General off-season discussion/plan thread

[NinerNation21]

Really insightful and informative interview from Lynch and Shanahan: https://www.ninersnation.com/2020/4/27/21238479/49ers-lynch-shanahan

 

Quote

JL: “We’re sitting there on the clock, that was tough because I had been talking to Ron Rivera and having really good talks, but they were getting a lot of interest on Trent. Every time it felt like we were at a point where we’d have it finish, he’d say, ‘Let’s wait till tomorrow.’ That was frustrating, but we were willing to take that chance to be able to add a guy like Kinlaw, to be able to add Aiyuk and then to also go on and maneuver with the things we did today.

From the Redskins perspective, they botched this whole thing. We got another steal of a trade. First Jimmy G, then Trent Williams. I don't know if it's being at the right place at the right time, or if Lynch is just super persistent. 

 

Quote

KS: “One thing that was really cool was if the Washington deal didn’t go through, one of our Plan Bs was to try to draft [OL] Colton [McKivitz] there in the fourth round and then we made that risk to move that to go up and get the receiver we wanted. Then we did end up getting Trent, and to still be able to get him (McKivitz) in the fifth round was a hell of a deal. We felt really excited about how today went.”

Shanahan really likes McKivitz. It sounds like they targeted him in the 4th before the draft even started. I wonder what it is about him that he really liked.

 

Quote

JL: “Tristan Wirfs is a player we were extremely fond of. He’s an unbelievable athlete. He’s an unbelievable player, well-schooled from Iowa.

Not surprising. It seems like it was going to be Wirfs, Lamb, or Kinlaw. 

 

Quote

JL: "We overwhelmed people from a defensive line perspective. We lost an exceptional player in Buckner, and we felt like we had had an opportunity to fill that void, and we felt like even though we were assuming some risk without the Trent Williams thing being done, that was a risk we were willing to take. Thank God we stayed persistent on that, and Washington came around, and I think now we’re feeling very good about the direction we went.”

This is our identity on defense and Kinlaw helps to keep that going. Aiyuk matches our offensive identity of we run through you or around you regardless of your efforts. Our 1st-round picks fit our philosophy perfectly. 

[N4L]

On 2/3/2020 at 12:31 AM, N4L said:

Breida should get tendered with a 2nd/3rd round tender for 3ish million. He had a rough second half of the year, but he is a good #2/#3 back. Would be fine with trading him for a 5th or so if we add another runner (see below) 

BOOM

[Melbourne 9er]

On 4/27/2020 at 6:48 AM, NinerNation21 said:

Fine with everything except not keeping Sanders. Not sure if it could’ve happened or not, but that’s all I’d change. 

I still don't get the Sanders love, especially at the price. He played 2 great games for us (14-269-2). However, including playoffs, he played the other 11 games for 27-304-1. I don't care about his leadership skills at this point as I wouldn't be paying 8m per year for  wide receiver with those numbers.

[dan77733]

On 4/26/2020 at 3:54 PM, Forge said:

How would you have gotten the money to keep all of those players? Because what you're proposing was not feasible. Especially since you are drafting at 14 and keeping Buckner....

Would have re-signed Armstead which we did. Ward's money goes to Sanders for one year, maybe two. Then in 2021, I would release/trade Ford which combined with Staley's retirement (or release if he didn't retire) would give the team plenty of cap room to keep Buckner. Wouldn't keep Solomon Thomas. Let his contract expire and leave to get a good comp pick the following year or franchise tag/trade him if I knew I had a deal in place.

For 2021, according to Overthecap, the only player I would have to re-sign in addition to Buckner would be Tartt. Basically, I would let the older or just not productive players depart and keep my actual young core intact. I would always go with young talent and position priority. For example, Buckner or Ward? If you could keep one, who would it be? Would anyone really pick Ward?

Ward will be 29 in July, is injury prone, has missed literally two seasons out of six and I have Moore going into his third year and to be honest, I would want to see what he can do as a starter. Give him a shot. Still have Tartt back there and a great front seven.

Then there's Breida, I know he fell off in the last third of the season and playoffs but they didn't exactly give 10-12 carries a game. His touches were low. 23 carries in the last 7 games including being inactive for Super Bowl. Yeah, he had a horrible game against Seattle. Join the club. And he's traded in favor of a guy who hasn't played in three years and you could say that Breida had better stats in his first three seasons than McKinnon did but yet, who do we keep? Can't say it's a salary cap move because if it was, Coleman would be gone instead of Breida. Just makes no sense to me.

Then the team trades a 2021 3rd round draft pick for a 32 year old OT who like Sanders is a UFA in a year from now and wants an extension. Brilliant freaking move. SMH. An OT was there at 13 and 14. But nah, let's trade a 2021 3rd rounder for what could be a one year veteran rental in which we gain nothing. You don't give up draft picks in the first three rounds for a player who could only be a one year rental, is 32 and who may want a good amount of money that quite honestly, when you think about could easily have been put towards Buckner in 2021. Seriously, if Williams leaves, gets injured or whatever, team is in the same exact situation in a year from now. Makes no sense to me. Not when you have TWO chances to draft a starting LT.

