Alex Mack

10 Views | 20 Replies | Last: 3 yr ago by StillABear1
chazzed
How long do you want to ignore this user?
He may be interested in playing his home games in Santa Clara. I hope that he plays and gets another shot at a ring. Whether or not he hangs up his cleats, I wish him well. He is such an outstanding Cal representative.

https://www.si.com/college/cal/news/alex-mack-free-agency?fbclid=IwAR1fBsAUH-0IW5-FJpx73GN3f4UUAeQUEqC9R4DGl7BZOhnvZdEO2HF1UlU
heartofthebear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I hope he comes to SF if only to dispell the ongoing myth that the 49ers are pro-Furd and anti-Cal. Apparently his price tag is reduced. SF would get him at about half the market value for a veteran all-pro center. Richberg, the current SF center who is coming off injury, would fetch around 11 mill. Alex is around 6 mill, according to reports from various podcasters and media. It's hard for me to believe that that Alex will go for that little, but he is in his declining years. I would prefer the 49ers pick up Creed Humphrey (Georgia) or Josh Myers (Ohio St.) in the 2nd round and pay Garland or some other guy that is alot less expensive than Mack.

Either way, the 49ers are in a rubicks cube type of situation with their finances. If they spend on one position, they have to skimp on another. With needs at OL, DB and DL and a chance to upgrade at WR and QB, SF will have to decide which needs get met in FA and which in the draft. They'll need to release some key players in any case. Guys like FB "Juice" and CB Sherman could leave. Often injuried but elite EDGE player Dee Ford is likely gone as well and all of their CBs are UFA.

This off-season could make or break the team for the foreseeable future. The good news is that their NFC competition has their own issues.

New Orleans has an aging roster. Brees is in decline and they are way over the cap. They are unlikely to have a SB worthy roster in the years to come.

Green Bay is in better shape, but they will have to replace Rodgers at some point in the next 5 years and Jordan Love is not the guy. Also, GB tends to make the most head scratching draft day decisions of any team in contention. Finally, RB Jones is going to be looking for a pay day and I'm not sure GB has the money.

Seattle's Wilson is no longer as mobile as he was and his accuracy is slipping. Wilson and the Seahawks are engaged in a war of words over who is at fault. Wilson wants more protection so look for Seattle to bolster the OL this off-season. Or do they bring in a QB for the future? I'm not sure who that would be unless they trade up and they really don't have much in the way of draft picks this draft.

The Rams have pushed all of their chips in to win now. Their window is about 3 years, they watch as they plummet after Stafford starts showing his age.

Arizona has talent but not coaching.

TB will be good as long as Brady continues on his plant based diet, which keeps him ageless. I think TB will be the standard in the NFC for the next 4 years.

Dallas has major financial issues, or will once they resign Prescott, which they have to do to stay functional as a team. Keeping talent around him will be a challenge without the money to do so.

Minnesota might be a team to watch, but QB Cousins will cost Minnesota above 30 mill. against the cap this next few years, crippling their ability to build talent around them. Look for them to try for a QB in the first round of the draft so that they can have a way out of the Cousins contract. As overpriced as Jimmy G. is, Cousins is worse, way worse.

If the 49ers play this off-season right, and don't succumb to pressures to mortgage their future for just one player, SF could build a roster that could have sustained success for the next half decade. The key will be to shop the FA market wisely, getting productive players for under market value and not resigning anybody that is maxing their market value. Where the gaps remain, the draft happens to be deep and talented in most of the same areas where they have needs. So they should do fine there.

Such an approach, along with staying healthier, should get them back on the winning track next season, but I don't expect it will really pay off until 3 or 4 years down the line.

79 Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I hope they don't lose Juszczyk. He really helps the run game. As much as I like Kittle, they may want to test the trade market for him. He is a heckuva player but another one who is often hurt. They could get some real good value in return.
71Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
heartofthebear said:

I hope he comes to SF if only to dispell the ongoing myth that the 49ers are pro-Furd and anti-Cal. Apparently his price tag is reduced. SF would get him at about half the market value for a veteran all-pro center. Richberg, the current SF center who is coming off injury, would fetch around 11 mill. Alex is around 6 mill, according to reports from various podcasters and media. It's hard for me to believe that that Alex will go for that little, but he is in his declining years. I would prefer the 49ers pick up Creed Humphrey (Georgia) or Josh Myers (Ohio St.) in the 2nd round and pay Garland or some other guy that is alot less expensive than Mack.

