Niners Trade for #3 Pick

Zososoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 30, 2009
6,477
South of North
Nope, you're not.
I was also confused by everyone wanting JG back. He's had one full season where he was very good. Everything beyond that is projection. I will say however, that the logic in this thread about JG being their best option for this year does ring true. It also makes a ton of sense to me why they would want a chance to draft a guy in this QB class in case JG gets hurt, underperforms, and in any event for next year and beyond.
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
11,618
I was also confused by everyone wanting JG back. He's had one full season where he was very good. Everything beyond that is projection. I will say however, that the logic in this thread about JG being their best option for this year does ring true. It also makes a ton of sense to me why they would want a chance to draft a guy in this QB class in case JG gets hurt, underperforms, and in any event for next year and beyond.
At its simplest version:

JG > Cam

That's alot of what people are seeing. The Pat's made a ton of roster moves, people are excited to be competitive, and many people feel that Cam isnt a SB level quarterback anymore.

I'm of the opinion that he doesnt represent much of an upgrade. While hes a better QB, this offense was built for a player with Cams strengths. Power running, big bodies to throw to, RPO and play action out the ass. Frankly, its build like a Madden team.

That aside, JG is still owed $25m. I cant imagine - based on his injury history and average success on the field - that he'd be willing to forfeit that for a chance to start elsewhere. He can wait a year, collect $25m, and give it a go in free agency next year. Hes not going to take a paycut, and I see very little value in extending him/pushing his cap into future years when we still, four full seasons later, have no idea if hes worth building around.

JG makes very little sense to me.
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I was an early advocate for Jimmy G, mostly because of his familiarity with the system. But now, I only see a path to the Pats that involves getting cut between the draft and training camp. Otherwise, the money simply doesn't make sense.

I am now hoping (at least today, I reserve the right to change my mind multiple times between now and the draft) that the Pats trade up to get a QB.
 

bsj

Renegade Crazed Genius
SoSH Member
Dec 6, 2003
20,484
Central NJ SoSH Chapter
I wanted JG before and I still want him to an extent. He is an upgrade over cam and playing with cam could be an interesting package. That said I feel like a lot of the media types who thought he would be a good fit now are saying he isn’t merely because it seems less likely to happen.

However I will concede I wanted him under the right circumstance and I agree it looks less right now than it did before because of the cap situation.

now I think the general consensus is that the best fit is a highly rated rookie in this years draft that cam can groom for a year.

that to me isnt a round 3 guy. But I just worry they won’t have the desire to spend the capital needed to really go up and get a top 5 option
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
26,787
Hingham, MA
That aside, JG is still owed $25m. I cant imagine - based on his injury history and average success on the field - that he'd be willing to forfeit that for a chance to start elsewhere. He can wait a year, collect $25m, and give it a go in free agency next year. Hes not going to take a paycut, and I see very little value in extending him/pushing his cap into future years when we still, four full seasons later, have no idea if hes worth building around.
Jimmy's best scenario, IMO, is to start for the Niners while they groom their rookie QB, and he plays well on a stacked roster and takes them (deep?) into the postseason, thus setting himself up for a decent contract next year when the Niners inevitable cut him. I completely agree that he would not willingly forfeit the $25M for a chance to start elsewhere. But that being said, I think you could argue that the second best scenario for Jimmy - assuming no one is willing to trade for his contract - would be to get cut, sign with the Pats for a below market deal (~$10-15M or whatever), have a solid season on a pretty good roster, and set himself up to get paid again next year.

In other words, in terms of his potential career earnings, I think he is better of starting on a good team (like SF or NE) than he is riding the bench and collecting $25M.
 

Remagellan

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
At this point they'd be dumb to go up into the top five until they see whom the Niners select. I doubt the Pats see all the QBs as equally desirable, and to spend the draft capital necessary to go up to 4 or 5 and then discover the guy you were targeting is gone would be a disaster.

