clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

An argument against the 49ers acquiring Jamal Adams

New, comments

San Francisco not only has invested a lot in their defense already, but they’d likely have to give up a valuable piece on offense

NFL Pro Bowl Photo by Mark Brown/Getty Images

We’ve made arguments for the San Francisco 49ers acquiring New York Jets All-Pro safety Jamal Adams. One argument I won’t get behind is, “the 49ers were already “first or second in this stat,” so they don’t need Adams. That is not the way to look at a trade. The goal in anything is always to improve, if possible. If the 49ers were to land Adams, they’d be a better football team. One of the biggest arguments against the Niners safeties is they don’t generate turnovers or have ball production. That’s not the case with Adams.

Now it’s time to use logic and argue against the Niners making a move to acquire Adams, starting with the most obvious reasons.

Current money tied into the defense

John Lynch’s philosophy has been clear since he took over as general manager: build through the trenches. The 49ers have invested heavily in the defensive line during Lynch’s tenure. San Francisco just rewarded Arik Armstead, and we’re two or three years away from Nick Bosa becoming the highest-paid defensive player in the NFL. If Javon Kinlaw is as good as we think he’ll be, the Niners 2020 first-round pick will be next in the line of extensions. That’s just one position group.

Fred Warner’s extension won’t be as tricky if the 49ers move on from Kwon Alexander and don’t invest highly into a linebacker. Still, Warner won’t be cheap—especially if he keeps ascending as a player. That extension could come as soon as next offseason.

Now, to the position, Adams plays. In the secondary, the 49ers’ top-four cornerbacks are free agents after this season. In today’s NFL, there’s no way to “hide” a cornerback. Offenses will find you and take full advantage of your weak link. San Francisco won’t be able to “get by” to hand out cheap deals in free agency at one of the most important football positions. If the team decides to bring Richard Sherman back, he’s going to be among the league leaders in average salary at cornerback for at least one or two years.

Yes, the 49ers could save around $4 million if they cut Jaquiski Tartt, but investing over $15 million a season in Adams when you have put so much into your defensive line doesn’t leave a lot of money to go around elsewhere. We haven’t even touched on the other side of the ball, where the team’s two best players by season’s end play. Trent Williams and George Kittle are in line to get paid as well.

You’re going to have to trade away a valuable piece

Several people around the league have hinted at the Cowboys and Eagles being front runners. Tony Pauline of Pro Football Network believes the Jets are interested in acquiring La’El Collins from Dallas, who is their right tackle. Most fans overvalue draft picks. The Jets are looking for upgrades themselves. If they’re stuck on right tackle, would you be willing to trade Mike McGlinchey? He has two more years under contract and would be an instant upgrade over Chuma Edoga. You could likely get a deal done by doing so, but you also create another hole on offense.

We’d now be looking at a right side of Daniel Brunskill at tackle and Tom Compton or Colton McKivitiz at right guard. In this hypothetical, do you include Tartt in the trade? What if the Jets don’t want him? That’s $6.2 million sitting on the bench. The team could release Tartt as previously mentioned, but he’s proved to be too valuable to not get any compensation for.

What are some of your logical arguments against the 49ers acquiring Adams?