Either way, the 49ers are in a rubicks cube type of situation with their finances. If they spend on one position, they have to skimp on another. With needs at OL, DB and DL and a chance to upgrade at WR and QB, SF will have to decide which needs get met in FA and which in the draft. They'll need to release some key players in any case. Guys like FB "Juice" and CB Sherman could leave. Often injuried but elite EDGE player Dee Ford is likely gone as well and all of their CBs are UFA.

This off-season could make or break the team for the foreseeable future. The good news is that their NFC competition has their own issues.

New Orleans has an aging roster. Brees is in decline and they are way over the cap. They are unlikely to have a SB worthy roster in the years to come.

Green Bay is in better shape, but they will have to replace Rodgers at some point in the next 5 years and Jordan Love is not the guy. Also, GB tends to make the most head scratching draft day decisions of any team in contention. Finally, RB Jones is going to be looking for a pay day and I'm not sure GB has the money.

Seattle's Wilson is no longer as mobile as he was and his accuracy is slipping. Wilson and the Seahawks are engaged in a war of words over who is at fault. Wilson wants more protection so look for Seattle to bolster the OL this off-season. Or do they bring in a QB for the future? I'm not sure who that would be unless they trade up and they really don't have much in the way of draft picks this draft.

The Rams have pushed all of their chips in to win now. Their window is about 3 years, they watch as they plummet after Stafford starts showing his age.

Arizona has talent but not coaching.

TB will be good as long as Brady continues on his plant based diet, which keeps him ageless. I think TB will be the standard in the NFC for the next 4 years.

Dallas has major financial issues, or will once they resign Prescott, which they have to do to stay functional as a team. Keeping talent around him will be a challenge without the money to do so.

Minnesota might be a team to watch, but QB Cousins will cost Minnesota above 30 mill. against the cap this next few years, crippling their ability to build talent around them. Look for them to try for a QB in the first round of the draft so that they can have a way out of the Cousins contract. As overpriced as Jimmy G. is, Cousins is worse, way worse.

If the 49ers play this off-season right, and don't succumb to pressures to mortgage their future for just one player, SF could build a roster that could have sustained success for the next half decade. The key will be to shop the FA market wisely, getting productive players for under market value and not resigning anybody that is maxing their market value. Where the gaps remain, the draft happens to be deep and talented in most of the same areas where they have needs. So they should do fine there.

Such an approach, along with staying healthier, should get them back on the winning track next season, but I don't expect it will really pay off until 3 or 4 years down the line.


Resign Williams, Verrett and Juice. Sign Mack and draft an OG. Don't try to retain Ford, Richburg and Sherman. Oh, and trade for Watson.....

There you are - an easy to-do list. Accomplish that and a sixth Lombardi is within reach.....
heartofthebear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
71Bear said:

heartofthebear said:

I hope he comes to SF if only to dispell the ongoing myth that the 49ers are pro-Furd and anti-Cal. Apparently his price tag is reduced. SF would get him at about half the market value for a veteran all-pro center. Richberg, the current SF center who is coming off injury, would fetch around 11 mill. Alex is around 6 mill, according to reports from various podcasters and media. It's hard for me to believe that that Alex will go for that little, but he is in his declining years. I would prefer the 49ers pick up Creed Humphrey (Georgia) or Josh Myers (Ohio St.) in the 2nd round and pay Garland or some other guy that is alot less expensive than Mack.

Either way, the 49ers are in a rubicks cube type of situation with their finances. If they spend on one position, they have to skimp on another. With needs at OL, DB and DL and a chance to upgrade at WR and QB, SF will have to decide which needs get met in FA and which in the draft. They'll need to release some key players in any case. Guys like FB "Juice" and CB Sherman could leave. Often injuried but elite EDGE player Dee Ford is likely gone as well and all of their CBs are UFA.

