Solving for Garoppolo

First Adam Schefter was sure he'd be traded for a 1st round pick. Now he's sure he'll stay a Patriot for 2017.

So, nothing's really changed, has it?

As with Schefter's initial "he's gone" pronouncement, this "he's staying" one was greeted with suspicion; this was just Bill Belichick trying to drive up the price for that obscure object of pigskin desire, Jimmy Garoppolo. At this point, Belichick could say the sky is blue and the ocean is wet and we'd get 5,000 words from pigskin pundits and bobbleheads about a trip they took to the beach, just to be sure. Garoppolo is off the market? Sure. Yeah. Okay. Right. Got it. Wink. Nod. Say no more. Say. No. More.

The conventional wisdom has been that Belichick wants to max out Garoppolo's value. If he leaves as a free agent after the 2017 season (conventional wisdom also notes New England can't afford both Brady and Jimmy G), the best the Pats will get is a compensatory pick. The conventional wisdom further posits a quarterback-needy team should offer a 1st or two 2nd rounders or some other combination of assets worth much more than a low 3rd rounder in 2018. The math is obvious. Trade Garoppolo for assets. Convert assets into players. Win another Super Bowl while Tom Brady is still throwing his fastball in the low 90s.

The value proposition isn't quite that simple though. You have to consider what Garoppolo is worth to Belichick and the Patriots in 2017 in addition to that low 3rd round pick in 2018. New England could have the second-best QB in the AFC East backing up Tom Brady in 2017. How much is that worth? Is there a single player in the 2017 draft who's worth more than that?

So, maybe it makes sense for the Patriots to hang onto Garoppolo.

As a fan, I'll say it's disappointing to think New England won't trade Garoppolo. Not because of the draft capital chickens I've been counting. Because trading Jimmy G would mean that Belichick and the Patriots believed Tom Brady can play at a championship level until he's 45. Not trading Garoppolo implies they're preparing for an entirely different outcome. I know part of this is the afterglow of SB51 but emotionally, I'm not sure I'm ready to let go of Tom Brady. I'm not sure I'll be ready in 2021.

So, let's break it down…

Belichick is playin'

Belichick is clearly disappointed in what's been offered for Garoppolo so far and he wants you to know it. That doesn't mean there isn't a deal that still gets this done. If Cleveland, San Francisco or Chicago offers two 1st round picks (2017 and 2018), does Belichick say no? Remember Cleveland, San Francisco and Chicago, you're asking Belichick to give up a year where he has the two best quarterbacks in his division.

Belichick isn't playin'

Quarterback is the single most important position in football. An injury to your team's starting quarterback generally ranges from merely devastating to an extinction-level event. There's a reason why your backup QB is a backup, after all. Jimmy G on the other hand is a starter in waiting.

Garoppolo isn't just a low deductible insurance policy; he's a kevlar vest. He makes Belichick and New England bulletproof. Why trade that away?

Garoppolo is a bridge to Brissett

By all reports, the Patriots like what they have in Jacoby Brissett (a lot) but are they ready to be one play away from "and starting under center for the New England Patriots… Jacoby Brissett!"? The thumb injury had to set Brissett back to some degree. Giving him another year to work with Josh McDaniels and his staff only makes sense. They want to be sure about Brissett before letting Garoppolo go.

Garoppolo is the QB of the Future

Yes, it was a small data sample but it was a damned good small data sample. Garoppolo threw for 502 yards and 4 TDs in a little less than 6 quarters of action in 2016. That projects to 5,333 yards and 43 TDs over a full season.

I'll give you a moment to think about that.

I don't think Brady is going to fall off the proverbial cliff in 2017. Okay, he's turning 40 but he's still Tom Brady. Was there anything fluky about his performance in 2016?

No. The answer is no.

2016 was arguably Brady's best season and there's absolutely no doubt it was one of the three best seasons of his storied career (2007 and 2010 being the other two). He won his 5th Super Bowl without Rob Gronkowski, one of the Top 10 players in the NFL when he's healthy. Aren't all of the good citizens of Patriots Nation looking forward to Brady and Gronk back on the field together in 2017?

Yes. The answer is yes.

Back to that small data sample… 5,333 yards and 43 TD passes (and 0 interceptions).

It puts Belichick's Schefter-repped position into perspective at the very least. It makes me wonder why there's any debate as to Garoppolo's value.

If Tom Brady wins a sixth Lombardi Trophy in 2017, maybe Gisele talks Tom into retiring.

Perhaps Brady finally shows some subtle signs of decline that only Belichick and McDaniels notice and Belichick does the most Belichick thing ever and moves on from the greatest quarterback of all time in 2018, trading Brady to San Francisco who promptly leads the 49ers on an improbable run to Super Bowl 53 because Tom Brady. Seriously, would that surprise us? Brady winning back-to-back rings with the Patriots and then his third in a row as a 49er?

I think I just boggled my own mind.

Where was I? Oh, right. Jimmy G. QB of the Future.

Why not hang onto Garoppolo? Why trade away a young QB with 5K/43 TD potential?

Why make a decision before you have to?