I don't get the JG love. The guy can't stay on the field, and he hasn't been that great when he has played. I'm cautiously optimistic Cam will be a lot better next year with better weapons and better health. I also would have been fine with the Pats going up to get a QB in this draft, but I think the Niners going up to three may have shut the door on that possibility.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
20,343
At this point they'd be dumb to go up into the top five until they see whom the Niners select. I doubt the Pats see all the QBs as equally desirable, and to spend the draft capital necessary to go up to 4 or 5 and then discover the guy you were targeting is gone would be a disaster.

I don't get the JG love. The guy can't stay on the field, and he hasn't been that great when he has played. I'm cautiously optimistic Cam will be a lot better next year with better weapons and better health. I also would have been fine with the Pats going up to get a QB in this draft, but I think the Niners going up to three may have shut the door on that possibility.
I think the most likely spot for the Patriots is 7. If the guy they like is there 7 is doable.
I think ATL is going to want more for 4 than they are willing to pay, I think CIN stays at 5 and MIA stays at 6 (why pre-emptively trade back up unless you have a very specific plan).
My feeling for the most likely trade is if the QB the Pats want is available come 7, they'll need to leapfrog up over CAR. DET seems unlikely to take a QB (they appear to want to give Goff a chance) and they are rebuilding, so more picks are better there.
 

sodenj5

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
4,690
CT
Mac Jones at 3 is fine, but if you’re the 49ers, you get an F- for reading the room and a F- for trade value.

He’s their guy, fits their system, blah, blah, blah, blah. That’s fine but you could have had Mac Jones and two additional first rounders if you sat there and did nothing.

Which is why I won’t believe it’s Mac Jones until they actually draft him. I still think it’s Trey Lance.
 
I'm not a big JG fanboy, but it does feel like a lot of people here are really down on him

Career numbers - Rate, ANY/A

Watson 104.5 - 7.26
Wilson 101.7 - 6.99
JG 98.9 - 7.00
Dak 97.3 - 7.00

Up against the other 3 big name QBs who've been "available" or sort-of available this off-season, JG is right there.

Has he been hurt a lot? Sure, but one or two injuries is all it takes to go from a solid guy to "injury-prone". Does this mean he'll be hurt in the future? Maybe, but I wouldn't stake my life on it.

Has he had better weapons than other guys? Maybe, not everyone has a George Kittle.

Was this past season his best? No it was not, and if you believe that's reflective of what he is now then you might be right.

But I think to describe his performances on the field overall as less than "pretty good, actually" are a bit harsh.
 

scott bankheadcase

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 1, 2006
1,212
hoboken
Mac Jones at 3 is fine, but if you’re the 49ers, you get an F- for reading the room and a F- for trade value.

He’s their guy, fits their system, blah, blah, blah, blah. That’s fine but you could have had Mac Jones and two additional first rounders if you sat there and did nothing.

Which is why I won’t believe it’s Mac Jones until they actually draft him. I still think it’s Trey Lance.
I disagree with this. Mac Jones wasn't making it to 12 no matter what.

That said, they probably could have spent less and traded up to somewhere between 5 and 9 and still got him.
 

Zososoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 30, 2009
6,477
South of North
I think the most likely spot for the Patriots is 7. If the guy they like is there 7 is doable.
I think ATL is going to want more for 4 than they are willing to pay, I think CIN stays at 5 and MIA stays at 6 (why pre-emptively trade back up unless you have a very specific plan).
My feeling for the most likely trade is if the QB the Pats want is available come 7, they'll need to leapfrog up over CAR. DET seems unlikely to take a QB (they appear to want to give Goff a chance) and they are rebuilding, so more picks are better there.
Once you get this far in the logic, you kinda have to see how it all plays out. I mean, the friggin' JETS are picking at 2 and always have the potential to go full JETS! Then you can see who SF actually picks (let's assume it's Mac for the sake of argument). If the Pats are in love with a specific QB and he's available at 4, then they can go get him. If they like 2 guys about equally, they can make offers to ATL AND CIN. At that point, who knows if the price goes up or down. Because on the one hand, you can now guarantee to get one of your 2 guys with either the ATL or the CIN pick (drives price down), but in this scenario all the other clubs see this too and probably try to move on those picks as well (drives price up).

