There are 266 users in the forums
Originally posted by LifelongNiner:
I thought it was about not having to pay someone 27 million per year on average for middle of the pack QB play.
Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
Originally posted by YACBros85:
Originally posted by glorydayz:
Originally posted by Dshearn:
Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
Originally posted by glorydayz:
We gave up the 29th overall pick last year and the 29th overall pick this year for Trey Lance.
But it feels like we gave up two #1 overall picks when we talk about the trade. Normally if a person looked at the results and draft picks given up we would look like the winners in that trade taking us from #12 overall all the way back to #29 in back to back years. Problem here is that he wasn't on the field for it.
I hate that trade and this is not an anti TL convo.. not even talking TL.. but the idea of going back 9 picks and giving up the next two years worth of firsts is just dumb.
Pick 12 had some real players there and we could have kept all the ones.
Those picks are around 16 million a year on the cap (12, 29 and 29)
I get the idea of the draft pick being a loss. You simply don't drop that much draft capital into a project under any circumstance......but I do like the trade.
On a team that that has great players you have to make the cap work for the team.
The Trey trade, and the CMC trade (the picks and the players you no longer need because of Trey and CMC) just about pay for CMC.
To me that is win, on a team as talented as the 49ers....I love the idea of trading away 3+ million dollar gambles if you can get great NFL talent that is cost controlled.
That is very well said, this was my train of thought as well.
Agreed. The trade was a cap move as much as it was a need to upgrade the QB position. The fans who say they hate the trade never see the cap savings side of it. It would be completely different if this roster wasn't so stacked.
That's a terrible post / mentality imo. It basically reads like we should give up our first round picks voluntarily as there is a cap charge associated with each pick.
Sure there is a cap charge, but your math is all wrong. Cap hit for a 29th overall player in round one is no where near 16 mil a year what are you talking about? Cole Strange had a cap hit of $2.2 mil last year which is a complete bargain.
Your whole idea is just flat false.
Originally posted by Pillbusta:
That's what Kyle said but not about Jimmy but in general talking about how cheap QBs allows you to build around him
Honestly the only QB worth the huge salary is Pat Mahomes. When you have him you're in the final four annually and likely the Super Bowl. Even with having to win the AFC
Originally posted by Dshearn:
Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
Originally posted by YACBros85:
Originally posted by glorydayz:
Originally posted by Dshearn:
Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
Originally posted by glorydayz:
We gave up the 29th overall pick last year and the 29th overall pick this year for Trey Lance.
But it feels like we gave up two #1 overall picks when we talk about the trade. Normally if a person looked at the results and draft picks given up we would look like the winners in that trade taking us from #12 overall all the way back to #29 in back to back years. Problem here is that he wasn't on the field for it.
I hate that trade and this is not an anti TL convo.. not even talking TL.. but the idea of going back 9 picks and giving up the next two years worth of firsts is just dumb.
Pick 12 had some real players there and we could have kept all the ones.
Those picks are around 16 million a year on the cap (12, 29 and 29)
I get the idea of the draft pick being a loss. You simply don't drop that much draft capital into a project under any circumstance......but I do like the trade.
On a team that that has great players you have to make the cap work for the team.
The Trey trade, and the CMC trade (the picks and the players you no longer need because of Trey and CMC) just about pay for CMC.
To me that is win, on a team as talented as the 49ers....I love the idea of trading away 3+ million dollar gambles if you can get great NFL talent that is cost controlled.
That is very well said, this was my train of thought as well.
Agreed. The trade was a cap move as much as it was a need to upgrade the QB position. The fans who say they hate the trade never see the cap savings side of it. It would be completely different if this roster wasn't so stacked.
That's a terrible post / mentality imo. It basically reads like we should give up our first round picks voluntarily as there is a cap charge associated with each pick.
Sure there is a cap charge, but your math is all wrong. Cap hit for a 29th overall player in round one is no where near 16 mil a year what are you talking about? Cole Strange had a cap hit of $2.2 mil last year which is a complete bargain.
Your whole idea is just flat false.
I was thinking total cap impact of all t three picks
Pick 12 Micah Parsons 5.4m (final year)
Pick 29 Cole Strange 3.9m (final year)
Pick 29 Estimated 4.0m (final year)
3rd Rounder estimated 1.6m (final year)
Raw money is 13.9m
I was unsure of the bonus stuff, so I hedged saying AROUND 16m I could be off on that, It probably would have been more accurate to say around 15m with a give and take of 1m.
Still the point stands. I would rather have CMC.
I would 100% rather package top high salary picks and trade them for proven great NFL talent when possible. I would much rather the Panthers EAT the vast majority of CMCs contract and the 49ers pay a fraction of the cost in exchange for draft picks that are 100% a gamble.
Yeah man, I am totally in on trading picks for proven talent that is heavily cost controlled with the original team eating the signing bonus given the current 49ers team.
Originally posted by YACBros85:
Agreed. The trade was a cap move as much as it was a need to upgrade the QB position. The fans who say they hate the trade never see the cap savings side of it. It would be completely different if this roster wasn't so stacked.
Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
It's not a matter of not seeing the cap saving side of the argument, but more of a matter of prioritizing quality play at the position over cap savings.
It's a nuanced discussion with many angles, but look at the overall picture to this point. You drafted a project player with the plan to sit him for a year behind your costly veteran. Year one resulted in no improvement at the position, no savings at the position, and in fact additional costs. Year two you had savings at the position, but you still paid an expensive amount for insurance at the position and ended up relying on that insurance for a good chunk of the season. Additionally in year two, between those two options, you had no improvement in quality of play at the position.
