Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

49ers jump up to #3 pick in draft


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Capella said:

No. You haven’t seen how he does any of that with nfl caliber players in his face. It’s total projection for 300 attempts against sub-par competition. 

Good luck explaining how a QB's release would change or his ability to turn his back and carry out a PA fake would change depending on who he plays.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Capella said:

They should be furious about Lance and Mac. Both options were wrong. 

Fields seems like at least as wrong an answer. The problem is that you don’t trade 3 firsts for the third best QB in the draft.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, thecatch said:

Fields seems like at least as wrong an answer. The problem is that you don’t trade 3 firsts for the third best QB in the draft.  

What if you like him a lot more than the #2 guy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, chinawildman said:

Level of competition is irrelevant to how twitchy an athlete is. A QB with a quick release will have a quick release regardless of who he plays... and same goes for carrying out fakes, scrambling, going through progressions, etc.

IMO, it's hard to project players at an NFL level when they play against cupcake competition. Their receivers are more open. They aren't under constant attack by huge defensive lineman that can impale them. They can have way more time to throw and receivers get open against guys that can't cover very well.

Things that are usually good for evaluation are how a player does under pressure and how accurate he is. IIRC, Lance had less than a 50% completion rate for passes past the line of scrimmage. Imagine what that will be against NFL pass rushers, complex defensive schemes, and better coverage. It's far easier to process simple schemes when the game is much slower.

I didn't watch Lance play, but from the writeups I saw about him, under duress he would often tuck the ball in and try to run or did not have great footwork or positioning and would throw an awkward pass. Most of us have seen the plays where he broke free, scrambled, and completed a couple of deep passes. But that sounds like that those plays didn't happen all that often. I am always worried about guys that are more of a threat running than passing, as up until now those types of QBs haven't lasted as long as pocket passers.

Like all picks, how they do in the pros is hard to predict and lots of guys don't work out. I still think is is very green and needs time to learn (he hasn't played much and took most of last year off). IMO, if they throw him to the wolves too soon it could really put a dent in his confidence.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


 

Quote

Chad Forbes @NFLDraftBites

#49ers John Lynch goes to sleep realizing PROJECT QB the Head Coach Selected 3rd after giving up 2 Future 1st Rd Picks might've been available at 12. Or could've had Mac Jones or Justin Fields plus retained both 1st Rd Picks.... @JohnMiddlekauff @GuyHaberman 

SLOPPY

https://twitter.com/nfldraftbites/status/1387997977768255502?s=21

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Anarchy99 said:

IMO, it's hard to project players at an NFL level when they play against cupcake competition. Their receivers are more open. They aren't under constant attack by huge defensive lineman that can impale them. They can have way more time to throw and receivers get open against guys that can't cover very well.

I agree, but that wasn't the argument. I was strictly stating that compared to Lance and Wilson, Fields didn't have as much suddenness to his game as far as throwing motion, play fakes, turning and throwing, etc... Whether their receivers are open or not is irrelevant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, massraider said:

What if you like him a lot more than the #2 guy?

The odds of successfully picking any QB generally are pretty bad. The odds that the third one selected is going to be a franchise player are probably marginally worse. All the candidates at #3 seemed to have some big red flags. Spending three firsts and a third to take that gamble seems like a bad percentages play to me. But maybe Shanahan was right and Lance is a future rock star; more power to him if so and I certainly hope he’s right. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

11 hours ago, massraider said:

It was a fascinating pre-draft process, and the 49ers apparently didn’t have to do much to fuel the confusion over who they might take with the No. 3 pick.

Why bother? In today’s clock-bait era, they sat back and let the sports-writers make ludicrous claims for them & the echo chamber did the rest. Between Twitter & the major sports outlets they generated enough Mac Jones at 3 rage to power a small metropolis. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, thecatch said:

The odds of successfully picking any QB generally are pretty bad. The odds that the third one selected is going to be a franchise player are probably marginally worse. All the candidates at #3 seemed to have some big red flags. Spending three firsts and a third to take that gamble seems like a bad percentages play to me. But maybe Shanahan was right and Lance is a future rock star; more power to him if so and I certainly hope he’s right. 

Completely agree with all of this.

One might speculate that having the best tools-equipped player in a raw frame could be quickly molded into a very good QB for Shanahan’s offense. 

