f**k no.
We should be trading back and trying to acquire a future first.
There are 211 users in the forums
The Scenario
Apr 20, 2012 at 8:40 PM
- IdahoNiner
- Veteran
- Posts: 9,543
Apr 20, 2012 at 9:06 PM
- DirtyP
- Member
- Posts: 1,210
That would be an absolutely atrocious trade
Apr 20, 2012 at 9:20 PM
- PSYKO5
- Veteran
- Posts: 159
I wouldnt do it but can you imagine him in our backfield? That would be hella explosive!!
Apr 20, 2012 at 9:21 PM
- sincalfaithful
- Veteran
- Posts: 27,712
I'd be irate
Apr 20, 2012 at 11:36 PM
- SteveYoung
- Member
- Posts: 3,697
Originally posted by niners4lyfe:
I wouldn't be mad at all. I think we have other needs but Richardson IS GIFTED AND SPECIAL.
Next year there are a half a dozen backs as good as Richardson. We don't need him this year and we don't need to trade picks to get him.
Apr 20, 2012 at 11:40 PM
- BrianGO
- Veteran
- Posts: 10,300
Apr 20, 2012 at 11:40 PM
- Ninerjohn
- Veteran
- Posts: 66,190
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?
I think we should put a moratorium on ridiculous hypothetical trades.
Apr 21, 2012 at 12:15 AM
- forty9ers49
- Veteran
- Posts: 317
Originally posted by dtg_9er:
I don't think I've seen a mock lately showing him drop past the top five or six so...whatever. Two firsts and a second for a RB? No, I believe Harbaugh's system will be diverse enough to open holes for good running backs so this price is too steep. But Richardson and the two QBs are the three players I could see a team trading up to get.
This. Why would we trade so many draft picks for a position that is not worthy of being drafted that high? Not saying Richardson wont be great in the NFL but there's no way any team would give up as much for a RB
[ Edited by forty9ers49 on Apr 21, 2012 at 12:16 AM ]
Apr 21, 2012 at 12:35 AM
- LoboLtnLvr49er
- Veteran
- Posts: 1,494
Originally posted by Ninerjohn:
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?
I think we should put a moratorium on ridiculous hypothetical trades.
Apr 21, 2012 at 12:36 AM
- NickSh49
- Veteran
- Posts: 7,939
No no no no no no no.
I'll stick with Gore & Hunter.
I'll stick with Gore & Hunter.
Apr 21, 2012 at 12:52 AM
- SanDiego49er
- Veteran
- Posts: 47,963
Totally unrealistic. Won't happen.
That said we do NEED a RB. Not just want. People on the WZ are in denial about Frank Gore. At the end of the season and in the playoffs he kept taking himself out. He's really hit the wall. Gore is almost done. Age, injuries and an incredible pounding in the early years have caught up to him.
We need a RB but probably it won't happen this year. Hunter is a change of pace. That's it. Not a long term replacement.
That said we do NEED a RB. Not just want. People on the WZ are in denial about Frank Gore. At the end of the season and in the playoffs he kept taking himself out. He's really hit the wall. Gore is almost done. Age, injuries and an incredible pounding in the early years have caught up to him.
We need a RB but probably it won't happen this year. Hunter is a change of pace. That's it. Not a long term replacement.
Apr 21, 2012 at 12:56 AM
- NickSh49
- Veteran
- Posts: 7,939
Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
Totally unrealistic. Won't happen.
That said we do NEED a RB. Not just want. People on the WZ are in denial about Frank Gore. At the end of the season and in the playoffs he kept taking himself out. He's really hit the wall. Gore is almost done. Age, injuries and an incredible pounding in the early years have caught up to him.
We need a RB but probably it won't happen this year. Hunter is a change of pace. That's it. Not a long term replacement.
Agree.
Apr 21, 2012 at 2:48 AM
- elguapo
- Veteran
- Posts: 25,102
Would be cool but since we have hunter and Jacobs I think RB will not be a position drafted
Apr 21, 2012 at 3:11 AM
- 4everfaithful24
- Veteran
- Posts: 381
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.
Could not agree more. We have a perfect example of this case on our team and we'll do it again. Done Deal. Chalk it up.
Apr 21, 2012 at 5:47 AM
- DaDivaRecieva15
- Veteran
- Posts: 37,746
Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:
Originally posted by nickbradley:
*if*?
i think trent richardson is going to be a great RB but IF we do that trade (which i doubt) im taking floyd there
+100