QB Candidates Thread: The Search for the QBoTF

Originally posted by Rascal:

Originally posted by dtg_9er:
The problem with this is that he will command a FQB salary and may not be of that quality, whereas a rookie will allow them to also sign a lesser vet QB and draft another developmental guy without over spending on the position going forward. But as always...I trust the offensive minded HC's judgement and if he sees JG and the guy...great!

Edit: the safest way to go, since no one knows if JH or KC are FQBs worthy of numerous high picks, to draft two guys with high ceilings and let them rise behind a solid but less expensive vet. The team is not going to be in the SB next year so it seems premature to spend much of your draft on a QB.

The FQB salary only starts when you give him a big contract. For the sake of discussion, let's just say Garoppolo stinks up the joint in 2017, you still have an option of not giving him a big contract. You could either tag him if you need more time or you could even cut him and just write off the 2 pick.

So, in that sense, that is no different to if we were to draft a bust at 2.

Shirley you can't be serious ?

Originally posted by NYniner85:
Your not traded the 2nd overall pick if your not signing him asap...that's when he will be cheapest and we all saw the BS when you tag a qb in Washington you lose leverage.

That depends. You are trying to hone in on the disadvantage of his big contract right? What I am saying is you don't have to sign him right away. If it all works out which it should, you could sign him 10 games in? But, in the event if it doesn't work out, you could tag him or you could even just cut him and write off the 2 pick.

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

Originally posted by Rascal:
Tagging him is only a last resort, that was a hypothetical situation.

My point is anyone should be more sure of Garoppolo than any rookie even if is a small sample size of NFL games.

The problem with this is that he will command a FQB salary and may not be of that quality, whereas a rookie will allow them to also sign a lesser vet QB and draft another developmental guy without over spending on the position going forward. But as always...I trust the offensive minded HC's judgement and if he sees JG and the guy...great!

Edit: the safest way to go, since no one knows if JH or KC are FQBs worthy of numerous high picks, to draft two guys with high ceilings and let them rise behind a solid but less expensive vet. The team is not going to be in the SB next year so it seems premature to spend much of your draft on a QB.

I think the presumption that he gets full franchise QB money is faulty. He hasn't played enough to pull that kind of dough and get a very long deal. The morons who signed Oswieller not withstanding I don't think it will be anything more than barely inside top ten money unless it is a super short deal...which coincidently is pretty similar to a second over all QB for the first two years when you figure in signing bonus etc and the fact a rookies deal is usually super front loaded compared to vets. Sure the deal gets much, much cheaper for the rook after that but by then if he doesn't work out and you structure it correctly you could always move on.

Originally posted by Rascal:
The FQB salary only starts when you give him a big contract. For the sake of discussion, let's just say Garoppolo stinks up the joint in 2017, you still have an option of not giving him a big contract. You could either tag him if you need more time or you could even cut him and just write off the 2 pick.

So, in that sense, that is no different to if we were to draft a bust at 2.

I do not get the sense that Shanahan and Lynch are interested in locking up a QB for one year. They would do a sign and trade. It would really surprise me if they trade two first round picks for a guy for a one year contract or cut him after a year. Wow! Heads would explode around here if that were to happen.

Originally posted by Rascal:

The FQB salary only starts when you give him a big contract. For the sake of discussion, let's just say Garoppolo stinks up the joint in 2017, you still have an option of not giving him a big contract. You could either tag him if you need more time or you could even cut him and just write off the 2 pick.

So, in that sense, that is no different to if we were to draft a bust at 2.

Writing off the 2nd overall pick after one yr gets you fired this is madden where you can just shut off our PlayStation and start over lol...it's actually much different cause you have a rookie qb for five yrs cheap, you can develop them, mold them...the owners give you time PLUS you have extra cash to get talent around them....JG has one yr to learn a new system, which is hard enough to learn for a starter like Ryan then he's a FA. you have to sign him when he's traded.

Originally posted by dtg_9er:
I do not get the sense that Shanahan and Lynch are interested in locking up a QB for one year. They would do a sign and trade. It would really surprise me if they trade two first round picks for a guy for a one year contract or cut him after a year. Wow! Heads would explode around here if that were to happen.

Of course that wouldn't be their intention. All I am saying is you could keep your options open since NY was arguing with me on we haven't seen enough of Garoppolo.

In my reckoning, things will work out just fine and we will probably offer him the big contract 10 games in or so.

Originally posted by PhillyNiner:
I think the presumption that he gets full franchise QB money is faulty. He hasn't played enough to pull that kind of dough and get a very long deal. The morons who signed Oswieller not withstanding I don't think it will be anything more than barely inside top ten money unless it is a super short deal...which coincidently is pretty similar to a second over all QB for the first two years when you figure in signing bonus etc and the fact a rookies deal is usually super front loaded compared to vets. Sure the deal gets much, much cheaper for the rook after that but by then if he doesn't work out and you structure it correctly you could always move on.

If it's true that three or four teams will be bidding for JG this off season he will be signing a huge contract--he is a much better prospect than Osweiler. And if you don't believe he's a FQB why compete with three other teams for his services while the team has so many needs? But you are correct if Shanahan believes he's worth it...I'd be absolutely fine with him.

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

The problem with this is that he will command a FQB salary and may not be of that quality, whereas a rookie will allow them to also sign a lesser vet QB and draft another developmental guy without over spending on the position going forward. But as always...I trust the offensive minded HC's judgement and if he sees JG and the guy...great!

