2017 Jimmy G: The Dilemma
- Thread starter bakahump
- Start date
It's not like there won't be other contenders. Going to have to go through someone. My question was given this dynamic, what would our price be? For me, their #1 wouldn't be enough. But I don't think Belichick would worry too much about the potential scenarios that may not even materialized as long as he's getting a return he likes.
I want no part of him going to Houston. I can live with a rebuilding effort in Cleveland and getting value back, but I don't want him going to Houston and making our lives a living hell as long as him, Clowney, JJ, and Nuke are upright.
No.
Having three CBs of this stature would be sportsgasmic but ultimately a luxury item the Pats do not need to win.
Conversely, having an inadequate back-up QB could cost the Pats dearly in the event that Brady went down.
In short, give me two of Glimore, Butler and Sherman, keep Jimmy as insurance for 2017 and as a possible answer down the road (I know, with lots of complications and the possible loss of value as a trade chit).
But let me be clear: I'm in the "don't trade Jimmy period" camp. He's a possible franchise QB, this is a QB driven sport and I would rather lose trade value than see him walk out the door. As much as I have abnormal man love for Number 12, he's going to be 40 when next season starts and any QB, no matter what kind of shape he's in or what flavor ice cream he favors, can go down with a horrific injury.
No, Jimmy's worth more than "Sherman on a market-rate contract". The marginal value of upgrading a 3rd CB isn't that big relative to your 1st and 2nd CBs.
Looking back at Belichick's coaching career for instances where the starting quarterback has been injured. I compiled this myself mostly pulling from google and wikipedia. It's Friday afternoon and I'm bored.
New York Giants (1979-1990)
1983 - Not sure if this counts. Parcells named Scott Brunner the starting QB but then started Phil Simms in the sixth game of the season. Simms was injured shortly after and was out for the season. The Giants finished 3-12-1.
1990 - In Week 15 during the game against Buffalo, starting quarterback Phil Simms was injured and ultimately lost for the season with a broken foot. He was replaced by Jeff Hostetler, who won the final two regular season games prior to the playoffs. The Giants went 13-3 and won the Super Bowl.
Cleveland Browns (1991-1995)
1993 - If I am reading correctly, Bernie Kosar started the season but lost the starting job to Vinny Testaverde but an injury to Testaverde returned Bernie Kosar to the field. The Browns finished 7-9.
New England Patriots (1996)
New York Jests (1997-1999)
1999 - after going 12-4 with Vinny Testaverde as their starting QB in the previous year, in the first game of the 1999 season (and against the Patriots to boot), Testaverde suffered a ruptured achilles tendon and was out for the rest of the year. The Jets went 8-8.
New England Patriots (2000-current)
2001 - Fuck Yeah! In the second game of the season, Drew Bledsoe was hit by Mo Lewis which opened the door for some guy you probably never heard of. The Patriots finished 11-5 and won the Super Bowl. Once again - fuck yeah.
2008 - In the season opener, Tom Brady suffered a torn anterior cruciate ligament against the Chiefs and missed the remainder of the season. With Matt Cassel starting in place of the injured Brady, the Patriots finished 11-5 but still missed the playoffs due to the competitiveness of their division.
Long story short, having a quality back-up quarterback is important.
New York Giants (1979-1990)
1983 - Not sure if this counts. Parcells named Scott Brunner the starting QB but then started Phil Simms in the sixth game of the season. Simms was injured shortly after and was out for the season. The Giants finished 3-12-1.
1990 - In Week 15 during the game against Buffalo, starting quarterback Phil Simms was injured and ultimately lost for the season with a broken foot. He was replaced by Jeff Hostetler, who won the final two regular season games prior to the playoffs. The Giants went 13-3 and won the Super Bowl.
Cleveland Browns (1991-1995)
1993 - If I am reading correctly, Bernie Kosar started the season but lost the starting job to Vinny Testaverde but an injury to Testaverde returned Bernie Kosar to the field. The Browns finished 7-9.
New England Patriots (1996)
New York Jests (1997-1999)
1999 - after going 12-4 with Vinny Testaverde as their starting QB in the previous year, in the first game of the 1999 season (and against the Patriots to boot), Testaverde suffered a ruptured achilles tendon and was out for the rest of the year. The Jets went 8-8.
