Jimmy Garoppolo, QB, Los Angeles Rams

Not knowing much about trade mechanics myself - what would the chances of the 49ers getting help externally if Jimmy was traded mid-season?

What I mean is, can the team possibly recruit beyond Purdy if an attractive trade comes along?

If not, then does that basically mean there is zero chance of a mid-season trade (given that we are not going to go all-in on Purdy as QB2) unless we lose so many games that the season is effectively blown?

Originally posted by joeknows:
Not knowing much about trade mechanics myself - what would the chances of the 49ers getting help externally if Jimmy was traded mid-season?

What I mean is, can the team possibly recruit beyond Purdy if an attractive trade comes along?

If not, then does that basically mean there is zero chance of a mid-season trade (given that we are not going to go all-in on Purdy as QB2) unless we lose so many games that the season is effectively blown?

I don't expect Jimmy to be traded. A playoff contender would have to lose their starting QB and be willing to give up a 3rd or higher (imo). We have the best QB situation in the NFL as it stands and no way we are giving him up for peanuts.

I feel like they would have kept Sudfeld if they felt there would be a high probability that Jimmy could be traded mid season. At that point there wouldn't be anyone worth getting to replace Jimmy as QB2 and we would be stuck with the very raw Purdy as the backup.

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:

Originally posted by eric_anthony:

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:
Jimmy is way better than a top 20 qb. He is a 8-16 qb. This has been discussed over and over. Once you take out politics and PR, that's what the numbers say.

Then he would've gotten numerous trade offers despite his injury.

TThere were no offers because Kyle and John never wanted to trade him. From the get-go. Resigning at the last minute to provide salary cap space was the plan from early March until now. It's all it's all about keeping Trey's ego intact while he goes through another "learning year " Jimmy gets this and Figures it's a good way to end his time here while ramping into the starters role after surgery.

you know that all of that is fiction ..

Maybe. But you know what else is fiction? Jimmy's a crappy quarterback that's cost us for Super Bowls. That's fiction too. But that doesn't stop posters from writing 3,000 pages of garbage to protect Kyle's reputation for being Mr offensive genius. I like my Fiction more

... and Jimmy will be starting by week 4 ....

Fairytales

They do come true though...

+ Show all quotes
There is no possible way Jimmy starts week 4 unless Trey gets injured. Absolutely none. Even if Trey sucks really badly. AT BEST it would be mid-season, and even then only a fifty-fifty shot at best.

The starter will be determined by Kyle based on who gives us the best chance to win that week's game. Pretty effin simple. It will be evaluated every week. If trey executes the way kyle likes, he will start the whole season. If he plays like a 22 year old who's been in three games in two years, I don't guess he will be starting past october. This is about winning games. It is not about giving trey touch time. This has been crystal clear since last season. No change now.

I think he could make into week 3. But once the tape starts rolling, it's going to be really tough to keep trey in games. My 2c.

Although, there is a wild card.

Our IOL could be so godawful that it's really not going to matter who is behind center. In which case yeah, give trey more time since we'll be giving up 4 sacks a game and constantly nicking up our QB's. So there's that.

Let me repeat:

There is no possible way Jimmy starts week 4 unless Trey gets injured. Absolutely none. Even if Trey sucks really badly. AT BEST it would be mid-season, and even then only a fifty-fifty shot at best.

NONE. How do I know? Jimmy was playing terrible and we were 3-5 and he still got another chance.

See, the difference in the two cases is that when Jimmy got hurt there was nobody behind him. Now if Trey stinks it out- and I'm not saying he will-but if he does we do have somebody behind him. So that's the difference in the situations. That's another way of saying that Trey wasn't a realistic option last year. So I don't think your comparison of the two situations is reasonable because the two situations were not symmetrical

Let me put it this way. This is going to sound weird. But, if Jimmy got off to that mediocre start and had Jimmy Garoppolo on the bench absolutely 100% Shanahan would have put in Jimmy from the bench. I know that makes no sense but it's the best I can do.

Originally posted by joeknows:
Not knowing much about trade mechanics myself - what would the chances of the 49ers getting help externally if Jimmy was traded mid-season?

What I mean is, can the team possibly recruit beyond Purdy if an attractive trade comes along?

If not, then does that basically mean there is zero chance of a mid-season trade (given that we are not going to go all-in on Purdy as QB2) unless we lose so many games that the season is effectively blown?

