John Lynch - 49ers GM

Originally posted by kazak13:
just wish we would of traded for Mack and Gordon.. maybe add Bell in the mix and i think we would be a contender..

Don't stop there

We could have gotten Jarvis Landry, Gore, Allen Robinson, Trey Burton, Earl Thomas and Janikowski!

Originally posted by kazak13:

Originally posted by Fanaticofnfl:

Yeah let's trade for Aaron Rodgers, Von Miller and Jalen Ramsey while we're at it.

thats not realistic..
Lynch actually called for Mack.. id give up 2 firsts for him.. totally worth it..
We inquired about Gordon, whats a 5th rounder worth... high reward low risk, we didnt have a 5th throw in 7th and then 5th for following year..

so if we were more aggressive we would of had Gordon and Mack.. and we would be a much better team.. Breida is playing lights out for now..

How do we know that Lynch didn't offer what you just described? Maybe the the price to Send Mack across the bay was more than 2 Firsts(personally, I just don't see the raiders sending their best player to the niners for anything less than a ridiculous package). Also the trade you described for Gordon is a basically a 6th and 7th for him. I future 5th is equivalent to a current 6th. They usually lose a round when going into the future.

Originally posted by NCommand:
Oh, LOL.

Fair question. I'd say 8 (I predicted 7-9).

Without a dominant OL or ER, that's as good as it gets. That's on John 100%. I won't put injuries on him.

Kyle can scheme around not having a WR1 you can gameplan around but only if all 3 are healthy. We're seeing the affects on the whole unit when Goodwin is down.

I'll give John Lynch one more offseason to find an ER. The reason why I kind of (though not fully) excuse him for not getting one these past two offseasons is because these last two offseasons were crap for ER's. There were basically zero good ones in free agency, and there was only one elite prospect in each draft, both taken way out of our reach. The only two realistic possibilities we missed on were Landry (who had injury concerns so strong that the whole league passed on him for an entire round) and Mack (who the Raiders probably charged us a Bay Area rivalry premium for).

Next offseason, though, is supposed to have 3+ elite edge rushing prospects and at least one very good free agent (hopefully). So if there's a time to find an ER, it's next offseason. If Lynch doesn't get one then I'll jump on the criticism wagon with you.

As for the OL, we signed one of the best centers in the game and our first pick was an OL as well. I would say we're one good guard away from having a good OL.

Goodwin IS our number one WR. Whether you think he is or not, he was on pace for 1000+ yards before the injury, we paid him like a number one WR, and it's been clear these past two games that Jimmy has trouble getting rid of the football without him out there stretching the field.

I'm convinced anyone down on Lynch and Shanahan doesn't really follow what's going on with many other teams in the NFL.

Originally posted by kazak13:

Originally posted by Fanaticofnfl:
Yeah let's trade for Aaron Rodgers, Von Miller and Jalen Ramsey while we're at it.

thats not realistic..
Lynch actually called for Mack.. id give up 2 firsts for him.. totally worth it..
We inquired about Gordon, whats a 5th rounder worth... high reward low risk, we didnt have a 5th throw in 7th and then 5th for following year..

so if we were more aggressive we would of had Gordon and Mack.. and we would be a much better team.. Breida is playing lights out for now..

and that is why I am glad you are not the GM...the team would be screwed for years making those sort of deals. We would have no picks and we would still need at least one corner, a guard or two, one more LB, oh and Gordon would likely be at home doing blow off a hooker nursing his bad leg so add a WR to that to be a real superbowl contender. But hey Mack would make us a sure thing to be a early round exit in the playoffs for a few years so that's totally worth it.

Originally posted by PhillyNiner:
and that is why I am glad you are not the GM...the team would be screwed for years making those sort of deals. We would have no picks and we would still need at least one corner, a guard or two, one more LB, oh and Gordon would likely be at home doing blow off a hooker nursing his bad leg so add a WR to that to be a real superbowl contender. But hey Mack would make us a sure thing to be a early round exit in the playoffs for a few years so that's totally worth it.

Everybody sees a big name that might be available and immediately wants him. Occasionally you get him (Jimmy G, Sherman, etc.) Most of the time you don't because there's 31 other teams. It is what it is. Just because the front office doesn't trade for every available big name doesn't mean they're not doing their job. I'm critical of our FO too sometimes but come on people.

