Jimmy Garoppolo, QB, Los Angeles Rams

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
Realize your commentary on 2023, is based on less of a sample than 2016-2018. And you use it nonetheless. I am of the position you can use all the data, and you can preface with small sample size disclaimers. Certainly when SF is making the trade, they are using the data, and reviewing the film, what they have to go off of at least. If you have a game, you look at that game.

McD can do X's and O's. He cannot lead a team of men. So he's at best OC material imo.

I am actually basing my opinion on gameplay and film, and not the stats. I watched every one of Jimmy's games this year and there is no discernable physical difference in his play between this season and any other in his career. What is a constant is the same carelessness with the ball and hit and miss decision making that often results in turnovers. We were able to succeed with him by calling plays around his strengths and generally limiting his impact on the game in nearly every situation that we could. The Raiders didn't have that luxury.



He is the same Jimmy from a physical perspective. Same arm strength, quick release, mobility. All on display.



He is the same Jimmy from a mental perspective too.

In a small sample size you can have a set of games where you don't get punished for bad decision making or fundamentally questionable play at a position (see 17). You can also have a set of games where bad decision making and fundamentally questionable play leads to outlier poor statistics (see 18). The truth is between.

Either way, there's no actual evidence presented that he is now broken physically. There was obvious evidence for the other players you used in comparison.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
It's all 'the real Jimmy'
I might be the only one using logic to determine that yes, Jimmy with a ton of surg < Jimmy without a ton of surg
Let's get real, I don't think he's very good anymore, you all say he is? Fat chance. so you want to say he was never good, well that's not true either, now is it?

It's not a matter of logic. It's a matter of evidence. You're not providing any other than his stats aren't as good. There are many factors for that. Being broken down is not one. Provide evidence in the play. Show someone else who's breaking down film and seeing it.

Its nice to know that I am not the only one arguing with 6 anymore about this. His evidence of being washed up is "trust me bro."

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
Its nice to know that I am not the only one arguing with 6 anymore about this. His evidence of being washed up is "trust me bro."

I just think it's on a person to support their argument and he isn't doing it other than relying on a small sample size of a select group of stats, while also omitting other relevant small samples that hurt the argument.

If two starts in NE count, then three in SF prior to the ACL should as well. Rather than just acknowledge he omitted the games, he's now combining 16-18 and saying its a larger sample than the group of games from this year… and then pretending those games from this season are the basis of any argument that I'm making. They are not.

Jimmy is the same individual player this year as the years with SF. There's no meaningful difference in his physical or mental ability to play the position. The production difference is nearly entirely related to situation.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
Its nice to know that I am not the only one arguing with 6 anymore about this. His evidence of being washed up is "trust me bro."

I just think it's on a person to support their argument and he isn't doing it other than relying on a small sample size of a select group of stats, while also omitting other relevant small samples that hurt the argument.

If two starts in NE count, then three in SF prior to the ACL should as well. Rather than just acknowledge he omitted the games, he's now combining 16-18 and saying its a larger sample than the group of games from this year… and then pretending those games from this season are the basis of any argument that I'm making. They are not.

Jimmy is the same individual player this year as the years with SF. There's no meaningful difference in his physical or mental ability to play the position. The production difference is nearly entirely related to situation.

Jimmy is who some of us thought he always was. Everyone who thought he was more than that (besides 6) avoids this thread lol

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
Its nice to know that I am not the only one arguing with 6 anymore about this. His evidence of being washed up is "trust me bro."

I just think it's on a person to support their argument and he isn't doing it other than relying on a small sample size of a select group of stats, while also omitting other relevant small samples that hurt the argument.

If two starts in NE count, then three in SF prior to the ACL should as well. Rather than just acknowledge he omitted the games, he's now combining 16-18 and saying its a larger sample than the group of games from this year… and then pretending those games from this season are the basis of any argument that I'm making. They are not.

Jimmy is the same individual player this year as the years with SF. There's no meaningful difference in his physical or mental ability to play the position. The production difference is nearly entirely related to situation.