Obviously, it doesn't matter, what's done is done. But what can I say besides I simply disagree with the decisions they made this off-season.

[dan77733]

4 hours ago, Melbourne 9er said:

I still don't get the Sanders love, especially at the price. He played 2 great games for us (14-269-2). However, including playoffs, he played the other 11 games for 27-304-1. I don't care about his leadership skills at this point as I wouldn't be paying 8m per year for  wide receiver with those numbers.

In fairness to Sanders, it's not like Jimmy G put 300+ yards in both playoff games. Did he even hit 100 yards? Can't blame the WR for not having yards if the QB isn't passing. Plus, it was Jimmy G who overthrew him in the Super Bowl. It's not as if the ball was there and Sanders dropped it.

[Forge]

1 hour ago, dan77733 said:

Would have re-signed Armstead which we did. Ward's money goes to Sanders for one year, maybe two.

Not sure how Sanders is a better investment than Ward at this stage, especially given the depth of the receiver class in this draft, but minor quibble. You keeping Manny, but now relying on Moore at free safety. Tackling on defense takes a hit, but the defense was fairly competent with him in it, so this is a risk that totally make makes sense. 

1 hour ago, dan77733 said:

Wouldn't keep Solomon Thomas. Let his contract expire and leave to get a good comp pick the following year or franchise tag/trade him if I knew I had a deal in place.

sorry, what? You know he sucks, right? You're not getting a "good" comp pick, and you're certainly not tagging him to trade him. This is just a weird comment entirely and I couldn't let it go lol. There's no real impact of this comment or anything...it just struck me as profoundly weird. 

1 hour ago, dan77733 said:

For 2021, according to Overthecap, the only player I would have to re-sign in addition to Buckner would be Tartt. Basically, I would let the older or just not productive players depart and keep my actual young core intact. I would always go with young talent and position priority. For example, Buckner or Ward? If you could keep one, who would it be? Would anyone really pick Ward?

I have no idea what you are looking at. 

What about Kittle? 2020 is the last year of his deal and he needs an extension now. When are you signing that? What about Sherman? Last year of his deal as well. Are you letting him walk? Because then you have to replace him and you have two other corners that are also unrestricted free agents and another that is an rfa. Are you re-signing of them? Who are you replacing the with? 

What about Juice Check? Are you bringing him back? You have to re-sign him as well because 2020 is the last year of his deal. Do you have a back up quarterback? Because both CJ and Nick Mullens are up this year. You can tender Mullens, but a second round tender will likely be in excess of 4 million dollars for one year. Who's taking over for DJ Jones at the 1 tech? He's in the last year of his deal. So at this point I guess it would be Kinlaw, but in your scenario, we didn't trade Buckner for the #13 pick so we don't have Kinlaw. With no Tartt, who is your starting safety, because Harris is also a free agent. Trent Williams is a free agent, so obviously we have the gaping hole at LT, and even if you feel good about Brunskill...well crap, he's a free agent too. But we lucked out there, just restricted. We are missing a couple of running backs as well since Coleman and Jet are up. Defensive line will need some depth. Blair is a free agent along with Jones, and Hyder is only signed for a year. No fewer than 3 receivers are free agents next year. Mostly depth, of course, but Bourne has his moments. 

I mean, we have a ton of guys who are up as free agents, so I have no idea where you are coming up with the only players you have to resign in 2021 are Buck and Tartt. 

1 hour ago, dan77733 said:

And he's traded in favor of a guy who hasn't played in three years

No he wasn't. He was traded because he was superfluous and making nearly 4 million dollars this year. He was a UDFA we got 3 solid years from and a 5th round pick for in return. We didn't need him and the notion that we ran a "three headed monster" in the backfield is largely erroneous outside of the games in which we completely destroyed a team like Cincy. Jet is on a vet minimum contract, adds a dimension to the offense the rest don't have, and saves even more money by not being cut because his bonus doesn't accelerate. It absolutely can be viewed as a cost cutting move. Just because Coleman is more expensive doesn't mean that Breida's move wasn't. The team could trust Coleman more (both to stay on the field and for what he does on the field). Coleman, given his age, may have not had trade value as good as Breida. Now, I'm the biggest Coleman detractor on this forum, but even I understand why it's Breida who is gone and not Coleman. 

1 hour ago, dan77733 said:

Then the team trades a 2021 3rd round draft pick for a 32 year old OT who like Sanders is a UFA in a year from now and wants an extension. Brilliant freaking move.

