Jump to content

Niners traded up for Brandon Aiyuk at 25 WR


49erurtaza

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, 757-NINER said:

And for me, its the issue of trading up within the first 3 rounds and forking over premium future picks.

But what "premium future picks" were sacrificed this year? The FO picked up a 4th trading back with the Bucs, and then used that + a 5th rounder to move up for Aiyuk. So...you're upset about the 5th rounder? Does trading Matt Breida for an earlier 5th make you feel better?

Seems like much ado about nothing. Trading day 1/2 picks makes me nervous, as well, as these players are typically expected to be starters, but c'mon...day three picks are fungible, especially when you already have a stacked roster.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Ronnie's Pinky said:

But what "premium future picks" were sacrificed this year? The FO picked up a 4th trading back with the Bucs, and then used that + a 5th rounder to move up for Aiyuk. So...you're upset about the 5th rounder? Does trading Matt Breida for an earlier 5th make you feel better?

Seems like much ado about nothing. Trading day 1/2 picks makes me nervous, as well, as these players are typically expected to be starters, but c'mon...day three picks are fungible, especially when you already have a stacked roster.

Premium picks in general but in this case, yes. I coveted the 4th we fleeced from the Bucs and that 5th. Both picks could have been put to good use...stacked roster and all. Especially since that is an area of the draft this regime tends to excel.

RG is still a gapping hole. McKivitz is not guard, no matter what they tell you. He was definitely drafted to compete@OT.

Richburg could use a heir apparent. I like Garland...as a back-up.

I think we could really use another edge rusher, as both Bosa and Ford have injury history. Our edge pressure is extremely vital to the success of the defense as a whole and Blair will not be healthy to start the season.

Not to mention it would have been nice to draft another CB with some physical upside on the roster. Cowgirls took a CB I was really fond of 5 slots after the 4th we gave up to get Ayiuk. 

So yea...I felt we left some meat on the bone. Its not the end of the world but I just feel like they could have played it better. 

Edited by 757-NINER
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 757-NINER said:

Especially since that is an area of the draft this regime tends to excel.

I view this as navel-gazing, too. We're still in the land of tiny sample sizes, where randomness rules. Assuming that the FO will kill day three based on track record is just as suspect as assuming they'll screw up any attempt to trade up in the draft.

Let's let the front office do their jobs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Ronnie's Pinky said:

I view this as navel-gazing, too. We're still in the land of tiny sample sizes, where randomness rules. Assuming that the FO will kill day three based on track record is just as suspect as assuming they'll screw up any attempt to trade up in the draft.

Let's let the front office do their jobs.

 

Where did I say they would kill it? I simply said that is an area of the draft where they have found repeated success and seem to have a good formula for finding talent. I'm merely stating that I would have liked to have given them more opportunities in this area, given some the holes we still have. I wouldn't necessarily want us spending a 2nd on a center. But I'm definitely down for taking a flier on one in the 5th. 

Tiny sample size be damned, its the only sample size we can accurately access...

If all you're going to do is use some flawed statistical analogy to counter every point I make, we can end this debate right here.

The FO can do no wrong in your eyes on draft day and every move they make shouldn't be debated because they get paid to make the decisions and have all the info and we don't so we can't hold them accountable until all those players careers come to end and only then can their worth be judged accordingly...great, got it. We'll agree to disagree and move on. No point in going in circles over this. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, 757-NINER said:

If all you're going to do is use some flawed statistical analogy to counter every point I make, we can end this debate right here.

The FO can do no wrong in your eyes on draft day and every move they make shouldn't be debated because they get paid to make the decisions and have all the info and we don't so we can't hold them accountable until all those players careers come to end and only then can their worth be judged accordingly...great, got it.

I've stated that I am more skeptical of their ability to make good day 3 picks and less skeptical of their ability to execute draft day trade-ups than you are. In what way does this track with the idea that I think they are infallible?

There is no "statistical analogy" (whatever that is) to be done here because we are still in the realm of anecdotal evidence, not statistics. That's pretty much the point. We cannot draw conclusions at this point...only jump to them.

Edited by Ronnie's Pinky
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ronnie's Pinky said:

But what "premium future picks" were sacrificed this year? The FO picked up a 4th trading back with the Bucs, and then used that + a 5th rounder to move up for Aiyuk. So...you're upset about the 5th rounder? Does trading Matt Breida for an earlier 5th make you feel better?

Seems like much ado about nothing. Trading day 1/2 picks makes me nervous, as well, as these players are typically expected to be starters, but c'mon...day three picks are fungible, especially when you already have a stacked roster.

I was going to make this point about breida as well.

We basically traded Matt breida, #13, #31 for #14 and #25.  

