Let's talk about the 49ers (Super Bowl Edition)

[TLO]

Well Chiefs vs Packers is what I had hoped for, but that's not happening.

Let's talk about Chiefs vs 49ers here.

[rabblerouser]

Originally Posted by KCChiefsFan88

Apparently you don't understand what type of compensation it would take to trade for the #1 overall pick in the draft next year (i.e. where Trevor Lawrence will likely get selected).

And the team picking #1 overall may decide there is no amount of compensation they are willing to take to pass up on drafting Lawrence.

Idk, Cincinnati is capable of making some baffling decisions that will **** their franchise in the long term...

[rabblerouser]

Originally Posted by smithandrew051

Pretty sure it’s BURT VATCH. He spells his name in all caps.

BRENT VEEEOTCH.

Last name pronounced like Snoop Dogg's enunciation:

"Rollin' down the street, smokin' indo, sippin' on Gin & Juice...VEEEEOTCH!!"

[pugsnotdrugs19]

Lawrence is the type of prospect where if a team like Atlanta had the pick, they’d take him.

There’s like 5 teams who will keep their guy over taking him IMO.

[Eleazar]

Originally Posted by A8bil

Paying Goff absolutely gutted the Rams. Goff is no Mahomes (I say that begrudgingly as a Cal alum), but the roster will get thinner. How's KC's drafting record outside of Mahomes? You have to find gems in the lower rounds when you get cap constrained.

Really, every team is screwed if they don't draft well. There's never enough cap space for a team that drafts poorly to fill all their holes.

There's also the aspect that when you have a guy like Mahomes who will have you contending every year, guys will sometimes take a below market deal to come win a title. Guys who might otherwise have left in free agency will stick around. New England did a lot of this.

As far as the Rams go, Goff/Donald/Cooks/Gurley might seem parallel our situation with Mahomes/Jones/Hill/Kelce, but what's the key difference there? The four Chiefs will all be worth what they are being paid.

The Rams have thrown elite money at an average QB, a RB and WR who seem to be declining, and a DT who probably isn't the 20 sack guy he's being paid as, but the 10 sack guy he's been every other year of his career.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by pugsnotdrugs19

Lawrence is the type of prospect where if a team like Atlanta had the pick, they’d take him.

There’s like 5 teams who will keep their guy over taking him IMO.

Not if their team just went 2-14. I can get to 4 'probablies'.

Chiefs, Texans and Ravens - who else? Probably the Seahawks as well. Maybe the Eagles to get to 5?

And none of those teams would go 2-14 even without their respective QBs should they go down for the year in week 1. Those squads all have stable coaching staffs that would at least limp them to 5-6 wins.

If the Packers somehow went 2-14 next season and qualified at 1.1, they'd move on from Rodgers. They'd see it as a sign that he's heading downhill fast and is expensive enough that it's time to rebuild. Ditto the Saints or Falcons or anyone else with a 'name' quarterback with a big cap figure in his 30s. If the Rams went 2-14 w/ Goff they'd sit Lawrence for a year because of his reasonable cap figure and then turf Goff the following season.

I guess the Giants MIGHT be in play if they like Daniel Jones as much as rumored, but I'm betting they'd look to move Jones for a 2nd before they moved the pick for Lawrence, especially if he goes 2-14 next year as a starter.

There's just not a scenario where anyone's looking to dump that pick.

The 49ers aren't getting Lawrence unless they shit the bed themselves.

[smithandrew051]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Not if their team just went 2-14. I can get to 4 'probablies'.

Chiefs, Texans and Ravens - who else? Probably the Seahawks as well. Maybe the Eagles to get to 5?

And none of those teams would go 2-14 even without their respective QBs should they go down for the year in week 1. Those squads all have stable coaching staffs that would at least limp them to 5-6 wins.

If the Packers somehow went 2-14 next season and qualified at 1.1, they'd move on from Rodgers. They'd see it as a sign that he's heading downhill fast and is expensive enough that it's time to rebuild. Ditto the Saints or Falcons or anyone else with a 'name' quarterback with a big cap figure in his 30s. If the Rams went 2-14 w/ Goff they'd sit Lawrence for a year because of his reasonable cap figure and then turf Goff the following season.

I guess the Giants MIGHT be in play if they like Daniel Jones as much as rumored, but I'm betting they'd look to move Jones for a 2nd before they moved the pick for Lawrence, especially if he goes 2-14 next year as a starter.

There's just not a scenario where anyone's looking to dump that pick.

The 49ers aren't getting Lawrence unless they shit the bed themselves.

Texans and Ravens would be smart to trade their current QB for picks and build around Lawrence if they somehow had the Number 1 pick next year. Jackson and Watson are going to take a beating over the next few years (Jackson from running and Watson from his trash OL and lack of future picks).

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by smithandrew051

Texans and Ravens would be smart to trade their current QB for picks and build around Lawrence if they somehow had the Number 1 pick next year. Jackson and Watson are going to take a beating over the next few years (Jackson from running and Watson from his trash OL and lack of future picks).

Mahomes would take 1/2 as many sacks as Watson behind the same OL.

Watson's line gets an unreal amount of undeserved heat because of Watson's poor pocket presence. It's really remarkable.

[pugsnotdrugs19]

It’s not going to happen but if Baltimore did suck so bad that they got pick 1, I think even they would move on from Jackson as his playing style makes team building much more difficult as you need a specific style of players at each position. And his shelf life is presumably shorter.

They’re going to be good though so it doesn’t matter.

[ChiefsCountry]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Not if their team just went 2-14. I can get to 4 'probablies'.

Chiefs, Texans and Ravens - who else? Probably the Seahawks as well. Maybe the Eagles to get to 5?

And none of those teams would go 2-14 even without their respective QBs should they go down for the year in week 1. Those squads all have stable coaching staffs that would at least limp them to 5-6 wins.

If the Packers somehow went 2-14 next season and qualified at 1.1, they'd move on from Rodgers. They'd see it as a sign that he's heading downhill fast and is expensive enough that it's time to rebuild. Ditto the Saints or Falcons or anyone else with a 'name' quarterback with a big cap figure in his 30s. If the Rams went 2-14 w/ Goff they'd sit Lawrence for a year because of his reasonable cap figure and then turf Goff the following season.

I guess the Giants MIGHT be in play if they like Daniel Jones as much as rumored, but I'm betting they'd look to move Jones for a 2nd before they moved the pick for Lawrence, especially if he goes 2-14 next year as a starter.

There's just not a scenario where anyone's looking to dump that pick.

The 49ers aren't getting Lawrence unless they shit the bed themselves.

Ravens would give up present day Tommie Frazier in a heart beat for Trevor Lawrence. It's really just the Chiefs, Bengals (with Burrow), Seahawks, and maybe Texans that wouldn't budge on Lawrence.

[Megatron96]

Originally Posted by smithandrew051

Texans and Ravens would be smart to trade their current QB for picks and build around Lawrence if they somehow had the Number 1 pick next year. Jackson and Watson are going to take a beating over the next few years (Jackson from running and Watson from his trash OL and lack of future picks).

HOU is not ever trading Watson.

BAL is going to continue the Lamar Jackson experiment for at least another one or two years. Right now they're saying to themselves, "we just need a real pass rush. A LB or two. Another receiver. And we're good, as long as Lamar keeps improving as a passer."

It may not be totally accurate, but that's probably almost exactly what they're telling themselves right now.

[pugsnotdrugs19]

Texans wouldn’t do it but would be smart to as well. Watson has two torn ACLs to his name, will be much more expensive, and just isn’t as good in all likelihood.

[A8bil]

Originally Posted by Eleazar

Really, every team is screwed if they don't draft well. There's never enough cap space for a team that drafts poorly to fill all their holes.