Originally posted by PhillyNiner:
and that is why I am glad you are not the GM...the team would be screwed for years making those sort of deals. We would have no picks and we would still need at least one corner, a guard or two, one more LB, oh and Gordon would likely be at home doing blow off a hooker nursing his bad leg so add a WR to that to be a real superbowl contender. But hey Mack would make us a sure thing to be a early round exit in the playoffs for a few years so that's totally worth it.

no picks! we keep picking s**tty players with our firsts.. id rather have Mack than Solomon Thomas.. and Armestead combined

Originally posted by kazak13:

Originally posted by PhillyNiner:
and that is why I am glad you are not the GM...the team would be screwed for years making those sort of deals. We would have no picks and we would still need at least one corner, a guard or two, one more LB, oh and Gordon would likely be at home doing blow off a hooker nursing his bad leg so add a WR to that to be a real superbowl contender. But hey Mack would make us a sure thing to be a early round exit in the playoffs for a few years so that's totally worth it.

no picks! we keep picking s**tty players with our firsts.. id rather have Mack than Solomon Thomas.. and Armestead combined

Who wouldn't? You're not saying anything here.

Originally posted by NinerGM:

Originally posted by Fanaticofnfl:

Originally posted by NCommand:
Oh, LOL.

Fair question. I'd say 8 (I predicted 7-9).

Without a dominant OL or ER, that's as good as it gets. That's on John 100%. I won't put injuries on him.

Kyle can scheme around not having a WR1 you can gameplan around but only if all 3 are healthy. We're seeing the affects on the whole unit when Goodwin is down.

I'll give John Lynch one more offseason to find an ER. The reason why I kind of (though not fully) excuse him for not getting one these past two offseasons is because these last two offseasons were crap for ER's. There were basically zero good ones in free agency, and there was only one elite prospect in each draft, both taken way out of our reach. The only two realistic possibilities we missed on were Landry (who had injury concerns so strong that the whole league passed on him for an entire round) and Mack (who the Raiders probably charged us a Bay Area rivalry premium for).

Next offseason, though, is supposed to have 3+ elite edge rushing prospects and at least one very good free agent (hopefully). So if there's a time to find an ER, it's next offseason. If Lynch doesn't get one then I'll jump on the criticism wagon with you.

As for the OL, we signed one of the best centers in the game and our first pick was an OL as well. I would say we're one good guard away from having a good OL.

Goodwin IS our number one WR. Whether you think he is or not, he was on pace for 1000+ yards before the injury, we paid him like a number one WR, and it's been clear these past two games that Jimmy has trouble getting rid of the football without him out there stretching the field.

All of this is an extremely fair assessment.

I'd even say they have the fix what's going on at RG with a healthy starter. NC is right about Tomlinson being average at best....for now, but players grow and develop and he has improved since joining the team. I think this can become a good OL with a great RG. Then we need to sincerely ask ourselves about developing a plan for the future - Staley can't play forever.

I still think we're going to need help at CB. How I feel about Staley is how I feel about Sherman. Also, Baalke players tend to be oft-injured (talking to you Tart and Ward) so yep Safety should be considered for depth.

WR - Here's where NC and I agree - if we can get our hands one a WR that brings more talent to the team and at least softens the loss of on player on the offense (Goodwin), we need to get that player. Jimmy can't wait forever for his WRs to beat their 1-1 coverage and take a sack. I know KS says "I love these guys" but coverage is coverage and it's not like WR didn't need an infusion of talent anyway.

No comment about Edge. It's so obvious that it doesn't even need to be talked about.

This is where the priorities come into play. Right now, I'm thinking they are going to have to hold off until 2020 to draft a tackle early, assuming the majority of these picks in 2017-2019 produce. Reason being is because of the other areas of weakness that are holding back the team. Edge rusher and guard are at the top of the list to me. DB is a close third, but may be helped some if we had a pass rush. But we have absolutely no depth at those positions. If we are aggressive enough in free agency + the 2019 draft, then perhaps we can use that 1st or second round pick on Joe Staley's replacement. I'm hoping Staley is still a quality starter so our rookie wouldn't be forced to play immediately and puts us in a position where we have the luxury of 3 starting caliber tackles.

Originally posted by Fanaticofnfl:
I'll give John Lynch one more offseason to find an ER. The reason why I kind of (though not fully) excuse him for not getting one these past two offseasons is because these last two offseasons were crap for ER's. There were basically zero good ones in free agency, and there was only one elite prospect in each draft, both taken way out of our reach. The only two realistic possibilities we missed on were Landry (who had injury concerns so strong that the whole league passed on him for an entire round) and Mack (who the Raiders probably charged us a Bay Area rivalry premium for).

Next offseason, though, is supposed to have 3+ elite edge rushing prospects and at least one very good free agent (hopefully). So if there's a time to find an ER, it's next offseason. If Lynch doesn't get one then I'll jump on the criticism wagon with you.

As for the OL, we signed one of the best centers in the game and our first pick was an OL as well. I would say we're one good guard away from having a good OL.

Goodwin IS our number one WR. Whether you think he is or not, he was on pace for 1000+ yards before the injury, we paid him like a number one WR, and it's been clear these past two games that Jimmy has trouble getting rid of the football without him out there stretching the field.

