John Lynch - 49ers GM

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by VinculumJuris:
Agree to disagree on the missed SB opportunities—we had the Chiefs beat if pass protection holds up. We also likely beat Philly a few years back if Brock's elbow doesn't get destroyed, which gets us another SB appearance.

Wasn't Ward a SF draft pick?

Regarding the comparison with other OLs, I think the more important question is how our OL stacks up against their DLs, and we've seen a couple of recent bloodbaths on that front. At the same time, I agree our secondary will also be a liability, I just want to see the team investing in OL because the runway to get better is longer.

We stop 3rd and 16 and the game is basically over. No way is 2019 on the OL. Jimmy and the secondary were much bigger culprits.

Ward wasn't drafted by this regime. Im end they replaced him with a bargain basement signing.

TE missing a block isnt really on the OL.

We've seen more bloodbaths with our secondary than with the OL imo.

When we've had a pass rush we have also had a decent secondary. hmmmm

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by VinculumJuris:
Agree to disagree on the missed SB opportunities—we had the Chiefs beat if pass protection holds up. We also likely beat Philly a few years back if Brock's elbow doesn't get destroyed, which gets us another SB appearance.

Wasn't Ward a SF draft pick?

Regarding the comparison with other OLs, I think the more important question is how our OL stacks up against their DLs, and we've seen a couple of recent bloodbaths on that front. At the same time, I agree our secondary will also be a liability, I just want to see the team investing in OL because the runway to get better is longer.

We stop 3rd and 16 and the game is basically over. No way is 2019 on the OL. Jimmy and the secondary were much bigger culprits.

Ward wasn't drafted by this regime. Im end they replaced him with a bargain basement signing.

TE missing a block isnt really on the OL.

We've seen more bloodbaths with our secondary than with the OL imo.

Re: SB loss to the Chiefs, I was referring to LVIII where we settled for the FG in OT because McKivitz didn't block Chris Jones in the red zone with Aiyuk open in the end zone. If we score a TD there and KC matches, we get a sudden death possession to win it. Instead, we kick the FG and Mahomes puts us away.

Regarding Ward, right he wasn't a pick by this regime but I thought you were saying he was a FA acquisition. I got you now.

Originally posted by VinculumJuris:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by VinculumJuris:
Agree to disagree on the missed SB opportunities—we had the Chiefs beat if pass protection holds up. We also likely beat Philly a few years back if Brock's elbow doesn't get destroyed, which gets us another SB appearance.

Wasn't Ward a SF draft pick?

Regarding the comparison with other OLs, I think the more important question is how our OL stacks up against their DLs, and we've seen a couple of recent bloodbaths on that front. At the same time, I agree our secondary will also be a liability, I just want to see the team investing in OL because the runway to get better is longer.

We stop 3rd and 16 and the game is basically over. No way is 2019 on the OL. Jimmy and the secondary were much bigger culprits.

Ward wasn't drafted by this regime. Im end they replaced him with a bargain basement signing.

TE missing a block isnt really on the OL.

We've seen more bloodbaths with our secondary than with the OL imo.

Re: SB loss to the Chiefs, I was referring to LVIII where we settled for the FG in OT because McKivitz didn't block Chris Jones in the red zone with Aiyuk open in the end zone. If we score a TD there and KC matches, we get a sudden death possession to win it. Instead, we kick the FG and Mahomes puts us away.

Regarding Ward, right he wasn't a pick by this regime but I thought you were saying he was a FA acquisition. I got you now.

Burford didn't block Jones. If Feliciano doesn't get injured, we score a TD there.

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by VinculumJuris:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by VinculumJuris:
Agree to disagree on the missed SB opportunities—we had the Chiefs beat if pass protection holds up. We also likely beat Philly a few years back if Brock's elbow doesn't get destroyed, which gets us another SB appearance.

Wasn't Ward a SF draft pick?