And again: Lance is the only QB of the top 5 to play extensively in a PA passing system, which is exactly what Shanny runs. 

With JimmyG they have the luxury of making Lance the backup for (up to) a year, unless JimmyG struggles or gets hurt again.

The ideal scenario is Lance gets some garbage time snaps in wins or losses to build experience against pro players, and JimmyG has a good enough season to trade him for 2022 draft picks. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

 

I said exactly that last night, so completely agree. They wanted/coveted a Mahomes/Allen type. Shanny didn’t pay all that to take an immobile “safe” QB in Mac Jones. I don’t think Jones name was ever in the conversation & i can’t say enough about the efforts of Jones’s agent to hype him up into the top 11. If the Niners don’t make this deal he probably falls to the Pats without a trade. 

I think it comes down to Shanny preferring Lance to Fields in the stuff we have no idea about.

Physically, Fields and Lance are both lovely.  

So whether it's coachabilty, or the way Lance reacted to offensive concepts when they were talking, or they think his ball placement is just superior, I am guessing whatever it was, we aren't privy to.

The lack of experience , and one game in a year is concerning.  It has to be.  How many top 5 QBs got drafted where the team had so little film on them?  Scary, but you gotta trust that the team is a well-run organization, and Shanny is going to develop him.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, massraider said:

I think it comes down to Shanny preferring Lance to Fields in the stuff we have no idea about.

Physically, Fields and Lance are both lovely.  

So whether it's coachabilty, or the way Lance reacted to offensive concepts when they were talking, or they think his ball placement is just superior, I am guessing whatever it was, we aren't privy to.

The lack of experience , and one game in a year is concerning.  It has to be.  How many top 5 QBs got drafted where the team had so little film on them?  Scary, but you gotta trust that the team is a well-run organization, and Shanny is going to develop him.  

I keep reading that the difference is Lance’s ability to run a PA offense behind center. So ironically, the least experienced QB has the most experience for what Shanahan wants.

and yes, one game In a year is a concern. 28 PaTD & 1100 RuYd with a championship while calling his own protections is somewhat less concerning. 

Paying that much for a project at 3 is definitely risky. I, and every Niners fan, are praying it works out for them. It’s at least more exciting than Mac freakin Jones. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Anarchy99 said:

IMO, it's hard to project players at an NFL level when they play against cupcake competition. Their receivers are more open.

I never get the logic that brings up the inferior defenses that the small school QBs face while ignoring the fact that he also played with lesser talents supporting him.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Anarchy99 said:

IMO, it's hard to project players at an NFL level when they play against cupcake competition. Their receivers are more open. They aren't under constant attack by huge defensive lineman that can impale them. They can have way more time to throw and receivers get open against guys that can't cover very well.

Yeah I remember the constant pressure that Mac Jones faced playing behind that terrible Alabama offensive line.

Seriously the bolded describes every game I watched Mac Jones play - he was untouched throwing to wide open superior talent.

Edited by Dr. Octopus
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dr. Octopus said:

Yeah I remember the constant pressure that Mac Jones faced playing behind that terrible Alabama offensive line.

I have been quick to point out that Jones effectively playing on an NFL team against overmatched competition should be held against him. He had all day to throw in a clean pocket. That's not how it is in the NFL. He was nowhere near as good under pressure (and not as athletic as other QBs). 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Anarchy99 said:

I have been quick to point out that Jones effectively playing on an NFL team against overmatched competition should be held against him. He had all day to throw in a clean pocket. That's not how it is in the NFL. He was nowhere near as good under pressure (and not as athletic as other QBs). 

So your argument against Lance makes no sense then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clemson was stacked while the rest of the ACC was pretty poor.

Alabama had two receivers go in the first 10 picks and had the best OL in the country.

Ohio State was stacked while the rest of the BG10 was pretty poor.

BYU and NDKS both play against other less talented teams but have lesser talent surrounding them.

I mean we can play this game with all the QBs.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

Except he was the only QB of the top 5 prospects to play in a PA passing system like the one Shanahan largely employs.

Also reportedly the only one to call protections behind center, run the no-huddle up tempo offense Shanny loves. And he reportedly interviewed extremely well as a highly cerebral guy. 
 

“Lance was also the lone prospect among the top five quarterbacks to spend any meaningful amount of time playing under center and running many of the play-action concepts the 49ers like to employ consistently, which could help him adapt more quickly to Shanahan's offense.”

that would all seem to fit your “experience” narrative too, no? 

