Jimmy Garoppolo Appreciation Thread

[Forge]

31 minutes ago, 757-NINER said:

Thank you, I was just about to mention this. His downfield accuracy is shotty at best. He's never been comfortable working that element of the passing game and at this point I don't think it's in him to fix or change that.

And for guy who doesn't chuck it that much, his int rate is atrocious. When you averaging 7 yards a pass and still to toss double digit ints there is a big problem.

I just want a QB who can make throws to every part of the field, is a willing and accurate deep ball thrower and doesn't fold like a lawn chair when pressured. I can deal with the ints if you're giving me that and not handcuffing the play-caller.

Honestly, I don't even want him gone in a vacuum. He's fine / solid. You can clearly win with him when you need to. I do think that you're basically heading down the Andy Reid path this way, but you can't really help that (what I mean by this is that Andy was ostensibly making average or worse QBs look good during his Philly days. Everyone knew how good he was because of what he was doing...but he kept falling short. But then he picked up an Elite QB and look what's happening...Shanny is the same way. He helped make Matt Schaub good. Cousins, though this mostly happened after the fact with McVay / Gruden / Stefanski, it started under the Shanny's,. RG3. Hell, Brian Hoyer wasn't a complete trainwreck in Cleveland. Then he gets a QB who is already great in Matt Ryan and they put up the #1 offense by DVOA, 1st in points scored, and have an MVP QB).

If you can keep him this year without restructuring and shake out the money you need to put that elite team around him, I'm all for it. I just don't think you can, which makes this a crap or get off the pot scenario, because you know what else is coming? Bosa's extension. He can do that after next year and while his brother waited, Nick may not given his injury history. Warners real extension cap hit will kick in 2022 as well. McG will be on a fifth year option and that will kick his salary / cap hit up another  10+ million. So how do you even keep Jimmy past this year with that coming as well? Personally, I'd be looking into way to get away from McG because I don't think you are paying he and Trent Williams, but until we re-sign Williams, that's still open. Given where we are drafting this year, there is an opportunity to do something we may not have the chance to do if we wait a year. And that's what is really making this tougher to gauge. I mean, if we don't take a first round QB, let jimmy start and we are a good but not great team, we end up in a worse draft position, we may not even be in a spot to get a guy that can be a franchise guy next year and we may have to unload Jimmy or other players anyway. That's the tricky part. I don't know if any of these guys this year are that, but we can easily get into the top 10 and get one and find out. 

Like, there are just so many moving parts and things that could happen but may not and all that jazz that I think I'm just trying to make my head explode. 

[Forge]

1 hour ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

Um, then I'm not sure if they do restructure his deal. I could see them being fine with a 10M dead cap in 2022, but 18M dead cap in 2022? That's tough. 

Just in the interest of full disclosure, I did make one error - the extension would be three years through 2025, not a 2 year deal through 2024. Doesn't change any of hte cap hits or anything because I did the 23 million restructure over 5 years (4.6 per, so if you cut him after 1 year, 4.6 x 4 = 18.4 + dead hit on original contract). But I wanted to correct that. 

[J-ALL-DAY]

14 minutes ago, Forge said:

Just in the interest of full disclosure, I did make one error - the extension would be three years through 2025, not a 2 year deal through 2024. Doesn't change any of hte cap hits or anything because I did the 23 million restructure over 5 years (4.6 per, so if you cut him after 1 year, 4.6 x 4 = 18.4 + dead hit on original contract). But I wanted to correct that. 

Quote

The 49ers can easily convert a large portion of his $25.5 million pay into up-front money. That bookkeeping maneuver would push the bulk of the cap hit to 2022, the final year of his contract and a year when the cap should see a significant rise.

https://www.nbcsports.com/bayarea/49ers/jimmy-garoppolos-future-49ers-starting-qb-comes-more-focus

I guess this is what confuses me. 

[Forge]

Just now, J-ALL-DAY said:

https://www.nbcsports.com/bayarea/49ers/jimmy-garoppolos-future-49ers-starting-qb-comes-more-focus

I guess this is what confuses me. 

