2023 NFL offseason

[Steve_DeBerg_Fan_420]

29 minutes ago, Forge said:

It's just a terrible process is all, and people tend to ignore process in favor of results which is to be expected. This regime has frequently shown terrible process and it hasn't caught up with them yet outside of the injury plagued season. 

Fans tend to overrate draft picks as well. 

 

The results are what matter, the process is just an ends to a means.  Nolan and McC always loved their process, but it lead to garbage players.  Baalke was able to generate great number for number value with his picks, but he missed on a lot of players.  

These guys have stocked the team so well, we have to let guys walk every season that are above average NFL starters.  The comp picks even sweeten the deal.  That is a great problem to have.  Whatever process that leads the team to finding value players with late round picks is fine with me.   I just don't see reaching for a kicker as a big deal.  They liked Jake Moody more for whatever reason, and there is a strong chance the entire team's season rides on his individual performance on a single play.  It's worth a third round pick to get the guy they want.  Especially considering we have three of them each year. 

[Forge]

6 hours ago, Steve_DeBerg_Fan_420 said:

The results are what matter, the process is just an ends to a means.  Nolan and McC always loved their process, but it lead to garbage players.  Baalke was able to generate great number for number value with his picks, but he missed on a lot of players.  

 

I'm a poker player and I can always tell when people aren't as they don't have the same perspective lol. Results matter, yes. Nobody should ever suggest otherwise...that would be silly. But they are not the only thing that matters. Context and process also matter. If results were the only thing that mattered, you should have wanted Shanny fired midway through 2021, instead most niners fans laughed at that thought. He was basically Falcons era Dan Reeves at that point.  If you're ignoring context and process, you're missing huge pieces of the puzzle. Good process just gives you a better chance at more sustainable, long term results that are successful. 

That doesn't mean it's 100%. That's a common flaw I find in anti-analytics people arguing about (that's not to say you are an anti analytics person...I have no idea if you are or not, I'm simply drawing a line between similar principles of thinking). They levy an argument that analytics people act like it's 100%. It's not. Its simply percentages and probabilities. Analytics people know that doing the analytically correct thing doesn't result in 100% positive results. That's never an argument that they are trying to make, but always seems to be an argument that anti analytics people lob back whenever someone does the "analytics" thing and it fails. 

You can have a bad process and get good results...odds are it won't be for long, but weirder things have happened. You can also have the process and not get the results, it happens. But if you have the process, you should increase the odds that you get the results that you want. Counting cards in blackjack is a perfect example. You don't always win when counting cards...but you give yourself a better chance to do so (though its pretty nominal given multi decks in a shoe). Now, taking a shot on Moody isn't such a big deal that it means your entire process is flawed. That particular part of their process was flawed imo, but it's not something so big that its going to bring about the end of this particular regime lol. Worst case scenario in my opinion is that Moody costs them one super bowl run. 

But I also don't want to see consistently poor process. Do it every now and again and it's whatever, but keep doing it and I think you could be in for some rough times sooner or later. 

6 hours ago, Steve_DeBerg_Fan_420 said:

These guys have stocked the team so well, we have to let guys walk every season that are above average NFL starters.  The comp picks even sweeten the deal.  That is a great problem to have.  Whatever process that leads the team to finding value players with late round picks is fine with me.   I just don't see reaching for a kicker as a big deal.  They liked Jake Moody more for whatever reason, and there is a strong chance the entire team's season rides on his individual performance on a single play.  It's worth a third round pick to get the guy they want.  Especially considering we have three of them each year. 

I mean, we aren't going to have three third round picks every year. You certainly can't count on minority hires every year, so we will have Ryans / Carthon the next two, but there's nothing to say that we get any more. Mike McGlinchey will be the first third round player compensatory pick we have received under this regime (we've never even gotten a 4th round player comp pick under this regime, I'm pretty sure). 

Also, assuming that teams are going to keep finding good players in the late rounds is not something I would bank on either...just too much luck involved in the draft in general (though I do hope that we keep using late round picks to acquire young, solid vets on rookie deals like we did with Omenihu....I love that strategy). I can't think of any team that consistently does that over 6, 7, 8 years.  But hoping that late round picks continue to work is the Seattle disease. They blew up the draft for like a 3 year stretch on their late round picks and nobody cared that they kept setting fire to their earlier picks afterward.  Then those late round picks, which require an abundance of luck to just hit on, dried up (as they will because you're just regressing to the mean, tbh) their depth eroded and the team was overly reliant on a Russell Wilson. You may also have to sign free agents on your own, which may erode your ability to accumulate comp picks as well. 

