Revisiting the CMC Trade

[ECHornet]

59 minutes ago, Ivan The Awesome said:

I think those CMC picks will help get the most important piece to this puzzle. The next QB. Unfortunately that's how this cookie had to crumble. 

Wouldn’t that be the best win-win trade of all time.

SF wins 14 straight and the Super Bowl then we use those picks to trade up & find a franchise QB who leads us to our first Super Bowl. 

[Dave Gettleman's Shorts]

CMC went to team that knew how to scheme and utilize him unlike in Carolina were the game plan was 20 HB dives up the middle until his wheels fell off by week 3

[Wundrbread33]

1 hour ago, Ivan The Awesome said:

I think the point of the "RB aren't value positions" is being misconstrued. It's not that it isn't of value, it's that it's easy to replace. Foreman...for example. Replaced CMC and almost willed us to a playoff berth. 

 

You can get a decent back in the mid or late rounds or get someone off the street to perform well or better that expected. Hence why the value isn't as high as say a CB, QB, DE, LT, etc. 

 

The picks we got for CMC, no one else would have given up what the niners did. If there were other teams willing to give up all that, then you'd have a bidding war for CMC, which never happened. 

CMC is so much more than a dime a dozen runningback. He’s one of the most dynamic weapons in the league, and is just as good a receiver as a runner. 

Therefore he isn’t just a “RB”

Foreman was able to replace CMC because of the way our dumbass coordinator was using CMC. 
 

Used properly (like he is now) he is just as much of a difference maker as any top playmaker in the league. 
 

Injury is the only way he isn’t in the hall when he hangs the cleats up. 

[Wundrbread33]

I think what’s misconstrued is calling CMC a runningback. 
 

Instead, he’s a player you can line up anywhere, and he will be better than the defender the majority of the time. 

[pantherj]

I don't want any highly expensive RB on the roster. Period. The best time to have a RB is when he's young and healthy. I was totally ok with the CMC trade, but not trading Burns was criminal. Then he did absolutely nothing in our critical must win TB game to make the playoffs. Painful.

CMC gave us his best years body-wise, and we won't be on the hook to pay the big money later in his career. Win. The players we draft with the picks won't be as good as CMC of course, but consider the cap space we've opened up. Excellent.

Edited January 28, 2023 by pantherj

[4Corners]

Wish him the best. Make the draft picks count. Move on people. He left amicably and it was probably best for both parties he was traded. 

[JawnyBlaze]

18 minutes ago, ECHornet said:

Wouldn’t that be the best win-win trade of all time.

SF wins 14 straight and the Super Bowl then we use those picks to trade up & find a franchise QB who leads us to our first Super Bowl. 

From your fingers to God’s ear

[Sean Payton's Vicodin]

It was a W for the 49ers now its up to the Panthers to make it a W for themselves.

[SmokinwithWilly]

Watching CMC line up out wide multiple times a game makes me hate how pathetic our OCs have been. Ask Madden would have provided a more explosive offense. 

[Wolfcop]

1 hour ago, Ivan The Awesome said:

I think those CMC picks will help get the most important piece to this puzzle. The next QB. Unfortunately that's how this cookie had to crumble. 

This is why it had to happen. If we get Young or Stroud, it’s because of that trade.

[The Natural]

At some point you've gotta move on. It was a win-win trade.

[Ricky Spanish]

C. McCaffrey - 1880 Total Yards, 13 Total TDs, 4.7 yd/att, 8.7 yd/catch, $11.8 Million salary

Travis Etienne - 1441 Total Yards, 5 Total TDs, 5.1 yd/att, 9.0 yd/catch, $1.8 Million Salary

CMC had the better season yes, but Etienne had a good year for 1/6th the cost. Was CMC's season 6x better than Etienne's? I don't think it was.

What is the more cost effective asset here?

Of course CMC is elite. Everyone knows this. But you don't need an elite RB in today's NFL to get 85% of the same output for a fraction of the cost.

[XClown1986]

McCaffrey is a talent. A stud. He may have a Marshall Faulk esque career in San Fran. But... Without a franchise quarterback... He is on a Barry Sanders trajectory, not Emmitt Smith. A running back can't win a Superbowl alone. He can help. He can be a threat. But facts are facts. RBs are paid the least and have the shortest careers of any position group because they get beat up. He was a luxury. But if we are able to flip two or 3 picks we got for CMac in a package to get a franchise QB? We win the trade. Hands down.

Edited January 28, 2023 by XClown1986

[CPantherKing]

42 minutes ago, Ivan The Awesome said:

I think the point of the "RB aren't value positions" is being misconstrued. It's not that it isn't of value, it's that it's easy to replace. Foreman...for example. Replaced CMC and almost willed us to a playoff berth. 

 

You can get a decent back in the mid or late rounds or get someone off the street to perform well or better that expected. Hence why the value isn't as high as say a CB, QB, DE, LT, etc. 

 

The picks we got for CMC, no one else would have given up what the niners did. If there were other teams willing to give up all that, then you'd have a bidding war for CMC, which never happened. 

Foreman did not replace CMC or will the Panthers to the door step of the playoffs (he disappeared in 36.4% of his games this season). Losing CMC hurt. Replacing Elf with Bozeman was the big boost to the run blocking up the middle. You never want to lose an elite receiving RB. Foreman is easily replaceable. A CMC or Faulk type RB is not. This is mediocre team thinking. Championship level discussion includes making sure you have a receiving threat coming out of the backfield that can run between the tackles at RB in today's NFL offense.