So yeah, here's to the Jets taking Sewell or something and creating chaos for BB to take advantage of.
 

Zososoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 30, 2009
6,477
South of North
I'm not a big JG fanboy, but it does feel like a lot of people here are really down on him

Career numbers - Rate, ANY/A

Watson 104.5 - 7.26
Wilson 101.7 - 6.99
JG 98.9 - 7.00
Dak 97.3 - 7.00

Up against the other 3 big name QBs who've been "available" or sort-of available this off-season, JG is right there.

Has he been hurt a lot? Sure, but one or two injuries is all it takes to go from a solid guy to "injury-prone". Does this mean he'll be hurt in the future? Maybe, but I wouldn't stake my life on it.

Has he had better weapons than other guys? Maybe, not everyone has a George Kittle.

Was this past season his best? No it was not, and if you believe that's reflective of what he is now then you might be right.

But I think to describe his performances on the field overall as less than "pretty good, actually" are a bit harsh.
Just my $0.02, but any serious discussion/comparison of JG has to include the sample size (i.e. games played).
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
18,868
Philadelphia
I think the most likely spot for the Patriots is 7. If the guy they like is there 7 is doable.
I think ATL is going to want more for 4 than they are willing to pay, I think CIN stays at 5 and MIA stays at 6 (why pre-emptively trade back up unless you have a very specific plan).
My feeling for the most likely trade is if the QB the Pats want is available come 7, they'll need to leapfrog up over CAR. DET seems unlikely to take a QB (they appear to want to give Goff a chance) and they are rebuilding, so more picks are better there.
This is my take too. Given the price established to move from 12 to 3, I think ATL would ask for a similar return to go from 15 to 4 and I just have trouble seeing BB doing that (although you never know). The Patriots really need four things to happen. 1) At least one QB they really like to still be available after SF picks. 2) ATL not to trade their pick to somebody who wants that guy. 3) MIA not to get blown away by an offer for their pick, in a way that causes them to rethink what is likely a plan to draft Pitts or Chase at 6. 4) Win any bidding contest for Detroit's pick.

Its a difficult parlay but not a completely implausible one.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
26,787
Hingham, MA
This is my take too. Given the price established to move from 12 to 3, I think ATL would ask for a similar return to go from 15 to 4 and I just have trouble seeing BB doing that (although you never know). The Patriots really need four things to happen. 1) At least one QB they really like to still be available after SF picks. 2) ATL not to trade their pick to somebody who wants that guy. 3) MIA not to get blown away by an offer for their pick, in a way that causes them to rethink what is likely a plan to draft Pitts or Chase at 6. 4) Win any bidding contest for Detroit's pick.

Its a difficult parlay but not a completely implausible one.
Yeah if Wilson goes 2 and Mac goes 3, then 1) is a success. 2) who knows. 3) I doubt Miami trades back out but crazier things have happened 4) absolutely correct. So it really comes down to outbidding someone for 4 or 7. I think the Pats best bet is to wait and see what happens too. If it goes Lawrence-Wilson-Mac, then first see what happens at 4 - if Atlanta trades it, and Lance or Fields is picked, then if the guy the Pats love is picked, so be it. If the guy the Pats love ISN'T picked, then give up whatever you need to at 7 to grab him.
 