——————————————

“Make no mistake: Lance isn't nearly as far away from playing as his lack of experience might lead you to believe, either. North Dakota State put a lot on Lance's plate, asking him to spit out lengthy terminology in the huddle, handle NFL-style play-action dropbacks from under center and call protections at the line of scrimmage. Lance handled all of that even as a redshirt freshman, and though he will still have a big transition to the NFL, those things should all help make it a bit easier.

———————————————

You know for every quote you pull off the web i could find 20 saying the exact opposite.

And again this is a risky pick with one of their picks.  This is 3 first rounds picks worth of risk

Insanity

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

But you also have to consider the reward that they may have the next Mahomes or Allen, just a little raw.

With risk there’s also reward. 

“It was Trey Lance, the player considered one of the biggest risks in the draft because of his small, 17-game sample at FCS powerhouse North Dakota State, but also the one who many believe boasts more upside than any quarterback in the draft.”

That quote includes Lawrence & Wilson. 

You do understand that means upside means that his floor is incredibly low.  Lawrence's bar is already extremely high

Lance is extremely low - 3 first round picks.  I'm going to keep repeating that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, thecatch said:

Fields seems like at least as wrong an answer. The problem is that you don’t trade 3 firsts for the third best QB in the draft.  

They could have stayed were they were and had Fields (pretty much) and had a shot a top tackle or safety in the next couple of years.  Now they have no first round picks for two more years

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, thecatch said:

The odds of successfully picking any QB generally are pretty bad. The odds that the third one selected is going to be a franchise player are probably marginally worse. All the candidates at #3 seemed to have some big red flags. Spending three firsts and a third to take that gamble seems like a bad percentages play to me. But maybe Shanahan was right and Lance is a future rock star; more power to him if so and I certainly hope he’s right. 

Shanahan isn't a god, he doesn't know anymore than the average coach and scouting team and the fact remains 80% of these guys amount to nothing.

He may be right here but it's going to be as much luck as it is he's right

If every coach who liked a player traded away 3rd round picks to massively reach for him the nfl would have of bad teams

Maybe in a couple of years Shanny will like a FS and he'll trade another 3 first round picks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Dr. Octopus said:

I never get the logic that brings up the inferior defenses that the small school QBs face while ignoring the fact that he also played with lesser talents supporting him.

Doesn't that make him a lesser talent then?

And the game is way less complicated and it's slower than at the major schools.  It's a huge difference

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Dr. Octopus said:

Clemson was stacked while the rest of the ACC was pretty poor.

Alabama had two receivers go in the first 10 picks and had the best OL in the country.

Ohio State was stacked while the rest of the BG10 was pretty poor.

BYU and NDKS both play against other less talented teams but have lesser talent surrounding them.

I mean we can play this game with all the QBs.

That's why so many of these guys fail in the nfl.  It's also why you don't trade 3 first rounds picks for a project

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, killface said:

Doesn't that make him a lesser talent then?

And the game is way less complicated and it's slower than at the major schools.  It's a huge difference

Possibly, but that's not what I was commenting on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, chinawildman said:

Level of competition is irrelevant to how twitchy an athlete is. A QB with a quick release will have a quick release regardless of who he plays... and same goes for carrying out fakes, scrambling, going through progressions, etc.

 

2 hours ago, Capella said:

No. You haven’t seen how he does any of that with nfl caliber players in his face. It’s total projection for 300 attempts against sub-par competition. 

I'm less concerned with the players in his face than I am the corners and LBs covering his targets. Those windows are tiny compared to college, especially Division I. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Dr. Octopus said:

Clemson was stacked while the rest of the ACC was pretty poor.

Alabama had two receivers go in the first 10 picks and had the best OL in the country.

Ohio State was stacked while the rest of the BG10 was pretty poor.

BYU and NDKS both play against other less talented teams but have lesser talent surrounding them.

I mean we can play this game with all the QBs.

Trevor won many of us over in January 2019.  Which had nothing to do with the ACC. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, killface said:

You do understand that means upside means that his floor is incredibly low.  Lawrence's bar is already extremely high

Lance is extremely low - 3 first round picks.  I'm going to keep repeating that

I fail to see how his floor is "incredibly low" when he won a championship & had spectacular numbers doing so. 

