John Lynch - 49ers GM

Originally posted by jed_X:

Originally posted by DRCHOWDER:
I think whatever team Myles is getting traded to will have do a new deal with him since he has no guaranteed money. That being said bring him down! #11 and some others, use the rest getting some DT since this draft is deep there, fix oline through FA and we're favorites!

This. Also, him getting traded to a legit superbowl contender might even make him take a discount to make it work. Not guaranteed, but I've seen this so many times. Remember the guy already got his 100m guaranteed money.

This is one reason why I feel like we are actually in the running

Cmon Lynch fix that Solly Thomas mistake

It'll most likely end like this though lol...

If we really want Garrett (and we should), we can't nickel and dime it. This would really be the last chance of this core, and what better way will there be than with two fearsome passrushers on each side all the time? The first this year and next are the minimum, with some mid rounders this year thrown in. Unlike the McCaffrey trade which happened mid-season when the cap structure of all teams was set, other teams have flexibility who they can cut and restructure. This will be a bidding war. We're not the only contender that could use such an addition. So, forget "overpaying", and "value" and go for it. It is very unlikely that the #11 and next year's first (hopefully #32 ) plus the #75 and/or #99 will jointly contribute as much as Garrett will NEXT YEAR. This really is the crux: are we building for the future, or are we really going for it NOW? For me there is no question what we should be doing. "Overpay". Boo-hoo, that will get us an "F" on the trade gradings in ESPN and the various websites. Do we care about this, or about making the team better now?

We threw away two #1s (we flipped the other) for a wild punt on a QB, who even had he not busted out would have taken years to contribute. And we're discussing nickel and diming a trade for one of the (proven!) best players in the league who's still barely 30?

I really hope John goes hard after Garrett. This team is so close and this could be the final piece that truly puts us on a completely different level than everyone else in the league. This pass rushing duo would break records together.

Originally posted by mitpdub:

I'd do this deal in a heartbeat pic.twitter.com/5VbIZIcw8r

— Coach Yac 🗣 (@Coach_Yac) February 3, 2025

While this sounds reasonable, I think we have to come through with a slam dunk offer with #11 and the equivalent of another 1st round pick

Originally posted by paulk205:
If we really want Garrett (and we should), we can't nickel and dime it. This would really be the last chance of this core, and what better way will there be than with two fearsome passrushers on each side all the time? The first this year and next are the minimum, with some mid rounders this year thrown in. Unlike the McCaffrey trade which happened mid-season when the cap structure of all teams was set, other teams have flexibility who they can cut and restructure. This will be a bidding war. We're not the only contender that could use such an addition. So, forget "overpaying", and "value" and go for it. It is very unlikely that the #11 and next year's first (hopefully #32 ) plus the #75 and/or #99 will jointly contribute as much as Garrett will NEXT YEAR. This really is the crux: are we building for the future, or are we really going for it NOW? For me there is no question what we should be doing. "Overpay". Boo-hoo, that will get us an "F" on the trade gradings in ESPN and the various websites. Do we care about this, or about making the team better now?

We threw away two #1s (we flipped the other) for a wild punt on a QB, who even had he not busted out would have taken years to contribute. And we're discussing nickel and diming a trade for one of the (proven!) best players in the league who's still barely 30?

Two #1's is about right… if you're the Rams/Lions/Commanders and you're picking #26 or later.

If you're us and we're picking #11 then two 1sts is too many, unless it's 2026 and 2027 1sts. #11 is valued at about two #25's.

That #11 does give us leverage over the other teams I mentioned, though. #11 and a 2026 2nd (and some chips on the side) is a much more attractive offer than a lot of other teams have to offer.

I can not stress enough that for the Browns, picks >>>>> players. They're not going to want a 31-year-old Kupp or a gadget Deebo or a decent non-rookie corner. They're going to want picks. They're stuck with Watson for a few more years and Garrett wants out, so no player is going to help them short term or long term. And therefore that #11 pick is our leverage.

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by Fanaticofnfl:
The MOST I'm giving up is #11 and our 2026 2nd. Idk if that gets it done but I would do it in a heartbeat. We'd get to pay him pennies for two years.

Rams already trying to give Kupper Coop away.. we can't let the Rams get MG

Browns can't take on Cooper Kupps contract and the cap hit they'll take if they trade Myles Garrett. Cleveland right now is -$27 mil over the cap, they can't really trade him till after June from what I read. Either way the Browns will have to cut players they don't want to before March.

Originally posted by Fanaticofnfl:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by Fanaticofnfl:
The MOST I'm giving up is #11 and our 2026 2nd. Idk if that gets it done but I would do it in a heartbeat. We'd get to pay him pennies for two years.

Rams already trying to give Kupper Coop away.. we can't let the Rams get MG

We have pick #11. Rams have pick #26 and no second.

Thats why we need to offer pick #11. We have something none of the other contenders have thanks to our garbage season lol

Also, Browns are going to want picks. No players. They're not contending with that Watson contract and they know it.

Why are the Rams the team that people think are involved anyway? They already have a really good young/cheap dynamic DL. Moving Kupp is more about trying to get rid of a bad contract and get younger.

