NFL 2021 - The Houston Texans v Deshaun Watson

[Maithanet]

I think we're mostly in agreement that being something like the 16th best quarterback has value, but not a lot, because you're still a lot worse than the top 5 quarterbacks.  When you need to add an injury qualifier to it, that diminishes the value further. 

On top of that, when you're talking about Darnold or Wentz, there is still a chance for real upside, even if that chance is small.  In his second year, Wentz had about ten games where he looked like a top 5 quarterback.  If he returns to that form, then the trade was a steal.  Likewise Darnold probably sucks, but anyone can see that the Jets were a disaster around him, and it's possible in a better situation he'd improve, a la Ryan Tannehill.  Not likely, but possible. 

For Garrapollo, what is the argument?  He's been in the league for a while, so he's not likely to improve organically.  The Niners had a ton of talent, good coaching, and didn't ask him to do too much, and he was still only pretty good at his very best, and often much worse than that.  If he can't succeed there, why would any team like Washington or Chicago or Denver think things would go any better for them?  I don't know that they would.

Handsome Jimmy looks like he's on the backup track to me, unless New England wants him back.

[DMC]

5 hours ago, Maithanet said:

For Garrapollo, what is the argument?  He's been in the league for a while, so he's not likely to improve organically.  The Niners had a ton of talent, good coaching, and didn't ask him to do too much, and he was still only pretty good at his very best, and often much worse than that.  If he can't succeed there, why would any team like Washington or Chicago or Denver think things would go any better for them?  I don't know that they would.

Handsome Jimmy looks like he's on the backup track to me, unless New England wants him back.

The argument is pretty similar to Wentz's, actually.  Wentz was very good in 2017 - he led the league in QBR at 78.5.  You know who else was really good in 2017?  Jimmy Garoppolo.  His QBR in 5 games was 82.7.  Garoppolo obviously has a very checkered injury history and risk.  You know who else does?  Carson Wentz.  The idea that Wentz could improve "organically" much more than Garoppolo is quite dubious.  Wentz has 68 career starts, Garoppolo has 32.  Wentz is only a year younger than Garoppolo.  

Now, do I think Wentz has more value than Garoppolo?  Yes.  But do I also think if Wentz got a conditional 1st/2nd plus a 3rd, then Garoppolo's relative value should be at least a 2nd?  Yes. 

Also, this idea that Garoppolo has "a lot of talent around him" is quite the exaggeration.  The Niners' wide receiver situation was pretty bleak in 2019 before they traded for Sanders, and even more so in 2017.  He had Kittle, of course, but other than that the offensive "talent" around him was decidedly average at best.  Good (to great) coaching?  Absolutely, but let's not overstate the talent level of Garoppolo's targets throughout most of his Niner career.

As for why would any team want him, well, he's a clear upgrade from Cam Newton, Andy Dalton, or Drew Lock.  And those teams are all looking to compete right now (I agree I don't see why football team would want him).  Really, if anything, it's you guys who are underrating Garoppolo's value.  Here's a Bears beat writer commenting on Matt Maiocco's trade suggestion for Garoppolo:

Quote

“From the Bears, a deal for Garoppolo could net them 2019 third-rounder David Montgomery, a pass-catching running back who fits Shanahan’s scheme, and the No. 83 overall pick,” said Maiocco.

With Damien Williams in the fold, Tarik Cohen coming back and running back being one of the most replaceable positions in the game, the Bears would almost certainly make that deal if they determined Garoppolo was their best option moving forward at quarterback.

While I don't want (or rather think the Niners need) Montgomery, a 1000 yard rusher with two more years on a rookie contract plus a 3rd rounder is at least the same value as a 2nd rounder - probably more.

[dbunting]

So Watsons lawyer comes out today to say that sexual acts did happen, but were always consensual. Not a good look.

