ImageImageImageImageImage

#2 Pick

Moderators: Wolfay, MHSL82, CalamityX12

What should the 9ers do at #2

Mitch Trubisky
3
23%
DeShone Kizer
0
No votes
Jonathan Allen
1
8%
Trade
7
54%
Other
2
15%
 
Total votes: 13

Jikkle
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,545
And1: 103
Joined: Aug 24, 2014
         

Re: #2 Pick 

Post#41 » by Jikkle » Wed Jan 4, 2017 9:06 pm

From what I've read is the Jets don't feel like their future QB is on the roster and that they love Trubisky. Along with the fact seats are going to get hot I think they'll definitely be in play for a trade up if the Browns go Garrett.

Have to get a next year's 1st from them though as even if they draft Trubisky he won't be an effective day 1 starter and it's likely there 2018 1st will be a top 10 pick again.
CalamityX12
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 9,753
And1: 960
Joined: Mar 15, 2012
         

Re: #2 Pick 

Post#42 » by CalamityX12 » Wed Jan 4, 2017 9:14 pm

Maybe the Jets can trade with the Browns!!!!!!!!!
The ModFather

My sports teams are currently experiencing suckiness. Please pardon the mess.
thesack12
Head Coach
Posts: 6,040
And1: 201
Joined: Jun 06, 2008
Location: N DA NAP
     

Re: #2 Pick 

Post#43 » by thesack12 » Wed Jan 4, 2017 9:22 pm

Jikkle wrote:From what I've read is the Jets don't feel like their future QB is on the roster and that they love Trubisky. Along with the fact seats are going to get hot I think they'll definitely be in play for a trade up if the Browns go Garrett.

Have to get a next year's 1st from them though as even if they draft Trubisky he won't be an effective day 1 starter and it's likely there 2018 1st will be a top 10 pick again.


If they could somehow manage to pry #6 + 2018 1st for #2, I would immediately fall in love with the new regime, whomever it would be.

Unfortunately, I'm not real confident that will happen.
Jikkle
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,545
And1: 103
Joined: Aug 24, 2014
         

Re: #2 Pick 

Post#44 » by Jikkle » Wed Jan 4, 2017 10:36 pm

thesack12 wrote:
Jikkle wrote:From what I've read is the Jets don't feel like their future QB is on the roster and that they love Trubisky. Along with the fact seats are going to get hot I think they'll definitely be in play for a trade up if the Browns go Garrett.

Have to get a next year's 1st from them though as even if they draft Trubisky he won't be an effective day 1 starter and it's likely there 2018 1st will be a top 10 pick again.


If they could somehow manage to pry #6 + 2018 1st for #2, I would immediately fall in love with the new regime, whomever it would be.

Unfortunately, I'm not real confident that will happen.


If the Jets are serious about trading up to the #2 spot there is no way it's not going to cost them their 2018 1st rounder

For the Eagles to trade up from #2 from #8 they had to give up their 1st, 3rd, and 4th round picks for 2016. A 2017 1st round pick and a 2018 2nd round pick.

The Eagles also got a 4th rounder in return.

Now clearly you wouldn't get quite that big of a haul for #6 but it's not going to be that far off either.

The question will be if the Jets feel trading up to that spot is worth the price as nobody is going to sell that pick for cheap.
thesack12
Head Coach
Posts: 6,040
And1: 201
Joined: Jun 06, 2008
Location: N DA NAP
     

Re: #2 Pick 

Post#45 » by thesack12 » Wed Jan 4, 2017 11:18 pm

Jikkle wrote:
thesack12 wrote:
Jikkle wrote:From what I've read is the Jets don't feel like their future QB is on the roster and that they love Trubisky. Along with the fact seats are going to get hot I think they'll definitely be in play for a trade up if the Browns go Garrett.

Have to get a next year's 1st from them though as even if they draft Trubisky he won't be an effective day 1 starter and it's likely there 2018 1st will be a top 10 pick again.


If they could somehow manage to pry #6 + 2018 1st for #2, I would immediately fall in love with the new regime, whomever it would be.

Unfortunately, I'm not real confident that will happen.


