John Lynch - 49ers GM

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by Hysterikal:
I mean we had fans thinking we would get high picks and a player for Aiyuk same with Deebo. Fans typically overvalue their own guys. Browns fans however have a right to expect everything for Garrett. Edge rushers typically age very well and are still effective after 30. I still don't think Myles gets traded but if he does I think it's gonna be Khalil Mack level trade if not a little more.

Lol for sure it's always one fan base saying I'll give you a 3rd and the other side saying I want 3 1sts lol.

Yeah I tossed out the Mack trade as something logical. Mack was also like 25 when he got moved. Myles will be 30 end of the season next yr.

I don't think he gets moved…but the browns have to take a look in the mirror and realize that they f**ked up and they need to tear it all down.

Mack was 27 for the trade and wasn't the player Garrett is that's why I think he nets them more than the Raiders got for Mack. If I'm the Browns I'm considering the blow it all up & trade for as many 1st round picks for the 2027 draft as possible. Cause that 27' class looks like it's gonna be a historically good class. From Manning, Raiola, Jeremiah Smith, Ryan Williams, Lagway, Simmons, Coleman and Dylan Stewart landing a few of those guys could provide a foundation to build on.

Originally posted by Hysterikal:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by Hysterikal:
I mean we had fans thinking we would get high picks and a player for Aiyuk same with Deebo. Fans typically overvalue their own guys. Browns fans however have a right to expect everything for Garrett. Edge rushers typically age very well and are still effective after 30. I still don't think Myles gets traded but if he does I think it's gonna be Khalil Mack level trade if not a little more.

Lol for sure it's always one fan base saying I'll give you a 3rd and the other side saying I want 3 1sts lol.

Yeah I tossed out the Mack trade as something logical. Mack was also like 25 when he got moved. Myles will be 30 end of the season next yr.

I don't think he gets moved…but the browns have to take a look in the mirror and realize that they f**ked up and they need to tear it all down.

Mack was 27 for the trade and wasn't the player Garrett is that's why I think he nets them more than the Raiders got for Mack. If I'm the Browns I'm considering the blow it all up & trade for as many 1st round picks for the 2027 draft as possible. Cause that 27' class looks like it's gonna be a historically good class. From Manning, Raiola, Jeremiah Smith, Ryan Williams, Lagway, Simmons, Coleman and Dylan Stewart landing a few of those guys could provide a foundation to build on.

so if the browns are lucky they have maybe 1 first rounder after they sell off all their prime assets

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by Hysterikal:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by Hysterikal:
I mean we had fans thinking we would get high picks and a player for Aiyuk same with Deebo. Fans typically overvalue their own guys. Browns fans however have a right to expect everything for Garrett. Edge rushers typically age very well and are still effective after 30. I still don't think Myles gets traded but if he does I think it's gonna be Khalil Mack level trade if not a little more.

Lol for sure it's always one fan base saying I'll give you a 3rd and the other side saying I want 3 1sts lol.

Yeah I tossed out the Mack trade as something logical. Mack was also like 25 when he got moved. Myles will be 30 end of the season next yr.

I don't think he gets moved…but the browns have to take a look in the mirror and realize that they f**ked up and they need to tear it all down.

Mack was 27 for the trade and wasn't the player Garrett is that's why I think he nets them more than the Raiders got for Mack. If I'm the Browns I'm considering the blow it all up & trade for as many 1st round picks for the 2027 draft as possible. Cause that 27' class looks like it's gonna be a historically good class. From Manning, Raiola, Jeremiah Smith, Ryan Williams, Lagway, Simmons, Coleman and Dylan Stewart landing a few of those guys could provide a foundation to build on.

so if the browns are lucky they have maybe 1 first rounder after they sell off all their prime assets

I do keep seeing a lot of chatter about teams positioning themselves for that 27 draft. Many are already blushing about the top end and they already think solid depth etc. So teams will want to try and load up picks if they want to trade up etc.