Restricted free agent and former udfa Matt breida for moving up 5 spots in the first round is incredible value. I can live with that ten times out of ten

 

we also moved up roughly 20 spots in the 5th round. So Id say it was actually some solid manuevering. 

This draft feels like plan A was executed. Not sure what else they had cooking but I think if you asked Kyle and John what their perfect draft would have looked like 1 week before, they probably would have said Trent williams, kinlaw, aiyuk, colton 

Our needs were LT, WR, 3tech in that order and we had two first and little else to work with. We took our 3tech first, our WR second, and our biggest need of LT last. That shows a well executed plan, because I really don't believe we would have taken kinlaw if we wouldnt have felt really good about the Williams trade. We wouldnt have been able to move up to get aiyuk (based on the way Mia drafted I'd say there was a moderately strong chance he would have gotten taken next). 

So, we worked backwards but ended up with three legit players who are going to play a lot of snaps next year. Gotta give credit for that. They weren't going to let who we drafted be up to chance, they made a choice to pay a little bit more by squeezing minor value elsewhere (breida, 1 spot trade down). That's well done 

 

It feels great to have a team that is clearly well respected inside of other franchises. John lynch has had the Midas touch for a long time. His relationship with Ron Rivera is what got us Trent Williams (that and the fact they waited too long and the market dried up)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, N4L said:

was going to make this point about breida as well.

We basically traded Matt breida, #13, #31 for #14 and #25.  

Restricted free agent and former udfa Matt breida for moving up 5 spots in the first round is incredible value. I can live with that ten times out of ten

 

Such blatant disregard for pick #245. 

I hope *checks draft summary* Raymond Calais (HA! Out of all the people to get drafted in that spot, it was A, someone I knew and had watched, and B, was someone we very well could have drafted ourselves) is a stud just to make you look bad. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now I'm really curious just because this is sort of a fun exercise. 

  • 13  + 31 + 245 + 176 + Breida 

for 

  • 14 + 25 + 153 

Rough values Breida at an early 4th round pick (108/109). That actually makes the Breida return look pretty damn good lol. 

If you do the updated model, 534 / 566 = 32 points for Breida. Roughly equivalent to a late third round pick, 102 / 103. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will never agree with the trade up for Aiyuk, but will concede that stepping out and taking a wider view in such a manner shows that the team is still getting good values overall here. Their final standing was better than their initial one even with having to give up Breida. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Forge said:

Such blatant disregard for pick #245. 

I hope *checks draft summary* Raymond Calais (HA! Out of all the people to get drafted in that spot, it was A, someone I knew and had watched, and B, was someone we very well could have drafted ourselves) is a stud just to make you look bad. 

I guess not being Mr Irrelevant (#255) makes you relevant, but somehow #245 still feels irrelevant. 

The 5th we received from MIA was 20 spots higher the 5th we traded to the Vikings, which I didn't count toward the calculation, so consider it a wash

 

Calais was someone you told me to scout for FFMD. He would have been a great fit here. When I heard his name called, it felt like tampa was specifically drafting someone they knew we wanted. I would bet he was our preference over Hasty. I don't know if he makes tampa's roster though, I guess he could as their 4th running back, more likely we could steal him off of their PS if we want.  

Kind of interesting that we did make some deals within the NFC. We traded with tampa, Minnesota, philly, Washington. I wouldn't have thought Minnesota for example would really be willing to make trades with us after we smoked them lol 

22 minutes ago, Forge said:

Will never agree with the trade up for Aiyuk, but will concede that stepping out and taking a wider view in such a manner shows that the team is still getting good values overall here. Their final standing was better than their initial one even with having to give up Breida. 

Yes, trading breida (and #245 LOL) to move up to take the WR we like is a really solid deal. I understand that we temporarily had more assets than that, and while everyone expected us to move down, I keep repeating the fact that we have literally never traded down more than 1 spot. Not once in four years. This was the year to do it, but instead we only kinda did it, we traded enough assets away to give us the ammo to go make another move up.

its like that guy that made trades from a paperclip to a car. Incremental value each transaction will eventually lead to a greater output than input. we made a bunch of small moves for the sole purpose of having ammo to trade up for aiyuk. that's just good business. 

Edited by N4L
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, N4L said:

Yes, trading breida (and #245 LOL) to move up to take the WR we like is a really solid deal. I understand that we temporarily had more assets than that, and while everyone expected us to move down, I keep repeating the fact that we have literally never traded down more than 1 spot. Not once in four years. This was the year to do it, but instead we only kinda did it, we traded enough assets away to give us the ammo to go make another move up.

its like that guy that made trades from a paperclip to a car. Incremental value each transaction will eventually lead to a greater output than input. we made a bunch of small moves for the sole purpose of having ammo to trade up for aiyuk. that's just good business. 