If the Jets are serious about trading up to the #2 spot there is no way it's not going to cost them their 2018 1st rounder

For the Eagles to trade up from #2 from #8 they had to give up their 1st, 3rd, and 4th round picks for 2016. A 2017 1st round pick and a 2018 2nd round pick.

The Eagles also got a 4th rounder in return.

Now clearly you wouldn't get quite that big of a haul for #6 but it's not going to be that far off either.

The question will be if the Jets feel trading up to that spot is worth the price as nobody is going to sell that pick for cheap.


Sure, you can definitely use prior trades as a base strategy in your negotiations. However, every draft is different progressing under different circumstances. In order to get that type of return you have to have multiple teams interested and making bids, which was the case last year. That definitely isn't a given in a draft where there are no surefire #2 prospects (especially QBs.) I'm sure many teams will call, but that doesn't mean they will be making offers to that magnitude.

I hope you are right though. I personally definitely want to move off #2 in this draft, 4-7 range is about ideal.
Jikkle
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,545
And1: 103
Joined: Aug 24, 2014
         

Re: #2 Pick 

Post#46 » by Jikkle » Wed Jan 4, 2017 11:29 pm

thesack12 wrote:
Jikkle wrote:
thesack12 wrote:
If they could somehow manage to pry #6 + 2018 1st for #2, I would immediately fall in love with the new regime, whomever it would be.

Unfortunately, I'm not real confident that will happen.


If the Jets are serious about trading up to the #2 spot there is no way it's not going to cost them their 2018 1st rounder

For the Eagles to trade up from #2 from #8 they had to give up their 1st, 3rd, and 4th round picks for 2016. A 2017 1st round pick and a 2018 2nd round pick.

The Eagles also got a 4th rounder in return.

Now clearly you wouldn't get quite that big of a haul for #6 but it's not going to be that far off either.

The question will be if the Jets feel trading up to that spot is worth the price as nobody is going to sell that pick for cheap.


Sure, you can definitely use prior trades as a base strategy in your negotiations. However, every draft is different progressing under different circumstances. In order to get that type of return you have to have multiple teams interested and making bids, which was the case last year. That definitely isn't a given in a draft where there are no surefire #2 prospects (especially QBs.) I'm sure many teams will call, but that doesn't mean they will be making offers to that magnitude.

I hope you are right though. I personally definitely want to move off #2 in this draft, 4-7 range is about ideal.


Competition will certainly drive up the price for the pick but there is always going to be a base price for the pick and #1 and #2 are very expensive picks and I don't think the 9ers GM to be would even entertain a conversation for it without it starting with swapping 2017 1st rounders and getting a 2018 1st rounder.

#1 and #2 are rarely traded because of the astronomical price for them even when there is no competition for it. It's the Boardwalk and Park Place of the draft world.
thesack12
Head Coach
Posts: 6,040
And1: 201
Joined: Jun 06, 2008
Location: N DA NAP
     

Re: #2 Pick 

Post#47 » by thesack12 » Thu Jan 5, 2017 1:16 am

Jikkle wrote:
thesack12 wrote:
Jikkle wrote:
If the Jets are serious about trading up to the #2 spot there is no way it's not going to cost them their 2018 1st rounder

For the Eagles to trade up from #2 from #8 they had to give up their 1st, 3rd, and 4th round picks for 2016. A 2017 1st round pick and a 2018 2nd round pick.

The Eagles also got a 4th rounder in return.

Now clearly you wouldn't get quite that big of a haul for #6 but it's not going to be that far off either.

The question will be if the Jets feel trading up to that spot is worth the price as nobody is going to sell that pick for cheap.


Sure, you can definitely use prior trades as a base strategy in your negotiations. However, every draft is different progressing under different circumstances. In order to get that type of return you have to have multiple teams interested and making bids, which was the case last year. That definitely isn't a given in a draft where there are no surefire #2 prospects (especially QBs.) I'm sure many teams will call, but that doesn't mean they will be making offers to that magnitude.

I hope you are right though. I personally definitely want to move off #2 in this draft, 4-7 range is about ideal.


Competition will certainly drive up the price for the pick but there is always going to be a base price for the pick and #1 and #2 are very expensive picks and I don't think the 9ers GM to be would even entertain a conversation for it without it starting with swapping 2017 1st rounders and getting a 2018 1st rounder.

