2017 Jimmy G: The Dilemma
- Thread starter bakahump
- Start date
I still have a pair of those, in good condition because you don't need gloves very often where I live. I call them my Dan Marino gloves.
Actually, there are a few teams that should trade a 1st rounder for JG, but even if that's on offer, I can't see the Pats trading JG to the Broncos, Texans, Dolphins or Chiefs.
By the way, you are getting ganged up on not because your initial point is wrong—it would seem no one actually has ponied up a first rounder or more—but because despite the fact that you spend hours on a Boston sports forum breathlessly analyzing how many millions Mike Tannenbaum(!!) should pay for Kenny Stills(!!!) in the face of Leonte Caroo's all but certain emergence—and who receives generous support by Pats fans in the Dolphins thread for your team's apparent progress this year—you seem to be among the first to troll the Pats threads when given the opportunity.
And this isn't a good one. Jimmy G may or may not be the next great NFL QB. He may or may not be traded for a haul. But when you compare what we know about him (his college pedigree, his NFL performance to date, his contract, and his tutelage under Brady and McDaniels) with the number of first round busts and how central elite QB play is to success in the NFL, it's hard to conclude that Cleveland or SF are going to use those picks more effectively. In fact, given what we know about the upcoming draft and those teams' history of dysfunction, I'd almost certainly bet they won't. At a minimum, the odds would appear to be about even.
But let's not let that get in the way of a good hot take...
And this isn't a good one. Jimmy G may or may not be the next great NFL QB. He may or may not be traded for a haul. But when you compare what we know about him (his college pedigree, his NFL performance to date, his contract, and his tutelage under Brady and McDaniels) with the number of first round busts and how central elite QB play is to success in the NFL, it's hard to conclude that Cleveland or SF are going to use those picks more effectively. In fact, given what we know about the upcoming draft and those teams' history of dysfunction, I'd almost certainly bet they won't. At a minimum, the odds would appear to be about even.
But let's not let that get in the way of a good hot take...
Agreed. you could add the Jets as well.
The market for JG will pick up once the Romo and Cousins chips are off the table and the teams that lose out will be staring at the prospect of JG or status quo. The fear of being left out or doing nothing can be a big motivating factor for teams with a frustrated fan base.
Careful. Calling out Soden for what he is wakes up the BbtL sleeping cerberus.
He may well be right. I mentioned Trubisky because Jimmy G is cited as a comp for him. And it would be so Cleveland Browns -- actually, so NFL -- to pass on Jimmy (and his several year apprenticeship under the best coaching staff in the NFL and his six quarters) in favor of the shiny new thing who started one year in college.
That, as much as anything else, is emblematic of how most of the NFL teams roll, and why there is no parity despite the League's all out attempts to legislate it.
An irony here is that if I'm a fan of another AFC East team, I would rather firmly want JG dealt out of NE. If he isn't, Mehta's funny piece this week may be money.
That, as much as anything else, is emblematic of how most of the NFL teams roll, and why there is no parity despite the League's all out attempts to legislate it.
An irony here is that if I'm a fan of another AFC East team, I would rather firmly want JG dealt out of NE. If he isn't, Mehta's funny piece this week may be money.
Just for the unhinged reaction of the pasty couch potato brigade, I'd love it if he just decided he likes being Brady's backup, agrees to $1 or $2M a year and retired a multimillionaire with his brain and body intact.
I know, I know...it's usually not worth reading too much into social media messages but....this seems a little interesting. Especially considering he's not much of a social media guy and hasn't posted anything in almost a month.
Garoppolo posted this to his IG account a short while ago. Is that a "Peace out"?
"V" for Vollmer???
I think he spotted Peyton in the stands and was just pointing out that he now joins him in the two ring club.
As it turns out, there was no dilemma with Jacoby E.
B escapes this sort of thread by demographics.
Let's look at how the Pats have handled the Back-up QB situation over the past 10 years, as that could shed some light on the team's thinking:
2017: 3? (Brady/Garoppolo?/Brissett)
2016: 3 (Brady/Garoppolo/Brissett-3rd Rd)
2015: 2 (Brady/Garoppolo)
2014: 2 (Brady/Garoppolo-2nd Rd)
2013: 2 (Brady/Mallett)
2012: 2 (Brady/Mallett)
2011: 3 (Brady/Hoyer/Mallett-4th Rd)
2010: 2 (Brady/Hoyer)
2009: 2 (Brady/Hoyer-UDFA)
2008: 3 (Brady/Cassel/O'Connell-3rd Rd)
I started the list in '08 because that's where the current "Backup QB Plan" comes into focus:
- O'Connell was drafted high as the Cassel successor, but it didn't work out. Cut after one season
- Interestingly, they didn't go for the traditional "veteran" QB in 2009 but went with UDFA rookie Brian Hoyer
- In Hoyer's 3rd year, a high pick is used to draft Mallet, the new backup heir apparent
- Mallet understudies for 1 season and then holds the job for 2 years.
