Trade back scenarios

[optimist4720]

Trade straight up with Philly #46 & 51 for #30 Not sure why Philly would do this but.. ; Trade with Cleveland #37 & #67 for #30... Cleveland gets 2 gems at #4 & 22 and go for Weeden at #30; In both scenarios we risk a bit to land a WR & RG/OT & RB prospect in the second rd. We might be able to land the guys we want and add 3 net higher quality guys than otherwise. In scenario with Cleveland we would trade up again in the 2nd to grab someone packaging #62 and either #92 or #125 to earlier 2nd rd. What would you be willing to give for NE #31?? Ie pick both at #30 and #31? Next yr. 1st and 3rd?

 

[Heathbar012]

It's too difficult to discuss trading back without knowing what is available. I suggest coming up with scenarios that you would like to see based on your favorite on-line mock. For example, if things play out how walterfootball.com predicts, I would:

Trade #30 to the Colts for #34 and #97
#34 - Peter Konz, Wisconsin
Trade #61 (and, if necessary #237) to the Dolphins for for #72, #73
#72 - Juron Criner, Arizona or Brandon Boykin, Georgia (depending on who you like best at that pick - I'm a Criner fan)
#73 - Chris Polk, Washington
#92 - Jared Crick, Nebraska
#97 - Chase Minnifield, Virginia or Orson Charles, Georgia (if you like Boykin more than Criner)
#125 - Shaun Prater, Iowa or Marvin Jones, Cal (again, for Boykin fans)
#165 - Michael Brewster, Ohio State
#199 - Audi Cole, N.C. State
#237 (if not used in the Miami trade) Donte Paige-Moss, UNC

Obviously, nothing can be predicted, but I agree that it is fun to imagine how us arm-chair GMs would make certain decisions.

 

[deep9er]

IMO we need quality over quantity and this means trading up. doesn't need to be #30, but TRY to move up a little for round 2 or 3 or 4.....

there's quite a few articles wanting depth and yeah, we could use it. but still prefer four higher picks than seven or more. prefer five higher picks over seven total.

if we trade down for future picks, thats ok.

 

[Kinzu]

IMO we need quality over quantity and this means trading up. doesn't need to be #30, but TRY to move up a little for round 2 or 3 or 4.....

there's quite a few articles wanting depth and yeah, we could use it. but still prefer four higher picks than seven or more. prefer five higher picks over seven total.

if we trade down for future picks, thats ok.

I agree
If we trade down it's for future picks and not to acquire more in this draft. We should be all means though look to trade up if it's for a player that can immediately help this team.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

IMO we need quality over quantity and this means trading up. doesn't need to be #30, but TRY to move up a little for round 2 or 3 or 4.....

there's quite a few articles wanting depth and yeah, we could use it. but still prefer four higher picks than seven or more. prefer five higher picks over seven total.

if we trade down for future picks, thats ok.

I agree there's really no need to pick seven, eight, or nine players this season. However, I wouldn't mind trading back into the early second if we can get a good offer. Adding four guys in the first three rounds would be a great way to flesh out the depth on a roster that is already pretty set at the starting positions. We have the luxury of adding projects this year, and Baalke seems to like those types of players.

 

[numone9er]

I'm more in favor of trading for future picks. Usually teams are willing to give up higher future picks then draft picks in the years class they are trading for. I still think we can get a quality player at 30, though.

 

[Bemular]

I'm more in favor of trading for future picks. Usually teams are willing to give up higher future picks then draft picks in the years class they are trading for. I still think we can get a quality player at 30, though.

This

 

[Heathbar012]

I'm more in favor of trading for future picks. Usually teams are willing to give up higher future picks then draft picks in the years class they are trading for. I still think we can get a quality player at 30, though.

I'd be fine with grabbing the Colts' and/or Dolphins' 2nd rounders next year. I see less reaches occurring if the Niners are picking earlier in some of these rounds. Of course, that is assuming there are few to no unexpected picks, and we all know that won't be the case. For example, I would be shocked if Konz lasts to #34, as walterfootball believes, but it would be incredible value. The same goes for Criner and Polk in the third. I wouldn't spend a late 2nd rounder on either of the Pac-12 guys, though. Early to mid-3rd is more like it. If that also leads to more depth this year or next, I favor it over taking Fleener or reaching for a need.