skinny21

I think the combo of 1) needing a qb, 2) having the chance to draft a very well regarded qb at 2 (w/o not needing to trade up), and the fact we’d be starting a new HC’s reign with a top notch qb prospect… it’s an absolute no brainer to pick qb at 2. I think it’s huge for the fanbase as well, although I don’t think that should really be a consideration for FO. And lastly, we have a lot of resources to improve the talent around the young qb. Now, if for some reason they don’t see it with the qb that is available? If they’re worried about scheme fit, or some red flags give them pause? Highly, highly doubtful IMO, but I suppose there’s at least some sort of chance they wind up preferring a trade back. Personally, I don’t think it’s worth the time to discuss, but to each their own. And this is coming from someone that still thinks Howell could be a good qb.

Sounds like you’re equating leadership to personality/maturity? Maybe I could have worded it better, because I wasn’t trying to be blasé about it. My point was that I think most FO’s would rate things like throwing ability, processing speed, reading defenses, work ethic and others (maybe even being a decent person/maturity) over leadership.

I believe they’re prioritizing leadership over an X’s and O’s because a HC can delegate. While leadership is a definite plus at qb, I’d assume it’s probably down the list of the top boxes to check for the position…

You make some really good points here. I’ve been of the mind that we (generally) go by “supply” - OT and WR are seemingly deep in the draft, and looks like a pretty good group of Edge, corner and ILB in FA. More generally, I’d tend to avoid FA for RB and TE (in our case specifically, would love to find a stud TE and they don’t hit FA… though we could use a decent guy there as well, which you can get in FA). I was partially in alignment with you in that I’d look to add one good OL in FA (and 2-3 in the draft), but your points about needing time to develop is pretty salient when we’re looking at fielding a rookie qb in a new offense….

Wonder if that was a Del Rio vs Rivera thing (he played a lot the last 4 weeks), or due to how he looked when Barton was out (IIRC Barton missed some time recently?). I know Speilman isn’t our GM, but it’ll be interesting to see how we play things in FA given he said to Keim he strongly believes FA is to supplement, whereas Harris seems to want to turn this around in a hurry. Obviously those points don’t necessarily oppose each other, but I could see going a bit lighter on FA than we might expect… at least until after a year of evaluation and getting everyone’s feet wet (the staff, new QB, etc). And not that in should inhibit us from spending, but there’s also the idea of extending some of our own in the near future. Beyond Cosmi, I’m not sure who is likely to fit that bill though. Actually kind of shocking how few guys I see as potentially worth extending down the line… maybe Forrest? Of course, any contracts we sign wrap up before any of their own drafted guys will be due 2nd contracts.

Didn’t you say that last week? Oh wait, that was yesterday. Ok, maybe you’re onto something.

I’ve been pretty impressed with Hudson this season. Anyone else notice him being quite… demonstrative last game? Very curious what that was about - seemed like much of it was directed at the sideline?

I’ve been of the mindset that our FA should focus on defense and adding high end talent (though we’ll sign a bunch of cheaper guys too of course). DE, ILB, and then either a corner or safety (I think we’ll sign one of each at least, but I think only one will/should be a higher priced guy). I’d look to add a higher end talent at IOL too. Very doable IMO, though convincing those types to come here might be the hard part. Then the draft can focus on taking advantage of quality depth at OT and WR, while also adding some combo of RB, IOL, TE and maybe a couple of defensive players. This is presuming we land a QB in the 1st of course, which, by the way, I’m not yet 100% on, even if I think it’s the safest offseason bet (other than a new FO). The one thing that gives me pause is 1) the analytics side and 2) the idea that the focus could be on slow playing things a bit - waiting on big deals until the rookie qb (and to a lesser extent the coaching staff/FO) gets their feet wet. Maybe they do indeed go after 1 year deals, or guys that they hope can break out in the near future.

Not disagreeing with you, but I’m curious how you came to this conclusion? I’ll add that a part of my calculus, beyond saving 8-10mil or whatever to allocate elsewhere, was that Scott seemed to hold up vs Bosa (and our ground game was quite effective too). Made me think maybe we could get by with the two of them (Lucas/Scott), along with Daniels and whatever OTs we draft (plus Cosmi and perhaps Wylie as emergency OTs). But I’d still hold onto Leno until post-draft at the least in this scenario. I hear you on this. While I’m looking forward to drafting an OT (plus a 2nd lineman that could hopefully play inside or out), I’m not getting my hopes up that they’ll be clear upgrades from day 1.