[DanteGabriel]

10 minutes ago, dbunting said:

So Watsons lawyer comes out today to say that sexual acts did happen, but were always consensual. Not a good look.

Oh Deshaun. You can't Kobe away 22 accusations that way.

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, DanteGabriel said:

Oh Deshaun. You can't Kobe away 22 accusations that way.

Think of all the rings he'd have to buy!

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

On 4/8/2021 at 2:29 PM, DMC said:

Also, this idea that Garoppolo has "a lot of talent around him" is quite the exaggeration.  The Niners' wide receiver situation was pretty bleak in 2019 before they traded for Sanders, and even more so in 2017.  He had Kittle, of course, but other than that the offensive "talent" around him was decidedly average at best.  Good (to great) coaching?  Absolutely, but let's not overstate the talent level of Garoppolo's targets throughout most of his Niner career.

Dude, he won a playoff game passing the ball eight times. That's unheard of in the modern era. Literally any okay QB could have thrived with the team that season.

Quote

As for why would any team want him, well, he's a clear upgrade from Cam Newton, Andy Dalton, or Drew Lock.  And those teams are all looking to compete right now (I agree I don't see why football team would want him).  Really, if anything, it's you guys who are underrating Garoppolo's value.  Here's a Bears beat writer commenting on Matt Maiocco's trade suggestion for Garoppolo:

Is he an upgrade over those three? Yes. But is he worth trading anything of value for? No. Trading for Jimmy puts an immediate ceiling on most teams, and it's not a very high one. 

1 hour ago, DanteGabriel said:

Oh Deshaun. You can't Kobe away 22 accusations that way.

There's a good chance his career is over. And to think just a few months ago I was saying he'd be a steal if you could get him for just the value of four first round picks (still don't think that take was wrong though, given what the Niners trade for the rights to draft Mac freaking Jones).

 

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Dude, he won a playoff game passing the ball eight times. That's unheard of in the modern era. Literally any okay QB could have thrived with the team that season.

The fuck does it matter?  He only had to throw the ball eight times because the defense and running game were that dominate.  As for "any okay QB," first, the whole point of all of this is "okay QBs" clearly have a lot of trade value right now.  Second, I watched virtually every snap of his that season, and he had some pretty impressive performances - the Saints game being the standout.  Not many QBs would have been able to win that game.

6 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

But is he worth trading anything of value for? No. Trading for Jimmy puts an immediate ceiling on most teams, and it's not a very high one. 

Garoppolo's contract is entirely flexible, so no, trading for him doesn't "put a ceiling" on anything.  Those teams would trade for him first and foremost because they want an upgrade to compete this year.  Anyway, this argument is tiresome.  The rationale for why Garopollo would be worth a 2nd if Wentz and Darnold got what they got is pretty damn manifest - moreover such valuation is obviously not "homer" bias considering I've seen plenty of Pats/Bears/Broncos/national media at least acknowledge that's about where his value is at.  That was my entire point, and I don't see you arguing it here.  You just seem to want to whine about Garoppolo more for some reason.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, DMC said:

The fuck does it matter?  He only had to throw the ball eight times because the defense and running game were that dominate.  As for "any okay QB," first, the whole point of all of this is "okay QBs" clearly have a lot of trade value right now.  Second, I watched virtually every snap of his that season, and he had some pretty impressive performances - the Saints game being the standout.  Not many QBs would have been able to win that game.

You:

Quote

Also, this idea that Garoppolo has "a lot of talent around him" is quite the exaggeration.

To win a playoff game, quite easily I must add, while only throwing eight passes means he had an insane amount of talent around him. Quit focusing on the WRs, especially when you also conceded he has one of the two best TEs in the league. So yeah, most okay QBs could easily win that game. And if you want to bring up him having one good game, I'll just point to the stat I previously linked over multiple seasons which shows he's very turnover prone. And he's playing in an offense that's set on easy mode for QBs. 

