade down to stockpile value. And every team does that sometimes, I just watched a team that did it a lot, and succeeded that way.

I think that behavior was greatly incentivized by being in a successful position - there is, of course, the difference in starting position, aggravated by periodic league raids on our draft stock. But even more importantly, we were in a position to parlay patience + known success into later year value. Even if our coach didn't "Win now!" he wasn't going to lose his job the next year. So some coach GM under win-now pressure was always happy to buy us two cheeseburgers tomorrow for a cheeseburger today.

So all this packaging of multiple year picks strikes me as doubling down on a crapshoot. Draft day is just a huge load of variables. Can't avoid it, that's where good new players come from, not to mention temporarily affordable contracts. But doubling, tripling, and quintupling down to get that one superman? Not for me.

Unless Bill & co. do it. Yeah, I'm still one of them.

I do love to watch it though, especially being old enough to remember Ricky "Cautionary Tale" Williams, who managed to do this to two teams. That's gotta be some kinda record.

Trading many picks for a QB as opposed to a WR or a RB is perhaps a different equation, as many teams are finding out. A good QB should be a 10+ year proposition.

But then there's the argument that you can't win a Super Bowl without the benefit of bonafide first round talents on their first contracts.

 

[RIpats88]

Trading many picks for a QB as opposed to a WR or a RB is perhaps a different equation, as many teams are finding out. A good QB should be a 10+ year proposition.

But then there's the argument that you can't win a Super Bowl without the benefit of bonafide first round talents on their first contracts.

You have to be really sure that the QB you are drafting is going to be "the guy" its worked out for some teams, it hasn't for other teams. I don't like the idea of "drafting a QB" high just because they are a QB. if you end up with Dwayne Haskins then you just wasted a pick that you could've used on a more sure talent.

the bears traded up and took trubisky, the rams traded up and took Goff. both those ended up being failures. IF Bill sees a guy as the future he will trade up and get him. If he doesn't I dont think hes going to risk the farm on someone who may be a bust and will set the franchise back.

 

[upstater1]

You have to be really sure that the QB you are drafting is going to be "the guy" its worked out for some teams, it hasn't for other teams. I don't like the idea of "drafting a QB" high just because they are a QB. if you end up with Dwayne Haskins then you just wasted a pick that you could've used on a more sure talent.

the bears traded up and took trubisky, the rams traded up and took Goff. both those ended up being failures. IF Bill sees a guy as the future he will trade up and get him. If he doesn't I dont think hes going to risk the farm on someone who may be a bust and will set the franchise back.

But...your chances are much better with QBs than they are with other positions.

Last 5 years teams are 11 of 17 with 1st rounders, and that's counting Trubisky, Wentz and Darnold as busts.

 

[Ring 6]

The comp 3rd is far from guaranteed. In the best case scenario for them that JG signs elsewhere for a great deal, they still may not get the 3rd if they sign FA's. They could realistically get nothing if so, vs having a guaranteed 2nd or 3rd rounder, that is a big big difference. Neither side has very strong leverage here or the ability to dictate what happens, and yes Jimmy's best option COULD be to stay and play his heart out if he decides . But we're talking in the scenario JG does decide to force a trade/ release there's a very good chance he gets what he wants.

Ill just stop here and say we disagree rather than repeat myself.

 

[PScottman]

I'll end this now with my annual plea for football commons sense. Please remember that football is the ULTIMATE team game. It is a game where the SUM is greater than the individual parts. That means you cannot judge a team by how good they are as individuals, but rather how they will play together. And regardless of who is on the roster now, we will not be able to tell what this team will end up being UNTIL probably mid October.

Ken, this should be required reading for all of the "draft kings" and armchair GMs lusting after eighty million dollar plus skill position albatrosses that don't impact wins because the back up left guard you have to play after the starter gets injured only gives the QB .00045 seconds to throw the ball (especially if that QB is Newton as it is right now).

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Yeah, the real trick is hitting at 199 or something on a franchise guy. Not only do you avoid wasted draft capital (although I think that's overvalued,) more importantly your guy's rookie deal can be for ****, allowing you to build around him. The expectation is set that payday's a little while off and everybody accepts it (if you're lucky. Or, they might hold out early for an extension the minute they do good...)

 

[mgteich]

i'm not sure why you are so intent that the 49ers are keeping Jimmy G. when other than schefter/rappoport who clearly get their news from the team to pump up their trade leverage. The Mike Florios/Jeff howes are saying theres no way they are keeping him with the new guy.

sure they could force a guy who is unhappy to stay. but other than the Texans, we generally don't see that happen. The lions had all the leverage on stafford too but still honored his trade request. and this is forcing a guy to stay for $25million who may NOT even see the field.

if the rookie looks good in camp, you think they still are going to start Jimmy G? theres at least a 50% chance Jimmy loses his job in training camp/during the season.

