2022 NFL Draft #1 (Senior Bowl & Combine)

[JIllg]

If we're going to make a play up the draft board, 1. I think that it will be by trading Deebo. I absolutely love watching Deebo as a player, but he's on the last year of his deal and he's lived up to the ~25 million dollar price tag he will command literally one time while having not insignificant injury issues. With Bosa, we have the 5th year option as additional leverage. With Bosa, he's been a defense defining player whenever healthy. With Bosa, we do not have options who could take on more responsibility with any reasonable expectation. Deebo plays at a position (pass catcher) where we have the greatest depth of talent on the team. If he commands a return similar to Davante Adams or Tyreek Hill, that trade should strongly be considered. With Kittle as a 1, Aiyuk as a 2, and Jennings/Juice being 4th and 5th level options, we don't need to replace Deebo with an equivalent ace, just a quality role player. Of course, it would be incredible to keep all of those playmakers around at the same time. It just might not be financially feasible given how quickly the receiving market has spiked. I'd have been fine with Deebo at 18 or 20 mil. I'd be pretty touchy on a long term contract at 22. But 25 plus is just too much, even prorated so that the hit tends to match the increasing cap. 2. I think that it will be to make a play for an offensive tackle, maybe even a veteran on an existing contract that we can take in due to not having to pay Deebo. Shanahan and Lynch have been very proactive regarding both offensive tackle spots and since their first year when they didn't have much choice. Since then they've worked hard to have 2 highly paid or highly drafted players at the position who could reasonably be expected to be healthy. They've gone out of their way to do this, sometimes ignoring other needs and sometimes moving tackles that don't fit their mold. We passed on Derwin James and Minkah Fitzpatrick pretty boldly with an incredibly bad secondary. Maybe they are fine with McGlinchey on his fifth year option coming off a ruptured quad at right tackle this year. But I doubt it. And I doubt that they're particularly interested in second round tackles. There generally isn't much meat left on the bone at tackle by that point in the draft and this is an organization that tends to fall in love and make moves to secure their preferred prospect rather than attempting to read the value tea leaves and wait to take players that they appreciate more than the consensus. 

[NcFinest9erFan]

WE are going to pick him in R2 huh?

[Forge]

3 hours ago, rudyZ said:

After the 2021 draft class, I have no doubt this team has no problem having a pick redshirt his rookie year. Prior to injuries, the only player they had any plan of playing all year was probably Hufanga on special teams. But then, injuries, and some players showed up (well, mostly Mitchell). But if all things had gone according to plans, we would have only had marginal production from the 2021 class at all. So, drafting an edge to redshirt a year? Definitely not out of the realm of possibilities. 

I don't necessarily like it, but if you want to preview our 2022 draft class, just look at our projected 2023 starters. If there's a contract running out, you can bet on us drafting a player at that position this year.

I'd be more inclined to believe we drafted with the intent to redshirt people if I thought that was actually what happened last year (outside of Trey, which is a unique scenario given the position). But I don't think that's what happened elsewhere. I think if the intent was to redshirt a guy like Banks, we wouldn't have tried to move him to RG where he had a shot at the starting role. We would have just kept him at LG where he was comfortable. I think Banks just sucked that bad. Sermon was just flat out beat by every other person on the roster, including another rookie, but one of them was always going to play because Mostert isn't that lead back guy. Moore was the initial swing tackle before getting Shanny upset and losing the role to McKivitz. Ambry simply wasn't ready, we all saw that.  When Lenoir hinted that he may have been ready to play, he did. When we discovered he wasn't, he didn't. 

Most of those selections (again, besides Trey) was to fill an immediate need, not a 2022 need. We needed a guard last year. We needed corners last year. We needed running backs last year.  They just couldn't hack it and I think more than anything, Shanny wants to run a meritocracy. He wants to be able to trust the guys that he has in there to be able to do the job. 

