Pats QB Options

Status
Not open for further replies.

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
21,395
When I look at the QBs, I see 3 guys who seem like no doubt early 1sts (Lawrence, Fields, Wilson in that order) then one super high variance play (Lance) who should go top half, then 1 guy who is probably more of an early 2nd talent who gets inflated to 1st by QB inflation (Jones) but I wouldn't want in the top half of the round. After that.... I don't see a guy I would want to use a top 75 pick on, just way too much downside on limited reasonable upside.
 

ndpope

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
62
Dedham, MA
If you think a QB is worth trading up to the start of the 2nd, shouldn't you go a little extra to draft him at the end of the first so you can get a 5th-Year option? That would seem to maximize the value on a QB rookie contract and allow you to feel more comfortable redshirting him his rookie year. If Davis Mills is worth trading up, then 33 seems like a worse option from Jax than 25.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
13,265
Mansfield MA
If you think a QB is worth trading up to the start of the 2nd, shouldn't you go a little extra to draft him at the end of the first so you can get a 5th-Year option? That would seem to maximize the value on a QB rookie contract and allow you to feel more comfortable redshirting him his rookie year. If Davis Mills is worth trading up, then 33 seems like a worse option from Jax than 25.
The fifth year option is not as favorable as it used to be. Picks after 10 used to be a bargain but now the whole round's contracts have been replaced by a sliding scale based on playing time / accolades, and it's fully guaranteed. So the value of the 5th year might be less than the difference in contracts between 25 (4 years/$12.5 MM in 2020) and 33 (4 years/$8.7 MM).
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
27,404
Hingham, MA
A few quotes from Shanny & Lynch today

Adam Schefter

@AdamSchefter

·
17m


49ers' GM John Lynch: "Our job it to make the right decision....This process has been as thorough as any one I've been a part of."


Adam Schefter

@AdamSchefter

·
14m


Kyle Shanahan: "We could have sat there at 12, and waited which one came to us, if one did. ... But we made a decision that we felt we needed to get a starting QB. We wanted to dicatate it. We'll get the one that we feel is best for us."


Adam Schefter

@AdamSchefter

·
12m


Kyle Shanahan said that when the 49ers traded up, there were five QBs he was "OK with taking. After going through this, I feel good about five guys at three. ... We started with one candidate in mind, but all have gotten better since."


Adam Schefter

@AdamSchefter

·
7m


Kyle Shanahan said he and John Lynch are not paying attention to what draft experts and 49ers' fans are saying the team should do on social media. "It is so irresponsible to let something like that affect your decision."
 

nattysez

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2010
5,313
Can you guarantee Jimmy G will be on the roster after Sunday? "I can't guarantee anybody in the world will be alive past Sunday..." therefore, Kyle Shanahan says he can't guarantee anybody on this roster will still be on the roster past this weekend. #49ers
https://twitter.com/hashtag/49ers?src=hashtag_click

I think Shanahan just threatened Jimmy G's life...

View: https://twitter.com/MikeGiardi/status/1386770206647848960

View: https://twitter.com/Z12superfly/status/1386772819615358980


View: https://twitter.com/gkittle46/status/1386782018130829312
 
Last edited:

54thMA

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2012
7,662
Westwood MA
Eh, it's okay. I should have started a thread titled "Reiss: If Patriots stay at 15, their pick should come right about when MuppetAsteriskTalk's wife decides to leave him for the Uber driver who picked her up at Logan"
But I love this post, so there's that.
 

54thMA

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2012
7,662
Westwood MA
Kyle Shanahan: "We could have sat there at 12, and waited which one came to us, if one did. ... But we made a decision that we felt we needed to get a starting QB. We wanted to dicatate it. We'll get the one that we feel is best for us."
Poor Jimmy G, talk about a man without a country.

I bet Jimmy is getting upset.
 

54thMA

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2012
7,662
Westwood MA
Can they? Sure. Will they? Zero chance.
I really, really, really hope you are 100% correct.

Because that is an awful trade.

I know I'm way in the minority as someone who hopes if the QB they really want is not in the cards, they hold at 15 and fill an area of need/take the best player available.
 

JM3

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
520
Is it bad that I don't even hate this that much? Probably.

The 3rd to 4th is only a 12 pick drop (96 to 108), so in order to get from 15 to 4 we'd be giving up...

