Trade 7th pick!

Since we are going back to the West Coast Offense and not alot of QB can fit that system how about trading it for a lower 1st rd. pick for their 1st rd next year with the intention of trying to get Luck. My assumption would be teams that need QB's like us will try to fill the need this year through the draft and free agency. So instead of pushing the issue we can take best available Defensive player in the 1st and maybe take a QB in the 2nd?


1.CB or DE pass rusher(late 1st due to trade)
2.QB- I think Stanzi could be a good fit
3.CB or DE depends how we pick first
4.OL
4 WR- speedster
5.Safety
6.OLB
6.DT
7.best available

that would be awesome. We should find the team that is gonna be terrible next year and trade back.

Originally posted by philosoraptor:
that would be awesome. We should find the team that is gonna be terrible next year and trade back.

Because I'm sure a team like Buffalo is going to turn it around in one offseason and be a Super Bowl contender, right?

I would be okay with trading down and picking up another 2nd round pick and swapping firsts. We can get a DL in the 1st, CB and QB in the 2nd.

Originally posted by chico49erfan:
I would be okay with trading down and picking up another 2nd round pick and swapping firsts. We can get a DL in the 1st, CB and QB in the 2nd.

I think trading down is easily the best option but it seems like I want us to to do that every year and it never happens.

Lots of guys who probably grade out mid 1st who can help us out.

Not so easy. You have to find someone who wants to trade up.

However, under the new collective bargaining agreement, the huge contract that normally is given to 7th overall picks should be much less, if a rookie salary cap is instituted, as many think. This would give incentive for more trades.

Originally posted by MadDog49er:
Not so easy. You have to find someone who wants to trade up.

However, under the new collective bargaining agreement, the huge contract that normally is given to 7th overall picks should be much less, if a rookie salary cap is instituted, as many think. This would give incentive for more trades.

Are you sure that would be active for this draft?

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by MadDog49er:
Not so easy. You have to find someone who wants to trade up.

However, under the new collective bargaining agreement, the huge contract that normally is given to 7th overall picks should be much less, if a rookie salary cap is instituted, as many think. This would give incentive for more trades.

Are you sure that would be active for this draft?

Very much a possibility, or they could phase it in over time. It will be in the contract. Most vets seem to approve a CBA with a rookie wage scale.

I'd stay put. We can get a good football player in the top 10. And #7 BTW is not so marquee that lots of teams are jumping all over it. People want to the #1 pick or maybe top 5. It's tough to trade out of #7. You might not have any takers. Stay put and take the best player hopefully at a position of need.

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
I'd stay put. We can get a good football player in the top 10. And #7 BTW is not so marquee that lots of teams are jumping all over it. People want to the #1 pick or maybe top 5. It's tough to trade out of #7. You might not have any takers. Stay put and take the best player hopefully at a position of need.

actually, If i was a GM i would want no part of the top 3 picks, so picks 4-7 are ideal, especially 7, since its less salary, and a bunch of quality guys usually fall.

So not definate we would or they would trade in, but not impossible.

Originally posted by AB83Rules:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
I'd stay put. We can get a good football player in the top 10. And #7 BTW is not so marquee that lots of teams are jumping all over it. People want to the #1 pick or maybe top 5. It's tough to trade out of #7. You might not have any takers. Stay put and take the best player hopefully at a position of need.

actually, If i was a GM i would want no part of the top 3 picks, so picks 4-7 are ideal, especially 7, since its less salary, and a bunch of quality guys usually fall.

So not definate we would or they would trade in, but not impossible.

I don't think it's impossible. Just not a sure thing that there will be a market for #7. You may have to pick. At least be fully prepared to do so.

Originally posted by AB83Rules:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
I'd stay put. We can get a good football player in the top 10. And #7 BTW is not so marquee that lots of teams are jumping all over it. People want to the #1 pick or maybe top 5. It's tough to trade out of #7. You might not have any takers. Stay put and take the best player hopefully at a position of need.

actually, If i was a GM i would want no part of the top 3 picks, so picks 4-7 are ideal, especially 7, since its less salary, and a bunch of quality guys usually fall.

So not definate we would or they would trade in, but not impossible.

i agree, but if Luck declared, then i want the #1 overall lol

Originally posted by chico49erfan:
I would be okay with trading down and picking up another 2nd round pick and swapping firsts. We can get a DL in the 1st, CB and QB in the 2nd.

I like your thinking bro. Either get an additional 2nd round pick or another 1st round pick for 2012.

Also would like Adrian Clayborn by trading down and getting a DL and a QB in the 2nd weather is Stanzi, Gabbert even Moore.

Originally posted by Norwalks_Best:

Originally posted by chico49erfan:
I would be okay with trading down and picking up another 2nd round pick and swapping firsts. We can get a DL in the 1st, CB and QB in the 2nd.

I like your thinking bro. Either get an additional 2nd round pick or another 1st round pick for 2012.

Also would like Adrian Clayborn by trading down and getting a DL and a QB in the 2nd weather is Stanzi, Gabbert even Moore.

Moore did not declare for the draft.