[Forge]

1 hour ago, JIllg said:

If we're going to make a play up the draft board, 1. I think that it will be by trading Deebo. I absolutely love watching Deebo as a player, but he's on the last year of his deal and he's lived up to the ~25 million dollar price tag he will command literally one time while having not insignificant injury issues. With Bosa, we have the 5th year option as additional leverage. With Bosa, he's been a defense defining player whenever healthy. With Bosa, we do not have options who could take on more responsibility with any reasonable expectation. Deebo plays at a position (pass catcher) where we have the greatest depth of talent on the team. If he commands a return similar to Davante Adams or Tyreek Hill, that trade should strongly be considered. With Kittle as a 1, Aiyuk as a 2, and Jennings/Juice being 4th and 5th level options, we don't need to replace Deebo with an equivalent ace, just a quality role player. Of course, it would be incredible to keep all of those playmakers around at the same time. It just might not be financially feasible given how quickly the receiving market has spiked. I'd have been fine with Deebo at 18 or 20 mil. I'd be pretty touchy on a long term contract at 22. But 25 plus is just too much, even prorated so that the hit tends to match the increasing cap. 2. I think that it will be to make a play for an offensive tackle, maybe even a veteran on an existing contract that we can take in due to not having to pay Deebo. Shanahan and Lynch have been very proactive regarding both offensive tackle spots and since their first year when they didn't have much choice. Since then they've worked hard to have 2 highly paid or highly drafted players at the position who could reasonably be expected to be healthy. They've gone out of their way to do this, sometimes ignoring other needs and sometimes moving tackles that don't fit their mold. We passed on Derwin James and Minkah Fitzpatrick pretty boldly with an incredibly bad secondary. Maybe they are fine with McGlinchey on his fifth year option coming off a ruptured quad at right tackle this year. But I doubt it. And I doubt that they're particularly interested in second round tackles. There generally isn't much meat left on the bone at tackle by that point in the draft and this is an organization that tends to fall in love and make moves to secure their preferred prospect rather than attempting to read the value tea leaves and wait to take players that they appreciate more than the consensus. 

I've really thought a lot about this the last couple of days. If we are going to make a move on the board, I would assume its because of this as well (trading Deebo). 

I've long had a love / hate idea of giving big money to Deebo. Love him as a player, but yeah, he's one of those guys that 100% gives you pause to give a big contract too. I was listening to Rob Guerrera yesterday and he was saying that MM thought that Deebo would maybe hold out. The penalties are pretty extreme for that under the new CBA, so I'm not sure if it'll happen or not, but if Deebo wants his money, I could see it. But I've also heard people bring up things such as the offense being different under Lance which may impact Deebo's usage and how he and Aiyuk are already really good friends (and training buddies) so it may be a situation where Aiyuk becomes the #1 under Lance. It really is a fascinating discussion. 

I mean, would the Jets offer something comparable to what they offered for Hill for Deebo? 35, 38 and flipping 69 for a late 3rd / early 4th (so probably our comp pick for McD). 

I honestly would be so shocked if we traded Deebo, but I would also 100% understand the impetus for making that move. There are layers here for sure. 

[Forge]

 

[Chrissooner49er]

1 hour ago, JIllg said:

If we're going to make a play up the draft board, 1. I think that it will be by trading Deebo. I absolutely love watching Deebo as a player, but he's on the last year of his deal and he's lived up to the ~25 million dollar price tag he will command literally one time while having not insignificant injury issues. With Bosa, we have the 5th year option as additional leverage. With Bosa, he's been a defense defining player whenever healthy. With Bosa, we do not have options who could take on more responsibility with any reasonable expectation. Deebo plays at a position (pass catcher) where we have the greatest depth of talent on the team. If he commands a return similar to Davante Adams or Tyreek Hill, that trade should strongly be considered. With Kittle as a 1, Aiyuk as a 2, and Jennings/Juice being 4th and 5th level options, we don't need to replace Deebo with an equivalent ace, just a quality role player. Of course, it would be incredible to keep all of those playmakers around at the same time. It just might not be financially feasible given how quickly the receiving market has spiked. I'd have been fine with Deebo at 18 or 20 mil. I'd be pretty touchy on a long term contract at 22. But 25 plus is just too much, even prorated so that the hit tends to match the increasing cap. 2. I think that it will be to make a play for an offensive tackle, maybe even a veteran on an existing contract that we can take in due to not having to pay Deebo. Shanahan and Lynch have been very proactive regarding both offensive tackle spots and since their first year when they didn't have much choice. Since then they've worked hard to have 2 highly paid or highly drafted players at the position who could reasonably be expected to be healthy. They've gone out of their way to do this, sometimes ignoring other needs and sometimes moving tackles that don't fit their mold. We passed on Derwin James and Minkah Fitzpatrick pretty boldly with an incredibly bad secondary. Maybe they are fine with McGlinchey on his fifth year option coming off a ruptured quad at right tackle this year. But I doubt it. And I doubt that they're particularly interested in second round tackles. There generally isn't much meat left on the bone at tackle by that point in the draft and this is an organization that tends to fall in love and make moves to secure their preferred prospect rather than attempting to read the value tea leaves and wait to take players that they appreciate more than the consensus. 

