Trade the #2?

Originally posted by Rascal:

Originally posted by fan49:

Originally posted by mayo49:

Way to go is grab Myles at #2 and trade for Garoppolo.

There is no better outcome than this

That will never happen without a 1st.

Ehhh Allen is always a option for them as well, as much as Garrett is a beast Allen has played better than him this yr. they have poo on that DL outside of Sheldon.

I'm still fine with going for Mitch or Watson if Myles is gone...The great thing is we have a ton of options and at worst have the 2nd overall pick.

I'm fine with a trade down as long as we have a plan at the qb position...if we can swap 1st and grab a 2nd and 3rd from the jets PLUS land Watson I'd be down for that.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Let that dude know he needs to stop doing blow, its screwing up his thought process.

Patriots players suck when they go to another team especially QBs. Garropolo wont be as good on our team with no WRs.

If we dont get Myles or we do. I want to draft a couple times in the first round.

Trading down might not be that bad. Considering d-ends performances like first rounder Taco Charlton and Barnette..

Originally posted by SFBuckeye:
Patriots players suck when they go to another team especially QBs. Garropolo wont be as good on our team with no WRs.

Yeah Chandler Jones has been awful for the Cards this year.



I love how people make these grand proclamations based on an extremely limited number of circumstances. How many QBs have thrived with the Patriots and gone on to some other team? Cassel? So where is this "especially QBs" rhetoric coming from? O'Connell and Mallett both sucked to varying degrees while with New England.

Originally posted by SFBuckeye:

Patriots players suck when they go to another team especially QBs. Garropolo wont be as good on our team with no WRs.

For the love of god stop comparing 7th rd and UDFA QBs to a 2nd rd pick. Just because they play for NE does not make them the same caliber of player.

The fact that they were able to get players that were basically undrafted to have careers like they have in and out of their organization leads me to believe they can develop qbs...JG is the highest qb drafted by bill since he's been there, that my friend says something.

Please look at the player not the team, only reason he's a "backup" is because he's behind Brady.

We're a lot further away from .500 than one player, even one as talented as Garrett, so yes trade down and stockpile picks in the top half of the draft. IMO we're 8 players away from being competitive:

QB
C
2 WRs
NT
ILB (maybe 2 depending on Bowman's recovery)
OLB/Pass Rush
FS

Trading the #2 overall should bring 3 or 4 draft spots that can address the above with the remaining coming from FA signings. Sadly, this isn't a strong QB class that would create a bidding war.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by Rascal:
That will never happen without a 1st.

Why, because that is what New England is reportedly asking for? If they are looking to trade him they will have to accept less than that. Don't see any team giving up a 1st round pick for a QB with less than 2 career starts who is on the verge of a huge payday when they can just draft a QB and have them on a cheap deal for 4 to 5 years.

You can look back at the Matt Schaub trade where the Falcons got two second rounders but a key difference there is that rookie QB's were getting pretty hefty paydays, especially the guys picked early. That isn't the case anymore and drafting a QB gives you a bargain deal.

Why? Many reasons:

1) Too many teams competing for Garoppolo

2) Garoppolo is actually good

3) Precedence set by the Bradford trade (1 x 1st and 1 x 4th) and with a lot of people thinking Garoppolo being much better than Bradford (sure you can argue about the small sample size, but you can decide for yourself). Personally, there is no way I would have traded for Bradford in the first place, let alone a 1st and a 4th. But, Garoppolo is a different matter entirely.

4) Sure a lot of us like Trubisky and Watson, but at the end of the day it is still the draft, it is a much bigger gamble than trusting your own eyes on Garoppolo playing in a couple of NFL games, not to mention he has been coached arguably at the highest NFL level by Bill Belichick/McDaniels and the Patriots' system for 3 years already.


At the end of the day, what it boils down to is the risk factor. I have much more confidence in Garoppolo than a Trubisky or Watson at this very juncture having seen what I've seen. But, to me, either way is fine, doesn't matter whether the 9ers trade for Garoppolo or draft Trubisky or Watson at 2, I am cool with it as long as we don't defer to the lower rounds and draft some project QB. Or put it this way, I am only happy with those 3 names.

To me, if a team say like the Browns or 9ers were to give up a 1st for a top QB prospect in the draft, then all you will be doing effectively is may be spend a 4th on top of that, but with that you will get a much more finished product to do away with the risk of busting plus he is already ready to play from day one.

All depends on the offer. Of course no chance in hell I trade back if Myles is there.

Good post, Rascal. You make a lot of sense.

Originally posted by 49er_Rider:

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by Murphys1:
Fitz said today on the radio that he could justify trading our 1st round pick for Garappolo based on the idea that he is as talented and much more ready than Mitch or Watson. Thinks he's better. If true, he would be worth our top pick. He's only 25 years old, and has attended Belicheck University for three years.

Let that dude know he needs to stop doing blow, its screwing up his thought process.

No way hes worth a 1st round pick he hasn't played a full season and the games when he played he got injured. 2nd maybe but not a 1st.

I know it's not fair, but that's what I think about too - he seems to get hurt pretty quick when he got opportunities to play.

The last time we picked close to this high we picked #1 and it was alex smith and it was a horrible decision. Not because of the pick but because the team was so bad, and this one is worse, and there wasnt any other talent around. Sound familiar. Any qb we worry about now is just going to waste away on this roster with the talent around. I feel like trying to have 5 to 6 picks in the first 100 and 4 or 5 in the first 100 next draft is the way to go and worry about a qb next year.

I dont think garrapalo is going to be any good here anytime soon nor any qb drafted. Just my opinion

Now all of this is based on the fact that baalke isn't within 1000 miles of our draft

Originally posted by Sims19849ers:

Originally posted by okdkid:
As always - it depends on the offer.

This. If Garrett is there, just take him. If not, weigh your options and see if we can get 3 to 4 of the top 50 prospects

Bingo!

Originally posted by mayo49:
Good post, Rascal. You make a lot of sense.

Ditto

You can't trade the number two pick if it belongs to Cleveland