Did the 49ers follow the Patriots' blueprint by trading Buckner?

The 49ers may have made the right decision trading Buckner. But did they indeed follow the Patriots’ blueprint?

The 49ers made a shocking, controversial move when they traded one of their best players, DeForest Buckner, for a first-round pick.

Would the Patriots have done the same thing in the 49ers’ shoes?

General manager John Lynch believes he did exactly what the Patriots would have done, as reported by Albert Breer in a fascinating, wide-ranging interview he conducted with Lynch this past weekend.

“(Lynch) raised how New England once let Richard Seymour and Chandler Jones go,” Breer wrote. Which is true. The Patriots traded Seymour to the Raiders in 2009, and traded Jones to the Cardinals in 2016. Both were elite pass rushers.

“As Lynch saw it, the Niners got more than just the 13th pick from the Colts,” Breer reported. “The team could do what looked impossible a few months ago, holding onto both Armstead, at $17 million per year, and emerging safety Jimmie Ward, the team’s 2014 first-round pick, at $9.5 million per, while bringing back depth pieces like Ben Garland, who was (and likely will continue to be) vital on the offensive line, in the wake of Weston Richburg’s injury.”

The 49ers may have made the right decision trading Buckner. I’m not disputing that. But did they indeed follow the Patriots’ blueprint?

Unlikely. Here’s why:

1. The Patriots probably wouldn’t have re-signed Armstead, Ward or Garland.

Trading Buckner allowed the 49ers to keep those three players. But those three might not be the type of players the Patriots would prioritize re-signing.

Garland is a backup center. He’s replaceable. Ward will be 29 next season and hasn’t played a full 16-game schedule since 2015. He isn’t necessarily “emerging.”

And Armstead has had one good season -- 2019. Would the Patriots give $17 million annually to a defensive lineman who’s had just one good season? Probably not. In 2018, the Patriots could have re-signed defensive lineman Trey Flowers, who has had a better, more consistent career than Armstead. But they let Flowers sign with the Lions.

If the Patriots wouldn’t give Flowers a second contract, why would they give one to Armstead?

2. The Patriots traded Seymour when he was 29, not 26.

In his prime, Seymour was as good or better than Buckner. Seymour was the sixth-pick in the draft and a three-time All Pro. And the Patriots still traded him to the Raiders for the 17th pick.

But the Patriots used that pick on an offensive tackle -- Nate Solder. They didn’t trade Seymour for a younger, cheaper defensive tackle, the way the 49ers essentially traded Buckner for Javon Kinlaw. The Patriots traded Seymour for an offensive lineman, because they were transitioning from a defensive team that revolved around Bill Belichick to an offensive team that revolved around Tom Brady.

Also, Seymour was 29 when the Patriots traded him. Buckner is 26. And the Patriots already had given Seymour a hefty contract extension in 2007. They didn’t trade Seymour because he was expensive, the way the 49ers traded Buckner.

The Patriots traded Seymour in 2009 after he had knee surgery. Meaning they traded him because he was old and breaking down. Buckner hasn’t had knee surgery. He’s healthy and durable and young. Hasn’t even reached his prime yet.

3. The Patriots traded Jones after an incident with synthetic marijuana.

The Patriots traded Jones to the Cardinals when he was 26, just before his prime. And Jones has recorded a whopping 60 sacks for the Cardinals the past three seasons.

But there was a reason the Patriots traded Jones. Two months earlier, and just six days before a playoff game against the Chiefs, Jones had to go to the hospital after taking synthetic marijuana. The Patriots generally don’t pay big money to players with drug incidents. So they traded him for a second-round pick, and used it to take another offensive lineman -- guard Joe Thuney.

As far as we know, Buckner never has had a drug incident. The 49ers never had to worry about what he’d do the week before a big game, because he’s a pro, and he performs. He had 1.5 sacks in the Super Bowl.

Buckner also is extremely expensive -- more expensive than some starting quarterbacks. Meaning the 49ers might have been right to trade him, time will tell. It’s comforting for the 49ers to believe they did what the 49ers Patriots would have done. But the 49ers did their own thing, and they should be up front and own it. They didn’t follow the Patriots blueprint. They created their own.