Edit: the safest way to go, since no one knows if JG or KC are FQBs worthy of numerous high picks, to draft two guys with high ceilings and let them rise behind a solid but less expensive vet. The team is not going to be in the SB next year so it seems premature to spend much of your draft on a QB.

You draft a qb at 2 guess who's playing? That vet you sign will only play until your eliminated and from there the keys go to your draft pick for good regardless if he's ready. Yeah he's cheaper and in theory you can sign more around him but he's also going to be developing and holding the team back those years. With Jimmy G you can win right away with the right moves around him. You're never that far off in the NFL. I think people underestimate how quickly we can then this around especially if we land a qb.

I'm fine with either route now but I'd love to keep those 2nds because that's the best place to load up on offense.

Originally posted by NYniner85:
Writing off the 2nd overall pick after one yr gets you fired this is madden where you can just shut off our PlayStation and start over lol...it's actually much different cause you have a rookie qb for five yrs cheap, you can develop them, mold them...the owners give you time PLUS you have extra cash to get talent around them....JG has one yr to learn a new system, which is hard enough to learn for a starter like Ryan then he's a FA. you have to sign him when he's traded.

Same goes with taking a QB at 2. Anything can happen. It happens. You could keep him for 5 years if you want, but if you are a bust, the chances are you are a bust. Didn't we dump AJ Jenkins only after a year?

You are the one who wanted to argue it.

I think Garoppolo would work out just fine if you ask me.

Originally posted by Rascal:

That depends. You are trying to hone in on the disadvantage of his big contract right? What I am saying is you don't have to sign him right away. If it all works out which it should, you could sign him 10 games in? But, in the event if it doesn't work out, you could tag him or you could even just cut him and write off the 2 pick.

writing off the 2nd overall pick will get you fired...I don't think you realize how important it is to get a pick that high right?

You sign him when he comes in, you don't wait...he performs amazing your paying him top 5 money the longer you wait the higher the price goes especially if other qbs get signed before him. This is probably the lowest his contract will be (Brock money) he balls out its luck money.

he could also be pissed you didn't want to sign him (Kirk style) then not want to do a deal with you. Then you have a whole new set of issues.

Can you see why draft picks are so important? The value of them is already set for 4-5 yrs.

Originally posted by Rascal:
Of course that wouldn't be their intention. All I am saying is you could keep your options open since NY was arguing with me on we haven't seen enough of Garoppolo.

In my reckoning, things will work out just fine and we will probably offer him the big contract 10 games in or so.

He will not be coming to SF unless he gets a huge contract or can leave after next year. Then the bidding will begin again. I'm not saying they should not go after him if Shanahan is convinced he's the guy or there is a high degree of of comfort with a trade. But it seems unlikely they will give up two or more high picks and then say...naw, we don't really like him.

Originally posted by NYniner85:
writing off the 2nd overall pick will get you fired...I don't think you realize how important it is to get a pick that high right?

You sign him when he comes in, you don't wait...he performs amazing your paying him top 5 money the longer you wait the higher the price goes especially if other qbs get signed before him. This is probably the lowest his contract will be (Brock money) he balls out its luck money.

he could also be pissed you didn't want to sign him (Kirk style) then not want to do a deal with you. Then you have a whole new set of issues.

Can you see why draft picks are so important? The value of them is already set for 4-5 yrs.

Then, don't get on me about the disadvantage of having to pay him the big contract. You can't have it both ways.

Of course if he plays well, then sign him ASAP.

I never anticipated any issue with Garoppolo, you are the one who wants to argue it.

Originally posted by Rascal:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Writing off the 2nd overall pick after one yr gets you fired this is madden where you can just shut off our PlayStation and start over lol...it's actually much different cause you have a rookie qb for five yrs cheap, you can develop them, mold them...the owners give you time PLUS you have extra cash to get talent around them....JG has one yr to learn a new system, which is hard enough to learn for a starter like Ryan then he's a FA. you have to sign him when he's traded.

Same goes with taking a QB at 2. Anything can happen. It happens. You could keep him for 5 years if you want, but if you are a bust, the chances are you are a bust. Didn't we dump AJ Jenkins only after a year?

You are the one who wanted to argue it.

I think Garoppolo would work out just fine if you ask me.

I'm not arguing with you just telling you why it's risky and why it might not be worth it that's all...you make you own opinions which is fine as well.

Half of the upside at drafting a qb is because of the money and the idea that the qb takes up most of every team's cap space. You get a russel Wilson for cheap for 4 yrs you get to keep all your top talent and bring in better vets it's that easy. You draft a blake bortles you get to mold a qb along with bring in top talent like M Jackson, prince amukamara, J Thomas (whether they work out or not) because your qb isn't eating up your cap space.

Blake might not be the answer for them but they now have a good team around him and could still draft a qb with not a lot invest money wise at qb.

All that needs to be figured in when giving up picks for a guy that's gonna have to be signed on top of it.

Originally posted by dtg_9er:
He will not be coming to SF unless he gets a huge contract or can leave after next year. Then the bidding will begin again. I'm not saying they should not go after him if Shanahan is convinced he's the guy or there is a high degree of of comfort with a trade. But it seems unlikely they will give up two or more high picks and then say...naw, we don't really like him.

No. Belichick's job is not to make sure Garoppolo will get the biggest contract for Garoppolo. The big contract will not be agreed before the trade. Unless Garoppolo has an issue to sign a long term deal with the 9ers, if not he will be dealt as long as Belichick is happy with the trade. Then, the discussion of the big contract will be between the 9ers and Garoppolo going forward and if it all works out, it might get signed by midseason or a little after that.