49ers pick 7th!

Originally posted by OnTheClock:

Originally posted by Thorhawk:

Originally posted by LBSI9ers:

Originally posted by Thorhawk:

Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:

Originally posted by Thorhawk:
as long as its not Newton or a CB I will be happy.

seriously have u seen our secondary

im hoping for a pass rusher (fairly bowers quinn) or a CB (peterson prince jenkins) with our pick

Of course i have seen our secondary. A legit pass rusher can make the entire secondary better. And Newton is going bust at the next level.

Newton destroyed Alabama with his arm. He completed almost 70% of his passes. Look at what he did against the elite of the SEC. He isn't simply a running QB. Besides people have said the same thing about Tebow. He looks great out there. Newton is actually more refined as a passer than Tebow.

Newton runs the most gimmicky offense in college football. No thanks.

I can't disagree that many of these players come from gimmicky offenses.. however, this is what coaches are for.. Newton is a tremendous athlete. Boom or bust. Look at Josh Freeman now. I mean, look at what Tebow has already done.

There will always be pros and cons to taking players like Newton, but sometimes I think this Pro-Style Offense bullcrap is severely, and I mean severely overrated. As if playing in a pro-style system gives you some godly advantage.

Coaches who take players like Newton know what they're getting, and if they take someone like that, they're saying they're prepared to work with them and get them ready. It all depends on how you groom a guy, that will impact your chances of their success.

Some guys are just head cases and burn out in the league, sometimes it's just bad luck for a team. But on this Newton topic, I say if we have a coach that can work with him and make him into something special, then go for it. But you better be dang sure you know what you're doing.

We'll see what happens, but I'd have Newton somewhere in the top 3 on my list of QB's I'd take.

I think Newton has too many red flags to take a risk on him in the first. Thats just the way I feel, and qbs that come from spread offense or gimmicky offenses typically do not experience success in the NFL.

^ Newton didn't destroy Alabama! Alabama forgot to score on the 2nd half!

Originally posted by highway49:

Originally posted by Kezar1965:
Is our 2nd rd. pick going to drop to the last place of the 6 win teams then move up one spot in the 3rd and so on?

your right, i'll have to check GBN

Just a WAG but # 7 over all.. then # 46 then 76th.....? There's 7 teams at 6-10

[ Edited by highway49 on Jan 2, 2011 at 20:53:44 ]

Originally posted by SWAGG-ER:

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by SWAGG-ER:

Originally posted by AllTimeGreat:

Originally posted by ninerlifer:

Originally posted by MILFS:

Originally posted by AllTimeGreat:

Originally posted by bigmike55:
That would be awesome. Who knows, if we get Harbaugh, maybe he can pull some strings and get his boy Luck with a blockbuster trade?

I don't know if that's really the best move honestly. Trading for Luck is going to cost us a bunch of picks in this draft and probably our first rounder next year. I remember everyone was all over Eli Manning, he pulled his stunt and the Chargers got a king's ransom for him. While Luck is better than Manning, my point is that it may not be worth it to trade up for Luck.

I agree. I don't think we should give up this year's picks and next year's picks for an unproven player. I say we trade down and pick up more picks and draft a QB in the 2nd or 3rd round like Stanzi and bring in a veteran QB like Palmer or Orton.

Take a risk! The Giants and Chargers took risks! Got Manning and Rivers! Not bad risks.

Chargers go the better deal and they traded Manning.

Didn't know Rivers won a Super Bowl...

that's the ultimate answer...would rex grossman be on rivers' level if he had been won the superbowl?
rivers was one of the best QB in the league nearly every season, eli is just a good QB but nothing special.

Did you just compare Rex Grossman to Eli Manning? Like really?

They both went to the Super Bowl because of their team's defense and overall play, not on their backs. I don't see that it's that far of a stretch to compare the two, especially when people try to make the point that the Giants got the better end of the deal because they won the SB. There's no telling that the Giants wouldn't have won the SB that year with Rivers at QB. Hell, if we're speculating we could say that the Giants could have won multiple Super Bowls if they drafted Rivers. He is obviously the better QB.

Originally posted by SWAGG-ER:

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by SWAGG-ER:

Originally posted by AllTimeGreat:

Originally posted by ninerlifer:

Originally posted by MILFS:

Originally posted by AllTimeGreat:

Originally posted by bigmike55:
That would be awesome. Who knows, if we get Harbaugh, maybe he can pull some strings and get his boy Luck with a blockbuster trade?

