There are 71 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Trade Up for Iupati?

Trade Up for Iupati?

If the top 3 or 4 tackels are gone at 13 (probably will), we won't be taking one there.

I am very high on OT/G Mike Iupati, but he's a big reach at 13 or 17. So say we take Spiller, Haden, Thomas, or Mays (two of the above) with our #13 and #17.

We can then trade up to get Iupati between picks 24 - 27...that would cost us a third-rounder.

Iupati can play both Guard and Tackle, so he provdes excellent depth for us.

Imagine going home on Day 1 with Spiller, Haden (or Thomas), and Iupati!
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Trade Up for Iupati?

If the top 3 or 4 tackels are gone at 13 (probably will), we won't be taking one there.

I am very high on OT/G Mike Iupati, but he's a big reach at 13 or 17. So say we take Spiller, Haden, Thomas, or Mays (two of the above) with our #13 and #17.

We can then trade up to get Iupati between picks 24 - 27...that would cost us a third-rounder.

Iupati can play both Guard and Tackle, so he provdes excellent depth for us.

Imagine going home on Day 1 with Spiller, Haden (or Thomas), and Iupati!

I think we'll see if this is a possibility after Chester Pitts makes his visit.
I think that trading back into the first round will cost them a third this year and next years #1 which is a little more than I would be willing to spend.
Originally posted by saj4423:
I think that trading back into the first round will cost them a third this year and next years #1 which is a little more than I would be willing to spend.

Where are you pulling that from? Trade Calculator dictates a 3rd rounder to move up from 49 to 25. I think you're speculating about keeping the #49...which isn't a bd move either.

We'd give up our #1 next year and take 4 players in the first 50 picks this year. We can take Iupati AND an OT!
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Originally posted by saj4423:
I think that trading back into the first round will cost them a third this year and next years #1 which is a little more than I would be willing to spend.

Where are you pulling that from? Trade Calculator dictates a 3rd rounder to move up from 49 to 25. I think you're speculating about keeping the #49...which isn't a bd move either.

We'd give up our #1 next year and take 4 players in the first 50 picks this year. We can take Iupati AND an OT!

I never like the idea of trading away a 1st rounder. Instead, I think I would prefer Iupati, a tackle and only one of your sexy picks.
Originally posted by English:
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Originally posted by saj4423:
I think that trading back into the first round will cost them a third this year and next years #1 which is a little more than I would be willing to spend.

Where are you pulling that from? Trade Calculator dictates a 3rd rounder to move up from 49 to 25. I think you're speculating about keeping the #49...which isn't a bd move either.

We'd give up our #1 next year and take 4 players in the first 50 picks this year. We can take Iupati AND an OT!

I never like the idea of trading away a 1st rounder. Instead, I think I would prefer Iupati, a tackle and only one of your sexy picks.

But Iupati is a reach at 13 or 17; You'd get better value trading up for him.

Also, trading away future #1s isn't a bad move if done right. There's a reason draft value charts value "next year" picks at 50% value. That's a year of development lost.

For example, if we traded a #1 to get Iupati, Iupati in his second season in 2011 would be much better than a rookie RT in 2011.
Trade up to draft a guard come on joe that's not smart business
Originally posted by lamontb:
Trade up to draft a guard come on joe that's not smart business

guard/tackle...and he's a guy that Scouts Inc (McShay) has as the #14 prospect in the whole draft. To get his talent in the late 1st would be a steal.

Iupati's dilemma is that guards rarely get drafted high, even if they're the best guard anybody's ever seen. But he plays tackle too.
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Originally posted by lamontb:
Trade up to draft a guard come on joe that's not smart business

guard/tackle...and he's a guy that Scouts Inc (McShay) has as the #14 prospect in the whole draft. To get his talent in the late 1st would be a steal.

Iupati's dilemma is that guards rarely get drafted high, even if they're the best guard anybody's ever seen. But he plays tackle too.

