There are 91 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Trading up for Okung

Originally posted by momoney925:
Originally posted by mayo63:
Originally posted by sspiker:
No.
Why would we trade up into the top 10 for a RT ?
Originally posted by KRS-1:
Why would we trade up into the top 10 for a RT ?

Okung would play LT and then Staley would be shifted over to RT.
The OP is talking about trading away a 3rd round pick. If you look at the Niners draft history in the third round it is not too great. I would give up pick #79 and 13 to trade up to number 10 if Okung was available. The #1 rated OT on the board.

webzoners crack me up, they are willing to draft Iupati at 13 or 17 and take a risk he could be switched to Tackle, but not willing to trade a 3rd round pick to get an OT that can play LT and RT.
Originally posted by RedWaltz24:
Originally posted by KRS-1:
Why would we trade up into the top 10 for a RT ?

Okung would play LT and then Staley would be shifted over to RT.

Why would we put our LT on the right side when he is doing a fine job where he is ? Better off to keep that draft pick required to move up and grab one of the other prospects who can play RT than trade up into top 10 and pay bigger dollars to Okung.

Originally posted by 9erred:
The OP is talking about trading away a 3rd round pick. If you look at the Niners draft history in the third round it is not too great. I would give up pick #79 and 13 to trade up to number 10 if Okung was available. The #1 rated OT on the board.

webzoners crack me up, they are willing to draft Iupati at 13 or 17 and take a risk he could be switched to Tackle, but not willing to trade a 3rd round pick to get an OT that can play LT and RT.

Cleveland would have to be the target as Oakland or Buffalo would likely rather take Okung. Cleveland is not trading down to 13 for two 3rd round picks, they would want a 2nd in this year's draft.

There are other OT prospects in this draft that can play both LT and RT. Trading up should be for an elite prospect at a position of need, RT is a need but not a position you trade into the top 10 to get unless that is the only critical need on your roster.
Originally posted by KRS-1:
Originally posted by RedWaltz24:
Originally posted by KRS-1:
Why would we trade up into the top 10 for a RT ?

Okung would play LT and then Staley would be shifted over to RT.

Why would we put our LT on the right side when he is doing a fine job where he is ? Better off to keep that draft pick required to move up and grab one of the other prospects who can play RT than trade up into top 10 and pay bigger dollars to Okung.

Staley is doing an "OK" job at LT. I would love to see where he is ranked but I'm confident that it would be somewhere in the middle of the pack at best. Okung would be a dominate LT and would allow us to move Staley where he really belongs at RT. Having Okung/Staley bookends would be nice.

Originally posted by 9erred:
The OP is talking about trading away a 3rd round pick. If you look at the Niners draft history in the third round it is not too great. I would give up pick #79 and 13 to trade up to number 10 if Okung was available. The #1 rated OT on the board.

webzoners crack me up, they are willing to draft Iupati at 13 or 17 and take a risk he could be switched to Tackle, but not willing to trade a 3rd round pick to get an OT that can play LT and RT.

Cleveland would have to be the target as Oakland or Buffalo would likely rather take Okung. Cleveland is not trading down to 13 for two 3rd round picks, they would want a 2nd in this year's draft.

There are other OT prospects in this draft that can play both LT and RT. Trading up should be for an elite prospect at a position of need, RT is a need but not a position you trade into the top 10 to get unless that is the only critical need on your roster.
Originally posted by jmoore71:
Originally posted by KRS-1:
Originally posted by RedWaltz24:
Originally posted by KRS-1:
Why would we trade up into the top 10 for a RT ?

Okung would play LT and then Staley would be shifted over to RT.

Why would we put our LT on the right side when he is doing a fine job where he is ? Better off to keep that draft pick required to move up and grab one of the other prospects who can play RT than trade up into top 10 and pay bigger dollars to Okung.

Staley is doing an "OK" job at LT. I would love to see where he is ranked but I'm confident that it would be somewhere in the middle of the pack at best. Okung would be a dominate LT and would allow us to move Staley where he really belongs at RT. Having Okung/Staley bookends would be nice.

Originally posted by 9erred:
The OP is talking about trading away a 3rd round pick. If you look at the Niners draft history in the third round it is not too great. I would give up pick #79 and 13 to trade up to number 10 if Okung was available. The #1 rated OT on the board.

webzoners crack me up, they are willing to draft Iupati at 13 or 17 and take a risk he could be switched to Tackle, but not willing to trade a 3rd round pick to get an OT that can play LT and RT.

Cleveland would have to be the target as Oakland or Buffalo would likely rather take Okung. Cleveland is not trading down to 13 for two 3rd round picks, they would want a 2nd in this year's draft.

There are other OT prospects in this draft that can play both LT and RT. Trading up should be for an elite prospect at a position of need, RT is a need but not a position you trade into the top 10 to get unless that is the only critical need on your roster.

