The desperate desire to trade down is frustrating

[Solar7]

I'm genuinely struggling to understand why so many of you want to move away from a consensus #1 player. I get that it's not a "need," but we're staring down a potentially elite player, and some of you want to exchange him for a bunch of warm bodies.

If our pass rush is elite, it'll cover up a lot of holes on this team, as opposed to hoping that a bunch of other players that were passed over happen to pan out.

 

[Cheesebeef]

I'm genuinely struggling to understand why so many of you want to move away from a consensus #1 player. I get that it's not a "need," but we're staring down a potentially elite player, and some of you want to exchange him for a bunch of warm bodies.

If our pass rush is elite, it'll cover up a lot of holes on this team, as opposed to hoping that a bunch of other players that were passed over happen to pan out.

probably because people don't think Bosa is a generational talent or a consensus #1 so if we can move down only a couple spots and pick up another late first or early second rounder, it would be beneficial.

not that hard to understand.

 

[Chopper0080]

The idea is that you can trade down to #4 and still get one of the top 3 DL guys.

 

[jlove]

Personally, I don't think any of the consensus or currently mocked Top 10 are much of a difference. Personally, I think if a coaching change and defensive scheme back to the 3-4 which our personnel fit, we don't need a top defensive player. If we go back to 3-4, I would love to come away with OL J Williams and N'Keal Harry in the 1st round.

 

[scandalous_b]

probably because people don't think Bosa is a generational talent or a consensus #1 so if we can move down only a couple spots and pick up another late first or early second rounder, it would be beneficial.

not that hard to understand.

Nick Bosa dominated at Ohio State.

His brother Joey was drafted at #3 overall and is one of the best pass rushers currently in the NFL.

His dad was a 1st round pick as a DE.

His uncle was a 1st round pick as a DE.

What makes you think that Nick won't be good or worthy of the #1 pick?

 

[JosiahLee]

probably because people don't think Bosa is a generational talent or a consensus #1 so if we can move down only a couple spots and pick up another late first or early second rounder, it would be beneficial.

not that hard to understand.

This is where I’m coming from...I don’t trust that he will stay healthy. Haven’t we suffered enough from signing players with an injury history?

 

[Solar7]

probably because people don't think Bosa is a generational talent or a consensus #1 so if we can move down only a couple spots and pick up another late first or early second rounder, it would be beneficial.

not that hard to understand.

He's been mocked to #1 pretty much all year. This is one of the few years in recent history where no one is actually arguing about who should be the top pick (besides us).

The idea is that you can trade down to #4 and still get one of the top 3 DL guys.

Trade to someone who desperately wants the top DL guy... so we can pick up a DL guy they're not sold on.

Personally, I don't think any of the consensus or currently mocked Top 10 are much of a difference. Personally, I think if a coaching change and defensive scheme back to the 3-4 which our personnel fit, we don't need a top defensive player. If we go back to 3-4, I would love to come away with OL J Williams and N'Keal Harry in the 1st round.

I think this is silly, but sure, you want to fill needs instead of picking elite talent and filling in the holes. I get it, but it's frustrating.

Nick Bosa dominated at Ohio State.

His brother Joey was drafted at #3 overall and is one of the best pass rushers currently in the NFL.

His dad was a 1st round pick as a DE.

His uncle was a 1st round pick as a DE.

What makes you think that Nick won't be good or worthy of the #1 pick?

This. Very much this.

 

[football karma]

why do i want to trade down?

its because when you look at past drafts -- the guys the draft guides claim are the best players dont turn out to be the best players in that draft -- especially true on non-qbs

 

[wa52lz]

Nick Bosa dominated at Ohio State.

His brother Joey was drafted at #3 overall and is one of the best pass rushers currently in the NFL.

His dad was a 1st round pick as a DE.

His uncle was a 1st round pick as a DE.

What makes you think that Nick won't be good or worthy of the #1 pick?

His dad and uncle were busts, so are you saying there is a 66% chance he's a bust?

Sent from my Moto G Play using Tapatalk

 

[jlove]

He's been mocked to #1 pretty much all year. This is one of the few years in recent history where no one is actually arguing about who should be the top pick (besides us).


Trade to someone who desperately wants the top DL guy... so we can pick up a DL guy they're not sold on.


I think this is silly, but sure, you want to fill needs instead of picking elite talent and filling in the holes. I get it, but it's frustrating.


This. Very much this.

If you read what I said, my desire for J Williams and Harry are my desire, specifically Harry, but those choices are dependent on us going back to the 3-4. Our draft choices over the past few years have been defensive personnel for the 3-4. We are much better in that alignment. I don't feel our defensive woes would be as prominent. Especially having Swearinger back as well. If we stay at 1 or even if we trade down, I would be stoked with Bosa or Q Williams if we stay at 1. If we trade to 4 then I'd take Q Williams, Oliver, Greedy or J Williams. Greedy or J Williams makes most sense if we trade down. Putting Greedy opposite PP would give more time for Jones and Golden and DT's to get to the QB

 

[Proximo]

This is the way I look at it. A great de gives you maybe 20 difference making plays in a season.

A wr, cb, lb or ot give you much more every down impact. I just don’t think de’s win you many games.

It’s not like Golden sucks either, how much is this guy really going to help.

I would far prefer to get the best ot and one of the top wrs or cbs in the draft. Far far prefer it.

 

[scandalous_b]

His dad and uncle were busts, so are you saying there is a 66% chance he's a bust?

