Aaron Curry... Worth the price?

by youALREADYknow on Apr 8, 2009 2:32 PM PDT

I'm interested in the poll results on this one, so please vote and explain your feelings on this improbable scenario.

We've all heard the talk of teams wanting to trade down this year to save money, but I'll make one case for the Niners trading up in this year's draft. My preference would still be to trade down from #10 to the teens, but it appears far more likely that a team wishing to trade up would rather get a 5-9 pick if they're going after Sanchez/Stafford. This brings me to the purpose of this FanPost... Aaron Curry.

Aaron Curry is simply the best football player in this draft as of today. We've gone through the benefits and drawbacks to taking all of the college DE's who fit the 3-4 OLB physical mold, but if we're going to be honest none of them comes remotely close to the level of Aaron Curry at OLB in the NFL. Aaron Curry is a complete linebacker who can play both inside or outside, has the strength and size to shed linemen, has the speed and agility for coverage, and has the discipline and mindset that Singletary would covet.

The Rams have already gone public stating that they want to trade down from #2, but surely other top 5 teams are thinking the same with the $30-50M contract that a top 5 pick will command. This might be the cheapest year to trade up because there is so little demand and teams will have to take a discount to get out of a top slot. Every team in the top 5 is going to be dangling their pick this year and practically daring a team to open their wallet to get elite talent.

Let's look at some possible trade partners:

Rams #2 overall for Niners #10 and 2010 1st round

Chiefs #3 overall for Niners #10, #42, and 2010 3rd round

Seahawks #4 overall for Niners #10 and #42

Obviously the first scenario doesn't look too appealing, but the Chiefs and Seahawks picks could provide some value. The Chiefs don't have a 2nd round pick and have already had private workouts with players who fall in the late 1st to early 2nd round range... not a coincidence. I strongly doubt Curry falls beyond pick #5 unless the Lions take Stafford AND another team trades up to get a QB.

Here's how I believe the draft is shaping up as of today:

1 DET: QB Matthew Stafford or OT Jason Smith

2 STL: OT Jason Smith or OT Eugene Monroe

3 KC: DE Brian Orakpo

4 SEA: OLB Aaron Curry

So the question becomes... is Aaron Curry more valuable than the options likely to be available at #10 and #42 OR would you rather spread the risk with two players who may be 1st round caliber talent but may not make as much of an impact as Curry would?

Please vote for the option you would prefer. (For the record, I'd prefer to trade down but I believe that Aaron Curry could indeed provide more value than the options at #10 and #42 depending on the first 9 picks in the draft.)

Poll

Choose the option that you would most prefer to see on draft day.

49ers trade #10 and #42 to Seahawks for #4 and select Aaron Curry

31 votes

49ers stay at #10 and take OT Oher or OT Smith

17 votes

49ers stay at #10 and take DE Maybin or DE Brown

19 votes

49ers stay at #10 and hope to trade down

35 votes

102 votes | Poll has closed

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.

Tweet Comment 26 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Definitely...

… not worth the price. While Curry is indeed a beast and I would love for him to be with the 49ers, that’s just too steep a price to pay for an OLB. If the team already had an NT, RT, and various other needs that can be filled by that second rounder, then maybe it would be worth a shot. But seeing as how the team will actually be faced with players who can fit those needs (NT/RT) at the top of round two, trading that away this year would be a mistake. Curry is a very good prospect, but not that good.

If your poll scenario means that Crabtree is gone, I’d go with option three only if Brown is available. Otherwise, I’d go with option four.

by sfgfan on Apr 8, 2009 3:00 PM PDT reply actions

poll scenario

I generally agree with you, but we’re not guaranteed to see Brace or Loadholt at #42.

The scenario that could happen at #10 would be Curry, Monroe, J. Smith, Crabtree, Raji, Orakpo, and A. Smith all taken before our pick. That leaves two picks unspoken for and a further possibility of no QB’s taken, thus Brown and/or Oher could be off the board as well.

Rays in '08.... Desmond Jennings - the breakout continues.....

by youALREADYknow on Apr 8, 2009 3:41 PM PDT up reply actions

True.

As I’ve mentioned before, my belief is that if Crabtree, Orakpo and Brown are gone (also assuming Curry, Monroe, J.Smith are gone), I’d rather the team take Sanchez than any of the other OTs. That’s my personal preference, mind you.