He's a guard he may be able to attempt to play tackle, but as of right now the guy is a guard. And sorry i'm not at all for trading away a 1st rounder for a guard. the position just doesn't hold the value. Unless you see a QB,LT,CB, or DE that you really want, I wouldn't trade away a future 1st rounder. Yes he's the best guard on the board but I'd rather reach for him then trade away a pick.
Originally posted by lamontb:
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Originally posted by lamontb:
Trade up to draft a guard come on joe that's not smart business

guard/tackle...and he's a guy that Scouts Inc (McShay) has as the #14 prospect in the whole draft. To get his talent in the late 1st would be a steal.

Iupati's dilemma is that guards rarely get drafted high, even if they're the best guard anybody's ever seen. But he plays tackle too.

He's a guard he may be able to attempt to play tackle, but as of right now the guy is a guard. And sorry i'm not at all for trading away a 1st rounder for a guard. the position just doesn't hold the value. Unless you see a QB,LT,CB, or DE that you really want, I wouldn't trade away a future 1st rounder. Yes he's the best guard on the board but I'd rather reach for him then trade away a pick.

You would "rather reach for him then trade away a pick"? Isn't that the same as trading away a future pick???

Also, would you trade away a future #1 for Steve Hutchinson? He went at #17, I believe that's the highest a guard has ever gone...and he's the best Guard in the league.
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Originally posted by English:
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Originally posted by saj4423:
I think that trading back into the first round will cost them a third this year and next years #1 which is a little more than I would be willing to spend.

Where are you pulling that from? Trade Calculator dictates a 3rd rounder to move up from 49 to 25. I think you're speculating about keeping the #49...which isn't a bd move either.

We'd give up our #1 next year and take 4 players in the first 50 picks this year. We can take Iupati AND an OT!

I never like the idea of trading away a 1st rounder. Instead, I think I would prefer Iupati, a tackle and only one of your sexy picks.

But Iupati is a reach at 13 or 17; You'd get better value trading up for him.

Also, trading away future #1s isn't a bad move if done right. There's a reason draft value charts value "next year" picks at 50% value. That's a year of development lost.

For example, if we traded a #1 to get Iupati, Iupati in his second season in 2011 would be much better than a rookie RT in 2011.

Or we could trade down for him.

Regarding future No 1's, don't try reasoning with me. You may have all the arguments in the world but I still hate the idea! Takes away your flexibility and spoils next year's draft.
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Originally posted by lamontb:
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Originally posted by lamontb:
Trade up to draft a guard come on joe that's not smart business

guard/tackle...and he's a guy that Scouts Inc (McShay) has as the #14 prospect in the whole draft. To get his talent in the late 1st would be a steal.

Iupati's dilemma is that guards rarely get drafted high, even if they're the best guard anybody's ever seen. But he plays tackle too.

He's a guard he may be able to attempt to play tackle, but as of right now the guy is a guard. And sorry i'm not at all for trading away a 1st rounder for a guard. the position just doesn't hold the value. Unless you see a QB,LT,CB, or DE that you really want, I wouldn't trade away a future 1st rounder. Yes he's the best guard on the board but I'd rather reach for him then trade away a pick.

You would "rather reach for him then trade away a pick"? Isn't that the same as trading away a future pick???

Also, would you trade away a future #1 for Steve Hutchinson? He went at #17, I believe that's the highest a guard has ever gone...and he's the best Guard in the league.

How is reaching for a guy the same as trading away a pick? If you think the guy is rated between 20-24 and you draft him at 17 then that is a reach. How is that the same as trading away your 1st rounder for 2011?

And i wouldn't trade a 1st round pick for Hutchinson. He's the best in the league but there are plenty of guys drafted below him that do above average work. the problem is the Niners GM keeps picking the wrong guys.
Originally posted by English:
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Originally posted by English:
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Originally posted by saj4423:
I think that trading back into the first round will cost them a third this year and next years #1 which is a little more than I would be willing to spend.

Where are you pulling that from? Trade Calculator dictates a 3rd rounder to move up from 49 to 25. I think you're speculating about keeping the #49...which isn't a bd move either.

We'd give up our #1 next year and take 4 players in the first 50 picks this year. We can take Iupati AND an OT!

