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

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:
I thought this thread was about the OL?

It's about the same mistaken belief that the 9ers don't care about the OL when they have put more emphasis over the years on it then they have the secondary.

I challenge the idea that spending every pick next year on OL is a good thing regardless of whether the picks work out just to show they care. That's stupid. Identify the player.

But if someone wants to make an argument about a position group being ignored that argument should go to the secondary not the OL. Both Philly and Detroit have put big investment in their secondaries. Yet the comparison is only made to the OL.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
They drafted many, many good DB's. Even on the current team. Mustapha, Green, Lenior are all really good players. They have shown they can draft DB (S and CB). Which doesn't surprise me because Lynch was one. It's the one spot he seems to be able to identify and draft and hit on the pick. He busts on a lot of other areas. With those 3 there is simply NO WAY you can say our defensive backfield is as bad as our offensive line. It's probably better than most teams. Add in the little Smurf who can cover the slot. It's not our weak spot. Lynch is able to find them in middle and later rounds. The good ones. Green was taken high. But offensive line they just ignore or bust. Some years they didn't even pick 1. I kid you not. Look up their drafts.

Mustapha is hurt. Don't know when he will even play. Jayir Brown was the worst starting player on the whole 49ers last year. Tre Brown is a huge ? at Corner.

Mustapha will come back and be healthy. He's a missile out there. One of the better young Safety's in the league. Our defensive backfield is NOT as bad as you claim it is. Our offensive line on the other hand....

Originally posted by Scoots:
And what $60M+ are you cutting from the roster?

To answer your question, if a team decides to focus on having a great OL, and paying for it, there are 2 ways to pay for it without shortchanging the defense.
1: pay less for skill position players. The easiest place to do this is RB where a mediocre RB will look much better behind a great OL. The second area would be WR where you trust that weaker WR will have more time to get open since a great OL is protecting a QB who will have more time to throw. Personally, I would be investing less in the WR position, as there are a ton of good WR coming out each year. Each year, spend a 3rd round pick on a WR, and don't sign them to a 2nd contract.
2: Pay less for a QB. Shanahan has had good success on getting production from mediocre QB. With this strategy, you would not give Brock Purdy a new contract but would instead trade him.

Originally posted by fryet:
To answer your question, if a team decides to focus on having a great OL, and paying for it, there are 2 ways to pay for it without shortchanging the defense.
1: pay less for skill position players. The easiest place to do this is RB where a mediocre RB will look much better behind a great OL. The second area would be WR where you trust that weaker WR will have more time to get open since a great OL is protecting a QB who will have more time to throw. Personally, I would be investing less in the WR position, as there are a ton of good WR coming out each year. Each year, spend a 3rd round pick on a WR, and don't sign them to a 2nd contract.
2: Pay less for a QB. Shanahan has had good success on getting production from mediocre QB. With this strategy, you would not give Brock Purdy a new contract but would instead trade him.

Neither the Eagles or Lions are employing that strategy,

Where is this scenario of dominant OL with questionable cheap QB and weapons succeeding?

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
Mustapha will come back and be healthy. He's a missile out there. One of the better young Safety's in the league. Our defensive backfield is NOT as bad as you claim it is. Our offensive line on the other hand....

It was last year. Was far worse.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
I don't see comp picks as early draft capital. To me early draft capital is minimum top 75. Really top 50. Only team in ShananLynch timeframe to not use a top 50 pick on a DB via pick or trade.

It's less of a criticism and more of a perspective that people like SD and Ncommand ignore because it doesn't fit their 9ers only ignore the OL argument. Can't even say that in FA either as we just added 2 1sts and a 3rd to OL group while we signed Tre Brown and Dallas Flowers in the secondary.

To me (and I think most) it's first 2 days of the draft.

Where do you go to get the data that says the 49ers have taken significantly fewer DBs in the top 75 picks than any other team? I could do it but it would take me a while :)

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:
Most of those guys you named were picked when there were fewer teams in the league. That meant more depth at each position and gave each team a better chance at hitting on a player.

