On a wild Friday, news broke on two trades involving 2021 NFL draft picks within minutes of each other. First, the San Francisco 49ers altered their future by trading up to No. 3 overall, sending the Miami Dolphins their No. 12 overall pick, a 2022 first-rounder, a 2022 third-rounder and a 2023 first-rounder in return. Shortly after, the Dolphins jumped back up to No. 6 overall. The Philadelphia Eagles sent Miami that sixth pick and a fifth-rounder in exchange for the No. 12 pick, a fourth-rounder and a 2022 first-rounder.
The swaps significantly changed the scene for Round 1 of the draft, which begins April 29 in Cleveland. The Niners now have the chance to select one of the top quarterbacks in the class, while the Eagles acquired extra assets that will help them rebuild their roster. The Dolphins, meanwhile, managed to do a little bit of both, staying in the top six while also adding a first-rounder for down the road.
So how did each team do? We asked our NFL experts, NFL Nation team reporters and NFL draft analysts to grade each team's moves. Which teams won big, and which teams still left plenty of room for skepticism? We also took a quick look at what the nine-pick jump for San Francisco means for current QB Jimmy Garoppolo. Let's dive in, starting with the very active Dolphins.
Jump to:
Dolphins | 49ers | Eagles | Garoppolo
Grade the Dolphins' move from No. 3 to No. 12 and then up to No. 6.
Matt Bowen, NFL analyst: B+. After both moves, the Dolphins are now in a position to draft an offensive playmaker with dynamic traits at No. 6, whether it be Florida tight end Kyle Pitts, LSU receiver Ja'Marr Chase or Alabama receiver DeVonta Smith. And with the future draft capital from the 49ers, Miami has flexibility to upgrade its roster.
Mike Clay, NFL analyst: B. It's easy to look at the "net profit" and grade it an A, but this is two separate trades in my opinion. The trade with the 49ers was terrific considering Miami wasn't going to take a QB, but the follow-up with the Eagles is confusing. I'm not sure many would agree that moving a future first-rounder and dropping 33 spots on Day 3 is worth jumping up six spots for a non-quarterback, assuming that's the plan. That's especially the case considering Miami is not a lock to be a playoff team in 2021, and that future first-rounder could very well be in the early-to-mid portion of the 2022 draft. But overall, yes, it's a net profit.
Dan Graziano, national NFL writer: A. Miami is playing with house money. When the Dolphins made the Laremy Tunsil trade with Houston, there is no way that they or the Texans imagined the 2021 first-rounder they got in return would be as high as No. 3. They now spin it into still more picks while dropping back only three spots. Committed to Tua Tagovailoa and not looking to draft a QB, they now can be sure that at least three players from the group that includes Oregon tackle Penei Sewell, Chase, Smith, Pitts and Alabama receiver Jaylen Waddle will be there when they pick. And they'll be able to take someone who instantly makes their young QB better.
Mel Kiper Jr., NFL draft analyst: A. This is the ideal scenario for the Dolphins, who are clearly committed to Tagovailoa as their franchise quarterback. They pick up extra prime assets and move down only three spots, which means they can still get one of the top wide receivers -- Chase, Smith and Waddle -- with the No. 6 pick or take a versatile weapon in Pitts. This team is built to contend in the AFC East in 2021.
Todd McShay, NFL draft analyst: A. Put it this way: If Miami weren't able to move out of No. 3, it likely would have been targeting Chase, Smith, Sewell or maybe even Northwestern tackle Rashawn Slater. Now the Dolphins pick up additional picks, including a future first-rounder, and will likely land the same player at No. 6. That's a win.
Kevin Seifert, national NFL writer: B+. The Dolphins already have a quarterback to build around. (That's how they should view Tagovailoa, at least.) So there was every reason to trade down from No. 3 and accumulate more opportunities to build around him. I'm less certain about their decision to move back up. Who is it for, and why was that particular player so important?
