2017 Jimmy G: The Dilemma

[dcmissle]

Agree. I don't think he's here after 2017 unless Tom goes down with a serious injury or its apparent he's much closer to the end of the line than he appears at this point.

I think this basically will be a game of chicken between BB and the folks running things in Cleveland. The Rams cannot get out of the Goff business right now. The 49ers are playing there own game of chicken with Washington over Cousins. A trade to Denver or any intra-division team is not in the cards. So unless Houston can work wonders with the Osweiler contract, my guess is that this is a Cleve-NE marketplace. Should be interesting.

 

[BigSoxFan]

Does Houston really need to work wonders with Osweiler contract? He's a sunk cost but Jimmy is cheap this year, which makes it perfect on their end. Then, next year you presumably pay up for Jimmy with Osweiler's money.

Only hangup I see with Houston is that you'd be making a potential competitor a lot better by giving them Jimmy. That Divisional Round game this year could have been a loss had Houston had a competent QB.

Cleveland is such an ideal trade partner in basically every way that it makes too much sense not to get done.

 

[finnVT]

I'm pretty sure I wouldn't do this, but... one way to make it work with Houston would be to have them restructure Osweiler's contract, then ship him to NE along with a bunch of picks for JG. (There's an article here on how they could do this: https://overthecap.com/looking-brock-osweilers-contract/). That would give NE a backup for next year without rushing JB into that role, presumably at a salary of something like $3-4mil depending on the restructure. It would also lessen the dead money hit to HOU, in theory making them more willing to part with a good package of picks. Given they pick #25, this is obviously less appealing than going after Cleveland's #12 without taking back a crappy backup QB, but if that's not on the table, or if HOU can sweeten the pot enough, it's perhaps plausible.

For Chi/SF, I can't see them trading a top 3 pick, so probably what you're aiming for there is a 3/4 this year and a 1st next. Hopefully they think next year's first is lower (they'd both probably be wrong), and the 3rd is real value in exchange for waiting a year on the high pick. The weird 4th round penalty on the pats would seemingly complicate this.

 

[Mugsy's Jock]

my guess is that this is a Cleve-NE marketplace. Should be interesting.

Can still make a lot of good arguments for the Bears -- not in the conference, have an obvious need yet don't seem light years away from being competitive, and have plenty of draft capital to offer.

Plus the hometown thing, though I expect that's totally irrelevant.

 

[dcmissle]

I forgot about Chicago. They could help a lot if interested.

I don't see SF. Shanahan's track record is with Cousins, not JG. And Shanahan has a six-year deal, so is well positioned to wait Washington out on Cousins.

 

[edmunddantes]

Chicago is the dark horse for the fact, as mentioned in numerous places, that Fox and GM are probably done after this year. So they make a move to save themselves now.

Jimmy works than yay! Glad we gave up that 1st for a winner.


Jimmy doesn't work, oh well. We won't be here to deal with missing draft capital anyways. Good luck to the next guy!

 

[KingChre]

One thing I have been pondering recently is the possibility of a player coming back as the main asset in a Garoppolo deal. Most of us seem to be caught up in the teams that have draft picks available that make sense, but would it shock anybody if the return was a young CB or DL and a 3rd round pick or something along those lines?

Player for player trades are obviously rare in the NFL but given how cheap Garoppolo's contract is for 2017, that does make it easier to absorb the pro-rated cap hit for the outgoing player in a trade for any team that acquires him.

We know Belichick thinks outside the box routinely and we have evidence of this given the stories that came out after the Collins trade. He supposedly attempted to deal him for either Deandre Hopkins or Brandin Cooks before having to settle for the pick from Cleveland. Neither of the trades worked out at the time but they are clear indications of the Patriots' mindset with regard to trades.

