Why don't the 49ers spend more draft capital on the OL?

Originally posted by fryet:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
You guys are using the Chicken or the Egg argument in here. What comes first? Are you picking offensive line because you are bad? Are you bad and then you have the opportunity to pick offensive line high up on a certain year?

Picking offensive line is NOT MAKING YOU BAD. If you have some down years there is the OPPORTUNITY to pick offensive line HIGH UP in the draft. You do so and it makes you better in the long term. Of course a team picking early or high is coming off a bad season. They have a real opportunity to pick high. You want to hit on that. Not miss. You could make all these same arguments about defensive line, CB, WR, whatever. You had a down year. Now you have the opportunity to pick something really good.

Lions - 2021 - 1 - 7 overall - Penei Sewell - 6'5" 335 lbs. 5.09 40 time. They had a down year. Then had a real opportunity. Did picking him make them better or worse? Or keep them down as you are suggesting? Because picking offensive linemen means you lose apparently according to the arguments I see here. Or they had a down year. Saw a real opportunity. Picked it and got better. Have not picked offensive linemen as high because they haven't picked early lately. But he still improved them when they had the chance. If you can get a Franchise Tackle when you have the opportunity you DO IT. It's that simple.

I am not understanding your argument. The 49ers have not been picking in the top 10 and have not spent a first round pick on OL in quite some time, and I think the only 2nd round pick was Banks which has now left the team. Contrast that with DL where the 49ers have invested many 1st/2nd round picks over the years. So, why do you think OL has not been a priority for the 49ers, and do you agree with their approach?

When you are there you can pick it is the point. When you are down and have a high pick. These guys are arguing that teams like New Orleans are bad because they pick offensive line. LOL.

It's not a priority because it doesn't matter to Shany/Lynch. They think you build a team with front 7, CB, WR and special play calls and offense. Offensive line doesn't matter much to them. I think it's one of their fatal flaws. It's one of what holds us back from being able to win the Super Bowl.

Originally posted by scooterhd:
The trade out from Suamataia brought us Renardo Green and the bigger half of Guerendo, so I wouldnt be walking that one back at the moment.

What's done is done but a big part of not drafting an O-lineman has been that dumb ass trade up for Trey Lance. Lynch and Shanahan really shot themselves in the foot with that one. A huge gamble that didn't hurt for the first three years but now they're feeling it.

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by scooterhd:
The trade out from Suamataia brought us Renardo Green and the bigger half of Guerendo, so I wouldnt be walking that one back at the moment.

What's done is done but a big part of not drafting an O-lineman has been that dumb ass trade up for Trey Lance. Lynch and Shanahan really shot themselves in the foot with that one. A huge gamble that didn't hurt for the first three years but now they're feeling it.

Yeah that's been a real catastrophe. We would have had the ammo to restock and rebuild the offensive line. Some of them even with high up picks. You never want to trade that much for one guy. Especially an unproven guy.

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
You guys are using the Chicken or the Egg argument in here. What comes first? Are you picking offensive line because you are bad? Are you bad and then you have the opportunity to pick offensive line high up on a certain year?

Picking offensive line is NOT MAKING YOU BAD. If you have some down years there is the OPPORTUNITY to pick offensive line HIGH UP in the draft. You do so and it makes you better in the long term. Of course a team picking early or high is coming off a bad season. They have a real opportunity to pick high. You want to hit on that. Not miss. You could make all these same arguments about defensive line, CB, WR, whatever. You had a down year. Now you have the opportunity to pick something really good.

Lions - 2021 - 1 - 7 overall - Penei Sewell - 6'5" 335 lbs. 5.09 40 time. They had a down year. Then had a real opportunity. Did picking him make them better or worse? Or keep them down as you are suggesting? Because picking offensive linemen means you lose apparently according to the arguments I see here. Or they had a down year. Saw a real opportunity. Picked it and got better. Have not picked offensive linemen as high because they haven't picked early lately. But he still improved them when they had the chance. If you can get a Franchise Tackle when you have the opportunity you DO IT. It's that simple.

How did Evan Neal work for the Giants?

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
When you are there you can pick it is the point. When you are down and have a high pick. These guys are arguing that teams like New Orleans are bad because they pick offensive line. LOL.

It's not a priority because it doesn't matter to Shany/Lynch. They think you build a team with front 7, CB, WR and special play calls and offense. Offensive line doesn't matter much to them. I think it's one of their fatal flaws. It's one of what holds us back from being able to win the Super Bowl.

They have never taken a DB higher than pick 64 in 9 years. At no point have they shown they think you build with CB.

