QB Brock Purdy Thread

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by Furlow:
But only Smokey has said (my interpretation anyway) that Herbert and Love are better, and he just said that Purdy is better than Tua. So then why wouldn't Purdy at least get more than Tua? What they're saying is they like Purdy better than Herbert, Love, Tua, Dak, etc - but they just don't want to pay Purdy what those guys got paid. Their argument to me is one against NFL QB contracts, which is a separate discussion.

I'm confused here… was this just a typo?

What I said was I thought Brock was better than Tua and I didn't think Tua should have been paid. Described it as an example of what not to do.

Your bottom line in the post is definitely part of this. There will just be philosophical differences in how people think the QB position should be handled.

Not a typo, but a little confusing yeah lol. But you confirmed what I said, you guys think Purdy is better than that group; you just don't want to pay him like that group because you think that group is overpaid. I carved you out because you said Herbert and Love are better than Purdy; but you did say Purdy was better than Tua - so why not pay Purdy more than Tua? Which your answer of course is "Tua is overpaid."

So the argument that the Purdy detractors have in common is that you only think Mahomes, Burrow and Allen are worth their contracts; and everyone else is overpaid. That is a separate discussion in my opinion. Purdy's value relative to his peers is right in there with those guys. So if you want him as your QB, that is the price. And if you're not willing to pay that price, then trade Purdy and start over.

Instead what you're arguing for is a dream world scenario in which you get to keep Purdy (because you think he's a top QB) but not pay him like he's a top QB. It's just not going to happen.

Now Brock is married he will be setting down to being a pay check earner.

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Without stats, what is the best way to evaluate players?

Film.

Very Subjective.

lol...you cant make this stuff up.

Originally posted by Furlow:
Not a typo, but a little confusing yeah lol. But you confirmed what I said, you guys think Purdy is better than that group; you just don't want to pay him like that group because you think that group is overpaid. I carved you out because you said Herbert and Love are better than Purdy; but you did say Purdy was better than Tua - so why not pay Purdy more than Tua? Which your answer of course is "Tua is overpaid."

So the argument that the Purdy detractors have in common is that you only think Mahomes, Burrow and Allen are worth their contracts; and everyone else is overpaid. That is a separate discussion in my opinion. Purdy's value relative to his peers is right in there with those guys. So if you want him as your QB, that is the price. And if you're not willing to pay that price, then trade Purdy and start over.

Instead what you're arguing for is a dream world scenario in which you get to keep Purdy (because you think he's a top QB) but not pay him like he's a top QB. It's just not going to happen.

You are definitely misunderstanding my posts. I do not think Purdy is a top QB. I thought he was a fringe top 10 QB (anywhere from 9-12 ish) coming into this season and he did not play as well.

Some other quick notes:
- I don't think Tua is overpaid. I would not have paid him at all.
- I do think Herbert and Love are worth their extensions, for somewhat different reasons. It's not just the top 3-4 guys for me.
- I think Brock and Love have had similar levels of play so far, but I also believe Love has a higher ceiling.
- I do not think Brock is in Herbert's class either in current ability or potential.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by Furlow:
He can speak for me on this point, because I've said it many times. My hope is that Purdy does the smart thing for the team, and signs a deal in the low to mid $50m per year range. That would be a discount (relative to his peers) and allow some flexibility to keep/sign other players. But if he does get high $50m to low $60m range, I can accept that as that is the "going rate" for a QB of his caliber.

My point about the human aspect (meaning treatment of the player, not humanity) and capitalism is addressing Faithful's spam posts about $30m-$40m per year being "life changing" and "the richest contract in 49ers history" therefore Purdy should just be happy with that. That is simply not how contract negotiations work. Not one person in here would accept less money at their jobs than their peers simply because it was more than what they used to make.

And I don't hear one person saying we have to do this "because that's how it's done in the NFL." We're saying we want Purdy to be our QB for at least the next 4 season, based on his play while here; and we understand that means paying him a contract relative to his peers. The alternative is to trade him now while he's under his rookie contract to a team that's willing to sign him long term, and then start over looking for a new QB.

You guys are trying to make something happen that is WAY outside of that, that is not based in reality. The only players who play one year or lame duck contracts are fringe players just trying to stay/get on a roster. Not QB's with Purdy's level of ability and accomplishment.

Lamar and Cousins are recent examples. Lamar had been a unanimous MVP.

Cousins wasn't a full time starter until the last year of his rookie contract, so he only had one season of work to "stand on." He then played two season under the franchise tag which ended up costing the Redskins more than if they had just extended him. He then signed a contract with the Vikings.

Lamar was insane for doing what he did, risking a possible career ending injury just to squeeze every single possible dollar out of his contract. If Purdy wants to bet on himself like that and play out his final year, I'll respect that. But it would be foolish in my opinion. And if he wants what Lamar wanted which was to be the highest paid QB and get every possible dollar; then he may very well have to go to other teams and negotiate with them, as Lamar did.

But these are just hypotheticals because we haven't heard any of this from Purdy. I don't recall the exact numbers but the Ravens were offering Lamar a huge deal that would have made Lamar a top 2-3 paid QB. If Purdy is offered that and wants more, then by all means he'll have to shop himself to other teams or play out his final year on his rookie deal and "prove it." I just don't see that happening.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by Furlow:
Not a typo, but a little confusing yeah lol. But you confirmed what I said, you guys think Purdy is better than that group; you just don't want to pay him like that group because you think that group is overpaid. I carved you out because you said Herbert and Love are better than Purdy; but you did say Purdy was better than Tua - so why not pay Purdy more than Tua? Which your answer of course is "Tua is overpaid."

So the argument that the Purdy detractors have in common is that you only think Mahomes, Burrow and Allen are worth their contracts; and everyone else is overpaid. That is a separate discussion in my opinion. Purdy's value relative to his peers is right in there with those guys. So if you want him as your QB, that is the price. And if you're not willing to pay that price, then trade Purdy and start over.

Instead what you're arguing for is a dream world scenario in which you get to keep Purdy (because you think he's a top QB) but not pay him like he's a top QB. It's just not going to happen.

You are definitely misunderstanding my posts. I do not think Purdy is a top QB. I thought he was a fringe top 10 QB (anywhere from 9-12 ish) coming into this season and he did not play as well.

Some other quick notes:
- I don't think Tua is overpaid. I would not have paid him at all.
- I do think Herbert and Love are worth their extensions, for somewhat different reasons. It's not just the top 3-4 guys for me.
- I think Brock and Love have had similar levels of play so far, but I also believe Love has a higher ceiling.
- I do not think Brock is in Herbert's class either in current ability or potential.

If you think Purdy is fringe top 10 then I understand your posts. And if Kyle/Lynch think that, then they should trade him or let him sit out.

No idea how you can say Tua is not overpaid but you wouldn't have paid him at all. Is that the worst type of "overpaid?" Lol.

You seem to be willing to pay based on measurables and ceiling rather than results and projection of similar/better results. I would not build a team nor offer contracts based on physical potential.

Originally posted by Furlow:
Cousins wasn't a full time starter until the last year of his rookie contract, so he only had one season of work to "stand on." He then played two season under the franchise tag which ended up costing the Redskins more than if they had just extended him. He then signed a contract with the Vikings.

Lamar was insane for doing what he did, risking a possible career ending injury just to squeeze every single possible dollar out of his contract. If Purdy wants to bet on himself like that and play out his final year, I'll respect that. But it would be foolish in my opinion. And if he wants what Lamar wanted which was to be the highest paid QB and get every possible dollar; then he may very well have to go to other teams and negotiate with them, as Lamar did.

But these are just hypotheticals because we haven't heard any of this from Purdy. I don't recall the exact numbers but the Ravens were offering Lamar a huge deal that would have made Lamar a top 2-3 paid QB. If Purdy is offered that and wants more, then by all means he'll have to shop himself to other teams or play out his final year on his rookie deal and "prove it." I just don't see that happening.

Sure, but that's an example of a non fringe player playing 3 one year contracts b2b2b. Then went on to sign a monster contract with the Vikings.

There may be more examples but those two came to mind immediately.

Originally posted by Furlow:
If you think Purdy is fringe top 10 then I understand your posts. And if Kyle/Lynch think that, then they should trade him or let him sit out.

No idea how you can say Tua is not overpaid but you wouldn't have paid him at all. Is that the worst type of "overpaid?" Lol.

You seem to be willing to pay based on measurables and ceiling rather than results and projection of similar/better results. I would not build a team nor offer contracts based on physical potential.

It's just a distinction that needed to be made. I wouldn't want Tua at 30 million a year either. He's just not good enough without having a freak unit around him (like some examples from past teams brought up in this conversation).

For the bolded, it's not one or the other. It's both. And it's not potential necessarily based on elite physical traits. I'd also be thrilled with Burrow and he has zero of them.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by Furlow:
Cousins wasn't a full time starter until the last year of his rookie contract, so he only had one season of work to "stand on." He then played two season under the franchise tag which ended up costing the Redskins more than if they had just extended him. He then signed a contract with the Vikings.

Lamar was insane for doing what he did, risking a possible career ending injury just to squeeze every single possible dollar out of his contract. If Purdy wants to bet on himself like that and play out his final year, I'll respect that. But it would be foolish in my opinion. And if he wants what Lamar wanted which was to be the highest paid QB and get every possible dollar; then he may very well have to go to other teams and negotiate with them, as Lamar did.

But these are just hypotheticals because we haven't heard any of this from Purdy. I don't recall the exact numbers but the Ravens were offering Lamar a huge deal that would have made Lamar a top 2-3 paid QB. If Purdy is offered that and wants more, then by all means he'll have to shop himself to other teams or play out his final year on his rookie deal and "prove it." I just don't see that happening.

