49ers Offensive Line

The niners might be thinking of signing a big name veteran tackle after Trent is gone. After all when trent is gone you will have the cap money to do that-maybe

Originally posted by pillageDatazz:
I'd love for them to get O line early (like yesterday), but it doesn't feel like they will, especially after those signings

Not to mention, we currently have a more than 4 OTs on the roster and a little depth at guard. After they get deal done with Trent, they'll more than likely target anything other than O line early...

I hope you're right because we sure can use a late gem (if lucky) and solid depth to groom

And THAT would be a horrible mistake by Shanny & Co. We need to draft for his replacement regardless if we get a deal done with Trent or not. This is a can that can no longer be kicked down the road.

Originally posted by WildBill:

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
I feel you there. But I really didn't overlook him. My thinking is that we draft Trent's replacement with our (hopefully) 1st pick, or 2nd pick, kick McKivitz to LG while the rookie takes on RT. Then, once Trent is gone, move McKivitz back to RT and the rookie to LT in 2027. But that's how I see it. I doubt Shanny & Co. are reading MHO.

I don't like the idea of bouncing players all over the place from one side to another and back again. You need continuity. Better to let the newbie go at it at guard. At least he will be on the same side.

I'm not against that either. Totally agree. Let him play LG then move to LT when Trent is gone. I'm all for it. But Trent's replacement need to be addressed high in this draft.

Trent singed.

BUT, we still need to draft his replacement high in the draft. I'm not getting off that. 2 year, $50 mil? That's not comforting because Trent WILL want more money next year and we'll be going through this whole song-&-dance again next year.

We still need to draft his replacement.

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:


Trent singed.

BUT, we still need to draft his replacement high in the draft. I'm not getting off that. 2 year, $50 mil? That's not comforting because Trent WILL want more money next year and we'll be going through this whole song-&-dance again next year.

We still need to draft his replacement.

i think we should just draft his replacement when he retires. I am all for taking a mid to late round pick to see if he develops into one but i don't like the idea of drafting one high with a day 1/2 pick and develop. Once he retires if we dont have one i like the idea of trading up and picking an OT that you like

Originally posted by ritz126:

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:


Trent singed.

BUT, we still need to draft his replacement high in the draft. I'm not getting off that. 2 year, $50 mil? That's not comforting because Trent WILL want more money next year and we'll be going through this whole song-&-dance again next year.

We still need to draft his replacement.

i think we should just draft his replacement when he retires. I am all for taking a mid to late round pick to see if he develops into one but i don't like the idea of drafting one high with a day 1/2 pick and develop. Once he retires if we dont have one i like the idea of trading up and picking an OT that you like

Yeah, because we haven't tried that before. What a novel idea.

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:

Originally posted by ritz126:

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:


Trent singed.

BUT, we still need to draft his replacement high in the draft. I'm not getting off that. 2 year, $50 mil? That's not comforting because Trent WILL want more money next year and we'll be going through this whole song-&-dance again next year.

We still need to draft his replacement.

i think we should just draft his replacement when he retires. I am all for taking a mid to late round pick to see if he develops into one but i don't like the idea of drafting one high with a day 1/2 pick and develop. Once he retires if we dont have one i like the idea of trading up and picking an OT that you like

Yeah, because we haven't tried that before. What a novel idea.

its a mid round pick you dont depend on that its a way of drafting a guy with a low capital draft cost at a premiere position. Youjust see if he develops and if he doesn't you pick a player early like i said but you do that once Trent retires

Originally posted by ritz126:

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:

Originally posted by ritz126:

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:


Trent singed.

BUT, we still need to draft his replacement high in the draft. I'm not getting off that. 2 year, $50 mil? That's not comforting because Trent WILL want more money next year and we'll be going through this whole song-&-dance again next year.

We still need to draft his replacement.

i think we should just draft his replacement when he retires. I am all for taking a mid to late round pick to see if he develops into one but i don't like the idea of drafting one high with a day 1/2 pick and develop. Once he retires if we dont have one i like the idea of trading up and picking an OT that you like

Yeah, because we haven't tried that before. What a novel idea.

its a mid round pick you dont depend on that its a way of drafting a guy with a low capital draft cost at a premiere position. Youjust see if he develops and if he doesn't you pick a player early like i said but you do that once Trent retires

Completely disagree. We've tried this before, and it keeps failing. No, we draft his eventual replacement now, let him play LG in 2026, and move him to LT when Trent retires/released. I think it's foolish to draft for need when Trent is gone because it assumes too much for it to be successful. That way we'll have a LT fully up-to-speed, and not reliant on a rookie at a premium position. And, we'll have on a rookie deal to boot. We need to get off that "draft & develop" hamster wheel. It don't work at premium positions. Sure, you can get Brock Pury/Tom Brady lucky every once in a while. But by-and-large you need to draft high for premium positions like LT.