You and @Forge make a convincing argument for a scenario that gets us higher in the Draft (if they really have their eye on someone) and less cap-strapped by trading Deebo. Had not seriously thought about that before. But, paying both Bosa and Deebo could hurt us and I think you all know who I would rather have if it comes down to a choice between them.... The choice is made easy when you consider who has been the most consistent in production. A real shame the cap has been as slow to rise as it has.

If Deebo is traded and the results are not dynamic? Oh how the haters will spew all over social media! Glad I have no presence there...

[Forge]

Another personal favorite of mine, but I think he has really improved his stock over the off season. I thought he could be a late day 2 / early day 3 guy before the senior bowl / combine / prodays. 

[GW21]

27 minutes ago, Forge said:

I've really thought a lot about this the last couple of days. If we are going to make a move on the board, I would assume its because of this as well (trading Deebo). 

I've long had a love / hate idea of giving big money to Deebo. Love him as a player, but yeah, he's one of those guys that 100% gives you pause to give a big contract too. I was listening to Rob Guerrera yesterday and he was saying that MM thought that Deebo would maybe hold out. The penalties are pretty extreme for that under the new CBA, so I'm not sure if it'll happen or not, but if Deebo wants his money, I could see it. But I've also heard people bring up things such as the offense being different under Lance which may impact Deebo's usage and how he and Aiyuk are already really good friends (and training buddies) so it may be a situation where Aiyuk becomes the #1 under Lance. It really is a fascinating discussion. 

I mean, would the Jets offer something comparable to what they offered for Hill for Deebo? 35, 38 and flipping 69 for a late 3rd / early 4th (so probably our comp pick for McD). 

I honestly would be so shocked if we traded Deebo, but I would also 100% understand the impetus for making that move. There are layers here for sure. 

I really don't see us trading Deebo for a couple of reasons: 

1. It sends the wrong message to the locker room. Deebo is a guy who had some issues coming into his second year and really worked on his habits and became a pro. He is a guy the coaches can point to in that locker room and say, "this is the work that Deebo did and look where he's at now" 
2. I think he's insanely important to what we do on offense

His injury history still scares me, much like it did when we drafted him. If we got a haul of picks for him, I wouldn't be opposed to trading him either, but it would definitely need to be worth it. If it was a package like the Jets offered for Tyreek Hill, then I'm with you and I'd have to strongly consider it. I do have concerns with players souring on our coaching staff if we keep trading core guys like Buckner and Deebo who have done everything the staff has asked of them and become leaders, but we'll see how it goes if we make that move I guess. 

[Forge]

8 minutes ago, GW21 said:

I really don't see us trading Deebo for a couple of reasons: 

1. It sends the wrong message to the locker room. Deebo is a guy who had some issues coming into his second year and really worked on his habits and became a pro. He is a guy the coaches can point to in that locker room and say, "this is the work that Deebo did and look where he's at now" 
2. I think he's insanely important to what we do on offense

His injury history still scares me, much like it did when we drafted him. If we got a haul of picks for him, I wouldn't be opposed to trading him either, but it would definitely need to be worth it. If it was a package like the Jets offered for Tyreek Hill, then I'm with you and I'd have to strongly consider it. I do have concerns with players souring on our coaching staff if we keep trading core guys like Buckner and Deebo who have done everything the staff has asked of them and become leaders, but we'll see how it goes if we make that move I guess. 