So what's he's talking about is basically restructuring without the extension, which is comparable to what I said earlier about not restructuring as much actual money, it's affects are just done different. It's not really going to solve anything because I don't know that it's really enough money but maybe it would. Here's the breakdown: 

Basically, he's talking about converting the non SB salary to upfront / SB. Fine. That is very common, everyone does it all the time. But if you don't extend him, it's only prorated over only 2 years, 2021 and 2022 (what remains on the contract). So lets say you convert 24 million of that to signing bonus. His cap hit next year goes from 26.9 to 1.5 (base / regular salary remaining from restructure) + 12 for the restructure proration + 1.4 for the original SB proration for a cap hit of roughly 15 million. You save 11 this year, which again, I think is a half measure. This would push 12 million out to the following year of 2022, which would make his cap number about 40 million with about 13.5 dead, so you could still cut him and save 27 million or keep him on the roster for 40 million. 

there is also the option to convert 24 million to signing bonus, add voidable years (as  many know, I'm not a fan of this at all, but we have started doing this a ton) and then you keep Jimmy for this year and next, he becomes a free agent in 2023 and we just have a dead his total of 14.5 million of so in 2023. So basically, how this would break down is that you would get him this year for about 6 million, next year you'd have him on the roster for 32 million (dead cap 19 million), and then he'd be a free agent in 2023 and we'd just have a dead cap of 14.5 no matter what. LIS, I'm not a fan of these things. This is the reason why the Eagles can't just set fire to next year to reset their cap; it's a 2 year process. Guys like Brandon Graham and malik Jackson are in the last year of multi million dollar deals and there is no cap savings from cutting them or trading them. 

If 11 is enough for this team to do what it needs to get done, I'd be okay with just restructuring without the extension....I just figured 11 wouldn't be enough. 

[Forge]

I would still investigate strongly the possibility taking a QB here. LIS, the draft conundrum Jimmy creates is that he's definitely good enough that we won't crater lol. So  I'm not sure when we are in this position again to potentially land a franchise QB without getting enormously lucky, but if saving 11 is enough for this team based on what their plan is, that's a solid idea without effectively tying him to the team for longer than a year at a time. The genius of his contract is that it's basically pay as you go. Minnesota is locked into Cousins for at least 2 more years. The Browns are probably going to lock themselves to Baker this year. Wentz is locked into the Eagles for 2 more years and may be a back up at a ridiculous cost unless they trade him to take on 34 million in dead money lol. Goff is locked into the Rams for at least 2 more years. Have to avoid long term commitments to guys like that because it really jams you up. 

[J-ALL-DAY]

31 minutes ago, Forge said:

So what's he's talking about is basically restructuring without the extension, which is comparable to what I said earlier about not restructuring as much actual money, it's affects are just done different. It's not really going to solve anything because I don't know that it's really enough money but maybe it would. Here's the breakdown: 

Basically, he's talking about converting the non SB salary to upfront / SB. Fine. That is very common, everyone does it all the time. But if you don't extend him, it's only prorated over only 2 years, 2021 and 2022 (what remains on the contract). So lets say you convert 24 million of that to signing bonus. His cap hit next year goes from 26.9 to 1.5 (base / regular salary remaining from restructure) + 12 for the restructure proration + 1.4 for the original SB proration for a cap hit of roughly 15 million. You save 11 this year, which again, I think is a half measure. This would push 12 million out to the following year of 2022, which would make his cap number about 40 million with about 13.5 dead, so you could still cut him and save 27 million or keep him on the roster for 40 million. 

there is also the option to convert 24 million to signing bonus, add voidable years (as  many know, I'm not a fan of this at all, but we have started doing this a ton) and then you keep Jimmy for this year and next, he becomes a free agent in 2023 and we just have a dead his total of 14.5 million of so in 2023. So basically, how this would break down is that you would get him this year for about 6 million, next year you'd have him on the roster for 32 million (dead cap 19 million), and then he'd be a free agent in 2023 and we'd just have a dead cap of 14.5 no matter what. LIS, I'm not a fan of these things. This is the reason why the Eagles can't just set fire to next year to reset their cap; it's a 2 year process. Guys like Brandon Graham and malik Jackson are in the last year of multi million dollar deals and there is no cap savings from cutting them or trading them. 

If 11 is enough for this team to do what it needs to get done, I'd be okay with just restructuring without the extension....I just figured 11 wouldn't be enough. 

I'd prefer going this route to be honest. 40M cap hit next year with a 17 game season will matter less and if you want to get rid of him, 13M isn't too bad of dead money. 

If we can restructure Jimmy's deal this way and then get rid of Ford, then you are in a really good position. Of course getting rid of Ford isn't easy due to him having to pass a physical. 

Are we in position in getting a franchise QB though? If we end up with say the 14th pick, is that a good enough spot to take one? You can trade up but then you are essentially giving up two years of draft picks. 

Since we are going to be so up against the cap going forward with all these extensions (plus Williams deal), this may be the draft to trade down a few times and accumulate like five picks in the first three rounds. Need as many cheap contracts as possible. 

[Forge]

2 hours ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

I'd prefer going this route to be honest. 40M cap hit next year with a 17 game season will matter less and if you want to get rid of him, 13M isn't too bad of dead money. 