StupendousMan

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
1,283
The latest post on Football Outsiders tries to predict the future NFL performance of each of this year's top QB prospects. I find it .... interesting that the projection for Trevor Lawrence gives him an equal probability of falling into each of these categories:
  • bust
  • adequate starter
  • above-average starter
  • elite
I guess even "generational talents" have a pretty big chance to fail, or end up as mediocre, in the big leagues.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
68,245
Oregon
The latest post on Football Outsiders tries to predict the future NFL performance of each of this year's top QB prospects. I find it .... interesting that the projection for Trevor Lawrence gives him an equal probability of falling into each of these categories:
  • bust
  • adequate starter
  • above-average starter
  • elite
I guess even "generational talents" have a pretty big chance to fail, or end up as mediocre, in the big leagues.
I could have predicted that without coming up with a fancy formula
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
The latest post on Football Outsiders tries to predict the future NFL performance of each of this year's top QB prospects. I find it .... interesting that the projection for Trevor Lawrence gives him an equal probability of falling into each of these categories:
  • bust
  • adequate starter
  • above-average starter
  • elite
I guess even "generational talents" have a pretty big chance to fail, or end up as mediocre, in the big leagues.
I wonder if that amount of variance is unique to QBs, even allowing for first-round picks. Do top-end "generational talents" at other positions tend to have less variance?
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
18,868
Philadelphia
The latest post on Football Outsiders tries to predict the future NFL performance of each of this year's top QB prospects. I find it .... interesting that the projection for Trevor Lawrence gives him an equal probability of falling into each of these categories:
  • bust
  • adequate starter
  • above-average starter
  • elite
I guess even "generational talents" have a pretty big chance to fail, or end up as mediocre, in the big leagues.
Or the model isn't that useful.

Just eyeballing the table of historical scores, it seems fairly reliable for identifying players that are not going to be good NFL QBs (anybody with a negative score, with 1-2 exceptions like Josh Allen) but not all that useful for figuring out who will actually be upper echelon NFL players.
 

Average Game James

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Apr 28, 2016
2,456
The latest post on Football Outsiders tries to predict the future NFL performance of each of this year's top QB prospects. I find it .... interesting that the projection for Trevor Lawrence gives him an equal probability of falling into each of these categories:
  • bust
  • adequate starter
  • above-average starter
  • elite
I guess even "generational talents" have a pretty big chance to fail, or end up as mediocre, in the big leagues.
I think we can safely ignore any model that projects JaMarcus Russell above Mahomes, Watson, and Aaron Rodgers.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
20,343
I disagree with this. Mac Jones wasn't making it to 12 no matter what.

That said, they probably could have spent less and traded up to somewhere between 5 and 9 and still got him.
I actually think this is true. I'm very down on Mac Jones, but a lot of rumors were circulating that CAR wanted him at 8.
 

leftfieldlegacy

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2005
743
North Jersey
I think the most likely spot for the Patriots is 7. If the guy they like is there 7 is doable.
I think ATL is going to want more for 4 than they are willing to pay, I think CIN stays at 5 and MIA stays at 6 (why pre-emptively trade back up unless you have a very specific plan).
My feeling for the most likely trade is if the QB the Pats want is available come 7, they'll need to leapfrog up over CAR. DET seems unlikely to take a QB (they appear to want to give Goff a chance) and they are rebuilding, so more picks are better there.
If SF takes Jones at 3 I think Miami's pick is very much in play in this scenario: SF takes Jones at 3. Carolina moves up to 4 and takes Lance or Fields. Cincy takes a non QB. Miami trades back to 9 for Denver's 2021 1st, a 2022 1st plus a 2023 1st (or equivalent). Miami would still have available one of: a very highly rated OL, a very highly rated WR, likely the best defensive player on the board or Pitts.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
20,343
If SF takes Jones at 3 I think Miami's pick is very much in play in this scenario: SF takes Jones at 3. Carolina moves up to 4 and takes Lance or Fields. Cincy takes a non QB. Miami trades back to 9 for Denver's 2021 1st, a 2022 1st plus a 2023 1st (or equivalent). Miami would still have available one of: a very highly rated OL, a very highly rated WR, likely the best defensive player on the board or Pitts.
Possible. I just don't think MIA traded back up to 6 without considering that a QB would go 4. Maybe they just loved the value, but generally a move to 6 this far before the draft makes me think they have a very short list of targets. Otherwise why not wait and see how if falls.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
26,787
Hingham, MA
If SF takes Jones at 3 I think Miami's pick is very much in play in this scenario: SF takes Jones at 3. Carolina moves up to 4 and takes Lance or Fields. Cincy takes a non QB. Miami trades back to 9 for Denver's 2021 1st, a 2022 1st plus a 2023 1st (or equivalent). Miami would still have available one of: a very highly rated OL, a very highly rated WR, likely the best defensive player on the board or Pitts.
Denver is going to give up two future firsts to move up 3 slots? No chance. Remember Miami already gave up a future first to move from 12 to 6. So they need at least a future first coming back to make it worth their while. Chances are they make a pick, like Pitts or WR1.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
18,868
Philadelphia
In gaming out these scenarios, I think its also worth emphasizing that a lot of teams probably won't like at least one (if not both) of the QBs remaining after SF picks, whoever that may be. A lot of football writers have mentioned in the last week that NFL opinions on Fields are all over the map, from top five pick to 4th rounder I think somebody claimed. I can definitely see a lot of teams being wary of giving up major assets for Lance given the combination of scant experience at a relatively low level of competition and hardly playing since 2019. And teams are likely pretty polarized on Jones as well.