If we continue our trend 26 will be high 30's 27 will be top 10

Originally posted by Hysterikal:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by Hysterikal:
I mean we had fans thinking we would get high picks and a player for Aiyuk same with Deebo. Fans typically overvalue their own guys. Browns fans however have a right to expect everything for Garrett. Edge rushers typically age very well and are still effective after 30. I still don't think Myles gets traded but if he does I think it's gonna be Khalil Mack level trade if not a little more.

Lol for sure it's always one fan base saying I'll give you a 3rd and the other side saying I want 3 1sts lol.

Yeah I tossed out the Mack trade as something logical. Mack was also like 25 when he got moved. Myles will be 30 end of the season next yr.

I don't think he gets moved…but the browns have to take a look in the mirror and realize that they f**ked up and they need to tear it all down.

Mack was 27 for the trade and wasn't the player Garrett is that's why I think he nets them more than the Raiders got for Mack. If I'm the Browns I'm considering the blow it all up & trade for as many 1st round picks for the 2027 draft as possible. Cause that 27' class looks like it's gonna be a historically good class. From Manning, Raiola, Jeremiah Smith, Ryan Williams, Lagway, Simmons, Coleman and Dylan Stewart landing a few of those guys could provide a foundation to build on.

#11 overall and 2026 2nd >> what Raiders got for Mack (just a little less than two future 1sts—trade was in September before the season started so nobody knew what those 1sts would be)

Originally posted by Hysterikal:
Mack was 27 for the trade and wasn't the player Garrett is that's why I think he nets them more than the Raiders got for Mack. If I'm the Browns I'm considering the blow it all up & trade for as many 1st round picks for the 2027 draft as possible. Cause that 27' class looks like it's gonna be a historically good class. From Manning, Raiola, Jeremiah Smith, Ryan Williams, Lagway, Simmons, Coleman and Dylan Stewart landing a few of those guys could provide a foundation to build on.

My math didn't math on that one lol. I mean Mack was a DPOY and multiple first-team all-pro and pro-bowler. And he was still younger.

I agree I'm moving for future picks and I think they need to do that at 2 this yr regardless (highest asking price for Sanders).

teams will want to sign Myles and he's not gonna do that for just any team which will shrink his market. Browns will brown and keep him more than likely lol.

Originally posted by paulk205:
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.

>>Friend, who cares where "#11 is valued at" in some chart? Who cares?

Well, every single GM in the NFL cares for one, as well they should. So if no one should care about value.....then maybe a team should offer their next 10 first round picks to us for Jake Moody? I mean, according to you "who cares" about value. Doesn't really make any sense, does it.

>>You have to hit on both youngsters..

No, actually you'd just have to hit on one of them....hitting on both would be awesome though. Hitting on one player who became a superstar and we get them cheap for 5 years is very very significant. Hitting on both would be simply amazing. But we wouldn't "have" to hit on both.

>>"Value" has, well, value when you are rebuilding, or when you are several pieces away..

Nope, value always has value ....to suggest there is value only in the situation of a rebuild or a "one piece away" is simply not correct. Successful teams are always trying to hit on their drafts, so that they can stay in the hunt each year. If you really believe what you wrote, then unless a team is in a rebuild or one piece away, then there is no value in the draft position. So according to you a team can trade it's 14th pick in round one to a team for it's 28th round one pick straight up because the 14th pick has no value? Sorry, I'm noy buying that logic. Value should always be considered, and it exists even when a team is not in a rebuild or one piece away. Would you be okay if, this year or any other year, the 49ers traded our 11th pick in the 1st round for another teams 22nd round pick straight up? If not, then value exists. Simply put, the 11th pick has more value than the 22nd pick. There is no guarantee as to the outcome of either of those picks, but to suggest there is no value is incorrect. The 11th pick is more valuable than the 22nd pick because more players will be available for the 11th pick. Whether of not we hit on that pick is a separate matter.

>>Do we like Garett? Can we fit him under the cap? Forget "value"

Would love to get Garett......but writing "forget value" is where we don't agree. If you really mean "forget value", then you should, in theory, be okay with giving up 50 of our first round picks for Garett, as long as we 1) want him, and 2) can fit him under the cap. I hope it would be very obvious to you that we should not do that deal, because Garrett's value is clearly not worth 50 1st round picks.

