RD2/#62 - Brady's Heir to the Throne
- Thread starter mabrowndog
- Start date
I think the bolded opinions are rash and not at all true. First, the draft's depth this year was supposed to extend into the fourth round and potentially beyond, where some had said 2nd round graded prospects would still be available. As of right now, the Pats have the 5th, 30th, and 40th picks in that round.( . ) ( . ) and (_!_) said:
Regarding the second point: I submit last year's draft. It sure seemed to me like they wanted to maximize their number of selections. Especially the Vikings trader where they moved down to add picks, players that appear to have the ability to be big-time contributors next year and in the future.
At the very least, can we get some video of this guy?
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BD5rn2Y6l8[/youtube]
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YimFjUFIq0[/youtube]
In the game scenario his feet are way more active than the combine. I'm no expert, but it does look like he fails to finish some of his throws, 'flinging' them to the receivers instead. He does make decisions quickly and seems to be fairly accurate, so who knows.
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BD5rn2Y6l8[/youtube]
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YimFjUFIq0[/youtube]
In the game scenario his feet are way more active than the combine. I'm no expert, but it does look like he fails to finish some of his throws, 'flinging' them to the receivers instead. He does make decisions quickly and seems to be fairly accurate, so who knows.
“@NEPD_Loyko: Bill Belichick "given the situation we have a QB, I think we had to address the position" "Better to be early than late"”
“
@MarkDanielsPJ: Belichick: "The situation we have at QB we felt as an organization we have to address that... better being early than being late."”
“@MarkDanielsPJ: Belichick: "You know what Ryan's contract situation is, you know what Tom's age is."”
“@MarkDanielsPJ: Belichick on having 3 QBs: "We'll do whatever's best for the team... we've had a number of different guys at different positions."”
“
@MarkDanielsPJ: Belichick: "The situation we have at QB we felt as an organization we have to address that... better being early than being late."”
“@MarkDanielsPJ: Belichick: "You know what Ryan's contract situation is, you know what Tom's age is."”
“@MarkDanielsPJ: Belichick on having 3 QBs: "We'll do whatever's best for the team... we've had a number of different guys at different positions."”
I'm re-reading Matt Waldman's assessment from the RFP. He was down on Garoppolo generally (rating him his #14 QB), but prefaces the description with the interesting note that:
"If I'm wrong about Garoppolo and he can address his most glaring flaws, he does enough things well for me to rank him fourth in this class. However, I have never seen a quarterback address the pocket issues that plague him."
Waldman likens him to Blaine Gabbert, saying that there are a lot of good pieces there but the whole is less than the sum of its parts. Waldman attributes that to an "aversion to physical play" based on what he's seen on film, something that he doesn't think is correctable. But if he's wrong, there's some upside. Garoppolo has a pretty good arm and accuracy and a very quick release. He's got OK size and is pretty athletic - not a burner, but he can move a little.
An interesting note: Garoppolo's hands are just 9 1/4", not tiny but towards the small side.
I hate this pick for two reasons:
1) He looks like a douche in his NFL.com profile picture: http://www.nfl.com/combine/profiles/jimmy-garoppolo?id=2543801
2) Garoppolo is really annoying to have to spell. Is the second vowel an "A" or an "O." Are there two "P's" and one "L" or is it the other way around? I wish they'd taken someone like Carlos Hyde, whose name is way easier to spell.
"If I'm wrong about Garoppolo and he can address his most glaring flaws, he does enough things well for me to rank him fourth in this class. However, I have never seen a quarterback address the pocket issues that plague him."
Waldman likens him to Blaine Gabbert, saying that there are a lot of good pieces there but the whole is less than the sum of its parts. Waldman attributes that to an "aversion to physical play" based on what he's seen on film, something that he doesn't think is correctable. But if he's wrong, there's some upside. Garoppolo has a pretty good arm and accuracy and a very quick release. He's got OK size and is pretty athletic - not a burner, but he can move a little.
An interesting note: Garoppolo's hands are just 9 1/4", not tiny but towards the small side.
I hate this pick for two reasons:
1) He looks like a douche in his NFL.com profile picture: http://www.nfl.com/combine/profiles/jimmy-garoppolo?id=2543801
2) Garoppolo is really annoying to have to spell. Is the second vowel an "A" or an "O." Are there two "P's" and one "L" or is it the other way around? I wish they'd taken someone like Carlos Hyde, whose name is way easier to spell.