 

[Tony C]

nm

 

[Hoodie Sleeves]

I'm pretty sure I wouldn't do this, but... one way to make it work with Houston would be to have them restructure Osweiler's contract, then ship him to NE along with a bunch of picks for JG. (There's an article here on how they could do this: https://overthecap.com/looking-brock-osweilers-contract/). That would give NE a backup for next year without rushing JB into that role, presumably at a salary of something like $3-4mil depending on the restructure. It would also lessen the dead money hit to HOU, in theory making them more willing to part with a good package of picks. Given they pick #25, this is obviously less appealing than going after Cleveland's #12 without taking back a crappy backup QB, but if that's not on the table, or if HOU can sweeten the pot enough, it's perhaps plausible.

That OTC article is a stretch

Osweiler is guaranteed $16M salary next year, and is probably going to be Houston's starter (as they can't really afford anyone else). He's not going to renegotiate in any sort of way that's going to allow him to be someone's backup unless it gives him more money. $13M worth of bonus and $3M worth of salary isn't an increase for him, as they're not really accelerating money, and because he loses his opportunity to start. And even if he did- it only gets Houston about $3M over two years - which means that Houston really can't give him any sort of bump.

It's better for him to get cut, collect his $16m, and then go see if he can win a backup job somewhere, or maybe even wrest a job from one of the Blake Bortles of the world.

If Osweiler had two years of guarantees left, there'd be some chance of this happening, as there'd be some benefit to him of accelerating the money from year 2 to year 1- and there'd be some wiggle room to absorb the extra bonus into saved salary - but the way things stand, there isn't really a case that both improves Houston's position, and improves Osweiler's. The only real chance would be if they trade him somewhere that Osweiler will be the starter.

 

[snowmanny]

Why is Osweiler necessarily the starter? He finished the season as the backup.* Houston makes sense to me because they can ditch Osweiler after 2017 and pay Garoppolo starting in 2018 AND they have the greatest urgency: Cleveland, SF, Chicago are unlikely to make the playoffs next year with anyone at QB, but the range out outcomes for 2017 Houston is very broad and very QB-dependent.

*Edit: he started the playoff game because of injury.

 

[dbn]

It would be great if Cousins ended up in, say, SF. A desperate WAS would make for a great trade partner.

Washington has all of their own picks (17th in each round) plus: round 4, #7; rd. 5, #10; and rd. 6, #25.

 

[mauf]

I forgot about Chicago. They could help a lot if interested.

I don't see SF. Shanahan's track record is with Cousins, not JG. And Shanahan has a six-year deal, so is well positioned to wait Washington out on Cousins.

Can the Niners wait WAS out? Seems like Denver and Houston would be interested in trading for Cousins, and might even be willing to forfeit two late first-rounders to sign him if WAS slaps the non-exclusive tag on him.

 

[E5 Yaz]

Can the Niners wait WAS out? Seems like Denver and Houston would be interested in trading for Cousins, and might even be willing to forfeit two late first-rounders to sign him if WAS slaps the non-exclusive tag on him.

Apparently, not if Cousins has a say in it

Kirk Cousins' preferred destination is the San Francisco 49ers if he were to be traded by the Washington Redskins, according to a source close to the quarterback.
He loved playing for new 49ers coach Kyle Shanahan when he was the Washington Redskins' offensive coordinator. Shanahan is a detail-oriented coach, which meshes well with Cousins' mind-set.
http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/18789067/kirk-cousins-preferred-destination-san-francisco-49ers

 

[jsinger121]

Cousins just got the exclusive franchise tag. Jimmy G market is about to rise.

 

[Hoodie Sleeves]

Why is Osweiler necessarily the starter? He finished the season as the backup.* Houston makes sense to me because they can ditch Osweiler after 2017 and pay Garoppolo starting in 2018 AND they have the greatest urgency: Cleveland, SF, Chicago are unlikely to make the playoffs next year with anyone at QB, but the range out outcomes for 2017 Houston is very broad and very QB-dependent.

*Edit: he started the playoff game because of injury.

