49ers want first for Jimmy G

[top dawg]

5 hours ago, BrianS said:

When healthy, the dude is a high end starter.  Not elite, but high end.  That's worth something.

However, every other team can read the writing.  JimmyG only has 2.8 million in dead cap, but 24 million in salary.  The construction of that contract was genius.  They own him for the next two years . . . if they want him.  If not, he can be cut with basically zero consequences.

Unfortunately, for us to trade for him, Teddy has to be part of the deal.  Thus, Teddy + a first for JimmyG is probably about right.  No, JimmyG alone isn't worth it, but to the Panthers, that's not the deal.  If we were a team with cap space, maybe a third would do it.  We're not that team.

I would say he is above average, but I cringe a little bit at calling him high end. A high end talent wouldn't have overshot what probably would have been a game-winning throw in the Super Bowl. 

[Actionman0z]

7 hours ago, bythenbrs said:

I half jokingly reminded Mrs. Nbrs that Good Friday is still Friday, and that means date night.  I got the above response.  Should I interpret that as a 'no'?

Take charge

[joemac]

17 hours ago, BurnNChinn said:

And Panthers want a first for Teddy. Soooooo?

Where have you seen anybody officially saying that?!?!

[ForJimmy]

 

[BurnNChinn]

50 minutes ago, joemac said:

Where have you seen anybody officially saying that?!?!

I was being sarcastic lol

[AceBoogie]

18 hours ago, Aquemini said:

Jimmy G's Super Bowl year he accounted for 28 TD - 13 giveaways ..

Cam this past season accounted for 21 TD - 11 giveaways

So Jimmy net 5 more TD in a Super Bowl year, than Cam did in his supposed 'awful' 2020

Jimmy is made of glass, too.

People don’t realize Cam only accounted for a few less TDs than Tom in his last season with NE

[Peon Awesome]

San Francisco has a bit of leverage. Trading him compared to cutting him doesn't save money, so it wouldn't be a cap saving measure. And they see value in keeping him as an ideal bridge for whoever they draft at 3. So while I think there's certainly an element of starting the negotiating price high, I don't think it's a Carson Wentz situation where they're going to trade him no matter what, taking the best offer they can find. I think internally they'd probably take less ,like a 2 or a conditional 3rd, but I think if the best offer is a conditional 4th, which may be, they'd just as well hold onto him.

[Panthero]

[Jay Roosevelt]

I know I would.

[Louie]

[top dawg]

21 hours ago, Peon Awesome said:

San Francisco has a bit of leverage. Trading him compared to cutting him doesn't save money, so it wouldn't be a cap saving measure. And they see value in keeping him as an ideal bridge for whoever they draft at 3. So while I think there's certainly an element of starting the negotiating price high, I don't think it's a Carson Wentz situation where they're going to trade him no matter what, taking the best offer they can find. I think internally they'd probably take less ,like a 2 or a conditional 3rd, but I think if the best offer is a conditional 4th, which may be, they'd just as well hold onto him.

They have leverage on Garropolo. That's about it. 

If they're going to keep him, they should just say so. Putting a ridiculous offer out into the aether is, well, ridiculous.