(03-31-2021, 07:43 AM)Sneakers Wrote:

(03-28-2021, 08:35 AM)Bullseye Wrote: To me, the only rational explanation for the move is they have strong positive convictions about three QBs in this draft.  If they were targeting one particular QB, getting up to #3 guaranteed nothing in terms of their availability, as you pointed out. 

As for who is worth such a move, fields may not have been among their top three QBs.  There is speculation that either Lance or Jones are the 49ers intended target.

Because they already have an established QB in Garoppolo, the 49ers were not desperate for a new starter this year.  Because of this, they could get a physically gifted but raw and inexperienced guy like Lance and sit him for a year behind Garoppolo.  Then after the apprenticeship, they could trade away the vet and have Lance for the next few years.

As for Jones, Shanahan had a guy like him in Matt Ryan when he was OC in Atlanta.

But most on these boards who have chimed in have indicated in one form or another the price the 49ers paid was too steep.

How much would you expect to pay in terms of draft choice compensation to trade up for a QB?

Consider in 2001, Atlanta sent the 5th overall pick, their 2001 3rd round pick, their 2002 2nd round pick and KR Tim Dwight to move up to #1 overall for QB Michael Vick.

Consider also in 2004, basically to move up from 4 to 1, the Giants gave up two 1sts (2004-Phillip Rivers and 2005), a 3rd round pick and a 5th round pick.

2017 saw three teams trade up in the draft for QBs in the first round:

• Chicago traded the #3 overall, #67, and #111 to the 49ers to move up one spot for Mitchell Trubisky.
  
• Kansas City traded the #27 overall pick, a 2017 3rd round pick, and a 2018 1st round pick to move to 10th overall for Mahomes
  
• Houston sent a 2018 first round pick to move up from 25 to 12 for Deshaun Watson
  

In 2018, to move from 6th overall to 3rd, the Jets sent the Colts the first round pick (#6) and three 2nd round picks-two in 2018 and one in 2019).

Also in 2018, to move from 12 to 7, the Bills gave up their first and two 2nd round picks (53 and 56-after a lot of other maneuvering to get those picks) for Josh Allen.

It seems that if you are going to move up double digit spots or move into the top spot, you should expect to give up at least two #1s.  But the 49ers moved up from 12 to 3 and gave up 3 #1s and a 3rd.  It would seem as though they overpaid, but trade value charts don't necessarily drive the costs...it's the demand.

I think because there is a glut of QBs at the top of this draft, there has been more chatter about trading up into those top spots, which drives up the cost to move into those spots.

I think if Carolina or Denver were to move up to #2, though they are not moving up as far as San Francisco did, they will end up paying more now that the market was set for the #3 pick and the #6 pick.

You're right, the have to be sold on at least 3 QBs to make that kind of move.  That being said, does it make sense to pay that much, then sit the guy for a year?  

I don't think the early first round  trading is close to done.  The Jets are the wild card, are they happy with Darnold?  For that matter, are the Lions convinced Goff will develop?  Denver needs a QB and Carolina is desperate.  

I can see the #6 changing hands again.  The Dolphins could be make out like bandits in this draft!  Drop back a couple more spots and still get their #1 target.  Could as many as 5 QBs go in the first 9 picks?

One last thought.  What if the Dolphins aren't sold on Tagovailoa.  They could be high on Lance or Jones, but expect him to be 4th or 5th QB taken, which most experts and mocks predict.  If they trade back to 8th or 9th and take a QB, it will be the rope-a-dope of the century.

As I've said in another post, I am not dissuaded or deterred by the prospect of sitting a QB for his first year if I thought he would be a long term answer at the position.  Too many great QBs have sat for most or all of their rookie years and went on to have hall of fame careers.

I agree with you there is a good chance there will be one more trade for a QB in the top ten.  It very well could be the Dolphins trading back from 6 to 8 or 9.  But I see that happening only one of two ways:  1.  Atlanta doesn't take a QB at 4.  If they don't, then chances are they trade out of that spot.  2.  Mac Jones is the apple of some team's eye and is the 5th QB with a first round grade.  While I don't necessarily see Mac Jones as a top ten QB pick, the Carolina brass worked with him at the Senior Bowl.  They could value him enough to move up to make sure they get him.

I don't think Miami has necessarily soured on Tua, and I think they would be making a mistake if they were.  Nobody seems to be soured on Joe Burrow.  Tua's numbers are virtually identical to his, and he doesn't have anywhere near the skill position support that Burrow has in Cincy.  That said, prior to all of the off field stuff, Watson represented a rare opportunity to substantially upgrade the QB position.  I think accumulating all of these future first round picks enables Miami to do several things:

1.  The picks give them ammo to trade for Watson in the future once all the legal issues clear up;
2.  Those picks enable the Dolphins to give Tua the surrounding talent he needs if they decide to stick with him;
3.  If Watson's legal issues are not cleared to the Dolphins' satisfaction and no trade for him happens, and they somehow sour on Tua, the picks better enable them the ability to trade up in future drafts to get another QB.

---