Executives grade trade activity

[Catsfan69]

We lost value on the Cmac trade. 

 

It was stupid

[ForJimmy]

19 minutes ago, Catsfan69 said:

We lost value on the Cmac trade. 

 

It was stupid

Says who?

[Mr. Scot]

3 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

Says who?

No one that works in the NFL, it sounds like...

[ForJimmy]

2 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

No one that works in the NFL, it sounds like...

Yeah it’s just whiney fans who are overly attached to the player. I’ve been there before…

[poundaway]

9 hours ago, LinvilleGorge said:

It ultimately comes down to wins and losses and championships. It looked for years like the Chargers fleeced the Giants in that Eli Manning trade. They got an arguably better QB in Rivers and made good use of that bevy of picks. But at the end of it all, the Giants got two rings out of the deal. So who really won that trade?

 

This.

We can keep trying to feel  better about trading away CMC for what will probably be a low 2nd, 3rd and change.

IDGAF what GMs or "experts" say about the trade.  Shlt, some experts said we won the Darnold trade at the time. 

Lets see what we get with those picks  and what CMC does with the 9ers. So far CMC has a  rushing, receiving and passing TD's in ONE game.

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/news/49ers-christian-mccaffrey-stats-passing-rushing-receiving-td/zv3btetgcj6idnvd2ngrsvmm

And now the 9ers have "cracked" the top ten in power rankings after DEMOLISHING the Rams:

https://www.49ers.com/news/nfl-power-rankings-49ers-crack-top-ten-christian-mccaffrey-rams-sweep

 

 

Edited November 3, 2022 by poundaway

[Basbear]

3 hours ago, Catsfan69 said:

We lost value on the Cmac trade. 

 

It was stupid

 

3 hours ago, ForJimmy said:

Says who?

My main deal with the CMC trade,  we got a OC thats more than likely not going to be here in 23.....the guy that couldnt figure out how to use him, so now just trade him??? that part is fuging dumb. 

Not to say the haul is weak, just the reasons... After two weeks, shanny found out how to use him, fug any madden nerds could do the same....

Edited November 3, 2022 by Basbear

[carpanfan96]

14 hours ago, TheCasillas said:

I was mainly replying to your statement: most of those picks don’t project as starters

As I stated, 2nd and 3rd rounders are projected starters.

Do what??? The success rate (average starter for 4 years) is like 60% in round 1, 50% in round 2, high 30's in round 3 at best depending on position.  An average to good draft gets 1-2 players at best that stick with a team past the rookie contract. 

 

The rate of a 3rd rounder getting a second deal with any team is around 45%. 

Round 2 is 65% to get a second deal. 

21% of all draft picks become average starters or better based on AV. 

2nd and 3rd round picks not being starters and being out of the league in 4 years is more likely than getting a starter from either of those rounds.

I like the McCaffery trade but the averages say those picks probably don't turn into any starters at all. 

Edited November 4, 2022 by carpanfan96

[DaveThePanther2008]

I think Foreman and Hubbard are the key to this trade.  If they can keep the 100+ yards per game going it will make the loss of CMC easier.  I also believe we need to get Foreman under contract for a couple of seasons.

We have three picks in the first two rounds and we need to make them count.  Round 3 could also provide a starter if Fitterer and our staff do a good job.  I have faith we can find 4 starters in the top 3 rounds.  At minimum we need 3 starters from round one and two.

[TheCasillas]

8 hours ago, carpanfan96 said:

Do what??? The success rate (average starter for 4 years) is like 60% in round 1, 50% in round 2, high 30's in round 3 at best depending on position.  An average to good draft gets 1-2 players at best that stick with a team past the rookie contract. 

 

The rate of a 3rd rounder getting a second deal with any team is around 45%. 

Round 2 is 65% to get a second deal. 

21% of all draft picks become average starters or better based on AV. 

2nd and 3rd round picks not being starters and being out of the league in 4 years is more likely than getting a starter from either of those rounds.

