Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

49ers want first for Jimmy G


top dawg
 Share

Recommended Posts

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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • So the last guy who had the job got hired by his former team directly into a role he has no direct experience in?
    • Hard to pass up millions for a couple of days work per week for a coaching gig in the NFL that is 60-80 hours each week during the season and a more relaxed 50 hours a week during the off season. Yeah, I'd love to see him as our DC but hard to see him giving up the cushy job there if he gets it. And he's going to be a great commentator for the network.
    • Really, I think that is where negotiations come in. If you've got a QB getting you to 10 wins but statistically he's not a great performer, then you say look you can take $22 million or you can try it on the market. Because let's face it, out there, any leadership skills that we're seeing aren't going to be on the table, it's just going to be performance and that lands him in the QB2 market, which is much, much less lucrative (although any of us would love that money).  No one is saying that Bryce will be a $50 million QB, barring something short of a miraculous jump. I'm just saying that if we are winning somehow with him at the helm, then it would be fuging stupid to dive back into the rookie pool all over again. Let's say we do hit the 10 win mark, heck, let's call it 11 and a second round in the playoffs. I think we can all say that would be a really uplifting result and one that should be doable if we have good play. What do we do then? Here's what I would offer if I were Morgan and Tepper. $25 million a year for 3 years, each year with up to $10 million in incentives for touchdowns, wins, playoff depth, being under 10 interceptions, completing a full season, passing yardage milestones, taking less than 15 sacks. Look, Bryce isn't a Ferrari, he isn't a Corvette, or a mid-level BMW. He's probably a new Toyota Sienna that will definitely get you somewhere and bring the whole team along with it, no fuss but not a lot of pizazz.  And really, it's about the destination, not about what drove you there.
×
×
  • Create New...