It wouldn't be all that surprising if QBs went 1-3 and then the other two guys didn't end up going until somewhere in the 7-15 range.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
26,787
Hingham, MA
In gaming out these scenarios, I think its also worth emphasizing that a lot of teams probably won't like at least one (if not both) of the QBs remaining after SF picks, whoever that may be. A lot of football writers have mentioned in the last week that NFL opinions on Fields are all over the map, from top five pick to 4th rounder I think somebody claimed. I can definitely see a lot of teams being wary of giving up major assets for Lance given the combination of scant experience at a relatively low level of competition and hardly playing since 2019. And teams are likely pretty polarized on Jones as well.

It wouldn't be all that surprising if QBs went 1-3 and then the other two guys didn't end up going until somewhere in the 7-15 range.
Which is why I agree the Pats need to stay patient and see what happens draft night, and be ready to pounce if their guy is available at 7.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
68,245
Oregon
Denver is going to give up two future firsts to move up 3 slots? No chance. Remember Miami already gave up a future first to move from 12 to 6. So they need at least a future first coming back to make it worth their while. Chances are they make a pick, like Pitts or WR1.
I agree that the Denver idea is an overpay, but there are enough receiver types that Miami could move again in the top 10-12 if the guy they really want is off the board
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
26,787
Hingham, MA
I agree that the Denver idea is an overpay, but there are enough receiver types that Miami could move again in the top 10-12 if the guy they really want is off the board
Agreed, just pointing out what the probable cost is to make it worth their while. Although I suppose if Waddle and Pitts go 4-5 they might sell it off. Never say never. It’d be like Draft Day! (so I’ve heard, never seen it).
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
68,245
Oregon
Agreed, just pointing out what the probable cost is to make it worth their while. Although I suppose if Waddle and Pitts go 4-5 they might sell it off. Never say never. It’d be like Draft Day! (so I’ve heard, never seen it).
The Cleveland Browns front office knows what it's doing ... it's a fantasy film
 

leftfieldlegacy

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2005
743
North Jersey
Possible. I just don't think MIA traded back up to 6 without considering that a QB would go 4. Maybe they just loved the value, but generally a move to 6 this far before the draft makes me think they have a very short list of targets. Otherwise why not wait and see how if falls.
I just don't think Miami anticipated that SF would move to 3 to take Jones. That's what makes the 6th pick more valuable ( and worth trading) than it would be if Jones was QB 5 instead of Fields or Lance. If Miami's short list is 1 or 2 players then your right, they stay at 6 and take their guy, but if Miami's short list has 3 names on it then they can trade back to 9 and still get their guy and add draft picks for 2022 /23.
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
12,926
New York City
Mac Jones at 3 is fine, but if you’re the 49ers, you get an F- for reading the room and a F- for trade value.

He’s their guy, fits their system, blah, blah, blah, blah. That’s fine but you could have had Mac Jones and two additional first rounders if you sat there and did nothing.

