2024 Draft Class: OL

Originally posted by NYniner85:
That fair. I have Mims and Fautanu a tier ahead of Kingsley. There's depth, but there's also tiers. I don't even know if Kingsley makes it to SF. I can see the Ravens/Packers/cowboys taking him. I can see DC moving back up to get him all the same. They have a lot of picks to work with.

Sometimes you can't let the board come to you…sometimes you gotta make a move for a guy that can be a foundational piece on a team that's already setup pretty well.

I also think our second next yr will be almost a 3rd and I wouldn't be shocked if we moved Deebo next yr to grain some capital.

Im not a fan of trying to justify picks by saying it's almost the next round. A 2nd is a 2nd. Even still, we have been complaining about the 9ers 3rd round picks for years. So, if we get emotional over the 3rd round picks that we use. It clearly means we feel there is value in those picks. So almost a 3rd or not we as fans feel like we can get foundational pieces there too.

Heck, we may even get a foundational piece at one of the non primary positions. If you look up the highest paid non primary positions you'll see you can get them with almost 3rd round picks

Originally posted by krizay:
Im not a fan of trying to justify picks by saying it's almost the next round. A 2nd is a 2nd. Even still, we have been complaining about the 9ers 3rd round picks for years. So, if we get emotional over the 3rd round picks that we use. It clearly means we feel there is value in those picks. So almost a 3rd or not we as fans feel like we can get foundational pieces there too.

Heck, we may even get a foundational piece at one of the non primary positions. If you look up the highest paid non primary positions you'll see you can get them with almost 3rd round picks

I mean you know a 2nd isn't just a 2nd. That's like saying a 1st is a 1st when we're drafting 31st and DC is drafting 2nd overall. There's context…if you don't think that matters that's fine. We will disagree.

if there's a guy they love go get him…that's all I'm saying. Let's not assum someone like Kinglesy will be there as well. Premium position and a good player? Why's he for sure gonna be there? Teams can move ahead of us as well.

your last paragraph is what exactly? Just being condescending just because? I'm just talking, not trying to argue. You never want to move up….So I'm not shocked you don't want to this time as well

Originally posted by NYniner85:
I mean you know a 2nd isn't just a 2nd. That's like saying a 1st is a 1st when we're drafting 31st and DC is drafted 2nd overall. There's context…if you don't think that matters that's fine. We will disagree.

if there's a guy they love go get him…that's all I'm saying. I mean let's stop acting like they've nailed on all their 2nd and 3rd rd picks. Let's stop assuming someone like Kinglesy will be there as well. Premium position and a good player? Why's he for sure gonna be there?

your last paragraph is what exactly? Just being condescending just because? I'm just talking, not trying to argue. You never want to move up….So I'm not shocked you don't want to this time as well

A 2nd is a 2nd no matter how you want to dissect it. No matter what context ou want to use. Not even sure how you can disagree with a fact.

I'll play that game too. Why would a team trade back? Premium position good player why would they not draft whatever tackle it is you want to trade for? Or better yet, why would they make that trade for a future pick?

Clearly we don't know who will be available. Having OT or bust mindset is a foolish mindset. We have more holes than just OT. So if miss out on the Premium OTs we just pivot. I promise you there are more OTs that can step in and be an upgrade.

Yes, my last paragraph was posted just to poke you. Just using some of what you've been writing against you. But it's true.

I am a fan of trading up when I think there is a need. I don't think there is a need to for OT. Just like I didn't think there was a need 3 years ago. I am a fan of having more bullets because they have been suspect with their picking and our depth suffers some because of it.

I feel like after wasting picks the past 3 years we need to use our picks. Especially considering our QB is about to be paid.

Originally posted by krizay:
A 2nd is a 2nd no matter how you want to dissect it. No matter what context ou want to use. Not even sure how you can disagree with a fact.

I'll play that game too. Why would a team trade back? Premium position good player why would they not draft whatever tackle it is you want to trade for? Or better yet, why would they make that trade for a future pick?