#1 and #2 are rarely traded because of the astronomical price for them even when there is no competition for it. It's the Boardwalk and Park Place of the draft world.


It really depends on what the draft pool is and what the situation of the teams interested in trading are.

For instance it was widely documented that both KC and Jax were open for business in the 2013 draft, but nobody stepped up and made a solid offer for #1 or 2 that year. There were no clear cut tiers in prospects so teams were more than happy to sit idly and let the board come to them because they had several prospects graded out the same.

As it pertains to this draft, it sure is shaping up that after Garrett there is a huge drop, then about 5-7 guys could make a case for #2. Its going to be a beauty is in the eye of the beholder type thing. If Frisco has 3-5 guys all rated the same, if the opportumity presented itself they would be foolish not to move back a couple spots even if they only pick up say a 3rd for doing so. The team has so many holes, it needs an influx of as much talent as possible even if they didn't get as much value for #2 as others have in past years. If they rate somebody a firm #2, then of course thats an entirely different scenario.

Another thing to remember is the rookie wage scale. These teams that move up also have to take into account the sizable cap cost difference between #2 and say #6 plus whatever assets they would have to give up. That is inconsequential to the 9ers and their cap situation, but it could be a factor for some teams that would like to move up. Again this is where the prospect tiers come into play, if teams have multiple guys rated on the same level they will just sit back and take whomever is available to him.

Again, I'll repeat I hope Frisco can move back a bit and get a king's ransom but with this draft I'm skeptical they can find a dance partner to do so.
Ray_Dogg
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 3,149
And1: 165
Joined: May 09, 2014
       

Re: #2 Pick 

Post#48 » by Ray_Dogg » Thu Jan 5, 2017 6:22 am

thesack12 wrote:
CalamityX12 wrote:I can't logically see the Jets doing that(QB) without giving Hackenberg(2nd rd pick) a honest chance.


Everything I hear about that is, he's already considered a sunken cost. Maybe not to that extreme so quickly, but it sure seems like NYJ is far from confident in the guy. They went with Geno over him, then Petty over him, then back to Fitz over him.

Supposedly one jet's offensive coach is (anonymously) quoted as saying Hackenberg can't throw the ball in the ocean.


That was evident in college. Horribly inaccurate passer. Why they thought that would be resolved is beyond me. That pick was flushed down the toilet when they drafted him.
CrimsonCrew
Analyst
Posts: 3,622
And1: 144
Joined: Aug 21, 2014
 

Re: #2 Pick 

Post#49 » by CrimsonCrew » Fri Jan 6, 2017 6:31 am

thesack12 wrote:
CalamityX12 wrote:
thesack12 wrote:
Eric Decker + #6 + 3rd rounder for #2 + 6th rounder

I kinda like it but I feel we should get more still....... a future 2 or a future 1 .....


If this was a draft like 2016, 2015, or 2012 where quarterbacks were the clear cut definite top 2 picks Frisco could mine a lot more value out of #2. Unfortunately, that isn't the case in this draft.

If this proposed scenario was at all realistic, 9ers might be able to squeeze a little more value than what I posted because Decker is coming off injury but not a whole lot more IMO.


Not sure I agree that QBs were the clear-cut top two picks this past year. Prior to the trades up to one and two, a number of mocks had Goff falling to us, and Wentz typically lower than that. Those guys went that high because they were QBs, and only for that reason.

I wouldn't make a trade for that return. Decker is going to be a pricey 30-year-old WR coming off an injury. By the time we're relevant again, how much will he be contributing? The Browns just traded the #2 pick for #8, a third, and a fourth that year, a first the following year, and a second the year after that. We may not get that much, but we'd damn well better get two other picks in the first three rounds in 2017 and 2018 in addition to whatever spot we move down to. Unless we're only moving a spot or two, in which case maybe this year's second-rounder does it.
thesack12
Head Coach
Posts: 6,040
And1: 201
Joined: Jun 06, 2008
Location: N DA NAP
     

Re: #2 Pick 

Post#50 » by thesack12 » Fri Jan 6, 2017 10:00 pm

CrimsonCrew wrote:
thesack12 wrote:
CalamityX12 wrote:I kinda like it but I feel we should get more still....... a future 2 or a future 1 .....