Originally posted by Ensatsu:
OL requires too much development time. And by the time they develop and learn Kyle's complicated system, they will depart in free agency. This is why Kyle prefers to just pay for OL in free agency or get undrafted guys he can sneak onto the practice squad.

For defensive linemen, its more about athleticism and having a quick first step. They can get coached up easier and don't have to learn a complicated system. They just gotta train hard and work on their hand technique. So its much safer and preferable to draft defensive linemen high because they have less chances of being a bust. At minimum even in the worst case, you'll get a decent run stopper.

They tried to draft OL high, and didn't see much of a return. McGlinchey was a bust, considering where he was picked. Aaron Banks was just average. Both did not get 2nd contracts with the team.

So at the end of the day, it just comes down to Kyle's system being too complicated for offensive linemen and quarterbacks.

Puni didn't seem to struggle.

Certainly the system is complex, but it just means they have to draft the right players.

On that front there is something that I don't think a lot of people see/think about. In 2019 there were 3 teams where the bulk of their running plays on the first 2 downs were zone running scheme. In 2021 it was 22 teams (and coaches in the extended Mike Shanahan tree had spread to half the NFL). In 2024 every team in the NFL used zone running as a significant part of their scheme. When that happens the optimal players for those schemes increase in value and defenses are progressively tuned to stop it. The direct result of that is what it's always been ... the best coaches tend to win until someone comes up with an innovation that breaks the trend.

I think it was recent contracts signed by 49ers FAs that broke the 49ers chances of targeting OL specifically when players who are just better than functional are making that much money. Some of that might be the 49ers front office' approach of waiting as long as possible to re-up their own players I guess too.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
You guys are using the Chicken or the Egg argument in here. What comes first? Are you picking offensive line because you are bad? Are you bad and then you have the opportunity to pick offensive line high up on a certain year?

Picking offensive line is NOT MAKING YOU BAD. If you have some down years there is the OPPORTUNITY to pick offensive line HIGH UP in the draft. You do so and it makes you better in the long term. Of course a team picking early or high is coming off a bad season. They have a real opportunity to pick high. You want to hit on that. Not miss. You could make all these same arguments about defensive line, CB, WR, whatever. You had a down year. Now you have the opportunity to pick something really good.

Lions - 2021 - 1 - 7 overall - Penei Sewell - 6'5" 335 lbs. 5.09 40 time. They had a down year. Then had a real opportunity. Did picking him make them better or worse? Or keep them down as you are suggesting? Because picking offensive linemen means you lose apparently according to the arguments I see here. Or they had a down year. Saw a real opportunity. Picked it and got better. Have not picked offensive linemen as high because they haven't picked early lately. But he still improved them when they had the chance. If you can get a Franchise Tackle when you have the opportunity you DO IT. It's that simple.

How did Evan Neal work for the Giants?

You can't look at it like 1 player who didn't work out. First he's pretty fat and could stand to lose some weight. I think that would help him. Second he has had some injury problems as I understand.

"We had several guys we were interested in. The draft didn't fall to us the right way. You have to stick true to your board."

This is what Shany/Lynch say every year. What does it lead to? Undrafted FA's and 3rd and 4th tier FA's filling out your offensive line. Both the starters and depth. Outside of TW who we got in a trade and Puni who is our best offensive line draft pick in years and years. You have to PICK it. Of course you want to hit on the right ones and not get the wrong ones. But just ignoring, letting it slide, saying the draft didn't fall our way isn't the answer. It leads to an offensive line stockpiled with late round draft picks and undrafted free agents. A scrap heap of left over guys. I'm unable to see how that's better.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
When you are there you can pick it is the point. When you are down and have a high pick. These guys are arguing that teams like New Orleans are bad because they pick offensive line. LOL.

It's not a priority because it doesn't matter to Shany/Lynch. They think you build a team with front 7, CB, WR and special play calls and offense. Offensive line doesn't matter much to them. I think it's one of their fatal flaws. It's one of what holds us back from being able to win the Super Bowl.

They have never taken a DB higher than pick 64 in 9 years. At no point have they shown they think you build with CB.

The point is they PICK it. 64 is SUPER HIGH for the 49ers if you were talking offensive line. They rarely if ever pick that high for offensive line. I guess you could point to McGlinchey. Who was ok but not great. But they have been at this now for 9 years and you couldn't find too many examples where they take it high. Some years they don't even pick it at all. Look up their drafts. 64 is 2nd round. Not really that bad. Considered pretty high of a pick. It's not like top 10 or top 20 or top 25. That's true.