Seth Walder, sports analytics writer: A-. If they weren't going to take a QB at No. 3, then Miami's only correct option was to trade down. Not only did GM Chris Grier do that, but he extracted enormous, overwhelming value from the 49ers. The Dolphins passed some of that value on to the Eagles, but their trade with Philadelphia was nowhere near as lopsided. According to our pick value estimates, Miami gained the equivalent of a mid-first-round pick in value, though that is without any discount for future picks. Even with a discount, the Dolphins are clear winners for the day.
Cameron Wolfe, Dolphins reporter: A+. The Dolphins are building around Tagovailoa and are likely to select one of the top offensive playmakers in the draft. Value wasn't great at No. 3, so picking up future first- and third-round picks to possibly take the same guy at No. 6 is brilliant. Trading back always made the most sense for a team that is building into a contender but doesn't need the premium positions often taken in the top three. With QBs now likely to go with the first three -- and possibly four -- picks, Miami will get its choice between multiple players in an elite group. The first big winner in this trade is Miami. The second is Tagovailoa.
Field Yates, NFL analyst: A. It's simplest for me to evaluate these two maneuvers as one large swap, so I'm bullish on the concept that for moving down three spots Miami wound up with an additional 2023 first-round pick. Now that pick is two full years away, and San Francisco could very well be good enough that the pick is closer to No. 30 than No. 10, but it's still a valuable chip. Miami remains well positioned to land a premiere pass-catcher at No. 6, and while someone like Chase would have been worth the third overall pick on talent, it seems plausible he or another elite pass-catcher will be sitting right there waiting for Miami at sixth overall.
Grade the 49ers' move from No. 12 up to No. 3.
Bowen: B. This move tells us that coach Kyle Shanahan believes in the current construction of the 49ers' roster, in addition to his ability to evaluate the QB position -- with an eye on a rookie signal-caller at No. 3 overall.
Clay: B. They obviously gave up a haul to get it done, but I'm always on board with doing whatever it takes to find a franchise quarterback. The likes of Justin Fields (Ohio State) and Trey Lance (North Dakota State) aren't locks, but Jimmy Garoppolo clearly hasn't been enough of a difference-maker. So this move was worth the heavy investment.
Graziano: B-. Shanahan watched his father do something similar with Washington in 2012, giving up three first-round picks and a second-rounder to move up from No. 6 to No. 2 and take Robert Griffin III. Washington won its division that year, but in the big picture Griffin didn't work out. This is a gamble by a coach and GM who know they have a good roster and need to elevate the ceiling at the QB position. If they hit on the right quarterback, we'll look back and say it was a great move. If they don't, they'll suffer for the lack of high picks in the next couple of drafts.
Kiper: B+. It's a heavy price to pay for the 49ers, sacrificing 2022 and 2023 first-round picks to move up nine spots. Now, this is going to be a quarterback, and we don't know whom Shanahan & Co. covet out of Fields, Lance and Alabama's Mac Jones. But they must like one of those guys a lot, and they felt like they had to move up now to get their guy. The plus side is that their 2022 and 2023 picks could be in the 20s -- if they win with whichever quarterback they select. But that's not always a given because of injuries and other factors. The Texans certainly never thought they'd be picking No. 3 in this draft when they traded with Miami for Tunsil.
McShay: B. The Niners don't make this trade if they weren't targeting a specific quarterback whom they've already decided can be their guy -- and one not named Trevor Lawrence or Zach Wilson, who presumably will be off the board. San Francisco gave up a lot, but QB was its biggest need, and if it hits on this pick with its QB of the future, then it's worth it. It just has to hit, and the QB it brings in must be a massive upgrade over Garoppolo.
Seifert: B-. In the big picture, this move signals the beginning of the end for the 49ers' incumbent quarterback and the start of a new period of development for the next one. There is reason to trust Shanahan to make a good decision on the quarterback he drafts at No. 3, but the failure to establish Garoppolo in that role will push out the success horizon of Shanahan's tenure. He has had three losing seasons and one Super Bowl run in four years with the 49ers. The chances of taking a step back with a young starter are much higher than somehow maintaining competitiveness with Garoppolo until the next guy is ready.