Which is why I won’t believe it’s Mac Jones until they actually draft him. I still think it’s Trey Lance.
People are addicted to saying this but the bottom line is that none of us have any ability to read the room on this. You think that because the reporters and draftniks think Mac Jones is the number five QB that gives you insight on what NFL teams think? Most importantly, It only takes one other team to see Mac Jones as a probable high quality NFL starter for you to have zero chance of getting him anywhere past roughly 5.
 

sodenj5

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
4,690
CT
People are addicted to saying this but the bottom line is that none of us have any ability to read the room on this. You think that because the reporters and draftniks think Mac Jones is the number five QB that gives you insight on what NFL teams think? Most importantly, It only takes one other team to see Mac Jones as a probable high quality NFL starter for you to have zero chance of getting him anywhere past roughly 5.
That one team is San Francisco. There’s something to be said for bidding against yourself. Who is the other team trading into the top 3 for Mac Jones?
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
20,343
People are addicted to saying this but the bottom line is that none of us have any ability to read the room on this. You think that because the reporters and draftniks think Mac Jones is the number five QB that gives you insight on what NFL teams think? Most importantly, It only takes one other team to see Mac Jones as a probable high quality NFL starter for you to have zero chance of getting him anywhere past roughly 5.
I don't get drafting Mac Jones as 3rd QB personally, BUT... if your staff does think he's the clear #3 QB (or higher)... you needed to get to no lower than 4 likely to ensure you get him, because a QB was always going 3, and somebody other than you likely has Jones as their 4th QB or higher. Rumors are CIN isn't taking calls at 5. So now you have to worry about 4 or 6 going to someone else. Price on 4 is likely not much lower than 3, so might as well lock in the spot. Better to go to 3 and "overdraft" than get locked out of a QB prospect you really want because Lance goes 3 and you get outbid for 4. Or Lance goes 3, Fields goes 4 and CAR jumps 2 spots to scoop you on Jones.
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
12,926
New York City
That one team is San Francisco. There’s something to be said for bidding against yourself. Who is the other team trading into the top 3 for Mac Jones?
I don't know, San Francisco doesn't know, and, unless you happen to have access to every NFL team's final draft board (and we could even restrict it to the final draft boards of the 10 or so teams who could pretty plausibly draft a QB), neither do you. Do you know for sure that Carolina wouldn't make that trade? New England? Jets? That the Falcons wouldn't pick him at four? Broncos? Eagles?

If you think he's going to be really good you need to trade up and get him. Particularly since you have to assume other teams might see the same things that you do in his game.

EDIT: This is all a little simplified. The NFL teams do have a bunch of spies of different sorts--agents might disclose information, reporters swap information with GMs, scouts and coaches talk to each other, college coaches talk to each other and to NFL teams, etc. There's even some subterfuge (I guess BB tried to make the Jets believe that he was trading up to get Vernon Gholston to get them to overdraft him.) So it's not like the teams are operating in a total vacuum. But at the end of the day you just can't tell for sure what other teams are going to do so if you love a player you're taking a big risk if you assume that no one else will pick that player before you get a chance.
 
Last edited:

sodenj5

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
4,690
CT
I don't know, San Francisco doesn't know, and, unless you happen to have access to every NFL team's final draft board (and we could even restrict it to the final draft boards of the 10 or so teams who could pretty plausibly draft a QB), neither do you. Do you know for sure that Carolina wouldn't make that trade? New England? Jets? That the Falcons wouldn't pick him at four? Broncos? Eagles?

If you think he's going to be really good you need to trade up and get him. Particularly since you have to assume other teams might see the same things that you do in his game.
Do you have to? Miami and LA both got QBs last year without trading up and letting the board come to them.

There were less viable QBs in that draft than in this draft.
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
11,811
Santa Monica, CA
It's hard to believe the Niners are taking Jones at #3. I suspect it's bullshit and they go with one of Fields/Lance.

It's going to be a really interesting first round from the Pats' perspective. They are very clearly set up to bundle picks and move up, given all the FA movement. But if QBs go 1-2-3, what are the odds Belichick likes the leftover QB or two enough to go through with a trade up?

The weird scenario that may play out is that he doesn't like the remaining QB, but moves up to the 4-7 range to take the absolute best defensive player on the board, or the best offensive lineman.
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
12,926
New York City
Do you have to? Miami and LA both got QBs last year without trading up and letting the board come to them.

