The Official QB Thread- JD5 taken #2. Randall 2.0 or Bayou Bob? Mariotta and Hartman forever. Fromm cut

[KDawg]

Just now, UK SKINS FAN 74 said:

He’s certainly better than Hoyer, Beathard and Mullins in that respect.

And Lance so far.

 

So he's a bit over a JAG.

 

He's just not anything special. 

[mistertim]

5 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

Their record with and without him says that even if a JAG, the other JAGs cant do what he has.

 

It's a fair point, but after watching Jimmy G play on and off for years now I can't really take the record thing to mean that he's actually a good QB.

 

Personally, I think it's more likely a couple of other factors. One is that SF's backups have been really bad, and the other is that SF likely has their offense extremely fine tuned to exactly what Jimmy G can and can't do. We know Kyle is a really creative offensive mind, so that wouldn't surprise me at all.

 

He's a cog in their machine that they've specifically crafted for targeted purposes. So in that regard, he works for them right now. But IMO that doesn't mean he's actually a good QB or would be any good with another team that doesn't have their system fine tuned like SF's. 

 

I'm guessing most other mediocre QBs would have had the same success in SF (assuming they tailored their offense around the guy's abilities). Again, the fact that they're not only so ready to move on from Jimmy G but also give up 3 1st round picks to do so tells me they realize that he's a JAG.

[KDawg]

1 minute ago, mistertim said:

 

 

He's a cog in their machine that they've specifically crafted for targeted purposes

 

This is it. In a nutshell. 

 

But, upon watching Jimmy G I have come to the conclusion he is a better cog to our machine than Heinicke.

 

That doesn't mean I actually want him as our QB. And, again, I think his value to SF as the starter while Lance continues to develop is worth more than the draft pick he'd net in return for a trade.

 

He is my floor. My worst case scenario. The guy we get for next year that I feel crappy about but thankful its at least a starter. He'd still be disappointing. But he's a NFL QB.

[mistertim]

4 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

This is it. In a nutshell. 

 

But, upon watching Jimmy G I have come to the conclusion he is a better cog to our machine than Heinicke.

 

That doesn't mean I actually want him as our QB. And, again, I think his value to SF as the starter while Lance continues to develop is worth more than the draft pick he'd net in return for a trade.

 

He is my floor. My worst case scenario. The guy we get for next year that I feel crappy about but thankful its at least a starter. He'd still be disappointing. But he's a NFL QB.

 

Agreed. He's better than Heinicke, but I'm with you in that he's basically the last option for me as our starter next season. The last option I'd be remotely "ok" with. It would be very disappointing, but not as disappointing as Heinicke or Trubisky.

[goskins10]

3 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

This is it. In a nutshell. 

 

But, upon watching Jimmy G I have come to the conclusion he is a better cog to our machine than Heinicke.

 

That doesn't mean I actually want him as our QB. And, again, I think his value to SF as the starter while Lance continues to develop is worth more than the draft pick he'd net in return for a trade.

 

He is my floor. My worst case scenario. The guy we get for next year that I feel crappy about but thankful its at least a starter. He'd still be disappointing. But he's a NFL QB.

 

That's really the issue though, the full picture. Is Jimmy G better than what we have? Yes, without a doubt. But what is the cost to get him? If you get him cheap, OK I could see maybe going after him. But he is NOT going to be cheap. QBs coming of a NFC Championship run - regardless of if it's becasue of them or despite them which you could argue is Jimmy's case, will not come cheap. You can plan on at least your current 1st and another 1st and more. That's the cost of trading for an experienced QB that has shown they can start in the NFL. 

 

For me Jimmy G is Alex Smith 2.0 but a little more reckless. The recklessness gets you some more downfield plays but also more TOs as the one thing Alex was good at was not turning the ball over but he also rarely had big plays once he got to us. 

 

I jsut do not want the team to spend those resources on a guy like Jimmy G. Let's start building for a long term future. Swing for a young guy and if does not work out, reload and try again in 3 to 4 yrs. At least them you are on a rookie contract and can build a serious team around them. I mean I did not want Haskins as I thought we could ride Keenum one more year, gather more resources and make a QB run the next year. But OK, they took a swing. The player was wrong but the goal was right I believe. 