This off-season could make or break the team for the foreseeable future. The good news is that their NFC competition has their own issues.

New Orleans has an aging roster. Brees is in decline and they are way over the cap. They are unlikely to have a SB worthy roster in the years to come.

Green Bay is in better shape, but they will have to replace Rodgers at some point in the next 5 years and Jordan Love is not the guy. Also, GB tends to make the most head scratching draft day decisions of any team in contention. Finally, RB Jones is going to be looking for a pay day and I'm not sure GB has the money.

Seattle's Wilson is no longer as mobile as he was and his accuracy is slipping. Wilson and the Seahawks are engaged in a war of words over who is at fault. Wilson wants more protection so look for Seattle to bolster the OL this off-season. Or do they bring in a QB for the future? I'm not sure who that would be unless they trade up and they really don't have much in the way of draft picks this draft.

The Rams have pushed all of their chips in to win now. Their window is about 3 years, they watch as they plummet after Stafford starts showing his age.

Arizona has talent but not coaching.

TB will be good as long as Brady continues on his plant based diet, which keeps him ageless. I think TB will be the standard in the NFC for the next 4 years.

Dallas has major financial issues, or will once they resign Prescott, which they have to do to stay functional as a team. Keeping talent around him will be a challenge without the money to do so.

Minnesota might be a team to watch, but QB Cousins will cost Minnesota above 30 mill. against the cap this next few years, crippling their ability to build talent around them. Look for them to try for a QB in the first round of the draft so that they can have a way out of the Cousins contract. As overpriced as Jimmy G. is, Cousins is worse, way worse.

If the 49ers play this off-season right, and don't succumb to pressures to mortgage their future for just one player, SF could build a roster that could have sustained success for the next half decade. The key will be to shop the FA market wisely, getting productive players for under market value and not resigning anybody that is maxing their market value. Where the gaps remain, the draft happens to be deep and talented in most of the same areas where they have needs. So they should do fine there.

Such an approach, along with staying healthier, should get them back on the winning track next season, but I don't expect it will really pay off until 3 or 4 years down the line.


Resign Williams, Verrett and Juice. Sign Mack and draft an OG. Don't try to retain Ford, Richburg and Sherman. Oh, and trade for Watson.....

There you are - an easy to-do list. Accomplish that and a sixth Lombardi is within reach.....
I more or less agree. But I don't think we can afford Watson and Williams at the same time and I'm not sure what Watson's final price will be. There will be a bidding war. I'm not sure I agree with signing big name talents when there are other options. There are other options at QB and at OT.
71Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
heartofthebear said:

71Bear said:

heartofthebear said:

I hope he comes to SF if only to dispell the ongoing myth that the 49ers are pro-Furd and anti-Cal. Apparently his price tag is reduced. SF would get him at about half the market value for a veteran all-pro center. Richberg, the current SF center who is coming off injury, would fetch around 11 mill. Alex is around 6 mill, according to reports from various podcasters and media. It's hard for me to believe that that Alex will go for that little, but he is in his declining years. I would prefer the 49ers pick up Creed Humphrey (Georgia) or Josh Myers (Ohio St.) in the 2nd round and pay Garland or some other guy that is alot less expensive than Mack.

Either way, the 49ers are in a rubicks cube type of situation with their finances. If they spend on one position, they have to skimp on another. With needs at OL, DB and DL and a chance to upgrade at WR and QB, SF will have to decide which needs get met in FA and which in the draft. They'll need to release some key players in any case. Guys like FB "Juice" and CB Sherman could leave. Often injuried but elite EDGE player Dee Ford is likely gone as well and all of their CBs are UFA.

This off-season could make or break the team for the foreseeable future. The good news is that their NFC competition has their own issues.

New Orleans has an aging roster. Brees is in decline and they are way over the cap. They are unlikely to have a SB worthy roster in the years to come.

