Excellent Michael Hurley Article: Significant Aspect Of Garoppolo Trade That Nobody’s Talking About

[Ivan]

After all is said and done i think it really is what it is:

Unless Sasha is going to sashay up to BB today with a deal that cannot be refused they keep the best backup in football at a great cap number.

Then, kick that can down the road to next year where more information is known about 41 year old TB and how JB has developed.

While tag and trade next year will of course bring far less than a trade this year -- it does appear no team is offering what it would take to part with 2017's best insurance policy at the most important position.

I agree.

 

[YOUGOTMOSSED]

So did Matt Cassell.



I bet you could say that about a lot of JAG QBs. Bring Hoyer or Fitzpatrick here and either guy could keep the Pats competitive. That doesn't say a lot about JG.

Very true... but JG is far from a sure thing either. As I said before there's reason to think it's much more likely he is a system guy than a future superstar.

Enough of these stupid Matt Cassell comparisons. I'm pretty sure that I could have stood behind that 2008 Patriots O-line, thrown passes to Randy Moss and Wes Welker and lead the Pats to at least an 11-5 record.

 

[Ivan]

Enough of these stupid Matt Cassell comparisons. I'm pretty sure that I could have stood behind that 2008 Patriots O-line, thrown passes to Randy Moss and Wes Welker and lead the Pats to at least an 11-5 record.

You're right, Garrapolo has never won 11 games in a season so it's a terrible analogy.

 

[sb1]

Enough of these stupid Matt Cassell comparisons. I'm pretty sure that I could have stood behind that 2008 Patriots O-line, thrown passes to Randy Moss and Wes Welker and lead the Pats to at least an 11-5 record.

Well to be fair he was indeed a guy that "knew the system and proven he can win with the Patriots". That's not always a trait that means a lot when looking at a QB.

 

[Love The Drake]

Jimmy G won one game against a team that didn't make the playoffs. He looked great in doing that. However that doesn't really mean he can win the superbowl with this team. It means he can win against a mediocre team with this team. I think most qb's in this league could win a game with this team. It doesn't necessarily make them a great QB.

He didnt just win he dominated

 

[sb1]

He didnt just win he dominated

JG? Not really.

 

[moosekill]

He didnt just win he dominated

I thought he played well, better than I expected, but wouldn't have said dominated. I would have said he dominated in the first quarter against Miami until he got hurt.

 

[supafly]

Unless I'm missing something, Miguel's overthecap.com cap space calculation for 2018 does not yet include any projected carryover from 2017. Ergo ...

.. $178M - projected 2018 cap
. -$125M - 2018 cap hits for current contracts
= .$ 53M
+ .$ 27M - 2017 cap space that could be carried over
= .$ 80M

Oddly enough, I made your exact same argument many times this offseason, but I don't expect every single penny to be carried over. Either way, let's say you're right and they have that much money available. It still doesn't address the 2 biggest issues in terms of Garoppolo choosing to stay here as a backup instead of going somewhere and starting, and it doesn't address what to do with Tom Brady.

 

[DaBruinz]

Except that one must ask the question "are there REALLY that many sure things at the top of the QB draft?"

Look at last year. Carson Wentz and Jared Goff. Who here thinks these are going to be future Pro Bowl Franchise QBs? Meanwhile Dak Prescott was drafted in which round? The draft is a crapshoot, and while you can often get a GOOD QB at the top of the first, you seldom get a GREAT QB simply because there are only a few of those, one every 5 years or so. Let's look at the top 10 QB picks since 2001 when the Dynasty began.