[KDawg]

Just now, goskins10 said:

 

That's really the issue though, the full picture. Is Jimmy G better than what we have? Yes, without a doubt. But what is the cost to get him? If you get him cheap, OK I could see maybe going after him. But he is NOT going to be cheap. QBs coming of a NFC Championship run - regardless of if it's becasue of them or despite them which you could argue is Jimmy's case, will not come cheap. You can plan on at least your current 1st and another 1st and more. That's the cost of trading for an experienced QB that has shown they can start in the NFL. 

 

For me Jimmy G is Alex Smith 2.0 but a little more reckless. The recklessness gets you some more downfield plays but also more TOs as the one thing Alex was good at was not turning the ball over but he also rarely had big plays once he got to us. 

 

I jsut do not want the team to spend those resources on a guy like Jimmy G. Let's start building for a long term future. Swing for a young guy and if does not work out, reload and try again in 3 to 4 yrs. At least them you are on a rookie contract and can build a serious team around them. I mean I did not want Haskins as I thought we could ride Keenum one more year, gather more resources and make a QB run the next year. But OK, they took a swing. The player was wrong but the goal was right I believe. 

 

Everything is about cost.

 

It's impossible to have this conversation as many times as we are and say how much you're willing to pay for each target unless you create a word document and copy and paste it at the end of every post.

 

I doubt most who would even entertain Jimmy would spend a 1. Him being a last ditch option should speak volumes on perceived worth.

[Est.1974]

Jimmy G most probably has more value to SF next season if Lance isn’t ready. I’d also add I don’t know why he’d come here on the knowledge we were taking a QB. That really makes it a short term money making exercise for him.

 

I don’t really want him here, however I also don’t see the logic of him coming in as a placeholder. He will cost one draft pick at least and 20mil in 2022. That’s a poor move by Rivera and Co.

 

I would probably say that as much I wouldn’t like the option I would rather they bring him in on the premise of being our medium or long term answer. Give him a couple of years extension, lower the 2022 cap hit. Add weapons to bolster our offense. Give him a chance to succeed. That too isn’t a great outcome but it’s the only way I just justify him being brought in.

 

Having a 20mil one year stop gap that you had to trade for. Rivera and Mayhew should be fired if they think that is an acceptable way forward.

[goskins10]

1 minute ago, KDawg said:

 

Everything is about cost.

 

It's impossible to have this conversation as many times as we are and say how much you're willing to pay for each target unless you create a word document and copy and paste it at the end of every post.

 

I doubt most who would even entertain Jimmy would spend a 1. Him being a last ditch option should speak volumes on perceived worth.

 

I was not talking at you, I was adding to your post. I agree with all you said. But too many times I see those wanting a Jimmy G or someone else either ignore that cost or woefully underestimate what it would cost. What I see is " well he is better than what we have so lets get him" and as you know it's just not that simple. 

 

I personally do not want any veteran QB. I really want us to be looking more long term and at least have the QB on a rookie contract so the rest of the team building can go on. If the guy doesn't work out, OK reload and try again. 

[Mooka]

Just now, UK SKINS FAN 74 said:

Having a 20mil one year stop gap that you had to trade for. Rivera and Mayhew should be fired if they think that is an acceptable way forward.

 

No way.

 

30+ mil a year stopgap. (and a 5+ year deal)

 

Garoppolo isn't going anywhere to take a pay-cut after leading a team possibly to the SB. 

 

And it'll take at least a 2nd rounder just to be able to pay him that big contract. (49ers will certainly ask for a 1st) 

[cakmoney61]

1 hour ago, KDawg said:

 

Depends on the website for Willis. He's also listed at 210 and 215 on other sites. Senior Bowl will be the accurate measurement. 

 

Except neither of us want Jimmy. He's just a fall back. 

I understand both of your positions.  For me, Jimmy G is not a fall back.  He represents more of the same for Washington at the QB position which is that hamster perpetually spinning on that mind-numbing wheel.

 

Listen, my assessment of Jimmy G could be totally wrong.  And if he ends up here, I want him to make me eat crow week after week and year after year.

 

 

 

[KDawg]

2 minutes ago, cakmoney61 said:

I understand both of your positions.  For me, Jimmy G is not a fall back.  He represents more of the same for Washington at the QB position which is that hamster perpetually spinning on that mind-numbing wheel.

 

Listen, my assessment of Jimmy G could be totally wrong.  And if he ends up here, I want him to make me eat crow week after week and year after year.

 

 

 

 

Here's the part that I'm not sure I'm conveying adequately...

 

A fallback to me means... anyone other than Heinicke. Literally.