Green Bay is in better shape, but they will have to replace Rodgers at some point in the next 5 years and Jordan Love is not the guy. Also, GB tends to make the most head scratching draft day decisions of any team in contention. Finally, RB Jones is going to be looking for a pay day and I'm not sure GB has the money.

Seattle's Wilson is no longer as mobile as he was and his accuracy is slipping. Wilson and the Seahawks are engaged in a war of words over who is at fault. Wilson wants more protection so look for Seattle to bolster the OL this off-season. Or do they bring in a QB for the future? I'm not sure who that would be unless they trade up and they really don't have much in the way of draft picks this draft.

The Rams have pushed all of their chips in to win now. Their window is about 3 years, they watch as they plummet after Stafford starts showing his age.

Arizona has talent but not coaching.

TB will be good as long as Brady continues on his plant based diet, which keeps him ageless. I think TB will be the standard in the NFC for the next 4 years.

Dallas has major financial issues, or will once they resign Prescott, which they have to do to stay functional as a team. Keeping talent around him will be a challenge without the money to do so.

Minnesota might be a team to watch, but QB Cousins will cost Minnesota above 30 mill. against the cap this next few years, crippling their ability to build talent around them. Look for them to try for a QB in the first round of the draft so that they can have a way out of the Cousins contract. As overpriced as Jimmy G. is, Cousins is worse, way worse.

If the 49ers play this off-season right, and don't succumb to pressures to mortgage their future for just one player, SF could build a roster that could have sustained success for the next half decade. The key will be to shop the FA market wisely, getting productive players for under market value and not resigning anybody that is maxing their market value. Where the gaps remain, the draft happens to be deep and talented in most of the same areas where they have needs. So they should do fine there.

Such an approach, along with staying healthier, should get them back on the winning track next season, but I don't expect it will really pay off until 3 or 4 years down the line.


Resign Williams, Verrett and Juice. Sign Mack and draft an OG. Don't try to retain Ford, Richburg and Sherman. Oh, and trade for Watson.....

There you are - an easy to-do list. Accomplish that and a sixth Lombardi is within reach.....
I more or less agree. But I don't think we can afford Watson and Williams at the same time and I'm not sure what Watson's final price will be. There will be a bidding war. I'm not sure I agree with signing big name talents when there are other options. There are other options at QB and at OT.
Since Watson is under contract, he would come at a small financial price in 2021- roughly $10 million (subsequent years would be much more expensive). Assuming SF would either trade or cut Jimmy G. if they were to acquire Watson, the Niners would come out ahead for one season on the switch by about $10-15 million. However, the cost in draft choices and players on the existing roster would be quite steep.

As noted, Williams is all about money since he is a free agent. Much of his first year salary with SF would be paid with the dollars saved in the Watson/Garrapolo switch.
Golden One
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Agree. Much more sensible for the Niners to draft a QB (even in the first round) and develop him while Jimmy G continues to start. Not worth giving away the store for Watson.
heartofthebear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
71Bear said:

heartofthebear said:

71Bear said:

heartofthebear said:

I hope he comes to SF if only to dispell the ongoing myth that the 49ers are pro-Furd and anti-Cal. Apparently his price tag is reduced. SF would get him at about half the market value for a veteran all-pro center. Richberg, the current SF center who is coming off injury, would fetch around 11 mill. Alex is around 6 mill, according to reports from various podcasters and media. It's hard for me to believe that that Alex will go for that little, but he is in his declining years. I would prefer the 49ers pick up Creed Humphrey (Georgia) or Josh Myers (Ohio St.) in the 2nd round and pay Garland or some other guy that is alot less expensive than Mack.

Either way, the 49ers are in a rubicks cube type of situation with their finances. If they spend on one position, they have to skimp on another. With needs at OL, DB and DL and a chance to upgrade at WR and QB, SF will have to decide which needs get met in FA and which in the draft. They'll need to release some key players in any case. Guys like FB "Juice" and CB Sherman could leave. Often injuried but elite EDGE player Dee Ford is likely gone as well and all of their CBs are UFA.

This off-season could make or break the team for the foreseeable future. The good news is that their NFC competition has their own issues.

