Trading For Vernon Gholston

by methodrampage on Mar 18, 2008 11:45 AM PDT Comment 31 comments

So this trade that the Raiders are trying to pull off with the Falcons for Hall has got me thinking. First, WTF are the Raiders doing? They were crappy last year and bringing in a malcontent CB and a can't stay healthy WR for tons of money isn't going to put them in the playoffs. Secondly, with the Raiders reportedly giving up a 2nd and 6th round draft picks for Hall they're only left with a 1st, 4th, 5th (maybe) and 7th. To me it would seem like the Raiders might consider themselves in a position to trade down. They've spent a ton of money this offseason already and I'm not sure if they want to pay #4 money to a rookie, especially considering the trouble they had paying Russell. With that said I think the Raiders would be willing to listen to offers for that #4 pick but do you guys think it's worth it to trade up for Vernon Gholston?

There's been a lot written about what the Niners top needs are and I don't really want to get into that whole debate again but I consider, and I some of you agree, two of our top needs being OT and a pass rushing OLB. I'd be perfectly fine with taking a OT with the 29th pick but if given the opportunity to trade up for Gholston and then take an OT in the 2nd round I'd be all for it. Gholston is an absolute beast and his combine numbers are in the upper echelon of freakish while the OT that we could draft in the 2nd round might not be a huge step down from what the Niners would get at #29.

I guess I better address what it could possible cost the Niners to move up to the #4 pick overall. Obviously the #29 pick would have to be included probably with the '09 1st round pick and a 4th rounder from this years draft as well. So would you trade the Niners 1st and 4th round picks this year and their 1st round pick next year for opportunity to draft Gholston?

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Niners Nation's writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Niners Nation's writers or editors.

0 recs | Comment 31 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Gholston

He seems like a freak of nature....I'm gonna look into him a little more and get back to you.

Niners Nation - The premier 49ers blog on the Internet!

by Fooch on Mar 18, 2008 11:51 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I would..

I think I would do it. The reasons, to me, are fairly easy, but take a lot into assumption.

The 49ers really need a pass rushing LB right now, in addition to an OT. It could possibly be argued that those are their two biggest needs remaining this offseason. As Braekneck pointed out, if the 49ers jump up and take Gholston and then take someone like Carl Nicks or Sam Baker in the early second (VERY possible), they'd be in fairly good shape going into the season.

Suppose that the 49ers did take Gholston, thus setting their LB group and pretty much finalizing their defense for the next two years. No high draft picks will need to be used on the defense for the next few years, and especially not a first rounder.

Suppose that the 49ers use the depth of this draft to take Nicks or Baker, both of whom aren't much different than the guys projected to go ahead of them (Williams, Cherilus, and Otah), and with either, the 49ers would most likely be getting their starting RT they need. With the offensive line squared away (Staley and Nicks/Baker manning the tackles, Snyder and Baas manning the guards, and Heitmann with maybe another two years in him), the 49ers won't need to use any high picks on any offensive lineman in the future, and especially not first rounders.

So that leaves the QB, WR, RB, and TE positions on offense. The 49ers appear to be set at QB for the next three years (Hill and Smith). They also appear to be set at RB for at least a couple of years (barring a catastrophic injury). At TE, the team is looking to re-sign Delanie Walker and keep him alongside Vernon Davis, so that should be set for a few years too.

So that really just leaves WR. I don't like drafting WRs in the first round, due to the extremely high risk in them not panning out. I think the 49ers may share a similar opinion, but I don't know that for sure. The 49ers have WRs signed for at least two more years. The ones that aren't may easily be retained if they show that they're worth an extension/re-signing, as the 49ers have plenty of money under the cap. With all that said, I don't think the 49ers would need to use a first rounder on a WR next year either.

I guess the basis of my entire argument is that the 49ers don't necessarily NEED that first rounder next season. Gholston is a freak, and as Braekneck has previously pointed out, he looks like he could be the next Merriman. I think that if anyone in this year's draft is worth that kind of a trade up (two first rounders, one low and one probably middle, and a fourth rounder), Gholston would be that guy.

by sfgfan on Mar 18, 2008 12:18 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Yes

I agree with both you and Braekneck. Obviously, it's unlikely that it will happen, but man would that be sweet.

We are not who I thought we were.

by marcello on Mar 18, 2008 1:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nice analysis

While it's obvious that I'd be willing to give up next year's 1st rounder for Gholston I do think there would be defensive value in that pick. Depending on how this draft goes and how Tarrel Brown and Dashon Goldson develop I could see the Niners wanting to spend a first round pick on a CB or FS. But with that said, Gholston's pass rush would eliminate some of the need to upgrade the secondary.