Osweiler to me is the starter because he's making big money. I think benching him for Savage was largely an attempt to "put some urgency in him" (which is nonsense). I just don't expect them to sit him on the bench making $16M. I'm not saying that's what they should do, but I think its what they will do. I think he'll get every opportunity to get his spot back, and if hes not drastically worse than Savage, he'll start. (And while Savage was better than Osweiler, he was still terrible, and teams having film on him isn't going to fix that)

They're not a bad spot for JG - I just don't see any situation that allows them to unload any of BO's salary. He's just not really a tradeable asset at this point.

 

[tims4wins]

Osweiler to me is the starter because he's making big money. I think benching him for Savage was largely an attempt to "put some urgency in him" (which is nonsense). I just don't expect them to sit him on the bench making $16M. I'm not saying that's what they should do, but I think its what they will do. I think he'll get every opportunity to get his spot back, and if hes not drastically worse than Savage, he'll start. (And while Savage was better than Osweiler, he was still terrible, and teams having film on him isn't going to fix that)

They're not a bad spot for JG - I just don't see any situation that allows them to unload any of BO's salary. He's just not really a tradeable asset at this point.

I agree with all this. Savage came in for Brock and led them back for a home win against an awful Jacksonville team. Then they beat the mighty Bengals 12-10, also at home. Then he got hurt. He wasn't good when he played, and he will be worse as teams have more film on him. Brock will be the starter. And to be honest Brock played pretty well in the playoffs. His receivers didn't help him much vs. the Pats

 

[InstaFace]

That's pretty revisionist history based on commentary here during Texans games. In the Divisional playoff, Brock's defense played pretty well (frankly, better than "pretty well"), but Brock had THREE interceptions in 40 pass attempts. Houston had a -42% Offensive DVOA for that game. He dropped a deuce on the field, on a day when if he'd played to the level of an average NFL quarterback, he might have had a chance for the upset. He managed to overthrow the once-proud Raiders who were themselves fielding a QB making his first career start, by meriting a -20% offensive DVOA (Against Oakland's -42%). That WC game was downright painful to watch.

I don't know what you were watching that made you say he "played pretty well in the playoffs", but there is no universe in which any real Texans fan (and you can ask Steph Stradley) was impressed by or even optimistic as a result of Brock's performance this year.

His contract being a sunk cost, Bill O'Brien and co should do whatever they think best to optimize their roster, without regard to Brock's feelings, or how their own fans will feel at Brock having been awarded a contract he was manifestly undeserving of. Starting Savage or even trading for Garoppolo could all be reasonable possibilities depending on the specifics.

 

[dcmissle]

Apparently, not if Cousins has a say in it

Kirk Cousins' preferred destination is the San Francisco 49ers if he were to be traded by the Washington Redskins, according to a source close to the quarterback.
He loved playing for new 49ers coach Kyle Shanahan when he was the Washington Redskins' offensive coordinator. Shanahan is a detail-oriented coach, which meshes well with Cousins' mind-set.
http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/18789067/kirk-cousins-preferred-destination-san-francisco-49ers

John Keim is a good and reliable reporter. But there is a lot of jockeying through the press. So on the heels of the above, another writer with a pipeline to the team released a piece suggesting that Cousins was open minded about signing in other places too.

Which is adorable because in these circumstances, you find out who is leaking to whom, who is whose 'ho.

This is as good as it gets in terms of a player have a team over a barrel. I am enjoying the hell out of this Cousins business.

 

[mauf]

Cousins just got the exclusive franchise tag. Jimmy G market is about to rise.

I don't see it that way.

Washington tagging Cousins was a given; the only question was whether he'd get the exclusive or non-exclusive tag. Now that that question is answered, how is JG's market affected?

-- Cleveland's interest in JG is unchanged; they weren't likely to be in on Cousins regardless, and they certainly weren't going to give up two 1st-rounders to sign him.

-- San Francisco wasn't going to surrender two picks to sign Cousins either; they'll either swing a trade or bide their time. So they're where they were; any interest they might have in JG is unchanged.

-- Houston wasn't going to be able to fit both Cousins and Osweiler under the cap; they would need a trade, which could happen with either an exclusive or non-exclusive tag on Cousins. JG remains a more logical option for the Texans, but the exclusive tag on Cousins doesn't change anything.