- Garoppolo (2nd rd) impresses in training camp, and the team feels comfortable giving him the back-up job (the ability to extract some trade picks for Mallett may be a factor)
- In Garoppolo's 3rd season, the new heir apparent is drafted (Brissett), also with a high pick.
The common denominators:
- High picks for backup QBs
- No veterans
- Top back-up in position for no more than 3 seasons.
History strongly suggests that a Garoppolo trade is highly likely. Diminishing skills from an aging starter would certainly alter the calculus, but that's not the case here.
2017: 3? (Brady/Garoppolo?/Brissett)
2016: 3 (Brady/Garoppolo/Brissett-3rd Rd)
2015: 2 (Brady/Garoppolo)
2014: 2 (Brady/Garoppolo-2nd Rd)
2013: 2 (Brady/Mallett)
2012: 2 (Brady/Mallett)
2011: 3 (Brady/Hoyer/Mallett-4th Rd)
2010: 2 (Brady/Hoyer)
2009: 2 (Brady/Hoyer-UDFA)
2008: 3 (Brady/Cassel/O'Connell-3rd Rd)
I started the list in '08 because that's where the current "Backup QB Plan" comes into focus:
- O'Connell was drafted high as the Cassel successor, but it didn't work out. Cut after one season
- Interestingly, they didn't go for the traditional "veteran" QB in 2009 but went with UDFA rookie Brian Hoyer
- In Hoyer's 3rd year, a high pick is used to draft Mallet, the new backup heir apparent
- Mallet understudies for 1 season and then holds the job for 2 years.
- Garoppolo (2nd rd) impresses in training camp, and the team feels comfortable giving him the back-up job (the ability to extract some trade picks for Mallett may be a factor)
- In Garoppolo's 3rd season, the new heir apparent is drafted (Brissett), also with a high pick.
The common denominators:
- High picks for backup QBs
- No veterans
- Top back-up in position for no more than 3 seasons.
History strongly suggests that a Garoppolo trade is highly likely. Diminishing skills from an aging starter would certainly alter the calculus, but that's not the case here.
This feels like the whole "Bill Belichick never drafts X in the first round" - there's just not enough of a sample to override the "BB will do whatever he feels is best for the franchise".
Brady is fantastic, but he's 40. His skills most certainly are diminishing.
But isn't the real question whether or not a diminishing Brady is still better than Jimmy G and for how long?
Most certainly it appears that Brady will still be better next season, which is why this seems such a tough decision.
I mean Jimmy will probably be better in 2019 or 2020, but can the Pats extend the decision that long without allocating too much cap room.
"His skills are most certainly diminishing" seems too strong to me. I think its easier to argue Brady's skills actually have been on a slightly upward trajectory for the last several years on balance (pocket mobility and deep ball accuracy in particular).
Now, that improvement is insane given Brady's age. I would agree Brady's skills are very likely to diminish given his age. I would bet he is worse in 2017 then he was in 2016 give his age. There is real risk Brady falls off a cliff at some point rather than showing gradual decline, and that year could be 2017 given his age. Im highly skeptical he's playing at a high level at 45. But, outside of maybe quarterback sneaking, we havent really seen diminishing skills yet.
So I think Jimmy G as heir apparent isnt going to be in the cards given contract timing.
Now, that improvement is insane given Brady's age. I would agree Brady's skills are very likely to diminish given his age. I would bet he is worse in 2017 then he was in 2016 give his age. There is real risk Brady falls off a cliff at some point rather than showing gradual decline, and that year could be 2017 given his age. Im highly skeptical he's playing at a high level at 45. But, outside of maybe quarterback sneaking, we havent really seen diminishing skills yet.
So I think Jimmy G as heir apparent isnt going to be in the cards given contract timing.
Brady will be better than Jimmy G next year, of course, but "how much" is an important question - and the same case goes for 2018.
The real decision relies on the question of "where is the tipping point" and "is the difference between Brady and Jimmy G large enough to offset the value lost letting a franchise QB walk away"
So yeah, you've basically got it. And BB has way more data than we do. It's totally possible that he's looking at JG and saying "He's just another Cassel, extract maximum draft value," it's also possible that he's looking at him and saying "he's going to be the franchise for 10+ years, almost no cost is too much". We just don't know, and we won't until they do something.
I just really don't like the "Belichick won't do this because he hasn't in the past" when the sample is basically 3 backup quarterbacks,when JG is significantly more talented than those 3, and Brady is significantly closer to the end of his career. The specifics are pretty much the whole question.
Good summary.
The toughest part (at least from what I have seen as a fan) is that Brady is a lot better than Jimmy G now and should be for at least 2017 and possibly 2018.
In fact, I think will be better than Jimmy until Brady loses it.
I have no idea when that will happen, but will trust BB to make the right decision.
Question on your post - are you saying BB would punt (not try to win a SB) 2018 and go with an inferior Jimmy G because Jimmy will be superior in 2021? Or are you just stating questions BB may be asking himself.
Disclaimer - years are just for the example and are not actual predictions.
Isn't the real question:
Is 2018 JG > 2018 TB12 + 1st round draft pick?
or
Is 2020 JG > 2020 JB + 3rd round compensatory pick (is that right?) + that previous 1st round pick?