It's the draft. Go look at the last 5 drafts & see what % of 1st round picks were as good as anyone thought on draft day. I'll wait. So many "can't miss" players do.

As of this moment, no one "understands" anything, and it's ridiculous to couch your speculation/opinion in some esoteric agrgumatum ad populum common knowledge that doesn't actually exist. 

Edited by Hot Sauce Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, kittenmittens said:

Could have just stayed put and had Fields lol

How so? CHI traded up to take fields at 11. 

Niners had the 12th pick. 

The math doesn't seem to check out. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, -OZ- said:

Trevor won many of us over in January 2019.  Which had nothing to do with the ACC. 

Yes, I'm exaggerating a little to make a point - teams like Clemson, OSU and Bama do face off against each other - it's not like every game is easy.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

How so? CHI traded up to take fields at 11. 

Niners had the 12th pick. 

The math doesn't seem to check out. 

I mean they could have easily traded up to one of those teams.  Like Dallas.  Philly doens't have 12 if they don't trade with them.

Edited by kittenmittens
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Dr. Octopus said:

Yes, I'm exaggerating a little to make a point - teams like Clemson, OSU and Bama do face off against each other - it's not like every game is easy.

Right, and to me that's the point. How did these guys do in big games. Jones has done well, Trevor is a stud. Fields has done well. Lance? :tumbleweed:

Edited by -OZ-
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, killface said:

Shanahan isn't a god, he doesn't know anymore than the average coach and scouting team and the fact remains 80% of these guys amount to nothing.

I bet he knows a heck of a lot more than you do. 💡

Quote

He may be right here but it's going to be as much luck as it is he's right

See, that's a BS tactic right there. If he's right he's lucky, but if he's wrong he was stupid? Sorry to keep calling you out like this but you can't play this both sides game. If he is right here, then you need to give credit where due.

You don't get to crow about it both ways. That's a cop out. Sorry. 

 

Edited by Hot Sauce Guy
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, kittenmittens said:

I mean they could have easily traded up to one of those teams.  Like Dallas.  Philly doens't have 12 if they don't trade with them.

Yeah, but apparently they didn't want Fields. They wanted the kid who played in a PA system & called his protections behind center, like a 49ers QB in a Shanahan system needs to do. 

So the real question isn't whether they could have had Fields at 11 by dealing up a pick, the question is how high would they have had to move to get Lance. 

That's the only question relevant to the 49ers because Lance was always their guy. ATL wasn't serious about trading 4, the Bengals weren't moving from 5, Dolphins moved back up to 6, so they weren't moving.  So what was the 49ers option to move up? And now we know that the Bears were willing to give up a haul to go get a QB. Who's to say they wouldn't have leapfrogged the Niners to do it had they not made that trade? 

It's always easier to MM QB these sorts of things. Yes, the Niners paid a lot. Yes, they took a project with that equity. But they got their guy, who's one of the most gifted athletes in the draft and who they felt fit their system. 

20-20 hindsight questioning the deal doesn't really serve a purpose because we don't know that it's accurate. It's just speculation, not fact. And had the Niners waited until draft day, it's highly likely someone else would have given the Dolphins a similar haul for 1.03, changing the entire dynamic of the picks. And possible even taken Lance there as well. We just don't know that though because the Niners were bold enough to do it 1st. So hey, good for them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

Yeah, but apparently they didn't want Fields. They wanted the kid who played in a PA system & called his protections behind center, like a 49ers QB in a Shanahan system needs to do. 

So the real question isn't whether they could have had Fields at 11 by dealing up a pick, the question is how high would they have had to move to get Lance. 

That's the only question relevant to the 49ers because Lance was always their guy. ATL wasn't serious about trading 4, the Bengals weren't moving from 5, Dolphins moved back up to 6, so they weren't moving.  So what was the 49ers option to move up? And now we know that the Bears were willing to give up a haul to go get a QB. Who's to say they wouldn't have leapfrogged the Niners to do it had they not made that trade? 

It's always easier to MM QB these sorts of things. Yes, the Niners paid a lot. Yes, they took a project with that equity. But they got their guy, who's one of the most gifted athletes in the draft and who they felt fit their system. 