Here's to hoping Albert Hanyesworth stomps on Alex Smith's head.

by methodrampage on Mar 19, 2008 7:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

You're right..

As I mentioned, my reasoning involves quite a bit in the ways of assumptions. I don't really discuss how Hudson, Brown and Spencer are going to continue to develop. I'm hoping/expecting them to develop as planned.

Spencer is a solid CB, when he's healthy. He just hasn't shown that he can STAY healthy enough to eventually take the starting role from Walt Harris. Brown and Hudson definitely raise a couple of valid question marks, and I agree, the 49ers may see some defensive value in next year's first round pick.

But yes, Gholston's ability to potential at the pass rush could make the secondary's job a lot easier.

by sfgfan on Mar 19, 2008 8:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

very logical look

and i agree with you, id love to see looks on the faces of opposing qbs and rbs as they look over the line and see gholston and bam bam. but i dont know if id say the d would be set for the next few years. i think we would still need an impact d lineman who can eat up blockers and a little secondary help soon.

by sam23 on Mar 19, 2008 1:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah.

As I mentioned in my response to Braekneck, a little secondary help could be in the works the next couple of years. It all depends on how someone like Goldson pans out at FS (if he could wrestle the job away from Roman) or guys like Hudson, Spencer, and Brown fare in trying to wrestle play time away from Walt Harris.

As for the defensive lineman who eats up blockers, guys like that can be had after the first round. I don't quite think that their line is completely inept, as I think Franklin CAN play the nose and Sopoaga and Smith should be able to play DE just fine. If guys like Fields, Oliver, Cohen, and McDonald show something this year, the 49ers could move Sopoaga inside to rotate with Franklin more, thus making the defensive line, probably, the deepest rotation in their defense.

by sfgfan on Mar 19, 2008 2:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

yea

we are on the same page. i just think, even with gholston, we'd be a haynesworth type dt away from being an elite defense. you think d-line will be deeper than linebacker? and i think corner could be a serious issue by next offseason. teams are going to target walt harris even more next year. spencer is the only one that i think has shown much potential, and i think he's a better nickel corner.

by sam23 on Mar 19, 2008 2:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

depth

I do think that the depth at defensive line will be a lot better than the depth at linebacker with the current set of players. This is primarily because the 3-4 defensive line positions aren't THAT special in that you need highly specialized guys to do it. No one in a 3-4 line is expected to be a super penetrating player. They're not expected to be "disruptive". They're just expected to be able to hold the point of attack (i.e. occupy at least one blocker, and hopefully more), and free up space for the "stars" of the 3-4 (the linebackers) to do their jobs.

The 49ers currently have four or five guys (aside from Smith) that I think can step in and do a solid job at defensive end already: Sopoaga, Fields, Oliver, Cohen, and McDonald. That leaves the big man in the middle. As I said earlier, I think Franklin is more than capable of performing the task, and if Cohen/McDonald/Fields/Oliver/McDonald can take over DE for good, Sopoaga can take over the nose. Remember, the team also believes Fields and Cohen can fill in at the nose in a pinch.

Another reason I say that the 49ers are deeper at defensive line than linebacker is because the 49ers lack talent at their LB depth. They have solid starters in Lawson, Moore/Thomas, Willis, Haralson/Banta-Cain. They lack depth serious depth. At linebacker, the players aren't as interchangeable as they are along the defensive line. Banta-Cain would make a very sorry interior LB. Similarly, Moore and Thomas are a little on the small side to consistently do well on the outside of a 3-4.

I think they need another linebacker more than they need anyone on the defensive line. They especially need a pass-rusher, which they really lack right now.

Walt Harris is almost like the Arnaz Battle of that defense. His first year, everyone thought he was a scrub and would play to that level. He proved them wrong. Last year, people thought he'd get picked on a lot, and he did a fair job again. Having an improved pass rush, which is what they'd have if they were to trade up to take Gholston, would work wonders on a smart CB who rarely makes a mental mistake.

