Raiders sign QB Jimmy Garoppolo (3 years, $67.5M, $34M gtd)

[big_palooka]

26 minutes ago, BackinBlack said:

I wont lie, while I still dont have too high of expectations for this year, I do see the plan now. 
Which IMO is rebuild the next two years. . . which they wont admit. 
But if they get a rookie QB either this or next, they are (praying here), setting him up for success. 
Just keep building the roster, limit the dead cap money, and draft well. 

Its march, I am sure by sept ill have come around to Jimmy and believe we can compete for the playoffs, but at the moment i just dont see it. 
 

I agree. I think last season, they went all in to help Carr thinking they could win shootouts with a suspect defense. Now it feels like a reset. Build the roster via the draft and set things up for a future QB.

The playoffs in the AFC are tough. A lot of great QBs and teams. The Raiders just need to get better and reset the poor drafting done by Gruden to get some talent in here. 

We are however impatient and want instant results. 

[true2form]

2 hours ago, drfrey13 said:

By that reasoning if Garappolo can get us to the playoffs then the situations are parallel.  I am not saying he will but just we do not know until we see what Jimmy can do with the team.

Agreed, we are just not there yet.  That's what I'm saying.

[Dessie]

So just to confirm it’s a 1 year deal for $34m or a 2 year deal for $48m is that right ? 

[NickButera]

6 hours ago, big_palooka said:

Do you truly think one of the 4 QBs is worth trading 2 firsts, 2 seconds + for in this class?

I personally don't. Draft hasn't happened yet, if the guy they wanted at 1 ends up at 3 maybe they still make a move. 

No, but I don't think we'd have to give up that much. 

1. We're not going from 9 to 1. 

2. We don't have to trade up to 1, we can trade up to 3. 7 to 3 we'd give up much less. 

[NCOUGHMAN]

Interesting 

[NYRaider]

6 hours ago, Dessie said:

So just to confirm it’s a 1 year deal for $34m or a 2 year deal for $48m is that right ? 

From what I understand he has $18.75M in dead cap if we cut him three days after the new league year starts but only $7.5M if we cut him within three days of the new league year starting.

[Dessie]

6 hours ago, NYRaider said:

From what I understand he has $18.75M in dead cap if we cut him three days after the new league year starts but only $7.5M if we cut him within three days of the new league year starting.

But he’s gtd $34m so if we cut him next year it’s a 1yr $34m deal? if he’s on the roster next year it’s a 2yr $45m deal rising to $48m on bonuses ?

I get we can spread the cost for cap purposes. 

[Darbsk]

OK, I’m watching a boatload of Jimmy Garoppolo film and I’m starting to sell myself (is that wise?)

I think Carr is out and out the better QB but Garoppolo + McDaniels might be better than Carr + McDaniels if that makes sense.

Man, he misses so many deep throws though 😳 don’t know whether he’s just not looking or is reading from low to high and going safety first……. Our short and intermediate passing game should be on the money though. I’ll give him credit for hanging in the pocket, I thought he ran more than he does, very few scrambles I’m seeing.

Al Davis would roll in his grave RIP. He’d definitely draft Levis or Richardson 😄

Edited March 15, 2023 by Darbsk

[BackinBlack]

5 hours ago, Dessie said:

But he’s gtd $34m so if we cut him next year it’s a 1yr $34m deal? if he’s on the roster next year it’s a 2yr $45m deal rising to $48m on bonuses ?

I get we can spread the cost for cap purposes. 

Well i believe if it was a 1 year deal, wed have a cap hit of 34mil this season. 
If we cut him, before next season, the 34 mil will be spread between 2 seasons?

Qb contracts are getting tougher and tougher to figure out cap wise lol. Which i guess is a good thing, we are getting creative. As long as no more, no trade clauses, I like it!

[Geezy]

12 hours ago, NYRaider said:

From what I understand he has $18.75M in dead cap if we cut him three days after the new league year starts but only $7.5M if we cut him within three days of the new league year starting.

Kind of smart. If we go QB in this draft we can cut him right away next off-season and not have any dead cap, if I’m understanding it right. If not we take our QB in next years draft and still have a bridge in place. JG just ensures we don’t force a rookie in the draft. Which was what I wanted to begin with, just was hoping it wasn’t Jimmy lol don’t like the QB, but I love the move/thought process. 

[Darbsk]

2 hours ago, Geezy said:

Kind of smart. If we go QB in this draft we can cut him right away next off-season and not have any dead cap, if I’m understanding it right. If not we take our QB in next years draft and still have a bridge in place. JG just ensures we don’t force a rookie in the draft. Which was what I wanted to begin with, just was hoping it wasn’t Jimmy lol don’t like the QB, but I love the move/thought process. 

It makes it more comfortable to draft a guy like Levis or Richardson as well as we don’t have to throw them to the wolves straight away and rely on them to captain the ship. They could effectively be red shirted for a year or two (unless Garoppolo gets injured of course). That may open up the possibility of drafting a lower round QB too as they’d have time to sit and learn.

[NYRaider]

1 hour ago, Darbsk said:

It makes it more comfortable to draft a guy like Levis or Richardson as well as we don’t have to throw them to the wolves straight away and rely on them to captain the ship. They could effectively be red shirted for a year or two (unless Garoppolo gets injured of course). That may open up the possibility of drafting a lower round QB too as they’d have time to sit and learn.

For me it'd just be kind of crazy to invest into Jimmy G / another WR and then trade up or use or FRP on a QB that we aren't planning to play this year. We have so many holes on the OL and defense.

[Dessie]

 

[NYRaider]

3 minutes ago, Dessie said:

 

So it's pretty clear that Jimmy was realistically plan C for us at best. We probably would've preferred trading up to #1 for Stroud or trading for Rodgers but didn't want to pay the price. I will say I'm happy that we at least didn't sit on our hands and miss on a QB though.

[Dessie]

1 minute ago, NYRaider said:

So it's pretty clear that Jimmy was realistically plan C for us at best. We probably would've preferred trading up to #1 for Stroud or trading for Rodgers but didn't want to pay the price. I will say I'm happy that we at least didn't sit on our hands and miss on a QB though.