Clearly we don't know who will be available. Having OT or bust mindset is a foolish mindset. We have more holes than just OT. So if miss out on the Premium OTs we just pivot. I promise you there are more OTs that can step in and be an upgrade.

Yes, my last paragraph was posted just to poke you. Just using some of what you've been writing against you. But it's true.

I am a fan of trading up when I think there is a need. I don't think there is a need to for OT. Just like I didn't think there was a need 3 years ago. I am a fan of having more bullets because they have been suspect with their picking and our depth suffers some because of it.

I feel like after wasting picks the past 3 years we need to use our picks. Especially considering our QB is about to be paid.

A 2nd is not a 2nd…if you refuse to use context, that's not my problem. A difference of 30 prospects is a big deal. I don't care how you spin it.

I never said OT or bust. I said would you be willing to move a future 2nd for one of the higher tiered guys. You aren't…you never are. Shocking.

Some teams need picks because their roster isn't great. SF is not in that situation. they're trying to win it all right now. They need to also find those replacements at those premium positions.

dude you don't have to promise me anything, I've spent plenty of time watching and researching all the prospects.

Like always you have to put some condensing thing into it, which had nothing to do with what I was saying…just have a convo instead of constantly being snarky with me.

again you can have your opinion…that's why I literally said "that's fair" in my original respond.

Originally posted by NYniner85:
A 2nd is not a 2nd…if you refuse to use context, that's not my problem. A difference of 30 prospects is a big deal. I don't care how you spin it.

I never said OT or bust. I said would you be willing to move a future 2nd for one of the higher tiered guys. You aren't…you never are. Shocking.

Some teams need picks because their roster isn't great. SF is not in that situation. they're trying to win it all right now. They need to also find those replacements at those premium positions.

dude you don't have to promise me anything, I've spent plenty of time watching and researching all the prospects.

Like always you have to put some condensing thing into it, which had nothing to do with what I was saying…just have a convo instead of constantly being snarky with me.

again you can have your opinion…that's why I literally said "that's fair" in my original respond.

Out of curiosity, why aren't you willing to trade this year's 2nd? This year's 2nd is guaranteed to be in your almost 3rd area. Where as anything can happen this year and our 2nd may land in the almost 1st category.

Plus, future picks are usually upgraded a round compared to the current year. So why not trade an almost 4th instead?

Originally posted by krizay:
Out of curiosity, why aren't you willing to trade this year's 2nd? This year's 2nd is guaranteed to be in your almost 3rd area. Where as anything can happen this year and our 2nd may land in the almost 1st category.

Plus, future picks are usually upgraded a round compared to the current year. So why not trade an almost 4th instead?

I don't think we need to trade a 2nd next year to move up and get a guy we really like.

I'm fine moving a 3rd or 4th all the same.

listen you're the one that brought up Kingsley, saying he's basically the same tier as the others. If that's the case then you can't be confident he will be there or a team won't move ahead…my point is instead of letting the board fall to you…target a guy you really love and try to move up.

I really don't see that as some taboo thing.

Originally posted by NYniner85:
A 2nd is not a 2nd…if you refuse to use context, that's not my problem. A difference of 30 prospects is a big deal. I don't care how you spin it.

I never said OT or bust. I said would you be willing to move a future 2nd for one of the higher tiered guys. You aren't…you never are. Shocking.

Some teams need picks because their roster isn't great. SF is not in that situation. they're trying to win it all right now. They need to also find those replacements at those premium positions.

dude you don't have to promise me anything, I've spent plenty of time watching and researching all the prospects.

Like always you have to put some condensing thing into it, which had nothing to do with what I was saying…just have a convo instead of constantly being snarky with me.

again you can have your opinion…that's why I literally said "that's fair" in my original respond.

A spoon is not a spoon……there is no spoon

Originally posted by NYniner85:
I don't think we need to trade a 2nd next year to move up and get a guy we really like.

I'm fine moving a 3rd or 4th all the same.

listen you're the one that brought up Kingsley, saying he's basically the same tier as the others. If that's the case then you can't be confident he will be there or a team won't move ahead…my point is instead of letting the board fall to you…target a guy you really love and try to move up.