20-20 hindsight questioning the deal doesn't really serve a purpose because we don't know that it's accurate. It's just speculation, not fact. And had the Niners waited until draft day, it's highly likely someone else would have given the Dolphins a similar haul for 1.03, changing the entire dynamic of the picks. And possible even taken Lance there as well. We just don't know that though because the Niners were bold enough to do it 1st. So hey, good for them. 

I really don't know, you could be right. It is entirely speculation.

I was just thinking they could have gotten their QB cheaper in hindsight.  Excellent question on whether it would have been cheaper to get specifically Lance in hindsight.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, kittenmittens said:

I really don't know, you could be right. It is entirely speculation.

I was just thinking they could have gotten their QB cheaper in hindsight.  Excellent question on whether it would have been cheaper to get specifically Lance in hindsight.

Yeah, I mean - your question is fair. I think it's one we're all asking, inside and outside the fan-base 

But if Lance turns out to be the next Josh Allen (arguably his best comp) I don't think anyone will complain about what they paid for him. Hell, if he's 80% of 2020 Josh Allen I think most would call that a successful pick. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

I fail to see how his floor is "incredibly low" when he won a championship & had spectacular numbers doing so. 

It's the draft. Go look at the last 5 drafts & see what % of 1st round picks were as good as anyone thought on draft day. I'll wait. So many "can't miss" players do.

As of this moment, no one "understands" anything, and it's ridiculous to couch your speculation/opinion in some esoteric agrgumatum ad populum common knowledge that doesn't actually exist. 

Weirdly that's my argument completely

Nobody knows, not even Shanahan and Lance cost 3 first round picks.  Not 1 like those other guys

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

I bet he knows a heck of a lot more than you do. 💡

See, that's a BS tactic right there. If he's right he's lucky, but if he's wrong he was stupid? Sorry to keep calling you out like this but you can't play this both sides game. If he is right here, then you need to give credit where due.

You don't get to crow about it both ways. That's a cop out. Sorry. 

 

It's not because he's like any other coach but most other coaches don't trade 3 first round picks.  He's stupid because he paid a huge price for a huge risk.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, killface said:

Weirdly that's my argument completely

Nobody knows, not even Shanahan and Lance cost 3 first round picks.  Not 1 like those other guys

But Shanahan thinks he knows. Which, after months of evaluation, is a lot more credible than what anyone on a FBG message board thinks we know. 

That's the point I take issue with. You casually lumping in a highly successful OC / HC with "everyone". That's preposterous.

Shanahan & his scouting team are literally the most knowledgeable about these players. Clearly they evaluated all of Jones, Lance & Fields. And based on everything they saw, they believed he was their guy, 

And the price they paid is 100% irrelevant - it was the cost to move up. You go looking at things to buy and they have a price. They paid the price. End of discussion of what the cost to move up was, and whether it was more or less than Fields. The only way that matters at all is if they evaluated Fields & Lance and saw no difference. Clearly they believed it was worth paying that price for Lance, because (obviously) they did. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, killface said:

It's not because he's like any other coach but most other coaches don't trade 3 first round picks.  He's stupid because he paid a huge price for a huge risk.  

 

 

He paid what the Dolphins were asking to take the player he believed was the best fit to run his offense. 

Crowing about the price doesn't prove that he was "stupid" because the price was the price. 

You make it sound like he was choosing between generic and name-brand potato chips here in a casual decision. 

And clearly Shanahan believed there was significantly less risk in paying to get Lance than paying slightly less and taking Fields. Again, as evidenced by the fact that he did so. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

But Shanahan thinks he knows. Which, after months of evaluation, is a lot more credible than what anyone on a FBG message board thinks we know. 

That's the point I take issue with. You casually lumping in a highly successful OC / HC with "everyone". That's preposterous.

Shanahan & his scouting team are literally the most knowledgeable about these players. Clearly they evaluated all of Jones, Lance & Fields. And based on everything they saw, they believed he was their guy, 

And the price they paid is 100% irrelevant - it was the cost to move up. You go looking at things to buy and they have a price. They paid the price. End of discussion of what the cost to move up was, and whether it was more or less than Fields. The only way that matters at all is if they evaluated Fields & Lance and saw no difference. Clearly they believed it was worth paying that price for Lance, because (obviously) they did. 

He's been a head coach for 3 years so let's not jump the gun there.  Josh McDaniels had a lot of success as an OC as well.