I never like the idea of trading away a 1st rounder. Instead, I think I would prefer Iupati, a tackle and only one of your sexy picks.

But Iupati is a reach at 13 or 17; You'd get better value trading up for him.

Also, trading away future #1s isn't a bad move if done right. There's a reason draft value charts value "next year" picks at 50% value. That's a year of development lost.

For example, if we traded a #1 to get Iupati, Iupati in his second season in 2011 would be much better than a rookie RT in 2011.

Or we could trade down for him.

Regarding future No 1's, don't try reasoning with me. You may have all the arguments in the world but I still hate the idea! Takes away your flexibility and spoils next year's draft.

One hypothetical trade-back scenario is Dallas sending us their #90 and the #27 for the #17 to take S Earl Thomas. FS is a huge need for Dallas and he's local.

We can still get a star at 13, Iupati at 27, an OT at 49, and perhaps a couple of defensive backs at 79 and 90.
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Originally posted by English:
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Originally posted by English:
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Originally posted by saj4423:
I think that trading back into the first round will cost them a third this year and next years #1 which is a little more than I would be willing to spend.

Where are you pulling that from? Trade Calculator dictates a 3rd rounder to move up from 49 to 25. I think you're speculating about keeping the #49...which isn't a bd move either.

We'd give up our #1 next year and take 4 players in the first 50 picks this year. We can take Iupati AND an OT!

I never like the idea of trading away a 1st rounder. Instead, I think I would prefer Iupati, a tackle and only one of your sexy picks.

But Iupati is a reach at 13 or 17; You'd get better value trading up for him.

Also, trading away future #1s isn't a bad move if done right. There's a reason draft value charts value "next year" picks at 50% value. That's a year of development lost.

For example, if we traded a #1 to get Iupati, Iupati in his second season in 2011 would be much better than a rookie RT in 2011.

Or we could trade down for him.

Regarding future No 1's, don't try reasoning with me. You may have all the arguments in the world but I still hate the idea! Takes away your flexibility and spoils next year's draft.

One hypothetical trade-back scenario is Dallas sending us their #90 and the #27 for the #17 to take S Earl Thomas. FS is a huge need for Dallas and he's local.

We can still get a star at 13, Iupati at 27, an OT at 49, and perhaps a couple of defensive backs at 79 and 90.

Trading with Dallas is like negotiating with Satan. But the deal looks ok and I suspect that in a year's time everyone will have forgotten where we drafted Iupati. And for once we will have a line!
Originally posted by English:
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Originally posted by English:
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Originally posted by English:
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Originally posted by saj4423:
I think that trading back into the first round will cost them a third this year and next years #1 which is a little more than I would be willing to spend.

Where are you pulling that from? Trade Calculator dictates a 3rd rounder to move up from 49 to 25. I think you're speculating about keeping the #49...which isn't a bd move either.

We'd give up our #1 next year and take 4 players in the first 50 picks this year. We can take Iupati AND an OT!

I never like the idea of trading away a 1st rounder. Instead, I think I would prefer Iupati, a tackle and only one of your sexy picks.

But Iupati is a reach at 13 or 17; You'd get better value trading up for him.

Also, trading away future #1s isn't a bad move if done right. There's a reason draft value charts value "next year" picks at 50% value. That's a year of development lost.

For example, if we traded a #1 to get Iupati, Iupati in his second season in 2011 would be much better than a rookie RT in 2011.

Or we could trade down for him.

Regarding future No 1's, don't try reasoning with me. You may have all the arguments in the world but I still hate the idea! Takes away your flexibility and spoils next year's draft.

One hypothetical trade-back scenario is Dallas sending us their #90 and the #27 for the #17 to take S Earl Thomas. FS is a huge need for Dallas and he's local.

We can still get a star at 13, Iupati at 27, an OT at 49, and perhaps a couple of defensive backs at 79 and 90.

Trading with Dallas is like negotiating with Satan. But the deal looks ok and I suspect that in a year's time everyone will have forgotten where we drafted Iupati. And for once we will have a line!



We just wont have any QB worth a s**t and an OC that might possibly be the worst in the history of teh 49ers. Great just great