I’ve been of the opinion that we should retain Leno for various reasons, similarly to how I thought we should hold onto Moses, but now I’m thinking I might rather re-sign Lucas and then cut Leno. Save money, Lucas can play on both sides of the line, and if we wind up drafting two starting caliber OTs (not likely, but possible), we’re not paying big money to our swing tackle. With that said, I might hold off on cutting Leno until post-draft. I’d be a little surprised if the new staff slow plays the roster build/re-tool via going light on FA contracts. They’re going to want to turn this around in a hurry, and it’s apparent this roster needs added quality more than need quantity. Obviously they’ll need to add inexpensive FAs to fill out the roster, but I expect they’ll shoot for a few bigger names. Now whether they can convince bigger names to sign here is a different story…

Tempting for sure. Not only the 5th year option alone, but I’d assume it would be for a receiver or tackle, so you’re probably leapfrogging some teams that want to go after the same positions, and it’s a 5th year for a premium priced position. On the flip side, 1) with strong positional depth in the draft at both of those spots, it may be a smarter draft strategy to just wait, and 2) that early 4th rounder probably has a pretty good chance at being a contributor or maybe even a solid starter sooner than later. Tough call. Of course, you could always attempt to then trade back with the second 2nd rounder and recoup the loss…

Prepare to open the flood Gates!

I’m right with you on all of this… and a little surprised I didn’t end up a 49ers fan given how much I loved watching Montana, and then Young, play. Frankly, the odds of any qb becoming elite is minute, though that shouldn’t prevent trying to land/groom one to that end. I don’t blame those that think Sam can’t/won’t become an elite qb - I strongly doubt it myself (and I’m not even convinced he can/will become a “good” qb either - this staff may well have ruined him). The one aspect that gives me pause on that negative line of thinking, beyond having been dealt a horrendous hand this year, is his mental make up. The combo of self correcting, not getting phased (by turnovers, big games, etc), and the ability to perform in pressure situations (2 minute drills)… those things are pretty huge. Combine all of that with plus arm talent and athleticism, and him showing the ability to place the ball accurately (could use more consistency here, but that could be more about his supporting cast), and all that’s left, IMO, is - can he become comfortable enough in an offense (he may well not get that opportunity) and can he dissect defenses quickly enough? The million dollar question(s).

Yeah, Bowers is appealing because of the depth at the other spots and questionable TE depth… but I could be reading the tea leaves wrong.

I think generally, you keep youth, you keep cheaper guys that have shown something, and pricier guys that have years left on their contract (assuming they’re roughly playing up to their cost). And of course you have guys hitting FA that you may or may not re-sign (I’d consider Curl, though I think he’ll want too much, and I probably let Fuller walk), and guys going into their final year you might extend (Cosmi, for example, is a no-brainer for me). It’s nuanced though. Take someone like Brian Robinson. If we draft a qb this year, the expectation/hope is we probably kind of stink next year, challenge for playoffs in ‘25, and are contenders for a period after that. With 2 years left on his deal, trading Robinson for a 3rd-5th makes some sense - you shouldn’t re-sign backs (generally) and so why not get a pick (w/ a 4 year contract, if they pan out - big if) if BR isn’t gonna help us contend? Flip side, having a ground game helps a qb out, and Robinson’s proven to be a solid runner and pass catcher. So, maybe you hold onto him as a transition piece instead? I’m certainly not anxious to move on from Terry, I’d hold on to him for our qb’s sake, but I do get the thinking that by the time we’re actually contending (in theory), he’s a FA or in his final year. I’d keep Dotson for sure though. No telling if he pans out, but he’s relatively cheap for 3 more years and (more importantly, IMO) his trade value is terrible right now. Definitely let Samuels walk, probably cut Logan (I’d like to get someone in-house before releasing him). Leno I hold onto for now. Not anxious for a repeat of releasing Moses (not apples to apples of course)… gotta prioritize protecting the young qb.

Foregoing qb and being on the receiving end of a bidding war for our pick is pretty darn tempting, especially if we only drop back a couple/few slots. Trade back for a 2025 1st, plus a second day pick this year and we could trade back into the 1st while still holding two 2nds and two 3rds (or one 2nd and three 3rds, etc depending on the trade back compensation). We’ll probably screw that possibility up by winning vs the Jets of course… sigh. I wouldn’t overly mind a RT if 1) they plan for him to flip to LT the following year - I’d rather a semi-competent Leno at LT and a good rookie at RT than a rookie at LT (who may or may not be an immediate upgrade from Leno), and Leno possibly sucking it up at RT (if past is prologue). 2) Skirts your point, but if we trade down a tad first. More importantly, the reason I quoted you - given the apparent depth at tackle and receiver, which makes more sense to target in the 1st vs 2nd? What if Bowers is also in the mix - Bowers, then OT and WR in the 2nd? Or possibly trade up into the 1st for one of those 2?

