Should we place a moratorium on 'trade'down' mock drafts?

Originally posted by nickbradley:
I, for one, am tired of seeing mock drafts posted with highly-optimistic trade-down scenarios from #30 where we get a player that we were going to draft at #30 anyway. They're less than worthless and I ask that we post honest mocks for the next 10 days.

well the fact is that Baalke has traded 3 times in each of the 2 drafts he has managed so you really cant say "this will never happen". To me we are more likely to trade up for a prospect rather then trade back(unless it is by more the 15 spots) because last year we really showed that the league wide perception of value does not apply to us as we "reached" for Aldon by at least 5 spots if not more according to all of the talking heads at the time. We then proceeded to trade up for a 3 year project QB, then we "reached" beyond the word of reach for a cornerback who all of the talks heads had given a 6th round grade and picked him the 3rd. We traded up a small school guard in the 5th and took a DE in the 7th with the intention of making him a FB(albeit this was the fallback for not landing Marecic).

Originally posted by sfout:
well the fact is that Baalke has traded 3 times in each of the 2 drafts he has managed so you really cant say "this will never happen". To me we are more likely to trade up for a prospect rather then trade back(unless it is by more the 15 spots) because last year we really showed that the league wide perception of value does not apply to us as we "reached" for Aldon by at least 5 spots if not more according to all of the talking heads at the time. We then proceeded to trade up for a 3 year project QB, then we "reached" beyond the word of reach for a cornerback who all of the talks heads had given a 6th round grade and picked him the 3rd. We traded up a small school guard in the 5th and took a DE in the 7th with the intention of making him a FB(albeit this was the fallback for not landing Marecic).

All good points, but predicting trades in a mock draft make the mock itself worthless.

Originally posted by nickbradley:

Originally posted by sfout:
well the fact is that Baalke has traded 3 times in each of the 2 drafts he has managed so you really cant say "this will never happen". To me we are more likely to trade up for a prospect rather then trade back(unless it is by more the 15 spots) because last year we really showed that the league wide perception of value does not apply to us as we "reached" for Aldon by at least 5 spots if not more according to all of the talking heads at the time. We then proceeded to trade up for a 3 year project QB, then we "reached" beyond the word of reach for a cornerback who all of the talks heads had given a 6th round grade and picked him the 3rd. We traded up a small school guard in the 5th and took a DE in the 7th with the intention of making him a FB(albeit this was the fallback for not landing Marecic).

All good points, but predicting trades in a mock draft make the mock itself worthless.

How? What in the definition of "mock draft" indicates trades are irrelevant and void? Everyone knows the Vikings and/or Browns are going to do everything in their power to trade down. The Chargers are always listening to offers, the idea of a trade not happening at all is a baseless assumption. Yes the idea of 6-8 teams trading in round 1 is nearly ludicrous but more then likely there will be at least 2 trades this year, 1 being who ever wants Tannehill, 1 being whoever wants Michael Floyd, a 3rd option could be a team going all in for Trent Richardson if he slips to the Dolphins at 8.

Mock drafts with trades have to be realistic in a sense that you actually have to know who you're targeting and what team your going for, for example I think a logical landing spot for Kendall Wrigh is Cleveland at 22, they need an upgrade in the slot and also need to find a long term replacement for Josh Cribbs at KR(Wright has no history as a KR but would likely be able to pick up a skill like that fairly quickly). So we'd have to trade up to either Tennessee or Cincinnati, the bengals being the more likely target IMHO because a lot of mocks have them taking a Guard(Cordy Glenn) at 21 and they would still be able to land Silatolu or Konz at 30.

So when people make educated trade guesses like that I dont mind it but when people start saying we should trade up to 14 with the Cowboys so we can get Michael Floyd then I start having issues because at that point we might as well go all in and add in 2 more picks and get into the top 10 for Blackmon or a sure shot at DeCastro. Thats when trades get weird, because there is nothing to go on that a team like the cowboys at 14 would be willing to trade that far back.

If you don't like tem - don't readthem.

It's like changing the chanel, if you don't want to watch a program.

It is their mock, let them do whatever the hell they want.

