QB Brock Purdy Thread

Purdy only has 1 and 1/3 very good years when he had great weapons and teams didn't know him.
And then last year he had an average to below average year. So he's getting worse instead of better with more experience as teams learn his weaknesses and how to defend him.
This is too small a sample size to commit too much money to. Maybe teams are learning how to defend him and maybe he will not be good against these new Purdy-adjusted defenses.

Most players that are getting big extensions are more proven and have 4-5 years (or more) of experience, so teams know well what they are capable of. Purdy is still a big question mark. Have teams figured him out?

So it's not a fair comparison when you compare Purdy's salary to these more experienced QB's. Purdy should should get an adjusted lower contract while he gets more time to prove himself.

Also they want Purdy because Shanahan likes him. But Shanahan is not great at player evaluation. For example, Shanahan loves Cousins, but Cousins was never a great QB. Would you pay Cousins $55 million/year for an above average QB?

Also just because a stupid team like Dallas gives Dak a stupid contract, are we supposed to match it? No

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
brock just isn't worth what is being discussed. go back and watch 2024 and let me know if that guy is worth 50m. 2024 was a train wreck and he was on his rook deal which was a cheat code. bidding ourselves up on brock, paying more than any other club would pay for this player, it's a big reason the arrow is pointing down for the first time under shanny. we'll need to crush the upcoming draft.

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

brock just isn't worth what is being discussed. go back and watch 2024 and let me know if that guy is worth 50m. 2024 was a train wreck and he was on his rook deal which was a cheat code. bidding ourselves up on brock, paying more than any other club would pay for this player, it's a big reason the arrow is pointing down for the first time under shanny. we'll need to crush the upcoming draft.

Originally posted by DRCHOWDER:

Brock Purdy's camp wants $55M+ per year. #49ers want him closer to $50M. They're not as far apart as people think in AAV. The issue is the Length/Guaranteed $:

SF is positioning a 3 year deal while Purdy's team is seeking a 5 year contract.

Let the negotiations continue… pic.twitter.com/oLpVAgxZWd

— 49ers & NFL News 24/7 (@49ersSportsTalk) April 18, 2025

Hmmm....where have I heard this before?

As has been said since before the negotiations began,....if you are discussing AAV, you're mostly wasting your time since alot of that can be abandoned with out clauses and without escalators met.

GTD Money totals and Cap hits we cant escape is what's going to do it. If true, they are asking for alot given the amount of data we have that he'll be worth alot even 4-5 yrs from now. The 49ers constantly take the blame by default by many on here but if this stuff is true, then a stall is not going to be on us.

Originally posted by Typecast:
And if we extended Purdy on a record-setting deal, his cap hit would likely be closer to 15M/25M/35M/45M the first four years.

Jimmy G's contract was not a standard contract. We were flush with over 100M in cap space and the books clean. So Paraag opted to dump as much money as they could in the first year while being compliant with the CBA.

2. Cleaning up the Garoppolo deal. Here's what I found most interesting about the negotiation of 49ers QB Jimmy Garoppolo's five-year, $137.5 million deal—there was almost no acrimony. Talks began the day after San Francisco's season ended, and it took a little over a month to find the finish line.

"What was interesting was neither one of us even talked about the franchise tag, or using it as a floor, or as a ceiling," 49ers EVP of football operations Paraag Marathe told me. "We both knew it was there, and understood it was an option. But neither side used it as a chip. It was a positive negotiation, we knew the market, and we knew we were ahead of it. … We just wanted to keep the conversation free of that. We didn't want it to have negative framings. We wanted it to have positive framings."

Of course, it's not a coincidence that the average per year ($27.5 million) landed right around what the exclusive tag, which isn't calculated until April, will likely cost. But the team didn't threaten to hold him over for a year, and Garoppolo's camp didn't force the team to tag him, which made this one as easy as it could've been.