Not "will JG be better than TB", but will he be better enough to override the value of the pick from a trade (assumed here to be a 1st rounder)
Also that compensatory pick isn't even guaranteed. You can lose it depending on which free agents you sign.
Perhaps embedded as you say "2018 TB12" but I think we need to reflect the 2017 impact on winning a title of JG being in place. We hope that is zero, but statistically it is something higher than that.
Maybe I am oversimplifying things, but isn't the real question whether or not BB sees Jimmy G as a quarterback who can be a Super Bowl winning quarterback (leading the team, not as a backup)?
If the answer is no, then maximize his trade value and ship him off no matter when he might be better than TB. Pull the trigger whenever you feel his trade value is at its peak. If the answer is yes, then the potential return in a trade matters little because history has shown how difficult it is to find that kind of quarterback. You just don't trade him.
There are currently 7 active SB-winning quarterbacks:
Brady
Roethlisberger
E. Manning
Rodgers
Wilson
Brees
Flacco
(I don't count Osweiler)
Let's assume their teams, plus Dallas and Atlanta, believe they have such a QB on the roster. Depending on how you feel about 36yo Eli Manning, that's roughly a quarter of teams in the NFL who have that level of talent under center. On the borderline might be Rivers, Palmer and Cousins. But you'd have to really squint to believe many other QBs could win a title on anything other than the Trent Dilfer plan.
I made the argument a different way a few pages ago, but I believe Jimmy has shown flashes of talent at that level; remaining to be seen is the consistency, and the frequency of mistakes. The problem is that the judgment on "can he be a SB-winning QB" is not a binary proposition. It's a multi-dimensional probability distribution. The most we can say right now is that it would not be a surprise if he proved to be that level of talent, but it's far from guaranteed until he starts for a team regularly. I doubt even BB has a firm level of certainty on that question, though his error bars might be smaller.
Teams spend first-overall draft picks on players about whom they have far greater uncertainty than what we have on Jimmy G though.
Brady
Roethlisberger
E. Manning
Rodgers
Wilson
Brees
Flacco
(I don't count Osweiler)
Let's assume their teams, plus Dallas and Atlanta, believe they have such a QB on the roster. Depending on how you feel about 36yo Eli Manning, that's roughly a quarter of teams in the NFL who have that level of talent under center. On the borderline might be Rivers, Palmer and Cousins. But you'd have to really squint to believe many other QBs could win a title on anything other than the Trent Dilfer plan.
I made the argument a different way a few pages ago, but I believe Jimmy has shown flashes of talent at that level; remaining to be seen is the consistency, and the frequency of mistakes. The problem is that the judgment on "can he be a SB-winning QB" is not a binary proposition. It's a multi-dimensional probability distribution. The most we can say right now is that it would not be a surprise if he proved to be that level of talent, but it's far from guaranteed until he starts for a team regularly. I doubt even BB has a firm level of certainty on that question, though his error bars might be smaller.
Teams spend first-overall draft picks on players about whom they have far greater uncertainty than what we have on Jimmy G though.
Well, yes, but let's say BB trades JG, and with that trade can end up drafting a top-notch pass-rusher and other defensive reinforcements.
If BB had a great defense, he might be willing to accept a lower-level QB. Not a bad QB. Maybe he thinks he could win it all with a great defense, good offensive players, and Jacoby Brissett, or the equivalent of Matt Cassel or something.
I think Oakland and Carolina fans might want to have a word with you
Last edited:
No, it's not, because it ignores the most important factor: you can almost never get a franchise quarterback on the free agent market, and its difficult to get one otherwise. We don't just have to weigh JG's value the next couple of years, we have to weigh his whole career.
If they think JG is a franchise quarterback, the value of the single first round pick just isn't even comparable. There's a very real chance that you trade him and then end up wandering the wilderness that teams like the Texans inhabit. The difference in value between an elite quarterback, and say Brock Osweiler, is significantly more than a first round pick.
An elite passrusher is probably the second most valuable type of player- but the value pales compared to that of a good quarterback. There's nothing as crippling to a franchise as poor quarterback play.
So the question would be whether they think Jimmy G is a franchise QB and that Jacoby is not?
They already have one franchise QB in Brady, so they definitely don't need two franchise QBs backing him up.
They could trade the excess value of one to improve the rest of the team correct?
I am genuinely asking.
I know Jimmy will never be Brady, but if the Pats think he is only marginally better than Jacoby that would make a trade more likely?
See, my point was that I don't think the market will heat up. There's just too much overlap between the list of teams who might part with 1st-round equivalent value for JG, and the list of teams to which the Pats would never trade JG (divisional opponents, plus AFC contenders like DEN/KC/HOU).
Different situation. Not trading Bledsoe wasn't an option, and not every team that needed a QB could absorb his contract. The difference between the Bills' offer and BB's second-best option for Bledsoe was likely far greater than the difference between his best and second-best offers for JG will be.
Don't be silly ... they can't all sign the best player available. That would be against the rules.