There are 211 users in the forums
49ers Offensive Line
Apr 29, 2023 at 4:45 PM
- Predator85
- Veteran
- Posts: 4,563
" No rookie would come in and take Matt Pryor's job"
Apr 29, 2023 at 4:46 PM
- NCommand
- Hall of Fame
- Posts: 123,365
Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
Originally posted by NCommand:You said both those guys sucked anyways so what the f**k are you trying to argue here?
Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by NYniner85:
Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
Originally posted by Cisco0623:
This is a weird hill to die on lol
It was a top 5-10 pass blocking line last year via the metrics depending where you looked. Nothing to die on. I expect a FA added to the mixt and something similar this year.
I was expecting them to add a OT or two. Kinda bummed out given the guys there. I don't think our OL stinks or whatever.
Our OL doesn't suck by any means. It's just going to get punked in the playoffs unless something magical happens. And it could...just playing the odds on the current talent level and who we're likely to face.
Lol what?
Did we improve the right side of the OL? Against the Cowboys, 19 points, 66% pressure rate, only 8 passes past 10 yards. Fortunately, the defense finished that game. The goal was to improve the weakness.
You and 9ers4eva think we improved there after letting MM and Brunskill go?
I'm not Hysterikal here. MM had the best year last year but of course, we know what he and Brunskill are like when the chips are down.
So answer the question. Did we improve over their standard?
Apr 29, 2023 at 4:46 PM
- 9ers4eva
- Veteran
- Posts: 19,333
Originally posted by NCommand:
I didn't detest them. I knew they'd get destroyed in the playoffs when it mattered so the goal was to move on and improve there.
Did we?
I don't know. Taking a tackle at 99 wouldn't make it a yes.
Apr 29, 2023 at 4:49 PM
- 9ers4eva
- Veteran
- Posts: 19,333
Originally posted by NCommand:
You seem so convicted on that. Maybe there was a talented guy there who needed some development and refinement before taking over.
Because you don't find starting tackles outside the top 75 as rooks very often.
Apr 29, 2023 at 4:49 PM
- NCommand
- Hall of Fame
- Posts: 123,365
Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
Originally posted by NCommand:
I didn't detest them. I knew they'd get destroyed in the playoffs when it mattered so the goal was to move on and improve there.
Did we?
I don't know. Taking a tackle at 99 wouldn't make it a yes.
I never said it was a guarantee. But if you never add at least 3rd round talent, you'll never find out. It's 1st or 2nd or 5th-UDFA. And there have been plenty of mid tier talent who became very good. It's NY's whole mantra.
[ Edited by NCommand on Apr 29, 2023 at 4:49 PM ]
Apr 29, 2023 at 4:50 PM
- NCommand
- Hall of Fame
- Posts: 123,365
Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
Originally posted by NCommand:
You seem so convicted on that. Maybe there was a talented guy there who needed some development and refinement before taking over.
Because you don't find starting tackles outside the top 75 as rooks very often.
Yet here you are on the Colton McKivitz 5th round plus 3 years of development train? LOL
Apr 29, 2023 at 4:51 PM
- NCommand
- Hall of Fame
- Posts: 123,365
Originally posted by Predator85:
" No rookie would come in and take Matt Pryor's job"
Apr 29, 2023 at 4:53 PM
- 9ers4eva
- Veteran
- Posts: 19,333
Originally posted by NCommand:
I never said it was a guarantee. But if you never add at least 3rd round talent, you'll never find out. It's 1st or 2nd or 5th-UDFA. And there have been plenty of mid tier talent who became very good. It's NY's whole mantra.
So we need Marcus Martin and Brandon Thomas do we
Apr 29, 2023 at 4:54 PM
- Hoovtrain
- Veteran
- Posts: 32,103
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
Originally posted by NCommand:You said both those guys sucked anyways so what the f**k are you trying to argue here?
Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by NYniner85:
Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
Originally posted by Cisco0623:
This is a weird hill to die on lol
It was a top 5-10 pass blocking line last year via the metrics depending where you looked. Nothing to die on. I expect a FA added to the mixt and something similar this year.
I was expecting them to add a OT or two. Kinda bummed out given the guys there. I don't think our OL stinks or whatever.
Our OL doesn't suck by any means. It's just going to get punked in the playoffs unless something magical happens. And it could...just playing the odds on the current talent level and who we're likely to face.
Lol what?
Did we improve the right side of the OL? Against the Cowboys, 19 points, 66% pressure rate, only 8 passes past 10 yards. Fortunately, the defense finished that game. The goal was to improve the weakness.
You and 9ers4eva think we improved there after letting MM and Brunskill go?
I'm not Hysterikal here. MM had the best year last year but of course, we know what he and Brunskill are like when the chips are down.
So answer the question. Did we improve over their standard?