-- Denver might be the one team whose chances at landing Cousins are dimmer because of the exclusive tag, but the Pats were never going to trade JG to the Broncos anyway.

 

[dcmissle]

Cousins just got the exclusive franchise tag. Jimmy G market is about to rise.

Why I am enjoying this so much. Priceless:

Kirk Cousins‏Verified account @KirkCousins8 56m56 minutes ago

Tag! I'm it!

 

[tims4wins]

That's pretty revisionist history based on commentary here during Texans games. In the Divisional playoff, Brock's defense played pretty well (frankly, better than "pretty well"), but Brock had THREE interceptions in 40 pass attempts. Houston had a -42% Offensive DVOA for that game. He dropped a deuce on the field, on a day when if he'd played to the level of an average NFL quarterback, he might have had a chance for the upset. He managed to overthrow the once-proud Raiders who were themselves fielding a QB making his first career start, by meriting a -20% offensive DVOA (Against Oakland's -42%). That WC game was downright painful to watch.

I don't know what you were watching that made you say he "played pretty well in the playoffs", but there is no universe in which any real Texans fan (and you can ask Steph Stradley) was impressed by or even optimistic as a result of Brock's performance this year.

His contract being a sunk cost, Bill O'Brien and co should do whatever they think best to optimize their roster, without regard to Brock's feelings, or how their own fans will feel at Brock having been awarded a contract he was manifestly undeserving of. Starting Savage or even trading for Garoppolo could all be reasonable possibilities depending on the specifics.

His receivers had some crippling drops in the game in NE. Yes, he threw 3 picks, but all of which came after they were trailing by multiple scores. I think Fiedorowicz dropped a TD early, Will Fuller had a huge drop, etc. Not all that dissimilar to how the Steelers WRs fared in NE, actually.

 

[wilked]

What is a real timeline for Jimmy trade? Since the main draft currency is picks it is obviously bounded on that side by the draft (Apr 27), what other dates are significant here?

 

[Stitch01]

That's pretty revisionist history based on commentary here during Texans games. In the Divisional playoff, Brock's defense played pretty well (frankly, better than "pretty well"), but Brock had THREE interceptions in 40 pass attempts. Houston had a -42% Offensive DVOA for that game. He dropped a deuce on the field, on a day when if he'd played to the level of an average NFL quarterback, he might have had a chance for the upset. He managed to overthrow the once-proud Raiders who were themselves fielding a QB making his first career start, by meriting a -20% offensive DVOA (Against Oakland's -42%). That WC game was downright painful to watch.

I don't know what you were watching that made you say he "played pretty well in the playoffs", but there is no universe in which any real Texans fan (and you can ask Steph Stradley) was impressed by or even optimistic as a result of Brock's performance this year.

His contract being a sunk cost, Bill O'Brien and co should do whatever they think best to optimize their roster, without regard to Brock's feelings, or how their own fans will feel at Brock having been awarded a contract he was manifestly undeserving of. Starting Savage or even trading for Garoppolo could all be reasonable possibilities depending on the specifics.

Yeah. Brock will get another shot to compete for the starting job unless the Texans make a major move and he might very well beat out Savage, but Brock was bad after he came back as the starter and atrocious against the Patriots.

 

[Saints Rest]

What is a real timeline for Jimmy trade? Since the main draft currency is picks it is obviously bounded on that side by the draft (Apr 27), what other dates are significant here?

I think March 9 is significant as that is the deadline for cuts which may add some surplus to the market. Or it may create some heretofore unexpected demand.

I also think that the combination of the Combine and the various QB prospect Pro Days will impact JG's market as it gives teams who might be looking to draft their savior more info about those options.

 

[NDBoston]

Adam Schefter‏Verified account @AdamSchefter 3m3 minutes ago
In a move that will have a ripple effect on all QB-needy teams, Patriots are not expected to trade QB Jimmy Garoppolo, per league sources.

 

[PaulinMyrBch]

Lock it down.


