49ers Are 'Open For Business' For #2 Pick

[Shocker]

2 minutes ago, Marguide said:

Why not?

Yeah, the precedent is there.  Try explaining getting much less a yr later.  It will cost at least that or they aren't trading.

[MHS831]

The only way I do this is if Cleveland passes on Garrett.  Nobody else is worth it.

[t96]

13 minutes ago, Marguide said:

Not even close. First of all, next year's first is considered to equal a second this year. Go check the chart and you will see how far you are from reality.

The chart isn't reality. It's nonsense. Has no correlation to what actual league front offices think. And it varies year to year and team to team. This isn't some exact science you can look up in some chart that sports media made up. So much goes into it and 8 this year and next year's first definitely 'could' do it. Didn't say "definitely would." Various factors go into it, and none of them have anything to do with your fancy chart.

[Nails]

18 minutes ago, Marguide said:

Why not?

Supply and demand.  They're obviously desperate, we're not.

[Marguide]

17 minutes ago, thomas96 said:

The chart isn't reality. It's nonsense. Has no correlation to what actual league front offices think. And it varies year to year and team to team. This isn't some exact science you can look up in some chart that sports media made up. So much goes into it and 8 this year and next year's first definitely 'could' do it. Didn't say "definitely would." Various factors go into it, and none of them have anything to do with your fancy chart.

Sorry, you are off the mark again. The trade value chart was first constructed by the Cowboys years ago. The media had nothing to do with it.

So if it is nonsense, as you say, show us some examples of trades that deviated significantly from the chart.

Good luck.

[Marguide]

4 minutes ago, Nails said:

Supply and demand.  They're obviously desperate, we're not.

They aren't desperate. They are testing the market, as in, let's see if we can find someone willing to pay. If not, they keep the pick.

[Shocker]

Just now, Marguide said:

They aren't desperate. They are testing the market, as in, let's see if we can find someone willing to pay. If not, they keep the pick.

Yes, and they have too.  If the Panthers were at #2 what would we take to move down.  Answer:  A LOT.  Moving down to 8 must be tasty to every team but you aren't going down for beans.

[steven8989]

Not even close. First of all, next year's first is considered to equal a second this year. Go check the chart and you will see how far you are from reality.

I would say that's wrong if u look at the trade between eagles and browns last year it didn't take that much. It's only from 8 to 2. It's not from pick 28 to 2. Y'all over react about how much it will take.

Sent using the amazing CarolinaHuddle mobile app

[tiger7_88]

At most I'd give them Cam's bloody bandages from his recent surgeries for storage until the cloning process is perfected.

That's it.

[Lasus83.]

It wouldn't cost NEAR what the trade chart says since they are so desperate and any additional assets is better than none, but I'm still not sure.  Maybe 8, 40, and 64 for 2 and Tartt, if we ensure we get our man.  I don't want to give up a pick next year since we're already down one but maybe our 1st for their 2nd next year could be swapped since they'll likely only be a few spots away.

I also am not hearing that it's going to cost as much as anybody thinks. And talking to some fans they think their team likes players at 8 the same way they like players at number two.

Some of them said they would even take our 64th pick to make the trade down. Most said they would be comfortable with 40

Sent using the amazing CarolinaHuddle mobile app

[Marguide]

3 minutes ago, steven8989 said:

I would say that's wrong if u look at the trade between eagles and browns last year it didn't take that much. It's only from 8 to 2. It's not from pick 28 to 2. Y'all over react about how much it will take.

Sent using the amazing CarolinaHuddle mobile app
 

Cleveland got 8, 77 and 100 last year, 12 this year, and Philly's second round pick next year.

That's not much?

[Marguide]

5 minutes ago, Lasus83. said:

I also am not hearing that it's going to cost as much as anybody thinks. And talking to some fans they think their team likes players at 8 the same way they like players at number two.

Some of them said they would even take our 64th pick to make the trade down. Most said they would be comfortable with 40

Sent using the amazing CarolinaHuddle mobile app
 

So your source is fans?

Ok...

[Lasus83.]

A long time poster and San Francisco fan said on another forum:

"don't get me wrong...I totally want to gouge someone for that #2 pick, I just don't know how likely that is without a premium quarterback prospect. My hope is that Cleveland panics and wants to get their quarterback and moves up to #2 for a haul. But otherwise, there's just no reason for us to make a pick there. #8 is a real sweet spot for me because I don't view there to be a ton of difference between players 2 - 8 on the board; they are all in the same tier. And it's entirely possible that we still get a guy who is considered a top 5 player at #8 depending on the way the board plays out (I could easily see someone like Lattimore still being there). So why not just take the extra pick, even if the perceived value isn't in line?"

Sent using the amazing CarolinaHuddle mobile app

[Nails]

27 minutes ago, Marguide said:

They aren't desperate. They are testing the market, as in, let's see if we can find someone willing to pay. If not, they keep the pick.

They are desperate.  If the price is the value chart, the answer is not no but hell no for us.  It'd be their loss, until they realize they need more assets and must come down on the price.