Around the NFL

[big9erfan]

12 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

The other problem with valuing draft picks so much is that it is basically a crap shoot. This is why I respect what the Rams are doing for the most part. They are taking the sure thing rather than the unproven player. The one issue with the Rams is they are trading for guys who are on the last year of their deals (Watkins/Cooks) so if they don't re-sign them, then it becomes a one year rental. It does seem like the Cooks extension will be done before the season though. 

I think it is valid to ask if OBJ is worth 17-19 million per year though. Though some on here were willing to pay Robinson 13-14 a season, and he's not on the level of OBJ. With this team still having a crap load of cap space for now and the next few years, we could afford to take a big hit with his deal. I'm not worried about losing a 1st and a 3rd for someone of his caliber. We will be lucky to draft two guys that make the impact he does. Even with giving up a 1st and a 3rd, we will still have another 3rd rounder to go along with a 2nd rounder. Not bad, especially considering the type of guys the FO found in the mid to late rounds of the draft last year.

Yeah. I agree with this too.  I think the Eagles kind of opened up the flood gates, although I think NE had been operating that way for a while. People do tend to over-value draft picks realtive to picking up established talent. I even read an article that proposed picking up guys  in the last year or two of their rookie deals keeping them for only that year or two, and then just re-cycling the process. The cap has been around for a long time but I think NFL management has been slow to figure out how best to build a team with the cap restraint in place.

Haivng said that though it's not like draft picks have no value, particularly one as high as number 9. I think there's a reasonable chance that Ward and Nelson become pro bowlers and that one of them will be there at 9. Even if we only get a really good starter who falls short of pro bowl level, but get him for rookie contract money, that can be an important piece. In the end I think what it comes down to for me is that as much as I want a true number 1 WR on our team I don't value that position enough to give up multiple draft picks plus a whole tone of cap money to get one. In response to your dialog with Forge I'd consider using a 9 pick on a WR if I thought he was going to be as good as OBJ or Julio or Mike Evans.  But only consider it depending on who else was there. If I took one it would be with the knowledge that I had him locked up for 5 years on a rookie contract.

[rudyZ]

I'd be all for trading first rounders for established players if we were talking about late first rounders. With a high pick, you get the chance of acquiring a premium talent with cost control for five years, and that kind of player is very important to building a team. Now, maybe 9 is not enough to get us that premium talent. But that's on the talent evaluators to make that decision. Is it possible we're just waiting for the draft to see who can manage to pick up, first?

[big9erfan]

1 hour ago, rudyZ said:

I'd be all for trading first rounders for established players if we were talking about late first rounders. With a high pick, you get the chance of acquiring a premium talent with cost control for five years, and that kind of player is very important to building a team. Now, maybe 9 is not enough to get us that premium talent. But that's on the talent evaluators to make that decision. Is it possible we're just waiting for the draft to see who can manage to pick up, first?

Some years it wouldn't be.  But with 4 qbs likely to go in the top 8 that means 9 will net us one of the 5 best non-qbs in the league.  If we pick wisely that should net us "premium talent".

[TecmoSuperJoe]

People, forget the OBJ fairy tale. He's not worth two first round picks (who is other than a top quarterback?), he's coming off an injury, has on and off the field antics, and has one year left on his contract. I doubt the Giants find a trade partner for him even if the price is lowered to a first and a mid round selection. Jimmy G was putting up 300 yards a game with scrubs. WR isn't a position like corner, edge rusher, or quarterback. 49ers need to develop the talent they already have and/or get more through the draft. 

[Ronnie's Pinky]

10 hours ago, big9erfan said:

I don't believe though that a great WR has kept any team in the hunt for a decade, or been the key factor in a season long run all the way up to the SB.

Jerry Rice?

[Forge]

Just now, Ronnie's Pinky said:

Jerry Rice?

Joe and Steve may have had something to do with that. 

[Ronnie's Pinky]

4 minutes ago, Forge said:

Joe and Steve may have had something to do with that. 

Rice was the constant on offense when the team went through the QB transition, though, which really started in 1988. Incidentally, there's not a chance in hell the niners win the superbowl that season without Rice, who was the best player in all three of the team's playoff games during that run. Hell, they may not have even made the playoffs without him. 1988 was something of a down year for Rice statistically (no surprise given the QB turmoil at the time...it was a down year for Joe, as well, and Steve wasn't ready for prime time yet), but he came up huge in the big moments that year. Put a dagger in the Giants in a big-time regular season matchup, and then went out had maybe the single greatest playoff run of any player, ever.

[big9erfan]

18 minutes ago, Ronnie's Pinky said:

Jerry Rice?

I'm not at all sure that they wouldn't have won without Jerry.  Certainly they'd still be very good. It's not like those teams weren't loaded with talent on  both sides of the ball. The salary cap didn't start till '94 which happens to be right around when SF won its last SB.  Then of course there was Joe and Steve at the helm. World-class QBs surrounded by lots of good talent can win - with or without a world-class WR on the team.

[Ronnie's Pinky]

Amazing to see Jerry Rice's impact getting discounted by 49ers fans. I guess people forget how much that team had to struggle at times for victory. They might have won it in 1989 without Rice because the next best team in the league was the sorry-*** Rams (though the same is true of the QBs), but in 1988 or 1994?! Not a chance.

[Forge]

14 minutes ago, Ronnie's Pinky said:

Amazing to see Jerry Rice's impact getting discounted by 49ers fans. I guess people forget how much that team had to struggle at times for victory. They might have won it in 1989 without Rice because the next best team in the league was the sorry-*** Rams (though the same is true of the QBs), but in 1988 or 1994?! Not a chance.

I actually didn't see the second part of his post about the season long run. I'd agree with rice there maybe. At least there's an argument. I was focused on the first part about keeping them in the hunt for a decade. The decade long run has too many variables and supporting greatness for me to say rice did

[big9erfan]

4 minutes ago, Ronnie's Pinky said:

Amazing to see Jerry Rice's impact getting discounted by 49ers fans. I guess people forget how much that team had to struggle at times for victory. They might have won it in 1989 without Rice because the next best team in the league was the sorry-*** Rams (though the same is true of the QBs), but in 1988 or 1994?! Not a chance.

Not discounting how good he was, but you have to consider that that 1994 team had 9 other pro bowlers on the team in addition to Rice, and one of them was one of the best QBs of all time. Harris Barton, Derrick Deese, Steve Wallace, Richard Dent, Ricky Jackson, Ken Norton, John Taylor, Brynat Young were some of the non pro bowlers on the team. You just can't build rosters like that any more with the cap in place. With or without Jerry Rice that was one of the best groups of talent the 49ers have ever put together. So it's impossible to say what they'd have done without him.

[Ronnie's Pinky]

4 minutes ago, big9erfan said:

Not discounting how good he was, but you have to consider that that 1994 team had 9 other pro bowlers on the team in addition to Rice, and one of them was one of the best QBs of all time. Harris Barton, Derrick Deese, Steve Wallace, Richard Dent, Ricky Jackson, Ken Norton, John Taylor, Brynat Young were some of the non pro bowlers on the team. You just can't build rosters like that any more with the cap in place. With or without Jerry Rice that was one of the best groups of talent the 49ers have ever put together. So it's impossible to say what they'd have done without him.

Let's not forget how formidable that Cowboys team was, and how much luck it took to beat them even with Rice.

[N4L]

Let's not forget that the niners won 2 Superbowls before Jerry was drafted. This team can win with the WRs we have on the roster. I'm sure we can find a late round wr who fits the west coast offense well. 

Can the draft just hurry up and get here? 

[TecmoSuperJoe]

2 hours ago, Ronnie's Pinky said:

Amazing to see Jerry Rice's impact getting discounted by 49ers fans. I guess people forget how much that team had to struggle at times for victory. They might have won it in 1989 without Rice because the next best team in the league was the sorry-*** Rams (though the same is true of the QBs), but in 1988 or 1994?! Not a chance.

Rice was still a receiver at the end of the day. Receivers don't drag teams to titles. They also don't put up quality numbers consistently without a consistent quality QB. A QB still has to make the throws to the right target at the right time. Joe played well the second half of the season in 1988, and not coincidentally that is when the 49ers went on a huge winning streak. Craig having his best year of his career was just as important a piece as Rice that year at the skill positions.

[J-ALL-DAY]

8 hours ago, Forge said:

Joe and Steve may have had something to do with that. 

Well of course, but Rice sure the heck helped. A great WR alone isn't going to have the same impact as a great QB, but Rice/Irvin played big parts of the Niners/Cowboys dominance.