Ryan Clady or Joe Staley

Originally posted by 9erred:


In the fourth round of 2008, the niners chose Cody Wallace, with Anthony Collins, a projected first round OT on the board. The Bungles chose Collins, and he is their starter at RT, while Wallace is so far an inactive every game.

Another great move by Mike Nolan. Nolan seemed to be in love with Cody Wallace after the senior bowl.

Originally posted by LBSI9ers:

Originally posted by PA9erFaithful:

Originally posted by LBSI9ers:

Originally posted by PA9erFaithful:

Originally posted by LBSI9ers:

Originally posted by PA9erFaithful:

Originally posted by LBSI9ers:

Originally posted by PA9erFaithful:
The key words are "in retrospect." When you have a chance to get a guy that you think can be an excellent LT (as we thought we could in Staley), you do it. Hindsight means absolutely nothing.

Which was clearly stated in the post. The point is to better understand the past to apply the lessons to this draft. 'Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" George Santayana.

So what are you saying? The Niners FO should never trade up to get a guy they like because they should know that next year they'll have a chance to get a guy that could be even better?

In short yes. That is what I am saying. Why would we trade a valuable pick that we have no idea the value of yet to take a gamble on a guy? There is a consequence there right? Clearly our FO was not able to estimate the roster's ability, but the Patriots could. What I am saying is that trading away valuable picks have consequences. Here is the price: Clady. We gave up a lot for Staley. For a long time people have felt that we may not have lost on the trade. But clearly we have.

Thank god you're not a GM.

Hmm I wonder what Carolina is thinking right now? Are they thinking the same way you are? I bet not.

They're thinking they got their guy and the consequences of that they have to deal with at a later time. As opposed to some armchair GMs like you, who apparently have a crystal ball. By the way, can I have the lottery numbers for the Powerball drawing on wednesday night???

You realize your angry on a message board right?

You think I'm angry... good one

The arguement in this thread is weak.

You're banking on the Niners front office to KNOW who will be available at the pick that the team will be making on NEXT YEAR's draft. Unless you have Nostradamus in your Draft War Room you'll never know Clady will be available. Besides, Staley is better than Clady anyway.

Originally posted by Overkill:

Originally posted by LBSI9ers:
It is clear people are focusing on the fact that compared Clady to Staley. What I was trying to question is should teams trade first round choices in the next year. Given that the team isn't sure of the value. Staley is a good player, but did it justify his price?

That's because you equated the value of that draft selection with Clady. We would have had the #7 selection that year, Clady went 12th.

If we had taken DT Sedrick Ellis, OT Brandon Albert (who was expected to go ahead of Clady that year) or OT Chris Williams (who was rated equally to Clady prior to the draft) with that pick, does that change your estimation of Staley's "price"? All of those guys were on the board at #7 and Staley is better than any of them imo.

Yea your point is short sighted. I purposely left out Flacco as my comparison given that good QBs are more valuable than great LT. You also left out Mayo. The comparison is legit. Alberts was a gaurd at Virginia. Most people felt he couldn't translate to LT in the pros, some felt he could. Staley was a LT and he's a left tackle now. Same for Clady.

He was my original post:
In retrospect, the 2007 trade for Staley did have an impact on our draft in 2008. Statement of fact.

We would have had a shot at Ryan Clady. Statement of fact.

In retrospect obviously, we may have given up a HOF left tackle for a very good tackle. Statement of fact.

Would people still make this trade on draft day? The question.

The question asks did you learn something from this action based on the undeniable facts. That's all. Not, do we need to consult the oracle at Delphi?

[ Edited by LBSI9ers on Nov 3, 2009 at 16:14:35 ]

Originally posted by DarthNiner:
The arguement in this thread is weak.

You're banking on the Niners front office to KNOW who will be available at the pick that the team will be making on NEXT YEAR's draft. Unless you have Nostradamus in your Draft War Room you'll never know Clady will be available. Besides, Staley is better than Clady anyway.

Here Darth, for you buddy.