He is using other players who you can clearly see a difference on the field as comparisons, but theres nothing similar with them and Jimmy. He is using stats or "data" when there really isnt any statistic or data point that can back up his claims. Its been maddening for me to try to engage in a conversation with him about this over many months, and him refusing to answer the question presented (even though he claims he has answered this every time I asked).

Jimmy is no different this year than he was last year (arguably his best season as a professional) from a physical standpoint. If there was any evidence to support the contrary, we would have seen it.

Originally posted by 49ers808:
Jimmy is who some of us thought he always was. Everyone who thought he was more than that (besides 6) avoids this thread lol

To be fair, I actually agree with major parts of Faithful's arguments about Jimmy. Specifically that it wasn't a mistake to sign him and that his time here was generally good. I think it's hard to be an average starting QB in this league and it's hard to replace them, which is why I was labeled a Jimmy stan too when it came to the context of a Jimmy and Trey debate for example.

I just know he was never better than an average player. Team stats don't move me, lol.

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
It's all 'the real Jimmy'
I might be the only one using logic to determine that yes, Jimmy with a ton of surg < Jimmy without a ton of surg
Let's get real, I don't think he's very good anymore, you all say he is? Fat chance. so you want to say he was never good, well that's not true either, now is it?

It's not a matter of logic. It's a matter of evidence. You're not providing any other than his stats aren't as good. There are many factors for that. Being broken down is not one. Provide evidence in the play. Show someone else who's breaking down film and seeing it.

Its nice to know that I am not the only one arguing with 6 anymore about this. His evidence of being washed up is "trust me bro."

Every injury is real evidence, contact shortens careers, it's why RBs have the shortest career length in the game, they experience high rates of contact, at high speed, with front seven bigger bodied defenders. This is the type of contact on JG, when he's sacked, or when he's a ball carrier. To the extent that he experiences contact, he shortens his career in my view. He took a lot of contact, as we all saw. We know also, he doesn't handle contact well.

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
He is using other players who you can clearly see a difference on the field as comparisons, but theres nothing similar with them and Jimmy. He is using stats or "data" when there really isnt any statistic or data point that can back up his claims. Its been maddening for me to try to engage in a conversation with him about this over many months, and him refusing to answer the question presented (even though he claims he has answered this every time I asked).

Jimmy is no different this year than he was last year (arguably his best season as a professional) from a physical standpoint. If there was any evidence to support the contrary, we would have seen it.

I would push back on this pretty hard, clearly he was doing a lot better in 2016, 2017, and 2019, I would say 2021 also. QBR agrees on all but 2021. You, in my opinion, saw JG play with CMC and concluded that JG is playing his best ball. No he wasn't. He was getting a HOF caliber upgrade. Recall JG in 2022 vs DEN without CMC as an example...

just consider a 50 something QBR with our loaded 2022 team; vs a 80 something QBR with a bunch of no namers in 2017, there is not much comparison as to which was better

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
I would push back on this pretty hard, clearly he was doing a lot better in 2016, 2017, and 2019, I would say 2021 also. QBR agrees on all but 2021. You, in my opinion, saw JG play with CMC and concluded that JG is playing his best ball. No he wasn't. He was getting a HOF caliber upgrade. Recall JG in 2022 vs DEN without CMC as an example...

just consider a 50 something QBR with our loaded 2022 team; vs a 80 something QBR with a bunch of no namers in 2017, there is not much comparison as to which was better

It's a 5 game sample in 2017. His play fundamentally was virtually the exact same. You could take probably any long term veteran qb and isolate stretches of games with wildly different QBR results.

In 2017 he made questionable decisions and got mostly positive results. In another stretch of games he might not be as fortunate (like this year for example, or the beginning of '18)

QBR is a measure of impact on winning. When you are on a loaded team and get to throw easier balls (like last year) your QBR is going to reflect that you aren't playing a major role. When you are on a bad team, you're going to have to play a larger role and the smaller the sample the wider the variance.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
To be fair, I actually agree with major parts of Faithful's arguments about Jimmy. Specifically that it wasn't a mistake to sign him and that his time here was generally good. I think it's hard to be an average starting QB in this league and it's hard to replace them, which is why I was labeled a Jimmy stan too when it came to the context of a Jimmy and Trey debate for example.

