Jimmy Garoppolo-QB-EIU

Originally posted by Jcool:

In a nutshell: If organizations that need a quarterback have passed on you twice, chances are you aren't a very good one.

Ahhh okay...guess that's true when looking at Montana, Wilson, Romo, brady, McNair, Bulger, Brunell, Hasselbeck, Theismann, Garrard, Staubach etc...

How about you just watch the kid play and tell me what it is you don't like about him from a qb skill set....instead of try to poo poo on everything qb related.

Originally posted by okdkid:
That's true in regard to a QB's value as a prospect. But that doesn't hold true after 3+ years of NFL development. It's possible an average prospect turned good. Happens all the time at every position.

I'm not saying what Garoppolo is one way or the other. Just saying that the line of logic doesn't apply several years after the draft.

Yeah 2 of the major criticisms of Grop as a prospect was that he hadn't faced major competition, which 3 seasons of good preseason film at least mitigates that concern, and that he might not be able to handle a complex offense, but it appears he has a mastery of the Patriots Erhardt-Perkins passing offense which is among the most complex in the NFL.

Those 2 things make him a better prospect today than he was in 2014.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
I was down with the 49ers drafting Garoppolo in 2014, would be perfectly happy to see them trade for him as long as the compensation was "reasonable" for a guy with limited starts who will be due a BIG new contract soon.

I agree. I don't want to give him a huge blockbuster deal. But the reality is, when you're a horrible team like us that went 2-14, with terrible wide receivers you're going to have to overpay him somewhat as an incentive to come to SF rather than another franchise like the JETS that provides a city with marketability, endoresemens, and not to mention some good WR's.

They're going to have to give up a first for him (as much as I hate to say that) either this year or next.

I'm with Phoenix, if the compensation isn't outrageous, I'm all for trading for him.

Originally posted by mustangmele:

I agree. I don't want to give him a huge blockbuster deal. But the reality is, when you're a horrible team like us that went 2-14, with terrible wide receivers you're going to have to overpay him somewhat as an incentive to come to SF rather than another franchise like the JETS that provides a city with marketability, endoresemens, and not to mention some good WR's.

They're going to have to give up a first for him (as much as I hate to say that) either this year or next.

A. Garoppolo has no control over where the Patriots trade him.

B. They for sure arent trading him to a division rival so both the Bills and Jets are out


C. There is no way in hell the 49ers should trade a 1st rounder for him. I'd rather they take Trubisky on a long term rookie deal.

I dont care how we get him.... Lets see our options, Trubs = 1 year of college. Not enough proof. Watson ehhhh. People say Kaep 2.0, cant read the d which if true will be fully exposed in the nfl. Not necessarily on college level.


Or someone who has proved they can play at a high level in the NFL. Has all the attributes you could want, and is young. The decision is obvious. Simplify it for yourself, because its that simple.

PS. Jimmy looked better than Cassel with no real wide receivers. He is by far the best option we have this offseason, and its not even close

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by mustangmele:
I agree. I don't want to give him a huge blockbuster deal. But the reality is, when you're a horrible team like us that went 2-14, with terrible wide receivers you're going to have to overpay him somewhat as an incentive to come to SF rather than another franchise like the JETS that provides a city with marketability, endoresemens, and not to mention some good WR's.

They're going to have to give up a first for him (as much as I hate to say that) either this year or next.

A. Garoppolo has no control over where the Patriots trade him.

B. They for sure arent trading him to a division rival so both the Bills and Jets are out


C. There is no way in hell the 49ers should trade a 1st rounder for him. I'd rather they take Trubisky on a long term rookie deal.

What if its this years 2nd and next years 2nd?

Originally posted by Eli_23:

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by mustangmele:
I agree. I don't want to give him a huge blockbuster deal. But the reality is, when you're a horrible team like us that went 2-14, with terrible wide receivers you're going to have to overpay him somewhat as an incentive to come to SF rather than another franchise like the JETS that provides a city with marketability, endoresemens, and not to mention some good WR's.

They're going to have to give up a first for him (as much as I hate to say that) either this year or next.

A. Garoppolo has no control over where the Patriots trade him.

B. They for sure arent trading him to a division rival so both the Bills and Jets are out


C. There is no way in hell the 49ers should trade a 1st rounder for him. I'd rather they take Trubisky on a long term rookie deal.

What if its this years 2nd and next years 2nd?

if anyone says no to that they are blind. He is better than trubs. Lets look at the tape. Oh wait trubs has 1 full year, thats it. Jimmy G has college, and yes high level nfl tape.

Originally posted by Eli_23:
What if its this years 2nd and next years 2nd?

I'm down although I'd much rather make it a 2nd and a 3rd, or at least a conditional pick dependent on games started, particular stats attained...etc that offer the 49ers at least some protection but I do believe that a 2nd and a future 2nd gets it done.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
A. Garoppolo has no control over where the Patriots trade him.