46
12 spots in 4th round
1st & 3rd next year

It's not nothing, but if they are fully sold on Fields or Lance & they're there at 4? I'd be pretty excited.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
7,020
Dallas
I think a lot of us go by what BB has done in the past. Most of our history is what Bill has done while he had Tom. It should be fairly obvious after this free agency period that Bill is someone who will fluctuate on what he thinks is best if there is reason to change his mind. Is there an inefficiency with the cap going down due to COVID as well a a lack of home grown talent to sign? Time to spend more in free agency. The way they are built you could argue that they need or it would be particularly beneficial to add a QB on a rookie contract soon. Day 3 they should be able to add RBs, an ILB, and maybe an OT and a CB. No one stands out to me as a sure-fire pick at 46. There might not be an OT they like then or a CB who fits their needs. Would you rather have a potential top 10 quality QB or an OT and a CB? This is a somewhat weak draft class and that is especially true on day 2 so it wouldn't surprise me if Bill punted on day 2 to get someone who is of exceptional quality on day 1. If he can do a tradeup that wouldn't cost any 2022 picks I think he might do that. Plus with COVID the guys you are probably going to get early day 3 are close to the guys going day 2.
 

scott bankheadcase

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 1, 2006
1,333
hoboken
He's right. I watched the presser. I think there was a feeling that it was probably Jones, but there were enough whispers about people in the building loving Lance that no one was sure.

After that presser, everyone is sure it's Jones. Both Shanahan and Lynch were already super defensive. It was unlike every other presser they've given for 3 years now.

Interestingly, I think this is the first time the SF media is going a bit negative on this regime. Jones will need to be good very quickly to stop the knives from coming out.
 

JCizzle

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 11, 2006
13,603
As someone who watched the presser hoping to hear something different, the Niners are definitely taking McCorkle. The whole thing was a very thinly veiled defense of the decision. Pretty sure they added Kyle to the presser simply to try and cool off the fan base.

“If you’d [fans] be happy with him at 12, I don’t see why you wouldn’t be happy with him at 3.” For fucks sake. You traded a ransom to get to 3. This guy isn’t simply falling to 12.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
7,020
Dallas
There is no reason to trade or release him until late in camp. They don't know if the great white hope is going to be ready to start. Or if they pick Lance they definitely should keep him until then for the same reason.
 

Mystic Merlin

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 21, 2007
35,908
Hartford, CT
I don’t get why they would cut Jimmy G. First off, how could they be convinced in May that Mac Jones will win the job? This team is built to contend this year, I do not see them taking chances to clear out competition for Jones or let Jimmy G go somewhere else. Let Jones and Jimmy G compete for the job. And if Jimmy G wins and he gets hurt Week 3, then you’ve got a talented backup in the wings.

There also isn’t any indication ownership is putting pressure on Lynch to cut cash spend this year, and they don’t need the cap space.
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
11,915
Santa Monica, CA
There is no reason to trade or release him until late in camp. They don't know if the great white hope is going to be ready to start. Or if they pick Lance they definitely should keep him until then for the same reason.
I don't see Jimmy G as their break glass option at QB. They just traded up to #3 to draft a quarterback. In related news, they just bet their 49ers careers that whoever they draft is an immediate starter.

Jimmy will be released unless some other team buckles and throws them a 4th or 5th round pick for him. There are plenty of cheaper options to caddy for a rookie QB.
 

JM3

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
520
I don’t get why they would cut Jimmy G. First off, how could they be convinced in May that Mac Jones will win the job? This team is built to contend this year, I do not see them taking chances to clear out competition for Jones or let Jimmy G go somewhere else. Let Jones and Jimmy G compete for the job. And if Jimmy G wins and he gets hurt Week 3, then you’ve got a talented backup in the wings.

There also isn’t any indication ownership is putting pressure on Lynch to cut cash spend this year, and they don’t need the cap space.
A true Josh Rosen believer.
 

Mystic Merlin

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 21, 2007
35,908
Hartford, CT
A true Josh Rosen believer.
Good one, I put them up and you slam them down. :)

I don’t see fans or ownership having a problem with Lynch and Shanahan rolling into camp this year with Jimmy and a third overall QB. Obviously it is a failure if whoever they pick doesn’t eventually win the job from Jimmy G and put up top 10-12 QB production, but I don’t see the source of the immediate pressure to get the pick on the field Day 1 at all costs.
 

JM3

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
520
Good one, I put them up and you slam them down. :)

I don’t see fans or ownership having a problem with Lynch and Shanahan rolling into camp this year with Jimmy and a third overall QB. Obviously it is a failure if whoever they pick doesn’t eventually win the job from Jimmy G and put up top 10-12 QB production, but I don’t see the source of the immediate pressure to get the pick on the field Day 1 at all costs.
Sorry, I couldn't help myself.