Don't ask me a question like you are my parent lol. I swear watching you meltdown during FA and the draft is f**king priceless., you should write some strongly worded letters to the FO
Apr 29, 2023 at 4:54 PM
- 9ers4eva
- Veteran
- Posts: 19,333
Originally posted by NCommand:
Yet here you are on the Colton McKivitz 5th round plus 3 years of development train? LOL
And you were on the undrafted Andrew Norwell train. And 6th round twice cut Ryan Jensen train.
BTW where have I advocated starting McKivitz?
Apr 29, 2023 at 4:54 PM
- Fresh49
- Veteran
- Posts: 2,945
Not taking any linemen, at least for depth, to the weakest unit on the team, is concerning to say the least.
Apr 29, 2023 at 4:56 PM
- 9ers4eva
- Veteran
- Posts: 19,333
Originally posted by Fresh49:
Not taking any linemen, at least for depth, to the weakest unit on the team, is concerning to say the least.
Added a 5th round graded prospect as a udfa.
Apr 29, 2023 at 4:59 PM
- dj43
- Moderator
- Posts: 36,483
- NFL Pick 'em
Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
I don't know. Taking a tackle at 99 wouldn't make it a yes.
Everyone said the OL depth this year was weak. I compared the past four years and that assessment seems accurate.
Rd 20 21 - 22 - 23
1 - 5 -- 4 -- 9 -- 5
2 - 7 -- 9 -- 3 -- 7
3 - 7 -- 8 -- 8 -- 3
4 - 6 -- 6 -- 5 - 10
5 - 2 -- 4 -- 4 -- 6
6 - 6 -- 7 - 10 -- 4
7 - 5 -- 4 -- 5 -- 7
________________________
40 -- 42 - 44 - 42
The numbers seem to confirm that the depth this year was a round lower than in prior years. The total in the first two rounds is about the save in aggregate.
For those hoping for a 4th round pick or lower to beef up the OL, history shows the odds of that are not good.
In 2022, there were 13 of 38 Centers picked in the 4th or lower.
13 of the top 60 OGs and 13 of the top 60 OTs. (13 is the lucky number)
All of that to say, the FO probably made the right move not using 4th-round picks or lower to improve the OL. They obviously believe what we have is better than what we could have gotten.
[ Edited by dj43 on Apr 29, 2023 at 5:01 PM ]
Apr 29, 2023 at 5:01 PM
- evil
- Veteran
- Posts: 46,223
- NFL Pick 'em
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by evil:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by evil:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by evil:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Our OL doesn't suck by any means. It's just going to get punked in the playoffs unless something magical happens. And it could...just playing the odds on the current talent level and who we're likely to face., But a guy picked at 99 would prevent that?
At 99 (or 87), there were only a handful of T's and IOL taken. Adding to a talent pool can never hurt (see also, DL, LB, S, WR, etc.).
15 is a little more than a handful last I checked bud.
Given there's 400 OL, yeah, not that deep into the pool. LOL. It certainly didn't stop the other teams from adding.
Last year the 16th, 17th and 18th linemen taken were all drafted in round 3. None played a single OL snap.
So how is taking an OL at 99 going to assure our OL doesn't get punked in the playoffs?
They didn't have Colton McKivitz in front of them.
You didn't answer the question.
So how is taking an OL at 99 going to assure our OL doesn't get punked in the playoffs?
Williams + Banks + Brendel + Burford find cohesion and synergy and raise their standatd of play + a higher talent eventually beats out CM and gets up to speed by the playoffs with the group.
That's usually how it works unless you think CM is a top talent that can't be improved upon.
Assuming you pick the right guy, if there even is one there who will turn out. No guarantees though. We could have done that and the kid busts, or isn't ready in year one or breaks his leg etc.
So picking an OL at 99 doesn't assure the OL doesn't get punked in the playoffs.
Apr 29, 2023 at 5:02 PM
- 9ers4eva
- Veteran
- Posts: 19,333
Originally posted by dj43:
Everyone said the OL depth this year was weak. I compared the past four years and that assessment seems accurate.
Rd 20 21 - 22 - 23
1 - 5 -- 4 -- 9 -- 5
2 - 7 -- 9 -- 3 -- 7
3 - 7 -- 8 -- 8 -- 3
4 - 6 -- 6 -- 5 - 10
5 - 2 -- 4 -- 4 -- 6
6 - 6 -- 7 - 10 -- 4
7 - 5 -- 4 -- 5 -- 7
________________________
40 -- 42 - 44 - 42
The numbers seem to confirm that the depth this year was a round lower than in prior years.
For those hoping for a 4th round pick or lower to beef up the OL, history shows the odds of that are not good.
In 2022, there were 13 of 38 Centers picked in the 4th or lower.
13 of the top 60 OGs and 13 of the top 60 OTs. (13 is the lucky number)
All of that to say, the FO probably made the right move not using 4th-round picks or lower to improve the OL. They obviously believe what we have is better than what we could have gotten.
Data says it all.
Hopefully next year will yield a stronger OL class.