Regarding the comparison with other OLs, I think the more important question is how our OL stacks up against their DLs, and we've seen a couple of recent bloodbaths on that front. At the same time, I agree our secondary will also be a liability, I just want to see the team investing in OL because the runway to get better is longer.

We stop 3rd and 16 and the game is basically over. No way is 2019 on the OL. Jimmy and the secondary were much bigger culprits.

Ward wasn't drafted by this regime. Im end they replaced him with a bargain basement signing.

TE missing a block isnt really on the OL.

We've seen more bloodbaths with our secondary than with the OL imo.

Re: SB loss to the Chiefs, I was referring to LVIII where we settled for the FG in OT because McKivitz didn't block Chris Jones in the red zone with Aiyuk open in the end zone. If we score a TD there and KC matches, we get a sudden death possession to win it. Instead, we kick the FG and Mahomes puts us away.

Regarding Ward, right he wasn't a pick by this regime but I thought you were saying he was a FA acquisition. I got you now.

Burford didn't block Jones. If Feliciano doesn't get injured, we score a TD there.

Ah you're right--I forgot about the drama with Feliciano's posts after. Regardless, costly OL mistake.

Originally posted by VinculumJuris:
Re: SB loss to the Chiefs, I was referring to LVIII where we settled for the FG in OT because McKivitz didn't block Chris Jones in the red zone with Aiyuk open in the end zone. If we score a TD there and KC matches, we get a sudden death possession to win it. Instead, we kick the FG and Mahomes puts us away.

Regarding Ward, right he wasn't a pick by this regime but I thought you were saying he was a FA acquisition. I got you now.

KC would've gone for 2 and I have zero confidence the secondary stops them.

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by VinculumJuris:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by VinculumJuris:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by VinculumJuris:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by Kolohe:
Once again I didn't like that they paid only a little investment into the O-line position. Something that got the 9ers kicked outta the playoffs. Pretty much putting out the same O-line as last season.

What would you have done differently? Who would you have paid, and what FAs would you have not signed in order to pay a G or C. I understand the frustration, but we had so many needs across the roster, so I guess what was the more ideal path?

I would've given Alijah Vera-Tucker that contract he got. I would've signed Wyatt Teller or Braden Smith who can play both Guard or Tackle in a pinch. They continue to spend chump change on the O-line and expect premium results.

So you sign Vera-Tucker over Evans? Assuming Vera-Tucker would want to sign here, which is not a given.

It's hard to take these arguments seriously when you're not looking at the roster moves thus far holistically. We've improved in areas of serious need. We're going to have question marks like every other team. We still have a draft to help bring in competition. I fail to see the dour mood with some of you guys considering the haul of players we brought in on reasonable contracts.

And how did you know Nate Hobbs, Vederian Lowe or Brett Toth wanted to sign here? Again you asked what I would've done differently and I would've put more money into the O-line than they did so far.

I asked which players we signed that you would have not signed and instead allocated towards oline instead. It's a simple question. We don't have infinite money at our disposal, so which players would you have not signed in order to sign Vera-Tucker for example?

I think it's a bit of a fallacy to tell people they have to be armchair GMs as good as the pros just because they're dissatisfied with the results on the field. I don't tell the chef how to source ingredients and cook meals when I go to a restaurant, I just evaluate the quality of the food. We're consumers of a product, and I think the premise of this question is flawed.

Horses**t, it's a fair question. When you're rubbing your off-season crystal ball, you don't get to rail against decisions on one hand, then don't tell us which decisions would have been better. That's called having your cake and eating it too.

Otherwise, we might just sit back and patiently wait to see how these decisions play out before jumping off bridges. That's my point.

Woosah buddy. The original complaint was about the general lack of attention to OL, which is a fair complaint across a number of seasons. Trying to corner someone into doing the GM's job better than him strikes me as somewhat disingenuous.

