Zach Wilson, QB, Denver Broncos

Originally posted by btthepunk:
I don't think it'll take as much to move up to get him as some people are thinking.

If the season ended today we pick #12. Let's say that Jets and Jags pick Lawrence and Fields, after that you got Bengals, Cowboys, Chargers, and Dolphins (from Houston).

Looking at the NFL draft trade value chart, which teams don't always follow as strict as people think, to move from 12 to 6 would take 400 points. It could look like #12 and #44 for #6 and #115. Maybe even throw in someone like Dwelley is needed.

But of course that gets thrown out if someone moves for him. Some scouts still have Trey Lance ahead of him though and who knows what some GMs think of Jones and Trask.

Trade value chart goes out the window when it comes to QBs. I think other teams will be interested in moving up as well. It's gonna start at the 3rd/4th overall pick IMO.

Lance IMO will be the 3rd QB taken all said and done...he's gonna blow up the draft process. I think it's gonna take a 2022 1st and our 2nd this yr (all depending on where we draft).

FWIW Dwelley isn't worth anything and is actually a FA.

Originally posted by TheXFactor:

Originally posted by jersey49er:

Originally posted by 49ers808:

Good Morning Faithful! We are one week closer to this being a reality pic.twitter.com/qZduCDiVmQ

— NINER NATE (@ninernate49) December 14, 2020

👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻💪🏻💪🏻💪🏻💪🏻💪🏻💪🏻‼️‼️‼️

He NEEDS Troy Smith's permission to wear #1.

HIS NAME IS TROY SMIFF!!!

Originally posted by btthepunk:
I don't think it'll take as much to move up to get him as some people are thinking.

If the season ended today we pick #12. Let's say that Jets and Jags pick Lawrence and Fields, after that you got Bengals, Cowboys, Chargers, and Dolphins (from Houston).

Looking at the NFL draft trade value chart, which teams don't always follow as strict as people think, to move from 12 to 6 would take 400 points. It could look like #12 and #44 for #6 and #115. Maybe even throw in someone like Dwelley is needed.

But of course that gets thrown out if someone moves for him. Some scouts still have Trey Lance ahead of him though and who knows what some GMs think of Jones and Trask.

I thought for sure we'd be in the 16-18 range. If we lose to Dallas there's a strong chance we are in the top 10 at the very least. In which case it shouldn't take the farm to move up. If that turns out to be the case than i'd be ok with a slight move up for him if that were to happen. IMO he is not an extra 1st round pick better than Mac Jones. I'm not even sure FOR US he is even a better pick. Though I understand the allure of drafting Wilson.

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by btthepunk:
I don't think it'll take as much to move up to get him as some people are thinking.

If the season ended today we pick #12. Let's say that Jets and Jags pick Lawrence and Fields, after that you got Bengals, Cowboys, Chargers, and Dolphins (from Houston).

Looking at the NFL draft trade value chart, which teams don't always follow as strict as people think, to move from 12 to 6 would take 400 points. It could look like #12 and #44 for #6 and #115. Maybe even throw in someone like Dwelley is needed.

But of course that gets thrown out if someone moves for him. Some scouts still have Trey Lance ahead of him though and who knows what some GMs think of Jones and Trask.

I thought for sure we'd be in the 16-18 range. If we lose to Dallas there's a strong chance we are in the top 10 at the very least. In which case it shouldn't take the farm to move up. If that turns out to be the case than i'd be ok with a slight move up for him if that were to happen. IMO he is not an extra 1st round pick better than Mac Jones. I'm not even sure FOR US he is even a better pick. Though I understand the allure of drafting Wilson.

Well, part of it is that we don't have a quarterback who can consistently hit deep passes and passes outside the numbers.

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Well, part of it is that we don't have a quarterback who can consistently hit deep passes and passes outside the numbers.

I agree. That said, I feel they both can do what you say we are lacking.

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Well, part of it is that we don't have a quarterback who can consistently hit deep passes and passes outside the numbers.

I agree. That said, I feel they both can do what you say we are lacking.

I would agree that both are an upgrade over Jimmy, but I think Wilson has the stronger arm. But yeah, either one would probably make us better in about two or three years -- if not in their rookie season.

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by TheXFactor:

Originally posted by jersey49er:

Originally posted by 49ers808:

Good Morning Faithful! We are one week closer to this being a reality pic.twitter.com/qZduCDiVmQ

— NINER NATE (@ninernate49) December 14, 2020

👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻💪🏻💪🏻💪🏻💪🏻💪🏻💪🏻‼️‼️‼️

He NEEDS Troy Smith's permission to wear #1.

HIS NAME IS TROY SMIFF!!!

We are drafting one of the backup dancers for Backstreet Boys? Man that kid looks 12. Don't get me wrong, I'm 100% on board.