Sent from my Moto G Play using Tapatalk

1. Medicine has come a long way since the 1980s.

2. That's not how probability works.

3. He is among the elite of the elite for bloodlines when it comes to NFL draft prospects. While his father & uncle may be busts, I would be more than happy to compare their achievements to that of the other available draftees.

 

[kerouac9]

I was talking to my wife about this. We have stars around the roster; the meat of the team is what’s missing — the supporting cast that can allow the stars to shine brighter.

The best argument for trading down is that you get a better chance of filling out roster spots 10-15 with an early first and early 2nd or 3rd.

 

[DVontel]

How hilarious would it be for to trade back & draft multiple underwhelming players or flat out busts instead of a elite talent right in the palm of our hands. And he goes to SF haves a great career.

And Keim to make the selections is even more hilarious.

 

[kerouac9]

How hilarious would it be for to trade back & draft multiple underwhelming players or flat out busts instead of a elite talent right in the palm of our hands. And he goes to SF haves a great career.

And Keim to make the selections is even more hilarious.

There’s nothing certain in the draft. Would it be better to draft a guy and have him bust or underwhelm while a group of lower picks become stars?

 

[WisconsinCard]

How hilarious would it be for to trade back & draft multiple underwhelming players or flat out busts instead of a elite talent right in the palm of our hands. And he goes to SF haves a great career.

And Keim to make the selections is even more hilarious.

How hilarious would it be to stay at 1 and draft and injury prone bust. Then all the guys drafted from 4 - 6 are HOF caliber players? I don't think either are funny at all, and either of the scenario's are possible.

 

[WisconsinCard]

There’s nothing certain in the draft. Would it be better to draft a guy and have him bust or underwhelm while a group of lower picks become stars?

Was typing the same thing.

 

[scandalous_b]

There’s nothing certain in the draft. Would it be better to draft a guy and have him bust or underwhelm while a group of lower picks become stars?

Sure nothing is certain, but that doesn't mean that the odds are equal.

I would bet that the likelihood of getting one "star player" is more likely if you have the #1 pick vs. if you have the #10 and #20 picks.

 

[WildBB]

You know it's a no brainer this team HAS to protect Rosen moving ahead. Look how well the Colts came back this season with Luck for sure, but also revamping that OL. They invested in it over the years. Cardinals have to do the same.

If Raiders want Bosa, and give us two firsts and another pick, I think it is a no brainer option.

 

[scandalous_b]

How hilarious would it be to stay at 1 and draft and injury prone bust. Then all the guys drafted from 4 - 6 are HOF caliber players? I don't think either are funny at all, and either of the scenario's are possible.

What if all 32 first round picks are busts and out of the league within 3 years, and all 40ish 7th round picks are hall of famers. That scenario is possible too. Maybe we should trade the #1 pick for as many 7th round picks as we can get.

Probability doesn't work the way that you think it works. Just because a scenario is possible doesn't mean that it is equally as possible as another scenario.

 

[kerouac9]

Sure nothing is certain, but that doesn't mean that the odds are equal.

I would bet that the likelihood of getting one "star player" is more likely if you have the #1 pick vs. if you have the #10 and #20 picks.

Maybe, but I think the odds are that you get equivalent or better value with the 10 and 20 picks than you would with #1.

My opinion right now is that we have enough stars; we need 10 solid NFL starters. You’re more likely to get to those 10 with three or four picks in the top 50 than two.

 

[scandalous_b]

You know it's a no brainer this team HAS to protect Rosen moving ahead. Look how well the Colts came back this season with Luck for sure, but also revamping that OL. They invested in it over the years. Cardinals have to do the same.

If Raiders want Bosa, and give us two firsts and another pick, I think it is a no brainer option.

We needed offensive linemen in 2007 when we took Levi Brown at #5 overall. Adrian Peterson went two picks later. How did that work out?

 

[WisconsinCard]

What if all 32 first round picks are busts and out of the league within 3 years, and all 40ish 7th round picks are hall of famers. That scenario is possible too. Maybe we should trade the #1 pick for as many 7th round picks as we can get.

Probability doesn't work the way that you think it works. Just because a scenario is possible doesn't mean that it is equally as possible as another scenario.

You have no idea what I am thinking, so I'll tell you what they are. It is too early for me to say what I think we should do until free agency is over. I was just responding to another poster's "what if" scenario. As of right now I stay at number one and take the BPA, but that could change depending on what someone may offer for that pick.

 

[WisconsinCard]

We needed offensive linemen in 2007 when we took Levi Brown at #5 overall. Adrian Peterson went two picks later. How did that work out?

That is what happens when you draft for need. IMO you take care of needs in free agency and draft the BPA.

 

[scandalous_b]

Maybe, but I think the odds are that you get equivalent or better value with the 10 and 20 picks than you would with #1.

My opinion right now is that we have enough stars; we need 10 solid NFL starters. You’re more likely to get to those 10 with three or four picks in the top 50 than two.

Actually - you're equally as likely to get those 10 solid NFL starters in both scenarios. There's a 0% chance of getting 10 solid NFL starters with anything less than 10 picks.

Besides that - just because you say that having 3 or 4 picks in the top 50 is more likely to hit than having 2 picks doesn't mean its true. Each individual pick holds a certain level of value, and obviously having the #1 pick is most valuable.

The bottom line is this team needs talent. I'm taking Bosa #1 because he is by far the most elite prospect in this draft. I would rather take my chance on that guy than put my hopes into 2 or 3 lesser players later in the draft. This team cannot afford to miss on these picks.