Do you see any situation where we give up two firsts , a 2nd and a third for a top 3 pick?

Originally posted by pasodoc9er:
Now that the excitement, shouting, cheering, the drama, the tenseness, are over, I feel like I sat down to dinner and went away hungry. Not having any picks in rds 1 or 2 and then having 3 comp picks at end of rd 3…just left me flat. Kyle and JL were still relative newcomers to that draft, with only a few behind them. No question they took a talentless team and built it into one that is stacked with 2 NFC appearances, and 1 SB appearance. And they did it in lightning quick time. But they mortgaged the future for a small college QB wtih 1 yr of college ball and 1 yr of no football due to the covid disaster.

Yet in going back over the past week's happenings, somehow i feel we got cheated. By the time we picked, the cupboard was getting bare. It is also true that we really needed a starter OT, plus a starter swing OT, maybe a couple DBs, and perhaps a starter TE. In truth we didn't need much.

But the one glaring weakness, and it is a dilly, is QB. Yes we have a great one in Brock…but he is rehabbing an UCL and nobody knows what he will be left with talentwise, this yr…or next either. This was Trey's yr to shine but we all know what happened there…1 game in he torches his ankle and needs surgery…out for yr. Now going into this season we still have no idea what Trey brings to the table, and we got got the ??? With Brock. So yes, QB is a major league potential problem for us. And no, we aren't going anywhere in playoffs with Darnold at QB.

So, should we ever trade out two firsts , a 2nd and 3rd for a top 3 pick again? Maybe perhaps, but not for an unknown talent with little background data. But what if the pick had been Brock? Nope, different deal, in that in Brock we had tons of data at a Big 12 school with 4 yrs of football data, and he started all those games for 4 yrs. That huge stretch for a 1 yr QB who had not played the following yr was a major league stretch based on insufficient data, and we greatly overpaid for it. This is no knock on Trey, but is a knock on John and kyle. We learned a lesson 2 yrs ago…i hope we don't ever have to relearn it again.

We never should have done it the 1st time. Teams are FN stupid for constantly mortgaging the farm for these unknown QBs. That's just my opinion on it.

Originally posted by krizay:
We never should have done it the 1st time. Teams are FN stupid for constantly mortgaging the farm for these unknown QBs. That's just my opinion on it.

I said something like that in the Trey Lance tread. I hope the 9ers never do something stupid like that again. The only way I'd trade multiple 1st round picks again is for Patrick Mahomes or Joe Burrow.

That mistake is glossed over because the 49ers are so good. Had another team done that, they likely reset their franchise and guarantee misery for the next 6 years. But lets not act like we didnt lessen some superbowl chances. BPA at 13 is bring in Parsons, Slater, Vera-Tucker. Solving big needs for us.

I think they should do it again now that they have 2024/25/26 first rounders. Simply for the content and dialogue it creates for the 49er fanbase.

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by krizay:
We never should have done it the 1st time. Teams are FN stupid for constantly mortgaging the farm for these unknown QBs. That's just my opinion on it.

I said something like that in the Trey Lance tread. I hope the 9ers never do something stupid like that again. The only way I'd trade multiple 1st round picks again is for Patrick Mahomes or Joe Burrow.

But Mahomes and Burrow weren't Mahomes or Burrow when drafted. Neither was Joe Montana or Tom Brady. It's a lottery

Originally posted by English:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by krizay:
We never should have done it the 1st time. Teams are FN stupid for constantly mortgaging the farm for these unknown QBs. That's just my opinion on it.

I said something like that in the Trey Lance tread. I hope the 9ers never do something stupid like that again. The only way I'd trade multiple 1st round picks again is for Patrick Mahomes or Joe Burrow.

But Mahomes and Burrow weren't Mahomes or Burrow when drafted. Neither was Joe Montana or Tom Brady. It's a lottery

Burrow at least was the consensus #1 pick.

Mahomes went 10th and even that surprised many people.

However people claiming we mortgaged our future for that move clearly missed what happened the two years after we drafted Trey. Draft day definitely isn't as fun when you don't have a first or even 2nd round pick and your 3rd isn't til the very end of the round but we actually made the move at the PERFECT time. It just may not work out.

IMO you take that risk every time in that situation. We had a crazy injury riddled year the season after a SB trip. You know you have a good roster in place if it's healthy but you don't have an elite QB.

Nothing wrong with teams swinging for the fences to get an elite QB. Obviously if Trey doesn't work out we need to consider experience a strong part of the evaluation or be prepared to play the young guy and let him develop.

Originally posted by pasodoc9er:
Now that the excitement, shouting, cheering, the drama, the tenseness, are over, I feel like I sat down to dinner and went away hungry. Not having any picks in rds 1 or 2 and then having 3 comp picks at end of rd 3…just left me flat. Kyle and JL were still relative newcomers to that draft, with only a few behind them. No question they took a talentless team and built it into one that is stacked with 2 NFC appearances, and 1 SB appearance. And they did it in lightning quick time. But they mortgaged the future for a small college QB wtih 1 yr of college ball and 1 yr of no football due to the covid disaster.

Yet in going back over the past week's happenings, somehow i feel we got cheated. By the time we picked, the cupboard was getting bare. It is also true that we really needed a starter OT, plus a starter swing OT, maybe a couple DBs, and perhaps a starter TE. In truth we didn't need much.

But the one glaring weakness, and it is a dilly, is QB. Yes we have a great one in Brock…but he is rehabbing an UCL and nobody knows what he will be left with talentwise, this yr…or next either. This was Trey's yr to shine but we all know what happened there…1 game in he torches his ankle and needs surgery…out for yr. Now going into this season we still have no idea what Trey brings to the table, and we got got the ??? With Brock. So yes, QB is a major league potential problem for us. And no, we aren't going anywhere in playoffs with Darnold at QB.