B. They for sure arent trading him to a division rival so both the Bills and Jets are out


C. There is no way in hell the 49ers should trade a 1st rounder for him. I'd rather they take Trubisky on a long term rookie deal.

Good points on A & B. Don't know what I was thinking (I was in FA mode I guess haha). Regarding C I wouldn't mind that, only if Patriots wanted an outrages amount for him. But I would take Garoppolo in a heart beat over Trubisky. Trubisky hasn't proved anything in the NFL. Garoppolo has both in the NCAA and NFL. Gotta go with the "proven guy". Although, I wouldn't mind the niners trading down in the draft, getting multiple first rounders. One for Garoppolo, the other for Trubisky.

I'm not impressed and wouldn't want to give more than a 2nd and maybe conditional pick next year if he hits certain marks. He would be in his contract year, and does nothing special. I like how he's always moving his feet and a quick release, and doesn't turn the ball over, but other than that, not much. About 40% of his throws are quick outs (off the line of scrimmage), screens and flare routes. About 50% of them are slants and wide open WRs that he stares down or a few times he's looked the other way as soon as a play starts for about half a second(even tho he looks like he predetermined which side he's going to). And the last 10% are some good plays, scrambles usually to buy time, overthrew a handful of deep plays in 2 games. I'm not sold on him being our franchise Qb , although he is definitely better than gabbert and Kaep.

I feel he's similiar to an Alex Smith, mostly short game but can make the throws to wide open players, and doesn't like forcing the ball

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

A. Garoppolo has no control over where the Patriots trade him.

B. They for sure arent trading him to a division rival so both the Bills and Jets are out


C. There is no way in hell the 49ers should trade a 1st rounder for him. I'd rather they take Trubisky on a long term rookie deal.

That I think depends who they think is a better QB. If your either going to draft a QB or just trade for a QB I would rather just trade for Jimmy. Not saying he is worth the number 2 pick but I think he is better than Trubs. Now if Garretts available I don't answer the phones and send in the pick with 14:59 left on the clock.

How can people sit here and tell me Brady does it with no receivers. He makes his decent receivers look good. Yet Jimmy does it and hes just a Matt Cassel.... Lets stop playing the lets see if we can find a franchise qb, and just go get one who has proven he can play at a high level, with low level talent

Originally posted by DJamhour:
I'm not impressed and wouldn't want to give more than a 2nd and maybe conditional pick next year if he hits certain marks. He would be in his contract year, and does nothing special. I like how he's always moving his feet and a quick release, and doesn't turn the ball over, but other than that, not much. About 40% of his throws are quick outs (off the line of scrimmage), screens and flare routes. About 50% of them are slants and wide open WRs that he stares down or a few times he's looked the other way as soon as a play starts for about half a second(even tho he looks like he predetermined which side he's going to). And the last 10% are some good plays, scrambles usually to buy time, overthrew a handful of deep plays in 2 games. I'm not sold on him, although he is definitely better than gabbert and Kaep.

I feel he's similiar to an Alex Smith, mostly short game but can make the throws to wide open players, and doesn't like forcing the ball.

From everything I've seen of him in college and the NFL, preseason as well as his limited playing time, he's a much more aggressive passer. Whereas Alex always leaned towards the conservative side, Garoppolo tends to look for the killshot more often, he can dink and dunk it down the field, he can also attack vertically too.

Former Patriots assistant to the coach staff — and Oakland Raiders and Cleveland Browns general manager — Michael Lombardi did just that while discussing Jimmy Garoppolo, New England's starter until Brady returns from a four-game suspension, on The Ringer's "Bill Simmons Podcast". "I've been fortunate enough, I've watched practice for two years and took a lot of reps, I thought Jimmy Garoppolo is a really good player," Lombardi told Simmons, as generously transcribed by PatsPulpit.com's Rich Hill. "He does things really well and in the right scheme, in the right system, he can be really effective. He throws the ball vertically down the field better than (Brady) does. And he can make throws all over the field. He can move around. "And the players like him. You can see the team rallied around him. But that wasn't surprising because when Jimmy has lunch every single day, he's eating there with all the offensive linemen. He's a true quarterback in terms of his leadership skills are there. He's not aloof and he's not not around the team. He's involved and he's really taken to watching and observing and understanding the program and working on his skill set, even though he knew he was back-up to Tom."

Read more at: http://nesn.com/2016/09/ex-patriots-exec-jimmy-garoppolo-throws-vertical-better-than-tom-brady/

Originally posted by fan49:
How can people sit here and tell me Brady does it with no receivers. He makes his decent receivers look good. Yet Jimmy does it and hes just a Matt Cassel.... Lets stop playing the lets see if we can find a franchise qb, and just go get one who has proven he can play at a high level, with low level talent

I'm with you, I think the best way to go is Garoppolo. I could change my mind, but as of now, I think Garoppolo is our best move.