Garoppolo's winning percentage

[wilwhite]

A lot has been made of this, so I thought I'd take a look.

Garoppolo's record is 31-14 with San Francisco over the past five years, and they're 8-28 without him. That's pretty convincing. Trey Lance went 1-1.

So who went 7-27?

CJ Beathard 2-10
Nick Mullens 5-11
Brian Hoyer 0-6

Garoppolo is significantly better than those guys, no question. But is he's so good that he carried the Niners, or are those three so weak that you can't win with them?

 

[Schmoopy1000]

A lot has been made of this, so I thought I'd take a look.

Garoppolo's record is 31-14 with San Francisco over the past five years, and they're 8-28 without him. That's pretty convincing. Trey Lance went 1-1.

So who went 7-27?

CJ Beathard 2-10
Nick Mullens 5-11
Brian Hoyer 0-6

Garoppolo is significantly better than those guys, no question. But is he's so good that he carried the Niners, or are those three so weak that you can't win with them?

also add in the year he missed was also the year the defense got decimated by injuries. (Which the niners live & die on)
So if he doesnt get injured that year. His win loss record would be much worse. As his supporting defense wasnt there that year. They were absolutely horrible. A lot of those losses those other three QBs get to claim would have been Jimmy G's. When he came back from injury so did Bosa & other key defensive players. His major injury is the key to why his record looks so good. he stays healthy that year he gets a lot of L's tacked on to his record & then gets injured when the defense came back those nobody back ups would have more W's. All of a sudden that comparison of stats dont look so convincing. He should thank the timing of his injury for his next payday. (Someone will pay him)

 

[Clayton]

A lot has been made of this, so I thought I'd take a look.

Garoppolo's record is 31-14 with San Francisco over the past five years, and they're 8-28 without him. That's pretty convincing. Trey Lance went 1-1.

So who went 7-27?

CJ Beathard 2-10
Nick Mullens 5-11
Brian Hoyer 0-6

Garoppolo is significantly better than those guys, no question. But is he's so good that he carried the Niners, or are those three so weak that you can't win with them?

Those three are very obviously so weak that you can't win with them imo.

The Jimmy G to Lance transition is interesting, though. They both played AZ last year(?) and Jimmy G was given twice the pass load. Lance getting twice the yards on scrambles. Lance's bad throw % and Pressure % is notably worse than Jimmy G. Beyond those stats....they're very even which is interesting. That consistency would certainly suggest there are elements to Jimmy G's game that are 'the system'

You definitely want to see a larger sample size with Lance, though. And an offseason with him as the starter.

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

More of a tale of two situations. Jimmy did not carry the team but he isn't terrible. And those other 3 are backups and practice squad for a reason but as @Schmoopy1000 said, other injuries played a significant role as well. Not just the defense either. Kittle and Deebo both missed several games as well. Wins and losses are only a small part of the big picture.

 

[DJ]

Megs hasn't shown up.....LOL.

 

[DJ]

They have a good defense and running game.....Jimmy G isn't bad but he's not great either.....he's about 14-17 in the NFL as a starter in the League but he's also way better than those bum ass backups.

 

[Schmoopy1000]

They have a good defense and running game.....Jimmy G isn't bad but he's not great either.....he's about 14-17 in the NFL as a starter in the League but he's also way better than those bum ass backups.

I agree.
He is just a decent middle of the road QB that is excellent at bus driving.
In that role he leaves mistakes to a minimum. Which helps a team with good defenses & running games. Indy might call him. (or Denver)

 

[Robotech]

Jimmy G is an average NFL starting QB. Maybe he is even slightly above average. His best attributes are a quick release and quick decision making. He isn't terrible like many people say. He's an easy target for blame and extreme takes, but that comes with the territory when you are a starting NFL QB.

I do wonder if he would've developed into a very good QB if he didn't tear his ACL in 2018. Before that injury, he had a much better ability to escape pressure and extend plays.

 

[Jikkle]

The offense itself boosts the numbers of QBs because it gives them a lot of nice easy throws that get YAC. I recall PFF rating him at the bottom in their big-time throw stat which indicates to me that he's making a lot of routine easy throws.

I'd say Jimmy is about above average which is why some desperate team will probably overpay in a trade for him. He's basically a one-pitch pitcher but he throws that pitch pretty well.

He has moments when he shrinks under the pressure but he does have a lot of moments where he delivers under the pressure as well which I don't feel gets pretty glossed over.

If Lance ends up being a viable threat to defenses throwing deep the 9ers offense is going to be in great shape. Their biggest problem is when defenses decide to fully commit to shutting down the run and just eat a handful of Jimmy down the middle passes a game. That's basically what the Rams did in the NFC Championship game and if the 9ers had a QB that could punish teams for doing that the offense will be tough to stop.

 

[Jikkle]

Those three are very obviously so weak that you can't win with them imo.