As for Harris' heir apparent, I think Spencer's the only one that has shown a lot because he's the one with the most exposure. Hudson did well in his limited time last year, and I'm hoping he develops into a more consistent version of Spencer. Spencer, for all the talent he's shown, can't stay healthy. Brown, on the other hand, had to have learned quite a bit in his first year. It'll be interesting to see if the team plays him more this year (considering they're probably not getting Strickland back).

by sfgfan on Mar 19, 2008 2:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

i'm just

not as sold on franklin as you. i expected big him to be very good last year, and he just couldnt stay on the field more than 2 plays in a row. i agree they have plenty of depth at de, but i think dt is still an issue. imagine how good willis would be with a haynesworth type eating up blockers in the middle. as for harris, i like the guy and like his smart scrappy style, but at times last year he got burned. and now he's another year older. i think he's got another couple effective years in him, but i'm not sure he'll be starter quality. as far as lb depth i think ulbrich is a solid backup as well, and he is versatile and smart enough to play a couple positions in the 3-4. and im hopeful jay moore can be effective as an outside guy too. thats pretty good depth, though a gholston type would make it an elite group. any news on takeo spikes?

by sam23 on Mar 19, 2008 10:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

fallacy

That's where a lot of people made the mistake last year. Franklin didn't get elite DT money, let alone elite NT money. It was wrong to expect him to be an every down player at THE most physically demanding position in a 3-4. As I pointed out, he'll continue to rotate with Sopoaga, which makes NT a solid, but unspectacular spot. It doesn't have to be spectacular, he just has to be solid.

Ulbrich is a solid backup, I agree, but I disagree that he can play multiple positions in the 3-4. He's not very quick, nor is he fast, so playing outside is an absolute no-no. He'd probably best fit at Willis' spot, as he's not that strong or big either. However, I think Moore and Thomas can fill in for Willis just as well. I guess I'm just not very high on Ulbrich.

As for Spikes, since there hasn't been anything mentioned anywhere since he came in, I'm going to assume he failed his physical. As a courtesy, I'd imagine you don't go announcing to the world that you didn't sign a guy because he failed his second physical in less than two months. In any case, I don't think he'd be much of an upgrade over B.Moore or Thomas, as he's up there in years and is an injury prone player now.

by sfgfan on Mar 20, 2008 10:06 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

most elite d's,

regardless of their 4-3 or 3-4 formation, feature at least one impact player at each of the d-line, linebacker, and secondary. 4-3's tend to feature two stud d-linemen, while 3-4's at least two stud lb's. i think we have our impact guys in the secondary and in the linebacking corps but the d-line is seriously lacking. i like smith a lot and think he will fit well here, but he's not the stud they need there. i also like the oliver, mcdonald, sopoaga rotation at the other de spot. i think franklin is fine as a fill-in at NT, but in order to become an elite defense (and in nolan's scheme it needs to be to have a competitive team) they need a big time NT who doesnt just do whats expected of him most of the time and nothing more. sopoaga/franklin just aint it.

by sam23 on Mar 21, 2008 10:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I would do it...

For the reasons that sfgfan listed.

Although, we are talking about the Raiders here. You have to throw logic out the window when it comes to Al Davis. I think he is gonna keep the pick. But, if he does decide to shop the pick i'm thinking Dallas' 2 1st rounders+ would be more attractive to the Raiders. Your deal makes sense according to the draft value chart,but I think any deal for #4 would start with #29, #39, next years 2nd+.

by enut21 on Mar 18, 2008 5:39 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Raiders

I'd be really interested in what their cap situation will be if Hall really signs a 7 year $70M contract. If you add that with Tommy Kelly's and Javon Walker's contracts they've spent like $175M, plus Asomugha is going to get like ~$9.8M. If I was a Raider fan I'd be worried that the Raiders might not have any money left to sign picks, although it helps that they only have a couple picks left but that #4 pick could prove to be pretty costly and as loose as Al has been with free agent money he doesn't like to dish out the money for rookies. Unless the Raiders start cutting some major fat, starting with LaMont Jordan, Fabian Washington and Stuart Sweigart, I'd fully expect the Raiders to trade out of #4.

Here's to hoping Albert Hanyesworth stomps on Alex Smith's head.

by methodrampage on Mar 19, 2008 7:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Dead weight

It seems that the Raiders have a whole lot tied up in backups that will likely never hit the field or guys that just haven't earned their pay. There's always the possibility that they trade away some of that "weight" in exchange for some lower draft picks, just to shed salary while picking up affordable players.

by sfgfan on Mar 19, 2008 8:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Just wondering

Any chance of the niners trading say our 2nd rounder this year, 3rd rounder this year, and a 2nd rounder next year for the 4th,6th or 7th overall pick or I'm I just kidding myself. The pats defence needs upgrades in more than one whole and the jets and raiders have used a ton of cap room. Maybe throw in a 6th rounder?

by montasmob69 on Mar 18, 2008 7:46 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I don't know how these things work

But I'd be very very surprised if we could get a pick anywhere in the top ten without at least surrendering our first round pick.

I'm not good at trade speculation and this whole jazz, so I don't usually have a lot to say when it comes up and when I do it doesn't usually mean much, but that's my impression on this question, anyway.