If we can restructure Jimmy's deal this way and then get rid of Ford, then you are in a really good position. Of course getting rid of Ford isn't easy due to him having to pass a physical. 

Are we in position in getting a franchise QB though? If we end up with say the 14th pick, is that a good enough spot to take one? You can trade up but then you are essentially giving up two years of draft picks. 

Since we are going to be so up against the cap going forward with all these extensions (plus Williams deal), this may be the draft to trade down a few times and accumulate like five picks in the first three rounds. Need as many cheap contracts as possible. 

We are 100% in a spot to get a franchise QB unless they go off the board faster than people think, which is a possibility (if you think the guys there are franchise QBs). You don't blow that over a second round pick or even two. If you think that guy is the real deal, you 100% make that move, every time. No questions. The broncos went from 20 to ten for a late second and a future third. Buffalo went from 12 to 7 for two late seconds (same year, mid 50s, I believe). Arizona went from 15 - 10 for a third and a fifth. Tennessee went from 15 to 8 for a third and a future second and got back a 6th.  Chicago went from 11 to 9 for a 4th. You're not moving into the top 3. You're likely moving into 7-10 range from a draft spot between 11-14. If a guy like Fields is there and we think he's a franchise QB, or could be, and we are passing on that for like a second and third round pick,  I would have no words. If you're talking about getting to #2, I Understand that hesitance. 

And they have to think whoever is there is a franchise guy, of course lol. 

I mean, the move down philosophy isn't a lock to work, look at the Browns. They generated nothing from Julio's trade. Nothing from the Wentz trade (though there are tendrils of trades upon trades and one of the trades ended being a fifth for Teller) and Ward / Peppers for Deshaun Watson. It's tricky. Sometimes I advocate moving up, sometimes down. 

[Forge]

11 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

If we can restructure Jimmy's deal this way and then get rid of Ford, then you are in a really good position. Of course getting rid of Ford isn't easy due to him having to pass a physical. 

 

LIS...just depends on what they think 11 million actually does for them. 35 million we have right now covers Trent Williams and the draft class. Jimmy gives us 11, and cutting Dee / Richburg retiring gives you 9. That's 20. That's gotta cover Verrett & Warner's extension as the the main components, plus a new center and fill out the roster (assuming all are rookie UDFAs, that's about 500K each to cover double digit spots). There are other moves you can make of course to shake out some money, and I'm sure that they will do that, but there's not a ton of availability there. I'll be curious to see if we can tap into any soft markets...that's the real advantage if you have money this year. RFA tenders could  be out...giving wilson and e-man 6 million between the two of them is iffy in a cap crunch. I don't know. The cap gymnastics this year are fascinating because I have no idea what they want to do. 

If I knew what they wanted to do, I could make it work however LOL

[J-ALL-DAY]

3 minutes ago, Forge said:

We are 100% in a spot to get a franchise QB unless they go off the board faster than people think, which is a possibility (if you think the guys there are franchise QBs). You don't blow that over a second round pick or even two. If you think that guy is the real deal, you 100% make that move, every time. No questions. The broncos went from 20 to ten for a late second and a future third. Buffalo went from 12 to 7 for two late seconds (same year, mid 50s, I believe). Arizona went from 15 - 10 for a third and a fifth. Tennessee went from 15 to 8 for a third and a future second and got back a 6th.  Chicago went from 11 to 9 for a 4th. You're not moving into the top 3. You're likely moving into 7-10 range from a draft spot between 11-14. If a guy like Fields is there and we think he's a franchise QB, or could be, and we are passing on that for like a second and third round pick,  I would have no words. If you're talking about getting to #2, I Understand that hesitance. 

I mean, they have to think whoever is there is a franchise guy, of course lol. 

I mean, the move down philosophy isn't a lock to work, look at the Browns. They generated nothing from Julio's trade. Nothing from the Wentz trade (though there are tendrils of trades upon trades and one of the trades ended being a fifth for Teller) and Ward / Peppers for Deshaun Watson. It's tricky. Sometimes I advocate moving up, sometimes down. 

But you're not talking about trades to get in the top 3-5, which I am in my hypothetical. I do NOT think the top 3 QBs get out of the top 5 one way or another. Let's say Shanahan only sees Lawrence and Wilson as franchise QBs, then you almost certainly need to get in the top 3. Now, maybe a guy like Fields drops or Lance drops to the bottom 10 and he likes those QBs, then obviously that is different. I see Lawrence and Wilson going 1-2, even if it isn't the Jets taking Wilson (I think they will). If a team for whatever reason does not trade up for Wilson and the Jets stay put and take Sewell or whoever, then I think Wilson goes to the Dolphins spot. 