New Orleans has an aging roster. Brees is in decline and they are way over the cap. They are unlikely to have a SB worthy roster in the years to come.

Green Bay is in better shape, but they will have to replace Rodgers at some point in the next 5 years and Jordan Love is not the guy. Also, GB tends to make the most head scratching draft day decisions of any team in contention. Finally, RB Jones is going to be looking for a pay day and I'm not sure GB has the money.

Seattle's Wilson is no longer as mobile as he was and his accuracy is slipping. Wilson and the Seahawks are engaged in a war of words over who is at fault. Wilson wants more protection so look for Seattle to bolster the OL this off-season. Or do they bring in a QB for the future? I'm not sure who that would be unless they trade up and they really don't have much in the way of draft picks this draft.

The Rams have pushed all of their chips in to win now. Their window is about 3 years, they watch as they plummet after Stafford starts showing his age.

Arizona has talent but not coaching.

TB will be good as long as Brady continues on his plant based diet, which keeps him ageless. I think TB will be the standard in the NFC for the next 4 years.

Dallas has major financial issues, or will once they resign Prescott, which they have to do to stay functional as a team. Keeping talent around him will be a challenge without the money to do so.

Minnesota might be a team to watch, but QB Cousins will cost Minnesota above 30 mill. against the cap this next few years, crippling their ability to build talent around them. Look for them to try for a QB in the first round of the draft so that they can have a way out of the Cousins contract. As overpriced as Jimmy G. is, Cousins is worse, way worse.

If the 49ers play this off-season right, and don't succumb to pressures to mortgage their future for just one player, SF could build a roster that could have sustained success for the next half decade. The key will be to shop the FA market wisely, getting productive players for under market value and not resigning anybody that is maxing their market value. Where the gaps remain, the draft happens to be deep and talented in most of the same areas where they have needs. So they should do fine there.

Such an approach, along with staying healthier, should get them back on the winning track next season, but I don't expect it will really pay off until 3 or 4 years down the line.


Resign Williams, Verrett and Juice. Sign Mack and draft an OG. Don't try to retain Ford, Richburg and Sherman. Oh, and trade for Watson.....

There you are - an easy to-do list. Accomplish that and a sixth Lombardi is within reach.....
I more or less agree. But I don't think we can afford Watson and Williams at the same time and I'm not sure what Watson's final price will be. There will be a bidding war. I'm not sure I agree with signing big name talents when there are other options. There are other options at QB and at OT.
Since Watson is under contract, he would come at a small financial price in 2021- roughly $10 million (subsequent years would be much more expensive). Assuming SF would either trade or cut Jimmy G. if they were to acquire Watson, the Niners would come out ahead for one season on the switch by about $10-15 million. However, the cost in draft choices and players on the existing roster would be quite steep.

As noted, Williams is all about money since he is a free agent. Much of his first year salary with SF would be paid with the dollars saved in the Watson/Garrapolo switch.
  • The 49ers have 20.5 mill cap space. currently
  • I expect them to add to that by releasing or not resigning certain players
  • If they release Ford and Richburg they reclaim an additional 32 mill for a total of 52.5 mill.
  • With the 52.5 they would then need to sign at least 3 DBs, 3 OLs and a DL.
  • They also need to upgrade at DE, which costs more and they need to resign FB Juice.
  • If they sign OT Williams, they will use a third of that and will now be at around 34+ mill.
  • If they release Garapolo and sign Watson, they will save around 10.5 mill. for 2021 putting them back at around 45 mill.
  • They would then need to sign Verrett, Juice, Emmanuel Mosley, Brunskill and DJ Jones (those are the pretty much the most affordable and valuable 49ers to resign). Total pricetag is 27 mill.
  • Now you still need 1 more OL, 1 more DB, and a DE with 18 mill. left. And those guys need to be upgrades.
  • I guess we could resign Tartt for 8 mill., get Von Miller for 10 and get an OL with our 3rd round compensatory pick and release a couple of cheap players in order to sign him.