The Jimmy G to Lance transition is interesting, though. They both played AZ last year(?) and Jimmy G was given twice the pass load. Lance getting twice the yards on scrambles. Lance's bad throw % and Pressure % is notably worse than Jimmy G. Beyond those stats....they're very even which is interesting. That consistency would certainly suggest there are elements to Jimmy G's game that are 'the system'

You definitely want to see a larger sample size with Lance, though. And an offseason with him as the starter.

That's why personally feel the 9ers would've ultimately wound up in a better spot at the end of the season if they started Lance week 1.

I mean it's hard to argue sticking with Jimmy G considering they barely lost the NFC championship game but I feel by week 18 Lance would've been playing better than Jimmy was.

In both games Lance played I thought he played better once he settled down and got in a groove so I think starting week 1 and playing every game he could've been like a Davis Millis and had things together by the end of the season after a bumpy start.

 

[Schmoopy1000]

Jimmy G is an average NFL starting QB. Maybe he is even slightly above average. His best attributes are a quick release and quick decision making. He isn't terrible like many people say. He's an easy target for blame and extreme takes, but that comes with the territory when you are a starting NFL QB.

I do wonder if he would've developed into a very good QB if he didn't tear his ACL in 2018. Before that injury, he had a much better ability to escape pressure and extend plays.

Decent=Average

 

[Clayton]

That's why personally feel the 9ers would've ultimately wound up in a better spot at the end of the season if they started Lance week 1.

I mean it's hard to argue sticking with Jimmy G considering they barely lost the NFC championship game but I feel by week 18 Lance would've been playing better than Jimmy was.

In both games Lance played I thought he played better once he settled down and got in a groove so I think starting week 1 and playing every game he could've been like a Davis Millis and had things together by the end of the season after a bumpy start.

I can see both sides of it. Chiefs wasted a year of elite Kelce and Hill play with Alex Smith but when the next guy up is a raw prospect then maybe you can't make the change without losing your locker room

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

I can see both sides of it. Chiefs wasted a year of elite Kelce and Hill play with Alex Smith but when the next guy up is a raw prospect then maybe you can't make the change without losing your locker room

I agree. When a player is that raw, let him watch and learn how to be a professional. You guys were lucky to have Alex Smith. He was a great mentor and is a consumate pro. I think JimmyG is in that same vein. Maybe guys like Smith and Garropolo aren't going to be great on the field or carry a team to a championship (although the Niners came real close) but they are guys you can rely on to be a good team leader and presence in the locker room.

 

[jarntt]

Garoppolo is just not a good QB. You don't necessarily need a good QB to win, but it helps. Put just an average QB on the 49ers and they likely have another ring. Jimmy G is nowhere near average IMO.

Jimmy Garoppolo Stats, Height, Weight, Position, Draft, College | Pro-Football-Reference.com

Checkout the latest stats for Jimmy Garoppolo. Get info about his position, age, height, weight, college, draft, and more on Pro-football-reference.com.

www.pro-football-reference.com

He has played 6 playoff games and averaged 160 yards passing. Not one game, six games. That's hard to grasp from a QB in this era. He gets wins which is always the argument for him, but IMO they are in spite of him, not because of him.

 

[Cedrique]

A lot has been made of this, so I thought I'd take a look.

Garoppolo's record is 31-14 with San Francisco over the past five years, and they're 8-28 without him. That's pretty convincing. Trey Lance went 1-1.

So who went 7-27?

CJ Beathard 2-10
Nick Mullens 5-11
Brian Hoyer 0-6

Garoppolo is significantly better than those guys, no question. But is he's so good that he carried the Niners, or are those three so weak that you can't win with them?

I never realized he was that brittle.

 

[Clayton]

Garoppolo is just not a good QB. You don't necessarily need a good QB to win, but it helps. Put just an average QB on the 49ers and they likely have another ring. Jimmy G is nowhere near average IMO.



He has played 6 playoff games and averaged 160 yards passing. Not one game, six games. That's hard to grasp from a QB in this era. He gets wins which is always the argument for him, but IMO they are in spite of him, not because of him.

Niners are definitely built to win with the run and YAC but both Niners losses in the playoffs came when they needed Jimmy G to take over and he couldn't do it. I definitely wouldn't want to be a fan of a team that trades for Jimmy G.

 

[SeattleCoug]

Niners are definitely built to win with the run and YAC but both Niners losses in the playoffs came when they needed Jimmy G to take over and he couldn't do it. I definitely wouldn't want to be a fan of a team that trades for Jimmy G.

This is what I was going to say. YAC is a huge part of what makes that offense. Jimmy G is basically a one read and throw guy that has playmakers do their thing after the catch.

 

[Clayton]

This is what I was going to say. YAC is a huge part of what makes that offense. Jimmy G is basically a one read and throw guy that has playmakers do their thing after the catch.

I have seen some breakdowns of Jimmy G reading the field. My worry with him outside of the Niners system is that he'll turn into Teddy Bridgewater on the Panthers. Not a game winner, a few too many INTs

 

[jarntt]

Jimmy G, football legend

 

[sonnyblack65]