Yeah, I don't think that they are going to trade him. 

If it weren't for the rumors that said re-signing him was our top priority this offseason, I could have seen a scenario where we didn't extend him this off season and made him prove it again though. I'm honestly a little surprised that won't be the route we are taking, though obviously if there is a chance that Deebo holds out you probably don't want to go that way. 

It's a really tough contract because the Hill / Adams deals have so much fluff on the back end that make them look like "30 million contracts!" when in truth I Think that they got something closer to 24 (Hill's is basically 3 years, 72 million). So I'd say Deebo's market is probably like 22 in the functional years, but given his age, you can't just tack on a 45 million dollar base to inflate the contract value because he could easily see the 4th year of his deal at 30 years old lol

[GW21]

7 minutes ago, Forge said:

Yeah, I don't think that they are going to trade him. 

If it weren't for the rumors that said re-signing him was our top priority this offseason, I could have seen a scenario where we didn't extend him this off season and made him prove it again though. I'm honestly a little surprised that won't be the route we are taking, though obviously if there is a chance that Deebo holds out you probably don't want to go that way. 

It's a really tough contract because the Hill / Adams deals have so much fluff on the back end that make them look like "30 million contracts!" when in truth I Think that they got something closer to 24 (Hill's is basically 3 years, 72 million). So I'd say Deebo's market is probably like 22 in the functional years, but given his age, you can't just tack on a 45 million dollar base to inflate the contract value because he could easily see the 4th year of his deal at 30 years old lol

For real. Christian Kirk really boned us too. Jacksonville signing him to that contract was crazy and won't help our situation at all.

Overall the WR market is just so crazy to me right now. Chark only getting 10m, Juju got what, like 3m? then you have guys like Kirk making 21m or whatever it was and Zay Jones making more than he's worth. Baalke is still making it his mission to screw over the Niners. 

I'm pretty curious to see what all this craziness does to Stephon Diggs tbh. I'm sure he's going to be wanting a raise now too. 

[Justone2]

1 hour ago, Forge said:

Yeah, I don't think that they are going to trade him. 

If it weren't for the rumors that said re-signing him was our top priority this offseason, I could have seen a scenario where we didn't extend him this off season and made him prove it again though. I'm honestly a little surprised that won't be the route we are taking, though obviously if there is a chance that Deebo holds out you probably don't want to go that way. 

It's a really tough contract because the Hill / Adams deals have so much fluff on the back end that make them look like "30 million contracts!" when in truth I Think that they got something closer to 24 (Hill's is basically 3 years, 72 million). So I'd say Deebo's market is probably like 22 in the functional years, but given his age, you can't just tack on a 45 million dollar base to inflate the contract value because he could easily see the 4th year of his deal at 30 years old lol

I think it will depend on his asking price and how quickly we can get to a framework of the deal. If thats kind of hammered out around the draft(or at least we have a clear idea what his demands will be) i don't think he will be traded. If that is way higher than we want to go i can see him being traded away around that time.

[rudyZ]

6 hours ago, Forge said:

I'd be more inclined to believe we drafted with the intent to redshirt people if I thought that was actually what happened last year (outside of Trey, which is a unique scenario given the position). But I don't think that's what happened elsewhere. I think if the intent was to redshirt a guy like Banks, we wouldn't have tried to move him to RG where he had a shot at the starting role. We would have just kept him at LG where he was comfortable. I think Banks just sucked that bad. Sermon was just flat out beat by every other person on the roster, including another rookie, but one of them was always going to play because Mostert isn't that lead back guy. Moore was the initial swing tackle before getting Shanny upset and losing the role to McKivitz. Ambry simply wasn't ready, we all saw that.  When Lenoir hinted that he may have been ready to play, he did. When we discovered he wasn't, he didn't. 

Most of those selections (again, besides Trey) was to fill an immediate need, not a 2022 need. We needed a guard last year. We needed corners last year. We needed running backs last year.  They just couldn't hack it and I think more than anything, Shanny wants to run a meritocracy. He wants to be able to trust the guys that he has in there to be able to do the job. 

