There are 207 users in the forums
Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:Originally posted by CharlieSheen:Not where it counts for the goat convo
Team accomplishments. Gotcha.
Originally posted by JaggedJ:
Originally posted by dj43:
Originally posted by MucketyMuck:
Originally posted by dj43:
I posted this in the Purdy/Darnold thread but I'll put it here as well. It is insightful.
_____________________________
A look at what non-rookie QBs around the league are getting this year should help with some of the guesses/calculations as to Purdy's value.
from low to high
- $10M/yr - Brissett, Tyrod Taylor, Mariota
10-20 - Minshew, Darnold (1-year prove-it deal)
20-30 - Geno Smith, yep, he's the only starter in that range
30-40 - Mayfield, Carr, Aaron Rodgers (did anyone think there were a lot more?)
40-50 - Stafford, Allen, Mahomes (all on restricted deals), Cousins, Watson, Murray, (the true comparison here would be with Cousins, Watson, and Murray. I would argue Purdy is better than any of those three.
50+ - Hurts, Jackson, Herbert, Goff, Tua, Lawrence, Love, Burrow, Dak,
So, for those arguing for a trade, who do you want from this list to replace him? Give your reasons.
If you want to extend him, what is the comp that you would use to justify the number ($$$)?
I'd put him right at the Cousins range as far as talent and salary. I think their impact and consistency is pretty similar. 2nd tier guys that can slide into 1st tier depending on the day.
Fair enough.
I put Purdy's mobility higher than Cousins'. I also believe Purdy has been a better leader than Cousins. However, we can agree that the negotiations should start at least at that level.
That's not how the NFL works unfortunately.
When Kirk first signed with the Vikings he was near the top of QB, and again when re-signed a couple years later.
Comparing Brock to a fading Cousins and trying to justify us offering comparable money is going to get rejected before we can even offer him a pen.
There are 9 guys in that 50+ million bracket - and there's about to be a 10th.
Originally posted by bud49:
I went back and watched the game again from the other night after I had time to settle. Synopsis: Brock played a good game (i was wrong and excited on my first take) he took basically what the Rams D was giving, the missed PI's by the refs were the critical parts of the game to me. The throw to Juan that got picked, well Juan slowed down on the play (if you go back and watch you will see) not saying he would have scored but it may have not been an int. Other thing Deebo sucked a ss he was terrible.
Just go back and watch the game.
Originally posted by CharlieSheen:
That's what it comes down to. It's a team sport. If they both had 1 ring then Rodgers would be considered better. Instead Brady is #1 and Rodgers isn't even top 5. That's how it works bud
Originally posted by dj43:
I posted this in the Purdy/Darnold thread but I'll put it here as well. It is insightful.
_____________________________
A look at what non-rookie QBs around the league are getting this year should help with some of the guesses/calculations as to Purdy's value.
from low to high
- $10M/yr - Brissett, Tyrod Taylor, Mariota
10-20 - Minshew, Darnold (1-year prove-it deal)
20-30 - Geno Smith, yep, he's the only starter in that range
30-40 - Mayfield, Carr, Aaron Rodgers (did anyone think there were a lot more?)
40-50 - Stafford, Allen, Mahomes (all on restricted deals), Cousins, Watson, Murray, (the true comparison here would be with Cousins, Watson, and Murray. I would argue Purdy is better than any of those three.
50+ - Hurts, Jackson, Herbert, Goff, Tua, Lawrence, Love, Burrow, Dak,
So, for those arguing for a trade, who do you want from this list to replace him? Give your reasons.
If you want to extend him, what is the comp that you would use to justify the number ($$$)?
Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
Originally posted by bud49:
I went back and watched the game again from the other night after I had time to settle. Synopsis: Brock played a good game (i was wrong and excited on my first take) he took basically what the Rams D was giving, the missed PI's by the refs were the critical parts of the game to me. The throw to Juan that got picked, well Juan slowed down on the play (if you go back and watch you will see) not saying he would have scored but it may have not been an int. Other thing Deebo sucked a ss he was terrible.
Just go back and watch the game.
Purdy made some wild throws. That rocket that went over a wide opens Deebo's head was just WTF? The interception was also an ill-advised throw, even if Jennings slowed up. He had people open underneath.
He was playing too aggressive in general, looking for deep shots too much instead of taking what the defense was allowing him.
That said the 49ers absolutely got hosed on the no-PI call on the Kittle throw as Curl was hooking his arm all the way.
Originally posted by Ottawa49er:
>>>Owners don't care about how much they're paying for players. This isn't you buying a new car, dude
Correct, this is nothing like me buying a car.....but what possible relevance does that have dude?
And while owners are bound by the Cap....they likely do care how much they are paying for players. For example, Jed York would care very much if Lynch paid 50% of the Cap to Bosa and 50% of the Cap to Purdy, because they could only sign two players. So they mostly let the front office allocate the contracts but some owners are likely very involved.......thinking Jerry Jones here.
>>>The only concern that matters in football is budgeting for the salary cap
Nope. The salary cap is definitely one of the concerns that matter in football though. Talent evaluation, contract construction, coaching, and many other things are a concern in football.
>>>If the cap were a billion dollars, teams would be spending a lot more than they are, and $60 million would be nothing for a QB.
Again....relevance??? There is a Cap, so not sure what you are writing this for....it is not relevant BECAUSE there IS a Cap.
>>>You budget your salary cap based on the importance of the player, which is determined by the position he plays. If you have a QB who is the guy - generally, this is a top 8-12 QB - you pay them whatever portion of the salary cap the value of a QB who is THE guy would make.