Kolohe's complaint was that we didn't spend significant money on the oline this offseason. And I asked which players we signed with our allocated cap would he give up to sign a FA. In essence what position shoulf suffer to elevate another position on the roster? This whole board is full of such discussions.

This is not forcing someone into an unreasonable argument. Thats absurd. Especially when my point has always erred on patience instead of crystal ball reaction on a GMs actions—which is more in line with your 'let the experts cook' analogy.

we haven't even had the draft and people are already freaking out.

The disconnect for me is this complaint spans multiple seasons, and asking someone to be patient while detailing the moves they would have made this offseason to address a long-standing grievance with the front office's philosophy overall just seems fallacious. The front office has been given a lot of patience in terms of building the OL, and it continues to end seasons for us.

Edit: I also take your point that complaints without suggestions are just complaints, and they're working with finite resources / options. Maybe I'm just sympathetic to this complaint because I share it and want to see impactful efforts to improve here.

The issue I'm concerned about is what we're doing right now, not what we did or didn't do in season's past. Each season has unique challenges in putting together a roster. For the longest time I thought McKivitz needed to be replaced, but the FO stuck with him and he's turned into an average player on a decent contract.

For whatever reason this team has put a higher value on other positions. But we don't always get a look at what the team sees, either from within the building or from the league, or even draft, perspective. If they've determined that value doesn't live with paying a G good money, then they're going to continue to try and find value in that position. Ultimately, very few teams are strong top to bottom and some areas are relegated to finding value at certain positions. The hope is the team does in fact find value instead of finding turnstiles.

I guess I'm just in the boat of wait-and-see. In other years the oline has been really good in a single area, or at least overall serviceable. We still have a draft to go, and we still have a couple guys young and vet, that would be nice to see how they develop under our system. Laken turned out pretty good, maybe Jones or Toth follow a similar path. Maybe Colby blossoms in year two. Maybe a rookie pushes Brendel. There's still a lot of offseason and a lot of questions, oh, and a draft.

I'm just frustrated in the O-line not improving. Because it's the same reason every year why the 9ers either get knocked out of the playoffs or struggle during the season.

I'm just hoping they would change their ways and go against the grain. Put value in the Guard and Safety positions and see if the team improves that way. Sure the O-line might be good enough right now, but no doubt they could be upgraded.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by VinculumJuris:
Re: SB loss to the Chiefs, I was referring to LVIII where we settled for the FG in OT because McKivitz didn't block Chris Jones in the red zone with Aiyuk open in the end zone. If we score a TD there and KC matches, we get a sudden death possession to win it. Instead, we kick the FG and Mahomes puts us away.

Regarding Ward, right he wasn't a pick by this regime but I thought you were saying he was a FA acquisition. I got you now.

KC would've gone for 2 and I have zero confidence the secondary stops them.

They would've targeted Oren Burks. After Greenlaw went down, Burks became the target.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by VinculumJuris:
Re: SB loss to the Chiefs, I was referring to LVIII where we settled for the FG in OT because McKivitz didn't block Chris Jones in the red zone with Aiyuk open in the end zone. If we score a TD there and KC matches, we get a sudden death possession to win it. Instead, we kick the FG and Mahomes puts us away.

Regarding Ward, right he wasn't a pick by this regime but I thought you were saying he was a FA acquisition. I got you now.

KC would've gone for 2 and I have zero confidence the secondary stops them.

If the D stops KC somewhere on that drive where they had a 4th down and a 2nd and 14 at one point it would have been nice too.
KC just marches down the field to win the game with barely any push back after the 4th down conversion.

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by VinculumJuris:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by VinculumJuris:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by VinculumJuris:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by Kolohe:
Once again I didn't like that they paid only a little investment into the O-line position. Something that got the 9ers kicked outta the playoffs. Pretty much putting out the same O-line as last season.

What would you have done differently? Who would you have paid, and what FAs would you have not signed in order to pay a G or C. I understand the frustration, but we had so many needs across the roster, so I guess what was the more ideal path?