I just know he was never better than an average player. Team stats don't move me, lol.

Sorry but can't argue giving an average player a top 5 contract was good. Clearly they were good enough to overcome it but it was a mistake IMO. Could've franchised Jimmy then let him walk then paid Kirk something similar and likely won a ring.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
To be fair, I actually agree with major parts of Faithful's arguments about Jimmy. Specifically that it wasn't a mistake to sign him and that his time here was generally good. I think it's hard to be an average starting QB in this league and it's hard to replace them, which is why I was labeled a Jimmy stan too when it came to the context of a Jimmy and Trey debate for example.

I just know he was never better than an average player. Team stats don't move me, lol.

Sorry but can't argue giving an average player a top 5 contract was good. Clearly they were good enough to overcome it but it was a mistake IMO. Could've franchised Jimmy then let him walk then paid Kirk something similar and likely won a ring.

The old let's not pay avg guys argument that concludes with we should have paid Kirk.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
Sorry but can't argue giving an average player a top 5 contract was good. Clearly they were good enough to overcome it but it was a mistake IMO. Could've franchised Jimmy then let him walk then paid Kirk something similar and likely won a ring.

They didn't know that at the time. His play was promising. There was real reason to believe he could get better and that he could grow in the system. It didn't happen.

The contract was a product of circumstance and timing. Of course they signed him. The fanbase would have rightfully revolted had they not. They also were smart to give themselves outs in that contract.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
I would push back on this pretty hard, clearly he was doing a lot better in 2016, 2017, and 2019, I would say 2021 also. QBR agrees on all but 2021. You, in my opinion, saw JG play with CMC and concluded that JG is playing his best ball. No he wasn't. He was getting a HOF caliber upgrade. Recall JG in 2022 vs DEN without CMC as an example...

just consider a 50 something QBR with our loaded 2022 team; vs a 80 something QBR with a bunch of no namers in 2017, there is not much comparison as to which was better

It's a 5 game sample in 2017. His play fundamentally was virtually the exact same. You could take probably any long term veteran qb and isolate stretches of games with wildly different QBR results.

In 2017 he made questionable decisions and got mostly positive results. In another stretch of games he might not be as fortunate (like this year for example, or the beginning of '18)

QBR is a measure of impact on winning. When you are on a loaded team and get to throw easier balls (like last year) your QBR is going to reflect that you aren't playing a major role. When you are on a bad team, you're going to have to play a larger role and the smaller the sample the wider the variance.

You should do the two NFCC's and a Super Bowl appearance as an example and extrapolate that with other QBs with good teams. Show us other QBs that have had that success with great teams and the success that Jimmy had.

Originally posted by MucketyMuck:
You should do the two NFCC's and a Super Bowl appearance as an example and extrapolate that with other QBs with good teams. Show us other QBs that have had that success with great teams and the success that Jimmy had.

Honestly not quite sure what you're asking for specifically. It's rare to have extremely talented teams that can carry average QB play to SB contention.

Mark Sanchez comes to mind right off the bat. Alex Smith in '11. Russell Wilson to a lesser degree (because he was really good right away). Jalen Hurts.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by MucketyMuck:
You should do the two NFCC's and a Super Bowl appearance as an example and extrapolate that with other QBs with good teams. Show us other QBs that have had that success with great teams and the success that Jimmy had.

Honestly not quite sure what you're asking for specifically. It's rare to have extremely talented teams that can carry average QB play to SB contention.

Mark Sanchez comes to mind right off the bat. Alex Smith in '11. Russell Wilson to a lesser degree (because he was really good right away). Jalen Hurts.

For 3 straight healthy years.... Every year Jimmy was healthy the team was extremely successful. The years he wasn't they weren't. I'm poking a huge hole in the insinuation(not you particularly but it's been said for years) that Jimmy was just a long for the ride. It is an anomaly for a bad QB to take a team to the NFCC and Superbowl one single time. It's more than an anomaly when it's every year the QB was healthy. Jimmy was the most successful QB this team has had since Young. Now Jimmy is far from Young... Far from it... but his success was no anomaly.