The Athletic’s Matt Barrows put together another mock this week where the San Francisco 49ers make a trade with the Miami Dolphins to move up to No. 21. The 49ers take Georgia offensive tackle Amarius Mims. The team gives away No. 31, some fourth rounds and a third rounder next year to make the move.
Ok, a trade up to get this offensive line solidified is what I like! Except I don’t know about Mims, a player who has only started eight games over the past two seasons. Here’s what Barrows said on the pick:
course, this depends on which tackles are still available in the last third of Round 1, a group that could include Mims, Oklahoma’s Tyler Guyton and Arizona’s Jordan Morgan.
All three have imperfections. Mims and Guyton haven’t played much, with Mims limited to eight starts over the last two seasons and Guyton having started 14 games for the Sooners. Morgan isn’t as physically gifted as the other two — some think he’s best as a guard — and of that trio, he’s the most likely to be available at pick No. 31.
Most agree that Mims is the top prospect of that group due to his combination of size — 6-foot-8 with 36 1/8-inch arms — and quick feet. He also weighs 340 pounds, which is heftier than even Williams. (His shoe size is bigger, too: size 17 versus size 14 for Williams.)
Williams’ presence, of course, is a large part of why Mims would be a good pick.
Mims certainly could compete with Colton McKivitz at right tackle as a rookie. But he wouldn’t have to be thrown into the fire right away like he might if another team took him. He also could spend his rookie season apprenticing behind the best left tackle in the game.
Yeah, there’s a lot of potential and physical traits on this kid. I like all that he has.
Except those starts. Yikes.
In this scenario, they’d take Mims as the understudy to Trent Williams at left tackle, a position I view as the second-most important in football behind quarterback. They already tried this with the most important position in football with the Trey Lance misfire. The 49ers bet the farm on a kid who only had one season starting in Division I and it wound up blowing up.
That really concerns me on taking another person who hasn’t played enough football. I’m still spooked from the entire debacle and Lance’s one season of embarrassing lower level colleges, with an assumption that he could just get a massive level up in a few years. When you look at the opposite of the spectrum in Brock Purdy, he played a lot of football, but didn’t have that “potential” you were looking for. From this single instance, I’m more inclined to take the person who’s played more games in better competition than the guy who only started one full season.
Everybody—and every situation—is different. I’m obviously basing everything on a single bad outcome in the Lance/Purdy saga. For me to argue on just that one issue as evidence is admittedly shallow. That said, when you have an absolutely crucial draft for the 49ers, I’m worried a decision will be made on what this player will be and less on what he’s shown.
And this is all my own speculation on what’s happened in one situation. Two quarterbacks where one is making a case to be one of the league’s best and the other one who was seen as the heir apparent now fighting to stay on a roster. There’s other players with plenty of experience and it didn’t work out. Dante Pettis, Trey Sermon, and others come to mind. So in the scheme of things, we really don’t know. The draft is a crapshoot after all.
That said, if it came down it it: experience or potential; which one would you rather have if the other was less desirable? If someone who has been a physical freak but played just one season starting a better pick than someone who has started for three seasons, but maybe was a bit up/down or had some issues?