Adam Schefter‏Verified account @AdamSchefter
In a move that will have a ripple effect on all QB-needy teams, Patriots are not expected to trade QB Jimmy Garoppolo, per league sources.

 

[jsinger121]

Until a team offers them the moon.

 

[Rico Guapo]

Until a team offers them the moon.

Right?

Eight weeks away from the draft and you declare a guy off limits? Not their MO at all.

The only player Bill wouldn't trade IMO is Brady, and even that is up for debate.

 

[RedOctober3829]

Teams not meeting their price. Surprised to hear this nonetheless.

 

[PaulinMyrBch]

I don't think this is BB driving the price or posturing. I think he knows the realities of a 40 year old QB and isn't willing to risk having a 2nd year QB take the reigns should something happen to TB12 this year. How far into the future he feels a transition may take place is anyone's guess. But he tagged Cassel and traded him, so it isn't without precedent. One additional year of insurance may be worth the difference in value b/w JG now and JG tagged in a year to BB. We'll never really know what it is if this off-season goes by and there is never a confirmed offer on the table that we deny.

 

[Omar's Wacky Neighbor]

Lock it down.


Adam Schefter‏Verified account @AdamSchefter
In a move that will have a ripple effect on all QB-needy teams, Patriots are not expected to trade QB Jimmy Garoppolo, per league sources.

 

[SeoulSoxFan]

Way done thinking about why BB does something or doesn't do something. Got my tub of popcorn and enjoying the show.

 

[dcmissle]

"League sources", not "team sources". Not surprising because our team is pretty buttoned down.

Plural not singular.

Best guess is that Schefter called the teams most likely in the QB market, and more than one of them told him the Pats are not likely dealing JG.

Note that this does not help those teams looking around. Their self interest lies in attempting to expand perceived supply.

Things can change, but I think this report is pretty reliable.

And I'd never, ever second-guess this judgment. 10 years in the QB wilderness can seem like 100.

 

[sodenj5]

"
And I'd never, ever second-guess this judgment. 10 years in the QB wilderness can seem like 100.

As a fan of a team that was in said wilderness, I can confirm. Came out the other side like Leo in The Revenant.

 

[Reggie's Racquet]

Here is the link to the ESPN video interview
http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/18795544/jimmy-garoppolo-not-expected-traded-new-england-patriots

 

[Stitch01]

As a fan of a team that was in said wilderness, I can confirm. Came out the other side like Leo in The Revenant.

You misspelled "is" as "was"

 

[heavyde050]

"League sources", not "team sources". Not surprising because our team is pretty buttoned down.

Plural not singular.

Best guess is that Schefter called the teams most likely in the QB market, and more than one of them told him the Pats are not likely dealing JG.

Note that this does not help those teams looking around. Their self interest lies in attempting to expand perceived supply.

Things can change, but I think this report is pretty reliable.

And I'd never, ever second-guess this judgment. 10 years in the QB wilderness can seem like 100.

I would only second guess this judgment if it leads to no more titles for the TB12 led Pats.
I think it is so difficult to win the title that all chips should be cashed in to try and win over the next three year window.
Also the wilderness is vast - it contains teams like the Browns and the Pete Carroll led Pats.
That is the wilderness is all teams that don't compete for a title.
I still don't see how keeping Jimmy helps the Pats win a SB in the near term but BB knows and has forgot more than I will ever hope to know about football.
But in BB we trust.

 

[Stitch01]

Pretty clear by now that the Pats dont believe in a Brady window. That's a good thing to me. If they did believe in a Brady window they probably wouldnt be Super Bowl champions today because they would have cashed all their chips in during an earlier three year window.

 

[tims4wins]

I would only second guess this judgment if it leads to no more titles for the TB12 led Pats.
I think it is so difficult to win the title that all chips should be cashed in to try and win over the next three year window.
Also the wilderness is vast - it contains teams like the Browns and the Pete Carroll led Pats.
That is the wilderness is all teams that don't compete for a title.
I still don't see how keeping Jimmy helps the Pats win a SB in the near term but BB knows and has forgot more than I will ever hope to know about football.
But in BB we trust.