So let me ask you a question, as a 49ers fan, if he trade 4 first round picks is that too much?  5?  Or is it as you say irrelevant?

When Ditka put on that ridiculous wig did you think he knows what he is doing so he was 100% right or did you think 'this is ridiculous'

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

He paid what the Dolphins were asking to take the player he believed was the best fit to run his offense. 

Crowing about the price doesn't prove that he was "stupid" because the price was the price. 

You make it sound like he was choosing between generic and name-brand potato chips here in a casual decision. 

And clearly Shanahan believed there was significantly less risk in paying to get Lance than paying slightly less and taking Fields. Again, as evidenced by the fact that he did so. 

I agree

Ironically i don't think we are that far off

What makes him stupid is if Lance isn't the next Mahones (which all agree there is maybe a 20% chance of that happening).  Then he is stupid for wasting all that draft capital when he could have stayed put and got arguably better qbs.  

If he is the next mahones then you are right, it's irrelevant.  

Edited by killface
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, killface said:

He's been a head coach for 3 years so let's not jump the gun there.  Josh McDaniels had a lot of success as an OC as well.

So let me ask you a question, as a 49ers fan, if he trade 4 first round picks is that too much?  5?  Or is it as you say irrelevant?

 

Your question is irrelevant because that's not what he paid. Obviously. 

1 minute ago, killface said:

When Ditka put on that ridiculous wig did you think he knows what he is doing so he was 100% right or did you think 'this is ridiculous'

 

Ricky Williams was a generational talent and a spectacular pick, regardless of that stupid photo they posed for. 

And that situation is also completely irrelevant to the Niners pick of Lance at 1.03

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

Your question is irrelevant because that's not what he paid. Obviously. 

Ricky Williams was a generational talent and a spectacular pick, regardless of that stupid photo they posed for. 

And that situation is also completely irrelevant to the Niners pick of Lance at 1.03

So to answer the question a coach can do no wrong because he 'knows better' than everyone else.  And by everyone else I mean the countless scouting reports on Lance that say he is a massive risk.  Great physical specimen for sure but so was Jemarcus Russel

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, killface said:

I agree

Ironically i don't think we are that far off

What makes him stupid is if Lance isn't the next Mahones (which all agree there is maybe a 20% chance of that happening).  Then he is stupid for wasting all that draft capital

If he is the next mahones then you are right, it's irrelevant.  

Lance doesn't have to be the next Mahomes or even the next Josh Allen. 

Lance just needs to be the next Lance, and be the QB of the future for the 49ers. If he is successful at that, he was worthy of the price. If he's not, obviously he wasn't. 

Which can arguably be said about Fields, Mac Jones, and possibly even Wilson or Lawrence. If ANY of those players are busts (and statistically speaking more than 1 will be - helllooooo Akili Smith & Tim Couch) then they weren't worth the 1.01 or 1.02, or 1.11 via trade or whatever, respectively. 

At the end of the day 1 thing matters to justify the Lance pick: was he the right fit for the offense Shanahan wants to run for the next 5-10 years. 

Time will tell. The price they paid to get him is not relevant because they already paid it. They felt they needed to pay it when they had the opportunity to do so. 

None of that makes anyone "stupid". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, killface said:

So to answer the question a coach can do no wrong because he 'knows better' than everyone else.  And by everyone else I mean the countless scouting reports on Lance that say he is a massive risk.  Great physical specimen for sure but so was Jemarcus Russel

 

It's weird that you quoted me and somehow managed to not capture a single thing I said, but instead used that as a platform to continue to compare this to the Ricky Williams pick. 

I didn't say anything remotely resembling your assertions in this quote. I fully conceded that Shanahan could have picked the wrong guy. 

My point was that Shanahan picked the player he believed was right for his system, and likely utilized the scouting might of the 49ers office of player personnel to help him do so. Not that he can't make a mistake, but that he paid the price for the player he believed he's correct about. 

And he may not know better than everyone else, but I'm reasonably certain he knows a lot more than you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

It's weird that you quoted me and somehow managed to not capture a single thing I said, but instead used that as a platform to continue to compare this to the Ricky Williams pick. 

I didn't say anything remotely resembling your assertions in this quote. I fully conceded that Shanahan could have picked the wrong guy. 

My point was that Shanahan picked the player he believed was right for his system, and likely utilized the scouting might of the 49ers office of player personnel to help him do so. Not that he can't make a mistake, but that he paid the price for the player he believed he's correct about. 