Quote

Garoppolo's contract is entirely flexible, so no, trading for him doesn't "put a ceiling" on anything.  Those teams would trade for him first and foremost because they want an upgrade to compete this year.  Anyway, this argument is tiresome.  The rationale for why Garopollo would be worth a 2nd if Wentz and Darnold got what they got is pretty damn manifest - moreover such valuation is obviously not "homer" bias considering I've seen plenty of Pats/Bears/Broncos/national media at least acknowledge that's about where his value is at.  That was my entire point, and I don't see you arguing it here.  You just seem to want to whine about Garoppolo more for some reason.

If any of those teams traded that value for him they'd be wasting their time. There is no team in the league that is a Jimmy G trade away from even being a division winner. Therefore, there's no point in investing anything in him. And for what it's worth I wouldn't have traded for Darnold at all. I'd take a Goff kind of deal for Wentz though.

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

To win a playoff game, quite easily I must add, while only throwing eight passes means he had an insane amount of talent around him. Quit focusing on the WRs, especially when you also conceded he has one of the two best TEs in the league. So yeah, most okay QBs could easily win that game. And if you want to bring up him having one good game, I'll just point to the stat I previously linked over multiple seasons which shows he's very turnover prone. And he's playing in an offense that's set on easy mode for QBs. 

*sigh*  When I said there wasn't a lot of talent around him, I was referring to the talent around him that would buoy - or affect in any way for that matter - his individual performance and subsequent passing numbers.  I wasn't talking about how it's led to him having a (very) winning record - I've never made that argument because I agree it's stupid.  But the defense and running game are, very obviously, orthogonal to how the QB performs when he's throwing the ball (or running the ball, I suppose, but that's negligible for Garoppolo). 

And in that respect, the talent around him was very average for most of his Niner career beyond Kittle.  His WRs were mostly below average, none of the RBs worked out as receiving threats in spite of ShanaLynch's consistent attempts to find one, and while the OL is by-and-large solid, no one they've had has been elite until they got Williams.  (Plus, Garoppolo spent a whole hell of a lot of time under pressure as a lot of the OL starters are better run than pass blockers.)

11 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

If any of those teams traded that value for him they'd be wasting their time. There is no team in the league that is a Jimmy G trade away from even being a division winner. Therefore, there's no point in investing anything in him. And for what it's worth I wouldn't have traded for Darnold at all. I'd take a Goff kind of deal for Wentz though.

Ok, so you think the Wentz and Darnold deals were stupid too.  I agree!  That doesn't change the fact that those deals were made -- and thus that's where Garoppolo's value "should" be at in comparison.  You're basically making my argument for me.  The rest is just incessant bitching because, I don't know, Garoppolo drank your milkshake or something.  Are you jelly?  Mad that the Vikings are stuck with a virtually identically limited QB but can't get rid of him because his contract is such an albatross?

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

7 hours ago, DMC said:

*sigh*  When I said there wasn't a lot of talent around him, I was referring to the talent around him that would buoy - or affect in any way for that matter - his individual performance and subsequent passing numbers.  I wasn't talking about how it's led to him having a (very) winning record - I've never made that argument because I agree it's stupid.  But the defense and running game are, very obviously, orthogonal to how the QB performs when he's throwing the ball (or running the ball, I suppose, but that's negligible for Garoppolo). 

And in that respect, the talent around him was very average for most of his Niner career beyond Kittle.  His WRs were mostly below average, none of the RBs worked out as receiving threats in spite of ShanaLynch's consistent attempts to find one, and while the OL is by-and-large solid, no one they've had has been elite until they got Williams.  (Plus, Garoppolo spent a whole hell of a lot of time under pressure as a lot of the OL starters are better run than pass blockers.)

The Niners' offensive line and run game should make passing incredibly easy. To not factor that in to how it affects a QB's performance is to ignore a giant aspect on offense. Jimmy just has to hit wide open guys, and in the SB he failed at that when it mattered most. The weakest link on your offense is your QB. 