Originally posted by sfout:
How? What in the definition of "mock draft" indicates trades are irrelevant and void? Everyone knows the Vikings and/or Browns are going to do everything in their power to trade down. The Chargers are always listening to offers, the idea of a trade not happening at all is a baseless assumption. Yes the idea of 6-8 teams trading in round 1 is nearly ludicrous but more then likely there will be at least 2 trades this year, 1 being who ever wants Tannehill, 1 being whoever wants Michael Floyd, a 3rd option could be a team going all in for Trent Richardson if he slips to the Dolphins at 8.

Mock drafts with trades have to be realistic in a sense that you actually have to know who you're targeting and what team your going for, for example I think a logical landing spot for Kendall Wrigh is Cleveland at 22, they need an upgrade in the slot and also need to find a long term replacement for Josh Cribbs at KR(Wright has no history as a KR but would likely be able to pick up a skill like that fairly quickly). So we'd have to trade up to either Tennessee or Cincinnati, the bengals being the more likely target IMHO because a lot of mocks have them taking a Guard(Cordy Glenn) at 21 and they would still be able to land Silatolu or Konz at 30.

So when people make educated trade guesses like that I dont mind it but when people start saying we should trade up to 14 with the Cowboys so we can get Michael Floyd then I start having issues because at that point we might as well go all in and add in 2 more picks and get into the top 10 for Blackmon or a sure shot at DeCastro. Thats when trades get weird, because there is nothing to go on that a team like the cowboys at 14 would be willing to trade that far back.

Nobody trades up into the late first round unless there's a quarterback there or a highly-rated player falls.

And since we're taking best player available anyway, why would we trade the pick to someone else? Somebody would really have to knock our socks off to talk us out of taking that player; that kind of deal is a 2013 #1 to move up 20 - 25 spots. Perhaps the best-case scenario would be the Eagles falling in love with Harrison Smith and trading both of their second rounders to us in exchange for the #30 and our 3rd rounder. We get a point premium on part with a 'free' 4th round pick.

We then pick at 46, 51, 61, and 125.

Originally posted by nickbradley:
Nobody trades up into the late first round unless there's a quarterback there or a highly-rated player falls.

And since we're taking best player available anyway, why would we trade the pick to someone else? Somebody would really have to knock our socks off to talk us out of taking that player; that kind of deal is a 2013 #1 to move up 20 - 25 spots. Perhaps the best-case scenario would be the Eagles falling in love with Harrison Smith and trading both of their second rounders to us in exchange for the #30 and our 3rd rounder. We get a point premium on part with a 'free' 4th round pick.

We then pick at 46, 51, 61, and 125.

..........

i think we need amoratorium on posts calling for moratoriums

YES

Originally posted by nickbradley:
I, for one, am tired of seeing mock drafts posted with highly-optimistic trade-down scenarios from #30 where we get a player that we were going to draft at #30 anyway. They're less than worthless and I ask that we post honest mocks for the next 10 days.

Every 49er fan has an elephant memory of Bill Walsh trading down multiple times and gathering up a lot of future starters, super bowl champions and pro bowlers in one draft. They or I want lightning to strike twice, and who would not want that. Also the draft would be so mundane if it where not for the Patriots trading a bunch of times and stockpiling picks. The Patriots and Kansas City value two second round draft picks more than 1 first round draft pick. Especially this year when the FO has done such a good job to return all 11 starters to defense, both kickers returning, and an offense returning intact minus a draft bust in Chilo Rachal and a vack up versatile lineman in Adam Snyder. The Niners are in a perfect position to take BPA, and if that player is not available they might have the option to trade down and pick up players they can develop, as the chance of a draft pick starting on this team are slim.

Mocks are mocking, let people do what they want. If everyone followed basic rules it would be like us all picking the same girlfriend.

Originally posted by hofer36:
i think we need amoratorium on posts calling for moratoriums

+1

I think #30 is a great spot to be. If anything I see us trading a few spots UP if a player we have our eye on sort of slips. Perhaps some Stanford guy: there are several who project 15-25.

I enjoy reading all the mock drafts. It helps to pass the long off-season.

Plus, how many more mock drafts can you read that has the 49ers taking Hill, Fleener, Wright, etc...?

Last I heard, a mock draft was just that, a mock.

It's all fun. Just relax and don't read or reply to the mocks that have trade down scenarios.

I am looking forward to your next mock!

Originally posted by hofer36:
i think we need amoratorium on posts calling for moratoriums