So, should we ever trade out two firsts , a 2nd and 3rd for a top 3 pick again? Maybe perhaps, but not for an unknown talent with little background data. But what if the pick had been Brock? Nope, different deal, in that in Brock we had tons of data at a Big 12 school with 4 yrs of football data, and he started all those games for 4 yrs. That huge stretch for a 1 yr QB who had not played the following yr was a major league stretch based on insufficient data, and we greatly overpaid for it. This is no knock on Trey, but is a knock on John and kyle. We learned a lesson 2 yrs ago…i hope we don't ever have to relearn it again.

I don't see losing a first rounder (or several) as a franchise killer. Reuben and Solomon were basically, if I had to redraft, would be 6th or 7th rounders in my book. I still think Trey can amount to something, so I think it's still premature to conclude those 3 first round picks were wasted. Having said that, I've been impressed with the drafts since the Dante Pettis picks. They have really concentrated on the players with passion for football and I think they have done much better in getting more durable players. I think even McGlinchy had a - relatively speaking - healthy year for him. The rest of the OLine stayed pretty healthy last year too.

When you can hit all pro's in the 5th, 6th, and 7th rounds - you can afford to take some chances in the first and second rounds. Keep in mind ShanaLynch got rid of their 2nd round and a whole bunch of other picks for CMC. So that and the Trey deal reduced a lot of their draft capital this offseason.

So yes, I can conceive of ShanaLynch trading two firsts for a talent like CMC. I think ShanaLynch sees Trey as a possible John Elway/Steve Young type player - now they could be wrong - but if they are right, well WOW! You have a hall of famer on your hands. Is it worth a shot to do that? I think so if you can still hit on some good players in the 5th, 6th, and 7th rounds. In hindsight - Fred Warner would be a first rounder, Mitchell would be going in the first two rounds, Kittle would be a first rounder, Brendel would go in the first three rounds, Jauan Jennings would be a high second rounder, Brock Purdy would be - most likely first round, first pick.

No you shouldn't do that. It's giving up too much. A lot of 1st round QB's aren't as good as they are hyped to be. Sometimes later round QB's are better than you think like Montana (3rd), Brady (6th), Purdy (7th). Not everything is height, weight, speed at QB. It's seeing the field well, going through reads and progressions, making the right choice, throwing an accurate ball, being a leader, understanding the defense, understanding the offense. Just a lot more things going on especially at the QB position. They are scouted wrong in some cases IMO.

Originally posted by thl408:
I think they should do it again now that they have 2024/25/26 first rounders. Simply for the content and dialogue it creates for the 49er fanbase.

Love that mortgaging the future narrative never really applied and really doesn't apply now.

The price paid for Lance is not exorbitant if you get a guy with some solid history behind him. Brock Purdy for example. What makes the Lance pick questionable is the very limited PT he had in college. It was a very high-risk/high-reward deal. Right now it feels like a bad deal. Will it still feel that way come September?

Originally posted by dj43:
The price paid for Lance is not exorbitant if you get a guy with some solid history behind him. Brock Purdy for example. What makes the Lance pick questionable is the very limited PT he had in college. It was a very high-risk/high-reward deal. Right now it feels like a bad deal. Will it still feel that way come September?

Nice post.

If Lance lit the world on fire, no one would be complaining about the compensation to move up. The lack of playing time for him is what made this questionable from the jump. Also, if we didnt have Brock Purdy, people would also not be so quick to give up on Lance, nor would they already be saying how this was a bad trade.

Originally posted by English:
But Mahomes and Burrow weren't Mahomes or Burrow when drafted. Neither was Joe Montana or Tom Brady. It's a lottery

Very good point, if we could see their year 3 clips we would be set. But, we can't.

Originally posted by dj43:
The price paid for Lance is not exorbitant if you get a guy with some solid history behind him. Brock Purdy for example. What makes the Lance pick questionable is the very limited PT he had in college. It was a very high-risk/high-reward deal. Right now it feels like a bad deal. Will it still feel that way come September?

I think it looks bad and unlikely to get better. But I sort of understand why they did it. They just got the wrong guy IMO. Reached too hard for inexperience, lack of playing time, unproven long term production, not the highest level. All of those. But it looks like Brock Purdy will bail them out and people will forget the whole thing. So they got lucky and it may work out anyway. Just a different way than they were thinking.

If you have no QB, you do it. A few things about a redraft where we had our picks-

1. Anyone thinking we would've taken Micah Parsons has paid no attention to the kind of guys we draft after the Foster situation as well as Parsons's behavior at Penn State.

2. We drafted a QB because Jimmy can't stay healthy. This isn't a Kyle thing or 49ers thing. Jimmy started 2 games instead of 4 in 2016 for the Patriots because he got hurt. I think Jimmy is a good QB, but he is injury prone. If it weren't for Brock coming in our season would've gotten derailed AGAIN due to QB injury.

3. If you don't have a QB, you've got nothing. How patient will Washington be with Ron Rivera? How patient were the Broncos with Vangio? Colts with Reich. We can go on and on. Its practically impossible to win in this league consistently unless you have good QB play. If a team has identified a particular QB as the guy and you are in need, you make the trade.

Otherwise you are building a roster of talented players for another coach, because you will be out of a job

4. We were in a better position than most teams making that trade because we were good and still had Jimmy.

5. After getting beaten by Mahommes (2019) and seeing Allen up close (2020), Kyle shifted his philosophy on what he wants in a QB. Those types cost. It is today's NFL.