It kind of was. Especially if Williams is still the same. But even if he's just Joe's level that's a great way to keep the team afloat and is a high quality tackle for this year. 

1 hour ago, dan77733 said:

An OT was there at 13 and 14. But nah, let's trade a 2021 3rd rounder for what could be a one year veteran rental in which we gain nothing.

So first off - no guarantee that Wirfs is a tackle at the next level. There's that. I actually drafted him as a guard, and before the combine, most projected his position as guard. That's about an evaluation. He also has very limited exposure on the left side (only played there during an injury), and perhaps a truncated off season to be able adjust to any changes. 

Also, "we gain nothing". You gain the ability to keep a super bowl window open and not have a greater chance that it implodes because you can't keep your quarterback upright. It buys you time to come up with a longer term solution. Oh, and also there's no guarantee that we don't re-sign him, so there's that. Secondarily, you gain a replacement for Buckner (which  was kind of needed because Thomas blows) by not using that pick on Wirfs. 

Wirfs may be a good tackle, and may not be. If you're asking me which player, he or Williams, I feel better about not blowing up our season and forcing us to lose a year in a limited super bowl window, that answer is 100% Williams. 

In your scenario, we don't even have pick 14, so I'm curious how you would have solved his abrupt retirement if not Williams? Going to just hope the small sample from Brunskill was legit? Because that's a huge risk to take. 

And we also likely would get a fifth round comp pick if we don't re-sign him, which cancels out the fifth we gave up this year, and the pick we are giving up is a late third. You're talking pick 90-96 more than likely. It could certainly get you a solid player, no doubt there, but it's just not that big of a deal to me. Worse players get traded for more. 

[y2lamanaki]

14 hours ago, Melbourne 9er said:

I still don't get the Sanders love, especially at the price. He played 2 great games for us (14-269-2). However, including playoffs, he played the other 11 games for 27-304-1. I don't care about his leadership skills at this point as I wouldn't be paying 8m per year for  wide receiver with those numbers.

Here's a fun fact - if you only take the last 13 games of last season and subtract his two best games, Julio Jones is no longer a 1,000 yard receiver worth a $20 million cap hit. If you take out Tyreek Hill's two best games, he had a 10-game season of 41-563-5 in an offense that threw the ball over 100 times more than we did. I'm just as unimpressed.

Not to mention, remove Emmanuel Sanders from the 28-25 victory over Arizona and the 48-46 victory over New Orleans, and now you have a 5th seed 49ers team traveling to Philly, then Green Bay, then New Orleans. If you were a 5th seeded team who needed to trade pick #95 and drop 19 spots from the 4th into the 5th for a shot at winning the Super Bowl, you don't think that's worth it to make it happen? Let me ask it another way - if you were #2 in the NFC West and needed to trade a 3rd and make a 19-pick swap to win the NFC West and get past the Seahawks, you don't make that trade?

And you might not care about leadership, but I sure do - Deebo in 6 games before Emmanuel Sanders: 15 receptions, 168 yards, 1 total TD (2.5, 28, 0.17 per game). Deebo in 10 games after Emmanuel Sanders: 42 receptions, 634 yards, 5 total TDs (4.2, 63.4, 0.5 per game). That is monumental progression that is largely due to Sanders' presence - both leadership in helping develop young receivers by providing immeasurable veteran guidance, and on-field presence drawing attention away from them and allowing them to be #3 and #4 options in the passing game (behind Kittle and Sanders). 

All of that is worth the loss of pick #95, and a 19 pick swap. Especially because not one person would have complained one iota about the trade had Jimmy Garoppolo put the ball on target at the end of the Super Bowl. Then Sanders is an unmistakable legend in all-time 49ers lore. And if the difference of one pass on which all the fault belongs to the quarterback is the difference between an unsuccessful trade involving pick #95 and a successful trade involving pick #96, then I'd say you just about hit on exact value in the move.

[oldman9er]

42 minutes ago, y2lamanaki said:

Here's a fun fact -

Missed here, you have been, good sir. Best wishes. 

[NcFinest9erFan]

 

[GW21]

21 minutes ago, NcFinest9erFan said:

 

I don’t see it, but hopefully they are right.

[Forge]

Just now, Gore Whore 21 said:

I don’t see it, but hopefully they are right.

I don't see what they are talking about with regards to separating and being physical against press. That was one of the points of my concern that he's a slot receiver at the next level. But yeah, with I'm just going to roll with them regarding fit and all that good stuff. 

[GW21]

Some jersey numbers for you folks. I’m hoping Hurd goes back to 17. I hate 14 for some reason. 

[John232]

I will say, the traits and things that I find Aiyuk lacking are totally teachable. Just my two cents. I really liked the pickup, would've preferred Jeudy or Lamb, but the fact that we came out of this draft with Kinlaw, Aiyuk and Williams makes me pretty frickin happy. 

