Teams Should be Weary of Dealing a First-Round Pick for Garoppolo

            Jimmy Garoppolo flashed the talent of an NFL starter for the first two games of the 2016 season.

            Under center with Tom Brady serving his suspension from the witch hunt of Deflategate, Garoppolo led the New England Patriots to a 23-21 road victory over the Arizona Cardinals on 'Sunday Night Football.' Garoppolo completed 24 of 33 passes for one touchdown with a 106.1 passer rating. He followed that up with a 18-for-26 passing performance for 232 yards and three TDs versus the Miami Dolphins in a 31-24 win.

Garoppolo led the Patriots, an underdog on the road at Arizona, to a victory on primetime. (Ethan Miller/Getty Images)  

            A right shoulder injury forced Garoppolo out of the game against Miami, which thrust rookie quarterback Jacoby Brissett into action to close out the contest. Brissett then started the next two games at Gillette Stadium, defeating the Houston Texans on 'Thursday Night Football' and then losing to the Buffalo Bills.

            Despite failing to last through two games, Garoppolo impressed scouts and coaches across the league. He remains a hot commodity for QB-needy teams at the onset of the 2017 offseason.

            Garoppolo looked the part of a successful starting QB in his two weeks of play. But is it really worth it for a team to fork over a first-round pick for a guy who has thrown 94 career passes?

            As if his inability to stay healthy wasn’t enough to give teams pause, we have already seen another Patriots backup, Matt Cassel, thrive on a short-term basis in New England, only to fall flat on his face with the Kansas City Chiefs.

            After witnessing Cassel win 10 of 15 starts with New England in the 2008 season, Kansas City coughed up the No. 34 pick in the 2009 draft to acquire him (and linebacker Mike Vrabel). They also rewarded Cassel's performance in ’08 with a six-year, $62.7 million contract that included $28 million in guaranteed money. Aside from his 2010 Pro Bowl campaign, Cassel was a major bust for Kansas City. He was released in 2013 just four years into the contract and failed to ever become a long-term starter again, going 7-11 in spot starts for the Minnesota Vikings, Dallas Cowboys and Buffalo Bills over the past four seasons.

            Another concern for teams pondering a deal for Garoppolo—a free agent after 2017 who will be looking to sign a lucrative extension with whichever team trades for him—is we just saw Brock Osweiler fail colossally after being handed a 4-year, $72 million contract. This came a year after showing signs of a franchise quarterback while briefly taking over for Peyton Manning with the Denver Broncos in 2015.

            It’s unfair to compare the woeful Osweiler, who threw 15 touchdowns against 16 interceptions with a dreadful 72.2 passer rating, to Garoppolo. But keep in mind Osweiler was highly sought after during the 2016 offseason. The Broncos offered him a 4-year, $68 million deal, which he unwisely declined.  Garoppolo certainly has cleaner mechanics than Osweiler, but the fact remains Garoppolo only flashed greatness for a brief period in New England—similar to how Osweiler did in Denver (albeit Osweiler showcased far less with the Broncos).

Brock Osweiler did not live up to expectations in his first season with the Texans. (Brett Coomer/Houston Chronicle)

            Though unlikely, teams should fear Garoppolo is Osweiler 2.0. Garoppolo briefly succeeding in the Patriots' well-established offensive system is hardly a guarantee he will thrive elsewhere.

            The true value of Garoppolo, a potential one-year rental, should be a mid-round pick. Yet, there are rumors the Cleveland Browns may ship the 11^th pick in the upcoming draft and a second-rounder for a QB who showed merely glimpses of brilliance.

            The Chicago Bears, too, have been rumored in trade talks with New England with talks centered on the Bears’ first-round pick. Chicago desperately wants to move on from the embattled Jay Cutler. Would the Bears really give away the No. 3 pick in the draft to land Garoppolo, an unproven commodity?

            In recent years, teams have gravitated towards backups who had short stints of success and then signed these QBs to a long-term deal or traded for them in a blockbuster move. Kevin Kolb and Matt Flynn (in addition to Cassel and Osweiler) are proof of the risk of handing franchise money to a quarterback who lacks a large sample size of success.

            Maybe Garoppolo is different and becomes the elite quarterback that the Browns, Bears and other QB-hungry teams desire. It still sounds dicey to give the franchise reigns to Garoppolo after seeing other backups fail to pan out.

            New England would love if a team pulls the trigger on a trade that nets it a first-round draft selection as Brady continues to defy age and remain the best quarterback in football. But buyer beware, surrendering a top-draft pick—and potentially mortgaging the future—for Garoppolo could set the franchise back for years to come.