Purdy and 49’ers extension. 5 years 265 million

[Kirby Jackson]

7 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

FWIW with Purdy.  He's an above average starting QB and this contract won't look as bad a couple of years from now imo.

 

 

I actually think he’s pretty good too. I also think, that he played with the NFL’s best roster for a year and a half. This past year, the roster was a little worse and he was below average to bad IMO. That tweet doesn’t necessarily say it but he didn’t impact winning at all. The focus turned to him and he went 6-9. I know that they had injuries, but you could have had LOTS of QBs win at least 6 games in that situation. With this contract, he will never have rosters as good as his first couple of years again. Their rosters will look more like 2024 when he steered them to 6 wins.

 

It’s a tricky situation though. I don’t know what you would do differently? As the 49ers GM, you had to pay him. You could do a lot worse than him as a player. The problem is, the second you sign him to that deal, you’re resigned to mediocrity until you can get out from the contract. It’s not just Purdy either. It’s Tua, Derek Carr, it’s Cousins, it’s Geno, it’s Watson, it’s Darnold and maybe even Murray, Love, Goff and Lawrence. They’re all a little different but committing to a mediocre QB, above $25M AAV is bad business.

[Kirby Jackson]

7 hours ago, RoscoeParrish said:

He’s actually horrible. His career average is 150 passing yards per game. He’s not on Purdy or Geno or Cousins or Darnold’s level, respectfully. He can’t run an offense or read a defense or play QB at the NFL level.

 

Like I said, your take makes sense if you pick “league average guy making league average money.” Your take does not make sense for a dude who can’t play the position. You may as well say “you are better off paying Peterman $20M.” It’s just wrong.

Justin Fields was 4-2 last year. He didn’t set the world on fire but he was relatively efficient and won. That was my point. He’s not Peterman. He’s a little more like Tyrod was. He can make a few plays and if he manages mistakes (which Tyrod did better than Fields) you can win with him.
 

Again, I think Fields is probably a bottom 5 starting QB. The point that I’m trying to make is that I’d rather have QB 28 at $20M than QB 21 at $53M. Your ceiling is the exact same with either guy calling the shots. You can maybe get to the WC round. Purdy is a better player than Fields but not by a lot (especially last year). Give me the slightly worse player that’s way cheaper, every day. 

[GunnerBill]

2 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I actually think he’s pretty good too. I also think, that he played with the NFL’s best roster for a year and a half. This past year, the roster was a little worse and he was below average to bad IMO. That tweet doesn’t necessarily say it bulct he didn’t impact winning at all. The focus turned to him and he went 6-9. I know that they had injuries, but you could have had LOTS of QBs win at least 6 games in that situation. With this contract, he will never have rosters as good as his first couple of years again. Their rosters will look more like 2024 when he steered them to 6 wins.

 

It’s a tricky situation though. I don’t know what you would do differently? As the 49ers GM, you had to pay him. You could do a lot worse than him as a player. The problem is, the second you sign him to that deal, you’re resigned to mediocrity until you can get out from the contract. It’s not just Purdy either. It’s Tua, Derek Carr, it’s Cousins, it’s Geno, it’s Watson, it’s Darnold and maybe even Murray, Love, Goff and Lawrence. They’re all a little different but committing to a mediocre QB, above $25M AAV is bad business.

 

But it is also unavoidable. It is the market. 

 

On Purdy he reminds me VERY much of Tua. If the first read as designed in Kyle's offense is there he is dynamite. If you can take that away he hesitates and then you can force him into mistakes. 

 

He is a better athlete than Tua. But in terms of his from the pocket play they are very similar.

Edited 2 hours ago by GunnerBill

[RoscoeParrish]

2 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Justin Fields was 4-2 last year. He didn’t set the world on fire but he was relatively efficient and won. That was my point. He’s not Peterman. He’s a little more like Tyrod was. He can make a few plays and if he manages mistakes (which Tyrod did better than Fields) you can win with him.
 

Again, I think Fields is probably a bottom 5 starting QB. The point that I’m trying to make is that I’d rather have QB 28 at $20M than QB 21 at $53M. Your ceiling is the exact same with either guy calling the shots. You can maybe get to the WC round. Purdy is a better player than Fields but not by a lot (especially last year). Give me the slightly worse player that’s way cheaper, every day. 

4-2 before being benched for the corpse of Russell Wilson is not the flex you think it is for a guy who has been in the league for 5 years.

[BillsFan130]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

But it is also unavoidable. It is the market. 

 

On Purdy he reminds me VERY much of Tua. If the first read as designed in Kyle's offense is there he is dynamite. If you can take that away he hesitates and then you can force him into mistakes. 

 

He is a better athlete than Tua. But in terms of his from the pocket play they are very similar.

This is interesting as I hear a lot of people say Purdy is a west coast Tua.

 

I personally just don't see a ton of similiarities in their game

 

If it's because they run a similar west coast offensive scheme that is based off of timing and accuracy? Ok sure

 

But Purdy is WAY more off script than Tua- And has improved as a scrambler a lot over the last couple years.

 

Tua= Better at accuracy and timing 

Purdy= Better at scrambling/going off script.

