Forge Posted January 18, 2021 Share Posted January 18, 2021 Mostly just a bookkeeping note at this point, but Fields declared for the draft officially Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
49ersfan Posted January 18, 2021 Share Posted January 18, 2021 https://www.pff.com/news/draft-2021-nfl-mock-draft-justin-fields-goes-to-jacksonville-at-no-1-miami-picks-devonta-smith-lands-at-no-3 Latest mock has Zach Wilson falling to us at 12. Can't see Wilson falling that far...and even if he does, i think Shanny would get antsy and trade up for his guy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted January 18, 2021 Share Posted January 18, 2021 15 minutes ago, 49ersfan said: https://www.pff.com/news/draft-2021-nfl-mock-draft-justin-fields-goes-to-jacksonville-at-no-1-miami-picks-devonta-smith-lands-at-no-3 Latest mock has Zach Wilson falling to us at 12. Can't see Wilson falling that far...and even if he does, i think Shanny would get antsy and trade up for his guy It's a really weird draft because this is a one of the rare times where I actually think the best bang for your buck at the top really is with the Qbs. There is no Chase Young / Bosa & Williams type guys here. I look at the top position players and they are either not at great positions, or I just don't see them as guys I would consider top 5ish type prospects in mosts drafts. I'll be curious if it's a down year value wise to trade up because teams feel the same. If you are Miami, are you really going to draft Parsons or Smith at #3? Someone really going to take Slater in the top 8? I don't know...just seems kind of weak. Not a fan of the top of this draft outside of the QBs, to be honest. That may have something to do with so many of the guys opting out, I dunno. With the early reports, I don't think that Wilson / Fields fall to 12, but I think that we won't have to move up to 2/3 to get our guys. I think that we can start looking at the 6/7 range, tbh or we can get a "discount" to go from 12 to 4 for reasons I'll talk about in a second. I can realistically see the Jets going either way. There have been multiple reports stating that the feeling was they were going to ride with Sam and look to trade down; we will see if the latter happens. I don't see Miami taking a QB; I see them taking Smith / Parsons. I never have been in on the Atlanta QB thing. I mean, it wouldn't shock me if they did it, but given the age / contract status of Ryan / Julio and their own financial situation, I think that's a team that is going to try and retool on the fly. Trading down seems like a really good move for them. Cincy won't take a QB and almost guaranteed won't trade down. So now we are at 6. I think the Eagles made their choice on QB when they fired Pederson, so likely not going QB there, but could be a trade down spot. But now lets look at the potential trade *up* candidates. If you really think about teams that could trade up for a QB, you're thinking of a team like Carolina. But here's the thing. To go from 8 to 2/3/4, you may still have to give up that future first. Maybe they get from 8 to 4 for two seconds, but they're not sitting on a ton of draft capital and they aren't a great team. They need players. I believe that both of their starting tackles are free agents so there's not guarantee that they won't have a huge hole there. Samuel is a FA. The defense is just straight bad. They are in a really good spot to address a lot of those issues right where they are. If the Lions don't trade Stafford, they aren't going QB. All of their receivers are free agents right now, so Chase / Smith makes a lot of sense, and it's another team that has defensive problems with their best pass rusher also a free agent. If they trade Stafford, this becomes more reasonable, but we have to wait for that to happen. Something tells me Denver is going to ride out with Lock and give him veteran competition. I would expect them to sign someone like Jacoby Brissett, maybe Mitch Trubisky, etc. All the talk coming out of Denver seems to suggest they are not going to draft a QB at the top and give Lock another shot. Dallas? If they don't sign Dak, this obviously makes sense. We will have to see what shakes out there. The Giants aren't going to trade up for a QB. So at the very least, I really do think that we are in a good position to get a QB if we want one. Whether or not we want one is another story, and I'm not sure that we do, though obviously we put in the work to scout them. If we are willing to put our future first on the table, this becomes really interesting. Maybe that gets us up to #4 because Carolina would have to give up something similar to make that move and wouldn't be willing to make it (Buffalo gave up a future first + 5th rounder to go from 9 to 4 in 2014, so theoretically possible that is the cost). But lets say that Carolina really does want to go get a QB and decides to target Philly at 6. They probably don't have to give up to make that move. Maybe 2 thirds. But if you're Philly and the 49ers are still offering up that future first to go from 12 to 6, which interests you more, pick #12 + future first or pick #8 and two thirds? If I were Philly, it's the one with the first round pick because I don't think that there's a huge difference in the talent between 8 and 12 and if I'm SF, I'm perfectly fine with offering that up still because I really don't care if we draft the guy at 4 or 6...it's all the same as long as I get my guy. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted January 18, 2021 Share Posted January 18, 2021 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
