Trading Down May Be the Wise Choice

Originally posted by Dillesq:

Originally posted by krizay:
Trading down is our best option regardless of who is on tbe board.

Unless q. Nelson is there. He's the best player in the draft. You don't trade away from the best player. Otherwise i agree.

Best player in the draft is a guard??

Originally posted by jcs:
Best player in the draft is a guard??

Funny, but it is either Nelson, or this year's once-in-a-generation RB prospect.

Originally posted by Dillesq:
If Q. Nelson and Roquan Smith are gone (the blue chippers), trading down is our best option. Might even be the best option either way.

If we trade down we will pick up an additional 2nd. Which means we can pick up an Isaiah Wynn with our first, then still get a top notch corner with the 2nd we picked up.

We'd then have the saints 2nd still And two early 3rds.

Wynn is an immediate starter at G so is our next best option if we don't get Nelson.

Agree 100%. IMO if both Smith and Nelson are gone, one of those Top 4 QB will most likely still be on the board and we could cash in since a QB hungry team wouldn't have much options left.

lol If we get an early 2nd back, we basically got Jimmy G for free thanks NE

Hard to see us picking up an early second from a trade back but if we find ourselves with 2 late seconds and 2 early thirds I'm certain we're attempting to trade up to the early second.

Even with a late second and 2 early thirds it would not shock me in the least to see us trade up in the second.

the 49ers still need more blue chip prospects. If one falls to them @ 10, they need to select him.

Originally posted by jcs:

Originally posted by Dillesq:

Originally posted by krizay:

Trading down is our best option regardless of who is on tbe board.

Unless q. Nelson is there. He's the best player in the draft. You don't trade away from the best player. Otherwise i agree.

Best player in the draft is a guard??

Yes. Nelson is the best player in this draft. Hands down.

Personally if it was up to me, if 1 of Roquan or Nelson is there I'm not trading back..2 impact players day 1..

Originally posted by pdizo916:
the 49ers still need more blue chip prospects. If one falls to them @ 10, they need to select him.

A lot of people want to trade down, but for what? Sometimes the guy you let go for multiple picks turns out to be a perennial Probowler and those picks in return only amount to a few average role players that are probably gone in a few years anyway. I don't mind trading down, but only if there's value and it makes sense. There is something to be said for going for quality over quantity.

Originally posted by vermonator:

Originally posted by pdizo916:

the 49ers still need more blue chip prospects. If one falls to them @ 10, they need to select him.

A lot of people want to trade down, but for what? Sometimes the guy you let go for multiple picks turns out to be a perennial Probowler and those picks in return only amount to a few average role players that are probably gone in a few years anyway. I don't mind trading down, but only if there's value and it makes sense. There is something to be said for going for quality over quantity.

Well, this is the chicken or tbe egg scenario IMO....

Is the player a perennial pro bowl player because hes thst much better than the other guys at his posotion. Or because a good team who could afford to trade up selected him and the better teams obviously win more and have more pro bowl players?

Most prospects are going to look better when they are playing with better talent around them.

Now for the big picture reason. Tbe 3 positions that are head ansmd shoulders above all otbers that need fixed are... DE, C and CB. (Throw in WR and RB) and all those positions can be filled with really good talent in tbe 1st 3 rounds. With neither position containing a must have guy where we sit (aside from possibly Chubb if he fell). Thus us passing on what you determine to be blue chip.

Other big picture reason. Knowing that we can still add very hood players at pur critical positions with a trade. Then there's the ability to accumulate future assets.

I believe lynch said he wanted to be like tbe patriots and be in a position where you have lots of ammo in tbe draft. If we trade back and accumulate more ammo. Then next year we dont have the luxury of waiting or trading back to get what we need, we'd be able to go after it.

So trading back this year may eventually turn into a future bluechip and perennial ALL PRO that wemay not otberwise be able to obtain. While still obtaining talented players this year.

Originally posted by vermonator:

Originally posted by pdizo916:
the 49ers still need more blue chip prospects. If one falls to them @ 10, they need to select him.

A lot of people want to trade down, but for what? Sometimes the guy you let go for multiple picks turns out to be a perennial Probowler and those picks in return only amount to a few average role players that are probably gone in a few years anyway. I don't mind trading down, but only if there's value and it makes sense. There is something to be said for going for quality over quantity.

I don't think you can just look at the draft in isolation (ie trading down or standing pat) without looking at how John Lynch does in free agency. I personally think Free Agency has enabled the Pats to field a good team despite always drafting almost dead last every year. I think the two go hand in hand (Free agency and draft) and I think you trade down if you don't do that well in free agency, and if you do well in free agency then you should stand pat or trade up actually.

With Reuben Foster following the same path as Aldon Smith, the trade down scenario is looking really good right now. Letting someone like the Cards, Chargers or Bills tradeup to get their QB of the future while the Niners move to replace Reuben and get either a pass rusher or a top flight CB in the late first or early 2nd.

Originally posted by m_brockalexander:
With Reuben Foster following the same path as Aldon Smith, the trade down scenario is looking really good right now. Letting someone like the Cards, Chargers or Bills tradeup to get their QB of the future while the Niners move to replace Reuben and get either a pass rusher or a top flight CB in the late first or early 2nd.

I was thinking the same thing.

It looks like 4 QBs will go in the first 10 picks guaranteed. Niners should have ample opportunity to trade back.

Who wants to trade up? This is such an open ended scenario it's impossible to even critique lol

If there isn't a qb available at 9 that a team covets I don't see a trade happening. A lot of that action may happen from picks 5-8 anyways. Also, how far down and what is the compensation? I'd rather get a blue chip like Smith at 9 than trade down and get an extra second. I say this because we pretty much all agree a blue chip player like Smith will be a good player for us. Can't say that about lower first and 2nd round guys.

It really has to be great compensation to get us to drop down. Then we really gotta nail the picks!

Originally posted by Dillesq:

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by Dillesq:

Originally posted by krizay:
Trading down is our best option regardless of who is on tbe board.

Unless q. Nelson is there. He's the best player in the draft. You don't trade away from the best player. Otherwise i agree.

If he was the best player in the draft he wouldnt make it to #9/10. If the other 8/9 teams can trade away/pass pn him......so can we?

Of course we could. But we shouldn't.

TRADE DOWN IF EDMUNDS AND THE ROQ ARE BOTH GONE..