Nick Wagoner, 49ers reporter: B. The 49ers are doing the right thing in being bold to get their guy. Because they've already built a strong roster elsewhere, a top quarterback on a rookie contract would set them up to be contenders for years to come, which is their ultimate goal. They can no longer sit around as entire seasons are lost because Garoppolo can't stay healthy. But they get knocked down a peg here for moving only to No. 3, which means they likely will land just the draft's third-rated quarterback. Perhaps they are higher on whomever they like at No. 3 than other teams, but that's a big projection considering the huge cost.
Walder: C. I understand not wanting to be passive once they decided to move on from Garoppolo, but using two first-rounders to move up for the right to select the third quarterback in this draft is an exorbitant price. No QB is a certainty to pan out -- hardly any are even a probability! -- and either way this trade will hamstring their roster in the future.
Yates: B. I wanted to say incomplete, but B is a fence-sitting resolution for me. I've long believed that there is no price too significant to pay to land a franchise quarterback, so if whomever the 49ers take winds up as a franchise-altering player, the grade will prove to be an A+. But the downside for San Francisco is that if the player it takes does not connect as a home run, it has cashed in valuable future chips and limited its roster reinforcements going forward. I like confident and audacious franchises, and the front office in San Francisco has earned the benefit of the doubt in my opinion. This move has major upside.
Grade the Eagles' move back from No. 6 to No. 12.
Bowen: A-. With potentially four to five QBs being drafted in the top 10, the Eagles will still be in a position to land a difference-maker at No. 12 -- while picking up another first-round selection for down the road in this deal.
Clay: A. For the reasons I didn't love it for Miami, I do love it for Philadelphia. The rebuilding Eagles did not appear likely to draft a quarterback at sixth overall, so moving down six spots in the first in exchange for a future first-rounder and a jump up 33 slots on Day 3 is a no-brainer. What cements this as an "A" is that the Eagles are in the WR and CB market and are still likely to land one of the "big three" wideouts or one of the top corners at 12th overall.
Graziano: A-. Trading down is always a good idea if you aren't in love with your spot. Once the Eagles decided that they weren't going to be able to take a QB they liked better than Jalen Hurts, this was the right move. They'll still be able to land a very good cornerback or receiver at their new spot, and they have two first-round picks next year (three, actually, if Carson Wentz plays 75% of the Colts' offensive snaps, or if he plays 70% of the snaps and Indy makes the playoffs) to help them get a QB if Hurts doesn't pan out.
Kiper: B. I'm a little lower on this because I think they needed to get some weapons for Hurts, and they might miss on Pitts, Chase, Smith and Waddle if they're picking at No. 12. They might be the fourth-best team in the NFC East again in 2021. Now, they get a first-round pick in 2022, which means they have the capital to move up and get a quarterback if Hurts doesn't work out. But I would rather get Hurts help now and figure out 2022 later. At this point, I'd look for them to target a cornerback or offensive lineman at No. 12.
McShay: B-. This isn't a huge fall in the draft order, but the Eagles' biggest need is at wide receiver, and they essentially undid the lock they had on one of the top four pass-catchers in this class (Chase, Smith, Pitts and Waddle). Now they have to hope one of those players falls or instead target another need like cornerback. But it's worth noting that Philly could get another first-rounder next year from the Colts depending on Wentz's season, giving them three in 2022. It's sacrificing the quick grab for the long term. I appreciate and understand it, but it's a tough pill to swallow.
Seifert: A-. The Eagles weren't getting a quarterback at No. 6, and that makes a trade down preferable if someone wants to move up. You could argue they should have ignored the Hurts buzz and moved up when they were so close to one of the top four quarterbacks, but accumulating volume seems a better play for a franchise that needs to rebuild every part of its roster.
Walder: A-. Stockpiling future assets is a wise move for Philadelphia. The Eagles will take this season to see what they've got in Hurts, and if they want to move on, they'll have extra picks next offseason to make a move for a new QB and/or use those picks to build around that new quarterback.