I've been thinking through this Jimmy G stuff & idk why he would not veto any trade. He has a no trade clause that expires after this season & if a team is willing to give something up to pay him his current salary, they will be willing to give up nothing to pay him his current salary. He'll also get to fully select his location & say fu to the 49ers on the way out for trying to replace him, & strengthen his new team.

But yeah, I also don't see much point in the 49ers not just keeping him. He's not going to have less trade value next year or at the trade deadline than he does now.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
21,395
I don't see Jimmy G as their break glass option at QB. They just traded up to #3 to draft a quarterback. In related news, they just bet their 49ers careers that whoever they draft is an immediate starter.

Jimmy will be released unless some other team buckles and throws them a 4th or 5th round pick for him. There are plenty of cheaper options to caddy for a rookie QB.
No they didn't. They have been very open about not necessarily having the rookie start, you spend months laying that groundwork you can afford to not start the rookie right away.
 

Ferm Sheller

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2007
11,222
I'd love to see Denver trade for Jimmy G. He'd never take them anywhere and it'd remove Denver from the first round QB competition.
 

Seels

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
3,756
NH
I'd gladly trade the 1 and next year's 1 for Fields. Wouldn't even blink. The extra 2 and two 3rds would have me blink.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
21,395
Yes, because there's some other thing they would say.
I mean.. it doesn't matter what they say. The idea that they would get fired (2 years from a SB) because the QB they drafted didn't start week 1 is absolutely insane. Rookie QBs usually start because they go to garbage teams who have no other options. A smart organization isn't going to rush their potential franchise QB, and starting week 1 is not any particular indicator of future success, many of the best QBs didn't start right away, and that helped them be prepared when the time came.

I get that you hope they cut Jimmy G and we sign him, but your logic to getting there is deeply flawed.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
27,404
Hingham, MA
I think Jimmy G is their week 1 starter until he either gets hurt or sucks. There is a chance he plays the whole year IMO. The only downside there for the Niners is not getting a pick back until 2023, but it would also mean the team is having a super successful season.

Edit if I’m the Pats I think I’d offer them 120 or 122 or 139 and see if they take it.
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
12,354
Does nobody think that it would be an issue that the only news out of SF every single day would be when does the inevitable Mac Jones takeover begin?

I mean it’s great it all worked out with Alex Smith and Andy Reid and the number 10 pick, but I’m doubting the warm and fuzzies on this one.

But, hey, trade Jimmy Week 5 for a conditional 7th or something.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
27,404
Hingham, MA
Does nobody think that it would be an issue that the only news out of SF every single day would be when does the inevitable Mac Jones takeover begin?

I mean it’s great it all worked out with Alex Smith and Andy Reid and the number 10 pick, but I’m doubting the warm and fuzzies on this one.

But, hey, trade Jimmy Week 5 for a conditional 7th or something.
It will only be news if they lose or he doesn’t play well, in which case they could make a move anyway. If they are winning everything is hunky dory.
 
The Patriots are basically weak at one position, and that position happens to be the most important position in the game. Right? Assuming that's correct, my conclusion - as a fan of one of the teams that could be a trading partner with the Pats on Thursday night - is that a) the Patriots would be nuts not to overpay for a top QB prospect they like, and who Belichick can mold into the type of QB he wants, and b) every team that might trade with the Patriots knows this as well and has the leverage to demand 120 cents on the dollar. So in that hypothetical PFF trade, the Falcons absolutely ought to demand that sort of haul...and I think the Patriots absolutely ought to pay that sort of price.
 

Moosbrugger

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
325
wrong side of the bay
I guess Otto would be the one to ask, but I don't see Jimmy's agent letting him go near the 49ers trading camp. If your guy is preordained to get pulled for a rookie after the bye week, his next contract is going to be a one year prove-it deal with a phantom second year tacked on. This thread seems to focus on what is optimal for the 49ers but Handsome Jimmy and Don Yee might have a different set of priorities.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
38,696
The Patriots are basically weak at one position, and that position happens to be the most important position in the game. Right? Assuming that's correct, my conclusion - as a fan of one of the teams that could be a trading partner with the Pats on Thursday night - is that a) the Patriots would be nuts not to overpay for a top QB prospect they like, and who Belichick can mold into the type of QB he wants, and b) every team that might trade with the Patriots knows this as well and has the leverage to demand 120 cents on the dollar. So in that hypothetical PFF trade, the Falcons absolutely ought to demand that sort of haul...and I think the Patriots absolutely ought to pay that sort of price.
Screw that. I’m still smarting from the Sanu trade.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
27,404
Hingham, MA
I guess Otto would be the one to ask, but I don't see Jimmy's agent letting him go near the 49ers trading camp. If your guy is preordained to get pulled for a rookie after the bye week, his next contract is going to be a one year prove-it deal with a phantom second year tacked on. This thread seems to focus on what is optimal for the 49ers but Handsome Jimmy and Don Yee might have a different set of priorities.
What is best for Jimmy is to play, and play well, ideally for a winner. The Niners represent a reasonable chance for this scenario. So do the Pats. A team like Denver, probably less so. He doesn’t have a lot of great options. Even if he was cut he’d still be getting a one year prove it deal. The only way he gets a multi year deal is if he plays well and stays healthy. With this Niners team they could make him look damn good again like they did in 2019 and he could parlay that into his next contract.
 