I think part of the problem is because there aren't a lot of great OL players each year. The Niners are usually drafting near the end of the round and the few great lineman are gone by then. Another issue is not every O lineman is a good fit for the zone blocking scheme that Kyle runs. This year the Niners had a decent draft position but it was a very weak year for O line. On top of that they really wanted to upgrade the defensive front.

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:
I think part of the problem is because there aren't a lot of great OL players each year. The Niners are usually drafting near the end of the round and the few great lineman are gone by then. Another issue is not every O lineman is a good fit for the zone blocking scheme that Kyle runs. This year the Niners had a decent draft position but it was a very weak year for O line. On top of that they really wanted to upgrade the defensive front.

That's fine for 1 year. How do you explain the other 8 years? They have been at this for 9 years now. At some point you just have to conclude they don't value offensive line much. Certainly not high up. Not very often anyway. You can point to McGlinchey. But that's 1 guy and 1 year. What about the other 8 years. Nobody who watches this team for years and years and last year could possibly conclude our offensive line is ok and doesn't need anything.

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:
I think part of the problem is because there aren't a lot of great OL players each year. The Niners are usually drafting near the end of the round and the few great lineman are gone by then. Another issue is not every O lineman is a good fit for the zone blocking scheme that Kyle runs. This year the Niners had a decent draft position but it was a very weak year for O line. On top of that they really wanted to upgrade the defensive front.

That's fine for 1 year. How do you explain the other 8 years? They have been at this for 9 years now. At some point you just have to conclude they don't value offensive line much. Certainly not high up. Not very often anyway. You can point to McGlinchey. But that's 1 guy and 1 year. What about the other 8 years. Nobody who watches this team for years and years and last year could possibly conclude our offensive line is ok and doesn't need anything.

I don't recall anyone saying that the O line doesn't need anything. It is, however, certainly not as bad as you continue to maintain in various threads. It obviously is not top 5, but it is reasonable. It will be interesting to see what they do about the center. There are some interesting options this year and, ignoring the perpetual naysayers, next year's draft looks just what we need.

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
That's fine for 1 year. How do you explain the other 8 years? They have been at this for 9 years now. At some point you just have to conclude they don't value offensive line much. Certainly not high up. Not very often anyway. You can point to McGlinchey. But that's 1 guy and 1 year. What about the other 8 years. Nobody who watches this team for years and years and last year could possibly conclude our offensive line is ok and doesn't need anything.

The Eagles, who have managed to have the best OL in the NFL (or among the best) have spent exactly 1 more pick in the first 3 rounds of the draft in the last 9 years than the 49ers. It seems like draft capital is not all there is to being good on OL in the NFL.

Originally posted by Scoots:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
That's fine for 1 year. How do you explain the other 8 years? They have been at this for 9 years now. At some point you just have to conclude they don't value offensive line much. Certainly not high up. Not very often anyway. You can point to McGlinchey. But that's 1 guy and 1 year. What about the other 8 years. Nobody who watches this team for years and years and last year could possibly conclude our offensive line is ok and doesn't need anything.

The Eagles, who have managed to have the best OL in the NFL (or among the best) have spent exactly 1 more pick in the first 3 rounds of the draft in the last 9 years than the 49ers. It seems like draft capital is not all there is to being good on OL in the NFL.

They dug one all the way out from Australia which is unusual but innovative. Good for them on that one. Lane Johnson was picked very high. But it was years ago. Still he was a high pick. Or Sewell for the Lions if you want to use that as an example. Trent Williams even who wasn't drafted by us. But went very high when he was picked. We later got him in a trade. There is gold there. But you have to PICK it. Nobody is saying every pick every year or every high pick. There are other needs. But you can't completely ignore it either like the 49ers do. That's not a recipe for success.

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
They dug one all the way out from Australia which is unusual but innovative. Good for them on that one. Lane Johnson was picked very high. But it was years ago. Still he was a high pick. Or Sewell for the Lions if you want to use that as an example. Trent Williams even who wasn't drafted by us. But went very high when he was picked. We later got him in a trade. There is gold there. But you have to PICK it. Nobody is saying every pick every year or every high pick. There are other needs. But you can't completely ignore it either like the 49ers do. That's not a recipe for success.

So the Eagles have used 4 picks in the first 2 days of the draft over 9 years and the 49ers have used 3. That's pretty close to each other, and certainly implies the 49ers are "ignoring" it fairly similarly to the way the Eagles are ignoring it.

I wonder if, for LT, it makes more sense to sign rather than to draft them? About half the top LTs are not on the team that drafted them, and the ones that are on the team that drafted them are not yet on their 3rd contract where the big jump usually happens. But on the way to getting and developing those players teams burn a number of picks that don't develop, while free agency should be safer, if more expensive.