y2lamanaki Posted January 18, 2021 Share Posted January 18, 2021 On 12/12/2020 at 8:00 PM, N4L said: Curious to hear if @y2lamanaki would be on board with Trask I haven't watched him until today, not looking good against an LSU defense who is supposed to be bad Edit: as I type this he hits a 50 yard pass on a beautiful throw I would be on board with Trask if he's available in the 6th and we're good with him likely being out of the NFL in 2023. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted January 18, 2021 Share Posted January 18, 2021 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
757-NINER Posted January 18, 2021 Share Posted January 18, 2021 Just now, y2lamanaki said: I would be on board with Trask if he's available in the 6th and we're good with him likely being out of the NFL in 2023. Y2 ftw!!!! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted January 18, 2021 Share Posted January 18, 2021 4 minutes ago, y2lamanaki said: I would be on board with Trask if he's available in the 6th and we're good with him likely being out of the NFL in 2023. I will continue to reiterate that I am all in or all out. Give me TL / fields / Wilson / Lance in the first, or give me someone like Newman / Mond in like the 5/6 area to develop. I have no real interest in half measures. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
y2lamanaki Posted January 18, 2021 Share Posted January 18, 2021 To be clear, I think Trask will be taken much earlier than the 6th. When Nathan Peterman came out I made a similar comment. And much like Peterman, I think someone will take him too early and he'll stay in the NFL way longer than he should. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted January 18, 2021 Share Posted January 18, 2021 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GW21 Posted January 18, 2021 Share Posted January 18, 2021 12 minutes ago, Forge said: I’d be willing to take a shot in Lance. He’s got big time potential. I’d definitely be good with bringing him on if Jimmy is back so he can sit on the bench and learn the offense for a year, or as long as Jimmy can stay healthy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
757-NINER Posted January 18, 2021 Share Posted January 18, 2021 1 minute ago, y2lamanaki said: To be clear, I think Trask will be taken much earlier than the 6th. When Nathan Peterman came out I made a similar comment. And much like Peterman, I think someone will take him too early and he'll stay in the NFL way longer than he should. Trask is Brandon Weeden 2.0 for me... I've said it from jump, I don't see anything that makes me think he's a legitimate starting NFL QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted January 18, 2021 Share Posted January 18, 2021 1 minute ago, GW21 said: I’d be willing to take a shot in Lance. He’s got big time potential. I’d definitely be good with bringing him on if Jimmy is back so he can sit on the bench and learn the offense for a year, or as long as Jimmy can stay healthy. I feel pretty comfortable that he will be there. We may make the trade up just because that's what we do when there is someone we love, but we won't have to sacrifice a future first or anything, which is good. But honestly, I kind of think I'm still on the "screw it, just play him" bandwagon lol. If he's not starting, he's not getting game or practice reps, and if there is one thing I definitely want him to have, it's reps. I don't think we break him if we play him, which is usually the only time I advocate for sitting guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted January 18, 2021 Share Posted January 18, 2021 1 minute ago, 757-NINER said: Trask is Brandon Weeden 2.0 for me... I've said it from jump, I don't see anything that makes me think he's a legitimate starting NFL QB. He's got some nice traits mentally. He processes his patterns fairly well and knows where to throw. Understands concepts and I don't have any major issues with his pocket play. Ultimately, the arm is a killer though and the fact that he has no mobility isn't helpful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GW21 Posted January 18, 2021 Share Posted January 18, 2021 7 minutes ago, Forge said: I feel pretty comfortable that he will be there. We may make the trade up just because that's what we do when there is someone we love, but we won't have to sacrifice a future first or anything, which is good. But honestly, I kind of think I'm still on the "screw it, just play him" bandwagon lol. If he's not starting, he's not getting game or practice reps, and if there is one thing I definitely want him to have, it's reps. I don't think we break him if we play him, which is usually the only time I advocate for sitting guys. My only concern would be all the comments we’ve heard about how complex Kyle’s offense is and guys like Aiyuk and Samuel mentioning how long it took them to get comfortable. I wouldn’t want to crush his confidence right away when we could let him sit and still win games with Jimmy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts