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

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.

This.

It's universally agreed the draft is a gamble. And any gambler worth his salt doesn't wager the house on an unknown, unless the odds are drastically in his favor (poor gamblers bet the hosue on a coin flip--or worse). And in the case of the NFL draft, the odds are ALWAYS UNKNOWN. There are simply too many variables, past, present, and future, that cannot be accounted for.

All things being equal, more draft picks have a better chance of aggregate success than less draft picks. So stay put most of the time, and draft for need or BPA. Minor trades, moving around to better position yourself for a specific need, go for it. Large gambles? Nope.

Originally posted by NTeply49:
Yes. Trading up for Marvin Harrison Jr, much like how the Falcons moved up for Julio. Might even package Aijuk to do it.

I was just thinking about this scenario as I was reading this piece. I would seriously consider moving up for Marvin Harrison Jr no doubt. I would rather package Deebo than I would Aiyuk if that were the case. Aiyuk, Harrison Jr & CMC led offense would be tough on defenses for sure

Originally posted by Polkadots:

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.

This.

It's universally agreed the draft is a gamble. And any gambler worth his salt doesn't wager the house on an unknown, unless the odds are drastically in his favor (poor gamblers bet the hosue on a coin flip--or worse). And in the case of the NFL draft, the odds are ALWAYS UNKNOWN. There are simply too many variables, past, present, and future, that cannot be accounted for.

All things being equal, more draft picks have a better chance of aggregate success than less draft picks. So stay put most of the time, and draft for need or BPA. Minor trades, moving around to better position yourself for a specific need, go for it. Large gambles? Nope.

But again, DID we mortgage the farm, future or house? Based on our draft history and where the team currently is I say no. Sure you can use hindsight to say we could have drafted so and so, but we'd have done that anyway.

Originally posted by SLCNiner:
But again, DID we mortgage the farm, future or house? Based on our draft history and where the team currently is I say no. Sure you can use hindsight to say we could have drafted so and so, but we'd have done that anyway.

If you're using draft history as a counterpoint, you are actually making my point. The 49ers recent draft history is considered successful because of the sheer number of good players they have found compared to the busts. Ipso facto, more draft picks increases the odds the 49ers would have found yet another good player.

I think Kyle thought it may never be easier to get a top 5 pick. 2020 was injury filled so they got #12 overall. Any other year, they are picking 20+ish. There was no way Kyle would be positive of which QB would be available at #3, just assume NYJ would take Wilson. To Kyle, Trey was the best out of Fields, Mac, Trey. He swung for the fences - at least we know he'll try. Unless he tries again, he'll have to luck into a FQB. Maybe he did.

Originally posted by thl408:
I think Kyle thought it may never be easier to get a top 5 pick. 2020 was injury filled so they got #12 overall. Any other year, they are picking 20+ish. There was no way Kyle would be positive of which QB would be available at #3, just assume NYJ would take Wilson. To Kyle, Trey was the best out of Fields, Mac, Trey. He swung for the fences - at least we know he'll try. Unless he tries again, he'll have to luck into a FQB. Maybe he did.

I think one reason he swung for the fences is because his dad didn't after losing Elway, and Mike Shanahan never smelled a super bowl again.

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.

Not even. Unless there's a bonified prospect coming out like Elway, P Manning, or even Andrew Luck you do NOT mortgage the future for a possible success. Kyle got the trigger finger and primarily bc McVay stole Stafford from him. It was a stupid mistake for a guy that barely played college ball…

For all the disappointment and underperformance of Trey Lance, the 49ers have weathered this poor trade pretty well. Had they kept the picks over Lance would they be in a better situation? Probably. But two NFCC championships in a row is pretty damn good. Do the win the SB without Lance and with those first rounders? No idea.

To answer the question, I'd probably do it again for Caleb Williams. That's about it. But he will be Cardinal next year, which sucks. They could realistically add Williams and Harrison Jr. Yikes. That's a balance of power shifting draft IMO.

Probably not. I think trading away all that draft capital for an unknown ( Lance ) In the first place was too much of a gamble Imo.

With that being said, I think 9ers probably have enough talent and coaching to win a super bowl without the need of a superstar at QB ( hopefully ).