Jared Goff (Bust)
Carson Wentz (TBD)
Blake Bortles (Bust)
Jameis Winston (TBD)
Marcus Mariotta (TBD)
Andrew Luck (Elite)
Robert Griffin III (Bust)
Ryan Tannehill (Okay)
Cam Newton (Elite)
Jake Locker (Bust)
Blaine Gabbert (Bust)
Sam Bradford (Okay)
Matt Stafford (Okay)
Mark Sanchez (Bust)
Matt Ryan (Elite)
Jamarcus Russell (Bust)
Vince Young (Bust)
Matt Leinart (Bust)
Alex Smith (Okay)
Eli Manning (Elite)
Phil Rivers (Okay)
Carson Palmer (Okay)
Byron Leftwich (Bust)
David Carr (Bust)
Joey Harrington (Bust)
Michael Vick (Bust)

Out of those 26 guys, you've had 4 (four) who have made it to the Super Bowl, and only one guy has won it. You have thirteen busts (50%!!!!!! ), six okay QBs, four guys who are elite and four who we can't really assess yet but whose potential ranges from "okay to elite" . So is a 15% shot at an elite QB worth it?

Looking at the Super Bowls won by people other than Tom Brady, how many of those guys were Elite?

Peyton Manning
Russell Wilson
Joe Flacco
Eli Manning
Ben Roethlisberger
Brad Johnson

Manning was good in his first SB (note: not during the game, but during the season leading up to the game) but I probably could have played better in the second one. Flacco had a brief period of four games where he played out of his mind but after that he's just reverted to being Jump Ball Joe, and nothing makes me happier than the Ratbirds being stuck with his mega-contract and crappy play indefinitely. The Ben is a decent QB, but even with the great receivers and RB he has can't seem to win. He may well be overrated. Brad Johnson? Russell Wilson relies too much on his legs to have the longevity to be elite and his D was the major reason they won. Out of these guys, only the Mannings were drafted in the Top Ten.

So from my point of view. you don't need to draft a QB in the Top Ten, and it seems a position particularly prone to busts. What gets you to the top often is a great D with a merely competent (or even incompetent) QB. We already have two QBs who could suffice in that respect.

BTW, this analysis made me realize just how absolutely above and beyond every other QB Brady actually is. In case anyone forgot...

The fact that you consider Eli Manning "ELITE" but the likes of Carson Palmer and Phillip Rivers just "OKAY" doesn't help your argument. Neither does call Goff a "BUST" after one season..

 

[SEA_Pat]

The fact that you consider Eli Manning "ELITE" but the likes of Carson Palmer and Phillip Rivers just "OKAY" doesn't help your argument. Neither does call Goff a "BUST" after one season..

Sure, you could debate about each individual, but switch them if you like, does that make the point incorrect? Eli, for all his faults, has won two Super Bowls with quite good performances and very clutch throws. That's elite in my books. He certainly did more than his brother did. Carson Palmer is elite? Not in my books, every big game he's ever been in he's sucked. Phil Rivers? Too many dumb throws late in games.

As to Goff, sure, that's a guess at this point, if you like move him to "TBD". Still think the points remain.

 

[sb1]

Except that one must ask the question "are there REALLY that many sure things at the top of the QB draft?"

Look at last year. Carson Wentz and Jared Goff. Who here thinks these are going to be future Pro Bowl Franchise QBs? Meanwhile Dak Prescott was drafted in which round? The draft is a crapshoot, and while you can often get a GOOD QB at the top of the first, you seldom get a GREAT QB simply because there are only a few of those, one every 5 years or so. Let's look at the top 10 QB picks since 2001 when the Dynasty began.

Jared Goff (Bust)
Carson Wentz (TBD)
Blake Bortles (Bust)
Jameis Winston (TBD)
Marcus Mariotta (TBD)
Andrew Luck (Elite)
Robert Griffin III (Bust)
Ryan Tannehill (Okay)
Cam Newton (Elite)
Jake Locker (Bust)
Blaine Gabbert (Bust)
Sam Bradford (Okay)
Matt Stafford (Okay)
Mark Sanchez (Bust)
Matt Ryan (Elite)
Jamarcus Russell (Bust)
Vince Young (Bust)
Matt Leinart (Bust)
Alex Smith (Okay)
Eli Manning (Elite)
Phil Rivers (Okay)
Carson Palmer (Okay)
Byron Leftwich (Bust)
David Carr (Bust)
Joey Harrington (Bust)
Michael Vick (Bust)

Out of those 26 guys, you've had 4 (four) who have made it to the Super Bowl, and only one guy has won it. You have thirteen busts (50%!!!!!! ), six okay QBs, four guys who are elite and four who we can't really assess yet but whose potential ranges from "okay to elite" . So is a 15% shot at an elite QB worth it?