Imagine how Packer fans felt the night of the 2005 draft.wutang112878 said:
When you aren't proactive you end up being the Jets drafting a rookie QB in the year they need a QB because they failed to plan years prior.
Here's a clip against NIU:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXNISUKn1NA
Based on this one tape, he's definitely quick - quick feet, quick release. A couple times that burns him as he is too aggressive about trying to fit the ball in a small window. He's accurate on shorter routes and puts the ball in places where his receivers can get YAC. He doesn't hit any real long bombs but thoughts a couple nice corner routes that require good touch and anticipation. He has a good pump fake. He seems to deal with edge pressure OK but struggles when it's up-the-middle. I don't think he makes a throw from behind center all game. They do a lot of quick-hit stuff and screens; it doesn't seem like he does a lot of progressions.
http://draftbreakdown.com/players/jimmy-garoppolo/ has more.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXNISUKn1NA
Based on this one tape, he's definitely quick - quick feet, quick release. A couple times that burns him as he is too aggressive about trying to fit the ball in a small window. He's accurate on shorter routes and puts the ball in places where his receivers can get YAC. He doesn't hit any real long bombs but thoughts a couple nice corner routes that require good touch and anticipation. He has a good pump fake. He seems to deal with edge pressure OK but struggles when it's up-the-middle. I don't think he makes a throw from behind center all game. They do a lot of quick-hit stuff and screens; it doesn't seem like he does a lot of progressions.
http://draftbreakdown.com/players/jimmy-garoppolo/ has more.
Super Nomario said:
Well thats fantastic. Wasnt there a rumor that the Pats had Gabbert rated very highly? I hope there isnt some fatal flaw in the QB scouting process.
HomeRunBaker said:
Few counterpoints:
- How many of these handoffs actually work? We have Favre to Rodgers and Montana to Young, but there really arent that many examples of successful torch passing
- There is an alternate philosophy of just riding it out with your franchise guy, basically put all your eggs in his basket while he is playing. To reduce QB injury risk, get a quality veteran backup, but spend all your other resources helping that franchise QB. Then when the franchise QB leaves accept some rebuilding. I would be ok with that, just like I am ok with the Celtics rebuilding, its just part of the process in my mind
To make that sort of determination, you need a more nuanced understanding of what they liked and didn't like about Gabbert. Maybe they liked 80% of his game, disliked 20% but thought there was a good chance it was fixable, and it wasn't for a variety of reasons. Maybe he failed because of that 20%, or maybe they were wrong on the 80%. Then you would need to dig in to whether the evaluation of the 80% was flawed or whether it was realistic to think the 20% is fixable, etc. Waldman does this in the RFP - he rated Gabbert highly but now downgrades Garoppolo because he now perceives the Gabbertian flaws as likely unfixable. But maybe they were for Gabbert but aren't generally; I don't know.wutang112878 said:
And, FWIW, one of the smartest teams in the league traded for Gabbert to be their backup a couple months ago, so it's not like the Pats would be alone if they did like him.
Every team in the league has picked or liked some player who turned out to be garbage or hated some player who turned out to be awesome.
Also worth remembering that lots of people had JG as a second rounder and some higher. Bill Polian thought he should go in the first. Whether they should have picked a QB is one thing, but it's not like this was a reach vis-a-vis the scouting consensus.
Link to Garoppolo's stats: http://sny.stats.com/cfb/players.asp?id=193289
- Good improvement year-to-year, culminating with this year's 66% completion, 8.9 Y/A, 53 TD / 9 INT
- The game vs Northern Illinois I posted above? EIU's only loss all year (JG still threw for 450 yards, 6 TDs, 2 INTs)
- Only took 19 sacks all year in 14 games. A lot of that is scheme, but his quick release is a big part, too.
- He's punted 9 times in his college career. You know Belichick loves that. Do you think they even talked about QB play, or just about punting the whole time?
There seem to be a few plays in the first video that show him going through his progression to find the second or third target with a few that are probably masquerading as such as plays designed to look off the corner, but I am surprised that so many people had him rated so low. His pump fake is effective, his play action is awful. I thought his touch on the long ball was refreshing over what we've seen Brady trot out on game day to a myriad of receivers over the last few years. I also thought that he hung a lot of receivers out to dry on the plays over the middle in the first clip. None of these statements really ends up as a coherent opinion. I am not an NFL scout when it comes to talent evaluation, but I can't be worse than Mel Kiper.