Kyle Shanahan literally said that Purdy would be QB2 if Jimmy didn't take the pay cut. Meaning Purdy showed enough and they were confident enough in him to cut Jimmy. I don't think there's zero chance at all; I think it's the complete opposite and they've been pretty much saying as such. They didn't want to let him go or cut him for nothing. I still think priority #1 is trading him and that will absolutely happen if someone ever offers something. Regardless of our record. Only way Jimmy stays is if nobody offers anything and Trey gets hurt for an extended period

Originally posted by YACBros85:
I don't expect Jimmy to be traded. A playoff contender would have to lose their starting QB and be willing to give up a 3rd or higher (imo). We have the best QB situation in the NFL as it stands and no way we are giving him up for peanuts.

I feel like they would have kept Sudfeld if they felt there would be a high probability that Jimmy could be traded mid season. At that point there wouldn't be anyone worth getting to replace Jimmy as QB2 and we would be stuck with the very raw Purdy as the backup.

Huh? I mean they could've kept Sudfield over Purdy. You think the only reason they kept Purdy over Sudfield was because we were able to have Jimmy as the backup?

Originally posted by 49ers808:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
I don't expect Jimmy to be traded. A playoff contender would have to lose their starting QB and be willing to give up a 3rd or higher (imo). We have the best QB situation in the NFL as it stands and no way we are giving him up for peanuts.

I feel like they would have kept Sudfeld if they felt there would be a high probability that Jimmy could be traded mid season. At that point there wouldn't be anyone worth getting to replace Jimmy as QB2 and we would be stuck with the very raw Purdy as the backup.

Huh? I mean they could've kept Sudfield over Purdy. You think the only reason they kept Purdy over Sudfield was because we were able to have Jimmy as the backup?

Only because Sudfeld has more knowledge of the offense. Purdy played well in the pre season but it was the pre season. Maybe Purdy learned the entire playbook in one off season like Trey did but I have heard no reports of it as of yet. Its obvious they like Purdy. But reason tells me that it is not wise to go into the season without a veteran in the QB room. Not a team that is very close to being SB contenders anyway.

Originally posted by 49ers808:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
I don't expect Jimmy to be traded. A playoff contender would have to lose their starting QB and be willing to give up a 3rd or higher (imo). We have the best QB situation in the NFL as it stands and no way we are giving him up for peanuts.

I feel like they would have kept Sudfeld if they felt there would be a high probability that Jimmy could be traded mid season. At that point there wouldn't be anyone worth getting to replace Jimmy as QB2 and we would be stuck with the very raw Purdy as the backup.

Huh? I mean they could've kept Sudfield over Purdy. You think the only reason they kept Purdy over Sudfield was because we were able to have Jimmy as the backup?

Not really, from performance and salary cap standpoint Purdy was the better business decision.

Who has $2 million dollar back up as the #3 QB.

Originally posted by YACBros85:
Listen to Richard Sherman at the 0:50 mark.

Sherman and Kittle are smart. You can be a superbowl contender and be one injury away from being a bad team.
Guys like George Kittle work like crazy in offseason to be the best and one injury can f**k their season.
That´s why the Niners were so smart to keep Jimmy G.

Brock purdy might be the real gem here. A young jimmy G.

prove me wrong Mr lance. Turn into Josh Allen

Originally posted by YACBros85:
Only because Sudfeld has more knowledge of the offense. Purdy played well in the pre season but it was the pre season. Maybe Purdy learned the entire playbook in one off season like Trey did but I have heard no reports of it as of yet. Its obvious they like Purdy. But reason tells me that it is not wise to go into the season without a veteran in the QB room. Not a team that is very close to being SB contenders anyway.

If Lance went down Sudfield wasn't going to be a guy who was going to get you many wins in which case you might as well go with Purdy who looked to be the better player. Even if he had less experience. I think things have worked out pretty well as far as the QB situation goes.

Originally posted by 49ers81:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
Only because Sudfeld has more knowledge of the offense. Purdy played well in the pre season but it was the pre season. Maybe Purdy learned the entire playbook in one off season like Trey did but I have heard no reports of it as of yet. Its obvious they like Purdy. But reason tells me that it is not wise to go into the season without a veteran in the QB room. Not a team that is very close to being SB contenders anyway.

If Lance went down Sudfield wasn't going to be a guy who was going to get you many wins in which case you might as well go with Purdy who looked to be the better player. Even if he had less experience. I think things have worked out pretty well as far as the QB situation goes.

I think they were afraid of Purdy not making it through waiver wires and were going to keep 3 QB's regardless. Or maybe they are super high on a 7th round rookie QB that everyone else overlooked and Sudfeld was getting cut anyway. Doesn't really mean much at this point. I am happy with the QB room as it stands today.