I would've given Alijah Vera-Tucker that contract he got. I would've signed Wyatt Teller or Braden Smith who can play both Guard or Tackle in a pinch. They continue to spend chump change on the O-line and expect premium results.

So you sign Vera-Tucker over Evans? Assuming Vera-Tucker would want to sign here, which is not a given.

It's hard to take these arguments seriously when you're not looking at the roster moves thus far holistically. We've improved in areas of serious need. We're going to have question marks like every other team. We still have a draft to help bring in competition. I fail to see the dour mood with some of you guys considering the haul of players we brought in on reasonable contracts.

And how did you know Nate Hobbs, Vederian Lowe or Brett Toth wanted to sign here? Again you asked what I would've done differently and I would've put more money into the O-line than they did so far.

I asked which players we signed that you would have not signed and instead allocated towards oline instead. It's a simple question. We don't have infinite money at our disposal, so which players would you have not signed in order to sign Vera-Tucker for example?

I think it's a bit of a fallacy to tell people they have to be armchair GMs as good as the pros just because they're dissatisfied with the results on the field. I don't tell the chef how to source ingredients and cook meals when I go to a restaurant, I just evaluate the quality of the food. We're consumers of a product, and I think the premise of this question is flawed.

Horses**t, it's a fair question. When you're rubbing your off-season crystal ball, you don't get to rail against decisions on one hand, then don't tell us which decisions would have been better. That's called having your cake and eating it too.

Otherwise, we might just sit back and patiently wait to see how these decisions play out before jumping off bridges. That's my point.

Woosah buddy. The original complaint was about the general lack of attention to OL, which is a fair complaint across a number of seasons. Trying to corner someone into doing the GM's job better than him strikes me as somewhat disingenuous.

Kolohe's complaint was that we didn't spend significant money on the oline this offseason. And I asked which players we signed with our allocated cap would he give up to sign a FA. In essence what position shoulf suffer to elevate another position on the roster? This whole board is full of such discussions.

This is not forcing someone into an unreasonable argument. Thats absurd. Especially when my point has always erred on patience instead of crystal ball reaction on a GMs actions—which is more in line with your 'let the experts cook' analogy.

we haven't even had the draft and people are already freaking out.

The disconnect for me is this complaint spans multiple seasons, and asking someone to be patient while detailing the moves they would have made this offseason to address a long-standing grievance with the front office's philosophy overall just seems fallacious. The front office has been given a lot of patience in terms of building the OL, and it continues to end seasons for us.

Edit: I also take your point that complaints without suggestions are just complaints, and they're working with finite resources / options. Maybe I'm just sympathetic to this complaint because I share it and want to see impactful efforts to improve here.

The issue I'm concerned about is what we're doing right now, not what we did or didn't do in season's past. Each season has unique challenges in putting together a roster. For the longest time I thought McKivitz needed to be replaced, but the FO stuck with him and he's turned into an average player on a decent contract.

For whatever reason this team has put a higher value on other positions. But we don't always get a look at what the team sees, either from within the building or from the league, or even draft, perspective. If they've determined that value doesn't live with paying a G good money, then they're going to continue to try and find value in that position. Ultimately, very few teams are strong top to bottom and some areas are relegated to finding value at certain positions. The hope is the team does in fact find value instead of finding turnstiles.

I guess I'm just in the boat of wait-and-see. In other years the oline has been really good in a single area, or at least overall serviceable. We still have a draft to go, and we still have a couple guys young and vet, that would be nice to see how they develop under our system. Laken turned out pretty good, maybe Jones or Toth follow a similar path. Maybe Colby blossoms in year two. Maybe a rookie pushes Brendel. There's still a lot of offseason and a lot of questions, oh, and a draft.

I'm just frustrated in the O-line not improving. Because it's the same reason every year why the 9ers either get knocked out of the playoffs or struggle during the season.