New England Patriots (2000-current)
2001 - Fuck Yeah! In the second game of the season, Drew Bledsoe was hit by Mo Lewis which opened the door for some guy you probably never heard of. The Patriots finished 11-5 and won the Super Bowl. Once again - fuck yeah.
2008 - In the season opener, Tom Brady suffered a torn anterior cruciate ligament against the Chiefs and missed the remainder of the season. With Matt Cassel starting in place of the injured Brady, the Patriots finished 11-5 but still missed the playoffs due to the competitiveness of their division.
Long story short, having a quality back-up quarterback is important.
The analysis I was hoping do and just haven't yet - avg games started for successful QBs (filter out starters who lost time for performance), and 25th/75th percentiles for games lost upon injury. Something like that.
Trying to see if a significant injury (say 4+ games) is at all worth planning for. They've already shown the ability to absorb 4
Trying to see if a significant injury (say 4+ games) is at all worth planning for. They've already shown the ability to absorb 4
I don't think it's a matter of what they can "absorb." If Garoppolo was the QB right now where would they rank in the AFC? Second? Still first? Third behind Oakland and Pittsburgh? I'd have trouble dropping them lower than that.
With him starting they still have a reasonable shot at a first-round bye.
But with Brissett are they even favorites to win the division?
Having Garoppolo on the team next year could ultimately be worth nothing or it could save the season.
With him starting they still have a reasonable shot at a first-round bye.
But with Brissett are they even favorites to win the division?
Having Garoppolo on the team next year could ultimately be worth nothing or it could save the season.
Despite compelling arguments in favor of retaining Jimmy G, I can't help but look at all these pro day visits with high-end pass rushers and wonder if that signals an inevitable trade with Cleveland for the #12 plus. Yes, there's due diligence and there's scouting for when those players wind up on our competition, and yes, there's always the chance one of those pass rushers falls down to #72 or wherever, but it sure does seem like a LOT of attention paid to guys NE has absolutely no shot at landing otherwise.
I suppose that doesn't rule out other means of getting higher in the draft, even just into the 2nd round, but I really think this points to a trade of Jimmy G for picks in this draft.
Edit clarity
I suppose that doesn't rule out other means of getting higher in the draft, even just into the 2nd round, but I really think this points to a trade of Jimmy G for picks in this draft.
Edit clarity
Turning it around a bit, the mock drafts are pointing to Cleveland being LOADED with young talent after this draft. They'll have a young and cheap team filled with high-upside guys everywhere, except for the one place where you most need someone special.
If I'm Cleveland, I'm thinking 12+ for real hope of moving up past Cincinnati and Baltimore isn't a bad deal at all. And if I'm BB, well, it depends on what he believes about Brady's current health and future plans, but based on this past season, I can see him pushing some chips into the future. Maybe a 2018 1 to give him the draft capital needed to grab a QB next year if he needs one, plus a 2 or 3 this year?
If I'm Cleveland, I'm thinking 12+ for real hope of moving up past Cincinnati and Baltimore isn't a bad deal at all. And if I'm BB, well, it depends on what he believes about Brady's current health and future plans, but based on this past season, I can see him pushing some chips into the future. Maybe a 2018 1 to give him the draft capital needed to grab a QB next year if he needs one, plus a 2 or 3 this year?
If this list is accurate, I really one see one Pro Day visit (Barnett) with a guy commonly thought to be in play at #12. If anything this list suggests to me that the Patriots aren't putting a lot of stock in that possibility.
Depends on what the Browns are offering, right?
If the Texans are offering the sun, the moon and the stars, but the Browns are offering the sun and the moon, and you think you can get the moon next offseason after you tag him, I still think trading him to Houston is the least likely to happen of those three scenarios. If the Browns aren't bidding as aggressively as we've been led to believe, however, then that's different.
We'll see. They were 1-15 last year, 31st in points scored and 30th in points allowed. Young, yes, cheap, yes, high-upside, maybe, actually good? Probably not.
It's kind of interesting - while Cleveland has clearly sucked over the past few years (and basically since they came into existence), the AFC North seems fairly open looking into the future. The Bengals suck again, the Ravens are pretty blah, and while the Steelers are explosive Ben is so injury prone and getting older each year. The Browns could vault to 2nd or even 1st in that division within a couple years.
If I'm Cleveland, I'm thinking that 1/1 is my normal first round pick, while 1/12 is gravy. Turning 1/12 into a guy who has real potential (not just projected potential) to be the QB of the future, while still getting the best guy in the draft at 1/1 and what is likely another gem at #33, seems like the way to go.
