John Lynch - 49ers GM

Originally posted by Ensatsu:

Originally posted by BayToBrazil:

Listening to the Locked On NFL Draft podcast and they are proposing a trade:

Seattle #21 & 29
for
SF #2

NO WAY am I taking this. What am I missing?

pass. The edge rushers in that range are really meh. Would be horrible. Seahawks are gonna try and replace Clark

Better be more than that to move up that far.

Originally posted by Big_Daddy:
Yea, Lynch makes dumb risky moves

A great risk would be drafting Mahomes when the team still needed a QB. But we drafted our 3rd straight DL.

and people say..... no one knew mahomes would be great!! b******t. He was taken 10th and did great. What else you need?

If it was that obvious...why didn't the Browns take him? Or, the Bears after they moved up from 3 to 2? Or, any team between 1 and 9?

I also don't remember an avalanche of criticism at the time that the 49ers should have taken Mahomes at #2 (or #3 after the trade).

Your better argument is that the 49ers should have selected Latimore or Hooker given the troubles they have had in the secondary.

Ironically, you state that Lynch makes "dumb risky moves". At the time, Thomas was considered a "safe" move. Hooker and Latimore were considered riskier because of their injury histories. Mahomes was riskier because he was seen as being very raw.

And, if you're going to stick with the "49ers should have taken Mahomes" stance...the blame falls more at Kyle's feet than Lynch's. Kyle was going to get to pick his QB. He preferred to wait through the first year after studying the QBs. If Kyle had wanted Mahomes, he would have been the pick.

#2 for #21, #29, #84, #124, #159, 2020 1st, 2020 2nd

Still not sure if I'd do it. With the contract Wilson just signed they'll likely never see a pick at #2 or #32 until he's gone. They're gonna be stuck in the 15-25 range forever.

Originally posted by illinois9er:

Originally posted by BayToBrazil:

Listening to the Locked On NFL Draft podcast and they are proposing a trade:

Seattle #21 & 29
for
SF #2

NO WAY am I taking this. What am I missing?

That would be retarded

lol dumbest trade evar. Yeah lets just give a divisional rival Bosa or Williams and get pretty much nothing in return.

Originally posted by awp8912:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Why does everyone keep pointing to what the Giants were asking for? Just because thats what they asked for doesnt mean they were going to get it. They clearly settled on far less than the #2 pick and a player like Buckner, so why are we supposed to believe it would have cost us that to get him?

There's no point in being rational when discussing the OBJ potential trade. The ones that were opposed from the jump will just warp things their way.

My main point stands as follows: If we fail to get Bosa with the #2 pick then not trading for a HOF WR in his prime may go down as one of the stupidest things Lynch will ever do.

That's your opinion. I just seriously disagree with it. No point in arguing why, because your mind was made up long ago. OBJ...the more i thot on it, the less i liked it. In the end, i didn't even want him to step foot on our field. Glad he went elsewhere where he can whine and complain to someone else.

Originally posted by illinois9er:

Originally posted by BayToBrazil:

Listening to the Locked On NFL Draft podcast and they are proposing a trade:

Seattle #21 & 29
for
SF #2

NO WAY am I taking this. What am I missing?

That would be retarded

LMAO that's about 1100 points short on the draft chart.

I see zero trades that would make me want to miss on taking a blue chip player.

The entire league is built on household names. You get one without having to do a thing.

The bust rate for players taken outside the top 5 is stupid high by comparison. You don't just layer on an infinite amount of picks to make it worth it.

Also, I'm not sure the "trade back for the right deal" fans fully understand that this franchise has to win right now. Not next year if we end up with a sweet future pick.

The thought of passing on Bosa, Allen and QW when he literally have to do nothing to get one is disgusting.

Originally posted by kem99:

Originally posted by Big_Daddy:
Yea, Lynch makes dumb risky moves

A great risk would be drafting Mahomes when the team still needed a QB. But we drafted our 3rd straight DL.

and people say..... no one knew mahomes would be great!! b******t. He was taken 10th and did great. What else you need?

If it was that obvious...why didn't the Browns take him? Or, the Bears after they moved up from 3 to 2? Or, any team between 1 and 9?

I also don't remember an avalanche of criticism at the time that the 49ers should have taken Mahomes at #2 (or #3 after the trade).

Your better argument is that the 49ers should have selected Latimore or Hooker given the troubles they have had in the secondary.

Ironically, you state that Lynch makes "dumb risky moves". At the time, Thomas was considered a "safe" move. Hooker and Latimore were considered riskier because of their injury histories. Mahomes was riskier because he was seen as being very raw.

And, if you're going to stick with the "49ers should have taken Mahomes" stance...the blame falls more at Kyle's feet than Lynch's. Kyle was going to get to pick his QB. He preferred to wait through the first year after studying the QBs. If Kyle had wanted Mahomes, he would have been the pick.

As I've argued from Day 1, there was nothing smart about picking Thomas. He was clearly overrated due to playing in the PAC-12 and the one game against UNC. Just based on salary savings alone, selecting a QB in round 1 is always a good idea. I didn't like Trubisky but literally any QB (or any other player in the first round) would have been a better pick than picking a 3rd DT in a row.

Even though QW is a far better prospect than Thomas, picking him on a team overloaded with DT's is a bad idea.

I understand missing out on Mahomes because he was legitimately hard to project because of how unorthodox he is but I did not understand the hate for Watson at all. That dude balled out against the best defenses and Nick Saban even said that he was the best QB they've ever faced (including Cam Newton BTW).

Honestly, even CM22 would've been a better pick.

Originally posted by okdkid:
I see zero trades that would make me want to miss on taking a blue chip player.

The entire league is built on household names. You get one without having to do a thing.

The bust rate for players taken outside the top 5 is stupid high by comparison. You don't just layer on an infinite amount of picks to make it worth it.

You nailed it!

I hope JL doesn't try to get cute and overthink this.

It's either Bosa or Williams.

If they are overly concerned about Bosa injuries [his brother often gets injured] then go QW!

Originally posted by illinois9er:

Originally posted by BayToBrazil:
Listening to the Locked On NFL Draft podcast and they are proposing a trade:

Seattle #21 & 29
for
SF #2

NO WAY am I taking this. What am I missing?

That would be retarded

F--n' dumb!

With multiple reports that Washington may trying to trade into the top 5 to grab a QB, would the 49ers consider a trade down to #10 with the Broncos if Elway called (after the Cardinals selected Murray at No.1) to insure that he could draft his QB (likely Drew Locke)? Burns could be there at #10.

Originally posted by kem99:
With multiple reports that Washington may trying to trade into the top 5 to grab a QB, would the 49ers consider a trade down to #10 with the Broncos if Elway called (after the Cardinals selected Murray at No.1) to insure that he could draft his QB (likely Drew Locke)? Burns could be there at #10.

That would suck. Why play the "maybe a guy will be there" game when you are 100% guaranteed to get an even superior player by doing absolutely nothing?

I think sometimes fans want a more entertaining draft than a productive one.

If neither QW nor Bosa were available at #2, I could see the potential of trading down. But either one of those can't miss prospects will be there. Most draft picks don't pan out.