Staley would look better at LT if he had a better LG lined up next to him. In 9 games Staley allowed 3 sacks and wasn't flagged at all.
My first reaction was hell no. However, if it just meant giving up a 3rd round pick to get the best OT in the draft and jump Seattle I think it would be worth it. I have always thought that Staley was much better suited for RT and that he is not in any way an elite LT.

Look at it this way.. we would still have 3 picks in the top 3 rounds, would get the best OT in the draft, would screw over a division rival, and make the line that much better by shifitng Staley to a better spot.
Originally posted by Ninerjohn:
My first reaction was hell no. However, if it just meant giving up a 3rd round pick to get the best OT in the draft and jump Seattle I think it would be worth it. I have always thought that Staley was much better suited for RT and that he is not in any way an elite LT.

Look at it this way.. we would still have 3 picks in the top 3 rounds, would get the best OT in the draft, would screw over a division rival, and make the line that much better by shifitng Staley to a better spot.

+1

Makes sense.

If all three of those picks are solid, with at least strong possibility of starting....

I think we are 4-5 players from being a playoff team. 3 through the draft, 2 in FA (including PR/KR - someone like Rossum a few years back)
Originally posted by valrod33:
Originally posted by momoney925:
Originally posted by mayo63:
Originally posted by sspiker:
No.
  • sbccpv20
  • Info N/A
Yeah the reason i posted this was because It seems very likely that Oakland and Buffalo are both gana take an OT. I think i makes sense to try and get Okung If Seattle or KC takes Davis based on his potential. I mean really who would you rather have Okung or Trent Williams and a 3rd rounder. I think its important to pick a OT that has the potential to play the LT plus are RT needs to be better because we want our TE to be in pass routes as much as possible.
Originally posted by sbccpv20:
Yeah the reason i posted this was because It seems very likely that Oakland and Buffalo are both gana take an OT. I think i makes sense to try and get Okung If Seattle or KC takes Davis based on his potential. I mean really who would you rather have Okung or Trent Williams and a 3rd rounder. I think its important to pick a OT that has the potential to play the LT plus are RT needs to be better because we want our TE to be in pass routes as much as possible.

I'm taking this situation as Okung being the second tackle off the board.

It could very well end up that we either trade up to grab Okung in that situation or we get stuck reaching for B. Campbell with the 16th pick. Given our track record for 3rd rounders and the disparity between T's I'd say this was a smart move.

Moving Staley back to RT isn't desirable but not outside of reasonable, especially if we get a premier OT in the draft.
Since 'Bolts aren't tendering Sproles, he's an UFA...meaning Mac can go after him quick & hard, & get him signed. Once that's done, it could result in 1st rd solving our OL problems if they draft Campbell and Iupati. That would be very sweet...indeed.
I think there's a 30 or 40% chance that the top 4 picks go QB/DT/DT/QB; if that's the case, Okung would be the logical pick for the Chiefs at #5. However, I have read many times that Pioli wants to trade down to rebuild the team. According to that draft value calculator, the #17 and the #49 would be fair value to trade up.

In fact, that is the exact trade executed between the Browns (#5) and the Jets (#17 and #52). With such a move, we'd land a franchise tackle and still have the ability to draft a playmaker (Spiller, Haden, etc). We could also trade down from the #13.

Another fair trade option is the #13 and the #79 for the #5. We can take Wilson at #17 (or Spiller or Dez if they're there) and still take a big time player at #49.

Imagine a first round draft of Okung and Spiller??? Okung and Haden! Okung and Dez! Okung and Wilson! Or, Okung and Iupati!!!

Staley would move to the right side and we'd have bookends for a decade. Imagine Iupati in there as a pro-bowl guard...a ling of Okung/Bass-Rachal/Heitmann/Iupati/Staley. Wow! Smith would throw for 4,000 yards in 2011 and Gore would run for 1,800.

Can't think of any drawbacks...

[ Edited by nickbradley on Mar 26, 2010 at 15:56:25 ]
Originally posted by nickbradley:
I think there's a 30 or 40% chance that the top 4 picks go QB/DT/DT/QB; if that's the case, Okung would be the logical pick for the Chiefs at #5. However, I have read many times that Pioli wants to trade down to rebuild the team. According to that draft value calculator, the #17 and the #49 would be fair value to trade up.

In fact, that is the exact trade executed between the Browns (#5) and the Jets (#17 and #52). With such a move, we'd land a franchise tackle and still have the ability to draft a playmaker (Spiller, Haden, etc). We could also trade down from the #13.

Another fair trade option is the #13 and the #79 for the #5. We can take Wilson at #17 (or Spiller or Dez if they're there) and still take a big time player at #49.

Imagine a first round draft of Okung and Spiller??? Okung and Haden! Okung and Dez! Okung and Wilson! Or, Okung and Iupati!!!

Staley would move to the right side and we'd have bookends for a decade. Imagine Iupati in there as a pro-bowl guard...a ling of Okung/Bass-Rachal/Heitmann/Iupati/Staley. Wow! Smith would throw for 4,000 yards in 2011 and Gore would run for 1,800.

Can't think of any drawbacks...

no 2nd round pick is huge in a DEEP draft like this.