Right now we are already short 3 first round picks from Trey Lance, a second + a bunch of mid round picks for an aging CMC...there is 100% going to come a time when the depth of this roster is going to be tested as people get older. This team could look so very, very different in 2 years. 

It's okay to call the pick bad process and not loving it while also feeling like it's not the end of the world that they made the pick, which is largely where I am at. I still really believe that they made the pick because he looks like a guy that will make the big kicks, and as a kicker, maybe that is the most important thing? Like, if I asked people to name their top 5 kickers in the league, I feel like a number of people would have evan mcpherson on the list. But that dude has been 24th and 20th in FG rate his first two years, 31st and 21st in touchback rate. But he's been weirdly awesome from beyond 50 yards and hit some big playoff kicks. So maybe the former is acceptable because the latter is harder to find? 

[Steve_DeBerg_Fan_420]

2 hours ago, Forge said:

I'm a poker player and I can always tell when people don't have the same perspective lol. Results matter, yes. Nobody should ever suggest otherwise...that would be silly. But they are not the only thing that matters. Context and process also matter. If results were the only thing that mattered, you should have wanted Shanny fired midway through 2021, instead most niners fans laughed at that thought. He was basically Falcons era Dan Reeves at that point.  If you're ignoring context and process, you're missing huge pieces of the puzzle. Good process just gives you a better chance at more sustainable, long term results that are successful. 

That doesn't mean it's 100%. That's a common flaw I find in anti-analytics people arguing about (that's not to say you are an anti analytics person...I have no idea if you are or not, I'm simply drawing a line between similar principles of thinking). They levy an argument that analytics people act like it's 100%. It's not. Its simply percentages and probabilities. Analytics people know that doing the analytically correct thing doesn't result in 100% positive results. That's never an argument that they are trying to make, but always seems to be an argument that anti analytics people lob back whenever someone does the "analytics" thing and it fails. 

You can have a bad process and get good results...odds are it won't be for long, but weirder things have happened. You can also have the process and not get the results, it happens. But if you have the process, you should increase the odds that you get the results that you want. Counting cards in blackjack is a perfect example. You don't always win when counting cards...but you give yourself a better chance to do so (though its pretty nominal given multi decks in a shoe). Now, taking a shot on Moody isn't such a big deal that it means your entire process is flawed. That particular part of their process was flawed imo, but it's not something so big that its going to bring about the end of this particular regime lol. Worst case scenario in my opinion is that Moody costs them one super bowl run. 

But I also don't want to see consistently poor process. Do it every now and again and it's whatever, but keep doing it and I think you could be in for some rough times sooner or later. 

I mean, we aren't going to have three third round picks every year. You certainly can't count on minority hires every year, so we will have Ryans / Carthon the next two, but there's nothing to say that we get any more. Mike McGlinchey will be the first third round player compensatory pick we have received under this regime (we've never even gotten a 4th round player comp pick under this regime, I'm pretty sure). 

Also, assuming that teams are going to keep finding good players in the late rounds is not something I would bank on either...just too much luck involved in the draft in general (though I do hope that we keep using late round picks to acquire young, solid vets on rookie deals like we did with Omenihu....I love that strategy). I can't think of any team that consistently does that over 6, 7, 8 years.  But hoping that late round picks continue to work is the Seattle disease. They blew up the draft for like a 3 year stretch on their late round picks and nobody cared that they kept setting fire to their earlier picks afterward.  Then those late round picks, which require an abundance of luck to just hit on, dried up (as they will because you're just regressing to the mean, tbh) their depth eroded and the team was overly reliant on a Russell Wilson. You may also have to sign free agents on your own, which may erode your ability to accumulate comp picks as well. 

Right now we are already short 3 first round picks from Trey Lance, a second + a bunch of mid round picks for an aging CMC...there is 100% going to come a time when the depth of this roster is going to be tested as people get older. This team could look so very, very different in 2 years. 