Originally posted by Rathof44:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by TheXFactor:

Originally posted by jersey49er:

Originally posted by 49ers808:

Good Morning Faithful! We are one week closer to this being a reality pic.twitter.com/qZduCDiVmQ

— NINER NATE (@ninernate49) December 14, 2020

👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻💪🏻💪🏻💪🏻💪🏻💪🏻💪🏻‼️‼️‼️

He NEEDS Troy Smith's permission to wear #1.

HIS NAME IS TROY SMIFF!!!

We are drafting one of the backup dancers for Backstreet Boys? Man that kid looks 12. Don't get me wrong, I'm 100% on board.

Justin Herbert looks like he's 14. But man these kids can sling it.

If SF thinks he's the man and future..then you do what you can do get him.

Originally posted by NYniner85:
If SF thinks he's the man and future..then you do what you can do get him.

This, and it don't stop.

Taking a perceived lesser QB lower because of lesser Draft capital required seems nice in terms of cost spent, but the true value is in value gained, and if the purchase price is sweeter, but the QB netted is qualitatively lesser, the deal wasn't a good one. Spend more to get more to both:
1.) do the obvious thing and accumulate more wins and success, while also
2.) not needing to spend future picks to replace the "good Draft value deal" 4 years down the road.

Of course it then comes down to projections as to who is the superior player, as well is projecting where is the "market" value, but I posit while it's always a cost-benefit analysis, we should focus more on getting the best player(s) we can and then figure out the best value at which we can acquire them, not the other way around.

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

I would agree that both are an upgrade over Jimmy, but I think Wilson has the stronger arm. But yeah, either one would probably make us better in about two or three years -- if not in their rookie season.

I mean a stronger arm is cool but....

Originally posted by austrich:

This, and it don't stop.

Taking a perceived lesser QB lower because of lesser Draft capital required seems nice in terms of cost spent, but the true value is in value gained, and if the purchase price is sweeter, but the QB netted is qualitatively lesser, the deal wasn't a good one. Spend more to get more to both:
1.) do the obvious thing and accumulate more wins and success, while also
2.) not needing to spend future picks to replace the "good Draft value deal" 4 years down the road.

Of course it then comes down to projections as to who is the superior player, as well is projecting where is the "market" value, but I posit while it's always a cost-benefit analysis, we should focus more on getting the best player(s) we can and then figure out the best value at which we can acquire them, not the other way around.

Agreed! What's always seemed to be lost in translation is everyone's perceived market value for BOTH players.

I for one have them close to equal on their own merit but Jones higher value as it pertains to us.

Where others have Wilson considerably higher which if that's the case then sure go get your guy.

I feel it's closer to Aiyuk vs top 3 than some may think.

Just my opinion and why I wouldn't "over pay"

Originally posted by Rathof44:

We are drafting one of the backup dancers for Backstreet Boys? Man that kid looks 12. Don't get me wrong, I'm 100% on board.

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by austrich:
This, and it don't stop.

Taking a perceived lesser QB lower because of lesser Draft capital required seems nice in terms of cost spent, but the true value is in value gained, and if the purchase price is sweeter, but the QB netted is qualitatively lesser, the deal wasn't a good one. Spend more to get more to both:
1.) do the obvious thing and accumulate more wins and success, while also
2.) not needing to spend future picks to replace the "good Draft value deal" 4 years down the road.

Of course it then comes down to projections as to who is the superior player, as well is projecting where is the "market" value, but I posit while it's always a cost-benefit analysis, we should focus more on getting the best player(s) we can and then figure out the best value at which we can acquire them, not the other way around.

Agreed! What's always seemed to be lost in translation is everyone's perceived market value for BOTH players.

I for one have them close to equal on their own merit but Jones higher value as it pertains to us.

Where others have Wilson considerably higher which if that's the case then sure go get your guy.

I feel it's closer to Aiyuk vs top 3 than some may think.

Just my opinion and why I wouldn't "over pay"

Yep. This is why there's room for good debate in that we're dealing with multiple player projections, relative scheme fits, multiple predicted value points, macro team management philosophies, et al. Good stuff, and that's why we're all here, I think.

As for you, dude, I get your take on Wilson v. Jones. From your perspective in thinking they're of similar play values, it makes sense to go for the lesser cost to acquire. I see that.
I am in the camp of seeing the good of Jones - the pocket savvy, the deep touch, the mental processing, the competition credibility, et al. - while truly believing Wilson has a play value demonstratively higher, thus, I prefer to 1.) move up to get Wilson as opposed to 2.) sitting at ~12-16 and taking Jones or Trask.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by Rathof44:

We are drafting one of the backup dancers for Backstreet Boys? Man that kid looks 12. Don't get me wrong, I'm 100% on board.

Lol. I like it.