So much that last sentence. Initially, I was shocked and dismayed with the moves in the 1st round. Why? Because I was (foolishly) convinced we would trade down for more picks. Once I really looked at the talent we did get 1st round, it wasn't so bad to sit through day 2 with no picks. And then they just killed day 3 with the McKivitz, Woerner picks and trading for Trent. :o Just fantastic!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Ronnie's Pinky said:

Sure thing. Nobody knows anything, and all we can do is look to the past. Looking to the past is fine, but large recency and sample size biases are unavoidable when attempting to judge the global competence of a front office based on the results of, what, three drafts?

I'm sort of in the middle - as I judge trade-ups on the necessity and do agree some people get overly hung up on trade-ups - but to this specific point, some front offices would only be so lucky as to get three drafts from which to judge their results. There isn't really the luxury of giving a regime a large enough sample size to judge whether or not they are truly wise in making said trades, especially when the classes themselves really can't be judged for 3 years. So - you have to judge by the information you have, and so far the team has traded up for five players: 

1) Reuben Foster
2) CJ Beathard
3) Joe Williams
4) Dante Pettis
5) Brandon Aiyuk

We can't judge Aiyuk yet, and it would be generous to give Dante Pettis an incomplete. Of the other three, two are off the roster already and the other was inactive for all 19 games and lost his backup job to an undrafted free agent. So it's pretty fair to question whether or not this regime is legitimately good at making board decisions, or just general decision-making. With Foster, he was already known to have made numerous mistakes and got sent home from the combine. The talent falling to #31 and having the ability to snag that 5th-year option made this one super defendable, though. Especially, since the talent level of Foster made him someone that was legitimately in conversation at #2 overall. But Beathard was viewed as a 7th round pick, and there was no need to jump up and get him, other than Shanny's ability to sleep knowing they got the QB they reached for. Joe Williams had incredible red flags and wasn't even on our board when he was selected, which makes it incredibly strange to trade up for him. And Dante Pettis was one among a group of wide receivers of relatively the same value, and instead of staying put and taking the pick of the other guys who would have been available at the original spot (the next three wide receivers were James Washington, DJ Chark, and Michael Gallup, all with almost at least double Dante Pettis's career production. 

Trading up for a player should be done with value in mind. To the coaches - they saw Aiyuk as a guy who was worth taking at #13 overall, evidently over Lamb and Jeudy. That's a real unique take - and if it turns out that this is true, it won't matter so much. But it clearly wasn't true to the other WR-needy teams in that range took Lamb, Jeudy, and even Jefferson and Reagor before him. So it appears to be another instance of this regime needing to have a guy, and so far when they've needed that guy, they've flopped pretty badly.

I see the Aiyuk situation very similarly to how I see the Deebo Samuel situation last year. There were a group of similar receivers including Deebo, AJ Brown, DK Metcalf and others. It made sense to wait and pick from the best. We loved Deebo. We could have traded up for him and gave him a 5th-year option in the . But imagine losing Dre Greenlaw -  a luxury pick whom not one person thought we needed on draft day 2019, whether or not you liked the pick - to go up and secure Deebo. With Aiyuk, we made the opposite choice. We could have stayed put, and selected from Aiyuk (if he lasted), or any of the next three - Tee Higgins, Michael Pittman, Laviska Shenault. Instead, we gave up picks to get him. We may or may not have chosen someone who could have contributed to the team. We won't know. Maybe it could have been another defensive back or linebacker to groom and add to the depth - someone who could have competed for the roles guys like Marcel Harris, Dontae Johnson, and Al-Shaair had last year. Maybe it could have been an edge rusher behind Bosa, Ford, post-injury Ronald Blair, and.....that one guy we picked up.

So - I think it's fair to be really wary of this particular move, both in the context of this draft and the regime's historical choices. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, y2lamanaki said:

I'm sort of in the middle - as I judge trade-ups on the necessity and do agree some people get overly hung up on trade-ups - but to this specific point, some front offices would only be so lucky as to get three drafts from which to judge their results. There isn't really the luxury of giving a regime a large enough sample size to judge whether or not they are truly wise in making said trades, especially when the classes themselves really can't be judged for 3 years. So - you have to judge by the information you have, and so far the team has traded up for five players: 