Overall, I think there is a lot to like and he seems like a fine project. I do admit that I almost smashed my iPhone in frustration when I saw who we took in round 2 but I am more than willing to hold off on calling this move fool-hardy. I also had "Moneyball" moment where I was convinced his name didn't sound like one of a superstar-to-be. I immediately felt ashamed and had to come here to get my learn on.
Overall, I think there is a lot to like and he seems like a fine project. I do admit that I almost smashed my iPhone in frustration when I saw who we took in round 2 but I am more than willing to hold off on calling this move fool-hardy. I also had "Moneyball" moment where I was convinced his name didn't sound like one of a superstar-to-be. I immediately felt ashamed and had to come here to get my learn on.
Super Nomario said:
I dont disagree, just the comparison isnt enough to go on to say Gabbert sucked to Garoppolo is going to suck to. I do wonder what the fatal flaws for Gabbert were and if that altered their scouting process and how Garoppolo looks in those areas that were changed because the 'you cant fix' stuff does worry me. It kind of reminds me of Bledsoe when Bill was willing to trade him within the division because he already knew how to beat him, simple pressure in his face and he would be a deer in headlights and that 'have all the d-line stand' game accentuated the point. Bill realized that had been getting worse and was unfixable.
Its tough for me to get too excited because there are some risk flags with Garappolo: spread offense which can distort stats (Kliff Kingsbury) and he played against weak competition. His hands also arent huge which was one of the things that Pioli pointed to when doing the postmortem on Kingsbury. There are obviously examples of guys that overcome all that, but with that and this Gabbert comparison I am just a little spooked at the moment. Hopefully Easley makes me forget about all of this
I don't think you can grade Gabbert really. That Jags team was just atrocious. Maybe he develops differently in a different system. Take 2000 Tom Brady and put him into 2011 Jacksonville.
Interesting interview with JG's coach
http://m.weei.com/sports/boston/football/patriots/christopher-price/2014/05/10/graduate-student-jimmy-garoppolo-%E2%80%98raise
Every player enters the league with risk and areas that need to be improved, and the teams have to identify these areas and make judgments as to whether the player is capable (physically and otherwise) or improving those things. That's why they get paid the big bucks.wutang112878 said:
The other reality is that the upside gain (an above-average starting QB) vastly outweighs the downside risk (a second-round pick). The chances of Garoppolo being good are probably way less than 50-50, but the upside if it works out is so high that it's worth the downside, which is small. At the end of the day, 50% of 2nd-rounders basically bust anyway. This is a longer shot than that, but at some point the potential reward outweighs the risk. The smart teams recognize that the draft is an exercise is managing uncertainty. Garoppolo will probably fail, because most draft picks fail, but that doesn't invalidate the process.
He's better looking than Tom. Didn't think it was possible for the Pats to have the two best looking QBs in the game.
Again, as was discussed at length in the GFIN thread, if you want BB to alter the philosophy that he has used over the last 15 years to maximize a 1 or 2 year "Brady window" I think you are going to be disappointed.BigSoxFan said:
I guess I can understand Pats fans disagreeing with that plan, we all want them to win again, but they are just not going to pick a player who they like less because he might be able to contribute more now versus the guy who they feel will ultimately be the better player. They have a 36 year old QB, drafting a guy early in the draft if you believe he is the heir apparent is not a stupid move, even if it is disappointing that he probably won't make the team better in 2015.
I understand the need for depth at every position, even qb, but a TE or OL would have seen alot more of the field this year and made more of an impact than JG will. Oh well, hopefully the guy never sees the field for the next 4 years...
There is great danger in drafting QBs period. The flame out rate is tremendous.wutang112878 said:
I understand the angst, but agree 100% that it's better to be early than late. Can't be anything but agnostic on whether this is the right guy.
Well you were suggesting that they pick a guy who can help now and in addressing the replacement for your franchise QB that's just not a good way to approach it. You can quibble with the pick itself but the philosophy is completely consistent with how BB runs the show. Railing against this is pointless to me.BigSoxFan said:
This is excellent analysis. Thank God they didn't take Kouandjio or Attoachu (or whatever)Super Nomario said:
BillMuellerFanClub said:
He was taken about where he was projected to go. That he was taken by the Pats instead of a player we were wishcasting would START IMMEDIATELY seems to be one of the rubs. I recognize that they are highlight films, but it was also noticeable to me the number of plays where decision-making and the ability to work his progressions was obvious.