Looking at the Super Bowls won by people other than Tom Brady, how many of those guys were Elite?

Peyton Manning
Russell Wilson
Joe Flacco
Eli Manning
Ben Roethlisberger
Brad Johnson

Manning was good in his first SB (note: not during the game, but during the season leading up to the game) but I probably could have played better in the second one. Flacco had a brief period of four games where he played out of his mind but after that he's just reverted to being Jump Ball Joe, and nothing makes me happier than the Ratbirds being stuck with his mega-contract and crappy play indefinitely. The Ben is a decent QB, but even with the great receivers and RB he has can't seem to win. He may well be overrated. Brad Johnson? Russell Wilson relies too much on his legs to have the longevity to be elite and his D was the major reason they won. Out of these guys, only the Mannings were drafted in the Top Ten.

So from my point of view. you don't need to draft a QB in the Top Ten, and it seems a position particularly prone to busts. What gets you to the top often is a great D with a merely competent (or even incompetent) QB. We already have two QBs who could suffice in that respect.

BTW, this analysis made me realize just how absolutely above and beyond every other QB Brady actually is. In case anyone forgot...

Interesting analysis. Not sure I agree that Goff is a bust after just one season and it's premature for Gabbert too. They are also on teams that I'm not sure even Brady could help all that much. I also think it would have been more fair to bracket them as Elite, Good, OK, Bust. Guys like Rivers, Palmer, Stafford are a lot more than just "OK" quarterbacks. Sanchez was OK, he did have 4 road playoff wins. I think you missed Ben (Elite) in your list - he was almost top 10.

On the flip side of your argument, how many elite QBs other than Brady have been drafted late?

 

[DW Toys]

Even crap drafts have high end talent at the top. 2009 was an abomination at the top, but even it had players worth taking high.

I agree that he can multiply his vale at #12 but he could still get a "blue chipper" there.
I think Cleveland might be more inclined to trade perhaps for the #1.......and get ready for this....I am sure I will be nailed here....if we took Osweiler as part at maybe $2 million (if the Browns cut him the lose all $12mm)...OK. waiting for torches and pitchforks but hear me out. He can sit on the bench for a year. He might be as capable to be a back up as Brisett while he still learns. Can't McDaniels make Chicken Salad? We might boost up his trade vale in the year....and we get #1.
DW Toys

 

[sb1]

Well, projections for 2018 cap space are +/- $75M, so the Pats can probably afford it financially.

Then, it becomes a matter of figuring out how to rotate them as starters.

Sure, it's never been done before (by design) in the NFL. But then, the Pats haven't achieved 16 years of dominance by being conventional.

Can you imagine the effect on the league of the Pats suddenly introducing the concept of a "starting rotation" as in baseball? How many years would it take the other 31 teams to figure out how to gameplan for that (assuming that the other owners didn't make a rule against it)?

There is no chance we'll ever see something like that in the NFL. Other teams know it would be an absolute mess if they tried.

 

[maineman209]

There is no chance we'll ever see something like that in the NFL. Other teams know it would be an absolute mess if they tried.

Other teams aren't the Patriots.

 

[sb1]

Other teams aren't the Patriots.

By other I meant all, including the Patriots. I agree we are a very innovative and creative organization but that's not something that will ever work well in pro football. Or any other high level.

 

[maineman209]

Oddly enough, I made your exact same argument many times this offseason, but I don't expect every single penny to be carried over. Either way, let's say you're right and they have that much money available. It still doesn't address the 2 biggest issues in terms of Garoppolo choosing to stay here as a backup instead of going somewhere and starting, and it doesn't address what to do with Tom Brady.

Well, it's just short of $27M right now and they have yet to address reducing Amendola's $7M cap hit down to a reasonable number (say, $2.5M). And, again, what other major expenses might be coming? Draft picks will be about 1/2 million. NLTBE incentives that are earned may ultimately deduct 1-2 millon.