I'm still hopeful that Lance/Purdy will be that guy, though.

Originally posted by tohara3:

Originally posted by NTeply49:
Yes. Trading up for Marvin Harrison Jr, much like how the Falcons moved up for Julio. Might even package Aijuk to do it.

I was just thinking about this scenario as I was reading this piece. I would seriously consider moving up for Marvin Harrison Jr no doubt. I would rather package Deebo than I would Aiyuk if that were the case. Aiyuk, Harrison Jr & CMC led offense would be tough on defenses for sure

Would be insane to move into the top 5 from pick 32 for a WR.

Originally posted by Sickaa:
Probably not. I think trading away all that draft capital for an unknown ( Lance ) In the first place was too much of a gamble Imo.

With that being said, I think 9ers probably have enough talent and coaching to win a super bowl without the need of a superstar at QB ( hopefully ).

I'm still hopeful that Lance/Purdy will be that guy, though.

That was also another reason not to make the move. This roster and coach does not need some superstar.

When was the last time a team mortgaged their future for a qb and they became a HOF?

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.

Mahomes wasn't that highly regarded out of college. He wasn't considered a sure thing. Burrow only had one year as starter with LSU. Granted it was a good one but he didn't have a lot of experience. Any time you pick a QB it's a risk. Moving up to take one only means you have a better feeling about one guy over another but the risk is always there. Look at the draft that the Niners used t pick Lance.

Lawrence was the only guy considered a sure thing but just like every draft players moved up into the top level because nearly every team needs a QB. Lawrence struggled his first year but the talent started to show last season. Zack Wilson was a failure with the Jets. Fields is a threat as a runner but still hasn't shown he can be an NFL level thrower. Mack Jones has been so-so with the Patriots. We all know what happened with Lance. Every team felt good about the guys they drafted and only one has proved himself so far. Trey hasn't but it's been mostly because of injuries. He has to stay healthy and get some playing time if he expects to ever show what he can do. JG found out what happens when you can't stay healthy.

I don't know if I would ever give up that much draft capital to move up and take a QB. It's always risky. Unless he was a 3 or 4 year starter and had the talent of a Manning, Luck or Elway it would be hard to make that decision. I would be reluctant to do it for a guy like Lance that only had one year as a starter. On the other hand, I don't kniw as much about football as Kyle does. I don't know what traits he likes the most. I certainly didn't study film as much as he did. He must have seen a lot that he liked for him to give up all those picks.

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:
Mahomes wasn't that highly regarded out of college. He wasn't considered a sure thing. Burrow only had one year as starter with LSU. Granted it was a good one but he didn't have a lot of experience. Any time you pick a QB it's a risk. Moving up to take one only means you have a better feeling about one guy over another but the risk is always there. Look at the draft that the Niners used t pick Lance.

Lawrence was the only guy considered a sure thing but just like every draft players moved up into the top level because nearly every team needs a QB. Lawrence struggled his first year but the talent started to show last season. Zack Wilson was a failure with the Jets. Fields is a threat as a runner but still hasn't shown he can be an NFL level thrower. Mack Jones has been so-so with the Patriots. We all know what happened with Lance. Every team felt good about the guys they drafted and only one has proved himself so far. Trey hasn't but it's been mostly because of injuries. He has to stay healthy and get some playing time if he expects to ever show what he can do. JG found out what happens when you can't stay healthy.

I don't know if I would ever give up that much draft capital to move up and take a QB. It's always risky. Unless he was a 3 or 4 year starter and had the talent of a Manning, Luck or Elway it would be hard to make that decision. I would be reluctant to do it for a guy like Lance that only had one year as a starter. On the other hand, I don't kniw as much about football as Kyle does. I don't know what traits he likes the most. I certainly didn't study film as much as he did. He must have seen a lot that he liked for him to give up all those picks.

They already admitted to giving up those picks to draft a QB. They didn't know which QB they were planning to take. So the picks giving up wasn't strictly for Lance. It was for the position. That is what boggles my mind.

Personally, I say no. I think a trade like that should only be for a proven commodity. Trading that much draft capital for a "maybe" is unwise in my opinion.