The Browns draft Myles Garrett, who should the 49ers take?

Originally posted by NinerSickness:
Allen is a safer prospect. But he's not JJ Watt. He's not a guy like Garrett or Von Miller or Julius Peppers or Patrick Peterson who can single-handedly turn a defense around.

Trubisky, on the other hand, could be the guy to solve the biggest problem the Niners have had since 1999 (s**tty QB play). If there's a potential, franchise QB on the board, a guy would have to be a once-every-five-to-ten-years kind of prospect to pass on him.

YES!

No matter who the Browns take, the smart move for our new GM is to trade down. He can get 3-4 picks minimum...there isn't any pick at #2 who can beat that.

Originally posted by CorvaNinerFan:
No matter who the Browns take, the smart move for our new GM is to trade down. He can get 3-4 picks minimum...there isn't any pick at #2 who can beat that.

If there isn't value for a very needy team like the 49ers at #2, why would any other team trade up to #2?

The key is; everyone knows the 49ers need a QB and that there will be other similar value QBs available perhaps down to 12-15 or even later, hence they will not trade with the 49ers to get a QB.

Now if another team values Allen or some other defensive player, they won't trade with SF because they know they might get him at 3 or 4 and not have to give up the value to get to #2.

I just don't see a legit trading partner emerging this year.

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by CorvaNinerFan:

No matter who the Browns take, the smart move for our new GM is to trade down. He can get 3-4 picks minimum...there isn't any pick at #2 who can beat that.

If there isn't value for a very needy team like the 49ers at #2, why would any other team trade up to #2?

The key is; everyone knows the 49ers need a QB and that there will be other similar value QBs available perhaps down to 12-15 or even later, hence they will not trade with the 49ers to get a QB.

Now if another team values Allen or some other defensive player, they won't trade with SF because they know they might get him at 3 or 4 and not have to give up the value to get to #2.

I just don't see a legit trading partner emerging this year.

i could see the Jets trading up to two for mitch Trubisky if the Browns take Garrett.. . unless we want him more then the multiple high end picks that will get them Truby

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by CorvaNinerFan:

No matter who the Browns take, the smart move for our new GM is to trade down. He can get 3-4 picks minimum...there isn't any pick at #2 who can beat that.

If there isn't value for a very needy team like the 49ers at #2, why would any other team trade up to #2?

The key is; everyone knows the 49ers need a QB and that there will be other similar value QBs available perhaps down to 12-15 or even later, hence they will not trade with the 49ers to get a QB.

Now if another team values Allen or some other defensive player, they won't trade with SF because they know they might get him at 3 or 4 and not have to give up the value to get to #2.

I just don't see a legit trading partner emerging this year.

There's always options. If the Browns do take Garrett, the #2 spot has a shot at the #1 QB in the draft on everyones board. There's lots of teams that need a QB. Wentz was no where near being slotted as the #2 pick at this point last year

Originally posted by 49ers808:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by CorvaNinerFan:
No matter who the Browns take, the smart move for our new GM is to trade down. He can get 3-4 picks minimum...there isn't any pick at #2 who can beat that.

If there isn't value for a very needy team like the 49ers at #2, why would any other team trade up to #2?

The key is; everyone knows the 49ers need a QB and that there will be other similar value QBs available perhaps down to 12-15 or even later, hence they will not trade with the 49ers to get a QB.

Now if another team values Allen or some other defensive player, they won't trade with SF because they know they might get him at 3 or 4 and not have to give up the value to get to #2.

I just don't see a legit trading partner emerging this year.

There's always options. If the Browns do take Garrett, the #2 spot has a shot at the #1 QB in the draft on everyones board. There's lots of teams that need a QB. Wentz was no where near being slotted as the #2 pick at this point last year

.

Originally posted by 49ers808:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by CorvaNinerFan:
No matter who the Browns take, the smart move for our new GM is to trade down. He can get 3-4 picks minimum...there isn't any pick at #2 who can beat that.

If there isn't value for a very needy team like the 49ers at #2, why would any other team trade up to #2?

The key is; everyone knows the 49ers need a QB and that there will be other similar value QBs available perhaps down to 12-15 or even later, hence they will not trade with the 49ers to get a QB.

Now if another team values Allen or some other defensive player, they won't trade with SF because they know they might get him at 3 or 4 and not have to give up the value to get to #2.

I just don't see a legit trading partner emerging this year.

There's always options. If the Browns do take Garrett, the #2 spot has a shot at the #1 QB in the draft on everyones board. There's lots of teams that need a QB. Wentz was no where near being slotted as the #2 pick at this point last year

Why would the 49ers give up a chance to draft "the #1 quarterback on everyone's board" when they need a QB as badly as anyone else?

(I am assuming Kaepernick leaves this off-season or even if he does not, the GM realizes the need must be filled while CK is still the bridge.)

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by 49ers808:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by CorvaNinerFan:

No matter who the Browns take, the smart move for our new GM is to trade down. He can get 3-4 picks minimum...there isn't any pick at #2 who can beat that.

If there isn't value for a very needy team like the 49ers at #2, why would any other team trade up to #2?

The key is; everyone knows the 49ers need a QB and that there will be other similar value QBs available perhaps down to 12-15 or even later, hence they will not trade with the 49ers to get a QB.

Now if another team values Allen or some other defensive player, they won't trade with SF because they know they might get him at 3 or 4 and not have to give up the value to get to #2.

I just don't see a legit trading partner emerging this year.

There's always options. If the Browns do take Garrett, the #2 spot has a shot at the #1 QB in the draft on everyones board. There's lots of teams that need a QB. Wentz was no where near being slotted as the #2 pick at this point last year

Why would the 49ers give up a chance to draft "the #1 quarterback on everyone's board" when they need a QB as badly as anyone else?