I don't know if that's really the best move honestly. Trading for Luck is going to cost us a bunch of picks in this draft and probably our first rounder next year. I remember everyone was all over Eli Manning, he pulled his stunt and the Chargers got a king's ransom for him. While Luck is better than Manning, my point is that it may not be worth it to trade up for Luck.

I agree. I don't think we should give up this year's picks and next year's picks for an unproven player. I say we trade down and pick up more picks and draft a QB in the 2nd or 3rd round like Stanzi and bring in a veteran QB like Palmer or Orton.

Take a risk! The Giants and Chargers took risks! Got Manning and Rivers! Not bad risks.

Chargers go the better deal and they traded Manning.

Didn't know Rivers won a Super Bowl...

that's the ultimate answer...would rex grossman be on rivers' level if he had been won the superbowl?
rivers was one of the best QB in the league nearly every season, eli is just a good QB but nothing special.

Did you just compare Rex Grossman to Eli Manning? Like really?

dont you get it? look at their defenses...imo, grossman is worse than eli, no question. but eli is overrated...i said it already today: eli didnt do much before the sb-run and he didnt do much after it.

Originally posted by bigmike55:

Originally posted by AllTimeGreat:


+





I'm drinking the koolaide and loving it!

That would be awesome. Who knows, if we get Harbaugh, maybe he can pull some strings and get his boy Luck with a blockbuster trade?

Originally posted by highway49:

Originally posted by Kezar1965:
Is our 2nd rd. pick going to drop to the last place of the 6 win teams then move up one spot in the 3rd and so on?

your right, i'll have to check GBN

Yes that is how it works.

Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:

Originally posted by dbdublin:

Originally posted by ozanter:
Draft experts, please work out a realistic scenario where we can trade up from 7 to 1 to get luck!

No such scenario exists.

luck isnt worth what we have to give to get him

IMO best to stay where we are and get fairly bowers peterson prince or quinn

I don't know about that. Look at who we've picked in the 1st and 2nd rounds over the last few years. Are you telling me that those guys are worth not having a guy like Luck?

Look, I agree that it shouldn't be worth it to trade that many picks for one guy. But we haven't been super successful with our top picks anyway. So why not give them up to get Luck?

I'd happily give up next year's Balmer and Rachal for Luck this year.

Originally posted by TheFunkyChicken:

Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:

Originally posted by dbdublin:

Originally posted by ozanter:
Draft experts, please work out a realistic scenario where we can trade up from 7 to 1 to get luck!

No such scenario exists.

luck isnt worth what we have to give to get him

IMO best to stay where we are and get fairly bowers peterson prince or quinn

I don't know about that. Look at who we've picked in the 1st and 2nd rounds over the last few years. Are you telling me that those guys are worth not having a guy like Luck?

Look, I agree that it shouldn't be worth it to trade that many picks for one guy. But we haven't been super successful with our top picks anyway. So why not give them up to get Luck?

I'd happily give up next year's Balmer and Rachal for Luck this year.

it would take something like this years 1st and second and next years first and second to get it done and probally more than that

we have to many holes pass rush secondary (FS and CB), C/OG (not a big one but still) for us to trade 4 high picks for 1 player

Originally posted by TheFunkyChicken:

Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:

Originally posted by dbdublin:

Originally posted by ozanter:
Draft experts, please work out a realistic scenario where we can trade up from 7 to 1 to get luck!

No such scenario exists.

luck isnt worth what we have to give to get him

IMO best to stay where we are and get fairly bowers peterson prince or quinn

I don't know about that. Look at who we've picked in the 1st and 2nd rounds over the last few years. Are you telling me that those guys are worth not having a guy like Luck?

Look, I agree that it shouldn't be worth it to trade that many picks for one guy. But we haven't been super successful with our top picks anyway. So why not give them up to get Luck?

I'd happily give up next year's Balmer and Rachal for Luck this year.

That wouldn't get it done. Balmer was the 29th pick in the draft, not the 7th.

Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:

Originally posted by TheFunkyChicken:

Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:

Originally posted by dbdublin:

Originally posted by ozanter:
Draft experts, please work out a realistic scenario where we can trade up from 7 to 1 to get luck!

No such scenario exists.

luck isnt worth what we have to give to get him

IMO best to stay where we are and get fairly bowers peterson prince or quinn

I don't know about that. Look at who we've picked in the 1st and 2nd rounds over the last few years. Are you telling me that those guys are worth not having a guy like Luck?