It's okay to call the pick bad process and not loving it while also feeling like it's not the end of the world that they made the pick, which is largely where I am at. I still really believe that they made the pick because he looks like a guy that will make the big kicks, and as a kicker, maybe that is the most important thing? Like, if I asked people to name their top 5 kickers in the league, I feel like a number of people would have evan mcpherson on the list. But that dude has been 24th and 20th in FG rate his first two years, 31st and 21st in touchback rate. But he's been weirdly awesome from beyond 50 yards and hit some big playoff kicks. So maybe the former is acceptable because the latter is harder to find? 

There are a lot of words here.  I am not even sure what we are talking about with regard to the process.  I just think taking a specialist every few years around pick 100-200 is ok.  It sucks less as time goes on.  It's a little sooner than most people value the position, but I think at the end of the day, it could be the only thing that matters.  I don't think about kickers a lot, but it's not because they are not important.  He is probably good at navigating the wind, but I am not sure if Santa Clara has the same problem as the Stick.  

I think people apply analytics wrong in a lot of cases, but it can also be very valuable.  Football has a team component that makes over all grades and analysis very difficult and subject.  What is a missed tackle, a missed block, a missed coverage, an accurate throw?  I appreciate more targeted analytical information coupled with a game plan of what is expected and needed from the players.  It is not always in line with how other teams and the consensus values players.

I think this team probably blows up in two years or three years, but who knows.  I feel good about depth this year, and the pick pool has been replenished pretty well.  

I never wanted Shanahan fired, mostly because I have patience.  I value coaching.  I am not against processes in general, I'm not a total street ball anarchist, I just think it's ok they valued a kicker over an O-lineman.  I may eat those words, but hopefully McKivitz plays well.  

I personally woulda waited to draft a kicker, but I am just a dude.  They probably just would have taken Beal jr with the kicker pick, and a kicker with the Beal pick, so it may be moot.  

[Steve_DeBerg_Fan_420]

On 5/7/2023 at 10:16 AM, Forge said:

Right now we are already short 3 first round picks from Trey Lance, a second + a bunch of mid round picks for an aging CMC...there is 100% going to come a time when the depth of this roster is going to be tested as people get older. This team could look so very, very different in 2 years. 

This year might be this group of guys' last chance to win a superbowl.  The team as a whole will move forward, but I don't think there is any way to avoid turnover in 2024.  Maybe @49erscap has an idea about this teams sustainability for 2024 and 2025.  

 

On 5/7/2023 at 10:16 AM, Forge said:

Also, assuming that teams are going to keep finding good players in the late rounds is not something I would bank on either...just too much luck involved in the draft in general (though I do hope that we keep using late round picks to acquire young, solid vets on rookie deals like we did with Omenihu....I love that strategy). I can't think of any team that consistently does that over 6, 7, 8 years. 

 

The current 49ers front office has done it consistently over 6, but I am worried about turning over personnel guys.  

Quote

I mean, we aren't going to have three third round picks every year. You certainly can't count on minority hires every year, so we will have Ryans / Carthon the next two, but there's nothing to say that we get any more. Mike McGlinchey will be the first third round player compensatory pick we have received under this regime (we've never even gotten a 4th round player comp pick under this regime, I'm pretty sure). 

The team seems to find high quality minority coaches.  They have a few on the staff right now.  The only time I personally thought the team might be better without Shanahan is when I thought about what the team would be like with Ryans as HC.  I am glad the team stuck with Shanny, but it was an interesting thought.

Edited May 9, 2023 by Steve_DeBerg_Fan_420

[NinerNation21]

Take it with a grain of salt, but I kind of really hate the slotting, here. I was hoping for a week 4 or 5 SNF matchup. 

[AustrianNiner]

14 minutes ago, NinerNation21 said:

Take it with a grain of salt, but I kind of really hate the slotting, here. I was hoping for a week 4 or 5 SNF matchup. 

We are usually better in December than weeks 1-5 so I don't mind facing the Eagles later.

[NinerNation21]

1 minute ago, AustrianNiner said:

We are usually better in December than weeks 1-5 so I don't mind facing the Eagles later.

You have a valid point. I was just hoping for an early-season matchup before injuries start mounting up. 

[AustrianNiner]

2 minutes ago, NinerNation21 said:

You have a valid point. I was just hoping for an early-season matchup before injuries start mounting up. 

Since there is no game at MetLife we should be good lol

[49erscap]

23 hours ago, Steve_DeBerg_Fan_420 said:

This year might be this group of guys' last chance to win a superbowl.  The team as a whole will move forward, but I don't think there is any way to avoid turnover in 2024.  Maybe @49erscap has an idea about this teams sustainability for 2024 and 2025.  