Originally posted by Fanaticofnfl:
#11 overall and 2026 2nd >> what Raiders got for Mack (just a little less than two future 1sts—trade was in September before the season started so nobody knew what those 1sts would be)

I'd be looking at all the possible edge rushers via trade as well. Henderson, Maxx, watt. I know Joey had a pretty down year, but they might be able to get him for peanuts and rework his deal to play with his brother.

Originally posted by Ottawa49er:
>>Friend, who cares where "#11 is valued at" in some chart? Who cares?

Well, every single GM in the NFL cares for one, as well they should. So if no one should care about value.....then maybe a team should offer their next 10 first round picks to us for Jake Moody? I mean, according to you "who cares" about value. Doesn't really make any sense, does it.

>>You have to hit on both youngsters..

No, actually you'd just have to hit on one of them....hitting on both would be awesome though. Hitting on one player who became a superstar and we get them cheap for 5 years is very very significant. Hitting on both would be simply amazing. But we wouldn't "have" to hit on both.

>>"Value" has, well, value when you are rebuilding, or when you are several pieces away..

Nope, value always has value ....to suggest there is value only in the situation of a rebuild or a "one piece away" is simply not correct. Successful teams are always trying to hit on their drafts, so that they can stay in the hunt each year. If you really believe what you wrote, then unless a team is in a rebuild or one piece away, then there is no value in the draft position. So according to you a team can trade it's 14th pick in round one to a team for it's 28th round one pick straight up because the 14th pick has no value? Sorry, I'm noy buying that logic. Value should always be considered, and it exists even when a team is not in a rebuild or one piece away. Would you be okay if, this year or any other year, the 49ers traded our 11th pick in the 1st round for another teams 22nd round pick straight up? If not, then value exists. Simply put, the 11th pick has more value than the 22nd pick. There is no guarantee as to the outcome of either of those picks, but to suggest there is no value is incorrect. The 11th pick is more valuable than the 22nd pick because more players will be available for the 11th pick. Whether of not we hit on that pick is a separate matter.

>>Do we like Garett? Can we fit him under the cap? Forget "value"

Would love to get Garett......but writing "forget value" is where we don't agree. If you really mean "forget value", then you should, in theory, be okay with giving up 50 of our first round picks for Garett, as long as we 1) want him, and 2) can fit him under the cap. I hope it would be very obvious to you that we should not do that deal, because Garrett's value is clearly not worth 50 1st round picks.

only jimmy g would be in this territory

Originally posted by Ottawa49er:
>>Friend, who cares where "#11 is valued at" in some chart? Who cares?

Well, every single GM in the NFL cares for one, as well they should. So if no one should care about value.....then maybe a team should offer their next 10 first round picks to us for Jake Moody? I mean, according to you "who cares" about value. Doesn't really make any sense, does it.

>>You have to hit on both youngsters..

No, actually you'd just have to hit on one of them....hitting on both would be awesome though. Hitting on one player who became a superstar and we get them cheap for 5 years is very very significant. Hitting on both would be simply amazing. But we wouldn't "have" to hit on both.

>>"Value" has, well, value when you are rebuilding, or when you are several pieces away..

Nope, value always has value ....to suggest there is value only in the situation of a rebuild or a "one piece away" is simply not correct. Successful teams are always trying to hit on their drafts, so that they can stay in the hunt each year. If you really believe what you wrote, then unless a team is in a rebuild or one piece away, then there is no value in the draft position. So according to you a team can trade it's 14th pick in round one to a team for it's 28th round one pick straight up because the 14th pick has no value? Sorry, I'm noy buying that logic. Value should always be considered, and it exists even when a team is not in a rebuild or one piece away. Would you be okay if, this year or any other year, the 49ers traded our 11th pick in the 1st round for another teams 22nd round pick straight up? If not, then value exists. Simply put, the 11th pick has more value than the 22nd pick. There is no guarantee as to the outcome of either of those picks, but to suggest there is no value is incorrect. The 11th pick is more valuable than the 22nd pick because more players will be available for the 11th pick. Whether of not we hit on that pick is a separate matter.