And he may not know better than everyone else, but I'm reasonably certain he knows a lot more than you. 

He 100% knows more than me and my opinion of lance is not based on my analysis.  It's based on what I read.

I come here to discuss the value of the picks and FA signings

You seem to believe that it doesn't matter because every pick is the best pick because the coach picked them in that moment.  That shuts down a lot of discussion.  I struggle to see how you can't acknowledge that if Lance fails that it makes this a terrible decision by Shanahan (aka a stupid pick).  So much of what i read says that 49ers paid an extraordinary price for Lance 

Again I'm not having this argument with you if they just took fields at 12.  He would have been worth the risk no matter the mixed opinions on him. 

We are polluting this thread so we should stop now because we aren't getting anywhere.

I continue to believe like a lot of people out there that it was huge price to pay for a project qb.

Edited by killface
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

14 minutes ago, killface said:

You seem to believe that it doesn't matter because every pick is the best pick because the coach picked them in that moment.  That shuts down a lot of discussion.  I struggle to see how you can't acknowledge that if Lance fails that it makes this a terrible decision by Shanahan (aka a stupid pick).  So much of what i read says that 49ers paid an extraordinary price for Lance 

I said nothing resembling this description. This is 100% your projection based literally on not one word that I typed to this forum.  

14 minutes ago, killface said:

Again I'm not having this argument with you if they just took fields at 12.  He would have been worth the risk no matter the mixed opinions on him. 

We are polluting this thread so we should stop now because we aren't getting anywhere.

I continue to believe like a lot of people out there that it was huge price to pay for a project qb.

Actually no, you are polluting this thread by asserting a HC was "stupid" for trading up to take the player he evaluated and determined was the best fit for his offense. 

You further pollute the thread by asserting that if Lance works out, Shanny got "lucky" but if he's a bust, Shanny is "stupid". 

I'm just here correcting you.  Have a nice day. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

 

I said nothing resembling this description. This is 100% your projection based literally on not one word that I typed to this forum.  

Actually no, you are polluting this thread by asserting a HC was "stupid" for trading up to take the player he evaluated and determined was the best fit for his offense. 

You further pollute the thread by asserting that if Lance works out, Shanny got "lucky" but if he's a bust, Shanny is "stupid". 

I'm just here correcting you.  Have a nice day. 

That was super insulting.  But we are done. Enjoy your day

I'm secure knowing the bulk of people feel this way

Edited by killface
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, killface said:

That was super insulting.  But we are done. Enjoy your day

I'm secure knowing the bulk of people feel this way

It wasn't insulting at all. It was an accurate description. I don't need to sit here and have you project crap I didn't say or suggest without correcting you for it. 

So I corrected you for it. If you feel insulted by that, good - don't put words into people's mouths with those projection/summaries and you won't get into these situations. The most insulting thing to do is argue with your straw men while framing it as discussion with me. Sorry I won't let that garbage fly uncontested. 

The simple fact is that you're in here parroting what pundits are saying because you somehow believe they're right and shanahan is wrong. Weird how those pundits all earn a living generating clicks for FF sites and don't, you know, work for NFL franchises. 

But that's cool - you go on parroting them & playing both sides with luck vs skill of whether Lawrence does or doesn't work out. 

Putting you on ignore now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Hot Sauce Guy said:

It wasn't insulting at all. It was an accurate description. I don't need to sit here and have you project crap I didn't say or suggest without correcting you for it. 

So I corrected you for it. If you feel insulted by that, good - don't put words into people's mouths with those projection/summaries and you won't get into these situations. The most insulting thing to do is argue with your straw men while framing it as discussion with me. Sorry I won't let that garbage fly uncontested. 

The simple fact is that you're in here parroting what pundits are saying because you somehow believe they're right and shanahan is wrong. Weird how those pundits all earn a living generating clicks for FF sites and don't, you know, work for NFL franchises. 

But that's cool - you go on parroting them & playing both sides with luck vs skill of whether Lawrence does or doesn't work out. 

Putting you on ignore now. 

Please do.  It's mutual

And you did say all that stuff. Everything is irrelevant (your word) because that's the price and that's the pick.  It's a ridiculous argument.

But this is the last one forever. Bye bye

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
  • Create New...