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

[chknwing]

We can only take a quarterback if we're going to trade Sam darnold.  We have to pick a direction and move forward.

[firefox1234]

If Fields is there go for it. Lance depends on how the rest of the board looks.

[Mistuh Jones]

48 minutes ago, WUnderhill said:

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.

Same Mr. Underhill. Same. 

[trueblade]

52 minutes ago, WUnderhill said:

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.

 

32 minutes ago, Varking said:

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

Agree completely with these two posters.

[OldhamA]

1 hour ago, SetfreexX said:

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.

I disagree about that - he's no less talented than any of the top QBs in this Draft. 

I'd be mortified if we moved up for anyone. 

I personally wouldn't select Fields or Lance (unless I was playing hardball with the Broncos / Patriots / Football Team and was taking a player to trade him), but sadly I'm not in charge of things. 

[LinvilleGorge]

53 minutes ago, t96 said:

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...

Agreed

 

[Ivan The Awesome]

If either of them falls, I would not be mad if they pick either of them. They need to find the QB of the future one way or another.

But I would also be for seeing what team is willing to give up several picks and move up and have the Panthers move just far enough to get Darisaw or Horn, Phillips, TOP LB, whatever. Compensation would have to be very good, I'm talking about multiple picks. This years 1st, 2nd or 3rd this year, a first next, or second. Depending on who it is and how much they are willing to give up for Lance or Fields. 

[run-run-pass-punt]

If a guy you think is a long-term franchise QB is there at your pick, you have to take him - especially if you are uncertain at the position.

Having said that, I've warmed up to the potential in Darnold, and I'd rather build the o-line for whoever is under center.

But if we took a QB and realize that Darnold is ultimately the better of the two, it's not lost value. Plenty of QB hungry teams to recover the worth of that pick.

[MHS831]

OP makes some good points.  I know Rhule has perhaps more involvement (at least he did last year) than some coaches, to a point where the ultimate decision is probably his to approve or deny, and part of coaching is psychology--part of the GM position is playing the numbers.  MAKING IT SIMPLE:  Is Darnold a long-term franchise QB?  Is Fields or Lance?  (like run-run said--if you do not think Darnold is the answer, you take the QB)--however, if you simply do not know:

1. Darnold has the tools, but he was not really their first choice--Stafford and then Watson and now the Darnold move.  It was a shrewd move, because it gives the Panthers options.  However, did it lock the Panthers into a commitment with Darnold? The trade value says "nope."  Yet if the staff has decided to go all in to develop Darnold, do you draft another QB in round 1 (if you do, let's call a duck a duck--that QB is your starter in 2022, in 9 out of 9 situations.)  So if Darnold is to start and you draft a QB in the top 10, does that motivate Darnold or does that discourage his development?  Does it matter?  So what I am saying is this--it is probable that if you draft a QB in the top 8 you have made a decision about Darnold before he has played a down.  Is he insurance or do they think they can fix his mechanics? 

2. Darnold is young (approaching 24) and needs a shot with a good coach, OL, and weapons.  By signing Darnold, you get as much potential as you get in Fields and Lance, and perhaps a shorter learning curve.  Accepting him as your QB gives you options in the draft, options needed if you are serious about making this a championship team.  For example, if Fields is there at 8, I expect a team like New England (if they have not already moved up), or Washington, or Chicago, or maybe even Pittsburgh to move up.  They will offer picks in 2021 and a few in 2022.  Let's say we move back with Washington, a team probably willing to offer their first 3 picks and a second rounder in 2022 (for example).  You agree to trade back, you get a T, CB, WR in the first and second rounds, and Darnold's draft cost is more than covered.  Yes, you miss out on the elite player and settle for 3 very good ones, but in the end, you just got better in every area of concern and your QB is a former third overall pick who is 23 years old.  Oh, and with one of the picks you acquired, trade up later and take Mond or Mills or even Trask.  Develop him and in 2 years, if Darnold does not work out, he gets his chance and you have a QB with 2 years of coaching and some experience under his belt at age 24, ready to play.

My answer---use the fact that Fields or Lance is there as trade bait and build your team by moving back.

Edited April 16, 2021 by MHS831

[Jaxel]

If it's Fields at 8, I would run to the podium, take him, and then crack a bottle of my finest wine. If it's Lance, who is at least a year away, I take the OT or WR and roll the dice with Darnold. Then I still crack my finest wine and relax.

Edited April 16, 2021 by Jaxel

[JawnyBlaze]

Hell no I’m not against it. Fields and Lance are 3 and 4 on my list. I’m cautiously optimistic about Darnold, but getting a top tier young guy to ease into the starting role would be ideal. 

[irrevalentfalconsfan]

I think either one, should they fall that far, could be dangerous in your offense. Lance would be better in the future after sitting behind Sam, but Fields could be your next Newton. 

[RenoCarolina]

Not sure this topic is complete without adding Jones into the mix. 

There is growing opinion that immediate media reports that the niners pulled this trade for Jones are just a smokescreen.  Not sure why they need to create a smokescreen because the first two picks appear locks.  As the article says, the draft starts at #3.  But still, something not quite right about Jones being that high.

So if it is a smokescreen then add Jones into the mix at 8.

 

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/2021-nfl-draft-some-view-mac-jones-to-49ers-as-a-lock-but-heres-why-it-doesnt-pass-smell-test/

 

Edited April 16, 2021 by RenoCarolina

[run-run-pass-punt]

8 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

So what I am saying is this--it is probable that if you draft a QB in the top 8 you have made a decision about Darnold before he has played a down...

Accepting him as your QB gives you options in the draft, options needed if you are serious about making this a championship team.  For example, if Fields is there at 8, I expect a team like New England (if they have not already moved up), or Washington, or Chicago, or maybe even Pittsburgh to move up.  They will offer picks in 2021 and a few in 2022.  Let's say we move back with Washington, a team probably willing to offer their first 3 picks and a second rounder in 2022 (for example).  You agree to trade back, you get a T, CB, WR in the first and second rounds, and Darnold's draft cost is more than covered.  Yes, you miss out on the elite player and settle for 3 very good ones, but in the end, you just got better in every area of concern and your QB is a former third overall pick who is 23 years old.  Oh, and with one of the picks you acquired, trade up later and take Mond or Mills or even Trask.  Develop him and in 2 years, if Darnold does not work out, he gets his chance and you have a QB with 2 years of coaching and some experience under his belt at age 24, ready to play.

My answer---use the fact that Fields or Lance is there as trade bait and build your team by moving back.

Yep, that's how I see it as well.