 

 

The current 49ers front office has done it consistently over 6, but I am worried about turning over personnel guys.  

The team seems to find high quality minority coaches.  They have a few on the staff right now.  The only time I personally thought the team might be better without Shanahan is when I thought about what the team would be like with Ryans as HC.  I am glad the team stuck with Shanny, but it was an interesting thought.

I can speak on 2024 & 2025, the 49ers are projected to be over the 2024 cap, if it is indeed $256M, but they have 3 players entering final yr of deals(AA, Ward & Dre), so extending them, plus redoing Deebo saves over $40M, so we'll be just fine in 2024, 2025 is fine, we have like close to $80M in cap room right now, before picks sign.

[Chrissooner49er]

2 hours ago, AustrianNiner said:

Since there is no game at MetLife we should be good lol

Yes, as a result of that fateful game (Nick and Solomon both going down in the same game with ACL tears), I am so anti-turf. But there are degrees of bad turf and MetLife is the worst. 

[Steve_DeBerg_Fan_420]

42 minutes ago, 49erscap said:

I can speak on 2024 & 2025, the 49ers are projected to be over the 2024 cap, if it is indeed $256M, but they have 3 players entering final yr of deals(AA, Ward & Dre), so extending them, plus redoing Deebo saves over $40M, so we'll be just fine in 2024, 2025 is fine, we have like close to $80M in cap room right now, before picks sign.

Thanks!  It is not quite as bad as I thought.  This front office is pretty good with sustainability.  Signing Bosa and possibly Aiyuk will be complicated, but it is possible.  

[49erscap]

1 hour ago, Steve_DeBerg_Fan_420 said:

Thanks!  It is not quite as bad as I thought.  This front office is pretty good with sustainability.  Signing Bosa and possibly Aiyuk will be complicated, but it is possible.  

No it's not as bad as some would want you to think, yeah they have 4 players who will get pay raises due to playing time, Lenoir, Mitchell, Banks, & Hufanga, but they have flexibility to restructure contracts where it won't hurt them in 2024, or really beyond, no one is signed past 2026, Nick Bosa will be the first to be signed through 2027-beyond, I assume a 5yr extension thru 2028, and then Aiyuk next offseason. Our window is wide open for the next 3-5 yrs, just need one of the QBs to be a hit, hoping Trey comes in and takes the job, or Purdy is the guy, making chump change compared to other QBs in the NFL.

[N4L]

6 hours ago, AustrianNiner said:

We are usually better in December than weeks 1-5 so I don't mind facing the Eagles later.

Great point.

I bet the NFL put this game in week 13 to be sure that Purdy was healthy and back. Week 13/14 is basically the deadline for him to come back next season to allow enough time to get acclimated before the playoffs. 

Hoping for the bye week around week 10 or so. I would not mind a week 14 bye after the eagles game though. 

[J-ALL-DAY]

1 hour ago, N4L said:

Great point.

I bet the NFL put this game in week 13 to be sure that Purdy was healthy and back. Week 13/14 is basically the deadline for him to come back next season to allow enough time to get acclimated before the playoffs. 

Hoping for the bye week around week 10 or so. I would not mind a week 14 bye after the eagles game though. 

Unless the team is reeling and struggling, then Purdy is not seeing the field in week 13 or 14 if that is when he gets back to full health. At that point, Shanny will just roll with who he has and who is playing at that certain time....Unless of course there are injuries to both Lance and Darnold and we have a Josh Johnson type of QB at the helm lol.

[N4L]

1 hour ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

Unless the team is reeling and struggling, then Purdy is not seeing the field in week 13 or 14 if that is when he gets back to full health. At that point, Shanny will just roll with who he has and who is playing at that certain time....Unless of course there are injuries to both Lance and Darnold and we have a Josh Johnson type of QB at the helm lol.

I would tend to agree with you regarding the bolded, however I think the NFL would prefer the game be played with Purdy for ratings, and by putting the game in week 13, they have maximized the chances he is starting and in good health. 

I would not be surprised if the NFL thinks that Kyle is 100% committed to Purdy as his QB. That may not actually be true, but I think they may believe it to be true (although I am just guessing). A lot of what we have heard from the media is that Kyle was committed to him pre-injury. 

He may not start a game for us this season, he may start week 1, but week 13 is a time when I would say he has the highest likelihood of starting.