As for the deal itself, there were a couple things that I found interesting in the details. First, the Niners decided to use the cap room they have now to give themselves future flexibility. Garoppolo's cap number for 2018 is $37.0 million, which is $10 million more than any of the future figures—it's $20.0 million for '19, $26.6 million for '20, $26.9 million for '21, and $27.0 million for '22. Garoppolo got $35 million to sign, but $28 million of that was payable in a roster bonus due in March, which gets the quarterback his money up front and drops the whole figure on to the 2018 books, rather than spreading it out like a signing bonus would. (The remaining $7 million was paid to Garoppolo in the form of a signing bonus, which will be prorated). And Marathe said he'd have put even more into Year 1, if not for the little-known 50/50 rule, which compels teams to make the Year 2 cap figure at least 50 percent of the Year 1 figure.

Second, even though the Niners did drop 27 percent of the cap dollars into 2018, they still have a ton of financial freedom this offseason. Accounting for draft picks and IR contingency money, as well as Garoppolo's new money, the Niners still project to have around $63 million to spend in free agency. So they'll go into this offseason with a quarterback they believe in, and a ton of options for what's to come in March.

https://www.si.com/nfl/2018/02/15/indianapolis-colts-chris-ballard-frank-reich-coach-gm-mmqb

I believe we did the same front-loading on McKinnon's contract that year too.

Hope you didn't miss the basis and context of the post, though? We went to the SB when he accounted for about 10% of the cap.

Some have been saying ad nauseum that unless you've had absolutely fantastic drafts in recent years, you'd want a guy that accounts for almost 20% of the cap to play like a guy that accounts for 20% of the cap. The ability to "carry" the team is the term that's been used.

When the numbers start floating that high, a number of us want that money used elsewhere. The 49ers data since around their last 2 SB births show that that's a perfectly legit want.

Then,...as asked before, do the 49ers want to commit to longer terms given the limited proof they have that he's that guy? A 3 yr deal would make 4 yrs. Mix in that with the need to franchise tag him in years 5 and 6 if he's Joe Montana and they're probably content with that. In terms of GTD money, dont know that they truly want to commit that long. And that's fine and just.

Originally posted by maxsmart:
Purdy only has 1 and 1/3 very good years when he had great weapons and teams didn't know him.
And then last year he had an average to below average year. So he's getting worse instead of better with more experience as teams learn his weaknesses and how to defend him.
This is too small a sample size to commit too much money to.

Excellent summary,..and it has been stated here ad nauseum. They're not listening, though.

Originally posted by Montana:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
brock just isn't worth what is being discussed. go back and watch 2024 and let me know if that guy is worth 50m. 2024 was a train wreck and he was on his rook deal which was a cheat code. bidding ourselves up on brock, paying more than any other club would pay for this player, it's a big reason the arrow is pointing down for the first time under shanny. we'll need to crush the upcoming draft.

Cute filler

Originally posted by Strwy2Hevn:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
brock just isn't worth what is being discussed. go back and watch 2024 and let me know if that guy is worth 50m. 2024 was a train wreck and he was on his rook deal which was a cheat code. bidding ourselves up on brock, paying more than any other club would pay for this player, it's a big reason the arrow is pointing down for the first time under shanny. we'll need to crush the upcoming draft.

See above

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Trade Brock Purdy to the Titans for their second round pick and draft a quarterback @49ers.

— Grant Cohn (@grantcohn) April 19, 2025

Happened to pop up on my feed. Not nearly as bats**t as what was suggested earlier.

So trade away our franchise QB before his 4th season in the NFL for a 2nd round pick.

Not shocked to see Grant suggest such stupidity but you treating it like something worth humoring is…

He probably doesn't think he's a franchise QB in the way you do. That is likely the disconnect.

The definitions for that term can be wildly different.

Originally posted by maxsmart:
Purdy only has 1 and 1/3 very good years when he had great weapons and teams didn't know him.
And then last year he had an average to below average year. So he's getting worse instead of better with more experience as teams learn his weaknesses and how to defend him.
This is too small a sample size to commit too much money to. Maybe teams are learning how to defend him and maybe he will not be good against these new Purdy-adjusted defenses.