There was however a significant development in year two, and that was the emergence of Purdy. When he entered you did see improvement at the position. Unfortunately he suffered an extremely serious injury which casts doubt on his future on a variety of fronts.
So entering year 3, the only thing the team has reaped from the Trey Lance trade to this point is a cheaper QB room. You don't have an established QB, which is the most critical position on an NFL roster especially when you're in a Super Bowl window. On top of that, the decisions put you in a position to lose a reliable veteran that you could at least count on for winning play at the position.
This is not an ideal situation to be in given we're in a Super Bowl window. We all want good QB play at bargain prices, but we've only seen one side of that so far. Purdy's emergence is a wild card in the situation... a possible out from the team boxing itself in.
Originally posted by krizay:
Agreed. Patrick Mahomes is the only true "Franchise" quarterback currently in the NFL
Originally posted by genus49:
Originally posted by Bay2Bay9erAllday:
It's a big assumption to think we have two franchise QBs. The way Purdy was playing as a rookie it was looking that way....until the injury. Let's see how he comes back from injury before we assume he's a FQB.
Lance is hopes and prayers until he shows he's capable of being a FQB like Purdy before injury.
It's not hopes and prayers it's just time to get a proper evaluation.
We got no real look at Trey this season, certainly nothing like we got to see with Brock. Unfortunately Brock's 9ish games or Trey's 4ish games are not enough to say franchise QB or not.
I think we have a lot to get excited about with both guys though. Biggest question is staying healthy. Hopefully they do and we get ourselves two studs and hopefully the team picks the better of the two to keep long term.
Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
TLs final year is $10.8 mil.. so we are talking do you want multiple guys at $13.9 (your math) or one guy at $10.8.. I think it's silly to call this some kind of genius cap saving move.. that's not what moving up to get TL was, it was all about landing a FQB or hoping to get one.
Where are the savings, you are talking about a difference of what $3m? And you have to fill out the roster spots, even league minimum type guys are near or at $1m? The financials here are a wash.
Originally posted by NYniner85:
Originally posted by krizay:
Agreed. Patrick Mahomes is the only true "Franchise" quarterback currently in the NFL
Disagree with that
Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
Someone posted giving up firsts in 2022 and 2023 was a cap saving move.. I don't see it and I posted the math post #56200.. silly to give up ones to save money and that's not even what happened we didn't save any money from what I can tell
Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
Originally posted by YACBros85:
Agreed. The trade was a cap move as much as it was a need to upgrade the QB position. The fans who say they hate the trade never see the cap savings side of it. It would be completely different if this roster wasn't so stacked.
It's not a matter of not seeing the cap saving side of the argument, but more of a matter of prioritizing quality play at the position over cap savings.
It's a nuanced discussion with many angles, but look at the overall picture to this point. You drafted a project player with the plan to sit him for a year behind your costly veteran. Year one resulted in no improvement at the position, no savings at the position, and in fact additional costs. Year two you had savings at the position, but you still paid an expensive amount for insurance at the position and ended up relying on that insurance for a good chunk of the season. Additionally in year two, between those two options, you had no improvement in quality of play at the position.
There was however a significant development in year two, and that was the emergence of Purdy. When he entered you did see improvement at the position. Unfortunately he suffered an extremely serious injury which casts doubt on his future on a variety of fronts.
So entering year 3, the only thing the team has reaped from the Trey Lance trade to this point is a cheaper QB room. You don't have an established QB, which is the most critical position on an NFL roster especially when you're in a Super Bowl window. On top of that, the decisions put you in a position to lose a reliable veteran that you could at least count on for winning play at the position.
This is not an ideal situation to be in given we're in a Super Bowl window. We all want good QB play at bargain prices, but we've only seen one side of that so far. Purdy's emergence is a wild card in the situation... a possible out from the team boxing itself in.
Originally posted by Jeepzilla:
If Trey had 9ish games and produced like Brock did, I'm thinking the majority would think/feel/say/claim we have a FQB….
Originally posted by Pillbusta:
Originally posted by Bay2Bay9erAllday:
Let me introduce you to Brock Purdy
We have to beat Jalen Hurts and Pat Mahomes because I just saw the Super Bowl. I wanted Brock to do it this year. He didn't due to injury but those guys are now the standard so I have no problem rolling Trey out there next season as Brock is injured currently
Originally posted by Bay2Bay9erAllday:
Originally posted by CatchMaster80:
Like everyone else, I'm hopeful for Trey but have no idea if he will become a great QB. One thing I know is the value of having a QB that can keep a play alive and hit a receiver downfield while on the move. A QB that can see an opening and run for a critical 1st down. We saw it n the SB. We see it every week. It's something the Niners as a ream haven't had since Kap.
I know there are many things that go into making a successful QB Running isn't even the biggest part. Reading defenses and processing quickly along with a decent arm are more important but having the mobility as well makes the QB much more dangerous. It's what Kyle saw when he moved up and drafted Trey. He knew there were things that Trey would need to learn but he felt he could teach them. You can't teach arm strength and mobility.
Let me introduce you to Brock Purdy
Originally posted by NYniner85:
Originally posted by krizay:
Agreed. Patrick Mahomes is the only true "Franchise" quarterback currently in the NFL
Disagree with that