I'm just hoping they would change their ways and go against the grain. Put value in the Guard and Safety positions and see if the team improves that way. Sure the O-line might be good enough right now, but no doubt they could be upgraded.

I hear you. We'll see what the draft brings and how our bargain bin guys compete in camp at LG. There's a lot of ways this unit could look better than it did last year. My biggest concern is at C, where Brendel, despite his average PFF ranking, just looks so completely overpowered. It would be nice to see a 4th round rookie push him in camp, but likely that replacement won't come until later.

What's this wild s**t that Lombardi is talking about with a possible trade for miles Garrett? Lol I'm down. Send the damn farm. No idea how possible this is but would be a hell of a bookend

EDIT: now it's on the front page.

Not going to happen.

Originally posted by tankle104:
What's this wild s**t that Lombardi is talking about with a possible trade for miles Garrett? Lol I'm down. Send the damn farm. No idea how possible this is but would be a hell of a bookend

EDIT: now it's on the front page.

I don't care what page of the Webzone it is on. It consists of two parts: Part 1: SMOKE. Part 2: MIRRORS.

Nothing more than that. Just reporters who have nothing to report on and cannot cultivate sources because team sources mostly keep their big yappers shut. How many stories have you read in just the past two weeks about the number of teams looking to sign Jauan Jennings? It's got to be at least ten and counting. Stories about JJ going to the Raiders have been popping up for YEARS. So, just because it's on the front page of the Webzone says and means nothing.

Originally posted by billbird2111:

Originally posted by tankle104:
What's this wild s**t that Lombardi is talking about with a possible trade for miles Garrett? Lol I'm down. Send the damn farm. No idea how possible this is but would be a hell of a bookend

EDIT: now it's on the front page.

I don't care what page of the Webzone it is on. It consists of two parts: Part 1: SMOKE. Part 2: MIRRORS.

Nothing more than that. Just reporters who have nothing to report on and cannot cultivate sources because team sources mostly keep their big yappers shut. How many stories have you read in just the past two weeks about the number of teams looking to sign Jauan Jennings? It's got to be at least ten and counting. Stories about JJ going to the Raiders have been popping up for YEARS. So, just because it's on the front page of the Webzone says and means nothing.

Obviously I think it's unlikely. Would be badass though.

bosa - OSA - Mykel - Garrett. Let the boys dream!

Originally posted by tankle104:

Originally posted by billbird2111:

Originally posted by tankle104:
What's this wild s**t that Lombardi is talking about with a possible trade for miles Garrett? Lol I'm down. Send the damn farm. No idea how possible this is but would be a hell of a bookend

EDIT: now it's on the front page.

I don't care what page of the Webzone it is on. It consists of two parts: Part 1: SMOKE. Part 2: MIRRORS.

Nothing more than that. Just reporters who have nothing to report on and cannot cultivate sources because team sources mostly keep their big yappers shut. How many stories have you read in just the past two weeks about the number of teams looking to sign Jauan Jennings? It's got to be at least ten and counting. Stories about JJ going to the Raiders have been popping up for YEARS. So, just because it's on the front page of the Webzone says and means nothing.

Obviously I think it's unlikely. Would be badass though.

bosa - OSA - Mykel - Garrett. Let the boys dream!

you think bosa would not be part of the trade package?

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:
you think bosa would not be part of the trade package?

I think that would be dumb to do. Browns are very analytical - so I can see them valuing first round picks, especially next year for one of the vaunted QBs.

if we trade Bosa and our firsts, we are in arguably a worse position. Same holes and problems but with less capital.

2 first and Mac jones or 2 firsts and a 3rd. Idk. Does he have a no trade clause? Cause then Myles woukd have a big say in where he goes.

Micah went for 2 firsts and Clark. So i presume that trade comp isn't far off. Factor in the age and salary cap hit