Jimmy Garoppolo, QB, Los Angeles Rams

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by NCommand:
Handcuffing? No way.
Playing the style of offense he's most comfortable in and familiar with? No way.

That's what makes this little experiment so intriguing.

I don't expect Jimmys numbers to go up becauses hes more comfortable with Josh offense. Theyll go up out of necessity to keep Raiders in games.

You make a good point that emphasizes the reason I don't place too much importance on stats when comparing QBs. Some teams NEED to pass more because they have a terrible running game or they're always playing from behind. Jimmy's yards would have been greater if Kyle didn't have a balanced attack. The Niners D always kept the score close so he didn't need to have big games. Yardage, completion percentage and passer rating are a direct reflection of the style of offense, the quality of the receivers and indirectly, the defense.

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:
You make a good point that emphasizes the reason I don't place too much importance on stats when comparing QBs. Some teams NEED to pass more because they have a terrible running game or they're always playing from behind. Jimmy's yards would have been greater if Kyle didn't have a balanced attack. The Niners D always kept the score close so he didn't need to have big games. Yardage, completion percentage and passer rating are a direct reflection of the style of offense, the quality of the receivers and indirectly, the defense.

Circumstances play a tremendous part in things. While everything is interconnected it's never so simple to say X is the reason Y improved or regressed. Making those arguments are tremendously simplistic.

Geno Smith threw for the most yards ever by a Hawk QB. I'm no Russ fan but it wasn't because he was better than Russell ever was or "the offense was tailored to him". It was largely because their D was terrible and their games were mostly shootouts.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by Furlow:
Line up the excuses beforehand. Atta kid.

It's just objective reality.

But then I forgot the Raiders will have a top 5 defense next year just because of Jimmys existence on their team.

Say that Jimmy will "obviously do better" for a variety of reasons, knowing damn well if he plays poorly you will say "I told you so." Useful contributions.

Originally posted by Furlow:
Say that Jimmy will "obviously do better" for a variety of reasons, knowing damn well if he plays poorly you will say "I told you so." Useful contributions.

I wouldn't actually. May not be his fault. Lot of context involved as I stated above.

Swing and a miss.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by Furlow:
Say that Jimmy will "obviously do better" for a variety of reasons, knowing damn well if he plays poorly you will say "I told you so." Useful contributions.

I wouldn't actually. May not be his fault. Lot of context involved as I stated above.

Swing and a miss.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:
Furlow gonna now care about "fantasy stats"

Just watch when they are a .500 team and furlow gonna post his passing yards. s**ts gonna be hilarious

So if the D doesn't improve and they are .500 are you suggesting he won't blame Jimmy for the D and point to fantasy stats?

He told me he'd put it all on Jimmy man. I totally believed him.

.500 is better than .350 which Carr had. If Raiders go .500 or better that's a major improvement. Stupid points as usual by you two lol.

Originally posted by TreyDeyEeyDey:
.500 is better than .350 which Carr had. If Raiders go .500 or better that's a major improvement. Stupid points as usual by you two lol.

So if they go 6-11 it's all on Jimmy?

Originally posted by TreyDeyEeyDey:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:
Furlow gonna now care about "fantasy stats"

Just watch when they are a .500 team and furlow gonna post his passing yards. s**ts gonna be hilarious

So if the D doesn't improve and they are .500 are you suggesting he won't blame Jimmy for the D and point to fantasy stats?

He told me he'd put it all on Jimmy man. I totally believed him.

.500 is better than .350 which Carr had. If Raiders go .500 or better that's a major improvement. Stupid points as usual by you two lol.

Idc what Carr did. You especially love to bring up how he just wins and show his win% compared to other QBs when he was out.

10-7 should be the bare minimum based on some of your guys standards for him.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by TreyDeyEeyDey:
.500 is better than .350 which Carr had. If Raiders go .500 or better that's a major improvement. Stupid points as usual by you two lol.

So if they go 6-11 it's all on Jimmy?

Yup.

Edit: Well not completely but anything less than 6-7 wins is a huge disappointment imo.

Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:

Originally posted by TreyDeyEeyDey:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:
Furlow gonna now care about "fantasy stats"

Just watch when they are a .500 team and furlow gonna post his passing yards. s**ts gonna be hilarious

So if the D doesn't improve and they are .500 are you suggesting he won't blame Jimmy for the D and point to fantasy stats?

He told me he'd put it all on Jimmy man. I totally believed him.

.500 is better than .350 which Carr had. If Raiders go .500 or better that's a major improvement. Stupid points as usual by you two lol.

Idc what Carr did. You especially love to bring up how he just wins and show his win% compared to other QBs when he was out.

10-7 should be the bare minimum based on some of your guys standards for him.

I understand that he also has limitations and I dont think he can completely turn around a poor franchise. He's a good QB but not completely turn around a franchise by himself good like the top guys. He will help keep games close with his ability to move the chains and manage games and help win some and more than likely lose some. It's most definitely a team game but good QB play will propel them in an upward trajectory. That's if he can stay healthy which is unlikely. I see them borderline playoffs, probably on the outside looking in though.

I can give Jimmy credit while also understanding his flaws unlike y'all. He's right there in the 12-15 range right there with Carr and Cousins. I give those guys an edge in natural talent but I Jimmy an egde in ability to run an offense

Originally posted by TreyDeyEeyDey:
Yup.

Edit: Well not completely but anything less than 6-7 wins is a huge disappointment imo.

Yet I can see that being the case even with him playing well. 10-11 teams in conference are better. Marcus Epps alone won't make them competitive.

It's all contextual.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by Furlow:
Line up the excuses beforehand. Atta kid.

It's just objective reality.

But then I forgot the Raiders will have a top 5 defense next year just because of Jimmys existence on their team.

Poor Davante Adams is going to have his work cut out for him this season. He was already less than thrilled that the Raiders acquired Jimmy and not Rodgers. He'll be asking for a trade this upcoming offseason once his TD numbers fall off a Cliff

Originally posted by RunFrankieRun21:
Poor Davante Adams is going to have his work cut out for him this season. He was already less than thrilled that the Raiders acquired Jimmy and not Rodgers. He'll be asking for a trade this upcoming offseason once his TD numbers fall off a Cliff

Lol Gore.