What will Jimmy's trade value be in the offseason?

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by lamontb:
I can't think of the last time there was a qb injury and a team made a major trade. Teams now just roll with the average back up instead of making a drastic move. I don't see that as a likely option for Jimmy. Just pure hope at this point

I do recall Drew Brees still having value even though he had a shoulder injury.

While the Chargers missed the playoffs, the biggest blow was the injury to Brees' throwing shoulder in week 17 against the Denver Broncos. Brees required surgery after the season and this may have contributed to why the Chargers did not bring Brees back for the 2006 season.

The Chargers did offer a contract, but it was incentive based and had very little guaranteed money. Brees took this as an insult that the Chargers did not believe in him and his health. Brees left to New Orleans for a 6 year, $60 million contract that had $10 million guaranteed for the first season. The confidence the Saints showed in Brees was enough for him and he signed his new contract, leaving San Diego behind.
https://bleacherreport.com/articles/428430-the-biggest-mistake-in-chargers-history#:~:text=Brees%20left%20to%20New%20Orleans,contract%2C%20leaving%20San%20Diego%20behind.

Brees was supposed to go to Miami, They backed out due to the shoulder or something like that

Brees' injury was a rotator cuff injury, which was much more serious than Jimmy's capsule injury - so says the articles (no link) that I read. Defer to the Doc's on the board if I'm wrong.

Point is, even when Brees was injured, he had value. Jimmy's injury isn't as serious as Drew's was, and he'll be throwing in about 4 months. Easier to trade him then when he can throw vs now when nothing is certain. Plenty of time to trade Jimmy, and I am still confident in his value (even with a shoulder operation) can generate a trade around draft time. No need to panic and outright cut him right now.

Guys, you missed or ignored my previous post. Iamontb is not talking about Jimmy's value. He is talking about trading for a replacement for an injured QB. You and others on here seem to think that its an option to trade Jimmy to a team who experiences an injury loss to their QB1.

Again I will ask you....why is this a realistic scenario when historically it doesnt happen? QB1s get hurt all the time. If this was a realistic option, shouldnt there be a lot of examples of it happening? I have posted multiple times and no one has been able to come up with 1 example.

As long as a player has value to another team, he can be traded. Jimmy's a playoff level QB. He has value. The problem is that he's just had shoulder surgery and it's uncertain what his current value is (just like the Brees article), because of that surgery, hence ShanaLynch's difficulty in garnering a fair exchange for his services. Once the injury clears up, or once the prognosis is good because there's been some time to determine if there are no setbacks - it will be much easier to trade him, recover the cap space, and some possible draft capital. All ShanaLynch needs is a team that's willing to gamble on Jimmy for a fair price just like the New Orlean Saints signing Drew for a big contract, not knowing whether or not he still could play.

You must have missed the title of the thread.

I assume you were replying to my comment about how this reply of yours is irrelevant to the conversation. Just because the title of the thread is talking about one thing, doesnt meant that is what specific conversations are about. SMH

Ok lets erase everything and just reply to the following. The idea that some posters have said as a reason to keep Jimmy is in case a QB from another team gets hurt before the trade deadline and we can spin Jimmy there. My question is this....why is this brought up as a realistic possibility when there isnt historical evidence of this happening to back up the idea?

My comment is relevant. Yours was more of a red herring.

A red herring is something that misleads or distracts from a relevant or important question.[1] It may be either a logical fallacy or a literary device that leads readers or audiences toward a false conclusion. A red herring may be used intentionally, as in mystery fiction or as part of rhetorical strategies (e.g., in politics), or may be used in argumentation inadvertently.[2]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring#:~:text=A%20red%20herring%20is%20something,audiences%20toward%20a%20false%20conclusion.

Why is keeping Jimmy for the season discussed? Maybe because it's a possibility? You do understand the difference between possibility and probability don't you?

So you dont want to address my question. Got it. I dont understand why you refuse to focus on what we were talking about before you chimed in.

The claim was made by some that Jimmy could be kept so that if a QB gets hurt prior to the trade deadline that we could trade him there.....

.....Myself, lamontb and someone else asked why this claim was made when historically teams dont make big trades for QBs when their QB goes down.....

.....Then there has been nothing but crickets from the people who made the claim and you who refuses to answer the question.

There is nothing red herring about this. No one is trying to distract from the important question. We were discussing a specific claim which you refuse to address and the people making the claim refuse to back up with any sort of evidence.