I keep reliving the moment when Steve Young almost fell down... over and over....

by howtheyscored on Mar 18, 2008 8:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

No chance in hell

To give you an idea of estimated draft value, use this link that Braekneck posted in another thread.

http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/features/valuechart.html

by Rocktopus on Mar 18, 2008 9:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Good point of reference

A good point of reference is last year's draft. The 49ers had to send away a future first rounder in order to acquire an extra first rounder. They then traded away a second round pick and a second day pick to get a future first from a team that would pick in the 28-32 range. Essentially, they traded away a first, second, and fourth (I think that was it) for a first and a second.

That's a heck of a lot more than two second rounders and maybe a third and sixth rounder to move into the first. Also remember, the extra first rounder they acquired was at the BOTTOM of the first, so trading up to the 4th, 6th or 7th pick would cost even more. The value of a draft pick in the first round plummets really fast as you go deeper into the round.

by sfgfan on Mar 19, 2008 8:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Gholston

I like all of the reasons given for trading up for Gholston and definitely agree he's the kind of impact player who could do great things. Imagine him and Patrick Willis on the same defense. Crazy athleticism.

Niners Nation - The premier 49ers blog on the Internet!

by Fooch on Mar 18, 2008 10:10 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

And

many lawson as well. Wow, talk about a group of insane atheletes at LB and brandon moore is pretty atheletc too.

by montasmob69 on Mar 19, 2008 7:20 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Dontarrius Thomas

Thomas is even more athletic than Moore, at least he's supposed to be.

by sfgfan on Mar 19, 2008 8:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Visions...

of Thomas, Willis, Lawson and Gholston running around and smacking the shit out of running backs and quarterbacks is enough to give even the most morally steadfast impure thoughts at night.

Here's to hoping Albert Hanyesworth stomps on Alex Smith's head.

by methodrampage on Mar 19, 2008 9:01 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

visions of

suggs (lawson), ray ray (bam bam), bart scott (thomas) and adalius (gholston)

by sam23 on Mar 19, 2008 1:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

We could call them...

The A Team!

Starring....

Col. Patrick "Hannibal" Willis
Lt. Dontarrious "Faceman" Thomas
Capt. Manny "Howling Mad" Lawson
and Vernon "Bad Attitude" Gholston

by BawLa on Mar 19, 2008 11:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think

After see the whole points system and how picks are valued, I think this should be our trade. Oakland gets our 1st and 4th rounders this year and a 1st the next and we get the 4th overall pick. Then we trade our second for a late first next year. We won't have to spend an extra pick since we are picking higher this year. It will pain me to think that our O-line may be this bad, but Gholston is that good. Another option is to put our money in Quienten Groves as a second rounder, get Cherilus in the first, and spend 2 or 3 more picks on OL throughout the draft. These would be the most effectie plans. And though Groves lacks the bulk and stength of Gholston, he is extremely fast, and will most likely gain 10-15 pounds of muscle anyways.

by montasmob69 on Mar 19, 2008 10:55 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Points system and all that

The only way the 49ers would be able to unload this year's second rounder for a future #1 is if a team is desperate to move up into that spot. I don't think that would be the case in this particular draft.

In any case, I don't see why you'd have to trade this year's second rounder for a future #1 anyway. Especially if you've got a need at OT and you can take a player that is comparable to the first round talents in that particular spot in the second (i.e. Baker or Nicks).

Basically, the team can get Gholston AND a starting offensive tackle.

by sfgfan on Mar 20, 2008 9:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't think that'd be a very good idea...

I guess if you think the Niners are close to contention next year it might be worth it, but I don't think they are. As active as they've been in free agency they haven't addressed the most crippling weakness of their offense: That line is atrocious. Nobody on that O line played very well last season. Add to that Smiley and Harris are now gone and there was never much depth to begin with, then stick that poor line in Mad Mike's offense and you've got a disaster waiting to happen, I feel sorry for whichever QB is going to have to deal with that.

I doubt the Niners will be able to solve all of their line issues through one draft, especially not if they trade up for a LB.

by notor on Mar 24, 2008 2:29 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Aparently you missed the whole OT depth point

Unless you expect the Niners to draft OL back-to-back in the 1st and 2nd rounds.

Here's to hoping Albert Hanyesworth stomps on Alex Smith's head.

by methodrampage on Mar 24, 2008 12:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I really do think the line is that bad, yes

1st and high 2nd pick on OL in this draft likely gives you two immediate, solid starters on that line. Which would help turn an atrocious line into one which is a lot less questionable.

But OL isn't the only need on the team obviously, which is why I don't think it's a good idea to trade away a bunch of future picks just for Gholston.

by notor on Mar 24, 2008 10:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs