Jimmy Garoppolo, QB, Los Angeles Rams

Originally posted by joanieb:
Deep balls uncorked don't win Superbowls ... watch some Tom Brady videos for plays that DO win Superbowls. "That may be a year two title," well ... why not next year? How far away do you imagine this team to be? Aaron Donald is one of the greatest players in the NFL, he killed Jimmy and he did the same thing in the Superbowl. Take him away and the Niners win it all ... Aaron is tired, he wants to retire, it's hard to play like a beast year after year.

Are the 49ers getting Brady? And even if Donald retires, the 49ers don't win it all simply because he isn't there. Next year is next year. Thousands of things can happen between now and Feb., 2023. The f**k is the point of your post? Go back to accounting.

Originally posted by NotAFinga42:
Oh, I got you. See because you explicitly said he wasn't ready, not that you don't know whether he's ready or not. Right before calling it a failure.

Actually I didn't, and if you had read my post in the context of the post I was replying to (from helmet) and the post he replied to (from brodie), you might understand that. The discussion was about fan criticism of Trey Lance next season IF he didn't play well. I agreed that would be unfair to Trey Lance, but added that there would be legitimate reason for frustration from fans with his selection.

You probably shouldn't be condescending, Professor.

Originally posted by thl408:
aww man, don't ban him. This thread will be boring again. I wanted to read more about how Steve Young is a bum that teammates didn't like.

Steve literally has the weakest arm in NFL history and no deep ball.

EDIT: tl;dr:
It's not simply Jimmy's ability. It's the albatross contract (look at what Winston is making; Jimmy is way over market value), the draft capital, the injury history, and lack of leverage from the 49ers due to Trey's existence.

Originally posted by JTB1974:
All this love for a guy nobody in the league wants.

Not exactly. Nobody in the league wants him at his salary and in exchange for draft capital, when they could just wait, and if that doesn't work, there are options almost as good or comparable that are available.

Steelers would rather have Trubinsky over Jimmy.

That's not quite accurate. They'd rather have Trubisky than Jimmy + loss of draft capital + Jimmy's hurge contract.

The Panthers are willing to stick with horrible Sam Darnold.

This could be them making a sunk cost fallacy. It could also be a realization that Jimmy is eventually going to be cut, and that they are in position to draft a QB anyway.

Colts would rather have over the hill Matt Ryan.

Well, other than last year, Ryan has shown to be clearly better his entire career. Can't blame them for this one—especially considering that Ryan is ready to go and Jimmy won't be ready to go by the time training camp starts.

The Commanders would rather have Wentz.

True. Perhaps contract length remaining played a roll, as well as the famous bad blood. And again, Wentz is ready to go, and the two QBs are in the same tier anyway.

Falcons Mariota,

They just took a 40 million dollar cap hit and have to go cheap. No way they could realistically afford Jimmy.

Saints going with Winston.

Winston was a step above Jimmy last year, so this one isn't surprising.

But yes Jimmy is so awesome. And don't use his injury as an excuse, It was minor surgery.

The injury is definitely a reasonable excuse, because when your QB is not there for camp, he's behind on learning the offense and getting in a rhythm with teammates, and all the other stuff.

If teams really wanted him, that wouldn't stop them. And John is not even looking for a 1st RD pick for him. Teams don't even want to give up a 2nd for him.

Again, it's more than just Jimmy's ability. 25 million. Trey Lance is on the roster, so why would teams need to trade for him when he's probably going to be cut at some point?

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by NotAFinga42:
Oh, I got you. See because you explicitly said he wasn't ready, not that you don't know whether he's ready or not. Right before calling it a failure.

Actually I didn't, and if you had read my post in the context of the post I was replying to (from helmet) and the post he replied to (from brodie), you might understand that. The discussion was about fan criticism of Trey Lance next season IF he didn't play well. I agreed that would be unfair to Trey Lance, but added that there would be legitimate reason for frustration from fans with his selection.

You probably shouldn't be condescending, Professor.

Calling me professor because I know how to read?

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
Also agree with this. The underlying problem would be the team is expected to be a contender. Having a vet you don't love, and a young player who isn't ready to deliver is a failure to maximize the team's potential, and you paid A LOT.

"Having a vet you don't love and a young player who isn't ready to deliver is a failure to maximize the team's potential."

You said it IS a massive failure, not would be, IF, etc.

So…… find others to gaslight and argue with. Or share whatever the hell you're smoking, Joe.

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

LOL at this thread.

Multiple LOLs @ loser Stafford

Triggered?
Not sure what that reply has to do with anything Niner related.

Originally posted by NotAFinga42:

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by NotAFinga42:
Oh, I got you. See because you explicitly said he wasn't ready, not that you don't know whether he's ready or not. Right before calling it a failure.

Actually I didn't, and if you had read my post in the context of the post I was replying to (from helmet) and the post he replied to (from brodie), you might understand that. The discussion was about fan criticism of Trey Lance next season IF he didn't play well. I agreed that would be unfair to Trey Lance, but added that there would be legitimate reason for frustration from fans with his selection.

You probably shouldn't be condescending, Professor.

Calling me professor because I know how to read?

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
Also agree with this. The underlying problem would be the team is expected to be a contender. Having a vet you don't love, and a young player who isn't ready to deliver is a failure to maximize the team's potential, and you paid A LOT.

"Having a vet you don't love and a young player who isn't ready to deliver is a failure to maximize the team's potential."

You said it IS a massive failure, not would be, IF, etc.

So…… find others to gaslight and argue with. Or share whatever the hell you're smoking, Joe.

Jesus if you can't read those two sentences together and understand they're theorizing about a potential future scenario, I don't know what to say.

Perhaps, instead, you were just skimming and overreacted? Nothing wrong with acknowledging that, if true.

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Terrell Davis had 82 targets and 49 receptions in 1995. Fullback Aaron Craver had 57 targets and 43 receptions. They were the third and fourth WRs in receptions, and 3rd and 6th in targets, respectfully.
By comparison, the 1992 49ers, Rathman and Watters had 55 and 52 targets, respectfully (also ranked 3rd and 4th on the team in receptions, and 4th and 5th on the team in receptions).

1996 Broncos: 51 targets for Craver, 52 for Davis.
1993 49ers: FB Mark Logan had 48 targets. Ricky Watters had 45.
1997: 58 targets for Davis. Craver was replaced by Griffith, and throwing to the FB didn't happen much this season.
1998: Only 38 targets for Davis, their 4th leading receiver that year, behind Shannon Sharp, Rod Smith, and Ed McCaffery.

Clearly the offense slowly evolved over time in Denver, and the same thing happened in San Francisco with Shanahan, because while in 1992 and 1993 they actually used their running backs LESS than the Broncos did in 1995 and 1996, by 1994 Ricky Watters skyrocketed up the target chain, jumping to number 2. William Floyd, however, was 6th on the team in targets with only 26. However, Watters was used a great deal as a WR in 1994, if you actually watch the games. Moreover, this trend continued with Shanahan's replacement in 1995.

So, regarding Steve Young's career as a full time starter under Shanahan, you see the same trend but in reverse: when he started in San Francisco, he didn't use running backs that much, but dramatically shifted his last year there, using Ricky Watters much more in the passing game than he had before, while when he moved to Denver, he used running backs even more than he did in 1992 and 1993, but by 1998, Shanahan had phased running backs out of the passing game a great deal.

EDIT— Damn it are you the guy again? Just get lost. Your claims are not backed by the data or the visual evidence.

Out of 594 attempts for the 1995 Broncos. 49ers only had 480 attempts in 1992, 524 in 1993.

Don't forget about Amp Lee and others.

I've thought about it and I have decided I am going too far. Maybe I need a life...or at least a healthy outlet. Maybe I need to mature a little. Eeek am I becoming that guy? Oh my bad guys. I will stop.

Originally posted by DeepBallDoesntMatter:
What's funny is despite all the protesting in this thread, I'm pretty sure a bunch of people were let down after desperately trying to find impressive Young and Montana deep balls and seeing how hard it was to find them even completing anything down field. The gears are starting to turn in people's heads.

Oh , geez. Are you back again, extendjimmy?

Originally posted by DeepBallDoesntMatter:
I've thought about it and I have decided I am going too far. Maybe I need a life...or at least a healthy outlet. Maybe I need to mature a little. Eeek am I becoming that guy? Oh my bad guys. I will stop.

ok, thanks

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by DeepBallDoesntMatter:
What's funny is despite all the protesting in this thread, I'm pretty sure a bunch of people were let down after desperately trying to find impressive Young and Montana deep balls and seeing how hard it was to find them even completing anything down field. The gears are starting to turn in people's heads.

Oh , geez. Are you back again, extendjimmy?

That was one of him yesterday lol

Originally posted by DeepBallDoesntMatter:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Terrell Davis had 82 targets and 49 receptions in 1995. Fullback Aaron Craver had 57 targets and 43 receptions. They were the third and fourth WRs in receptions, and 3rd and 6th in targets, respectfully.
By comparison, the 1992 49ers, Rathman and Watters had 55 and 52 targets, respectfully (also ranked 3rd and 4th on the team in receptions, and 4th and 5th on the team in receptions).

1996 Broncos: 51 targets for Craver, 52 for Davis.
1993 49ers: FB Mark Logan had 48 targets. Ricky Watters had 45.
1997: 58 targets for Davis. Craver was replaced by Griffith, and throwing to the FB didn't happen much this season.
1998: Only 38 targets for Davis, their 4th leading receiver that year, behind Shannon Sharp, Rod Smith, and Ed McCaffery.

Clearly the offense slowly evolved over time in Denver, and the same thing happened in San Francisco with Shanahan, because while in 1992 and 1993 they actually used their running backs LESS than the Broncos did in 1995 and 1996, by 1994 Ricky Watters skyrocketed up the target chain, jumping to number 2. William Floyd, however, was 6th on the team in targets with only 26. However, Watters was used a great deal as a WR in 1994, if you actually watch the games. Moreover, this trend continued with Shanahan's replacement in 1995.

So, regarding Steve Young's career as a full time starter under Shanahan, you see the same trend but in reverse: when he started in San Francisco, he didn't use running backs that much, but dramatically shifted his last year there, using Ricky Watters much more in the passing game than he had before, while when he moved to Denver, he used running backs even more than he did in 1992 and 1993, but by 1998, Shanahan had phased running backs out of the passing game a great deal.

EDIT— Damn it are you the guy again? Just get lost. Your claims are not backed by the data or the visual evidence.

Out of 594 attempts for the 1995 Broncos. 49ers only had 480 attempts in 1992, 524 in 1993.

Don't forget about Amp Lee and others.

Well, 82/594 = 0.14
55/480 = 0.11

0.14 > 0.11

Originally posted by DeepBallDoesntMatter:
I've thought about it and I have decided I am going too far. Maybe I need a life...or at least a healthy outlet. Maybe I need to mature a little. Eeek am I becoming that guy? Oh my bad guys. I will stop.

All you need to do is realize very few people here hate Jimmy or thinks he sucks. We just think he's not going to ever be elite.

Jimmy led us out of Egypt. No one hates him for that. In fact, the fan base is grateful to him for that.

But Trey will lead us to the Promised Land, and it's not a slight against Jimmy to feel excited at that.

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:
LOL at this thread.

Multiple LOLs @ loser Stafford

Triggered?
Not sure what that reply has to do with anything Niner related.

I mean it's just about how arrogant people were whilst being so incredibly wrong. I feel like dealing with the arrogance has earned us the right to rub in the fact that we were right all along, that as soon as Stafford got legitimate help he'd become a winning QB.