1) Reuben Foster
2) CJ Beathard
3) Joe Williams
4) Dante Pettis
5) Brandon Aiyuk

We can't judge Aiyuk yet, and it would be generous to give Dante Pettis an incomplete. Of the other three, two are off the roster already and the other was inactive for all 19 games and lost his backup job to an undrafted free agent. So it's pretty fair to question whether or not this regime is legitimately good at making board decisions, or just general decision-making. With Foster, he was already known to have made numerous mistakes and got sent home from the combine. The talent falling to #31 and having the ability to snag that 5th-year option made this one super defendable, though. Especially, since the talent level of Foster made him someone that was legitimately in conversation at #2 overall. But Beathard was viewed as a 7th round pick, and there was no need to jump up and get him, other than Shanny's ability to sleep knowing they got the QB they reached for. Joe Williams had incredible red flags and wasn't even on our board when he was selected, which makes it incredibly strange to trade up for him. And Dante Pettis was one among a group of wide receivers of relatively the same value, and instead of staying put and taking the pick of the other guys who would have been available at the original spot (the next three wide receivers were James Washington, DJ Chark, and Michael Gallup, all with almost at least double Dante Pettis's career production. 

Trading up for a player should be done with value in mind. To the coaches - they saw Aiyuk as a guy who was worth taking at #13 overall, evidently over Lamb and Jeudy. That's a real unique take - and if it turns out that this is true, it won't matter so much. But it clearly wasn't true to the other WR-needy teams in that range took Lamb, Jeudy, and even Jefferson and Reagor before him. So it appears to be another instance of this regime needing to have a guy, and so far when they've needed that guy, they've flopped pretty badly.

I see the Aiyuk situation very similarly to how I see the Deebo Samuel situation last year. There were a group of similar receivers including Deebo, AJ Brown, DK Metcalf and others. It made sense to wait and pick from the best. We loved Deebo. We could have traded up for him and gave him a 5th-year option in the . But imagine losing Dre Greenlaw -  a luxury pick whom not one person thought we needed on draft day 2019, whether or not you liked the pick - to go up and secure Deebo. With Aiyuk, we made the opposite choice. We could have stayed put, and selected from Aiyuk (if he lasted), or any of the next three - Tee Higgins, Michael Pittman, Laviska Shenault. Instead, we gave up picks to get him. We may or may not have chosen someone who could have contributed to the team. We won't know. Maybe it could have been another defensive back or linebacker to groom and add to the depth - someone who could have competed for the roles guys like Marcel Harris, Dontae Johnson, and Al-Shaair had last year. Maybe it could have been an edge rusher behind Bosa, Ford, post-injury Ronald Blair, and.....that one guy we picked up.

So - I think it's fair to be really wary of this particular move, both in the context of this draft and the regime's historical choices. 

tenor.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did forget to add one very important caveat: 

While they've made some really questionable trade up choices, they legitimately turned the 2016 49ers whom they inherited into a legitimate year-to-year contender in 3 years, so it's also fair to give them some benefit of the doubt. They travel strange roads to get there, but they've really done a remarkable overall job. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Foster, Beathard and Williams were all in 2017, everybody's first draft. The Foster pick didn't work out (except for when it did), but the pick is entirely defensible from a process standpoint. Reuben Foster is extremely talented. Also, one season of pro-bowl level play is actually (sadly), about a middling return on a late 1st round pick. Many bust outright, and produce nothing. Reuben Foster delivered lot more than A.J. Jenkins.

Beathard...meh, they peddled a 7th rounder to get him, and guess what? C.J. Beathard has already delivered 4th round value. He's started ten games. Now, granted, he isn't good, but we needed a warm body at the QB position for a while there, and C.J. stepped up. Among other things, C.J. was the reason we didn't have to hurry Jimmy into the lineup after the trade. Filling the massive QB gap in our roster for 10 games with 4th +7th round picks is hardly bad business.

Both Joe Williams and Dante Pettis were "Kyle's guys", and both seem to lack the mental makeup to succeed in the NFL. I don't doubt that they had the right set of athletic traits to succeed in Kyle's system, but they don't have it between the ears. This seems to be, or to have been, Kyle's weakness as a talent evaluator. He's excellent at spotting guys with ability, but he doesn't seem to have much of a knack for finding guys with the toughness to make it in the league. This is where I'm a little skeptical of the Aiyuk pick, especially in light of the fact that in-person evaluations were curtailed this year.

I worry that Aiyuk will end up another Pettis...an undeniably talented guy, who just doesn't want it enough. But maybe Kyle has learned from the past? In the case of Aiyuk, Lynch seems to have leveraged his relationship with Herm Edwards in order to get better intel on what sort of a guy Aiyuk is. That eases my mind because I don't think Herm Edwards has the same blinders Kyle may have, and I don't think he'd pull one over on John Lynch. So, I'm more confident that Aiyuk has the jam to succeed in the NFL, but we shall see. I don't care about the trading of picks...that's just business, and a lot of people have irrational opinions about that sorta stuff. I just want Kyle to stop falling in love with talented chowderheads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...