Im excited to see jimmy throw with his patched up arm. What kind of reps will he take in practice now?

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by 49ers808:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
I don't expect Jimmy to be traded. A playoff contender would have to lose their starting QB and be willing to give up a 3rd or higher (imo). We have the best QB situation in the NFL as it stands and no way we are giving him up for peanuts.

I feel like they would have kept Sudfeld if they felt there would be a high probability that Jimmy could be traded mid season. At that point there wouldn't be anyone worth getting to replace Jimmy as QB2 and we would be stuck with the very raw Purdy as the backup.

Huh? I mean they could've kept Sudfield over Purdy. You think the only reason they kept Purdy over Sudfield was because we were able to have Jimmy as the backup?

Not really, from performance and salary cap standpoint Purdy was the better business decision.

Who has $2 million dollar back up as the #3 QB.

But we're paying him anyway so it makes sense to keep him if they thought he was the better QB.

If Jimmy gets traded then Sudfield is back to being #2 and when Jimmy leaves in the off-season Sudfield has the head start on being the #2 next year.

it only makes sense to cut Sudfield if they thought Purdy was the better QB.

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:

Originally posted by eric_anthony:

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:
Jimmy is way better than a top 20 qb. He is a 8-16 qb. This has been discussed over and over. Once you take out politics and PR, that's what the numbers say.

Then he would've gotten numerous trade offers despite his injury.

TThere were no offers because Kyle and John never wanted to trade him. From the get-go. Resigning at the last minute to provide salary cap space was the plan from early March until now. It's all it's all about keeping Trey's ego intact while he goes through another "learning year " Jimmy gets this and Figures it's a good way to end his time here while ramping into the starters role after surgery.

you know that all of that is fiction ..

Maybe. But you know what else is fiction? Jimmy's a crappy quarterback that's cost us for Super Bowls. That's fiction too. But that doesn't stop posters from writing 3,000 pages of garbage to protect Kyle's reputation for being Mr offensive genius. I like my Fiction more

... and Jimmy will be starting by week 4 ....

Fairytales

They do come true though...

There is no possible way Jimmy starts week 4 unless Trey gets injured. Absolutely none. Even if Trey sucks really badly. AT BEST it would be mid-season, and even then only a fifty-fifty shot at best.

+ Show all quotes
The starter will be determined by Kyle based on who gives us the best chance to win that week's game. Pretty effin simple. It will be evaluated every week. If trey executes the way kyle likes, he will start the whole season. If he plays like a 22 year old who's been in three games in two years, I don't guess he will be starting past october. This is about winning games. It is not about giving trey touch time. This has been crystal clear since last season. No change now.

I think he could make into week 3. But once the tape starts rolling, it's going to be really tough to keep trey in games. My 2c.

Although, there is a wild card.

Our IOL could be so godawful that it's really not going to matter who is behind center. In which case yeah, give trey more time since we'll be giving up 4 sacks a game and constantly nicking up our QB's. So there's that.

Let me repeat:

There is no possible way Jimmy starts week 4 unless Trey gets injured. Absolutely none. Even if Trey sucks really badly. AT BEST it would be mid-season, and even then only a fifty-fifty shot at best.

NONE. How do I know? Jimmy was playing terrible and we were 3-5 and he still got another chance.

See, the difference in the two cases is that when Jimmy got hurt there was nobody behind him. Now if Trey stinks it out- and I'm not saying he will-but if he does we do have somebody behind him. So that's the difference in the situations. That's another way of saying that Trey wasn't a realistic option last year. So I don't think your comparison of the two situations is reasonable because the two situations were not symmetrical

Let me put it this way. This is going to sound weird. But, if Jimmy got off to that mediocre start and had Jimmy Garoppolo on the bench absolutely 100% Shanahan would have put in Jimmy from the bench. I know that makes no sense but it's the best I can do.

And you base that on what?

Edit- let me remind you that Trey PROVED last year he was a "more realistic option" than CJ Beathard was in 2017, but it took FIVE games for Shanahan to bench Hoyer—one more than the four first claimed in the comment I responded to, and three less than the 3-5 start Jimmy had.

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
And you base that on what?

Edit- let me remind you that Trey PROVED last year he was a "more realistic option" than CJ Beathard was in 2017, but it took FIVE games for Shanahan to bench Hoyer—one more than the four first claimed in the comment I responded to, and three less than the 3-5 start Jimmy had.

Obviously, I base that on Kyle's judgement. What else? He's the one who decided trey wasn't ready for prime time, and went with Jimmy. Trey was 21. Come on.