Again, a league average QB could have done the same, or even better, under the same conditions. ShanaLynch know that, and that's why they think Mac Jones is a better option (for reasons I can't explain). Jimmy is simply not a very good QB and his trade value is probably rather low, otherwise I think he'd have been moved already.

Quote

Ok, so you think the Wentz and Darnold deals were stupid too.  I agree!  That doesn't change the fact that those deals were made -- and thus that's where Garoppolo's value "should" be at in comparison.  You're basically making my argument for me.  The rest is just incessant bitching because, I don't know, Garoppolo drank your milkshake or something.  Are you jelly?  Mad that the Vikings are stuck with a virtually identically limited QB but can't get rid of him because his contract is such an albatross?

No, Jimmy is older, more injured and has less upside. He doesn't have much value right now, hence why he's still on your team. You better believe they've been shopping him all offseason and they're clearly not getting a good offer in return.

And lol, I'd much rather have Cousins than Jimmy. Your own coach passed on drafting Watson and Mahomes because he thought he could sign him. Just to highlight why, over the past two seasons, Jimmy has started 22 games and thrown 34 TDs and 18 Ints. That's not very good. Kirk over the last two seasons has started 31 games and threw for 61 TDs against 19 Ints. Cousins is clearly the better QB. His TD volume is way better while throwing far fewer Ints per pass and he's been able to actually play. 

[DMC]

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

The Niners' offensive line and run game should make passing incredibly easy. To not factor that in to how it affects a QB's performance is to ignore a giant aspect on offense. Jimmy just has to hit wide open guys, and in the SB he failed at that when it mattered most. The weakest link on your offense is your QB. 

Again, a league average QB could have done the same, or even better, under the same conditions.

  I don't know if you're trolling or honestly just this slow, but for the last time, could a league average QB have done the same?  Sure.  That's the point.  Garoppolo is an average QB, and the market right now values average QBs insanely high.  Further, an offensive line should impact a QB's individual performance, and I never said it didn't.  I said their OL is solid, or average.  As for Garoppolo being the weakest link on the offense, no, this is wrong.  The receivers were the weakest link on the offense for the vast majority of his tenure.  Hopefully this changes next season, but only if Samuel and Aiyuk stay healthy (and they still need a reliable 3rd/slot).

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

ShanaLynch know that, and that's why they think Mac Jones is a better option (for reasons I can't explain).

You have no idea if ShanaLynch are going to pick Mac Jones, and assuming they definitely are because some talking heads speculate they are is absurd and pretty damn pathetic.  A lot of talking heads, btw, don't think they're gonna take Jones, plus a lot that made bold pronouncements they were have already started hedging.  Regardless, this is irrelevant.

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

No, Jimmy is older, more injured and has less upside. He doesn't have much value right now, hence why he's still on your team. You better believe they've been shopping him all offseason and they're clearly not getting a good offer in return.

LOL, again, you have no fucking idea what offers they're getting in return.  They obviously leaked they're looking for a first round pick a little bit ago.  That's not gonna happen, but it suggests they are fielding competitive offers and are trying to get teams to overpay.  Moreover, I'd wait until the draft (or immediately before) to trade him anyway because there's always a chance a team gets desperate at the eleventh hour - that's usually the best time to get the best offer.  In addition, I think there is some reticence to trade him and put that much pressure on any rookie QB to compete for a championship immediately.  I go back and forth on this, lately I think with all the outpouring of support Garoppolo has received from the locker room it may be prudent to trade him just to avoid a season-long controversy, but it seems quite possible ShanaLynch are legitly quite reticent to trade him unless an offer blows them away.