That leaves our roster rather thin and we have no future because, in 2022, we'll have to cut some more people in order to continue to pay Watson. Watson's cap hit will be $25 mill more for 2022 and 2023. Additionally the 49ers will have few draft picks to use in order to replace the cut players. And even draft picks cost money to sign. So how are you going to sign them?

Even in 2021, the talent and depth will be less at RB, CB, and OL because you won't sign Garland, Witherspoon, Coleman. The depth at WR will continue to be an issue.

Grasu and Compton will no longer be available at OL
Blair, Ansah, Willis, Jordan and Hyder will no longer be available at DL
K'Waun Williams will no longer be available at NB

As GM, you don't build an organization for a 1 year run. You build to be competitive for several years.
Which would be impossible if you put so much capital into 2 players (Williams and Watson).

Maybe we have different interests. As a fan, I would rather follow a team that is in the mix for the better part of a decade than a team that wins the super bowl one year and is marginal, at best, the rest of the time. And I think it is unreasonable to expect Lynch and Shannahan to feel any differently.
heartofthebear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A better idea would be to
  • release Ford and McGlinchy.
  • This would put SF at 46 mill to play with.
  • With that sign Brunskill, Juice, Verret, Mosley, Jones, Hyder and Dwelley for about 30 mill.
  • Sign Mack for 6 mill.
  • Sign a FA safety for 5 mill
  • Sign a FA CB for 4 mill
  • Get a really good OT, CB and DE in the draft by trading down.
  • Release other marginal players (ie. Jennings, Griffith, Daniels, Edwards, Shepley, Alexander, Walter) as needed in order to sign draft picks.
The point is that this is not the draft to lose out on. The draft is perfectly set up for SF to make a killing for now and into the future. The reasons for that are:

  • SF has 10 picks.
  • SFs needs are similar to the talent and depth in the draft. The draft is deep at CB, OL, RB and WR
  • There are teams that are desperate for a QB and would be pay a lot of draft capital for the #12 pick. SF could gain even more picks by trading down in the first round.
  • If SF trades down with a team like the Jets, Washington, Minnesota, Miami or Jacksonville, they could pick up enough picks in the first 3 rounds to land enough talent to meet their needs at OL, DB and WR.
  • While 1st round picks can be just as expensive as free agents, the lower round picks are more affordable.
  • There will be a lot of talent still available on the board even in the 5th round this year. SF could clean up and still be within budget.
  • If the 49ers strategize right in the draft, they could land 2 starting OLs, 2 starting DBs, an upgrade at WR depth, an upgrade at DE depth, a decent RB, a QB that can compete for a roster spot and a serviceable S. That is a way greater value than whatever Watson can give us.
chazzed
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Getting back on track, Mack will probably be the best center to come out of Cal for many more years.
71Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
chazzed said:

Getting back on track, Mack will probably be the best center to come out of Cal for many more years.
He was a generational talent. Pretty good for a 2 star 'rassler from Santa Barbara....
chazzed
How long do you want to ignore this user?
71Bear said:

chazzed said:

Getting back on track, Mack will probably be the best center to come out of Cal for many more years.
He was a generational talent. Pretty good for a 2 star 'rassler from Santa Barbara....


Yeah, that 2-star rating is nuts. Was it because he was relatively new to the sport? A late bloomer? I know that he was unconventional, going to the ground often (as would be expected from a wrestler).
71Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
chazzed said:

71Bear said:

chazzed said:

Getting back on track, Mack will probably be the best center to come out of Cal for many more years.
He was a generational talent. Pretty good for a 2 star 'rassler from Santa Barbara....


Yeah, that 2-star rating is nuts. Was it because he was relatively new to the sport? A late bloomer? I know that he was unconventional, going to the ground often (as would be expected from a wrestler).
In those days, recruiting ratings were not nearly as sophisticated as they are today. A kid from Santa Barbara could easily be overlooked (as Mack was) because he came from an area not known to produce big time talent.
heartofthebear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
71Bear said:

chazzed said:

71Bear said:

chazzed said:

Getting back on track, Mack will probably be the best center to come out of Cal for many more years.
He was a generational talent. Pretty good for a 2 star 'rassler from Santa Barbara....