First off....you do not budget the salary cap.....it is pre-set. A budget is an estimate.....like you would budget your revenue and expenses for the upcoming period. The Cap is fixed....you don't budget it. I'm assuming what you meant was that you "manage" the Cap to ensure you don't exceed it.....and that is correct. But it is not entirely correct to allocate value just based on the position played, although that is for sure part of it. You would also allocate based on the specific individual playing that position. i.e. Mahomes should expect a higher contract that many other starting QB's if signing a deal in the same timeframe as he is more valuable.
I'm not sure what you are saying by "The guy". You originally wrote "If he's not the guy, you don't pay him at all to be the starter". Now you seem to be defining "The Guy" as the top 8 or 12 starting QB's in the league. So does that mean the remaining 20 to 24 teams who don't have "The Guy" should not get paid? Obviously they would be paid according to their value.....even if they are not "The Guy" according to you.
You then suggest paying "The Guy" whatever portion of the salary cap the value of a QB is who is one of these 8 to 12 guys. Okay, strange wording but I think you mean pay them the value of their worth? If so, then I agree.....but again the guy in the 12th spot is not necessarily having the same value as the guy in the #1 spot. But I don't agree that the other 20 to 24 starting QB's in the league should be paid almost nothing. They still have value, just not as much as the top elite QB's.
>>Carr is only worth $2 million or so to me...
I get it, you don't like Carr. That's fine.
Originally posted by Brucey72:
I definitely don't want to trade him with the options currently out there. Personally I would like around 40m but I know he will get between 48m-53m. If he goes above 53m I'm not a fan of it
1m- Absolutely love
<35m- love
36m- 45m- like
46m - 53m- ok with it bc I've accepted it but feels like an overpay
54m+ dislike
Originally posted by FootballExpert49ers:
Here's what you're not getting: This isn't the NFL of even 12 years ago. You can't "build' anything in football anymore. The non-QB players aren't nearly as impactful as people think they are, and they all get injured anyway because modern players are on PEDs that lead to constant injuries...and of particular concern is the injuries that ruin their careers (which players rarely used to get).
You can't have a QB who is worse than around the 8th-12th best in the game and contend for a SB. You're not building the 2000 Ravens' defense, nor are you going to be able to run the ball en route to a SB victory.
You can't have Derek Carr and win the SB. Hence, why bother signing him to be anything more than a backup?
I guess you could hope for some fluke the way the 2017 Eagles did it with Wentz/Foles, but that's not any kind of model you want to follow.
If your QB is in the range where he's the guy who can contend for SBs (provided the schemes are in place on both sides of the ball), you pay him whatever it takes, short of some absurd contractual demand where you can't field a full roster.
Only after your top 8-12 QB is signed do you even think about the other players. Next should be kicker. After that, you do your best to fill in the rest.
Paying Bosa is a mistake. Paying Lenoir is a mistake.
The non-QBs should not be signed to long-term contracts because injuries will screw up the cap. So can retirements. Trent Williams would count $56 million against the cap should he retire after this season.
Originally posted by leakyfausett:
Kyler Murray has had one winning season. 34-43-1 enough said.
Originally posted by Ottawa49er:
Originally posted by FootballExpert49ers:
Here's what you're not getting: This isn't the NFL of even 12 years ago. You can't "build' anything in football anymore. The non-QB players aren't nearly as impactful as people think they are, and they all get injured anyway because modern players are on PEDs that lead to constant injuries...and of particular concern is the injuries that ruin their careers (which players rarely used to get).
You can't have a QB who is worse than around the 8th-12th best in the game and contend for a SB. You're not building the 2000 Ravens' defense, nor are you going to be able to run the ball en route to a SB victory.
You can't have Derek Carr and win the SB. Hence, why bother signing him to be anything more than a backup?
I guess you could hope for some fluke the way the 2017 Eagles did it with Wentz/Foles, but that's not any kind of model you want to follow.
If your QB is in the range where he's the guy who can contend for SBs (provided the schemes are in place on both sides of the ball), you pay him whatever it takes, short of some absurd contractual demand where you can't field a full roster.
Only after your top 8-12 QB is signed do you even think about the other players. Next should be kicker. After that, you do your best to fill in the rest.
Paying Bosa is a mistake. Paying Lenoir is a mistake.
The non-QBs should not be signed to long-term contracts because injuries will screw up the cap. So can retirements. Trent Williams would count $56 million against the cap should he retire after this season.
>>>You can't "build' anything in football anymore
>>>The non-QB players aren't nearly as impactful as people think they are, and they all get injured anyway
>>>Only after your top 8-12 QB is signed do you even think about the other players. Next should be kicker.
>>>Paying Bosa is a mistake. Paying Lenoir is a mistake
>>>The non-QBs should not be signed to long-term contracts because injuries will screw up the cap
I'm not sure how to even respond to your "logic". So you want to throw the bank at one of the top 8 or 12 QB's in the league, and then sign the kicker, and only then sign a bunch of inexpensive scrubs for the rest of the team because they don't really matter anyway with their low impact and will get injured, so pay them peanuts. Got it.
Well, I guess we can agree to disagree. End of the day people on this site want the 49ers to win. I really don't think your idea will work, but that is just my opinion. Cheers!
Originally posted by DRCHOWDER:
pay him whatever he wants, as long as he gets the team toyota camrys as he said. I should get one too for pointing this out.