Yates: A-. This is another move that I love, with a condition. At first blush, one reaction is that by moving down from No. 6 to No. 12, the Eagles are going to be hard pressed to land one of the top four pass-catchers in this year's class. My instinct is that it's actually possible that Philly could still land one of those players (Chase, Waddle, Smith or Pitts), and nothing prevents it from moving back up the order to land one of them if need be. Should the Eagles still get one of those four, I love the move.
Assuming San Francisco's move up to No. 3 is to draft a quarterback, will Jimmy Garoppolo stay with the 49ers, or will he be traded or released?
Bowen: I believe Garoppolo will be traded or cut. With a cap number of $26.4 million, the 49ers can move on from Garoppolo and allocate the money to the rest of their roster.
Clay: Reports suggest the 49ers will keep Garoppolo around, but I don't think he'll be starting many games in 2021. Consider this: Since 2010, 14 QBs have been drafted in the top three picks. Ten of the 14 played in Week 1, and two others were starting by Week 3. The others took over in Week 5 and Week 11. Expect things to play out similarly in San Francisco.
Graziano: He stays, and starts Week 1, but that's about as far as I can go. The 49ers are obviously about to draft his replacement, and his salary is an albatross. But his contract includes a no-trade clause for 2021 only, so he has some control over the situation. I think the Niners stick with him for now, but depending on how the first half of the season goes, they could trade him at the October trade deadline.
Kiper: This is tough. If the 49ers take Lance at No. 3, I think they should keep Garoppolo. Lance is green -- he started 17 FCS games in college -- and even Patrick Mahomes needed a redshirt year in the NFL. If they take Fields or Jones, Garoppolo is likely to be traded -- the Patriots make sense -- or cut. I'd lean toward the latter scenario because I have Fields and Jones higher in my rankings.
McShay: I think Garoppolo is staying put. I've been told that's the Niners' plan and the feeling around the league. Let him compete and provide some growth time for whatever quarterback the 49ers draft. And let's not forget that Garoppolo is a competent QB when he's healthy and has been in Shanahan's system for a few seasons now. San Francisco can rely on him until it's time to hand the keys over to the next guy.
Mike Reiss, Patriots reporter: Garoppolo would be a top option in New England, but I buy the 49ers' plan to stick with him as the day one starter for 2021. As for 2022, when the 49ers might be more open to moving on and turning things over to their No. 3 pick, I'd expect the Patriots to strongly pursue Garoppolo as the answer to the question that hovers over the organization: Who's the QB of the future?
Seifert: I think we'd be naive to believe Garoppolo is certain to remain with the 49ers. The team will certainly be tempted to keep him with the idea of maximizing its 2021 competitiveness, and maybe to elevate his trade value if he performs well. But if the 49ers wait until after he is replaced by the presumptive No. 3 pick, his trade value would plummet.
Wagoner: I can't say it with certainty because the 49ers might get an offer that's too good to pass up, but I think Garoppolo will stay and begin the season as the starter. What happens from there will depend on his health, but the Niners believe they can contend again in 2021, and a healthy Garoppolo likely gives them a better chance to do that than a rookie. Remember, no rookie quarterback has ever started a Super Bowl, let alone won one. What's more, the cap space saved doesn't do them much good now that free agency is mostly through. So, why not hang on to him and hope he stays healthy and plays well enough to bolster his trade value while a rookie learns under him like the Chiefs did with Alex Smith and Mahomes in 2017? Even if Garoppolo isn't healthy or struggles next year, the Niners would save $25.6 million by moving on from him then with his successor already in place.
Walder: One way or another, I think he's out. The 49ers really can't justify today's trade if they gave up two first-rounders to move up and still pay Garoppolo's big cap hit. I don't see many suitors out there who might be willing to pay his current salary -- Broncos? Patriots? -- so I lean toward him simply being cut.
Yates: I'll say he stays with the 49ers and starts in Week 1. Adam Schefter's reporting today has been adamant that San Francisco plans to keep Jimmy G. Also, the majority of quarterbacks who enter this league as first-rounders would benefit massively from a year of grooming. The trick is, rarely are they set up for it. This is the exception.