SF HC Kyle Shanahan can't guarantee that Jimmy Garoppolo will play this year

[patchick]

Of course Shanahan wouldn't promise Jimmy will play this year. That would be idiotic.

Imagine if he had said "We can't wait to get Jimmy into the starting role as soon as possible!" He'd be starting the clock on a weekly round of "OMG where's our new QB what's wrong with him he must be a bust" panic and pressure. Pretty much the worst possible welcome for a QB who has to learn a new and complex offensive system in the middle of the season.

My guess is they'll give Jimmy the time he needs to get comfortable, let the team rack up some draft-boosting losses, then let him start a few games at the end of the season to help him find his rhythm.

 

[dafoe2016]

He is completely full of ****. They will give him a couple of weeks, tops, top get up to speed and then throw hi in there. You want as much data as possible before you make a decision on a long term contract. As much as we love him, we saw a small sample size. The 49ers do not want a Brock Osweiler situation on their hands.

 

[Deus Irae]

Bill Belichick can't promise that Tom Brady will be the starting QB for the Patriots against Denver.

 

[chumpchange]

Good news for us. Hello pick 33-34!

I believe pick #34 was what we traded Cassell for, who was far more experienced than Jimmy. Great value on this trade if it happens that way.

 

[Wheelman]

Excellent news! Don't let Jimmy play at all! We need the niners to go 0-16. please please please please!

 

[Ring 6]

Just an fyi. They use a completely different offensive scheme which includes a different language to call the plays so it's going to take some time for JG to pick that up.

IIRC they use a Air Coryell West coast style of scheme.

JG is used to the Erhardt Perkins.

@AndyJohnson please correct me if I'm wrong.

Yeah, but I think it’s 95% a terminology thing as all offenses share many common concepts.
I think jimmy plays next week or the following game which is after a bye.

 

[Ring 6]

I believe pick #34 was what we traded Cassell for, who was far more experienced than Jimmy. Great value on this trade if it happens that way.

We traded cassel and vrabel for that pick.
We traded jimmy g for that pick and hoyer (in reality)

 

[NE-VT]

I completely agree with @Tony2046 : the new offensive system is why Jimmy will be held out.

Yeah, but I think it’s 95% a terminology thing as all offenses share many common concepts.
I think jimmy plays next week or the following game which is after a bye.

But I think it's a great fit for Jimmy G other than the language (he's going to have to literally go from speaking English to speaking French)

I don't think it is purely terminological; rather the terminological differences reflect a fundamental differance in how plays are conceptualized. The EP system uses a single word for a multiple receiver route concept, where other systems individually specify each route. English to French is a pretty good analogy, but I prefer thinking of it as English to Chinese; one is a character based language, and one uses letters. The base units of the language are different.

I think it is an deep and interesting question how quickly and easily a QBs could transition between the two. Perhaps going from EP to non-EP is easier than the reverse, or maybe it is harder. It might totally vary player to player. Perhaps some players prefer a more holistic view (EP), where others understand better by breaking it down a passing play specifically specifying each route. I even think it might effect the speed of a QB's reads.

Seeing how quickly Jimmy plays in SF will give us an interesting case study on it. Lack of understanding of the play-book or poor OL quality are the only reasons I could see SF delaying his first start. At least according to PFF, SF has a decent line ranked at #19. (I am huge PFF skeptic BTW: Ranking all 32 NFL offensive lines by average grade, Week 5 | NFL Analysis | Pro Football Focus ).

 

[Tony2046]

I completely agree with @Tony2046 : the new offensive system is why Jimmy will be held out.





I don't think it is purely terminological; rather the terminological differences reflect a fundamental differance in how plays are conceptualized. The EP system uses a single word for a multiple receiver route concept, where other systems individually specify each route. English to French is a pretty good analogy, but I prefer thinking of it as English to Chinese; one is a character based language, and one uses letters. The base units of the language are different.

I think it is an deep and interesting question how quickly and easily a QBs could transition between the two. Perhaps going from EP to non-EP is easier than the reverse, or maybe it is harder. It might totally vary player to player. Perhaps some players prefer a more holistic view (EP), where others understand better by breaking it down a passing play specifically specifying each route. I even think it might effect the speed of a QB's reads.

Seeing how quickly Jimmy plays in SF will give us an interesting case study on it. Lack of understanding of the play-book or poor OL quality are the only reasons I could see SF delaying his first start. At least according to PFF, SF has a decent line ranked at #19. (I am huge PFF skeptic BTW: Ranking all 32 NFL offensive lines by average grade, Week 5 | NFL Analysis | Pro Football Focus ).

It could go both ways. Keep him out until he gets a grasp of the playbook/scheme or use the remainder of the season to help him grow into it. Building his continuity with the offense one game at a time. Add a few plays each week kind of thing. I think that would help him and the team to get off to a better start next season.