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
I searched the first 10 pages of google and a long scrolling session on twitter and havent found a single thing that said we had an offer from Washington and Jimmy declined it. I am not saying you are lying or anything, but I wonder if what you heard was conjecture more than an actual report.

Like I said I heard it on a SF pod. I can't remember which one because it was before Wentz got traded there and around the time some said SF had a 2 on the table for Jimmy (I think Middlekauff stated that).

I got no reason to lie about it, doesn't matter any more and like another poster said the likelihood of a legit report coming out with that at this pt is not gonna happen.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
like i said what more do you want from a OL.. a touchdown run.. He didn't give up any sacks or run stuffs.. the very thing OL are supposed to do

Oh I don't know block the guy in front of you so the QB doesn't have to run for his life…Their job is to not give up pressure at the very least. He couldn't do that for 5 snaps.

I would love nothing more that for him to be better than Laken, he's shown nothing to say he will ever be.

KC film was preseason.. i guess you can cling on to that lol

as for Laken, he was trash before he came to the 49ers, look at how he turned out

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
I searched the first 10 pages of google and a long scrolling session on twitter and havent found a single thing that said we had an offer from Washington and Jimmy declined it. I am not saying you are lying or anything, but I wonder if what you heard was conjecture more than an actual report.

Like I said I heard it on a SF pod. I can't remember which one because it was before Wentz got traded there and around the time some said SF had a 2 on the table for Jimmy (I think Middlekauff stated that).

I got no reason to lie about it, doesn't matter any more and like another poster said the likelihood of a legit report coming out with that at this pt is not gonna happen.

Like I said, I am not saying you are lying. I was just curious if the person on the pod presented it as a report or as a "it makes sense that Jimmy wouldnt want to go there" type report.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
like i said what more do you want from a OL.. a touchdown run.. He didn't give up any sacks or run stuffs.. the very thing OL are supposed to do

Oh I don't know block the guy in front of you so the QB doesn't have to run for his life…Their job is to not give up pressure at the very least. He couldn't do that for 5 snaps.

I would love nothing more that for him to be better than Laken, he's shown nothing to say he will ever be.

Sorry to harp on you love your dedication on here and you clearly study the game pro and college so no hate here. But saying Banks hasn't shown anything. I swear I've seen people say the same about Lance and you jump down their throat. Rookies struggle. We complain about JG but TL did not beat him out. Thomas struggled I will admit but then his quality started to come through with play time. Banks give him a start maybe? Just one? How about a preseason start for Banks then lets see what we got

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
So you dont want to address my question. Got it. I dont understand why you refuse to focus on what we were talking about before you chimed in.

The claim was made by some that Jimmy could be kept so that if a QB gets hurt prior to the trade deadline that we could trade him there.....

.....Myself, lamontb and someone else asked why this claim was made when historically teams dont make big trades for QBs when their QB goes down.....

.....Then there has been nothing but crickets from the people who made the claim and you who refuses to answer the question.

There is nothing red herring about this. No one is trying to distract from the important question. We were discussing a specific claim which you refuse to address and the people making the claim refuse to back up with any sort of evidence.

The reason teams don't trade for QBs after their QB1 goes down is that by then, usually, there are no QBs available that would be better than its QB2. Jimmy's situation is unique. His shoulder would have recovered and he'd likely be better than the team's QB2.

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
KC film was preseason.. i guess you can cling on to that lol

as for Laken, he was trash before he came to the 49ers, look at how he turned out

You clearly didn't watch those 5 snaps that you're touting off about lol.

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
Sorry to harp on you love your dedication on here and you clearly study the game pro and college so no hate here. But saying Banks hasn't shown anything. I swear I've seen people say the same about Lance and you jump down their throat. Rookies struggle. We complain about JG but TL did not beat him out. Thomas struggled I will admit but then his quality started to come through with play time. Banks give him a start maybe? Just one? How about a preseason start for Banks then lets see what we got

Lance was good in college. Banks was not. Lance actually looked like he belonged in preseaon banks looked like the worst lineman on the field vs future Insurance salesman.