???

So, you're saying that SF should make believe that they are a terrible team and just start their draftee no matter what and have no top backup? The alternative is to behave like a playoff team and start Jimmy, putting in the rookie when the team thinks it right, which would likely be after a full season.

 

[Brandon_Cox]

if the rookie looks good in camp, you think they still are going to start Jimmy G? theres at least a 50% chance Jimmy loses his job in training camp/during the season.

My understanding - and I could be wrong - is that Jimmy's contract doesn't become guaranteed until the first game of the regular season. If he looks bad or the rookie looks ready before opening day, then cut his ass.

 

[sambam94]

cam better not be the starter game 1. The guy can't throw.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

Trade proposal for newton:

first round pick in 2021, 2022 and 2023, bb, and stidham!

 

[The Boomer]

So wait, you don't like Stidham?? Huh, who would have guessed.

Like for Cam, Stidham gets a mulligan for his 2A 2020 Covid no preseason weak offensive support disappointment. Stidham's 2B 2021 more normal season will be his make or break it chance.

 

[Jim Beankie]

I favor the idea of drafting 2 qbs. I like Mills and I'm tossed on Mond or Trask. It will give us some options either way. I think you are right on Jimmy G. Now the hope is that Cam has something left in the tank.

I'm irrationally obsessed with the 2 QBs idea and getting another Florida reject (like Cam) Franks in the 7th/UDFA as an Edelman/Meyers (former QB to receiver or even a Logan Thomas TE) type.

 

[50-yard-line]

Trading many picks for a QB as opposed to a WR or a RB is perhaps a different equation, as many teams are finding out. A good QB should be a 10+ year proposition.

But then there's the argument that you can't win a Super Bowl without the benefit of bonafide first round talents on their first contracts.

I'm not sure that will hold true much longer, since we're now seeing the Wilson and Watson issues. QBs have so much more leverage now.
I think the position is overrated (it's still the prime position, but not to the extent we're seeing).

Everyone argues that you need a great QB to get to the SB, but if you consider the last 20 years - 40 QBs, that perspective is warped because the greatest of all played in a quarter of those slots!

Who's the last SB winning QB on his rookie deal? Wilson, I think (with an insanely good Defense), and before that...Brady.

 

[The Boomer]

I'm not sure that will hold true much longer, since we're now seeing the Wilson and Watson issues. QBs have so much more leverage now.
I think the position is overrated (it's still the prime position, but not to the extent we're seeing).

Everyone argues that you need a great QB to get to the SB, but if you consider the last 20 years - 40 QBs, that perspective is warped because the greatest of all played in a quarter of those slots!

Who's the last SB winning QB on his rookie deal? Wilson, I think (with an insanely good Defense), and before that...Brady.

Wilson in the third round and Brady in the 6th round were nowhere close to being top 10 picks. Dolla Bill needs to let the second tier quarterbacks come to him. Everybody has a different preference. However, trading up to reach for somebody he most likes in Round 2 or Round 3 costs so little in terms of draft capital and expectations compared to picking a top 10 possible flop. Maybe Jones is a backup plan if BB has his man picked out for Round 2 or 3. If so, he might trade back with Jacksonville (the team best situated to maybe move up) with picks 25, 33 and 45 on their board. Jones is a value at 25 or 33. However, Mills is my man, but you can debate who will really be their choice. Moving around for a late second or early third round pick is a reasonable risk for Mills or whoever else BB covets.

 

[Sicilian]

I'm not sure that will hold true much longer, since we're now seeing the Wilson and Watson issues. QBs have so much more leverage now.
I think the position is overrated (it's still the prime position, but not to the extent we're seeing).

Everyone argues that you need a great QB to get to the SB, but if you consider the last 20 years - 40 QBs, that perspective is warped because the greatest of all played in a quarter of those slots!

Who's the last SB winning QB on his rookie deal? Wilson, I think (with an insanely good Defense), and before that...Brady.

Had Mahomes signed his extension by the time they won? If so, I think he was still counting on the old numbers, so for practical purposes that's another one. Maybe Roethlisberger too? He's the youngest QB to ever win a SB, so I have to imagine he was still on his rookie deal, but I don't know for sure. Flacco maybe too... I think he signed his big deal right after winning the SB, which is what led to him being a detriment to his roster rather than a boon, because he was now priced beyond what he could produce without better talent around him.

Edit: Sorry, you said LAST, so Ben and Joe don't matter. Mahomes might though.