 

JMO

Edited 1 hour ago by BillsFan130

[GunnerBill]

5 minutes ago, BillsFan130 said:

This is interesting as I hear a lot of people say Purdy is a west coast Tua.

 

I personally just don't see a ton of similiarities in their game

 

If it's because they run a similar west coast offensive scheme that is based off of timing and accuracy? Ok sure

 

But Purdy is WAY more off script than Tua- And has improved as a scrambler a lot over the last couple years.

 

Tua= Better at accuracy and timing 

Purdy= Better at scrambling/going off script.

 

JMO

 

Purdy is better than Tua are creating off script I agree. But I don't think he is better from the pocket when his first read isn't there. I think he hesitates and ends up late on throws if he is going through progressions pretty consistently. If he moves in those situations he normally has better outcomes than when he stays in and tries to get to his 2nd or 3rd guy.

[RoscoeParrish]

10 minutes ago, BillsFan130 said:

This is interesting as I hear a lot of people say Purdy is a west coast Tua.

 

I personally just don't see a ton of similiarities in their game

 

If it's because they run a similar west coast offensive scheme that is based off of timing and accuracy? Ok sure

 

But Purdy is WAY more off script than Tua- And has improved as a scrambler a lot over the last couple years.

 

Tua= Better at accuracy and timing 

Purdy= Better at scrambling/going off script.

 

JMO

It’s more because they both are limited athletically QBs that have had outrageous passing stats inflated by a Shanny system and surrounding by elite/HoF level talent, which allows them to get paid as elite QB’s which then causes the team to lose that talent they surrounded them with and that’s the end of the carousel ride.

[Kirby Jackson]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

But it is also unavoidable. It is the market. 

 

On Purdy he reminds me VERY much of Tua. If the first read as designed in Kyle's offense is there he is dynamite. If you can take that away he hesitates and then you can force him into mistakes. 

 

He is a better athlete than Tua. But in terms of his from the pocket play they are very similar.

Yeah, it’s wild. You really don’t have a choice but that’s an awful place to be. I’d much rather need a QB than pay a guy that’s just okay. I do agree on the Tua comparison. Purdy is good in that system.

[BillsFan130]

8 minutes ago, RoscoeParrish said:

It’s more because they both are limited athletically QBs that have had outrageous passing stats inflated by a Shanny system and surrounding by elite/HoF level talent, which allows them to get paid as elite QB’s which then causes the team to lose that talent they surrounded them with and that’s the end of the carousel ride.

Fair points- Although I used to say Tua is a system QB. And maybe he is- But he's absolutely vital to THAT system.

 

Miamis offence goes to absolute s*** when Tua gets injured lol

 

[Kirby Jackson]

49 minutes ago, RoscoeParrish said:

4-2 before being benched for the corpse of Russell Wilson is not the flex you think it is for a guy who has been in the league for 5 years.

The Steeler fans and people that follow them hated that decision. He has a starting role this year. Again, he’s not Peterman. You’re better off paying him $20M than Purdy $53M. There are 3 tiers of QBs: guys you win because of, guys you can win with, and young / unproven guys. The worst place to be is having “a guy you can win with making guy that you win because of money.” That’s Purdy

[GunnerBill]

6 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

The Steeler fans and people that follow them hated that decision. He has a starting role this year. Again, he’s not Peterman. You’re better off paying him $20M than Purdy $53M. There are 3 tiers of QBs: guys you win because of, guys you can win with, and young / unproven guys. The worst place to be is having “a guy you can win with making guy that you win because of money.” That’s Purdy

 

Thing is that middle class is very small. Baker is probably the ideal landing point. $33m AAV and performing as well as many of the $50m guys. Its just hard to find them. 

[BillsFan130]

6 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

The Steeler fans and people that follow them hated that decision. He has a starting role this year. Again, he’s not Peterman. You’re better off paying him $20M than Purdy $53M. There are 3 tiers of QBs: guys you win because of, guys you can win with, and young / unproven guys. The worst place to be is having “a guy you can win with making guy that you win because of money.” That’s Purdy

It's an interesting topic. Because what QBs can you win with, that make let's say 45 plus a year.

 

Josh, Mahomes, Burrow, Lamar, Stafford , Hurts I think are the concrete 6. (Although Hurts contract is very back loaded)

 

Then I would say you got maybes in Herbert, Baker and Goff
 

Then there's a big drop from there. (Lawrence, Dak , Purdy etc.)

 

I think your overall point is it's dumb to pay Purdy 45 a year (that was the real number that came out), cause you're not going to win with him at that number. Which I would agree with

 

 

[RoscoeParrish]

25 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

The Steeler fans and people that follow them hated that decision. He has a starting role this year. Again, he’s not Peterman. You’re better off paying him $20M than Purdy $53M. There are 3 tiers of QBs: guys you win because of, guys you can win with, and young / unproven guys. The worst place to be is having “a guy you can win with making guy that you win because of money.” That’s Purdy

Id rather pay Tyler Shough $6M than Fields $20M

[Kirby Jackson]

15 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Thing is that middle class is very small. Baker is probably the ideal landing point. $33m AAV and performing as well as many of the $50m guys. Its just hard to find them. 

Yeah, he’s an interesting case because I think Baker is better than that whole tier I listed earlier and he makes less than all of them.