I guess, but my point is not necessarily that those pass rushers will be available only at #12 overall, but that they won't be available at #72. Do you feel the same way, if that's the case?
Few, if any, teams waste visits on players available at 72. What the Patriots, and other late-drafting teams, are doing is getting a free look at players they might have to face in the next year. Heck, knowing the NE brain trust, they're probably identifying players who they might want to take a run at when their drafting teams fail to employ them properly. McClellin and Van Noy types, for example
I could be wrong, but I believe the patriots have in the past hosted plenty of players who would be available at 72 overall and later. Although I agree, and acknowledged earlier, that some visits are for scouting purposes.
We must have news on this front, simply MUST, as it is borderline unfamthomable that the Pats would not trade JG. So if there hasn't been even a decent trade rumor for many weeks, and if Mary Cabot has not posted even hypothetically for a couple weeks, then goddamit we'll create some of our own by reading tea leaves on who visits. Draft cannot get here soon enough.
The Cleveland Browns have not made up their minds about who to select with the first overall pick in the NFL draft, a league source told ESPN's Adam Schefter on Tuesday. The Browns' decision appears to be between defensive end Myles Garrett and quarterback Mitchell Trubisky, the source said.
http://www.espn.com/nfl/draft2017/story/_/id/19138109/cleveland-browns-considering-myles-garrett-mitchell-trubisky-no-1-pick
http://www.espn.com/nfl/draft2017/story/_/id/19138109/cleveland-browns-considering-myles-garrett-mitchell-trubisky-no-1-pick
I'd have to assume this is either bullshit or a lame negotiation strategy while looking at trading for a qb.
Even the Browns aren't this stupid.
Even the Browns aren't this stupid.
There are several reasons to be leaking this, one being a signal to Garrett -- calm down young man; you are not in Canton yet.
Another being to generate action on the #1 if they are genuinely open to passing on Garrett.
A third being to explode a few heads here. A comp that comes up often with Trubisky is JG. Why would you take the former not the latter? (1) Control; (2) small sample size with JG; (3) no one could force JG to sign an extension with the Browns -- he could go down Cousins Concourse; (4) Browns realistically are at least a couple years away from making much noise.
If there is anything to this (and I doubt it), it would confirm what happens in recent years. QB class is evaluated with so-so grades, but then it is over-drafted.
wait, "small sample size with JG", but an incoming draftee with a sample size of exactly 0 in-game reps, exactly 0 offseasons and 0 preseasons, and maybe 1 pre-draft film session with your coaches, is a reason to take Trubisky?
I get the arguments for years-of-control and the cost thereof. That's totally legit. I'd argue the window-of-contention thing (having a good QB suddenly brings you into a contention window, is a signal to FAs, gives you a foundation, etc), but it's still a fair argument. But sample size is not.
I get the arguments for years-of-control and the cost thereof. That's totally legit. I'd argue the window-of-contention thing (having a good QB suddenly brings you into a contention window, is a signal to FAs, gives you a foundation, etc), but it's still a fair argument. But sample size is not.
The entire back-and-forth is premised on the Browns having already sized Trubisky up as plausible a long-term answer. Otherwise, they'd never go there over someone like Garrett or pick your other top flight defensive prospect.
Once that threshold is crossed, and you buy the comp. does JG come with much more certainty, and the likely answer is "no". JG is not Steve Young, or even close to Steve Young.
I'm not saying the threshold should be crossed. I'm more persuaded by the people who have been saying for months that none of these guys warrants a first-round grade. But it's not out of the question that the Browns have a different view.
Not only is his NFL sample size zero, he only made about 15 starts in his entire college career. He had 572 passing attempts in his college career at UNC. Jimmy G? Almost 1700. He completed almost twice as many passes (1047) as Trubisky had passing attempts.
You are missing the point. If they decided the guy is, the guy they want, they will take actions based on the decision. For example I know a team that drafted a guy that never earned he starting job outright until his senior year and only completed 442 passes in college. Then that team, despite all the stats of the other guy had over tthe new QB, handed the kid the job,
JG has played against professional football players, and acquitted himself well. Trubisky has not. The error bars are certainly smaller on JG. Trubisky's ceiling may be higher (I don't know), but he's way more likely to not be a viable NFL starter than JG is.
That's not what the comment was in response to though - it was in response to JG having a "Small sample size".