By comparison, one of the knocks against Manziel is that if his first option wasn't open, he would tuck and run. As for a QB that hasn't been drafted yet but has been declared a binky by several SoSHers, one of the knocks on Aaron Murray is his habit of locking in on his primary receiver and not getting rid of the ball to this receiver or a secondary option quickly enough. JG has lots of film that should give some measure of preliminary confidence in his decision-making.
singaporesoxfan said:
This comment sounds facetious, but I would bet this is a box that gets checked.
Lastly, there was an article on the Pats drafting strategy published not too long ago that suggested Coach Bill looks at 2nd rounders as your high-risk/high-reward selections. First rounders (or at least the first 30 or so players off the board in any given draft) are supposed to be contributors with significant odds of success, whereas the 2nd rounders could be good, or could flame out. Maybe that's MMQBing the results for Bethel Johnson, Chad Jackson, Patrick Chung, Tavon Wilson, etc., but the caterwauling about JG misses an explanation that he was evaluated by the NEP to go around here in part because there is a relative risk/reward calculation to taking him as an apprentice vs. looking for a riskier potential 2014 starter.
In short, this was far from a random selection and the Patriots know better than us.
wutang112878 said:
Manning to Luck but that was different circumstances as they tanked to get Luck. In any normal year that would not have happened.
The discussion of the actual player interests me. Griping because you personally would not have picked a QB this high is pointless. But by all means, continue.BigSoxFan said:
Yes he was. Polian - who likes him -- even had him going at the end of round 1 if some team really liked him.Dick Pole Upside said:
Another thing to be said, he was one of the few QBs whose stock rose in recent weeks as others were being beaten up and picked apart.
Our first two picks present more than average risk in what is regarded as a very deep draft, So I totally get the angst. Also get that people generally would have felt more comfortable with one of the QBs regularly broadcast by Verne Lundquist. More difficult to understand is the criticism that the pats were too early addressing the position given Mallet's status and some of the shit shows we have seen around the League at QB. If this guy comes up short, expect them to address the position again next year.
Another issue with Gabbert is he was almost exclusively in the shotgun at Mizzou. He had a lot of footwork issues to work on in his transition to the NFL.Klostrophobic said:
I feel like expecting Brady's replacement to fall into their laps whenever one of the parties decides to move on would be the biggest waste of our draft picks possible. I want them drafting QBs early and often over the next 3 years until they are sure they have their guy. The best time to find out that the heir apparent isnt any good is when you've still got 2 years to fix the problem. I dont know if JG is the guy or not but i'm all all for finding out when it doesnt matter.
Well-spoken guy with a great work ethic. They're really going to have to work on his footwork in the pocket (something he admires about TB12) and tweak his delivery. I think his quick release is great, and I don't think he'll need a giant overhaul, but he's going to have to throw a bit more overhand as he transitions to the NFL. Thankfully he has a few years to learn that.
I'm convinced the Pats will carry 3 QBs for much of the year, whether it's Mallett or another veteran, we will see.
I'm convinced the Pats will carry 3 QBs for much of the year, whether it's Mallett or another veteran, we will see.
One positive thing that stood out to me on the film as others have noted was his quick release and throwing mechanics. That would seem to me to be something that can't be taught much once the player is at this level -- maybe refined slightly, but any major changes would risk messing with everything the player has learned so far (Tebow). Also, it's something that neutralizes the pass rush and is even more important these days and maybe lets you get away with less on your offensive line. So I like that.
I don't have any idea if footwork can be taught, but Brady is very good at it and I'm not sure he was always that good. If JG is coordinated and a hard worker you'd think he could get there.
Apart from that I will defer to BB and staff. They obviously found Brady and have found competent backups through the draft (though we never saw what Mallett could do, really). This is the highest they have taken a QB, so I'm not sure what that says about him.
As for the idea of the pick itself, I will echo what others have said -- if he is solid, it will be nice to have someone who can step in for a TB injury -- not just a major one, but if he had to miss a month or something you don't want that ruining your chances. In that way, it could be seen as enhancing the Brady window. It would really suck to miss a potential playoff run if Brady was back by December but they went 2-6 with Ryan Fitzpatrick or someone of that caliber, losing a bunch of close games. Maybe the chances of that are slim, but not zero.
I don't have any idea if footwork can be taught, but Brady is very good at it and I'm not sure he was always that good. If JG is coordinated and a hard worker you'd think he could get there.