 

I'm not saying they were fundamentally opposed to getting production from the draft class. Just saying it was oriented towards replacing players in 2022. We were keeping Jimmy, but we'd replace him in 2022 with Trey. We were going to lose Laken, we drafted Banks. We were going to let at least one of Mostert or Wilson go (I honestly thought both would), so we drafted Sermon. Most likely verrett wouldn't be back, we got Thomas. K'Waun would probably leave, we got Lenoir. We probably would let Skule go, we got Moore. Tartt (and back then, Moore too) was in a contract year, we got Hufanga. It just lines up perfectly, that all those draft picks were at positions we had upcoming free agents at. I don't believe it was a coincidence. Sure, if one of them, like Mitchell did, seized the opportunity and earned playing time, they would let the guy play. Even giving a chance to Banks at RG made sense, even if the plan for him was ultimately to replace Laken. You'd be a fool not to at least try him at RG, in case he's ready to make the jump (which he wasn't). Lenoir showed something in camp, but was taken advantage of in the regular season. But at the same time, the whole defense looked off. Warner, one of the best in the league, looked pretty average those first few weeks. We didn't have our starting corners. The only players who had any kind of success during that period were Bosa and Al Shaair. Moore seemed to be off to a good start, then he fell off the face of the earth for reasons unknown... I don't know. I feel like the staff was okay with not thrusting rookies into the spotlight. I personally disagree with that idea. But I think the staff is okay with it. So back to my point, I wouldn't be shocked if they drafted an edge and sheltered him. Give him very little playing time, situational at most, and creating opportunities with him, rather than rely on him for production.

I just wanted to mention something about Banks, again. The other day, I saw some highlights of the training camp, and looked at Banks a little bit. He's not a fat lumbering, physically limited, OL in my opinion. The guy looks like a good athlete. I saw him get to the second level and look quite fast. Maybe he wasn't ready, up to the task, not comfortable with the calls and assignments, or something, but stylistically, I think he'll fit right in. We all had doubts about Tomlinson when we traded for him, although trading a late round pick mitigated the risk. We're critical of Banks because of where we picked him, and over whom we picked him, and rightfully so. But in a vacuum, ignoring the details of his acquisition, I think he has the potential to be a good player. I assume he's a strong guy. He has a nice build. And I think his athleticism is underrated. And if there's one spot I would want to play a guy with questions marks, it's between Trent Williams and Alex Mack. He has to take a big step forward, but I think he's in a good situation. He needs to make the best of it. He has to take more than a step, because we don't know who's going to be at center next year (we don't even know who will be this year... we don't even know who will be alive on sunday).

[Forge]

22 minutes ago, rudyZ said:

I'm not saying they were fundamentally opposed to getting production from the draft class. Just saying it was oriented towards replacing players in 2022. We were keeping Jimmy, but we'd replace him in 2022 with Trey. We were going to lose Laken, we drafted Banks. We were going to let at least one of Mostert or Wilson go (I honestly thought both would), so we drafted Sermon. Most likely verrett wouldn't be back, we got Thomas. K'Waun would probably leave, we got Lenoir. We probably would let Skule go, we got Moore. Tartt (and back then, Moore too) was in a contract year, we got Hufanga. It just lines up perfectly, that all those draft picks were at positions we had upcoming free agents at. I don't believe it was a coincidence. Sure, if one of them, like Mitchell did, seized the opportunity and earned playing time, they would let the guy play. Even giving a chance to Banks at RG made sense, even if the plan for him was ultimately to replace Laken. You'd be a fool not to at least try him at RG, in case he's ready to make the jump (which he wasn't). Lenoir showed something in camp, but was taken advantage of in the regular season. But at the same time, the whole defense looked off. Warner, one of the best in the league, looked pretty average those first few weeks. We didn't have our starting corners. The only players who had any kind of success during that period were Bosa and Al Shaair. Moore seemed to be off to a good start, then he fell off the face of the earth for reasons unknown... I don't know. I feel like the staff was okay with not thrusting rookies into the spotlight. I personally disagree with that idea. But I think the staff is okay with it. So back to my point, I wouldn't be shocked if they drafted an edge and sheltered him. Give him very little playing time, situational at most, and creating opportunities with him, rather than rely on him for production.