The only way this is true is if they think Trubisky is their guy AND someone else's guy in the 2-11 spot. The way everyone is rating this QB class, I can't believe you'd rate him to any great degree over Watson/Mahomes/etc, but if they have, this is the only thing that makes sense. That they truly feel there is a large separation between Trubisky and the other QB's and they don't think they can get both Garrett and Trubisky.
So question becomes, what would you rather have if you select your own picks at 1, 12?
Trubisky + one of Foster, Humphrey, Barnett, Wilson, McKinley?
OR
Garrett + Watson/Mahomes?
They are the Browns for a reason, but I'd think the new philosophy would not repeat mistakes of the past.
So question becomes, what would you rather have if you select your own picks at 1, 12?
Trubisky + one of Foster, Humphrey, Barnett, Wilson, McKinley?
OR
Garrett + Watson/Mahomes?
They are the Browns for a reason, but I'd think the new philosophy would not repeat mistakes of the past.
Last edited:
Yeah, seriously.
If they draft Trubisky (who is about as risky as a first round prospect can be) high, then it's same shit, different day.
The simple fact is that guys who end up starting NFL quarterbacks are generally good enough to make it very clear they should be starting very early in college - the fact that Trubisky couldn't beat out a guy who didn't even get drafted is a huge knock on his talent level. (there are a handful of exceptions, but they're very rare).
Most of the studs are guys who start 35+ games at the college level, and still get drafted in the first round. Starting that many games means you were significantly better than anyone else on the team - and this was clear when you were an underclassman. It also means that scouts have plenty of film on you, and still think you're worth picking high, and it means that opponents had plenty of time to evaluate you.
Pretty much all of the huge draft busts (the Ryan Leafs and Jamarcus Russels) are guys who started 20-25 ish games and put up good numbers. Trubisky at 12 (let alone 1) is a landmine.
Good post. I would also add that scouting college QBs and predicting NFL success has gotten more difficult with the proliferation of spread offenses designed to simplify the game for college QBs from a mental standpoint. That is another warning flag with Trubisky. He has played almost exclusively from the shotgun in an offense designed to make his reads and decision making relatively simple. Good luck with that on the NFL level.
I have a good friend who runs a Fantasy Football site and believes the Browns plan is to take Garrett at 1, BPA (non-QB) at 12, and Mahomes at 33. Their fallback plan, should someone scoop up Mahomes before the 2nd round, would be to trade #33 and their 2018 1st round pick to the Pats for Jimmy G on Friday morning/Thursday night.
I'm not so sure. The Pats put a pretty high value on the 2nd round, and with #33, it allows BB a longer opportunity to leverage that pick for more assets. I thought it was an interesting theory but it hinges on who is left on the QB board come Friday.
If the Browns can add two really high quality guys on Thursday, and 1 + 12 says they should be able to do so, they really need to be able to make 2018 into a positive year. As others here have pointed out, the AFC North is ripe for the picking. The Browns are doing a lot of things right, but I think they need a QB to make it all start to happen THIS year, and I don't think that 1 or 12 is worth the QBs on this year's board.
After 18 seasons, it's fair to assume that Cleveland is Cleveland until it proves it isn't. That's a sensible default.
But somebodies did an impressive job stockpiling draft picks this year and next:
http://www.clevelandbrowns.com/news/article-5/Updating-the-Browns’-draft-picks-in-2017-2018-after-big-trade/75b3f5b3-9852-45e7-85d4-5c102b3d9508
If Polian were in charge, the script would be written -- draft as best you can, play all young guys, and lead the race to the bottom next season to get your QB a year from now. Not guaranteed, but not a bad plan.
But somebodies did an impressive job stockpiling draft picks this year and next:
http://www.clevelandbrowns.com/news/article-5/Updating-the-Browns’-draft-picks-in-2017-2018-after-big-trade/75b3f5b3-9852-45e7-85d4-5c102b3d9508
If Polian were in charge, the script would be written -- draft as best you can, play all young guys, and lead the race to the bottom next season to get your QB a year from now. Not guaranteed, but not a bad plan.
I know he came off a bit snarky, but I think it's a legit question. Does your friend have any actual sources or ties to anyone that would be able to provide said speculation? The fact he runs a fantasy website doesn't really mean much. Context matters, otherwise it's just noise.
Couldn't they just as easily move up from 33 to get Mahomes? If there is a QB run, probably just need to get ahead of the Texans.