Don't like parts of their process, but their process has generally been pretty sound. Just feels like when we whiff, we whiff HARD.

[757-NINER]

6 hours ago, y2lamanaki said:

Here's a fun fact - if you only take the last 13 games of last season and subtract his two best games, Julio Jones is no longer a 1,000 yard receiver worth a $20 million cap hit. If you take out Tyreek Hill's two best games, he had a 10-game season of 41-563-5 in an offense that threw the ball over 100 times more than we did. I'm just as unimpressed.

Not to mention, remove Emmanuel Sanders from the 28-25 victory over Arizona and the 48-46 victory over New Orleans, and now you have a 5th seed 49ers team traveling to Philly, then Green Bay, then New Orleans. If you were a 5th seeded team who needed to trade pick #95 and drop 19 spots from the 4th into the 5th for a shot at winning the Super Bowl, you don't think that's worth it to make it happen? Let me ask it another way - if you were #2 in the NFC West and needed to trade a 3rd and make a 19-pick swap to win the NFC West and get past the Seahawks, you don't make that trade?

And you might not care about leadership, but I sure do - Deebo in 6 games before Emmanuel Sanders: 15 receptions, 168 yards, 1 total TD (2.5, 28, 0.17 per game). Deebo in 10 games after Emmanuel Sanders: 42 receptions, 634 yards, 5 total TDs (4.2, 63.4, 0.5 per game). That is monumental progression that is largely due to Sanders' presence - both leadership in helping develop young receivers by providing immeasurable veteran guidance, and on-field presence drawing attention away from them and allowing them to be #3 and #4 options in the passing game (behind Kittle and Sanders). 

All of that is worth the loss of pick #95, and a 19 pick swap. Especially because not one person would have complained one iota about the trade had Jimmy Garoppolo put the ball on target at the end of the Super Bowl. Then Sanders is an unmistakable legend in all-time 49ers lore. And if the difference of one pass on which all the fault belongs to the quarterback is the difference between an unsuccessful trade involving pick #95 and a successful trade involving pick #96, then I'd say you just about hit on exact value in the move.

I don't think anyone can dispute what Sanders did for last year's team. His presence alone stabilized the WR core and vaulted the offense. He was definitely worth the half year rental. I mean look where it landed us...10 mins away from #6. 

Saying all that, I'm was glad we didn't resign him. His age started to show last year. Wasn't as quick nor elusive as he had been previously in his career. I do acknowledge that Achilles injuries really take two years to really recover from. But I'm not sure if he could regain that pre-injury form. Not to mention smaller, quick-twitch WRs usually start a rapid descent after age 32. Father time catches up with us all...

 

 

 

[Melbourne 9er]

7 hours ago, y2lamanaki said:

Here's a fun fact - if you only take the last 13 games of last season and subtract his two best games, Julio Jones is no longer a 1,000 yard receiver worth a $20 million cap hit. If you take out Tyreek Hill's two best games, he had a 10-game season of 41-563-5 in an offense that threw the ball over 100 times more than we did. I'm just as unimpressed.

Not to mention, remove Emmanuel Sanders from the 28-25 victory over Arizona and the 48-46 victory over New Orleans, and now you have a 5th seed 49ers team traveling to Philly, then Green Bay, then New Orleans. If you were a 5th seeded team who needed to trade pick #95 and drop 19 spots from the 4th into the 5th for a shot at winning the Super Bowl, you don't think that's worth it to make it happen? Let me ask it another way - if you were #2 in the NFC West and needed to trade a 3rd and make a 19-pick swap to win the NFC West and get past the Seahawks, you don't make that trade?

And you might not care about leadership, but I sure do - Deebo in 6 games before Emmanuel Sanders: 15 receptions, 168 yards, 1 total TD (2.5, 28, 0.17 per game). Deebo in 10 games after Emmanuel Sanders: 42 receptions, 634 yards, 5 total TDs (4.2, 63.4, 0.5 per game). That is monumental progression that is largely due to Sanders' presence - both leadership in helping develop young receivers by providing immeasurable veteran guidance, and on-field presence drawing attention away from them and allowing them to be #3 and #4 options in the passing game (behind Kittle and Sanders). 

All of that is worth the loss of pick #95, and a 19 pick swap. Especially because not one person would have complained one iota about the trade had Jimmy Garoppolo put the ball on target at the end of the Super Bowl. Then Sanders is an unmistakable legend in all-time 49ers lore. And if the difference of one pass on which all the fault belongs to the quarterback is the difference between an unsuccessful trade involving pick #95 and a successful trade involving pick #96, then I'd say you just about hit on exact value in the move.

I think you need to read the post again. I was replying to resigning Sanders this year, not the trade last year. Many people, including NN21 above, stated that they would have brought back Sanders this year. It would have cost us about 8m per year. He's done what was required of him now and it's not worth the money to bring him back this year.