There were less viable QBs in that draft than in this draft.
You don't literally have to, but the longer you wait the more risks you run. And the Dolphins and LA only waited until five and six, which is very different from 12.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
26,787
Hingham, MA
It's hard to believe the Niners are taking Jones at #3. I suspect it's bullshit and they go with one of Fields/Lance.

It's going to be a really interesting first round from the Pats' perspective. They are very clearly set up to bundle picks and move up, given all the FA movement. But if QBs go 1-2-3, what are the odds Belichick likes the leftover QB or two enough to go through with a trade up?

The weird scenario that may play out is that he doesn't like the remaining QB, but moves up to the 4-7 range to take the absolute best defensive player on the board, or the best offensive lineman.
If the remaining 2 QBs are Fields and Lance, feels like a decent chance.

Re: trading up to draft something other than a QB, I don't see the value when there will still be good DL and OT prospects available at 15. Wouldn't be worth giving up a future first to upgrade from (example) Darrisaw to Sewell, IMO.

Edit: they've proven they know what they are doing at the OL position, for instance the Solder pick back in 2011 was at 17 I believe. I don't think they think having a top tier OT is necessary to sucess.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
20,343
It's hard to believe the Niners are taking Jones at #3. I suspect it's bullshit and they go with one of Fields/Lance.

It's going to be a really interesting first round from the Pats' perspective. They are very clearly set up to bundle picks and move up, given all the FA movement. But if QBs go 1-2-3, what are the odds Belichick likes the leftover QB or two enough to go through with a trade up?

The weird scenario that may play out is that he doesn't like the remaining QB, but moves up to the 4-7 range to take the absolute best defensive player on the board, or the best offensive lineman.
I can't imagine moving top 7 for anything other than a QB. I just don't see where the value is... Sewell? I could see moving up a few spots to grab someone like Surtain, but a big jump almost has to be a QB to make sense on value.
 

Phil Plantier

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Mar 7, 2002
2,974
(I guess BB tried to make the Jets believe that he was trading up to get Vernon Gholston to get them to overdraft him.)
I was about to spout off that if BB drafted Gholston he would've made him into a player, but, yikes, I didn't realize how bad he was.

So then I have this exercise as a result of a shallow dive: Rank the following draft busts in order from highest to lowest Weighted Approximate Value (the stat at the top of ProFootballReference. No, it's not a great stat, but whatever):

Robert Gallery
Vernon Gholston
Justin Gilbert
Mike Mamula
Akili Smith

1. Gallery (37 WAV)
2. Mamula (31)
3. Gholston (8)
4. Gilbert (6)
5. Smith (1)(!)
 

Fishercat

Svelte and sexy!
SoSH Member
May 18, 2007
6,605
Manchester, N.H.
You don't literally have to, but the longer you wait the more risks you run. And the Dolphins and LA only waited until five and six, which is very different from 12.
I tend to agree with this, especially given how make or break QB for most teams. This isn't to say that paying a lot to trade up for other positions isn't necessarily worth it for the right guy, but hitting or missing on your QB just sends franchises on hugely different trajectories. It's very hard to justify, if you think Mac Jones is your franchise QB, not making the deal to lock him in only to have someone jump over you to get him.

This isn't to say it's the right decision overall, many a coach and GM has lost their job due to making the wrong trade up, but if you're gonna pay that ransom it makes way more sense for a QB if you think you're right. If I'm SF at 12 I have NO interest in waiting til 12 and hoping a slew of teams don't pay to jump ahead of me if the draft falls their way.
 

Al Zarilla

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
52,537
San Andreas Fault
couple other Shanny quotes

Kyle Shanahan: "To move up to 3, we had to feel good there’d be three guys we’d feel comfortable leading our team for a long time. There’s a chance to get there with four or five. There’s five guys at are kind of at this party." Says he's glad they have month to work on which one

Kyle Shanahan spoke with Garoppolo about trade, too: "Obviously no one wants to hear that. He wasn’t totally excited about it, as you’d expect. This doesn’t change any of our circumstances right now. We’ve got a real good team."