They have to get ready to pay stafford on a yr to yr deal making $50M+ they're OL was not good last yr overall. No TE. Their secondary stinks (best outside CB was Witherspoon ).

Now the only WR they got is Puka. IMO them making a move for Higgins makes more sense than moving picks for Myles.

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by Fanaticofnfl:
The MOST I'm giving up is #11 and our 2026 2nd. Idk if that gets it done but I would do it in a heartbeat. We'd get to pay him pennies for two years.

Rams already trying to give Kupper Coop away.. we can't let the Rams get MG

Browns can't take on Cooper Kupps contract and the cap hit they'll take if they trade Myles Garrett. Cleveland right now is -$27 mil over the cap, they can't really trade him till after June from what I read. Either way the Browns will have to cut players they don't want to before March.

And why would they want a 32 yr old expensive injured slot WR?

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by Fanaticofnfl:
The MOST I'm giving up is #11 and our 2026 2nd. Idk if that gets it done but I would do it in a heartbeat. We'd get to pay him pennies for two years.

Rams already trying to give Kupper Coop away.. we can't let the Rams get MG

Browns can't take on Cooper Kupps contract and the cap hit they'll take if they trade Myles Garrett. Cleveland right now is -$27 mil over the cap, they can't really trade him till after June from what I read. Either way the Browns will have to cut players they don't want to before March.

And why would they want a 32 yr old expensive injured slot WR?

I don't see the Rams trading for Garrett with an already young talented D-line and no way the Browns take Cooper Kupp it doesn't make sense for both teams. Browns f**ked themselves hard with that Deshaun Watson contract.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by Fanaticofnfl:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by Fanaticofnfl:
The MOST I'm giving up is #11 and our 2026 2nd. Idk if that gets it done but I would do it in a heartbeat. We'd get to pay him pennies for two years.

Rams already trying to give Kupper Coop away.. we can't let the Rams get MG

We have pick #11. Rams have pick #26 and no second.

Thats why we need to offer pick #11. We have something none of the other contenders have thanks to our garbage season lol

Also, Browns are going to want picks. No players. They're not contending with that Watson contract and they know it.

Why are the Rams the team that people think are involved anyway? They already have a really good young/cheap dynamic DL. Moving Kupp is more about trying to get rid of a bad contract and get younger.

They have to get ready to pay stafford on a yr to yr deal making $50M+ they're OL was not good last yr overall. No TE. Their secondary stinks (best outside CB was Witherspoon ).

Now the only WR they got is Puka. IMO them making a move for Higgins makes more sense than moving picks for Myles.

Because people have PTSD of everyone gift-wrapping stars to the Rams lol

I agree that Garrett to the Rams isn't likely, though.

Originally posted by Fanaticofnfl:
Two #1's is about right… if you're the Rams/Lions/Commanders and you're picking #26 or later.

If you're us and we're picking #11 then two 1sts is too many, unless it's 2026 and 2027 1sts. #11 is valued at about two #25's.

That #11 does give us leverage over the other teams I mentioned, though. #11 and a 2026 2nd (and some chips on the side) is a much more attractive offer than a lot of other teams have to offer.

I can not stress enough that for the Browns, picks >>>>> players. They're not going to want a 31-year-old Kupp or a gadget Deebo or a decent non-rookie corner. They're going to want picks. They're stuck with Watson for a few more years and Garrett wants out, so no player is going to help them short term or long term. And therefore that #11 pick is our leverage.

Friend, who cares where "#11 is valued at" in some chart? Who cares? Kiper? Draftniks? Why? Why do they matter?

The correct way to see it is: are you picking two players at #11 and next year's 1st rounder (one hopes at #32 ) who are going to produce as much as one of the three top defensive players in the NFL in his prime? A proven quality against two possibles at best? When our own star core is aging fast?

Possibly. Unlikely. You have to hit on both youngsters. The draft bust rate for the 1st round is about 2 to 1, and the star rate is probably 1 in 10. Garett is not a certainty (who is?) but he's damn more likely to hit immediately than one rookie this year and another next year.

The Rams, who everyone is using as the yardstick here, had no problem "mortgaging their future"... and have a championship to show for it.

"Value" has, well, value when you are rebuilding, or when you are several pieces away. We are not one piece away (no team is), but we are quite talented yet but our talent is aging. The time to strike is now. The questions are: Do we like Garett? Can we fit him under the cap? Forget "value".

Now, I'm not saying to pull a Ricky Williams trade here, nor a Herschel Walker one. We still need to pick a bunch of players. Luckily we have a boatload of picks. Pick them and hope some of them contribute quickly. But the same holds for whoever gets picked (by whoever) at #11. You hope, you do not KNOW. You don't quite know with a veteran superstar either (see Haynesworth, Albert), but the chances are better.

Originally posted by paulk205:

Originally posted by Fanaticofnfl:
Two #1's is about right… if you're the Rams/Lions/Commanders and you're picking #26 or later.

If you're us and we're picking #11 then two 1sts is too many, unless it's 2026 and 2027 1sts. #11 is valued at about two #25's.

That #11 does give us leverage over the other teams I mentioned, though. #11 and a 2026 2nd (and some chips on the side) is a much more attractive offer than a lot of other teams have to offer.

I can not stress enough that for the Browns, picks >>>>> players. They're not going to want a 31-year-old Kupp or a gadget Deebo or a decent non-rookie corner. They're going to want picks. They're stuck with Watson for a few more years and Garrett wants out, so no player is going to help them short term or long term. And therefore that #11 pick is our leverage.

Friend, who cares where "#11 is valued at" in some chart? Who cares? Kiper? Draftniks? Why? Why do they matter?

The correct way to see it is: are you picking two players at #11 and next year's 1st rounder (one hopes at #32 ) who are going to produce as much as one of the three top defensive players in the NFL in his prime? A proven quality against two possibles at best? When our own star core is aging fast?

Possibly. Unlikely. You have to hit on both youngsters. The draft bust rate for the 1st round is about 2 to 1, and the star rate is probably 1 in 10. Garett is not a certainty (who is?) but he's damn more likely to hit immediately than one rookie this year and another next year.

The Rams, who everyone is using as the yardstick here, had no problem "mortgaging their future"... and have a championship to show for it.

"Value" has, well, value when you are rebuilding, or when you are several pieces away. We are not one piece away (no team is), but we are quite talented yet but our talent is aging. The time to strike is now. The questions are: Do we like Garett? Can we fit him under the cap? Forget "value".

Now, I'm not saying to pull a Ricky Williams trade here, nor a Herschel Walker one. We still need to pick a bunch of players. Luckily we have a boatload of picks. Pick them and hope some of them contribute quickly. But the same holds for whoever gets picked (by whoever) at #11. You hope, you do not KNOW. You don't quite know with a veteran superstar either (see Haynesworth, Albert), but the chances are better.

You're correct from our perspective, but I was looking at it from the Browns' perspective. They're going to want picks more than anything else and they want those picks to be as high quality as possible, both to justify such a trade and give them more flexibility (perhaps they trade down from #11 and get a future 1st, who knows).

This is why a trade makes at least some sort of sense. We value Garrett and the two years left on his contract highly, more highly than the Browns (who aren't competing for at least three years) do. Browns value a high 1st highly, more highly than we do.

#11, our comp 3rd and a 2026 2nd is more valuable to the Browns than, say, #28 and a 2026 1st. Our first being #11 instead of low 20's matters to the Browns.

It's just not going to happen as much as it makes sense.

You can't have Bosa getting what he's getting and Brock about to get his deal and trade for a guy who will want a contract bigger than Bosas.

It's just too many eggs in one basket. Everything is logical - Garrett is a proven stud and you have no idea who you're going to get with #11.

BUT right now one of the biggest issues we had last year is lack of depth, trading away picks is going to hit that even more and make us even more top heavy.

Unless we can get this done for #11 and couple of later picks next year and say Deebo I think we gotta walk away.

Originally posted by genus49:
It's just not going to happen as much as it makes sense.

You can't have Bosa getting what he's getting and Brock about to get his deal and trade for a guy who will want a contract bigger than Bosas.

It's just too many eggs in one basket. Everything is logical - Garrett is a proven stud and you have no idea who you're going to get with #11.

BUT right now one of the biggest issues we had last year is lack of depth, trading away picks is going to hit that even more and make us even more top heavy.

Unless we can get this done for #11 and couple of later picks next year and say Deebo I think we gotta walk away.

Yeah you would have to include a large contract like Deebo in the deal as well. The only thing is the Browns might be trying to shed money as well since they are stuck the massage kid.
__PRESENT

Originally posted by genus49:
It's just not going to happen as much as it makes sense.

You can't have Bosa getting what he's getting and Brock about to get his deal and trade for a guy who will want a contract bigger than Bosas.

It's just too many eggs in one basket. Everything is logical - Garrett is a proven stud and you have no idea who you're going to get with #11.

BUT right now one of the biggest issues we had last year is lack of depth, trading away picks is going to hit that even more and make us even more top heavy.

Unless we can get this done for #11 and couple of later picks next year and say Deebo I think we gotta walk away.

I'm telling you all:

The. Browns. Do. Not. Want. Players. And they certainly don't want a player like Deebo who's no longer on his rookie contract.

If they unload Garrett, they're going to want picks. That's it. You mention the NFL overvalues picks. The Browns are going to value them EVEN MORE than the average team if they trade Garrett because that's virtually the only thing that's going to help them at all. I will be stunned if they even accept a single player in whatever king's ransom they get, unless it's someone who was just drafted last year.

I would argue the Browns could be offered Cooper Kupp + #26 overall this year and they would say "nah, we would rather have two future 1sts, thanks."

Think 2018 Raiders-Bears Khalil Mack trade (a tiny bit less than two future 1sts). That's the kind of deal Cleveland is looking for. Mack was two years younger but was also seeking a brand new contract effective immediately. Garrett is 29 with two years remaining so it'll probably be a very similar deal.

Personally, I would offer #11 and 2026 2nd and then let them try to bargain one more pick (like our comp 3rd).