Yeah, that 2-star rating is nuts. Was it because he was relatively new to the sport? A late bloomer? I know that he was unconventional, going to the ground often (as would be expected from a wrestler).
In those days, recruiting ratings were not nearly as sophisticated as they are today. A kid from Santa Barbara could easily be overlooked (as Mack was) because he came from an area not known to produce big time talent.
Rating agencies are better than they were for sure but there are still huge biases.
If you play the game and go to the camps and do the 7 on 7s and all of that stuff, the agencies will inflate your rating. Also, if you are from certain areas and schools you get hyped more and that can draw attention and ratings.

A guy who played at De La Salle is more likely to get a better rating than a guy from Berkeley High regardless of actual talent or measurables.
71Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
heartofthebear said:

71Bear said:

chazzed said:

71Bear said:

chazzed said:

Getting back on track, Mack will probably be the best center to come out of Cal for many more years.
He was a generational talent. Pretty good for a 2 star 'rassler from Santa Barbara....


Yeah, that 2-star rating is nuts. Was it because he was relatively new to the sport? A late bloomer? I know that he was unconventional, going to the ground often (as would be expected from a wrestler).
In those days, recruiting ratings were not nearly as sophisticated as they are today. A kid from Santa Barbara could easily be overlooked (as Mack was) because he came from an area not known to produce big time talent.
Rating agencies are better than they were for sure but there are still huge biases.
If you play the game and go to the camps and do the 7 on 7s and all of that stuff, the agencies will inflate your rating. Also, if you are from certain areas and schools you get hyped more and that can draw attention and ratings.

A guy who played at De La Salle is more likely to get a better rating than a guy from Berkeley High regardless of actual talent or measurables.
I disagree with your last sentence. Recently, there was a kid from a public high school in eastern Contra Costa County that received the attention of the recruiting services. In fact, he was probably underrated as a five star....

In this era, if a guy is worthy of a high rating, the services will find him no matter where he is from.

71Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
heartofthebear said:

A better idea would be to
  • release Ford and McGlinchy.
  • This would put SF at 46 mill to play with.
  • With that sign Brunskill, Juice, Verret, Mosley, Jones, Hyder and Dwelley for about 30 mill.
  • Sign Mack for 6 mill.
  • Sign a FA safety for 5 mill
  • Sign a FA CB for 4 mill
  • Get a really good OT, CB and DE in the draft by trading down.
  • Release other marginal players (ie. Jennings, Griffith, Daniels, Edwards, Shepley, Alexander, Walter) as needed in order to sign draft picks.
The point is that this is not the draft to lose out on. The draft is perfectly set up for SF to make a killing for now and into the future. The reasons for that are:

  • SF has 10 picks.
  • SFs needs are similar to the talent and depth in the draft. The draft is deep at CB, OL, RB and WR
  • There are teams that are desperate for a QB and would be pay a lot of draft capital for the #12 pick. SF could gain even more picks by trading down in the first round.
  • If SF trades down with a team like the Jets, Washington, Minnesota, Miami or Jacksonville, they could pick up enough picks in the first 3 rounds to land enough talent to meet their needs at OL, DB and WR.
  • While 1st round picks can be just as expensive as free agents, the lower round picks are more affordable.
  • There will be a lot of talent still available on the board even in the 5th round this year. SF could clean up and still be within budget.
  • If the 49ers strategize right in the draft, they could land 2 starting OLs, 2 starting DBs, an upgrade at WR depth, an upgrade at DE depth, a decent RB, a QB that can compete for a roster spot and a serviceable S. That is a way greater value than whatever Watson can give us.

Lots to think about there...