Most players that are getting big extensions are more proven and have 4-5 years (or more) of experience, so teams know well what they are capable of. Purdy is still a big question mark. Have teams figured him out?

So it's not a fair comparison when you compare Purdy's salary to these more experienced QB's. Purdy should should get an adjusted lower contract while he gets more time to prove himself.

Also they want Purdy because Shanahan likes him. But Shanahan is not great at player evaluation. For example, Shanahan loves Cousins, but Cousins was never a great QB. Would you pay Cousins $55 million/year for an above average QB?

Also just because a stupid team like Dallas gives Dak a stupid contract, are we supposed to match it? No

Boy this post is so full of lazy narratives.

The whole "teams don't know him" thing is a joke. Maybe you can apply it to his rookie play but what happened in year 2? Even last year teams weren't stopping Brock, they were stopping our offense. Kid averaged 257 yards per game with all the injuries and issues we had and you want to act like they figured him out? His game is based on things defenses can't figure out. It's about getting a read on our offense and taking advantages of our weak points. Something that becomes much easier when you're missing key players and the timing of the offense is thrown off cuz you have a lot of backups plying out there.

I also have no idea what you're talking about he doesn't have enough of a sample size to get paid.

Trevor Lawerence got paid after 3 seasons.
Joe Burrow got paid after 3 seasons.

And those guys were first round picks who had the 5th year option.

Brock is heading into year 4 and has been playing way above his salary. This team has paid Colin Kaepernick and Jimmy Garoppolo after way less starts and gave them the so called "highest deal in NFL history" at the time.

They likely dont need to do the same for Brock but he absolutely has enough shown to get his deal and there is nothing out there showing teams have a read on him…how about he doesn't have to play with a bunch of backups with a so so OL and defensive and special teams which keep hurting the team and make the QB feel likes gotta do it all?

Like what are you seeing out there to make these claims? It really blows my mind how some of you guys look at teams.

There is a big difference in saying Brock shouldn't get a record setting deal and saying he hasn't done enough to get an extension. Absolutely crazy take.

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by maxsmart:
Purdy only has 1 and 1/3 very good years when he had great weapons and teams didn't know him.
And then last year he had an average to below average year. So he's getting worse instead of better with more experience as teams learn his weaknesses and how to defend him.
This is too small a sample size to commit too much money to.

Excellent summary,..and it has been stated here ad nauseum. They're not listening, though.

You can keep stating the world is flat, doesn't make you right.

Not to mention you're talking out both sides of your mouth with this.

Either Brock has to show more or the 49ers extend him this offseason. Can't have it both ways.

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by maxsmart:
Purdy only has 1 and 1/3 very good years when he had great weapons and teams didn't know him.
And then last year he had an average to below average year. So he's getting worse instead of better with more experience as teams learn his weaknesses and how to defend him.
This is too small a sample size to commit too much money to.

Excellent summary,..and it has been stated here ad nauseum. They're not listening, though.

You can keep stating the world is flat, doesn't make you right.

Not to mention you're talking out both sides of your mouth with this.

Either Brock has to show more or the 49ers extend him this offseason. Can't have it both ways.

State the parts that are largely incorrect then.

1) limited time with great results
2) avg to below avg last year with a few less weapons
3) Teams with more film making more adjustments to his game
4) Small sample sizes garner less reasoning to commit long term.

World flat, 2 mouths, etc. Leave that stuff out and tell us what here doesn't make sense?

Originally posted by random49er:
State the parts that are largely incorrect then.

1) limited time with great results
2) avg to below avg last year with a few less weapons
3) Teams with more film making more adjustments to his game
4) Small sample sizes garner less reasoning to commit long term.

World flat, 2 mouths, etc. Leave that stuff out and tell us what here doesn't make sense?

How about reading the post I made just before that one addressing just that?