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:

Originally posted by ritz126:

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:

Originally posted by ritz126:

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:


Trent singed.

BUT, we still need to draft his replacement high in the draft. I'm not getting off that. 2 year, $50 mil? That's not comforting because Trent WILL want more money next year and we'll be going through this whole song-&-dance again next year.

We still need to draft his replacement.

i think we should just draft his replacement when he retires. I am all for taking a mid to late round pick to see if he develops into one but i don't like the idea of drafting one high with a day 1/2 pick and develop. Once he retires if we dont have one i like the idea of trading up and picking an OT that you like

Yeah, because we haven't tried that before. What a novel idea.

its a mid round pick you dont depend on that its a way of drafting a guy with a low capital draft cost at a premiere position. Youjust see if he develops and if he doesn't you pick a player early like i said but you do that once Trent retires

Completely disagree. We've tried this before, and it keeps failing. No, we draft his eventual replacement now, let him play LG in 2026, and move him to LT when Trent retires/released. I think it's foolish to draft for need when Trent is gone because it assumes too much for it to be successful. That way we'll have a LT fully up-to-speed, and not reliant on a rookie at a premium position. And, we'll have on a rookie deal to boot. We need to get off that "draft & develop" hamster wheel. It don't work at premium positions. Sure, you can get Brock Pury/Tom Brady lucky every once in a while. But by-and-large you need to draft high for premium positions like LT.

how many players have done this before in NFL? Also this year the only prospect i think that is capable of doing that is Proctor and he isnt even a great scheme fit.

I rather just trade up in a year or two and draft a LT. This is a weak OT class and i hate the idea of drafting a player to sit on the bench when we are in a SB window.

I'd like to see first round, IF they don't trade back, to be a defensive edge rusher. Second pick will be for the Offensive Line. Then a receiver later in the round and then I hope, best player available.

They need to start hitting in the draft again. Their elite are aging and Lynch and Shanny did well their first four or so seasons with mid round picks (lots of 5th rounders) becoming elite players, but the last 4 years, not so much. We need to start finding those players that can step up and become core players. I wouldn't be surprise either it they take a TE in this draft if one is available when they pick. They are built for a win now IF everything plays to their favor but they have to start looking down the road also.

Bottom line, I'll be glad when this weekend is over and all the speculation is over. I'm just hoping they get two immediete starters with their first two picks and find a couple of nuggets in the rough later in the draft.

Originally posted by ritz126:

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:

Originally posted by ritz126:

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:

Originally posted by ritz126:

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:


Trent singed.

BUT, we still need to draft his replacement high in the draft. I'm not getting off that. 2 year, $50 mil? That's not comforting because Trent WILL want more money next year and we'll be going through this whole song-&-dance again next year.

We still need to draft his replacement.

i think we should just draft his replacement when he retires. I am all for taking a mid to late round pick to see if he develops into one but i don't like the idea of drafting one high with a day 1/2 pick and develop. Once he retires if we dont have one i like the idea of trading up and picking an OT that you like

Yeah, because we haven't tried that before. What a novel idea.

its a mid round pick you dont depend on that its a way of drafting a guy with a low capital draft cost at a premiere position. Youjust see if he develops and if he doesn't you pick a player early like i said but you do that once Trent retires

Completely disagree. We've tried this before, and it keeps failing. No, we draft his eventual replacement now, let him play LG in 2026, and move him to LT when Trent retires/released. I think it's foolish to draft for need when Trent is gone because it assumes too much for it to be successful. That way we'll have a LT fully up-to-speed, and not reliant on a rookie at a premium position. And, we'll have on a rookie deal to boot. We need to get off that "draft & develop" hamster wheel. It don't work at premium positions. Sure, you can get Brock Pury/Tom Brady lucky every once in a while. But by-and-large you need to draft high for premium positions like LT.

how many players have done this before in NFL? Also this year the only prospect i think that is capable of doing that is Proctor and he isnt even a great scheme fit.

I rather just trade up in a year or two and draft a LT. This is a weak OT class and i hate the idea of drafting a player to sit on the bench when we are in a SB window.

"Scheme fit" is another hamster wheel that I think that's been adding to the lack of talent on this team. There can no more of a glaring example than the lack of talent along our O-line. Shanny & Co. have passed up on so much O-line talent of the last several years presumably due to scheme fit. Raheem Morris has been a breath of fresh air in that he's stated that he's not gonna dictate a scheme until he assesses the given talent. Now, I'm not wishing or expecting Shanny to follow suite. Shanny is too wedded to his scheme. But IMHO he's a bit too wedded to his scheme, so much so that it chokes out very good talent. Here's a list of players that fit Shanny's scheme:

Jake Brendel
Connor Colby
Drake Nugent
Nick Zakelj
Austen Pleasants
Jacob Cowing
Jordan Watkins
Brayden Willis
Jordan James
Isaac Guerendo

Who among those are moving the needle? Can we go to war with those scheme fits?