You're saying banks was good vs the jags and someone posted one of his 5 reps where he looked like a human turnstile. So forgive me that I don't have faith in Joshua garnett 2.0

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by Strwy2Hevn:

Originally posted by 49ers808:

Originally posted by NYniner85:
Where you getting money to sign FAs without affecting the 2023 cap? They aren't gonna cut Jimmy at this point until he passes a physical which is what in June/July? Who the hell you signing then lol

Yeah he f**ked SF with the surgery and saying no to being moved to DC.

Do we know this? I don't think any offer was on the table from anyone, DC included.

No. And we will never know for sure.

There was a report that DC had a 2 on the table and Jimmy said he didn't want to play there.

Not sure how you could also fault Jimmy for not wanting to play in DC when other QB's like Wilson and Watson didn't want to play there either.

Yes because Jimmy's on their level.

Thats pretty irrelevant. I get it you don't like Jimmy, most of you don't I get that. Still irrelevant though.

No it's actually VERY relevant.

No, its not. If Jimmy has s no-trade clause then it doesn't matter if he's Ken Dorsey or Cody Pickett. He has a right to reject the trade. Not to mention Lynch has also said they wanted to do right by Jimmy in the process.

Stop the frickin whining about Jimmy already no worries he'll be gone.

As an football player, your ability to play is very relevant to how picky you should be.

The two players you listed are two of the best QBs in the NFL. MVP caliber.

Jimmy's never proved to be even close to their level.

If 95% of teams would upgrade if you signed with them... of course you're totally fine to refuse to be traded to select teams.

When you're Jimmy G, a player who no one wants to trade for, (hypothetically) not waiving your trade clause would absolutely be foolish. Why? Because Jimmy will lose millions upon millions of dollars if he did in fact refuse a trade to Washington.

That's like saying a one star high school recruit should have the same pickiness as a five star recruit. Imagine a walk on level player refusing to play for LSU because he wanted to play for Bama. Get real man.

So by your logic Jimmy should've waived his NTC cause he's not on par with Wilson and Watson and instead should choose to go to a s**tty organization?? So much fail in your post and biased opinion.

Also no one wants Jimmy because of his shoulder injury not because of the player he is. How you people can't process that is beyond me, you guy act like he didn't do s**t to help the team get to the Super Bowl and playoffs.

This fanbase is getting to be embarrassing. No wonder they call us whiners.

Originally posted by Paul_Hofer:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
So you dont want to address my question. Got it. I dont understand why you refuse to focus on what we were talking about before you chimed in.

The claim was made by some that Jimmy could be kept so that if a QB gets hurt prior to the trade deadline that we could trade him there.....

.....Myself, lamontb and someone else asked why this claim was made when historically teams dont make big trades for QBs when their QB goes down.....

.....Then there has been nothing but crickets from the people who made the claim and you who refuses to answer the question.

There is nothing red herring about this. No one is trying to distract from the important question. We were discussing a specific claim which you refuse to address and the people making the claim refuse to back up with any sort of evidence.

The reason teams don't trade for QBs after their QB1 goes down is that by then, usually, there are no QBs available that would be better than its QB2. Jimmy's situation is unique. His shoulder would have recovered and he'd likely be better than the team's QB2.

There are also other reasons these types of trades dont typically happen, not just that there arent better options available.

-Money. Teams cant typically take on a big salary midseason.
-Familiarity. it typically doesnt make sense for a QB to come onto a new team midseason and expect him to learn the system/playbook and develop any sort of chemistry with the team.
-Compensation. Teams wont give up much value for a QB who would be their QB for part of 1 season.

There are a ton of reasons why these type of trades dont happen.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by Waterbear:
As an football player, your ability to play is very relevant to how picky you should be.

The two players you listed are two of the best QBs in the NFL. MVP caliber.

Jimmy's never proved to be even close to their level.

If 95% of teams would upgrade if you signed with them... of course you're totally fine to refuse to be traded to select teams.

When you're Jimmy G, a player who no one wants to trade for, (hypothetically) not waiving your trade clause would absolutely be foolish. Why? Because Jimmy will lose millions upon millions of dollars if he did in fact refuse a trade to Washington.

That's like saying a one star high school recruit should have the same pickiness as a five star recruit. Imagine a walk on level player refusing to play for LSU because he wanted to play for Bama. Get real man.

It's crazy that it even needs to be explained

Not its not crazy its your two biased opinions. Unreal.

Originally posted by Kolohe:
So by your logic Jimmy should've waived his NTC cause he's not on par with Wilson and Watson and instead should choose to go to a s**tty organization?? So much fail in your post and biased opinion.

