(04-08-2020, 05:15 PM)flgatorsandjags Wrote:

(04-08-2020, 03:59 PM)Upper Wrote: As I posted in the 20th pick feels like no man's land thread, I do not think that whoever we want will be there at 20. We're going to be forced to pick from a tier of players who are a large gap in skill from the players going in the few picks ahead of us.

It always looks like that and a player or 2 always fall.  It never goes exactly like all these mocks.

---

(04-08-2020, 03:41 PM)Upper Wrote: Or Henderson or any of the big 3 WRs. I will consider it a fail if we wind up picking at 20.

You dont just trade up to trade up.  If we want to trade up we need to do it for a franchise LT not one of the WRs.  There will be good WRs to be had day 2 or the mid rounds

As for your first response, yes, a player or two will always fall.  But I have a couple of caveats.  First, the player who falls unexpectedly may or may not be a system fit for you.  2.  By not trading up, you put your hope in the other teams not taking your guy(s) before you.  But I agree you don't trade up just to trade up.  It has to make sense from a draft board perspective and it has to make sense from a draft pick compensation perspective.

Regarding your second, I disagree about an absolute rule against trading up for a WR.  While I agree this is a very deep draft at the position, and we can fill the position later in the draft if necessary if the coaches feel the new offense needs a special type of receiver-one that won't be there at 20-then we should move up if it is affordable to do so.  The 49ers traded up for Jerry Rice.  The Falcons traded up for Julio Jones.  The Vikings traded up the day before the draft and wound up with Randy Moss.  Sometimes trading up for a receiver is the right thing to do.  We have the picks to move up, and there are enough receivers in this draft to still get one later.

---