(I am assuming Kaepernick leaves this off-season or even if he does not, the GM realizes the need must be filled while CK is still the bridge.)

Where did I say that? I just said they would have options in reference to the person who said nobody would trade for the #2 pick

Originally posted by 49ers808:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by 49ers808:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by CorvaNinerFan:
No matter who the Browns take, the smart move for our new GM is to trade down. He can get 3-4 picks minimum...there isn't any pick at #2 who can beat that.

If there isn't value for a very needy team like the 49ers at #2, why would any other team trade up to #2?

The key is; everyone knows the 49ers need a QB and that there will be other similar value QBs available perhaps down to 12-15 or even later, hence they will not trade with the 49ers to get a QB.

Now if another team values Allen or some other defensive player, they won't trade with SF because they know they might get him at 3 or 4 and not have to give up the value to get to #2.

I just don't see a legit trading partner emerging this year.

There's always options. If the Browns do take Garrett, the #2 spot has a shot at the #1 QB in the draft on everyones board. There's lots of teams that need a QB. Wentz was no where near being slotted as the #2 pick at this point last year

Why would the 49ers give up a chance to draft "the #1 quarterback on everyone's board" when they need a QB as badly as anyone else?

(I am assuming Kaepernick leaves this off-season or even if he does not, the GM realizes the need must be filled while CK is still the bridge.)

Where did I say that? I just said they would have options in reference to the person who said nobody would trade for the #2 pick

Fair enough.

Right now, it appears there are 3, perhaps 4 QBs that are closely grouped with no clear cut winner among them. That being the case, it does not seem likely anyone would give up the value it would take to get to #2 when they could almost certainly get another of that group of QBs at 5 or 8 or even lower. I'm not saying a trade won't be made. I just don't see another team willing to trade to #2 if Garrett is gone unless they want another defender and then why trade with SF who they know will be looking QB.

Even if Garrett is still there at #2, he must be the pick. No trade. Need that impact player.

Would LOVE to see a trade back within the top 6-7 picks if Garrett is not there. That's especially true if we end up trading a 2nd round pick for Garoppolo.

Originally posted by dj43:

Fair enough.

Right now, it appears there are 3, perhaps 4 QBs that are closely grouped with no clear cut winner among them. That being the case, it does not seem likely anyone would give up the value it would take to get to #2 when they could almost certainly get another of that group of QBs at 5 or 8 or even lower. I'm not saying a trade won't be made. I just don't see another team willing to trade to #2 if Garrett is gone unless they want another defender and then why trade with SF who they know will be looking QB.

Even if Garrett is still there at #2, he must be the pick. No trade. Need that impact player.

Have a feeling that wont be the case once we get into April.

Originally posted by Pick4Six:

Originally posted by NinerSickness:

Allen is a safer prospect. But he's not JJ Watt. He's not a guy like Garrett or Von Miller or Julius Peppers or Patrick Peterson who can single-handedly turn a defense around.

Trubisky, on the other hand, could be the guy to solve the biggest problem the Niners have had since 1999 (s**tty QB play). If there's a potential, franchise QB on the board, a guy would have to be a once-every-five-to-ten-years kind of prospect to pass on him.

YES!

To be fair, no one knew JJ watt was gonna me JJ watt. Dude was drafted with the 11th pick. But I do hope that we don't entertain the idea of drafting Allen cause he's not an immediate need, especially that high. Trubisky could be the guy, I am not on the hype train but I do see the potential that he has. He looks like a less decorated Luck coming out of the draft.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by dj43:
Fair enough.

Right now, it appears there are 3, perhaps 4 QBs that are closely grouped with no clear cut winner among them. That being the case, it does not seem likely anyone would give up the value it would take to get to #2 when they could almost certainly get another of that group of QBs at 5 or 8 or even lower. I'm not saying a trade won't be made. I just don't see another team willing to trade to #2 if Garrett is gone unless they want another defender and then why trade with SF who they know will be looking QB.

Even if Garrett is still there at #2, he must be the pick. No trade. Need that impact player.

Have a feeling that wont be the case once we get into April.

That's why I said "right now." Things usually do change.

Originally posted by dj43:
That's why I said "right now." Things usually do change.

Yeah but at that point it's just about teams settling into their preference. If there isn't much separation after the college season is over, then the only separation we'll see from here is just teams identifying who the prefer of the top 3. It doesn't mean any one of them is actually a better prospect. Only time will tell.

Originally posted by gold49digger:

Originally posted by Pick4Six:

Originally posted by NinerSickness:
Allen is a safer prospect. But he's not JJ Watt. He's not a guy like Garrett or Von Miller or Julius Peppers or Patrick Peterson who can single-handedly turn a defense around.

Trubisky, on the other hand, could be the guy to solve the biggest problem the Niners have had since 1999 (s**tty QB play). If there's a potential, franchise QB on the board, a guy would have to be a once-every-five-to-ten-years kind of prospect to pass on him.

YES!

To be fair, no one knew JJ watt was gonna me JJ watt. Dude was drafted with the 11th pick. But I do hope that we don't entertain the idea of drafting Allen cause he's not an immediate need, especially that high. Trubisky could be the guy, I am not on the hype train but I do see the potential that he has. He looks like a less decorated Luck coming out of the draft.

If you think Allen is JJ Watt 2.0, then it would make sense to take him over Trubisky. But I don't think you or anyone else thinks that. He's a great prospect, but he's not one of those rare types for whom you pass on a potential, franchise QB like a Calvin Johnson or an AJ Green or a Joe Thomas.

It's gotta be Garrett, Trubisky, a huge gap & everyone else in this draft IMO. And I could even be talked into Trubisky over Garrett because I really think he's going to be a great QB.