Jump to content

Dolphins trade 3rd overall pick to SF


Recommended Posts

Just now, Yin-Yang said:

Only justification, if true, is that they love two or more guys so much that they’re ecstatic to have any of them. Even then, with that much of a mortgage, you’d think they’d be sure by now...

I think it’s more likely that Kyle/Lynch aren’t telling anyone who they actually want, but do have an idea of who it is at this point. 

They mortgage to move up to 3 a month in advance instead of on draft day. It feels like they did have two or more guys in mind but now can use the extra time to differentiate. No more hiding about wanting a QB.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/8/2021 at 4:25 PM, 49ersfan said:

https://pantherswire.usatoday.com/2021/02/17/panthers-love-justin-fields-like-mac-jones/

Narrative earlier this week - Panthers loved Jones, from Mike Tannebaum

Narrative now - Panthers loved Fields, from Jordan Rodrigue.

I really can't take another 3 weeks of this 

Anything Mike Tannebaum says or does you should go with the opposite there is a reason he failed at being GM and VP for 2 organizations with very little to show for it other then bloated contracts and losing records. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Yin-Yang said:

Only justification, if true, is that they love two or more guys so much that they’re ecstatic to have any of them. Even then, with that much of a mortgage, you’d think they’d be sure by now...

I think it’s more likely that Kyle/Lynch aren’t telling anyone who they actually want, but do have an idea of who it is at this point. 

Yeah, do not buy any stock in the idea that the Niners do not know who they want. At this point, they know exactly who they want. They probably actually want Lawrence or Wilson, but they are expecting those 2 guys to be gone and are extremely comfortable with whoever their 3rd QB is.

Right now, I think that is Fields. This sort of thing happens almost every year, where the choice based just on tape from months ago is talked out of for whatever reason. Fields was the #2 2021 QB for a long time, even going back to the end of the college season. I think he is the guy at 3. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, soflbillsfan said:

Anything Mike Tannebaum says or does you should go with the opposite there is a reason he failed at being GM and VP for 2 organizations with very little to show for it other then bloated contracts and losing records. 

He was on a niners podcast a week or so ago and his reasoning was horrible. He stated the niners traded up to get their next Matt Ryan, Matt Schaub, or Jimmy G. I mean, thats insane?? Even if you like Mac Jones, you're not hoping he's Schaub or Jimmy G. You're hoping for Matt Ryan or Drew Brees.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, 49ersfan said:

He was on a niners podcast a week or so ago and his reasoning was horrible. He stated the niners traded up to get their next Matt Ryan, Matt Schaub, or Jimmy G. I mean, thats insane?? Even if you like Mac Jones, you're not hoping he's Schaub or Jimmy G. You're hoping for Matt Ryan or Drew Brees.

My favorite was talking about how they wanted to have a guy that "wouldn't screw up" and when you traded up, you wanted to go after talent and character (Mac is probably the least physically talented, and the only one with a character ding lol) 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Yin-Yang said:

Only justification, if true, is that they love two or more guys so much that they’re ecstatic to have any of them. Even then, with that much of a mortgage, you’d think they’d be sure by now...

I think it’s more likely that Kyle/Lynch aren’t telling anyone who they actually want, but do have an idea of who it is at this point. 

If that's the case, then why trade to 3?  Might have been cheaper to trade into pick 4 and get whichever QB is left of the 2 ( assuming it's Lawrence  then Wilson going 1 and 2)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, squire12 said:

If that's the case, then why trade to 3?  Might have been cheaper to trade into pick 4 and get whichever QB is left of the 2 ( assuming it's Lawrence  then Wilson going 1 and 2)

Honestly, the niners don't care about overpaying if they get their guy. You can see it all over their player acquisitions. It's just a thing that we have come to accept in the niner forum lol 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, squire12 said:

If that's the case, then why trade to 3?  Might have been cheaper to trade into pick 4 and get whichever QB is left of the 2 ( assuming it's Lawrence  then Wilson going 1 and 2)

     Aside from Forge's point that price is no object for Shanahan, I can think of only two likelihoods:

1.  Atlanta wasn't ready to deal.  Holding out for more?  

     This is consistent with the fact that neither Denver nor New England have been able to finalize a trade for #4.  Time is on Atlanta's side.  For now.

2.  Shanahan had a strong preference between Fields and Jones.

      Whether or not it is still the same preference is another question entirely--one that Kyle won't be answering.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Forge said:

Honestly, the niners don't care about overpaying if they get their guy. You can see it all over their player acquisitions. It's just a thing that we have come to accept in the niner forum lol 

so if SF is going to get their guy and is willing to overpay, then they probably don't have 2 players they would be equally willing to select.   That is the strong opposite to "going to get their guy".

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, squire12 said:

so if SF is going to get their guy and is willing to overpay, then they probably don't have 2 players they would be equally willing to select.   That is the strong opposite to "going to get their guy".

Not if you're the one who wants to make the decision as opposed to getting the scraps. In a situation where they haven't made a decision or view players similarly at the current point in time, "their guy"is a concept more than a specific player. Given more time, the opinion may change and they want to be in a position to adjust to that change. 

Though personally I think they had the decision already made. I think it's always been made.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Yin-Yang said:

Only justification, if true, is that they love two or more guys so much that they’re ecstatic to have any of them. Even then, with that much of a mortgage, you’d think they’d be sure by now...

I think it’s more likely that Kyle/Lynch aren’t telling anyone who they actually want, but do have an idea of who it is at this point. 

Since I was responding to the specific quote above about the concept of SF being "ecstatic with any of them", that is certainly not the same as "going to get their guy"

3 minutes ago, Forge said:

Not if you're the one who wants to make the decision as opposed to getting the scraps. In a situation where they haven't made a decision or view players similarly at the current point in time, "their guy"is a concept more than a specific player. Given more time, the opinion may change and they want to be in a position to adjust to that change. 

Though personally I think they had the decision already made. I think it's always been made.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, squire12 said:

Since I was responding to the specific quote above about the concept of SF being "ecstatic with any of them", that is certainly not the same as "going to get their guy"

Happy to have any of them also does not mean they don't have a preference or that they won't at some point. Lis, in that situation, "their guy" is a concept

I'm happy to have $20, $30 or $40 given to me for no reason, however I do have a preference on which. 

Happy to have any of them doesn't mean you want to give someone else the control either. You can be happy to have any of them and still want to make the call

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Forge said:

Happy to have any of them also does not mean they don't have a preference or that they won't at some point. Lis, in that situation, "their guy" is a concept

I'm happy to have $20, $30 or $40 given to me for no reason, however I do have a preference on which. 

Happy to have any of them doesn't mean you want to give someone else the control either. You can be happy to have any of them and still want to make the call

I must have missed the trade where SF was paid to move up to get their guy vs having to pay.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...