NFL Executive: Myles Garrett May Not Be The First Overall Pick

[DaveThePanther2008]

If you were rebuilding like we were in 2002 than selecting Garrett wouldn't be a bad idea. 

For us to trade up in such a deep draft is asinine.   While we might not get a freak we could stay at 8 and get a generational Tight End in Howard.   Or a generational Safety in Adams.   

Especially Defensive End that has a 50/50 chance of being a bust.  (ie Mario Williams) 

It is a pipe dream to think Garrett is worth that many picks.

[pantherclaw]

9 hours ago, csx said:

I never assumed Garrett going first was a lock. 

If it was anyone but Cleveland picking, he would be a lock. 

 

[pantherclaw]

Holy poo, did it get stupid in this thread. Time ti walk away before it attempts to spread.

[Mvp2014]

the only player i would be comfortable trading up for.  He should be pretty damn good, possibly a monster if he wants it bad enough

[unicar15]

Please make this happen. All in for Garrett. 

[csx]

11 hours ago, Saca312 said:

We honestly don't have that much holes. I would not be opposed to getting a generational physical specimen when we have a lot already patched up.

Imagine this on the same line:

These two rushing the passer... oh boy.

We need to keep the pipeline full. It's like sales.

[imminent rogaine]

11 hours ago, Marguide said:

Best draft depth in several years and we sit in a very favorable position at 8, along with holding two 2nd's and 5 other picks...nah, let's give it all up for 1 player. And mortgage next year's early pick to boot.

I just don't get the logic here.

 

Absolutely this. Maybe you consider consolidating if the draft class is awful... but this year's class is one of the best I can recall and it is deep in areas of need.

[tiger7_88]

10 hours ago, KillerKat said:

People got upset when Hurney traded the future, but if Gettleman does it, it'll be genius! So tired of the DG nut hugging around here. 

Hey, I'm a DG nut hugger from the get-go and I've made it clear that trading up would be a ridiculous waste of DG draft "gold".

People actually think "aw, if we just give them one of our 2nd round picks and our 3rd round compensatory pick, we could move up to #2!!!11!!1!1!!"

Naw, people... it would take a HELLUVA lot more than that to move up.  We're talking pretty much all of our Day 1 and 2 picks this year plus a couple of Day 1 or 2 picks from future years.

Uh uh... no way.  

[steven8989]

Hey, I'm a DG nut hugger from the get-go and I've made it clear that trading up would be a ridiculous waste of DG draft "gold".
People actually think "aw, if we just give them one of our 2nd round picks and our 3rd round compensatory pick, we could move up to #2!!!11!!1!1!!"
Naw, people... it would take a HELLUVA lot more than that to move up.  We're talking pretty much all of our Day 1 and 2 picks this year plus a couple of Day 1 or 2 picks from future years.
Uh uh... no way.  

It would not take that much. Just look at the trade from last year about the same. Eagles traded up to two from 8 and it didn't cost that much.

Sent using the amazing CarolinaHuddle mobile app

[tiger7_88]

9 hours ago, GoobyPls said:

Garrett at the very best turns out to be Mario Williams and that's his peak.  Garrett is lucky he's a great athlete if not he would be a 3rd round pick

The thing about Garrett is that compared to who everybody is comparing him to (Peppers and WIlliams), he's undersized.

Peppers, I think, isn't 290, but he's in the upper-280's.

Williams is over 290.

Garrett weighed in at the combine at 272.  Now that's an ideal weight for quickness, but how will it hold up against an NFL running game?  Because if he's not a COMPLETE defensive end (i.e. great at rushing the passer, competent-to-good/great at defending the rush), then why would you either (1) use the #1 overall pick on him or (2) spend all your draft picks to trade up to get him?

[tiger7_88]

6 hours ago, Danish Panther said:

I hear you, and agree with the one year scenario value. Any ways they could some how get arround this - is it even possible to offer him a new contract? I mean SF currently have a cap space above 72 millions...

Obviously I'm lacking a gerat amount of knowledge regarding the franchise tagging and contract possibilities - still trying to learn...  :-)

Usually with trades of that nature, it is contingent upon the new team and the potentially-traded player coming to an agreement on a new, extended contract.  Which would mean that if a player like KK was part of a draft-day trade, the trade likely would have been agreed upon and negotiated prior to the draft to cross all the t's and dot all the i's contract-wise.

To actually make the trade on draft day?  At that point, no new contract would have been negotiated and, as csx said, the new team would only have him on a one-year deal.  No team is going to make a trade like that as part of 1st round deal.

[La Pantera]

12 minutes ago, steven8989 said:

It would not take that much. Just look at the trade from last year about the same. Eagles traded up to two from 8 and it didn't cost that much.

Sent using the amazing CarolinaHuddle mobile app
 

Iggles gave up a ton. Would cost our 1st and 2nd. A first in 2018 and possibly another 2nd in 18' or 19'

[imminent rogaine]

Confused as to why people are referring to Mario Williams as a bust or a low-ceiling guy.... dude is 34th all time in sacks. If every first round pick you got turned into a Mario Williams-caliber-player, you'd be in the super bowl every year.

[dpm0409]

6 minutes ago, La Pantera said:

Iggles gave up a ton. Would cost our 1st and 2nd. A first in 2018 and possibly another 2nd in 18' or 19'

Was just about to quote that post and say the same thing.  Not sure what their definition of "not much" is, ha