Also no one wants Jimmy because of his shoulder injury not because of the player he is. How you people can't process that is beyond me, you guy act like he didn't do s**t to help the team get to the Super Bowl and playoffs.

This fanbase is getting to be embarrassing. No wonder they call us whiners.

LOL. No. Their logic is that elite players should be pickier with what teams they get traded to than average players. Which should be common sense, but here we are.

Originally posted by Kolohe:
So by your logic Jimmy should've waived his NTC cause he's not on par with Wilson and Watson and instead should choose to go to a s**tty organization?? So much fail in your post and biased opinion.

Also no one wants Jimmy because of his shoulder injury not because of the player he is. How you people can't process that is beyond me, you guy act like he didn't do s**t to help the team get to the Super Bowl and playoffs.

This fanbase is getting to be embarrassing. No wonder they call us whiners.

Stop saying Jimmy has a no-trade clause to waive he never had that for this season. Stop bringing it up.

if someone really really wanted him he would be on another team. His injury would not make a team pass on some great QB….I mean if Watson was coming off the same injury you think no one would have gotten in line to trade for him lol? Stop. Teams were lining up for him even while being a sexual predator.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
KC film was preseason.. i guess you can cling on to that lol

as for Laken, he was trash before he came to the 49ers, look at how he turned out

You clearly didn't watch those 5 snaps that you're touting off about lol.

i knew after the game was played when i heard that he played

you didn't even know he played until months later.. and obviously he didn't do anything bad during the game in your eyes or you would have known he played backed then.

it's all good, keep on panicking

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by Strwy2Hevn:

Originally posted by 49ers808:

Originally posted by NYniner85:
Where you getting money to sign FAs without affecting the 2023 cap? They aren't gonna cut Jimmy at this point until he passes a physical which is what in June/July? Who the hell you signing then lol

Yeah he f**ked SF with the surgery and saying no to being moved to DC.

Do we know this? I don't think any offer was on the table from anyone, DC included.

No. And we will never know for sure.

There was a report that DC had a 2 on the table and Jimmy said he didn't want to play there.

Not sure how you could also fault Jimmy for not wanting to play in DC when other QB's like Wilson and Watson didn't want to play there either.

Yes because Jimmy's on their level.

Thats pretty irrelevant. I get it you don't like Jimmy, most of you don't I get that. Still irrelevant though.

No it's actually VERY relevant.

No, its not. If Jimmy has s no-trade clause then it doesn't matter if he's Ken Dorsey or Cody Pickett. He has a right to reject the trade. Not to mention Lynch has also said they wanted to do right by Jimmy in the process.

Stop the frickin whining about Jimmy already no worries he'll be gone.

As an football player, your ability to play is very relevant to how picky you should be.

The two players you listed are two of the best QBs in the NFL. MVP caliber.

Jimmy's never proved to be even close to their level.

If 95% of teams would upgrade if you signed with them... of course you're totally fine to refuse to be traded to select teams.

When you're Jimmy G, a player who no one wants to trade for, (hypothetically) not waiving your trade clause would absolutely be foolish. Why? Because Jimmy will lose millions upon millions of dollars if he did in fact refuse a trade to Washington.

That's like saying a one star high school recruit should have the same pickiness as a five star recruit. Imagine a walk on level player refusing to play for LSU because he wanted to play for Bama. Get real man.

So by your logic Jimmy should've waived his NTC cause he's not on par with Wilson and Watson and instead should choose to go to a s**tty organization?? So much fail in your post and biased opinion.

Also no one wants Jimmy because of his shoulder injury not because of the player he is. How you people can't process that is beyond me, you guy act like he didn't do s**t to help the team get to the Super Bowl and playoffs.

This fanbase is getting to be embarrassing. No wonder they call us whiners.

Color me shocked you didn't get it.

I clearly said HYPOTHETICALLY if Jimmy didn't waive his no trade clause for Washington… he made a big mistake.

We have no idea if that's true or not that's why I specifically said that's a hypothetical situation.

Theres nothing biased about saying that the more talented of player you are the more you are allowed to be picky. That goes for any work industry not just football.

If you're a top lawyer in the nation vs some guy who just squeaked by in law school… of course you're not going to have the same opportunities.

Why this is a debate I have no idea. It has nothing to do with your perception of my personal bias.