Anyway, all that is fairly irrelevant too.  The point is, in comparison to the Wentz and Darnold deals, a second is what Garoppolo's value "should" be.  Garoppolo is only slightly older (a year difference really doesn't matter) and slightly more injured than Wentz.  Darnold is younger and cheaper, but he's also been much worse than Garoppolo thus far.  Any objective comparison of the important factors composing their trade value would reach the same conclusion.  And again, Niners fans/writers and myself are hardly the only ones who think so.

2 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Your own coach passed on drafting Watson and Mahomes because he thought he could sign him.

Yeah.  And then he traded for Garoppolo instead of signing Cousins - which would have cost nothing - instead.  My own coach clearly thought Garoppolo was better than Cousins, and my own GM was able to sign him to a much less dumbass contract.

Seriously, what did Garoppolo do to you?  Your irrational hatred here is really baffling.

[DanteGabriel]

40 minutes ago, DMC said:

Seriously, what did Garoppolo do to you?  Your irrational hatred here is really baffling.

He must be jealous of Handsome Jimmy's olive oil voice and guinea charm...

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

14 minutes ago, DanteGabriel said:

He must be jealous of Handsome Jimmy's olive oil voice and guinea charm...

I thought we agreed he was a rough edged greaser who secretly has a heart of gold.

56 minutes ago, DMC said:

  I don't know if you're trolling or honestly just this slow, but for the last time, could a league average QB have done the same?  Sure.  That's the point.  Garoppolo is an average QB, and the market right now values average QBs insanely high.  Further, an offensive line should impact a QB's individual performance, and I never said it didn't.  I said their OL is solid, or average.  As for Garoppolo being the weakest link on the offense, no, this is wrong.  The receivers were the weakest link on the offense for the vast majority of his tenure.  Hopefully this changes next season, but only if Samuel and Aiyuk stay healthy (and they still need a reliable 3rd/slot).

Lol. No, a league average at best QB who is old and often injured doesn't have value. If he did, he'd be gone by now. Just accept it. You're the only one who has argued Jimmy has any value. Teams will call to see if they can get him for a discount, but I seriously doubt anyone would trade remotely what you view as fair value for him unless their starter suffers an injury like Bridgewater did just before the start of the season.

And it wasn't the WR's fault he couldn't hit the open pass in the SB to win the game.

Quote

You have no idea if ShanaLynch are going to pick Mac Jones, and assuming they definitely are because some talking heads speculate they are is absurd and pretty damn pathetic.  A lot of talking heads, btw, don't think they're gonna take Jones, plus a lot that made bold pronouncements they were have already started hedging.  Regardless, this is irrelevant.

The mere fact they prioritized Jones' pro day over Fields says a lot considering Fields should be the obvious pick at three if Wilson and Lawrence are gone (and I'm coming back to the position that Fields may be a better option than Wilson).

Look, I like Jimmy. He seems like a cool dude. But he's at his best a middling QB and he hasn't been healthy over the last three seasons. I wouldn't trade anything of value for him.

 

[DMC]

21 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

No, a league average at best QB who is old and often injured doesn't have value. If he did, he'd be gone by now. Just accept it. You're the only one who has argued Jimmy has any value.

LOL, no, I'm really not.  In addition to the article I already cited, here's a former GM saying he's worth a 2nd round pick.  Here's a Bears blog saying a fair trade would be a 2nd and a 4th/5th.  Not to mention much of the Boston media continuing to insist Garoppolo is their target.  There is obviously widespread interest in Garoppolo, and the consensus is clearly he has ~ the value I'm referring to.  Does that mean that's his actual value?  No one actually knows.  Does that mean he'll even get traded?  Nope.  But you are demonstrably wrong about his perceived value.  Just accept it.

32 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

The mere fact they prioritized Jones' pro day

  Pro days don't mean shit.  Trying to read the tea leaves on them is for cheeto-eaters.  I suspect Shanahan and Lynch were there to talk to Belichick.

34 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

I wouldn't trade anything of value for him.

Nobody cares what you would trade for him.