#49ers coach Kyle Shanahan said it's accurate that team is planning to keep Jimmy Garoppolo, barring being blown away by offer. Shanahan said he believes it would be hard to find a QB who helps them win right now more than Garoppolo and excited to have a QB learning behind him.
Shanahan also said on Good Morning Football that if Jimmy G is mad, that's OK, because he plays better when he's mad. Not sure I've ever heard a coach say that about a quarterback before. Maybe a pass rusher...
 

Mugsy's Jock

Eli apologist
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 28, 2000
12,491
UWS, NYC
I think the most likely spot for the Patriots is 7. If the guy they like is there 7 is doable.
I think ATL is going to want more for 4 than they are willing to pay, I think CIN stays at 5 and MIA stays at 6 (why pre-emptively trade back up unless you have a very specific plan).
My feeling for the most likely trade is if the QB the Pats want is available come 7, they'll need to leapfrog up over CAR. DET seems unlikely to take a QB (they appear to want to give Goff a chance) and they are rebuilding, so more picks are better there.
I'm thinking that if Fields (or to a lesser extent, Lance) is available at 6, the Dolphins absolutely might trade down with the Panthers or Broncos to play keep away with the Pats.

Miami could pick up a meaningful asset (at worst, a 2022 first) for the price of risking just 2-3 names coming off the top of their wish list for the #6 spot... and not risk their division rival trading up to #7 to solve their QB problem.
 

BusRaker

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 11, 2006
948
Which is why I agree the Pats need to stay patient and see what happens draft night, and be ready to pounce if their guy is available at 7.
It might be the first draft I ever watch. GM Bill with his Brady-esque surveying of the field pre and post snap. Options 1 and 2 are covered but the running back is open in the flat and Bill with the perfect dump to #7 for a big gain
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
20,343
I'm thinking that if Fields (or to a lesser extent, Lance) is available at 6, the Dolphins absolutely might trade down with the Panthers or Broncos to play keep away with the Pats.

Miami could pick up a meaningful asset (at worst, a 2022 first) for the price of risking just 2-3 names coming off the top of their wish list for the #6 spot... and not risk their division rival trading up to #7 to solve their QB problem.
Miami could trade back if value is good. I think there is little to no chance they do it to keep a particular rookie QB away from the Patriots. It's like the "don't trade in the division" nonsense. Even mediocre front offices don't do that, only bad front offices make decisions based on the hope that somehow they're outsmarting their division rivals.
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
12,926
New York City
It might be the first draft I ever watch. GM Bill with his Brady-esque surveying of the field pre and post snap. Options 1 and 2 are covered but the running back is open in the flat and Bill with the perfect dump to #7 for a big gain
I like your enthusiasm but I think the equivalent of the dump to the flat is going to be draft a versatile lineman from Northwestern and watch him have a Matt Light like career.
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
12,236
More utter BS coming out of Shanahan’s mouth.
I totally get the rationale* in keeping Jimmy G for a year. But we are about two minutes in and already they have had to explain and re-explain their thinking and their plan, and insist they are never trading him (well, unless...), and furthermore they have discussed and then re-discussed his psyche (and who here doesn’t love having their boss repeatedly giving out psychological profiles of us?).

I mean this is going to get really old really fast.

*edit: well I get the theoretical rationale.
 

67YAZ

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2000
3,232
Miami could trade back if value is good. I think there is little to no chance they do it to keep a particular rookie QB away from the Patriots. It's like the "don't trade in the division" nonsense. Even mediocre front offices don't do that, only bad front offices make decisions based on the hope that somehow they're outsmarting their division rivals.
Also having that pick at 18 gives the Phins a wealth of options. If they're looking at 5 QBs going off the board in the top-6, then dropping down 2-3 slots could net them a player from their board's top-tier plus more picks. Or, if they see the talent leveling off for the next 20-odd players, they could drop to 15, 17, 19, 20, 24, or even 28 and get a huge haul and still have #18 that they could package to move up for a specific guy or trade for future another future 1st. The Miami draft team must be really grinding here given that all the possible moves they could make - basically every non-QB is in play for them.