There's also the aspect that when you have a guy like Mahomes who will have you contending every year, guys will sometimes take a below market deal to come win a title. Guys who might otherwise have left in free agency will stick around. New England did a lot of this.

As far as the Rams go, Goff/Donald/Cooks/Gurley might seem parallel our situation with Mahomes/Jones/Hill/Kelce, but what's the key difference there? The four Chiefs will all be worth what they are being paid.

The Rams have thrown elite money at an average QB, a RB and WR who seem to be declining, and a DT who probably isn't the 20 sack guy he's being paid as, but the 10 sack guy he's been every other year of his career.

Agreed with the part in bold. Bad luck on Gurley's knee. Donald is still a monster, but his problem is he doesn't have the same level of players next to him on the line so he gets all of the OL attention. I see it very much like the 49ers D-Line. When Ford is in the game, the entire line plays better because the opponent's OL cannot focus on just one player. When he goes out, they double or chip Bosa and Buckner every play. and they become far less impactful. That's the problem the cap creates. You can have a dozen great players, but the other 10 starters may just be average unless you can find some gems in the draft and get productivity from them on their rookie contracts.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Megatron96

HOU is not ever trading Watson.

BAL is going to continue the Lamar Jackson experiment for at least another one or two years. Right now they're saying to themselves, "we just need a real pass rush. A LB or two. Another receiver. And we're good, as long as Lamar keeps improving as a passer."

It may not be totally accurate, but that's probably almost exactly what they're telling themselves right now.

Yeah. If Lawrence were to come out in 2 seasons and Jackson failed in both, then maybe.

But we're talking next season. They're not going to trade a guy who took them to a #1 seed on the back of an MVP year 12 months later. It's just not going to happen.

I won't argue that it SHOULDN'T, but endowment effect is a real thing and they just won't do it.

The Bengals was a good call. They might still be a big ol' pile of shit come next season and with Burrows already in the fold, they won't move on from him yet. I could see a scenario where they'd make a trade.

But how are the 49ers gonna do it? They've established that they have a great coach and a solid front office. They'll be a .500 or better team for the next several years. Every pick they have in that period will be less valuable than all but maybe 5 teams in the league.

So how do they intend to leapfrog teams that will be picking in the top 5 next season? If the Bengals moved down, they won't be moving down more than a few spots (and they won't have any interest in Grapes). So now is SF going to trade Garappolo for a top 5 pick and use that to bundle w/ 4 more and get the deal done? Grapes doesn't have that kind of value and any team looking to move a pick for him would instead just go straight to the Bengals and use that same pick as the centerpiece of a deal for 1.1.

It isn't Madden. This idea falls apart upon any meaningful analysis.

[smithandrew051]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Mahomes would take 1/2 as many sacks as Watson behind the same OL.

Watson's line gets an unreal amount of undeserved heat because of Watson's poor pocket presence. It's really remarkable.

Either way you look at it, my point stands. By the time the Texans are ready to really contend, Watson will be beat to shit. It would be smart to trade him to someone who is drooling over his big plays to build around Lawrence if they had the first pick next year.

Obviously, none of that is happening. For one, they don’t have a first round pick next year I think.

[DRM08]

Originally Posted by A8bil

Nice choices that have (mostly) worked out. Hill dropped (I thought) because of his off field issues, is that not the case. The 49ers took a few risky guys like that in recent years that did not work out (e.g., Reuben Foster). Wasted picks.

Tyreek dropped because of the off-field baggage. But I don’t think he would have been a high 1st rounder even if he was squeaky clean. I could see him being a late 1st rounder or maybe 2nd rounder similar to DeSean Jackson.

Tyreek is so unique that I think he is one of the few WR’s who would be worth a really high draft pick such as Top 5. The fact that Belichick double teams him all the time is pretty strong evidence of how valuable he is. Opens up things for all the other receivers on the field.