Apart from that I will defer to BB and staff. They obviously found Brady and have found competent backups through the draft (though we never saw what Mallett could do, really). This is the highest they have taken a QB, so I'm not sure what that says about him.
As for the idea of the pick itself, I will echo what others have said -- if he is solid, it will be nice to have someone who can step in for a TB injury -- not just a major one, but if he had to miss a month or something you don't want that ruining your chances. In that way, it could be seen as enhancing the Brady window. It would really suck to miss a potential playoff run if Brady was back by December but they went 2-6 with Ryan Fitzpatrick or someone of that caliber, losing a bunch of close games. Maybe the chances of that are slim, but not zero.
The other point that some people are missing is that we've been really, really lucky to have a durable quarterback for 12 of the past 13 seasons. That's why we haven't had to find out how good Rohan Davey, Kevin O'Connell, Matt Gutierrez, Brian Hoyer, or Ryan Mallett have really been (at least until they left the Pats). As Brady gets older, this may change. Over the past few years, there have been quite a few times where a starting QB goes down and a playoff team quickly becomes a laughingstock overnight. The 2011 Bears were likely headed for 1st place in the division, then a Cutler injury led to them having to endure an 0-4 stretch by Caleb Hanie. Last year the Packers had Rodgers go down and had to rely on Matt Flynn and Scott Tolzien as they barely held on to make the playoffs. Having a low-cost, capable backup QB may not make an impact most of the time, but the huge benefit it can provide when necessary can save an entire season.
This is the most concisely written version of my thoughts as well. Take another 2nd rounder next year or 2016 if you have to, just don't leave us in the QB wilderness for half a decade after Tom.naclone said:
+2.ragnarok725 said:
People had best get used to this, unless the kid knocks their socks off during the next year, which I would bet against. This is the best way to guard against a 10-year run of irrelevance, and it's wildly optimistic to think a single second round pick will accomplish what you need to do.
Definitely getting the vibe they wanted to go out and find someone that fit the Brady mold as much as possible, and they'd have time to shape him over the next couple years before he has to see the field. Seems to me they wanted to secure that earlier than later. If this guy was watching video of Brady over and over and molding his game on him, it makes all the sense in the world. Quick release certainly fits the system. High IQ and football awareness helps. If Belichick and Co felt that highly about him as a player, this was a good pick.
I'm curious about his throwing style. Seems to be a very quick release once the decision is made, but I can't help but feel he's short arming the ball. I suppose the numbers speak for themselves, but curious if that could have a physical impact in the longterm. I'm not educated enough about QB arm mechanics to say much beyond that, but am certainly curious. To me it also says a lot about where Belichick feels the game is going in terms of speed over strength.
I'm curious about his throwing style. Seems to be a very quick release once the decision is made, but I can't help but feel he's short arming the ball. I suppose the numbers speak for themselves, but curious if that could have a physical impact in the longterm. I'm not educated enough about QB arm mechanics to say much beyond that, but am certainly curious. To me it also says a lot about where Belichick feels the game is going in terms of speed over strength.
Isn't that what you do at all positions supplemented by free agency? How else do you suggest acquiring your next quarterback aside from the draft since its rare you will ever acquire your franchise QB via FA?Eck'sSneakyCheese said:
If the Pats remain successful as a team over the next 2-3 years, then they will never get the chance to draft the next Andrew Luck. so they will have to do what they did last night. JG may or may not be TB's successor, but the approach with an aging Brady, and Mallett about to leave, is to me a sound one.
I was a bit down on the pick at first, but this sums up my rational thoughts fairly well; a very good to great QB covers a lot of holes on the roster and you can't expect yo luck into a 6th rounder/hall of famer again, so I do see the value of being proactive and having a few years to develop a guy who can step in with little drop off when Brady retires or is traded. Will I grumble and call JG Janeane Garofalo when he messes up in the preseason? Probably, but I'm pretty irrational during the game, so I'll try to give him the benefit of the doubt.naclone said:
Not facetious actually - I think the cold of Gilette is often an advantage for the Patriots but it's hard to tell with many QBs that played in the south if they can throw in the cold/snow. Kind of nice in that regard to get another QB who played in the Midwest.Dick Pole Upside said:
HomeRunBaker said:
Doing it once I understand, even though I'm not on board with JG at the moment. Doing it multiple times in succession is a waste.