>>Do we like Garett? Can we fit him under the cap? Forget "value"

Would love to get Garett......but writing "forget value" is where we don't agree. If you really mean "forget value", then you should, in theory, be okay with giving up 50 of our first round picks for Garett, as long as we 1) want him, and 2) can fit him under the cap. I hope it would be very obvious to you that we should not do that deal, because Garrett's value is clearly not worth 50 1st round picks.

You and I don't know what every single GM thinks. We can read what a bunch of draftniks think what GMs think. And I specifically said that I'm not advocating a Ricky Williams/Herschel Walker type trade, so all the "50 1sts" talk does not apply. We definitely need to draft a bunch of guys this year, and we need to have picks down the years to replenish the ranks as our players get older, become FAs or retire. But you can pick all through the draft. The relative position of picking is of limited, well, value (it's not worthless, but it's not as important as the BS chart would have us believe). We have a plethora of picks. We draft a bunch of guys and hope they're good. We've done it before: Fred was a 3rd rounder, Kittle a 5th, Purdy obviously was Mr Irrelevant, JJ was a 7th (I think), Deebo was 2nd (again, I think). Sure, we've struck out too - that's the point. It's the draft, it's a lottery. That's why you need to flood it with picks, hoping that some of them stick. That's why the Ricky Williams trade was idiotic - New Orleans traded their whole draft for him!

If the 49ers think they can use Garrett and fit him in the cap, the equation is very simple. Let's pick one of those "rich" trades that people think is "overpaying". 2 1sts plus some mid rounder(s). So: on one hand you have a veteran, proven top-3 defender in his prime. On the other hand you have #11, next year's first (which you hope will be in the high 20s or even 30s, if you get your s**t together as a team) and let's also say one of our picks in the 80s and 90s this year (I don't have them handy now, but you know which ones I'm talking about). That's 3 possibles (one of them next year) against one probable (or better). For a team than needs to win now (since our established talent is getting old) which one is more likely to contribute NOW? The possibles or the probable?

Let me say it in another way. If the draft included veterans as well as rookies, would you consider Garrett drafted at #11 a "reach"? Or to use the "rich" trade example from above: if Garrett went top-3 in this hypothetical draft (I assume some QBs would go higher than him, say Lamar and Mahomes), would you pull a Lance-type trade to move up from #11 to get him? Or do you look at the chart?

Of course at some point the equation will not work in the veteran's favour. Trading, say, 5 1st rounders means that you hope that the veteran will be better than 5 lottery draws in a row. That's becoming unlikely, especially since the guy will get older and will get injuries on the way. But within reason, you will have to "overpay": this will be a bidding war. It's not just the difficult position of the Browns that is the issue here, it is that there are other contenders who are competing against you. We are "fortunate" to have sucked this year compared to Baltimore, Philly or Buffalo, so we have an earlier pick than them plus we have accumulated a bunch and can afford to draft for quantity. We have the ammo, let's use it.

SOB.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

#49ers director of Scouting and Football Operations Josh Williams has been requested to interview for the #Jaguars GM job, source said.

The Columbia grad has been with the organization for 14 years and has worked with both the pro and college side of the scouting department.

— Ian Rapoport (@RapSheet) February 4, 2025

No, f**k off. Schneider and Sorensen were enough. Piss off Opie.

Originally posted by DRCHOWDER:

Trade for Garrett. Sign Drew Dalman, Sign DJ Jones and draft a bunch of dawgs and we are so back.

Probably Shanahan to Lynch right now. #FTTB pic.twitter.com/tRgVDTnfeO

— 49ers & NFL News 24/7 (@49ersSportsTalk) February 4, 2025

So give up a ton of draft picks and add like $60 million in new spending to a roster that's already limited in depth while having to extend your QB?

What in the New Orleans Saints is this?

Originally posted by NYniner85:

#49ers director of Scouting and Football Operations Josh Williams has been requested to interview for the #Jaguars GM job, source said.

The Columbia grad has been with the organization for 14 years and has worked with both the pro and college side of the scouting department.

— Ian Rapoport (@RapSheet) February 4, 2025

"If he's hired by Jacksonville, the 49ers would receive an additional third-round compensatory pick in the 2025 NFL draft."