Giving up a 2nd and a 3rd or future 2nd and 3rd and isn't that big of a deal. But going up from 14 or 15 to 2 obviously is a big deal. Then you are giving up the 2021 and 2022 top draft picks for that player. And if that player IS a franchise QB? Then of course it is worth it. But I don't necessarily see us being in a great position to grab one as of now as I don't think Shanahan will want to get in the top 3. Best bet is that he likes Lance as much as the non-Lawrence QBs and he slips some and they go up to get him. 

Now, if he sees Trask or Jones as his guy? Then I guess we are in the sweet spot to take a QB. 

[J-ALL-DAY]

1 minute ago, Forge said:

LIS...just depends on what they think 11 million actually does for them. 35 million we have right now covers Trent Williams and the draft class. Jimmy gives us 11, and cutting Dee / Richburg retiring gives you 9. That's 20. That's gotta cover Verrett & Warner's extension as the the main components, plus a new center and fill out the roster (assuming all are rookie UDFAs, that's about 500K each to cover double digit spots). There are other moves you can make of course to shake out some money, and I'm sure that they will do that, but there's not a ton of availability there. I'll be curious to see if we can tap into any soft markets...that's the real advantage if you have money this year. RFA tenders could  be out...giving wilson and e-man 6 million between the two of them is iffy in a cap crunch. I don't know. The cap gymnastics this year are fascinating because I have no idea what they want to do. 

If I knew what they wanted to do, I could make it work however LOL

So how much are you in this hypothetical pinning down for Williams? And you think the draft class will cost more than 10M? 

But I DO think 55M will be enough to sign the guys they really want to sign. I see Williams and Verrett as the two top priorities and then if they can re-sign K'waun or Hyder, they will try to do so. Getting someone like Mack shouldn't cost more than 5M. Even with the crazy amount of free agents, I don't see them dying to sign many of them. They already have a deep enough roster and can fill in some of the spots on minimums or with rookies. 

Now, if you think they want to bring back guys like Sherman and Tartt? Obviously that is different. I just hope they don't go crazy restructuring deals again. Unnecessary at this point.

[Forge]

1 minute ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

But you're not talking about trades to get in the top 3-5, which I am in my hypothetical. I do NOT think the top 3 QBs get out of the top 5 one way or another. Let's say Shanahan only sees Lawrence and Wilson as franchise QBs, then you almost certainly need to get in the top 3. Now, maybe a guy like Fields drops or Lance drops to the bottom 10 and he likes those QBs, then obviously that is different. I see Lawrence and Wilson going 1-2, even if it isn't the Jets taking Wilson (I think they will). If a team for whatever reason does not trade up for Wilson and the Jets stay put and take Sewell or whoever, then I think Wilson goes to the Dolphins spot. 

Giving up a 2nd and a 3rd or future 2nd and 3rd and isn't that big of a deal. But going up from 14 or 15 to 2 obviously is a big deal. Then you are giving up the 2021 and 2022 top draft picks for that player. And if that player IS a franchise QB? Then of course it is worth it. But I don't necessarily see us being in a great position to grab one as of now as I don't think Shanahan will want to get in the top 3. Best bet is that he likes Lance as much as the non-Lawrence QBs and he slips some and they go up to get him. 

Now, if he sees Trask or Jones as his guy? Then I guess we are in the sweet spot to take a QB. 

Well that's what i said...depends on your eval of the Qbs. Right now, I can easily see only 2 Qbs taken in the top 6 and maybe top 8. Jax, yes. Jets, maybe. Miami, no. Atlanta is a possibility, but I don't think that they will go that route. They really need an edge rusher. Matt Ryan is there for 2 more years as is Julio. Think that they will try and make it work. Its possible though, especially with Fields from GA. Cincy, no. Philly, no. Detroit? Maaaaaaybe? They have to trade Stafford first, otherwise I don't think that they would. Giants? Not unless Dave G is gone. Carolina and Denver is where it gets really interesting. So if 2 Qbs are off the board when the Giants pick, I wouldn't be surprised at all. 

 

[Forge]

Just now, J-ALL-DAY said:

So how much are you in this hypothetical pinning down for Williams? And you think the draft class will cost more than 10M? 

 

No less than 20 for Williams...just basing that on the Bakh contract. He really screwed us. Before that, Tunsil's contract would have been a nice spot for us, but if you're williams, I don't know why you're taking less than Bakhitiari. So then it becomes about massaging that cap hit the first year. 