I was just thinking something along these lines… For a new FO - considering new ownership, coming off a dismal season, with huge question marks on the roster, and perhaps factoring in the need/drive to bring fans back - what’s the best move? Start fresh at qb knowing the team could struggle next year, or use the pick to help build the roster. Incremental improvement to look more competitive or swing for the fences (possibly taking longer to truly look competitive)? Draft a top 3 qb? Draft an exciting offensive weapon and have Sam and a vet duke it out? Draft an OT? Trade back to help add pieces to the roster (and/or add pick(s) for the future)? If they roll with Sam or a vet, perhaps we look more competitive, but do we lose out in terms of the future looking bright? Some serious questions…

I have my concerns going TE that early in general, but just logistically - given the apparent depth at OT and WR, and the lackluster TE class overall - going with Bowers makes a lot of sense IMO. That’s not even factoring that our TEs are lacking, TEs can be a QBs best friend (especially a young QB), and it’s not a position where good ones hit FA usually.

Pretty much. And really, I’d think the additional 2nd and 3rd probably come fairly close to grading out to a late 1st…?

I mentioned a while back my concern that even though he seems pretty tough mentally, he was going to be ruined by this season. Not to say he doesn’t share some of the blame, but taking a lot of hits, getting pressured quickly, mostly only having time to throw short to guys that aren’t separating, not having the backing of a ground game, and feeling like he has to overcome a terrible defense… the odds were very long that he’d be able to show/prove much. Facing all of that as a young guy in a new scheme? I can’t think of a worse situation for a qb. While there’s a part of me that wants to see him with a better supporting cast - from coaches to oline to pass catchers to defense, the new FO virtually has to draft a qb early if they’re in a position to do so. Even if you like Sam as a qb, you can’t really just assume he will bounce back. Hope it all works out either way…

I’m all about taking advantage of the positions with more depth (that’s what she said). If receiver is deep too though, doesn’t this go both ways? I guess if you don’t see any wr #1 types after those initial guys, then I get what you’re saying. More broadly, it’s interesting that you can approach the depth factor in a couple different ways - 1) take a high end guy at a more shallow position knowing you can still get a good prospect at the deeper position later, 2) double dip at the deeper position (if it’s reasonable to do so - ie you have a need at the position). I suppose you could also forego the deeper positions, thinking other quality guys might get pushed further down the draft, but that seems less certain.

Perhaps a conditional 2nd or 3rd that can go as high as a 1st next year? That doesn’t sound too unreasonable to me (for either side), depending on the benchmarks…

And you have Stromberg to compete with the rookie IOL (LG or C), so we could wind up with just 1 rookie starting… assuming they do land a higher end FA IOL. I do think it makes some sense to draft 2 OTs though. Gives you a potential swing tackle (or at least competition for the spot) for this year, it’s a deep class - which we should take advantage of, and you’ve got a starter or competition for 2025. I’ll add that we need to move on from Leno in 2025 (small chance we move on from him this year), and that means we’re only paying 2 guys significant money this year (Leno and a FA) and next year (the FA and Cosmi, if we re-sign him). I like the prospect of competition, depth, and youth on the OL with not a lot of cap allocated.

I’m a fan of Howell. I haven’t seen anything to suggest he cannot get into that tier just below the top qbs. Setting aside Allen and Mahomes, I think it’s worth noting that some of these other top notch qbs have serious questions - most notably contracts and injuries. Not to say he will reach that point of course. It’s especially hard to say/project with so much crap he’s had to deal with. With that said, that’s a very compelling argument you make. Some semi-random, semi-related thoughts that I’ve been thinking about… 1. Shanahan (I think? SIP’s said it enough I should remember) saying that you never know until you get a guy into the building. The new FO might not know what exactly they have in Howell, but I feel comfortable at least saying he gets positive marks for work ethic, intelligence, attitude, etc. I’m not sure if Howell checks all the boxes implied by Shanahan’s quote - like processing speed and ability to read defenses, but he does check a lot of them. 2. Feels like moving Howell if we draft a qb makes the most sense, but then the new FO risks the possibility that Howell goes on to be a more successful qb than the guy they draft. 3. I’m wanting to take the long view. It shouldn’t be about next year. And yet, with new ownership, a new regime, and the state of the fanbase and franchise, it sure seems like they need to generate excitement (at the very least show some promise) next year. I’m fine with moving on from Howell if they draft their guy… I just hope they’re right. 4. I don’t know how excited the fanbase would be, but I think trading back to add a (hopefully) 1st next year would also be a super positive move for a new regime. Showing savvy and forward (and long term) thinking would be a really nice change. That’s assuming they have a plan for qb of course, whether that’s belief in Howell, thinking he deserves a shot, or if they see him at minimum as a placeholder (don’t love this last angle as a reason to punt on qb… unless they don’t love the draftable qbs). Gonna be fascinating to see how this plays out

No doubt. Feel like we also heard last year that the DT’s thought he was the toughest IOL to beat, or something to that effect. In Training camp I think? I could be misremembering, but that was my where my sliver of hope stemmed from. Well, that and him not being Norwell. Or Charles. Alas…