I understand what you mean about Brace and Loadholt. I’m pretty sure Loadholt is going in the bottom of the first. I’m thinking at least one of Britton, Loadholt, Beatty, or Meredith will be available at their second round pick, which all sound like they could make decent to good RTs. Brace is a big if, and I would definitely prefer him over any RT there, too.

by sfgfan on Apr 8, 2009 4:09 PM PDT up reply actions

We don't need no stink'in Aaron Curry . . .

by bignerd on Apr 8, 2009 3:22 PM PDT reply actions

fantastic picture

I think it’s in an Ole Miss jersey, but still cool.

by David Fucillo on Apr 8, 2009 3:30 PM PDT up reply actions

seconded

Great picture, but saying we don’t need Curry because of Willis… a lot of eggs in one basket right there.

Can you just imagine both Willis and Curry roaming the middle in a few years? Scary.

Rays in '08.... Desmond Jennings - the breakout continues.....

by youALREADYknow on Apr 8, 2009 3:42 PM PDT up reply actions

I’d love to have Aaron Curry but I do see one huge problem. Having two outstanding LB’s on the roster possess huge salary cap problems for the team. The Bears really didn’t want to be paying top dollar to both Urlacher and Lance Briggs which is why they messed with Briggs for so long.

Yes, I think it’s the Ole’Miss shot. Couldn’t find a better 49er photo at the right size.

by bignerd on Apr 8, 2009 4:03 PM PDT up reply actions

No matter what...

… the team will hope to have at least two oustanding LBs that they’ll have to pay. The hope is that there will only be one outstanding ILB. A pass rusher will get paid regardless, but a TED should never get paid what Willis will be making in a couple years.

by sfgfan on Apr 8, 2009 4:11 PM PDT up reply actions

Yes, you want multiple great LBs but not necessarily the two most talented/gifted guys in the league. Any team in the league would pay top dollar for either Willis and Curry so it would be too expensive to keep them both.

by bignerd on Apr 8, 2009 4:33 PM PDT up reply actions

not sure I agree with that

If the Niners are going to be a defense-minded team who features a rush-first offensive attack, then they don’t need a top-dollar QB or WR’s. When you’re not spending $5M+ each at the QB and WR position, then you can afford to spend more on the defensive end.

This team freed up a LOT of cap space this offseason from a few moves. Here are some 2008 cap numbers for players who either were released or re-structured their contract:

QB Alex Smith – $9.9M
CB Donald Strickland – $7.7M
OT Jonas Jennings – $5.8M
WR Ashley Lelie – $2M

Patrick Willis is a $4M player right now and I believe Curry will be a $5-6M player depending on his draft slot (3rd-5th). Much rather have that money spent on Aaron Curry than guys like Jennings or Lelie.

Rays in '08.... Desmond Jennings - the breakout continues.....

by youALREADYknow on Apr 8, 2009 5:13 PM PDT up reply actions

I have to admit I’m speaking more theory than reality here. Yes, you can make it happen but it’s the same scenario as drafting a OT with the 10th pick and paying two LT.

by bignerd on Apr 8, 2009 5:20 PM PDT up reply actions

I dont see why its a bad thing to have two great playmakers at LB

Chicagos D was pretty good. The Ravens D is pretty good. you know what they have in common. Damn good LBs..

now i voted to not trade up, but if we did i would not complain. Curry plays OLB tho right?

Other than death and taxes, only 4 things in this world are indisputable:
Brandon Roy is the BEST player in the NBA in the clutch.
Montana to Rice were the greatest to ever play the game.
The Four Horsemen of Maddux, Smoltz, Glavine and Avery were unstoppable.
No one protects the pipes like Luongo.

by GreatOden'sRaven on Apr 13, 2009 4:09 PM PDT up reply actions

I think...

… if the 49ers take a LB that high, he will have to at LEAST try to be an OLB.

by sfgfan on Apr 13, 2009 4:29 PM PDT up reply actions

But the Ravens retained Lewis and Suggs……..

by sundaysfinest on Apr 9, 2009 6:35 PM PDT up reply actions

Suggs doesn’t plug into every system.

by bignerd on Apr 9, 2009 8:37 PM PDT up reply actions

Are you proposing...