If this was a draft like 2016, 2015, or 2012 where quarterbacks were the clear cut definite top 2 picks Frisco could mine a lot more value out of #2. Unfortunately, that isn't the case in this draft.

If this proposed scenario was at all realistic, 9ers might be able to squeeze a little more value than what I posted because Decker is coming off injury but not a whole lot more IMO.


Not sure I agree that QBs were the clear-cut top two picks this past year. Prior to the trades up to one and two, a number of mocks had Goff falling to us, and Wentz typically lower than that. Those guys went that high because they were QBs, and only for that reason.

I wouldn't make a trade for that return. Decker is going to be a pricey 30-year-old WR coming off an injury. By the time we're relevant again, how much will he be contributing? The Browns just traded the #2 pick for #8, a third, and a fourth that year, a first the following year, and a second the year after that. We may not get that much, but we'd damn well better get two other picks in the first three rounds in 2017 and 2018 in addition to whatever spot we move down to. Unless we're only moving a spot or two, in which case maybe this year's second-rounder does it.


Some mocks go by straight prospect grades, and some account for team needs/etc. Tennessee obviously wasn't going QB fresh of drafting Mariota, and of the original draft order before Frisco's pick only Cleveland was in the market for a QB. San Diego, Dallas, Jacksonville, and Baltimore all weren't taking a QB in the first round. So the mocks that account for needs/situation were the ones showing Goff and Wentz down the board.

By this time last year it was apparent that Goff and Wentz were going 1,2 it was just a matter of who was going first and which teams were going to take them.

As for the other part of your post, My thinking is: 1) Frisco desperately needs WR help, and Decker is definitely an upper echelon player at the position. 2) Its all about young QB development. IMO Decker is a guy who can he develop a young QB develop. Decker played a hand in both Tebow looking much better than he actually was. Decker also played a huge role in Fitzpatrick playing out of his mind last year, this season no Eric Decker and Fitz faceplants again. The guy is just a huge asset for QB's in my opinion. Also, if it turns out McD is the new HC, Decker has familiarity with him and his scheme.

Now the value of picks/moving back, etc is arbitrary as everyone sees things differently. But sometimes the standard draft pick point value charts, or prior trade history aren't the best way to evaluate. Every situation is different.

If you're a trade down advocate, like me, we need to hope both Trubisky and Kizer absolutely kill the combine and pro days. If Watson works over Alabama and rocks the pre-draft process as well,he could perhaps re-enter the equation also.
thesack12
Head Coach
Posts: 6,040
And1: 201
Joined: Jun 06, 2008
Location: N DA NAP
     

Re: #2 Pick 

Post#51 » by thesack12 » Fri Jan 6, 2017 10:05 pm

Ray_Dogg wrote:
thesack12 wrote:
CalamityX12 wrote:I can't logically see the Jets doing that(QB) without giving Hackenberg(2nd rd pick) a honest chance.


Everything I hear about that is, he's already considered a sunken cost. Maybe not to that extreme so quickly, but it sure seems like NYJ is far from confident in the guy. They went with Geno over him, then Petty over him, then back to Fitz over him.

Supposedly one jet's offensive coach is (anonymously) quoted as saying Hackenberg can't throw the ball in the ocean.


That was evident in college. Horribly inaccurate passer. Why they thought that would be resolved is beyond me. That pick was flushed down the toilet when they drafted him.


Yup, it speaks volumes that in a lost season and absolutely nothing to play for they went back to Fitz over Hack in week 17.

Read another quote from a Jets player today saying Hack has "no chance."
Jikkle
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,545
And1: 103
Joined: Aug 24, 2014
         

Re: #2 Pick 

Post#52 » by Jikkle » Thu Jan 19, 2017 9:01 pm

I'm torn on if I want them to trade down or take a QB with the pick.

On the one hand you absolutely have to get a franchise QB and until you do you're just spinning your wheels.

On the other hand if we could the Jets or Bills to trade with us and give up a next years 1st along with the other picks the trade would require that would be a huge plus as well. That next years 1st has a legit shot of being a top 10 pick and our own 2018 pick has a legit shot of being a top 10 pick as well. So that's two potential top 10 picks to work with and you could get a lot better in a hurry if you have two pretty good drafts with those kind of picks.

Return to San Francisco 49ers