 Estimated rookie pool is about 9-10 million if we assume that we will move up a couple spots (we should) and get a third from Saleh, but I'm also rounding on cap space. We only have 22 right now slated for next year. I'm bumping it on my own assumption where the cap finishes

[J-ALL-DAY]

8 minutes ago, Forge said:

Well that's what i said...depends on your eval of the Qbs. Right now, I can easily see only 2 Qbs taken in the top 6 and maybe top 8. Jax, yes. Jets, maybe. Miami, no. Atlanta is a possibility, but I don't think that they will go that route. They really need an edge rusher. Matt Ryan is there for 2 more years as is Julio. Think that they will try and make it work. Its possible though, especially with Fields from GA. Cincy, no. Philly, no. Detroit? Maaaaaaybe? They have to trade Stafford first, otherwise I don't think that they would. Giants? Not unless Dave G is gone. Carolina and Denver is where it gets really interesting. So if 2 Qbs are off the board when the Giants pick, I wouldn't be surprised at all. 

So here is the thing, I DO think the Jets take a QB or someone jumps up to their slot and takes one. I'm also not convinced that Miami doesn't look hard into taking a QB. I get in a way why Tua keeps getting benched, but I don't get the feeling they are in love with him and truly believe in him. They have two first rounders so what if they just say, "you know what, Wilson is the better prospect and gives us a better chance going forward so why not just take him?" They likely won't be picking in the top 5 anytime soon with the team they have. 

I see three going top 8. 14 to 8 isn't a terrible jump though. If they rate Fields or Lance that much, then they certainly can go get them there.

5 minutes ago, Forge said:

No less than 20 for Williams...just basing that on the Bakh contract. He really screwed us. Before that, Tunsil's contract would have been a nice spot for us, but if you're williams, I don't know why you're taking less than Bakhitiari. So then it becomes about massaging that cap hit the first year. 

 Estimated rookie pool is about 9-10 million if we assume that we will move up a couple spots (we should) and get a third from Saleh, but I'm also rounding on cap space. We only have 22 right now slated for next year. I'm bumping it on my own assumption where the cap finishes

Got it, I was a little confused in thinking you had Williams having a 25M cap hit next year and then 10M for the rookie class...That seemed a bit excessive lol. So Williams is going to have a 20M cap hit regardless? Can't they lessen the first year's cap hit? 

[Forge]

8 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

But I DO think 55M will be enough to sign the guys they really want to sign. I see Williams and Verrett as the two top priorities and then if they can re-sign K'waun or Hyder, they will try to do so. Getting someone like Mack shouldn't cost more than 5M. Even with the crazy amount of free agents, I don't see them dying to sign many of them. They already have a deep enough roster and can fill in some of the spots on minimums or with rookies. 

 

20 million for Williams. 9-10 for rookies. Tender e-man that is about 3. Best case on Warner's extension is 6 (25m signing bonus prorated with bsae salary the same). Warner could help by playing out the contract, I just don't expect it. Right now you're at 39. What's best case on Verrett? The problem is that you won't go long term given his age and history, so it's a little harder to hide the cap unless you guarantee future years. I think the Jimmie Ward deal is solid. We managed to get hte first year at 4 million, so that's what I'm hoping for here. Then we partially guaranteed the second year and his cap jumped to 11. That money evaporates quick. I mean, that's how we went through the Ford restructure money after only signing people for weeks LOL. I believe we have 34 under contract, which means we need at least 17 spots for the top 51. I'd assume maybe 8 spots unaccounted for (not all rookies will make it) so filling with UDFAs is another 4 (and this is a very kind lower estimate). And that's not a team that is getting better externally, admittedly. You'll certainly have to hit on the rookies because there's going to be a number that are going to be counted on. It's closer. We will definitely have to say goodbye to some guys. 

[Forge]

4 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

Got it, I was a little confused in thinking you had Williams having a 25M cap hit next year and then 10M for the rookie class...That seemed a bit excessive lol. So Williams is going to have a 20M cap hit regardless? Can't they lessen the first year's cap hit? 

It's hard to say because I don't know what he wants or how we want to structure it. That's where it gets tricky. The market is 22/23 million per year which I think Williams tops because he's going to have access to every team.  So say 24 million. You have to get him to take the the SB over future year guarantees, I think, but still give him a lot of guarantees. Like, the Packers only gave Bakh 30 in signing bonus and I thikn the Texans gave Tunsil like 15. We need to give Williams like 50. That ties us to him for a long time, but honestly, I'm okay with that and I think most people would be as well. Then you get to prorate it at 10 / season (he's getting signed for 5 years even at his age if he stays with us...that I guarantee). So you definitely can get it down.