I agree with Donte Whitner! We need to get some TALENT in here. Enough with the choir boys and stop prioritizing scheme fit over talent so much. Trent's replacement isn't coming from mid-round picks. That's coming from top picks or a blockbuster FA signing. Period!!

Welcome to the $400 million dollar man club big Trent.

Originally posted by ritz126:
how many players have done this before in NFL? Also this year the only prospect i think that is capable of doing that is Proctor and he isnt even a great scheme fit.

I rather just trade up in a year or two and draft a LT. This is a weak OT class and i hate the idea of drafting a player to sit on the bench when we are in a SB window.

I am all for the best available player.....but we have to be real.....there are positions they will pay and positions they will not pay later down the road too.

So going Safety in the first sounds like an ok thing....but the dude could be a pro-bowler like Huff...and the team probably will not resign him.

Yeah, so most talented matters, but most talented at a "franchise" position matters more.

I really think that leans this whole conversation back to go tackle early. They will pay tackles.

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:

Originally posted by ritz126:

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:

Originally posted by ritz126:

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:

Originally posted by ritz126:

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:


Trent singed.

BUT, we still need to draft his replacement high in the draft. I'm not getting off that. 2 year, $50 mil? That's not comforting because Trent WILL want more money next year and we'll be going through this whole song-&-dance again next year.

We still need to draft his replacement.

i think we should just draft his replacement when he retires. I am all for taking a mid to late round pick to see if he develops into one but i don't like the idea of drafting one high with a day 1/2 pick and develop. Once he retires if we dont have one i like the idea of trading up and picking an OT that you like

Yeah, because we haven't tried that before. What a novel idea.

its a mid round pick you dont depend on that its a way of drafting a guy with a low capital draft cost at a premiere position. Youjust see if he develops and if he doesn't you pick a player early like i said but you do that once Trent retires

Completely disagree. We've tried this before, and it keeps failing. No, we draft his eventual replacement now, let him play LG in 2026, and move him to LT when Trent retires/released. I think it's foolish to draft for need when Trent is gone because it assumes too much for it to be successful. That way we'll have a LT fully up-to-speed, and not reliant on a rookie at a premium position. And, we'll have on a rookie deal to boot. We need to get off that "draft & develop" hamster wheel. It don't work at premium positions. Sure, you can get Brock Pury/Tom Brady lucky every once in a while. But by-and-large you need to draft high for premium positions like LT.

how many players have done this before in NFL? Also this year the only prospect i think that is capable of doing that is Proctor and he isnt even a great scheme fit.

I rather just trade up in a year or two and draft a LT. This is a weak OT class and i hate the idea of drafting a player to sit on the bench when we are in a SB window.

"Scheme fit" is another hamster wheel that I think that's been adding to the lack of talent on this team. There can no more of a glaring example than the lack of talent along our O-line. Shanny & Co. have passed up on so much O-line talent of the last several years presumably due to scheme fit. Raheem Morris has been a breath of fresh air in that he's stated that he's not gonna dictate a scheme until he assesses the given talent. Now, I'm not wishing or expecting Shanny to follow suite. Shanny is too wedded to his scheme. But IMHO he's a bit too wedded to his scheme, so much so that it chokes out very good talent. Here's a list of players that fit Shanny's scheme:

Jake Brendel
Connor Colby
Drake Nugent
Nick Zakelj
Austen Pleasants
Jacob Cowing
Jordan Watkins
Brayden Willis
Jordan James
Isaac Guerendo

Who among those are moving the needle? Can we go to war with those scheme fits?

I agree with Donte Whitner! We need to get some TALENT in here. Enough with the choir boys and stop prioritizing scheme fit over talent so much. Trent's replacement isn't coming from mid-round picks. That's coming from top picks or a blockbuster FA signing. Period!!

i dont get the argument you are making those were all mid to late round picks. You dont expect them to move the needle. We didnt not draft a talented player early because we thought we could get those guys you listed

I mean you can make the argument then we traded up for Aiyuk traded for CMC and drafted guys like Deebo and Kittle who are scheme fits who do move the needle. I mean it isn't like our offense hasnt been producing. Proctor can be a great player but he isnt the type of OL you play in a zone scheme concept. Its a fact that some players are better fits for some offense than others and we are consistently drafting late where it isnt like the talent is so overwhelming that you have to make that pick

Originally posted by Dshearn:
I am all for the best available player.....but we have to be real.....there are positions they will pay and positions they will not pay later down the road too.

So going Safety in the first sounds like an ok thing....but the dude could be a pro-bowler like Huff...and the team probably will not resign him.

Yeah, so most talented matters, but most talented at a "franchise" position matters more.

I really think that leans this whole conversation back to go tackle early. They will pay tackles.

i think we wouldve resigned Huff if he didnt miss more than half the season 2 years in a row