Jesus christ people have been saying this for like 10 years now. Stop the madness. The Pats don't think like this.

Edit: or what @Stitch01 said

 

[Ralphwiggum]

There's a Felger & Mazz thread for anyone who still believes the Pats should or will do anything other than run the team and the roster the same way they have been running it for the past 17 seasons.

 

[Hoodie Sleeves]

I think it is so difficult to win the title that all chips should be cashed in to try and win over the next three year window.

This is basically the antithesis of BB's franchise-building strategy.

 

[dcmissle]

There's a Felger & Mazz thread for anyone who still believes the Pats should or will do anything other than run the team and the roster the same way they have been running it for the past 17 seasons.

Yes. Reportedly, they crushed the team for not tagging Hightower -- on the very day the Revis release was announced. They, of course, crushed the team for not extending Revis.

 

[heavyde050]

This is basically the antithesis of BB's franchise-building strategy.

Yeah I get that.

That is why I wrote the other paragraphs that I trust BB.

As I can I would love to watch Brady continue to win, but I am glad I don't run the team because they wouldn't have any success.

 

[heavyde050]

Pretty clear by now that the Pats dont believe in a Brady window. That's a good thing to me. If they did believe in a Brady window they probably wouldnt be Super Bowl champions today because they would have cashed all their chips in during an earlier three year window.

That is a great point. And also why I wrote I trust BB.

I am 100% confident BB will do what is best for the team which includes trading Jimmy if he gets enough value for him. If not he will keep Jimmy.

 

[Papelbon's Poutine]

I'll believe it when I see him suiting up for the opening game. Schefter generally has good sources, but as someone noted, 'league sources' means crap. All this tells us is they have a high price tag on him that someone hasn't met yet.

 

[heavyde050]

There's a Felger & Mazz thread for anyone who still believes the Pats should or will do anything other than run the team and the roster the same way they have been running it for the past 17 seasons.

Again, I am glad BB is running the team and trust him to do the right thing.

Emphasis for complete clarity - BB knows what is the right thing and I do not.

 

[DavidTai]

So what, are you saying the team should -not- cash in all their chips now?
I think cashing in all the chips is pretty much exactly how teams fail to build anything lasting.

 

[Stitch01]

Yes. Reportedly, they crushed the team for not tagging Hightower -- on the very day the Revis release was announced. They, of course, crushed the team for not extending Revis.

To be fair, the Patriots offered Revis a contract that, based upon Revis' play the last two seasons, would still have been pretty terrible.

I'll believe it when I see him suiting up for the opening game. Schefter generally has good sources, but as someone noted, 'league sources' means crap. All this tells us is they have a high price tag on him that someone hasn't met yet.

Agree with this too. Pats dont really have any deadline here and they dont have to move Jimmy G. Even if they arent actively shopping him today or if its pretty clear the Browns or Bears wont pay up, if Drew Brees or Carson Palmer blow an ACL out in training camp, Im sure the Pats will be fielding phone calls.

 

[PaulinMyrBch]

I don't think its out of the question that BB has identified JG as the QB of this team for the next 10 years, starting at some point in the next 2-4 years. He may view him as too valuable to the Pats to trade him away and watch him play somewhere else. If that is the case, the transition and locking JG up is an issue we're not familiar with, but I'm guessing BB has it figured out to some extent. I would not be shocked to see the Pats to sign him to an extension before the final year of his contract is up. Extending him to keep him until it is time to pay him starter money.

 

[Stitch01]

Why do you think JimmyG would sign an extension for less than starter money now? After this season is over he can 1) sign a contract for starter money somewhere else and actually get to play football or 2) get ~$25MM in guaranteed money via the franchise tag. There's a small amount of risk for him and he has one cheap year left, so maybe you can sign him for 90% of the Osweiller contract instead of 100% of the Osweiller contract or something today (maybe not, football players tend to like actually playing football and he's somewhat blocked from playing football here), but why would he take a discount?