… that Curry would play the TED?

by sfgfan on Apr 8, 2009 4:11 PM PDT up reply actions

not at all

He would play weak-side, I meant middle as in LB, not ILB.

Rays in '08.... Desmond Jennings - the breakout continues.....

by youALREADYknow on Apr 8, 2009 4:22 PM PDT up reply actions

Weakside

I think Curry may be a stronger player in coverage than Haralson, so putting him on the weakside would weaken the strong-side significantly. Then again, putting Curry on the strong-side would take away some pass-rushing opportunities (but it’s not like he’s put up gaudy sack numbers in college, either).

by sfgfan on Apr 8, 2009 5:07 PM PDT up reply actions

TED is not a top five pick

It would be dumber than dumb to spend a top 5 pick on a TED LB.

Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.

by methodrampage on Apr 8, 2009 4:12 PM PDT up reply actions

NOT

worth the price at all. Our linebackers are fine. We have other bigger needs. This would be a mistake.

by june8thjrat on Apr 8, 2009 9:04 PM PDT reply actions

No trading Up

We have a fine pick at 10. We are going to get a talented guy at 10 whether it be Raji, Smith, Brown etc. Trading up last year would have made sense. IF anything, trade down for more picks

by iaalexeeff on Apr 8, 2009 10:17 PM PDT reply actions

I wouldn't mind

Rams #2 overall for Niners #10 and 2010 1st round

If that happened, I wouldn’t be upset. I’d be happy actually, because getting the #2 pick could open up some doors, and trading away next year’s number 1, while risky, wouldn’t be terrible, because we’d still have our 8 remaining picks in this year’s draft.

Would the team want Curry at 2 though? That, like others are saying, is a lot of money to be tying up in a LB. Would the team have to restructure Willis immediately? The team has to take care of home grown guys, and this is a perfect example of why the NFL needs a set draft cap per pick.

The thought of Curry coming into league and making more than a 2 time pro bowler is absurd. Especially since that players was the DROTY, and an all-pro.

by Andrew Davidson on Apr 9, 2009 1:30 PM PDT reply actions

Hmm.

I think I’m with you in terms of not being upset if they traded up (though I don’t think they should). I would be upset if they traded up to get Curry, though. You just don’t do that for an OLB that may not even amount to being a pass rusher (at least he didn’t really put up gaudy sack numbers in college).

by sfgfan on Apr 10, 2009 9:18 AM PDT up reply actions

sack numbers in college

His responsibility in college wasn’t to be a pass rusher, so that’s a bit misleading.

If we’re going on the basis of what players have done in college, then every possible OLB at pick #10 hasn’t performed any of the 3-4 OLB responsibilities in their career. Curry has consistently gotten into the backfield as proven by his TFL totals, but his role was more of a ball hawk in college than a pass-rushing OLB. If a guy can shed blocks to get to ballcarriers and can run a 4.5 with absurd explosion, then I have little doubt that he can shed blocks to get to the QB.

I also think his coverage skills are being overlooked. Still… I’m not in favor of trading up to get Curry unless the worst-case draft scenario happens.

Rays in '08.... Desmond Jennings - the breakout continues.....

by youALREADYknow on Apr 10, 2009 9:36 AM PDT up reply actions

Oh...

… I’m not completely writing him off. That’s why I said “may not”. While your point about the 3-4 OLB thing is well taken, I believe that most 3-4 OLBs are college DEs that were converted. While I understand that there is a high risk in that, there is ALSO a very high risk in taking a guy who’s assignments didn’t require him to rush a passer and put him in a position that requires him to. There is a lot more to rushing the QB than the speed an explosion he has.

Basically, I’m of the belief that teaching a LB to drop into a zone or cover a RB/TE is significantly easier than teaching him how to deceive and beat an NFL left tackle.

Basically, I’m against trading up (especially that far) to get him because he just isn’t worth that kind of acquisition price. He has a risk involved, just like Brown and Orakpo do, but the price to acquire them is significantly smaller (assuming at least one is available at #10).

by sfgfan on Apr 10, 2009 10:09 AM PDT up reply actions

not worth it ...

Curry’s pretty awesome, but overall we’ve got a whole bunch of holes/needs to fill this year, I’ll take a stronger team overall rather than just another high salary star player

"Those boos really motivate me to make something happen." - Bonds

by Persiflage on Apr 9, 2009 5:17 PM PDT reply actions