[Nictarion]

 

[Quijote Light]

4 hours ago, DMC said:

 

  Pro days don't mean shit.  Trying to read the tea leaves on them is for cheeto-eaters.  I suspect Shanahan and Lynch were there to talk to Belichick.

 

Fields is having another pro day, which I believe Shanahan is planning to attend. Kind of makes their “prioritizing” Jones a moot point. 

[DMC]

9 minutes ago, Quijote Light said:

Fields is having another pro day, which I believe Shanahan is planning to attend. Kind of makes their “prioritizing” Jones a moot point. 

Yeah.  Lance is gonna have another one too.  And if you really wanna read the tea leaves on pro days, Lynch made the trade while he was at Zach Wilson's, along with Saleh et al. for the Jets.  Plus, Shanahan already explained this nearly two weeks ago:

Quote

"We have people at all the spots. A lot of people we trust and people we'll meet with over the next month," Shanahan said. "I normally don't like to go to them a bunch unless I feel like I need or unless I have to for some reason. I also have kind of grown up in the idea that you don't want to go everywhere and show people things. When you're sitting at No. 12 and stuff, I don't want to go to a bunch of quarterback pro days and things like that. Now that you move up to three you don't have to hide as much. It's not as big of a deal to me as it might have been when we are sitting at 12.

"Also, Alabama has already had one. This is their second one. Just talking with Fields' agent and everything, we'll get another one from him too. So we'll be able to see him so that kind of made it an easy decision."

 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

5 hours ago, DMC said:

LOL, no, I'm really not.  In addition to the article I already cited, here's a former GM saying he's worth a 2nd round pick.  Here's a Bears blog saying a fair trade would be a 2nd and a 4th/5th.  Not to mention much of the Boston media continuing to insist Garoppolo is their target.  There is obviously widespread interest in Garoppolo, and the consensus is clearly he has ~ the value I'm referring to.  Does that mean that's his actual value?  No one actually knows.  Does that mean he'll even get traded?  Nope.  But you are demonstrably wrong about his perceived value.  Just accept it.

Lol. I seriously hope the Bears trade for him at that price, and I'm glad you had the wisdom to cite a blog. Your entire argument has been that when Jimmy is healthy, he's an okay QB. Well he's hasn't been healthy and he played in an easy system. Logically he'll be worse where ever he goes. Who in their right mind would trade for such a player? No smart team, that's for sure.

Quote

  Pro days don't mean shit.  Trying to read the tea leaves on them is for cheeto-eaters.  I suspect Shanahan and Lynch were there to talk to Belichick.

Nobody cares what you would trade for him.

Is this just your way of mentally preparing for the drafting of Mac Jones? 

[DMC]

15 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

I seriously hope the Bears trade for him at that price, and I'm glad you had the wisdom to cite a blog.

I cited a blog to demonstrate how laughably wrong you are.  I'm not the "only one" who projects Garoppolo's value at ~ a 2nd rounder.  Indeed, most everybody does. 

BTW, here's another one, actually one of my favorite speculations from New England - a 3rd rounder and Chase Winovich.  Winovich looks like a promising edge rusher already - and there are question marks among basically every top edge rushing prospect this draft.  Getting him would complete refortifying the depth at DL to 2019 levels, they wouldn't have to worry about it during the draft, and they'd have 4 picks from #43-117 to address WR, the secondary, and even an interior OL.  And a Pats beat writer thinks "you'd have to think the Patriots would consider this deal to reunite with Garoppolo."

24 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Is this just your way of mentally preparing for the drafting of Mac Jones? 

No, it's my way of saying thinking attendance at pro days is an indicator of anything is idiotic.

[DanteGabriel]

I hope they don't trade Winovich. I've heard him do a couple of radio interviews and he is fun. Direct, unable to dissemble, genuinely curious about the world. He went on some amazing almost-galaxy-brain stream of consciousness riff that I loved.

But he seemed to go into the Belichick doghouse last season.