yes, if I were a fins fan and they did this I’d be pissed too. You're absolutely not alone with how you are seeing this trade. It's not that CMC isn't a pro-bowl caliber or at least a very good player. He is. It's more this is bad or at least questionable team building, allocation of resources, and risk management.
Is CMC still a HOF kind of player or is he just very good? I am not sure. I know he's at least very good. PFF has an elusiveness rating which is: (Missed Tackles Forced) / (Designed Run Attempts + Receptions) * (Yards After Contact Per Attempt * 100). Of the running backs with 50 carries CMC ranks 11th out of 41 qualified backs. Future pro-bowler Rham is 2 spots ahead of him
View attachment 56736
We can also track his breakaway runs: Which runners earn the highest (and lowest) % of their yardage on big plays (any designed runs of 15 yards or more).
View attachment 56737
He's 18th. Now look - sure he is playing behind a bad line but plenty of other backs are too. Khalil Herbert for example plays on a run heavy CHI team with a terrible OL and he is tearing it up (relatively small SS). But it's possible with his injuries and age that he isn't the same guy. Still very good but not quite the same. You'd really have to watch his tape to know for sure. I haven't. Have any of you?
No doubt he's going to a great situation in SF. He's going to help this team and Jimmy G needs all the help he can get. If you don't have a good QB you need to surround that QB with a ton of talent. They do have a potential issue on offense though. Instead of trading for OL which might have been harder to do or not even an option they are going to sit pat. Unfortunately right now they are 1 OL injury from being in serious trouble. They don't have a functional center, issues at both guard spots, and next year it gets even scarier. Next year they have 33 guys under the roster and about 27m or so in cap space. They will need to replace their RT, Center, and probably one of their guard spots. They might need to get 3 OL starters alone. Paying 12m for an RB instead of drafting and developing one is an opportunity cost. Those 12m could get you at least 1 offensive line starter.
RBs rarely get healthier. He's hurt both ankles, his hamstring, his thigh, and his shoulder. It's more likely than not as he continues to age he will be an injury risk.
Giving up the equivalent to the 30th overall pick for an RB when you have a tight cap situation, don't have a stable offensive line this year or next year, and you have hardly any quality picks this year is short sighted to me. RB is not a valuable position even if that RB can also run routes from the slot. Do you really want to spend 12m and all those picks on a position you should be drafting and developing and when you need starters and have limited cap space. It's harder to see the future consequences of this move vs "This is a good fit and should be fun to watch" (which is true) but as Ben Baldwin said back in 2019...
They're one running back away from being one running back away
And just think about the allocation of resources here.
For people keeping track they have spent the following picks on the RB position:
They used two of their 4th round picks to trade up for Trey Sermon in 2021.
They used a 6th rounder to draft Elijah Mitchell in 2021.
They used a 3rd round pick to draft Tyrion Davis-Price in 2022.
And now they traded a 2023 2-3-4 and a 2024 5 to get CMC. That's a lot of draft capital for the RB room. Usually the upside when you use that much capital is that you don't have to PAY anyone but here that isn't the case.
To put that into perspective that amount of draft capital for 3 players is equal to about the 11th player in the draft. (remember they got rid of Sermon).
Final edit. I have no issue with draft an RB in the mid to late first and even investing in that position every year or every other year in rounds 3-4 (and sometimes 2). That's fine! Patriots have done that to great success! But the advantage to doing that is you get the most value out of your RBs who are best on their first contract and the bill is small. This is over-investing in the wrong way and it is not an efficient or prudent allocation of resources.