JM3

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
520
The Patriots are basically weak at one position, and that position happens to be the most important position in the game. Right? Assuming that's correct, my conclusion - as a fan of one of the teams that could be a trading partner with the Pats on Thursday night - is that a) the Patriots would be nuts not to overpay for a top QB prospect they like, and who Belichick can mold into the type of QB he wants, and b) every team that might trade with the Patriots knows this as well and has the leverage to demand 120 cents on the dollar. So in that hypothetical PFF trade, the Falcons absolutely ought to demand that sort of haul...and I think the Patriots absolutely ought to pay that sort of price.
I mean, by the Stuart chart, it's actually 200 cents on the dollar - 4 is worth 25.8 & Patriots are giving up 51.7 to get there.

This leverage against the Patriots stuff is whatever. The Falcons have as much leverage as the highest offer is worth more to them than keeping the pick. Teams work in their own best interest - not for the sole goal of screwing over the Patriots.

If the Patriots offer 180 cents & no one else is offering more than 160, the Falcons can either take their 180 cents from the Patriots, screw over their franchise by taking a worse deal, or draft a player (*ACHOOkylepittsACHOO*).

If the Patriots value 1 of Fields/Lance at that level & both are available, then I'm sure they'll make a competitive offer.

If they value both, though? Who knows.
 
Teams work in their own best interest - not for the sole goal of screwing over the Patriots.
Nobody, least of all me, is suggesting that the Falcons would be trying to screw over the Patriots just because they're the Patriots. It's just a question of understanding what the Patriots are really willing to pay to get their guy, and then getting them to pay as close to their theoretical maximum as they can. The worst case for the Falcons is that the Patriots (or whomever else) don't fork over enough assets to trade up, so the Falcons take a generational TE prospect or a potential franchise QB themselves. The worst case for the Patriots is that Cam Newton starts 17 games for them in 2021.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
21,395
I guess Otto would be the one to ask, but I don't see Jimmy's agent letting him go near the 49ers trading camp. If your guy is preordained to get pulled for a rookie after the bye week, his next contract is going to be a one year prove-it deal with a phantom second year tacked on. This thread seems to focus on what is optimal for the 49ers but Handsome Jimmy and Don Yee might have a different set of priorities.
What is his and his agent's play there....? I'll hold out and save you a whole bunch of money that I likely will never earn back? Jimmy should show up to camp in great shape, crush it and either have a great year and increase his value, or have a good start and get traded to a team that has a QB injury. Not playing isn't going to do much for him. SF isn't going to cut him or trade him for nothing to keep him from sitting out, all he's doing is eliminating his best chance to get paid to be a starter in this league.
 

JM3

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
520
Nobody, least of all me, is suggesting that the Falcons would be trying to screw over the Patriots just because they're the Patriots. It's just a question of understanding what the Patriots are really willing to pay to get their guy, and then getting them to pay as close to their theoretical maximum as they can. The worst case for the Falcons is that the Patriots (or whomever else) don't fork over enough assets to trade up, so the Falcons take a generational TE prospect or a potential franchise QB themselves. The worst case for the Patriots is that Cam Newton starts 17 games for them in 2021.
Yeah, that's how any negotiation works. Seems more likely the Falcons take Pitts, the Bengals don't know how phones work & take Sewell or Chase, Miami takes Chase or Smith & then we can trade a couple knee biters to move up to 7 & take the guy there :)
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
11,915
Santa Monica, CA
What is his and his agent's play there....? I'll hold out and save you a whole bunch of money that I likely will never earn back? Jimmy should show up to camp in great shape, crush it and either have a great year and increase his value, or have a good start and get traded to a team that has a QB injury. Not playing isn't going to do much for him. SF isn't going to cut him or trade him for nothing to keep him from sitting out, all he's doing is eliminating his best chance to get paid to be a starter in this league.
I'll bet you $100 to the Jimmy Fund that Jimmy G plays zero snaps for the 49ers this year.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.