So, it's not a question of "every single penny" being carried over. The question is whether or not the ultimate carryover number will be substantially less than $27M.

-----
If there really is only the possibility that one of the two must be a full time backup for the entire season and the other the full time starter, then the Pats will need to "read the tea leaves" at the end of this season. At that point, it seems like it's down to either franchise and trade JG, or franchise and keep him around for another season of leaf-reading, whether he likes it or not (for his $20-something-million guaranteed paycheck).

The only alternatives I can see are (barring catastrophic injury to Brady or significant, obvious decline):
1) Brady has already set a career end-date that we don't know about and JG is already scheduled to take over at that time.
2) Some sort of rotation that provides JG with more starting experience (and reputation/potential trade-value enhancement), and provides Brady with enough relief/rest during the season to keep him playing at an elite level longer.

The only way #2 happens is if Brady, JG, BB, McD, and the Krafts are all on board. Since we can only speculate about what they're all thinking, it's as possible as anything else.

 

[maineman209]

By other I meant all, including the Patriots. I agree we are a very innovative and creative organization but that's not something that will ever work well in pro football. Or any other high level.

Why not?

 

[maineman209]

Interesting analysis. Not sure I agree that Goff is a bust after just one season and it's premature for Gabbert too. They are also on teams that I'm not sure even Brady could help all that much. I also think it would have been more fair to bracket them as Elite, Good, OK, Bust. Guys like Rivers, Palmer, Stafford are a lot more than just "OK" quarterbacks. Sanchez was OK, he did have 4 road playoff wins. I think you missed Ben (Elite) in your list - he was almost top 10.

On the flip side of your argument, how many elite QBs other than Brady have been drafted late?

So, I reviewed the 120 QBs drafted from 2005-2014. I left off 2015 & 2016 because it seems way to early to make a judgement about those guys. Even 2014 is still a little sketchy to include.

Anyway, it appears that teams drafting a QB in the top three picks had about a 90% success rate in acquiring a franchise QB or, at least, a better than average long-term starter.

However, teams drafting in the 1st round *outside* the top three were successful only 30% of the time and ended up with "busts" more than half the time. By "busts", I mean guys who couldn't even be an okay backup QB.

In the second round, the franchise/starter success rate was down to 25%, and the bust rate was up to 60%. Not that much different from the rates for picks #4 thru #32, actually.

After the 2nd round, the odds of getting a franchise or starter were down to 6% (inflated by the Russell Wilson pick) and the odds of a bust were up to almost 75% (with about a 20% chance of snagging a not-totally-embarrassing bench-warmer).

 

[sb1]

Why not?

Among the many reasons - the fact that for most teams your QB is your best player and it makes sense to leave him on the field as much as possible and get most of the reps in practice. There is no compelling reason to put your not-best-QB out there unless you have to, and to pay and keep two great QBs on the roster. You can't split reps, rosters, systems and gameplans aren't constructed that way.

In baseball, rosters, systems and gameplans are static. There's a rotation because you play every day or couple of days and you have a 162 game schedule. Not equatable to football.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

So, I reviewed the 120 QBs drafted from 2005-2014...
Anyway, it appears that teams drafting a QB in the top three picks had about a 90% success rate in acquiring a franchise QB or, at least, a better than average long-term starter.

However, teams drafting in the 1st round *outside* the top three were successful only 30% of the time and ended up with "busts" more than half the time. By "busts", I mean guys who couldn't even be an okay backup QB.

In the second round, the franchise/starter success rate was down to 25%, and the bust rate was up to 60%. Not that much different from the rates for picks #4 thru #32, actually.

After the 2nd round, the odds of getting a franchise or starter were down to 6% (inflated by the Russell Wilson pick) and the odds of a bust were up to almost 75% (with about a 20% chance of snagging a not-totally-embarrassing bench-warmer).

Were we to give credence to this metric BB has time after time been a fool to draft QBs later than round 1. Mallett, Cassell, Bisquick. *
I just wish he's stop pissing away our valuable draft picks in the top half of the draft.


* I left off you-know-who