Deion Sanders was drafted in 1989 ... before expansion. And several were literal contemporaries of Deion.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
Mustapha is hurt. Don't know when he will even play. Jayir Brown was the worst starting player on the whole 49ers last year. Tre Brown is a huge ? at Corner.

"hurt" is not about the draft.

Originally posted by fryet:

Originally posted by Scoots:
And what $60M+ are you cutting from the roster?

To answer your question, if a team decides to focus on having a great OL, and paying for it, there are 2 ways to pay for it without shortchanging the defense.
1: pay less for skill position players. The easiest place to do this is RB where a mediocre RB will look much better behind a great OL. The second area would be WR where you trust that weaker WR will have more time to get open since a great OL is protecting a QB who will have more time to throw. Personally, I would be investing less in the WR position, as there are a ton of good WR coming out each year. Each year, spend a 3rd round pick on a WR, and don't sign them to a 2nd contract.
2: Pay less for a QB. Shanahan has had good success on getting production from mediocre QB. With this strategy, you would not give Brock Purdy a new contract but would instead trade him.

I don't see a list of players you are cutting from the roster to get the additional $60M you want to spend on the OL. Look at the roster, find the $60M+ to cut, then lets look at the weakness of position groups.

Originally posted by Scoots:
I don't see a list of players you are cutting from the roster to get the additional $60M you want to spend on the OL. Look at the roster, find the $60M+ to cut, then lets look at the weakness of position groups.

They already cut Deebo. They could also cut Brandon Aiyuk and CMC. Or they could opt to not pay Brock Purdy.

Originally posted by fryet:
They already cut Deebo. They could also cut Brandon Aiyuk and CMC. Or they could opt to not pay Brock Purdy.

And does that result in a better team? A great OL with Mac Jones at QB, Guerendo at RB, and Jennings and Pearsall at WR. Seems like an also-ran to me.

Originally posted by Scoots:
And does that result in a better team? A great OL with Mac Jones at QB, Guerendo at RB, and Jennings and Pearsall at WR. Seems like an also-ran to me.

Which is why I asked for the successful teams that are following the don't pay the QB and weapon formula.

Originally posted by Scoots:

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:
Most of those guys you named were picked when there were fewer teams in the league. That meant more depth at each position and gave each team a better chance at hitting on a player.

Deion Sanders was drafted in 1989 ... before expansion. And several were literal contemporaries of Deion.

That's what I said. There were 12 rounds instead of 7 because there were fewer teams to spread the talent around. No free agency and no salary cap. Completely different era. DBs could lay out any WR that came into their territory. Not they would get a suspension. Ronnie Lott and some of the guys he played with woud be paying fines every week now.

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:
That's what I said. There were 12 rounds instead of 7 because there were fewer teams to spread the talent around. No free agency and no salary cap. Completely different era. DBs could lay out any WR that came into their territory. Not they would get a suspension. Ronnie Lott and some of the guys he played with woud be paying fines every week now.

The point I was responding to was that you have to pick in the top 5 to get a Deion level DB. I was proving that's not been true.

I do wish the NFL would expand rosters by 20 players and just get rid of the practice squad. But I understand some people don't care about player development like I do :)

Originally posted by Scoots:

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:
That's what I said. There were 12 rounds instead of 7 because there were fewer teams to spread the talent around. No free agency and no salary cap. Completely different era. DBs could lay out any WR that came into their territory. Not they would get a suspension. Ronnie Lott and some of the guys he played with woud be paying fines every week now.

The point I was responding to was that you have to pick in the top 5 to get a Deion level DB. I was proving that's not been true.

I do wish the NFL would expand rosters by 20 players and just get rid of the practice squad. But I understand some people don't care about player development like I do :)

It's sometimes hard to know what people are responding to with the way some of the comments go on for several pages.

I agree with you about expanding the roster. I also think the NFL needs to explore a true minor league system so players can be developed. The way college players are jumpimg around and getting paid is ruining college ball. If they had a true minor league then players could be signed and developed instead of playing 5 or 6 years in college. They could play in the system that the big team does and be more ready to play. Leave college ball to actual student athletes instead of mercenaries.

This could be done if they wanted to. Colleges would be bette roff and the NFL would be getting players more prepared.