And then you'll do what? Fire him? Become a member of the Doom Squad and endlessly b***h about all of the decisions he should have made? Stop watching games? Become a Las Vegas Raiders fan? Honestly all the drama surrounding this guy is really amazing. He has taken a franchise that was going nowhere and brought them back to the edge of respectability within the space of one season. He has improved the roster dramatically, though clearly there is still work to do there, and generally speaking seems to have the team on the right track. And he is on record as saying that what he would really like to see the team do defensively is get off the field on third down more frequently with sacks. So clearly he knows there is a need. They had guys they apparently thought might be able to do the job and are now in the process of finding out they can't, so yes now it becomes a priority. The two guys that everyone was talking about after Chubb were Landry and Davenport. Don't really follow football outside the 49ers so don't know how they are doing on their respective teams but I haven't seen them show up much in the highlight reels yet, so maybe those guys weren't the answer people thought they would be.

They decided to prioritize improving the offensive line this year to protect their investment in Jimmy G. One can argue how successful they have been but they made several good faith moves in that direction, McGlinchey, Richburg, signing Cooper, though that didn't work out, and bringing back Person, who is currently starting and probably an upgrade over the position from last year. The jury is still out on Garnett but he played pretty well when he was in there and has a bit of a nasty disposition, which you like to see in your lineman. The question is will he stay healthy and is his heart really in the game. Time will tell I guess. All-in-all I don't have many complaints at this point and even if I did I don't know that I would derive much satisfaction from complaining about it all the time

Overall I am happy with the direction Paraag and Lynch have the team headed in but that doesn't mean Football Operations is above criticism for things like bad picks.

Originally posted by NinerGM:

Originally posted by Fanaticofnfl:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Oh, LOL.

Fair question. I'd say 8 (I predicted 7-9).

Without a dominant OL or ER, that's as good as it gets. That's on John 100%. I won't put injuries on him.

Kyle can scheme around not having a WR1 you can gameplan around but only if all 3 are healthy. We're seeing the affects on the whole unit when Goodwin is down.

I'll give John Lynch one more offseason to find an ER. The reason why I kind of (though not fully) excuse him for not getting one these past two offseasons is because these last two offseasons were crap for ER's. There were basically zero good ones in free agency, and there was only one elite prospect in each draft, both taken way out of our reach. The only two realistic possibilities we missed on were Landry (who had injury concerns so strong that the whole league passed on him for an entire round) and Mack (who the Raiders probably charged us a Bay Area rivalry premium for).

Next offseason, though, is supposed to have 3+ elite edge rushing prospects and at least one very good free agent (hopefully). So if there's a time to find an ER, it's next offseason. If Lynch doesn't get one then I'll jump on the criticism wagon with you.

As for the OL, we signed one of the best centers in the game and our first pick was an OL as well. I would say we're one good guard away from having a good OL.

Goodwin IS our number one WR. Whether you think he is or not, he was on pace for 1000+ yards before the injury, we paid him like a number one WR, and it's been clear these past two games that Jimmy has trouble getting rid of the football without him out there stretching the field.

All of this is an extremely fair assessment.

I'd even say they have the fix what's going on at RG with a healthy starter. NC is right about Tomlinson being average at best....for now, but players grow and develop and he has improved since joining the team. I think this can become a good OL with a great RG. Then we need to sincerely ask ourselves about developing a plan for the future - Staley can't play forever.

I still think we're going to need help at CB. How I feel about Staley is how I feel about Sherman. Also, Baalke players tend to be oft-injured (talking to you Tart and Ward) so yep Safety should be considered for depth.

WR - Here's where NC and I agree - if we can get our hands one a WR that brings more talent to the team and at least softens the loss of on player on the offense (Goodwin), we need to get that player. Jimmy can't wait forever for his WRs to beat their 1-1 coverage and take a sack. I know KS says "I love these guys" but coverage is coverage and it's not like WR didn't need an infusion of talent anyway.

No comment about Edge. It's so obvious that it doesn't even need to be talked about.

Awesome posts from both of you!!

Does anyone know the average success rate for drafting players in the NFL?

I thought it was 50%. Is that true?

Originally posted by highwayone:

Does anyone know the average success rate for drafting players in the NFL?

I thought it was 50%. Is that true?

It depends on how you define success. 2.3 is the average number of starters teams get from drafts. And the quality of those players can vary widely. But the chance of a first rounder becoming a starter is 50%, and significantly drops the further you go down the line.

Originally posted by highwayone:

Does anyone know the average success rate for drafting players in the NFL?

I thought it was 50%. Is that true?

Not even close.

Originally posted by highwayone:
Does anyone know the average success rate for drafting players in the NFL?

I thought it was 50%. Is that true?

it is all crap data, unless we come to a universal agreement on what success even means.

Some people already call Solomon Thomas a bust, and other guys think he is a solid starter who can run stop.