Dolphins trade 3rd overall pick to SF

[Forge]

5 minutes ago, JohnChimpo said:

It’s dated 3/28, but Alabama had their pro day on 3/23. What am I missing?

 

Seems like Lance or Fields to me. What is it about Fields that makes him a bad scheme fit? I think I read that earlier in the thread.

Alabama has two this year. 

I'll get to the second question when I can type more because I'm of the opinion that he's a very good fit

[rocky_rams]

I like Mac Jones. Hopefully SF get Lance or Fields instead and hopefully Wilson doesn’t fall in their lap

Edited March 29, 2021 by rocky_rams

[squire12]

Attending the pro day is interesting.

Wonder who they might bring in for individual workouts in the next few weeks

[Forge]

2 minutes ago, squire12 said:

Attending the pro day is interesting.

Wonder who they might bring in for individual workouts in the next few weeks

There are no individual workouts I'm pretty sure

[squire12]

34 minutes ago, Forge said:

There are no individual workouts I'm pretty sure

Didn't know if that was the situation 

[KingOfNewYork]

I doubt they're picking Fields

[Forge]

Just now, KingOfNewYork said:

I doubt they're picking Fields

I wouldn't doubt that at all. I can give reasons why it will or won't be any of them. I definitely view Lance/fields as the likely choice, but I keep switching back and forth on which one specifically

[Forge]

4 minutes ago, squire12 said:

Didn't know if that was the situation 

Yeah, no work outs, no in person meetings I'm pretty sure. I know that they have had several zoom meetings with Lance (I think I read somewhere the number was three, but unsure of the validity), unsure about other QBs

[KingOfNewYork]

4 minutes ago, Forge said:

I wouldn't doubt that at all. I can give reasons why it will or won't be any of them. I definitely view Lance/fields as the likely choice, but I keep switching back and forth on which one specifically

Is it more wishful thinking because just reading the signs I cant see the connection between Fields and the 49ers but I might be wrong. 

[Forge]

Just now, KingOfNewYork said:

Is it more wishful thinking because just reading the signs I cant see the connection between Fields and the 49ers but I might be wrong. 

I mean, Kyle coached him at the qb collective, so that's one. You can argue fields is the second or third best qb in the draft and the niners have the third pick. 

I'm not sure what the connections would be for Mac and Lance outside of you can argue that they are the third best qb and the niners have the third pick? 

[N4L]

16 hours ago, squire12 said:

21 hours ago, N4L said:

You aren't factoring in other injuries. We had 80 million in cap space on IR last year. The cap was 198. Basically 40% of the cap was on IR. It wasnt just Garoppolo. It was Nick bosa. It was George kittle. It was Richard Sherman. We had to use our swing tackle at center because we lost FIVE centers. 

Fully aware of the other injuries, since they weren't the primary discussion point going on, bringing them up is not relevant 

Quote

You also aren't factoring in how bad Garoppolos replacement was. We had a backup QB who would turn the ball over multiple times and it cost us games. Jimmy will now have a much more competent backup with whoever gets drafted at 3. So, a Garoppolo injury wont hurt us as much as it did last year. 

Fully aware of the issue at backup QB.  Again, since the focus of the discussion was on Jimmy G health, not the backup.

The reasoning was if Jimmy stays healthy SF won't pick this high so take your shot...not Jimmy needs a better backup

Well, the other injuries are completely relevant to the discussion at hand regarding the 49ers likelihood of picking high again.

The "garoppolo wins games when hes healthy" argument is a derivative of that discussion, not the other way around. 

You are choosing to focus on one singular issue - garoppolos health - without realizing that his health is no longer as big of a determining factor in the 49ers record. We will now have another QB to play in the event of injury. 

Ignoring the context of the rest of the teams health, and the improved nature of the QB room, just to argue that Garoppolos health is something you can not rely on, and therefore the niners should have planned on picking high again, rather than just making the deal to move up this offseason, seems intentionally dense and obtuse. If you cant rely on JG's health, then shouldnt you be going up and getting another QB that you like to play in his stead? What am I missing here??

The arguement you are making is - "garoppolo cant stay healthy, so the niners should have planned on picking high again next year". Even if you did not say those words verbatim, you are making counterpoints to 49ers fans who are telling you that the team does not expect to miss the playoffs for the next few years. We do not believe that is an unrealistic expectation because of the talent we have. George Kittle, Fred Warner, Nick Bosa, Trent Williams. Those are four all pro, cornerstone level players. Two of them were drafted in the third round or later. This front office finds guys in later rounds who can play. The only 2021 draft pick we gave up in this trade was #12. We still have 9 total picks. 

Feel free to disagree with the talent on/expectations of the niners, but refusing to step outside of the very narrow lense you are attempting to evaluate the discussion - through Garoppolos health solely - seems perplexing for a man of your deductive reasoning skills. 

17 hours ago, squire12 said:

Quote

Last year was the season from hell. We got kicked out of our home state. Had to play the last month of the season on the road. Everything that could go wrong, went wrong, yet we still had a top 10 defense, still scored a decent amount of points, still played hard, fought to the end. 