 

It also means we swing and whiff a bunch. Which is a more real possibility than many here seem to think. 

 

I just hope our front office doesn't get cute with the draft like many of the fans want to do if we don't hit the home run in the offseason. Get a QB in round 1. Period. 

[Est.1974]

9 minutes ago, Mooka said:

 

No way.

 

30+ mil a year stopgap. (and a 5+ year deal)

 

Garoppolo isn't going anywhere to take a pay-cut after leading a team possibly to the SB. 

 

And it'll take at least a 2nd rounder just to be able to pay him that big contract. (49ers will certainly ask for a 1st) 

I agree. He isn’t coming here, or going anywhere else, to do someone a favour and baby sit another rookie for one season.

[Chump Bailey]

Jimmy G Getting It Done in OT

 

[Chump Bailey]

There are some areas to Jimmy G's game where is not JAG material IMO, footwork and release most notably. Right now and being consistent, I'd be okay with a day 2 pick and a contract that won't hamstring our ability to upgrade. I'd still take Pickett personally at #11. I would also take another QB day 3 because I see real potential and letting them compete against Heinicke and Allen. 

[mistertim]

11 minutes ago, Mooka said:

 

No way.

 

30+ mil a year stopgap. (and a 5+ year deal)

 

Garoppolo isn't going anywhere to take a pay-cut after leading a team possibly to the SB. 

 

And it'll take at least a 2nd rounder just to be able to pay him that big contract. (49ers will certainly ask for a 1st) 

 

I would laugh my ass off at any team who gives up a 1st for Jimmy G (even if it's us, though in that case I'd be crying at the same time).

 

As far as his contract, he still has a year left so would a team necessarily have to give him a new contract as part of a trade? If so, that's an even harder pass for me. It's also why I've said that I think the scenario of us trading for Jimmy G and also drafting a QB high is probably not going to happen. If someone brings in Jimmy G for a high pick they'll probably be giving him a new contract as well, which means they're paying him to be "the guy".

[Ball Security]

The trade compensation from the Stafford trade is looking worse for Det.  Now their first pick is going to be 29-32.  They got CB Melifonwu from Syracuse who spent most of the year on IR, and a 2023 first, and a bottom third QB on a fat contract.

[Voice_of_Reason]

Davante Adams is a FA. Rodgers again spoke of uncertainties because so many of the Packer's player's contracts are up.  And they are in Cap Hell anyway.  

 

You know the team that isn't in Cap Hell?  Us. 

 

Tell Aaron that they will sign him to whatever he wants, and sign Davante to whatever he wants, and then trade whatever GB wants to get him.  

 

Rodgers + McLaurin + Davante Adams + (Healthy) Samuels + Gibson/Mckissic (if he re-signs, but why wouldn't he?) would be an unbelievably explosive combination.  To say nothing of Thomas when he returns from injury. Gotta keep them up-right, but I think the OL can do that for the most part.

 

Sign a MLB, and tell Chase and Montez to grow the eff up and play the scheme. Or trade Young as part of the deal, I don't care.  

 

Then you go win a SB.

 

And I don't care that Rodgers is a cantankerous, moody, strange old guy.  Dude can still play, and I don't care if his fiancé is totally bat-**** crazy and eats clay.

 

THAT is how I solve the problem.  (After yesterday's results and hearing the comments come out of GB after the loss.)

[mistertim]

12 minutes ago, Chump Bailey said:

Jimmy G Getting It Done in OT

 

 

To be fair, J.T. has also posted videos praising Heinicke. He basically points out good stuff QBs do in games, not necessarily making a determination if a QB is a good long term starter.

Edited January 24, 2022 by mistertim

[Hitman#21]

You offer players and 1's for Wilson

 

You offer players and 1's for Rodgers

 

You offer a 1 and change for Carr

 

You offer a 2 and change for Jimmy G

 

If these fail you trade up from 11 to take a QB if there is one you love.

 

This is the offseason, no excuses. 

[KDawg]

1 minute ago, Hitman#21 said:

You offer players and 1's for Wilson

 

You offer players and 1's for Rodgers

 

You offer a 1 and change for Carr

 

You offer a 2 and change for Jimmy G

 

If these fail you trade up from 11 to take a QB if there is one you love.

 

This is the offseason, no excuses. 

This is what we need to happen.

 

The excuse is that no team wants to give us the opportunity/the players don't want to come here/teams jump ahead of us in the draft.

 

We did this to ourselves by sitting on this need for so long. Now we're in a bad place.

[redskin301]

3 minutes ago, Hitman#21 said:

You offer players and 1's for Wilson

 

You offer players and 1's for Rodgers

 

You offer a 1 and change for Carr

 

You offer a 2 and change for Jimmy G

 

If these fail you trade up from 11 to take a QB if there is one you love.

 

This is the offseason, no excuses. 

This is such a bad QB class I don’t think I would want to trade up 

[srtman04]

5 minutes ago, Hitman#21 said:

You offer players and 1's for Wilson

 

You offer players and 1's for Rodgers

 

You offer a 1 and change for Carr

 

You offer a 2 and change for Jimmy G

 

If these fail you trade up from 11 to take a QB if there is one you love.

 

This is the offseason, no excuses. 

 

This QB class is HORRIBLE.   There is no one even close to Maholmes or Josh Allen level of talent in this draft.....this is really a poor draft to go all in for QB.  Probably the worst in a decade at least....

[KDawg]

2 minutes ago, redskin301 said:

This is such a bad QB class I don’t think I would want to trade up 

 

Why do you think this is a bad QB class? (I feel like I ask this question daily and I have yet to hear someone say, "I've watched all the QBs play and come to the conclusion x because y")

[mistertim]

4 minutes ago, redskin301 said:

This is such a bad QB class I don’t think I would want to trade up 

 

There isn't really any indication that this is a "bad" QB class. The only thing about it is that it lacks clear cut blue chip prospects like other drafts have...which actually makes it a better draft for us since we're not picking in the top 2.

 

2 minutes ago, srtman04 said:

 

This QB class is HORRIBLE.   There is no one even close to Maholmes or Josh Allen level of talent in this draft.....this is really a poor draft to go all in for QB.  Probably the worst in a decade at least....

 

This feels like an incredible amount of hyperbole. What are you basing it on?

Edited January 24, 2022 by mistertim

[Voice_of_Reason]

7 minutes ago, mistertim said:

As far as his contract, he still has a year left so would a team necessarily have to give him a new contract as part of a trade?

I think if you're trading for Jimmy G, you're extending him.  Otherwise you're spending a second (and probably something else) for a 1 year rental.  

 

I'd do that (and more) for Wilson or Rodgers.  Because you immediately become one of the favorites to win the NFC.  Jimmy G. does not do that for you.  So you're not going to give up assets for just one year.  You've got to get more mileage out of it.  Otherwise it's really not worth doing.

 

Again, I keep coming back to, "what are my options?"

 

Do I WANT Jimmy G?  No, not really.  

 

Caveat to everything below: I'm eliminating Watson as an option.  Until his legal troubles are cleared up and they know when he will be available, he's off the table.  Comish might suspend him for the entire season.  You need to know that BEFORE you give up assets to get him.

 

But if you don't think you can get Wilson or Rodgers, then you have to look in the draft and see if you think you can get a guy with a high enough ceiling that THIS draft is the place to go find your starter.  I honestly don't know if that's the case.  Picket wears 2 gloves to throw a college football.  That terrifies me. 

 

One thing I KNOW you shouldn't do in the draft is settle for a guy because he's the best at the position this year.

 

So, in the decision tree:

 

Option 1: Wilson or Rodgers.

 

Option 2: Is there a guy in the draft who we think can approximate a top-10 QB.  Not right now, but in a year or 2.  Somebody with at least the up-side of Herbert.  There is a certain amount of luck when it comes to getting a Mahomes or Allen.  Allen went 7, Mahomes went 10.  If anybody KNEW they would be the two best QBs in the NFL (and probably will be for the next 10 years, just like Brady/Manning), then they would have been select #1 overall.  So, is that guy available, or is the ceiling of the guys in the draft akin to a Kirk Cousins/Derick Carr/Jimmy G, but would need time to develop.

 

IF the answer to Option 2 is "Yes" then you sign a veteran (Mitch/Teddy/Winston/Mariota) and then trade up (if necessary) and grab your guy.

 

IF the answer to Option 2 is "No" then you absolutely do not reach in the draft.  You then consider trades for second-level QBs like Jimmy G., Carr, and others.

 

The only thing which is certain is TH as a planned starter, even for 1 week, is not in the cards.  I think there's a higher likelihood he doesn't make the team than Ron plans to put him out there to start.  The most likely scenario is he's brought back as a backup to a veteran starter, or 3rd string if you sign a vet and draft a rookie.