49ers open to trading both pics ???

***ACCORDING TO ESPN AND 49ERS WIRE*****. I may be in the minority, but IF this is true, I'm all for it if we can trade down and keep at least 1 of the 1st. rounders and yield multiple day 2 and 3 pics. LIKE I SAID IN PREVIOUS THREADS!!!- There will be good; WR, CB, OG, and DT ., from later 1st.rd.-UDFA in this draft (esp. WR, and IOL). I mean if we cud get say: a 1st. rounder(20th-25th), our original 2nd. rounder back, 2-3rds., and 2 4ths., (purely HYPOTHETICAL, don't get nerdy analytical on me, YOU may have that much time, but I don't). would you do it ?? OR-TELL ME/US yay or nay, why, and what wud you do/take for the #13 and #31 pics ???

God I hope not. Anything could happen I suppose, but we need an impact player or two.

If Ruggs is there, take him at 13 and then trade 31 + players (Brieda/Solly/Coleman/Pettis) to acquire more picks through the draft.

Don't screw this up.

Originally posted by English:
God I hope not. Anything could happen I suppose, but we need an impact player or two.

I'm fully on board with ya bro. But, I still think we can still get those players by picking later. Think about it this way, most of our starters were from Day 2-UDFA's (sans Defensive Line). And Bosa was an impact player and big factor in our success (and a 1st. rounder). But look at the others, even most of our FA signees were Day 2-day 3 guys. So, while our chances are safer and better to "stay put" where we are, we might just be ok, moving around too..

Originally posted by English:
God I hope not. Anything could happen I suppose, but we need an impact player or two.

if we can still get guys we need to fill holes. why not trade down twice. as long as we get a very solid wide out and d tackle and interior lineman i am fine. a good cb to

Originally posted by 9erguy:
If Ruggs is there, take him at 13 and then trade 31 + players (Brieda/Solly/Coleman/Pettis) to acquire more picks through the draft.

Don't screw this up.

This I was and am willing to do, BUT the article is stating BOTH pics, so I/we gotta think and brainstorm a little outta the box. Like English in the above posts- I AGREE with ya bro, But, this 'worst case" , is the 2 pics. So, we gotta think worse case-just incase.

Originally posted by cciowa:

Originally posted by English:
God I hope not. Anything could happen I suppose, but we need an impact player or two.

if we can still get guys we need to fill holes. why not trade down twice. as long as we get a very solid wide out and d tackle and interior lineman i am fine. a good cb to

If this is our worse case, I think we will be ok. I'm for staying put, but VERY OPEN to this defacto "plan B"..
BTW- I see the guy at Wash St. (Easop Randall Jr., sp) ran a 4.28 !! (faster than Ruggs-yikes) and he (like Tyreek Hill will probably be a day 3 guy). We may NOT be so bad off doing this, albeit a bit scary..

Not surprised. I expect them to be all in on their guy, and it's likely that guy is a OT and will be gone. Thus, a trade back from 13.

Here is what I've been thinking along with the rest of the trade down group. Here is what I've been playing around
Option A :
13-Ruggs
31- OT(Cleveland)

Option B: trade down with Pats at 23 + 3 3rds + 1 4th
23- Futlon/Mims/Matos/Jefferson
31-Aiyuk/Reagor/ Cleveland/Madubuike
Fill in the blanks on the rest
3rd-Gibson
3rd-OG
3rd-
3rd-
4th-
OR: Trade up to second with your 2 3rd- so now you have
23
31
2nd rounder
3rd
4th

Plenty of excellent players and you still have 2 first rounders.You can trade a pick or 2 for a young vet player
that fits us. You can easily move up and down if we have the ammo. Trade down!

Originally posted by toppdogg32:

If this is our worse case, I think we will be ok. I'm for staying put, but VERY OPEN to this defacto "plan B"..
BTW- I see the guy at Wash St. (Easop Randall Jr., sp) ran a 4.28 !! (faster than Ruggs-yikes) and he (like Tyreek Hill will probably be a day 3 guy). We may NOT be so bad off doing this, albeit a bit scary..

I'm preparing for multiple trade downs....is what it is. I have faith in this staff

Originally posted by English:
God I hope not. Anything could happen I suppose, but we need an impact player or two.

I would rather get 4-5 quality starters than 2 "impact players".

Originally posted by Waterbear:

I would rather get 4-5 quality starters than 2 "impact players".

Especially when one of the 4-5 quality starters can produce almost equally (in our offense) as 1 of the "impact" players.

Originally posted by Waterbear:

I would rather get 4-5 quality starters than 2 "impact players".

Yes sir. Me too!