I like the McCaffery trade but the averages say those picks probably don't turn into any starters at all. 

I was never speaking to the success rate of draft picks. That’s a whole different conversation.
 

GMs see 1-3 rounds as projected starters when they draft players. They don’t use those picks for “depth.” The success of those picks are not tied to how they view them.

 

you are trying to have a different debate than what I’m stating. I agree with what you posted above, and there have been countless times I’ve posted those stats on this forum over the last decade. However, I am talking about projections and not results.

 

The one thing I’ve learned about the statement you are making here is that the outliers outweigh the norm.

[1of10Charnatives]

On 11/3/2022 at 9:25 AM, Growl said:

projected as starter doesn’t meant staying power as a successful player, you’re looking at roughly a ~35% chance of a player selected in the second and third round becoming a long term player for you

those aren’t bankable numbers and the idea that the “good teams” get 3-4 starters out of every draft has been an enduring myth around here

Number of "starters" on an NFL team (since most people don't think of ST specialists as starters): 22

Avg career length by draft round of NFL players:

1st: 3.7

2nd: 3.3

3rd: 2.8

The majority of long term starters come out of these 3 rounds. That means that by and large teams overhaul their starters about every fourth year on average, given that these numbers work out to a little over 3 collectively. Divide 22 by 4 to determine how many starters a team on average needs to acquire or replace each year and you actually come out with 5.5.

Now we see why almost every team has lower round or UDFA talent finding a way into a starting role, sometimes as an obviously weak stopgap, sometimes better.  Every player who is a solid starter for more than 4 seasons worth of games (this calculation removed games lost to injury to get it's numbers) is contributing to this equation to a greater than expected degree. Every flop makes these numbers worse for his team.

Good teams do indeed need to get 3-4 starters out of every draft, because the numbers show that when you do worse than this, you are forced to start players who haven't really earned it, but you have to put somebody on the field. 

Not naming any names.

Dennis Daley. Michael Scofield. Trent Scott. Greg Little. Matt Kalil. Chris Clark.

And that's just at left tackle.

 

[mav1234]

Some posters are confusing projection of place on a roster when drafted based on scouts perception of a player(such as starter, depth, development) vs long term career success.

2nd and 3rd round picks are not "mid late fluff"... They have a lot of value, both in terms of potential starters based on projections and in trades if we needed to move up etc

[The Natural]

18 hours ago, poundaway said:

This.

We can keep trying to feel  better about trading away CMC for what will probably be a low 2nd, 3rd and change.

IDGAF what GMs or "experts" say about the trade.  Shlt, some experts said we won the Darnold trade at the time. 

Lets see what we get with those picks  and what CMC does with the 9ers. So far CMC has a  rushing, receiving and passing TD's in ONE game.

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/news/49ers-christian-mccaffrey-stats-passing-rushing-receiving-td/zv3btetgcj6idnvd2ngrsvmm

And now the 9ers have "cracked" the top ten in power rankings after DEMOLISHING the Rams:

https://www.49ers.com/news/nfl-power-rankings-49ers-crack-top-ten-christian-mccaffrey-rams-sweep

 

 

What CMC does with the Niners is completely irrelevant. We've built this offensive line to where we can have an effective run game with even average players. We got a huge contract off of our books and gained a bunch of draft picks and our running game hasn't skipped a beat. How is it not a win?

[poundaway]

6 hours ago, The Natural said:

What CMC does with the Niners is completely irrelevant. We've built this offensive line to where we can have an effective run game with even average players. We got a huge contract off of our books and gained a bunch of draft picks and our running game hasn't skipped a beat. How is it not a win?

The better CMC does, the better the 9ers do, the worse our draft picks become.

Its very relevant.

 

Edited November 4, 2022 by poundaway

[Davidson Deac II]

At this point, its all just conjecture. In the end, the value of the trade depends on how CMC does vs what we do with the picks.