R T Posted February 2, 2023 Share Posted February 2, 2023 4 hours ago, Sandy said: I guess I'm not ready for a minor rebuild. With the assets and future cap space obtained from a Rodgers trade, this could be more of a "reload" than a rebuild. That could also just be the part of me that wants to watch competitive football next year. the other side of the coin - I want to surround Love with as much offensive talent as possible, like we did Rodgers in his early years. I see Jones as more of an extension candidate than a trade candidate. Regardless of if the QB is Rodgers or Love the Packers are not in a rebuild. They should be even money to win the North and be a strong playoff contender either way. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Guy Posted February 2, 2023 Share Posted February 2, 2023 4 hours ago, Sandy said: I guess I'm not ready for a minor rebuild. With the assets and future cap space obtained from a Rodgers trade, this could be more of a "reload" than a rebuild. That could also just be the part of me that wants to watch competitive football next year. the other side of the coin - I want to surround Love with as much offensive talent as possible, like we did Rodgers in his early years. I see Jones as more of an extension candidate than a trade candidate. Love is going to take a year to figure things out as a starter. You can look at playoffs in '24 and beyond once he does. It's better to trade a year a year too soon than a year too late. In the case of a RB, it's better to trade them 2 years too soon. Their last productive year you can usually see them losing a bit of what made them special in the first place. Only one who never did was Barry Sanders because he never took big hits, and he got out a year or two before his decline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted February 2, 2023 Share Posted February 2, 2023 Love is going to be fine. He'll play as well as his coaches and teammates set him up. He should be getting 2020 esque OL play. Losing Bakh really cost us a couple postseasons. That was a historically harmful injury. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneTwoSixFive Posted February 2, 2023 Share Posted February 2, 2023 5 hours ago, Sandy said: I guess I'm not ready for a minor rebuild. With the assets and future cap space obtained from a Rodgers trade, this could be more of a "reload" than a rebuild. That could also just be the part of me that wants to watch competitive football next year. the other side of the coin - I want to surround Love with as much offensive talent as possible, like we did Rodgers in his early years. I see Jones as more of an extension candidate than a trade candidate. On average only 56% of players return from one year to the next and two years out it is just around 35%. So every year is a reload. Rebuild and reload can often be used interchangeably. Teams often don't want to admit to a rebuild, which has negative connotations for some, so managers often call it a reload. That sounds less drastic (though often isn't). There are several levels of reload/rebuild, from a moderate bloodletting of a couple of expensive vets, right up to a real tear-it-all-down selling some or all your best players for future draft picks and releasing many more. I have no fear of a reload given the roster churn in an average year is more than many people realise, especially not if it is (as Sandy describes it) a minor rebuild. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted February 2, 2023 Share Posted February 2, 2023 16 minutes ago, OneTwoSixFive said: On average only 56% of players return from one year to the next and two years out it is just around 35%. So every year is a reload. Rebuild and reload can often be used interchangeably. Teams often don't want to admit to a rebuild, which has negative connotations for some, so managers often call it a reload. That sounds less drastic (though often isn't). There are several levels of reload/rebuild, from a moderate bloodletting of a couple of expensive vets, right up to a real tear-it-all-down selling some or all your best players for future draft picks and releasing many more. I have no fear of a reload given the roster churn in an average year is more than many people realise, especially not if it is (as Sandy describes it) a minor rebuild. While it's true a good % of the roster turns over each year, turning over 10 players in the bottom 20 of the roster is much different than 10 players in the top 20 of the roster. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneTwoSixFive Posted February 2, 2023 Share Posted February 2, 2023 16 minutes ago, squire12 said: While it's true a good % of the roster turns over each year, turning over 10 players in the bottom 20 of the roster is much different than 10 players in the top 20 of the roster. It sure is, which is why I took pains to point out that there are different levels of rebuild/reload. Also, different people have different ideas on how much turnover constitutes a rebuild - its very subjective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted February 2, 2023 Share Posted February 2, 2023 5 minutes ago, OneTwoSixFive said: Different people have different ideas on how much turnover constitutes a rebuild - its very subjective. I'm sorry...but I cant agree with your conclusions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Penske Posted February 3, 2023 Share Posted February 3, 2023 Isn’t this an early draft crush? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vegas492 Posted February 3, 2023 Share Posted February 3, 2023 On 2/2/2023 at 8:38 AM, Old Guy said: WE can agree to disagree on this one! But they were rolling with Garoppolo when this went down, so it was no sure thing at that point. They went all in and it failed, that is not in dispute. The reasons do not matter. Losing your three top QB's doesn't matter? Since when? CM3 was a great trade for San Fran. They won all those games with him...and many of those games were won without Deebo, while playing a rookie 7th round pick at QB. When you have a great defense...with a question mark at QB....you better have a great run game. And they did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Guy Posted February 3, 2023 Share Posted February 3, 2023 4 minutes ago, vegas492 said: Losing your three top QB's doesn't matter? Since when? CM3 was a great trade for San Fran. They won all those games with him...and many of those games were won without Deebo, while playing a rookie 7th round pick at QB. When you have a great defense...with a question mark at QB....you better have a great run game. And they did. My point is quite simple! They went all in when Jimmy G was running the show. You know, Jimmy G, the guy they moved on from because they knew he couldn't get them over the hump. The McCaffrey move was desperation to get over the hump with a QB you desperately tried to get rid of the past off season. You call it a 'great trade.' I call it giving up a bunch for a guy with injury history and making 12 million a year for the next three years. A guy who didn't get you over the hump, regardless of circumstances. You make a move like that, it's to win it all. They didn't. Who was behind center didn't make much difference, see Purdy, Brock, AKA Mr. Irrelevant. Where was this 'great run game' last week? 24/81. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted February 3, 2023 Share Posted February 3, 2023 7 minutes ago, Old Guy said: My point is quite simple! They went all in when Jimmy G was running the show. You know, Jimmy G, the guy they moved on from because they knew he couldn't get them over the hump. The McCaffrey move was desperation to get over the hump with a QB you desperately tried to get rid of the past off season. You call it a 'great trade.' I call it giving up a bunch for a guy with injury history and making 12 million a year for the next three years. A guy who didn't get you over the hump, regardless of circumstances. You make a move like that, it's to win it all. They didn't. Who was behind center didn't make much difference, see Purdy, Brock, AKA Mr. Irrelevant. Where was this 'great run game' last week? 24/81. Who was behind center didn't make much difference? What are you watching? No way Purdy even goes .500 without the skills group that the 49ers had, and CM was probably the biggest reason for it. I was against the trade when it happened, but with Deebo and Jimmy get hurt and they still went undefeated, I was 100% wrong. Shocking to me that a RB didn't have a great game when they literally couldn't throw the ball, not figuratively, literally. With a healthy Purdy, they have a great chance in the game and this week. That was a great trade for them, and shows the value of a dynamic 3 down RB for a team, which Bijan is. RB's that can run for 1000 yards and have 80+ receptions are not the norm, and categorizing them as such is a outdated way of thinking. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Guy Posted February 3, 2023 Share Posted February 3, 2023 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Packerraymond said: Who was behind center didn't make much difference? What are you watching? No way Purdy even goes .500 without the skills group that the 49ers had, and CM was probably the biggest reason for it. I was against the trade when it happened, but with Deebo and Jimmy get hurt and they still went undefeated, I was 100% wrong. Shocking to me that a RB didn't have a great game when they literally couldn't throw the ball, not figuratively, literally. With a healthy Purdy, they have a great chance in the game and this week. That was a great trade for them, and shows the value of a dynamic 3 down RB for a team, which Bijan is. RB's that can run for 1000 yards and have 80+ receptions are not the norm, and categorizing them as such is a outdated way of thinking. And still no ring! The 49ers make that move for one reason, to win it this year. It didn't happen. Therefore, by any measurement, it failed. You can sugarcoat it all you want with reasons why it didn't happen. They pushed all in and lost. I don't hate them for going for it, but it didn't work. Edited February 3, 2023 by Old Guy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted February 3, 2023 Share Posted February 3, 2023 1 minute ago, Old Guy said: And still no ring! The 49ers make that move for one reason, to win it this year. It didn't happen. Therefore, by any measurement, it failed. You can sugarcoat it all you want with reasons why it didn't happen. They pushed all in and lost. I don't hate them for going for it, but it didn't work. By that measure, 99% of moves made in the NFL "fail." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brat&Beer Posted February 3, 2023 Share Posted February 3, 2023 This would be a very "Packer" selection. 3rd round maybe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Guy Posted February 3, 2023 Share Posted February 3, 2023 19 minutes ago, Packerraymond said: By that measure, 99% of moves made in the NFL "fail." Do 99% of the moves in the NFL involve the movement of that many draft picks for one guy? Your statement is hyperbole or are you stating the 49ers move for McCaffrey was a long-term play vs. thinking they could win it all this year by doing it? We both know the answer to that question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts