There are 102 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

The Scenario

Originally posted by nickbradley:
So on Thursday, here is how the Top 8 or 9 goes:

1. Luck

2. RGIII

3. Kalil

4. Tannehill

5. Claiborne

6. Cox

7. Blackmon

8. Ingram

The 49ers make a call to either Carolina at #9 or Buffalo at #10 and offer our 2012 #1, our 2012 #2, and our 2013 #1 in exchange for their pick in order to draft Trent Richardson. Are you happy with the trade? Ecstatic? Angry? What is your take?


That would be the worst scenerio of all time. Three #1's for a dman RB.....that has to the be the @#$%#@$@# idea of all time.
Originally posted by DVDA:
Weren't you the person complaining about unrealistic trade scenarios? What makes this any less ridiculous than the trades you ridiculed?

Yeah, im waitng for a response also
  • buck
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 12,857
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Originally posted by DaveWilcox:
That is a really steep price. I suspect that if he were there lot's of other teams would be interested as well.

draft value chart points-wise its dead-even

Brain-wise it is dead.
Originally posted by DVDA:
Weren't you the person complaining about unrealistic trade scenarios? What makes this any less ridiculous than the trades you ridiculed?

This isn't unrealistic because it's dead-even on points.
Originally posted by overthemiddle:
Not going to happen Next year there is going to be a lot more and as good running back. I would be angry with the trade giving up too much for too little.

No running backs next year will be better than Richardson - Lattimore will be a top 3, top 5 picks next year and isn't as good as Richardson
Originally posted by Nastastical:
Only incompetent organizations trade multiple early round draft picks for Running Backs. And Baalke is no idiot.

The shelf life for a RB is 3 years. Even the really good ones are lucky if they are still productive after the age of 28.

Yet you are talking about trading 3 potential future long term starters in exchange for a RB.

It has been proven time and time again. You do not need to waste a first rounder on a RB if you want to get a stud. Damn near all the top RB's in the league last year were drafted outside of the first round. Foster, McCoy, Gore, MJD, Forte, Rice, Murray and Turner.

I'm sorry you didn't have a more lucid first post. Richardson is a franchise back with very few miles on the tires - since he split time with Ingram for a while.

If later round backs are equal to top 5 backs, why are backs drafted in the top 5???
Originally posted by IdahoNiner:
f**k no.

We should be trading back and trying to acquire a future first.

Yes, because we need more picks?

How many roster spots do you think we have?
Originally posted by bigwads:
That would be the worst scenerio of all time. Three #1's for a dman RB.....that has to the be the @#$%#@$@# idea of all time.

Work on your math! 2 #1s and a 2nd.
not going to happen... that is way too much for a rb especially... i'm not sure i'd trade that for luck or rgIII
Originally posted by NinerDieHard:
not going to happen... that is way too much for a rb especially... i'm not sure i'd trade that for luck or rgIII

Lots of noobs this offseason on WZ...
thats f**king stupid and i'll be very upset, im not giving up all those picks for a damn rb when you can find them late like we did gore and they can become stars
I would rather keep the picks and draft Doug Martin in the second if I wanted a running back. All those draft picks are important for the stability of the team, and a lot cheaper than free agents.
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Originally posted by overthemiddle:
Not going to happen Next year there is going to be a lot more and as good running back. I would be angry with the trade giving up too much for too little.

No running backs next year will be better than Richardson - Lattimore will be a top 3, top 5 picks next year and isn't as good as Richardson

a rb that already suffered a serious knee injury will not be a top 5 pick, he will be a mid 1st at best and at worst late 1st rd pick
Originally posted by nickbradley:
I'm sorry you didn't have a more lucid first post. Richardson is a franchise back with very few miles on the tires - since he split time with Ingram for a while.

If later round backs are equal to top 5 backs, why are backs drafted in the top 5???

How many teams draft RB's in the top 10, just to regret it down the road? Other than Adrian Peterson, name me a top 10 RB who was worth being picked where he was drafted? In the last 5+ years the only one even close is McFadden and hes also dealing with injuries so far in his career. Hell even Peterson might not look like he was worth where he was drafted if he doesn't come back fully healthy from his knee injury.

And yes, anyone can get hurt. But RB's take way more of a pounding that any other position. And you want to give up 3 valuable picks for a guy that is known for trying to run through defenders instead of avoiding big hits.

And while i agree that hes a special talent. Richardson's style of play with definitely lead him to a short career.

If he fell all that way to #30, sure i would take him (Won't happen). But i would never trade up to take him.
I would be angry. If we did trade up that high, knowing coach and how he runs his team and what he values it would not be for Richardson.
Sorry to burst your bubble. If the trade did happen I would rather have Floyd.
I think Richardson goes to the Browns.
It's okay to have a draft crush, but Richardson is so far fetched for this team.