My initial reaction would be that it makes no sense to let McGlinchey go because a) he is on a team friendly rookie contact; b) he is a premier run blocker; c) although his pass blocking needs a lot of work, he is capable of learning and improving. First, he needs to bulk up.
helltopay1
How long do you want to ignore this user?
trade back in both rounds #1 and#2. very deep draft. Lynch/shanahan have had a history of choosing very poorly in rounds 1 and 2 in recent years. not sure how to identify thge problem...Therefore, trade back and maximize your darts. .
helltopay1
How long do you want to ignore this user?
mack may be take a home-discount since he is from Santa Barbara. he wants to come here...Make it happen. OL in round 2 is a possibility. also, round 1. Edge rusher is also a posibility in round 2.
heartofthebear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
71Bear said:

heartofthebear said:

A better idea would be to
  • release Ford and McGlinchy.
  • This would put SF at 46 mill to play with.
  • With that sign Brunskill, Juice, Verret, Mosley, Jones, Hyder and Dwelley for about 30 mill.
  • Sign Mack for 6 mill.
  • Sign a FA safety for 5 mill
  • Sign a FA CB for 4 mill
  • Get a really good OT, CB and DE in the draft by trading down.
  • Release other marginal players (ie. Jennings, Griffith, Daniels, Edwards, Shepley, Alexander, Walter) as needed in order to sign draft picks.
The point is that this is not the draft to lose out on. The draft is perfectly set up for SF to make a killing for now and into the future. The reasons for that are:

  • SF has 10 picks.
  • SFs needs are similar to the talent and depth in the draft. The draft is deep at CB, OL, RB and WR
  • There are teams that are desperate for a QB and would be pay a lot of draft capital for the #12 pick. SF could gain even more picks by trading down in the first round.
  • If SF trades down with a team like the Jets, Washington, Minnesota, Miami or Jacksonville, they could pick up enough picks in the first 3 rounds to land enough talent to meet their needs at OL, DB and WR.
  • While 1st round picks can be just as expensive as free agents, the lower round picks are more affordable.
  • There will be a lot of talent still available on the board even in the 5th round this year. SF could clean up and still be within budget.
  • If the 49ers strategize right in the draft, they could land 2 starting OLs, 2 starting DBs, an upgrade at WR depth, an upgrade at DE depth, a decent RB, a QB that can compete for a roster spot and a serviceable S. That is a way greater value than whatever Watson can give us.

Lots to think about there...

My initial reaction would be that it makes no sense to let McGlinchey go because a) he is on a team friendly rookie contact; b) he is a premier run blocker; c) although his pass blocking needs a lot of work, he is capable of learning and improving. First, he needs to bulk up.
McGlinchy is not improving. Yes, he is only 6 mill, but you can replace him for that. And since when is it acceptable to have a pro OT that does not pass block just because they run block well. There are about 10 OTs in the draft that do both at a high level. I particularly like Darrisaw, Cosmi or Slater. They aren't going to be any more expensive than Mike.
SmellinRoses
How long do you want to ignore this user?
heartofthebear said:

71Bear said:

chazzed said:

71Bear said:

chazzed said:

Getting back on track, Mack will probably be the best center to come out of Cal for many more years.
He was a generational talent. Pretty good for a 2 star 'rassler from Santa Barbara....


Yeah, that 2-star rating is nuts. Was it because he was relatively new to the sport? A late bloomer? I know that he was unconventional, going to the ground often (as would be expected from a wrestler).
In those days, recruiting ratings were not nearly as sophisticated as they are today. A kid from Santa Barbara could easily be overlooked (as Mack was) because he came from an area not known to produce big time talent.
Rating agencies are better than they were for sure but there are still huge biases.
If you play the game and go to the camps and do the 7 on 7s and all of that stuff, the agencies will inflate your rating. Also, if you are from certain areas and schools you get hyped more and that can draw attention and ratings.

A guy who played at De La Salle is more likely to get a better rating than a guy from Berkeley High regardless of actual talent or measurables.
Very true.
BubbaBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Randall Cunningham was from Santa Barbara high.
StillABear1
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BubbaBear said:

Randall Cunningham was from Santa Barbara high.


And Sam the Bam Cunningham, Jamal Wilkes and Baseball HOFer Eddie Mathews among others.

Alex Mack went to San Marcos HS I believe not SBHS, which serves SB and parts of Goleta along with Dos Pueblos
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.