 

I definitely agree that the staff is perfectly okay with not playing rookies, I just am not sure if they draft with that intention in mind. Kyle and John have shown time and again that they don't really give two craps about how other people perceive what they are doing lol, but it would strike me as really odd if they looked at Aaron Banks, a 24 year old rookie guard from Notre Dame taken in the second round and though, "we are doing this for 2023". That's a guy that should have been an immediate starter. 

 

23 minutes ago, rudyZ said:

I just wanted to mention something about Banks, again. The other day, I saw some highlights of the training camp, and looked at Banks a little bit. He's not a fat lumbering, physically limited, OL in my opinion. The guy looks like a good athlete. I saw him get to the second level and look quite fast. Maybe he wasn't ready, up to the task, not comfortable with the calls and assignments, or something, but stylistically, I think he'll fit right in. We all had doubts about Tomlinson when we traded for him, although trading a late round pick mitigated the risk. We're critical of Banks because of where we picked him, and over whom we picked him, and rightfully so. But in a vacuum, ignoring the details of his acquisition, I think he has the potential to be a good player. I assume he's a strong guy. He has a nice build. And I think his athleticism is underrated. And if there's one spot I would want to play a guy with questions marks, it's between Trent Williams and Alex Mack. He has to take a big step forward, but I think he's in a good situation. He needs to make the best of it. He has to take more than a step, because we don't know who's going to be at center next year (we don't even know who will be this year... we don't even know who will be alive on sunday).

Depends on what you're using as a measurement. In terms of RAS, he is below the "average NFL starter at guard" which is 8.37 but really doesn't mean much to me. I mean, I love athletes, but Laken had a terrible ras score even compared to Banks and we saw him be pretty damn good.

I thought he moved well as well. I'm concerned about his feet in pass pro as his stand up, kick back step to get his base is very slow and I think it allows for pass rushers to get inside and under him quite a bit. That's not really an athletic problem in my opinion but it could hint at some explosive issues coming out. 

[rudyZ]

18 hours ago, Forge said:

I definitely agree that the staff is perfectly okay with not playing rookies, I just am not sure if they draft with that intention in mind. Kyle and John have shown time and again that they don't really give two craps about how other people perceive what they are doing lol, but it would strike me as really odd if they looked at Aaron Banks, a 24 year old rookie guard from Notre Dame taken in the second round and though, "we are doing this for 2023". That's a guy that should have been an immediate starter. 

 

Depends on what you're using as a measurement. In terms of RAS, he is below the "average NFL starter at guard" which is 8.37 but really doesn't mean much to me. I mean, I love athletes, but Laken had a terrible ras score even compared to Banks and we saw him be pretty damn good.

I thought he moved well as well. I'm concerned about his feet in pass pro as his stand up, kick back step to get his base is very slow and I think it allows for pass rushers to get inside and under him quite a bit. That's not really an athletic problem in my opinion but it could hint at some explosive issues coming out. 

I probably wouldn't give him the benefit of the doubt if he wasn't playing between Williams and Mack, but yeah, there's a fair bit of good faith in my evaluation. I didn't watch his college "tape" (aka youtube highlights, if there's such a thing for guards not named Nelson), so I really don't know. I think I'm probably in the group of fans that has a higher-than-deserved faith in the coaching staff, in general. But then again, I thought Mike Nolan would be great, so...

[GW21]

6 hours ago, rudyZ said:

I probably wouldn't give him the benefit of the doubt if he wasn't playing between Williams and Mack, but yeah, there's a fair bit of good faith in my evaluation. I didn't watch his college "tape" (aka youtube highlights, if there's such a thing for guards not named Nelson), so I really don't know. I think I'm probably in the group of fans that has a higher-than-deserved faith in the coaching staff, in general. But then again, I thought Mike Nolan would be great, so...

I made a “Rollin’ with Nolan” signature back when those were a thing.