Main Entry: 1ret·ro·spect
Pronunciation: ˈre-trə-ˌspekt
Function: noun
Etymology: probably from retro- + prospect
Date: 1602
1 archaic : reference to or regard of a precedent or authority
2 : a review of or meditation on past events

— in retrospect : in considering the past or a past event

Originally posted by LBSI9ers:

Originally posted by DarthNiner:
The arguement in this thread is weak.

You're banking on the Niners front office to KNOW who will be available at the pick that the team will be making on NEXT YEAR's draft. Unless you have Nostradamus in your Draft War Room you'll never know Clady will be available. Besides, Staley is better than Clady anyway.

Here Darth, for you buddy.

Main Entry: 1ret·ro·spect
Pronunciation: ˈre-trə-ˌspekt
Function: noun
Etymology: probably from retro- + prospect
Date: 1602
1 archaic : reference to or regard of a precedent or authority
2 : a review of or meditation on past events

— in retrospect : in considering the past or a past event

Originally posted by DarthNiner:

Originally posted by LBSI9ers:

Originally posted by DarthNiner:
The arguement in this thread is weak.

You're banking on the Niners front office to KNOW who will be available at the pick that the team will be making on NEXT YEAR's draft. Unless you have Nostradamus in your Draft War Room you'll never know Clady will be available. Besides, Staley is better than Clady anyway.

Here Darth, for you buddy.

Main Entry: 1ret·ro·spect
Pronunciation: ˈre-trə-ˌspekt
Function: noun
Etymology: probably from retro- + prospect
Date: 1602
1 archaic : reference to or regard of a precedent or authority
2 : a review of or meditation on past events

— in retrospect : in considering the past or a past event

Originally posted by LBSI9ers:

Originally posted by DarthNiner:
The arguement in this thread is weak.

You're banking on the Niners front office to KNOW who will be available at the pick that the team will be making on NEXT YEAR's draft. Unless you have Nostradamus in your Draft War Room you'll never know Clady will be available. Besides, Staley is better than Clady anyway.

Here Darth, for you buddy.

Main Entry: 1ret·ro·spect
Pronunciation: ˈre-trə-ˌspekt
Function: noun
Etymology: probably from retro- + prospect
Date: 1602
1 archaic : reference to or regard of a precedent or authority
2 : a review of or meditation on past events

— in retrospect : in considering the past or a past event

could you tell me what the point of this thread is? I'm sure most posters here knows what retrospect means. This isn't an english discussion, this is a football discussion.

Here's the answer to why we traded up for Joe Staley . . . in retrospect



[ Edited by SonocoNinerFan on Nov 3, 2009 at 16:06:52 ]

Originally posted by SonocoNinerFan:
Here's the answer to why we traded up for Joe Staley . . . in retrospect

In retrospect, you actually have him blocking someone. Pretty rare to find that pic I bet.

^^ I'm sure he got flagged for holding on the play . . . plus his eyes are closed . . .

or we could've taken Cherilus, Williams, Harvey, or some other unimpressive players. Hell, we probably would've had a worse record/better pick and taken Vernon Gholston.

When all of the talking is done we have Staley. Hopefully we get a quality RT in FA or in the draft. Then with a couple of OGs we might have a quality Oline. Until then we have to deal in real time, not fantasy time.

Can we not toss around the words HOF please?

Originally posted by Overkill:

Originally posted by LBSI9ers:
It is clear people are focusing on the fact that compared Clady to Staley. What I was trying to question is should teams trade first round choices in the next year. Given that the team isn't sure of the value. Staley is a good player, but did it justify his price?

That's because you equated the value of that draft selection with Clady. We would have had the #7 selection that year, Clady went 12th.

If we had taken DT Sedrick Ellis, OT Brandon Albert (who was expected to go ahead of Clady that year) or OT Chris Williams (who was rated equally to Clady prior to the draft) with that pick, does that change your estimation of Staley's "price"? All of those guys were on the board at #7 and Staley is better than any of them imo.

Replace Staley with Kwame and we'd probally be picking alot higher that season. Who knows we might of been able to draft Matt Ryan. That's why I think we made the wrong move. We just weren't a good enough team to make that kind of risk. Thankfully the pick panned out so in the end no harm no foul.

[ Edited by tjd808185 on Nov 3, 2009 at 19:16:00 ]