Only your team faced challenges 

That is not what I am saying at all LOL

I am simply saying that this past season was an absolute disaster for the 49ers from things that were not strictly within their control. If you dont agree, then you werent paying attention and are ignorant to the current state of the 49ers

I shouldnt need to break it down for you. It is well documented. 

[Dr A W Niloc]

4 hours ago, TheKillerNacho said:

I heard previously that the pick was Lance.

      Pundits can say weird things.  Would you believe that many of them predicted Atlanta would take a Quarterback!?

      Lawrence, Wilson, and Fields are the three highest [PFF] rated draftees;  being QBs, they go 1st-2nd-3rd now that Miami has moved out of the way.  Trey Lance is ranked 10th but has average accuracy and isn't a quick study--the kiss of death for San Francisco (and, incidentally, New England).  Kyle Trask is 44th and Mac Jones is...complicated.

[N4L]

On 3/27/2021 at 9:49 AM, Blue said:

The logic of Garoppolo staying health for even half the season is ludicrously unrealistic though.

Which is exactly why we are actively looking to replace him. You are correct, he cannot be relied on to stay healthy. 

So yes, we should absolutely be willing to trade future picks for someone we believe to be the long term answer at QB. Someone who can be a legitimate, franchise QB. 

17 hours ago, Blue said:

You've had one winning season in the last seven years.

Yes, and we have been to 4 NFCCGs in the last 10 years. 

I fail to see how 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018 are part of the discussion. Also, 2014 was 8-8, so it wasnt a losing season either, like the "one winning season" implies

We went through a major rebuild, were rebuilt in 2019, went 15-4 and to the Superbowl, then had a bad year due to unforeseeable circumstances. Per my post above to squire, if you cant understand the context of the 2020 season then you are simply not informed enough with regards to the inner workings of the 49ers to have legitimate input as to the likelihood of long term success of this current core of players, and thereby the trade itself.

On 3/27/2021 at 9:32 AM, Blue said:

I'm not even ragging on the trade up, I just think the logic of "well they had to do it because they won't be picking this high otherwise" is laughably and demonstrably untrue. Just say that they must like a guy enough to go up and get him.

Considering we we traded away two future firsts, our expected future draft position is absolutely relevant to the discussion. 49ers fans are telling you that the front office and the coaching staff believes that it took the season from hell to pick at #12. You can choose to poo poo that thought process all you want, but that was absolutely a determining factor to our brain-trust as to why they felt comfortable shoving all of their chips to the center of the table right now at this time

This trade would look bad if we are picking in the top 5 (for any reason) over the next 2 years. The 49ers front office and their fans are telling you that we believe that to be a very low chance of that happening, which is why we are all comfortable trading away multiple future firsts and not thinking twice about it. Maybe we are all wrong, no one is saying its impossible, but we are saying it is on the low end of the spectrum of likely outcomes

On 3/27/2021 at 9:32 AM, Blue said:

You can keep talking about the talent level on the roster all you want. You are your record, and San Francisco's record under Shanahan (and beyond!) has been pretty bad outside of one year. Banking on that one year being the norm doesn't seem reasonable to me.

Please dont make the oversimplification of - you are what your record says you are. Lets do more than evaluate QBs by their win loss records. Same goes with coaches. Life isnt black and white. Everything is shades of grey. Context is key. Some teams deal more in certain years than other teams. Thats the nature of the beast, and also why its so hard to consistently win 10 games every year like the 49ers did in the 80s and 90s. That doesnt invalidate their superbowl run in 2019. It just means they cant sit on their hands for 2021 and expect to be back. They knew they couldnt rely on Garoppolos health long term, so they decided to make the move.

By making this move they are doing the opposite of banking on that one year, they are ensuring that they have a chance to have a QB who can raise the level of play of the other guys on the roster, even when everything else isnt perfect. 

Banking on that success would be taking a corner at #12 or a rotational DE and then being surprised when Garoppolo gets hurt and you dont have a legit backup behind him. Instead, we: 

1) Secured the immediate future of our QB position with a cost controlled rookie that will allow us to sign our homegrown talent to huge deals

2) Hedged against Garoppolo injury risk, thereby decreasing the chance that the 22 FRP is a high pick

3) Gave up no current assets so that we can improve the back end of the roster and ensure proper depth to make a playoff push - again, decreasing the future value of future picks. 

 

Im going to enjoy pulling these receipts when the niners win 10+ games next year. 13-3, 6-10, 10+ wins. Which one of those would be a fluke then?? LOL

Edited March 29, 2021 by N4L

[Hopper15]

So Kyle is attending Mac's Pro day instead of Fields Pro day. hmm

[Hunter2_1]

12 hours ago, 49ersfan said:

Mike Lombardi has been back and forth. The tweet yesterday said Lance. The tweet today says Jones. He's just guessing and now he gets to say he was right in either scenario (unless they take Fields)

 

Whoever they draft, there will be no redshirt year. There may be a redshirt 4 or 5 games before Jimmy breaks again. 

I'd go Fields, but it sounds like Lance will be your guy