I really don't see that as some taboo thing.

You don't think we need to trade a 2nd? The post that started this you said you would. Not exactly the value you've been touting over the past few weeks.

What I said was Kingsley and a 2nd was worth more than whatever OT you'd want to trade up for. I understand you stated 2025 2nd but look at 2024 2nd this year. Would you rather Kingsley AND Christian Haynes, max melton, khyree jackson, Renardo Green etc... Or just Mims or Fautanu?

It wouldn't be end of the world to trade up. I also don't think it would be a game changer either

Originally posted by LottDMontanaO:

Fautanu AND Rosengarten! https://t.co/TEXccMrs1f

— David Lombardi (@LombardiHimself) April 13, 2024

It's happening fellas, might as well start the thread already:

Welcome "not first almost first basically 2nd" round pick Roger Rosengarten

Originally posted by 49ers808:
It's happening fellas, might as well start the thread already:

Welcome "not first almost first basically 2nd" round pick Roger Rosengarten

How to "prove" that 2 = 1
Let's begin our journey into the bizarre world of apparently correct, yet obviously absurd, mathematical proofs by convincing ourselves that 1 + 1 = 1. And therefore that 2 = 1. I know this sounds crazy, but if you follow the logic (and don't already know the trick), I think you'll find that the "proof" is pretty convincing.

Here's how it works:

Assume that we have two variables a and b, and that: a = b
Multiply both sides by a to get: a2 = ab
Subtract b2 from both sides to get: a2 – b2 = ab – b2
This is the tricky part: Factor the left side (using FOIL from algebra) to get (a + b)(a – b) and factor out b from the right side to get b(a – b). If you're not sure how FOIL or factoring works, don't worry—you can check that this all works by multiplying everything out to see that it matches. The end result is that our equation has become: (a + b)(a – b) = b(a – b)
Since (a – b) appears on both sides, we can cancel it to get: a + b = b
Since a = b (that's the assumption we started with), we can substitute b in for a to get: b + b = b
Combining the two terms on the left gives us: 2b = b
Since b appears on both sides, we can divide through by b to get: 2 = 1
Wait, what?! Everything we did there looked totally reasonable. How in the world did we end up proving that 2 = 1?

Originally posted by krizay:
You don't think we need to trade a 2nd? The post that started this you said you would. Not exactly the value you've been touting over the past few weeks.

What I said was Kingsley and a 2nd was worth more than whatever OT you'd want to trade up for. I understand you stated 2025 2nd but look at 2024 2nd this year. Would you rather Kingsley AND Christian Haynes, max melton, khyree jackson, Renardo Green etc... Or just Mims or Fautanu?

It wouldn't be end of the world to trade up. I also don't think it would be a game changer either

Dude you're trying wayyyy to hard to argue right now lol . I said we don't have to trade this years 2nd to move up.

if you understand what I'm saying. Then why deflect about a scenario I'm not even talking about doing?

Christian Haynes, max melton AND one of the top tier OTs. Why can't we do that?

Originally posted by 49ers808:

Originally posted by LottDMontanaO:

Fautanu AND Rosengarten! https://t.co/TEXccMrs1f

— David Lombardi (@LombardiHimself) April 13, 2024

It's happening fellas, might as well start the thread already:

Welcome "not first almost first basically 2nd" round pick Roger Rosengarten

Somehow, I hope Fautanu is happening.

Originally posted by NYniner85:
Dude you're trying wayyyy to hard to argue right now lol . I said we don't have to trade this years 2nd to move up.

if you understand what I'm saying. Then why deflect about a scenario I'm not even talking about doing?

Christian Haynes, max melton AND one of the top tier OTs. Why can't we do that?

Originally posted by NYniner85:
Would folks be willing to give up next yrs 2nd to move up and get one of these OTs? I feel like I would.

Originally posted by NYniner85:
I don't think we need to trade a 2nd next year to move up and get a guy we really like.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Dude you're trying wayyyy to hard to argue right now lol . I said we don't have to trade this years 2nd to move up.