Quote:I can see a real problem if the first 4 picks are, in any particular order, Bosa, Jack, Ramsey, and Tunsil.   Of course, we have no idea how Dave is ranking the prospects, but if you look at Daniel Jeremiah's top 50 ranking as an example, you can see the problem.  Here's the way he ranks them:

 

1. <span>Laremy Tunsil - OT, Ole Miss</span>

<span>2. <span><span>Jalen Ramsey - S, Florida State </span></span></span>

<span><span>3. <span><span>Myles Jack - LB, UCLA </span></span></span></span>

<span><span><span>4. <span><span>Joey Bosa - DE, Ohio State </span></span></span></span></span>

 

<span><span><span><span>Now here's where we have a problem:</span></span></span></span>

 

<span><span><span><span>5.</span></span></span></span>DeForest Buckner - DT, Oregon  

6. <span><span>Ezekiel Elliott - RB, Ohio State </span></span>

<span>7: <span><span>Carson Wentz - QB, North Dakota State  </span></span></span>

<span><span>8. <span><span>Jared Goff - QB, Cal  </span></span></span></span>

<span><span><span>9. <span><span>Vernon Hargreaves - CB, Florida </span></span></span></span></span>

<span><span><span><span>10.</span></span></span></span>Ronnie Stanley - OT, Notre Dame

 

I could see possibly drafting Hargreaves, although he doesn't fit our style of CB, he's kind of small and doesn't tackle well.  Daniel Jeremiah says, "Hargreaves will have some issues outside because of his lack of size but he could be an elite nickel cornerback at the next level."   Do we spend the 5th pick on a nickel corner? 

 

Buckner is basically a 3-4 DE or a 3-technique DT,  and we're already overloaded at 3-tech DT.  He and Malik Jackson seem like almost the same guy.  

 

We don't need a QB or a RB.   I suppose we could draft the OT from Notre Dame, and put him at OG, but you don't spend the 5th pick in the draft on an OG. 

 

You have to go a little ways down the draft board to find guys that are really interesting, such as: 

 

17. <span><span>Kevin Dodd - DE, Clemson</span></span>

<span><span>18.</span></span>Leonard Floyd - LB, Georgia

 

21.Ryan Kelly - C, Alabama

 

So to me, the ideal thing if the draft goes Tunsil, Bosa, Ramsey, Jack would be a trade down.   Get that extra 2nd and maybe also extra 3rd round pick. 

 

 

I would take a good look at Leonard Floyd.   Jeremiah says this about Floyd: 

 

"Floyd was a three-year starter at linebacker for the Bulldogs. He has excellent height and a very lean, narrow frame. His alignment changes depending on the game. He is at his best coming off the edge and I'm projecting him as a SAM linebacker at the next level. As a rusher, he has an explosive first step and a devastating inside counter move. He generates a lot of pressure without OTs getting a hand on him. Despite his skinny frame, he is very effective transferring speed to power off the edge. Against the run, he needs to improve his ability to set the edge. He prefers to slip, spin or trade one for one. Overall, Floyd lacks ideal bulk but his explosiveness is rare and he has double-digit sack potential. "

 

Disclaimer:  I'm just using Jeremiah's rankings as an example, to show the difficulty we might have is the draft falls according to his rankings. 

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000...-nfl-draft

Exactly my concern, though explained in much more detail.

 

I'm seeing some chatter of Shaq Lawson as possibly a top 10 pick, but I'm not entirely sold on that.

 

As far as a trade down, it would seem that if Goff were available at 5, that would seem to generate more trade requests.

 

However, the next ten picks after us and their QBs are...

 

6.  Baltimore-Flacco

7.  San Francisco-Gabbert

8.  Philadelphia-Bradford

9. Tampa-Winston

10. NYG-Manning

11. Chicago-Cutler

12. New Orleans-Brees

13. Miami-Tannehill

14.  Oakland-Carr

15. Los Angeles-Foles

 

As you can see, very few of the teams below us have a pressing immediate need for a QB.  Baltimore is set with Flacco.  For some reason, Philadelphia seems okay with Bradford.  Tampa just took Winston.  The Giants appear to be in win now mode with Manning.  Chicago has Cutler-not great, but Fox has won with average guys at QB before. Perhaps the Saints could stand to take a QB to groom behind Brees, but Brees is still dangerous, as we saw first hand last year.  Miami has Tannehill and is another team that appears to be in win now mode.  Carr is looking like the QB that will return Oakland to prominence.  Foles is just a guy, but the way Fisher's offenses tend to go, they just need "a guy."

 

That leaves San Francisco as the only team within reasonable trading distance with us that has a pressing need for a QB at this point.  Now you can argue that with the trades, and a new head coach, the Eagles may be positioning themselves for a move up to get a QB.

 

But with that, there are some potential issues that could preclude a trade down for us, or limit the return in the form of draft picks.

 

1.  We don't need a QB, and neither does the Ravens.  That means if Goff is still on the board, the 49ers might be able to wait and still get him.

 

2.  If Goff is still on the board even after Cleveland picks, then perhaps he may not be the prospect that teams covet, which may drive down his demand in trade.  If teams do covet him, perhaps they will trade with Cleveland.

 

3.  Because we have the lowest of the top 5 picks and the number of spaces to move down with either SF or Philadelphia are minimal, the compensation we could expect would be minimal.

 

4.  If the 49ers and Eagles view Paxton Lynch as comparable in quality to Goff, then if both are on the board at 5, both could likely stand pat and have one or the other to fall to them.

 

***I know this idea was floated before, but if the Rams got desperate to move up from 15, I wonder if they'd be willing to give up Quinn.*** 

---