Are You Really Against Fields or Lance if they fall to #8...

[SetfreexX]

Whether it's on social media or in comments spread out through other posts there seems to be many who are OKAY with rolling forward with Darnold as ''THE'' guy on the roster. I have no issue with the trade for Darnold as IMO it was a relatively cheap deal, a 6th this year and a future 2nd & 4th can all be recovered one way or another, he only costs about 4M this year and we have until AFTER the draft to pick up the 5th year option. (Many sports news outlets still don't realize we haven't picked it up yet, and I don't think it's for a smokescreen, I think it's smart to wait and know what the draft brings)

Given the current draft / QB climate I understand the move, it allows them to not have to force the issue by reaching on a prospect that's not considered a top 4 QB later on in the draft, as bringing in a Mond or Newman or whoever while you have Darnold doesn't make a ton of sense. But Fields & Lance have a different level of potential compared to Darnold IMO. Darnold has ''all the tools'' but there's nothing about his game that could make him ''special''. 

I think if one of these guys falls, or potentially is in range between the 5th and our 8th, I would not be surprised at all to see us move up.

(KC traded the 27th, their 3rd in that same class and a future 1st to jump from 27 to 10 -- Compensation wise to jump 17 spots, that is not a lot -- moving from 8 to 5 or 6 if they decided to IMO is not out of the question. Swap 1sts, add a day 2 or 3 pick and a future 1st.)

I did not get any ''he's our guy'' vibes from the pressers from Fitt, and Rhule. They were both complimentary of his talent, but they do that for all acquisitions Coach / GM speak. 

So what are your thoughts...?

[saX man]

Yep, they've been clear they were intent on being active this free agency and filled the roster to allow for BPA come draft day.

That could very well be Fields or Lance.  Just like it could be Slater, Sewell, Pitts, & Horn.

I think they would take Pitts over both but I'd be interested to see how they stack up the 2 QBs, Horn & the OTs

[WUnderhill]

Wouldn’t be against Fields at all, and I think we would take him if he were there. However, I don’t think he’ll be there and I think the team feels the same.

Lance, I’m not so sure.

[frankw]

Only wallet clutching cheapskates on the huddle are afraid of taking a quarterback. Fitterer has already said we could move up or trade back depending on scenarios. It all hinges on if the 49ers are crazy enough to take Jones at 3.

[ForJimmy]

Oh you didn’t hear? We have to have a complete roster with no weaknesses before we dare take a rookie QB. I’ve been saying this the whole time. If we are high on a QB that falls to 8, I hope Darnold isn’t the reason we pass on one...

[LinvilleGorge]

On the contrary, I'm really against passing on one of them if he's there at #8.

[CRA]

Fields would be an even bigger steal IMO than when Star fell to us.  You have to draft him IMO if he falls to #8.   

I can go either way on Lance.  Draft him.  Don't draft him and get Sewell or something like that? I'm fine either way. 

[CRA]

12 minutes ago, frankw said:

Only wallet clutching cheapskates on the huddle are afraid of taking a quarterback. Fitterer has already said we could move up or trade back depending on scenarios. It all hinges on if the 49ers are crazy enough to take Jones at 3.

49ers essentially traded up for the #1 spot.  Everyone and there momma knows Trevor and Wilson are 1 and 2.  Not sure why they are trying to be so secretive given they paid to go up there.   If they initially owned the spot I get it.  

[DeSim]

You have to take either of them if they're there. 

Best case scenario is if you pick up Sam's 5th year option and he balls out this year, he can be traded easily next offseason since his value is way up and in a favorable contract for a starting QB ($18M I believe?).  Get a haul of picks to build around the QB that was drafted and that spent a year learning.  You then have extra picks, extra cash to build through free agency and the draft while your QB is on his rookie contract.

[Varking]

Wouldn’t be against Fields but I’d prefer Sewell over Lance at this point if those two were on the board. 

[t96]

Fields and Lance are in two different tiers of prospects if you ask me. If Fields is there you run to the podium. If Lance is sitting there along with Sewell somehow, it's not quite as easy of a decision. I really do like Lance and would love to get him at 8 but only if the coaching staff is completely sold on him as being the guy long term (I'd sit him behind Darnold for 1-2 years and try to trade Darnold for assets if he plays well), not just because he's a top QB prospect available there. Sewell would also go a long way towards us having success here long term. LT may be the 2nd most important position behind QB...

[t96]

5 minutes ago, CRA said:

49ers essentially traded up for the #1 spot.  Everyone and there momma knows Trevor and Wilson are 1 and 2.  Not sure why they are trying to be so secretive given they paid to go up there.   If they initially owned the spot I get it.  

Is Wilson really a given at #2? Everyone assumes it but I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if it's Fields. Many still think he's the clear #2 behind Lawrence, despite Wilson being the talk of the town more recently. Jets could have their cards very close to their chest and be targeting Fields. Lawrence is the only pick that is 100% set in stone.

[Peppers90 NC]

not against Lance, just not for him. Definitely for Fields tho

[d-dave]

Lance is super interesting, but we need someone who can be an immediate impact.  Fields is in another tier of guy.

Fields - wait until last second and see who wants to sell the farm then turn in the pick.

Lance - I'm 50/50 on him...  I'd still say go for the best guy on the board.