Look, I agree that it shouldn't be worth it to trade that many picks for one guy. But we haven't been super successful with our top picks anyway. So why not give them up to get Luck?

I'd happily give up next year's Balmer and Rachal for Luck this year.

it would take something like this years 1st and second and next years first and second to get it done and probally more than that

we have to many holes pass rush secondary (FS and CB), C/OG (not a big one but still) for us to trade 4 high picks for 1 player

While I agree with you, couldn't we fix the RG issue with a FA?

Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:

Originally posted by TheFunkyChicken:

Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:

Originally posted by dbdublin:

Originally posted by ozanter:
Draft experts, please work out a realistic scenario where we can trade up from 7 to 1 to get luck!

No such scenario exists.

luck isnt worth what we have to give to get him

IMO best to stay where we are and get fairly bowers peterson prince or quinn

I don't know about that. Look at who we've picked in the 1st and 2nd rounds over the last few years. Are you telling me that those guys are worth not having a guy like Luck?

Look, I agree that it shouldn't be worth it to trade that many picks for one guy. But we haven't been super successful with our top picks anyway. So why not give them up to get Luck?

I'd happily give up next year's Balmer and Rachal for Luck this year.

it would take something like this years 1st and second and next years first and second to get it done and probally more than that

we have to many holes pass rush secondary (FS and CB), C/OG (not a big one but still) for us to trade 4 high picks for 1 player

Yeah, but my point is that we don't draft well enough in the early rounds for me to feel like those picks have that much value.

We had holes in the OL, we drafted OL high for years, and we still have holes in the OL.

I know what you're saying, and if we get a real GM I might agree with you. But if we keep Baalke then I don't mind giving up future top picks to secure a franchise QB.

We're not going to win without a franchise QB, no matter how good our secondary gets. That's the reality of the modern NFL.

Originally posted by Gavintech:

Originally posted by TheFunkyChicken:

Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:

Originally posted by dbdublin:

Originally posted by ozanter:
Draft experts, please work out a realistic scenario where we can trade up from 7 to 1 to get luck!

No such scenario exists.

luck isnt worth what we have to give to get him

IMO best to stay where we are and get fairly bowers peterson prince or quinn

I don't know about that. Look at who we've picked in the 1st and 2nd rounds over the last few years. Are you telling me that those guys are worth not having a guy like Luck?

Look, I agree that it shouldn't be worth it to trade that many picks for one guy. But we haven't been super successful with our top picks anyway. So why not give them up to get Luck?

I'd happily give up next year's Balmer and Rachal for Luck this year.

That wouldn't get it done. Balmer was the 29th pick in the draft, not the 7th.

But we'd have to give up next years 1st as well, which could end up being the 29th pick. And my point is that we don't use our top picks well enough to justify keeping them instead of trading them for Luck. Balmer was just an example to illustrate that point.

Originally posted by TheFunkyChicken:

Originally posted by Gavintech:

Originally posted by TheFunkyChicken:

Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:

Originally posted by dbdublin:

Originally posted by ozanter:
Draft experts, please work out a realistic scenario where we can trade up from 7 to 1 to get luck!

No such scenario exists.

luck isnt worth what we have to give to get him

IMO best to stay where we are and get fairly bowers peterson prince or quinn

I don't know about that. Look at who we've picked in the 1st and 2nd rounds over the last few years. Are you telling me that those guys are worth not having a guy like Luck?

Look, I agree that it shouldn't be worth it to trade that many picks for one guy. But we haven't been super successful with our top picks anyway. So why not give them up to get Luck?

I'd happily give up next year's Balmer and Rachal for Luck this year.

That wouldn't get it done. Balmer was the 29th pick in the draft, not the 7th.

But we'd have to give up next years 1st as well, which could end up being the 29th pick. And my point is that we don't use our top picks well enough to justify keeping them instead of trading them for Luck. Balmer was just an example to illustrate that point.

We don't know where we're drafting next year and I'd say we've done quite well with our high picks in recent years. The 2010 draft is too early to tell but I have high hopes. Crabtree wasn't bad, and the other top 15 picks we've had recently are Vernon Davis and Patrick Willis.

Quote:
MaioccoCSN Matt Maiocco

RT @benjshap Ryan Mallett? > 49ers have targeted CB Prince Amukamara at No. 7. (Probably don't have to clarify but, yes, just made that up.)