Rep the Red & Gold: Shop 49ers Gear →

There are 556 users in the forums

QB Candidates Thread: The Search for the QBoTF

Shop Find 49ers gear online
Originally posted by Rascal:
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.

You have to anticipate both ends though and that's why the value in a trade goes down not up. He will have to be signed asap and that should be a question brought up in trade talks if he even wants to play for said team long term...NO ONE is trading for him if he says I'm not gonna sign there.
Originally posted by NYniner85:
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.
i agree..why handicap ourselves so early

Lets build this team, then start trading later
[ Edited by 49AllTheTime on Feb 13, 2017 at 10:37 AM ]
  • Rascal
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 13,926
Originally posted by NYniner85:
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.

OK, so there is no risk in taking a QB in the draft?

Or as a lot have argued this QB draft class is somewhat weak?

There is risk with either Garoppolo or drafting a QB. But, arguably less so with Garoppolo cos at least he has already played a few games in the NFL. And to date, we are still saying the jury is still out on Goff and Wentz.
Originally posted by NYniner85:
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.

Where's Jx head coach? The downside of taking Bortles is even if he's a good pick you're stuck with his ups and downs and developing him. York can say Shanny is here forever all he wants but if we go 2-14 year 3 he's done.
Originally posted by Rascal:
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.

You telling me SF will not be talking to JG's agents about his long term plans during this whole discussion? Dude that will be a big part of it. No team is trading for him if they don't have an idea on his long term plans. And if he says I don't know will his vlaue goes wayyyyy down
Originally posted by tjd808185:
Where's Jx head coach? The downside of taking Bortles is even if he's a good pick you're stuck with his ups and downs and developing him. York can say Shanny is here forever all he wants but if we go 2-14 year 3 he's done.

Yup that's true with both ways man...unless your getting Aaron Rogers your job will be on the line drafting, trading, or signing a FA qb. At least his had time he just didn't put it all together.
Originally posted by tjd808185:
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.

If you have a vet starting and are working a rookie or two into the mix, what would be the down side? You can keep the rookie on the bench as the Rams did, or you can throw him into the game as the Eagles did. It largely depends on the vet and the rookie and how they emerge from TC. Some rookies are ready earlier and some not. I trust Shanahan to do a good job with this...it's not like he is totally unaware of what you say and will just throw the rookie in because he feels he has to do so. They might even sign two vets and draft a rookie high.

With JG you can win a few games right away but you are still really lacking at key positions. You've used up your high picks on JG so you won't fill those positions with the best prospects.

My preference, as stated previously, is trade back for additional picks--take a second round QB and another later on, to learn behind a vet. I like many of the QBs in the draft but don't see a huge difference between the top and bottom of the first five or so. Peterman, Mahomes, Trubisky, Watson and Kizer are very interesting and have some very different attributes. Shanahan may see his next Cousins in that group. Why not pick up an elite ILB or OLB in the first and then go after a QB if Shanahan sees one he likes?
  • Rascal
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 13,926
Originally posted by NYniner85:
You telling me SF will not be talking to JG's agents about his long term plans during this whole discussion? Dude that will be a big part of it. No team is trading for him if they don't have an idea on his long term plans. And if he says I don't know will his vlaue goes wayyyyy down

Sure, they can talk about it. But, I doubt it will be agreed by the time the trade takes place.
Originally posted by NYniner85:
Yup that's true with both ways man...unless your getting Aaron Rogers your job will be on the line drafting, trading, or signing a FA qb. At least his had time he just didn't put it all together.

Agreed it's pick your poison. He can wait for Cousins or a better draft class but I wouldn't want to be Hu Jackson either and be 1-15 with no answer at qb.
Originally posted by Rascal:
OK, so there is no risk in taking a QB in the draft?

Or as a lot have argued this QB draft class is somewhat weak?

There is risk with either Garoppolo or drafting a QB. But, arguably less so with Garoppolo cos at least he has already played a few games in the NFL. And to date, we are still saying the jury is still out on Goff and Wentz.

No there's risk in both situations without question. I never said there wasn't...you don't need day one results with a rookie, you do when you trade and sign a qb though...you think Brock would be getting the s**t he does if he was a rookie or didn't signed a large contract? Just imagine if they actually traded the 2nd overall pick for him as well! That GM would be gone and possibly O'Brien.

All that stuff needs to be factored into trading for him and that's why IHMO giving up the 2nd pick in the draft is not what needs to be done. If a team wants to risk their jobs and the future on him have at it, I don't see the bears or browns do it either for their firsts.

A 2nd rd pick and maybe something next yr would be more exceptable, set a value and stay at that.

We will see
  • mayo49
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 65,216
I think #2 and #3 is too high for Garoppolo, but #12 is perfect. My money is on Cleveland landing him with that #12 pick.
Originally posted by Rascal:
Originally posted by NYniner85:
You telling me SF will not be talking to JG's agents about his long term plans during this whole discussion? Dude that will be a big part of it. No team is trading for him if they don't have an idea on his long term plans. And if he says I don't know will his vlaue goes wayyyyy down

Sure, they can talk about it. But, I doubt it will be agreed by the time the trade takes place.

If he says I don't want to play for the Browns they will not trade for him plain and simple. You don't invest a 1st on a guy who might be on your team for two yrs.
true. I think Jimmy G won't be worth it though
Originally posted by mayo49:
I think #2 and #3 is too high for Garoppolo, but #12 is perfect. My money is on Cleveland landing him with that #12 pick.
Originally posted by mayo49:
I think #2 and #3 is too high for Garoppolo, but #12 is perfect. My money is on Cleveland landing him with that #12 pick.

That's if he even he wants to play there...JG could simply say I'm not gonna play in Cleveland long term. I could see them going after Taylor/kap and drafting one of Watson/kizer/mahomes/Trubisky with a 1st or 2nd just as easy.
Originally posted by tjd808185:
Originally posted by NYniner85:
Yup that's true with both ways man...unless your getting Aaron Rogers your job will be on the line drafting, trading, or signing a FA qb. At least his had time he just didn't put it all together.

Agreed it's pick your poison. He can wait for Cousins or a better draft class but I wouldn't want to be Hu Jackson either and be 1-15 with no answer at qb.

Yup we have options and it might very well be waiting a yr for Kirk. I'd like a trade for JG if reasonable. At least we got a HC that knows qbs lol.
Open Menu Search Share 49ersWebzone