Sure, but that's an example of a non fringe player playing 3 one year contracts b2b2b. Then went on to sign a monster contract with the Vikings.

There may be more examples but those two came to mind immediately.

I disagree. Kirk in his 4th year of his rookie deal was an unknown. So that fits the description of a fringe player fighting for a roster spot. He certainly didn't have any leverage to ask for an extension at that point. Purdy on the other hand has A LOT of good/great QB play leading into the last year of his contract, so he has much more leverage than Kirk did going into his 4th year.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by Furlow:
If you think Purdy is fringe top 10 then I understand your posts. And if Kyle/Lynch think that, then they should trade him or let him sit out.

No idea how you can say Tua is not overpaid but you wouldn't have paid him at all. Is that the worst type of "overpaid?" Lol.

You seem to be willing to pay based on measurables and ceiling rather than results and projection of similar/better results. I would not build a team nor offer contracts based on physical potential.

It's just a distinction that needed to be made. I wouldn't want Tua at 30 million a year either. He's just not good enough without having a freak unit around him (like some of examples from past teams brought up in this conversation).

For the bolded, it's not one or the other. It's both. And it's not potential necessarily based on elite physical traits. I'd also be thrilled with Burrow and he has zero of them.

Burrow is 6'4" and has a stronger arm than Purdy. If Purdy was 6'4" with Burrow's arm strength, I'm guessing you'd have no problem with offering him a contract in the $50m-$60m range.

Originally posted by Furlow:
I disagree. Kirk in his 4th year of his rookie deal was an unknown. So that fits the description of a fringe player fighting for a roster spot. He certainly didn't have any leverage to ask for an extension at that point. Purdy on the other hand has A LOT of good/great QB play leading into the last year of his contract, so he has much more leverage than Kirk did going into his 4th year.

He's was a probowler, lol. I get not putting a lot of weight in being one, but that's a far cry from a fringe player. And that doesn't comment on the next two years. He played them on one year franchise tag deals and clearly there was a demand in the market for his services.

* Have to make a correction. Cousins was a probowler in 2016, not 15… but that's doesn't change the point much given he played another season on a 1 year deal after having two very good years*

Originally posted by Furlow:
Burrow is 6'4" and has a stronger arm than Purdy. If Purdy was 6'4" with Burrow's arm strength, I'm guessing you'd have no problem with offering him a contract in the $50m-$60m range.

Exactly! Brock is small and this past year played small. Give him 25-30 million for a couple years to test him out.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by Furlow:
I disagree. Kirk in his 4th year of his rookie deal was an unknown. So that fits the description of a fringe player fighting for a roster spot. He certainly didn't have any leverage to ask for an extension at that point. Purdy on the other hand has A LOT of good/great QB play leading into the last year of his contract, so he has much more leverage than Kirk did going into his 4th year.

He's was a probowler, lol. I get not putting a lot of weight in being one, but that's a far cry from a fringe player. And that doesn't comment on the next two years. He played them on one year franchise tag deals and clearly there was a demand in the market for his services.

* Have to make a correction. Cousins was a probowler in 2016, not 15… but that's doesn't change the point much given he played another season on a 1 year deal after having two very good years*

Going into Cousins' 4th year (which is where we're at with Purdy), Cousins was pretty much an unknown. He did not have leverage to get an extension the way that Purdy does now.

In retrospect, had Washington extended Cousins after his third year though ( he did have 5 starts and showed some promise), it would have been a helluva lot cheaper than tagging him twice and then losing him anyway.

I'm not saying they should have, because there wasn't much to go off of. What I am saying is that we DO have quite a bit to go off of with Purdy, so it will be much cheaper to extend him now rather than wait, tag him, extend him later, etc.

Originally posted by ninerfaninnorcal:

Originally posted by Furlow:
Burrow is 6'4" and has a stronger arm than Purdy. If Purdy was 6'4" with Burrow's arm strength, I'm guessing you'd have no problem with offering him a contract in the $50m-$60m range.

Exactly! Brock is small and this past year played small. Give him 25-30 million for a couple years to test him out.

We already "tested him out" for 2.5 seasons. Make up your mind if you want him as your QB or not.

Originally posted by Furlow:
Burrow is 6'4" and has a stronger arm than Purdy. If Purdy was 6'4" with Burrow's arm strength, I'm guessing you'd have no problem with offering him a contract in the $50m-$60m range.

Burrow's arm would make me feel better. I don't need Brock to be 6'4, though that is a nice advantage.

The point about the arm is a nuanced position. Burrow has an average, maybe above average arm… nothing special. I'm not a person who thinks you need special arm talent to be a top tier QB, and I argued that point relentlessly in favor of Brock before 2023. My point then was once you were past a minimum level of arm strength, the rest was a luxury. I also believed Purdy was right near that minimum, and now that I've seen two years I question whether he's not below the minimum. It's no issue if he's facing zones, making good reads, and throwing with elite anticipation into areas of the field. He's shown he can do that.