 

[neali]

That would be beyond stupid. How do you know how much to pay him in the offseason if you don't play him.

The 49'ers should sign him now to a 4 year deal and sit him out. They have a bad team. Don't need him playing for contract money in the last half of a season and getting killed.

 

[Ring 6]

The 49'ers should sign him now to a 4 year deal and sit him out. They have a bad team. Don't need him playing for contract money in the last half of a season and getting killed.

He has played 1.5 quarters of football in 4 years.
He needs to be on the field and they need to see what they have.
It would be foolhardy to sign him to a 4 year contract before seeing him play

 

[neali]

I believe pick #34 was what we traded Cassell for, who was far more experienced than Jimmy. Great value on this trade if it happens that way.

We had franchised Cassell at that point, so he was not cheap. 9ers got a better deal.

 

[Ring 6]

We had franchised Cassell at that point, so he was not cheap. 9ers got a better deal.

KC signed Cassell to long term deal right away so the tag was irrelevant. Plus the tag was a lot less then.
Sf is in pretty much the same spot only a couple months earlier.

 

[SammyBlueCat]

Haha.

To be fair there are a few posters here that know this stuff. PP2, Long D, NE VT, Knotra and others but I saw that @AndyJohnson had just posted and thought he would offer some input but the bastard just ignored me. So F**k him.

I know my stuff too however in a one dimensional kind of way.

 

[SammyBlueCat]

I predict Jimmy will play in about 4 weeks. The team could be 0-12 so it will be an early pre-season quality start. Look at Jacoby Brissette's starts.

 

[Tony2046]

I know my stuff too however in a one dimensional kind of way.

You're the only one in the forum who truly understands quickness.

Other members get it all screwed up. Fastness, dartiness, and runs like a "duck" (Wtf was that?).

 

[RobertWeathers]

Or pull a Hoyer

I actually think in stretches Hoyer is pretty good. Solid backup

 

[voluntarysaftey]

Hopeful timeline:
2018 - Jimmy gets the franchise tag
2019 - Jimmy gets the franchise take again
2020 -- Brady retires, Jimmy is a free agent, he decided to sign with the Pats

oh ya, and the Pats had drafted an all pro wr with that 2nd round pick who is coming into his prime.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

The 49'ers should sign him now to a 4 year deal and sit him out. They have a bad team. Don't need him playing for contract money in the last half of a season and getting killed.

This sounds like a Felger type response.

Okay then, if you're going to pay him, how much do you pay him? Are you going to hand him an $80M deal without even watching him play a single down for your team?

There is risk in pretty much everything in life, so it comes down to properly evaluating and assessing it.

Right now, you get to pay pretty much NFL minimum wage to evaluate a potential franchise QB in your system for 6 months. If you like him, you can guarantee to keep him for $24M or so next season, when you should have around $100M in cap room. Basically, you get a half year to evaluate him for almost nothing, or a year and a half evaluation for less than $25M BEFORE you have to make a massive financial commitment.

Sure, you could give him an extension now, but only if it's not market value. If you assume his market value will be something like the 4-year, $72M deal Osweiler got with $37M guaranteed in his first two years, then you don't sign him for that deal without seeing him play a single game in your system. That would be stupid. Only desperate idiots like the Texans do that.

So if you can get him for less than that, yes, you're minimizing the risk of him costing you more down the line by securing the player for less potentially. But you add on the risk that he'll be an expensive bust.

If you wait a year, you risk the price tag growing, but you minimize the expensive bust risk.

If you sign him to a market value deal right now, the potential downside to being wrong is an expensive mess that lasts several years on your cap, while the benefit is you might save $4M-$6M/year. If you wait, the potential downside is it might cost you $4M-$6M/year, but you can cut ties pretty quickly with little long-term damage. And the "worst-case" scenario to waiting is that he plays amazing, at which point yes, it costs you money, but you have an amazing player on your team.

In essence, if you sign him to a market-value deal right now, you (the team) assumes almost all of the risk. Right now, the risk is on the player. And it could work out this one time, absolutely admit that. People hit on 18 in blackjack and get a 3 sometimes. But that doesn't make it a good strategy long-term. If you keep assuming unnecessary risk over and over and over again, it's not going to work out well for you in the long-run.

 

[DarrylS]

Think Shanahan is blowing smoke, how can the 49ers determine his value if he does not play in a few games, just sign him to the current rate for starting QB's or pay him as a back up QB??... He essentially

Probably will not play on Sunday against Cardinals, but possibly will play against the Giants on Nov 12 or more probable on Nov 26 against the Seahawks.. doubt he will jeopardize SF winless season..

After that SF plays Bears, Texans, Titans, Jaguars and Rams.. not many "cupcakes" in that schedule..