2019 Draft Talk (Draft Order in OP)

[rudyZ]

20 hours ago, Forge said:

I think we absolutely resigned Ward to start and the staff was talking him up long before we resigned him

Just like we re-signed Daniel Kilgore to start, and the staff was talking him up before he was re-signed, and it took only 3 days to turn around and trade him once we signed a "better" player. Of course we were going to talk up Ward, and of course he's currently in line to be a starter. But if we draft someone who looks soooo good that he ends up stealing the job away from Ward, Ward is either going to be traded or released, or we can keep him around as a back-up at pretty much every spot in the secondary for a very reasonable one year contract. So yeah, he was signed to start. Doesn't mean he will start, or that we are done trying to improve the position.

[Forge]

9 minutes ago, rudyZ said:

Just like we re-signed Daniel Kilgore to start, and the staff was talking him up before he was re-signed, and it took only 3 days to turn around and trade him once we signed a "better" player. Of course we were going to talk up Ward, and of course he's currently in line to be a starter. But if we draft someone who looks soooo good that he ends up stealing the job away from Ward, Ward is either going to be traded or released, or we can keep him around as a back-up at pretty much every spot in the secondary for a very reasonable one year contract. So yeah, he was signed to start. Doesn't mean he will start, or that we are done trying to improve the position.

The situations aren't really comparable given we had all sorts of opportunity to sign better players than Ward and didn't. 

Also, I can't recall any scuttle talking about how the niners were out talking up Kilgore before resigning him. Seemed more of a necessary signing than anything. Not the case with Ward. Also, why would we talk him up before resigning him if we in fact wanted to resign him (which we did), especially if he's going to be in the free agent market?

You say what if we draft someone who ends up stealing the job, and I'm saying I don't think we will draft one high enough for it to be likely. What the team had done so far has suggested that they like the starters we have. Hope I'm wrong, they aren't great

What you are talking about is largely a happy accident, to be honest

[rudyZ]

3 minutes ago, Forge said:

The situations aren't really comparable given we had all sorts of opportunity to sign better players than Ward and didn't. 

Also, I can't recall any scuttle talking about how the niners were out talking up Kilgore before resigning him. Seemed more of a necessary signing than anything. Not the case with Ward. Also, why would we talk him up before resigning him if we in fact wanted to resign him (which we did), especially if he's going to be in the free agent market?

You say what if we draft someone who ends up stealing the job, and I'm saying I don't think we will draft one high enough for it to be likely. What the team had done so far has suggested that they like the starters we have. Hope I'm wrong, they aren't great

I agree that it is more likely that Ward is the guy they actually want, for whatever reason. I'm just not ready to close the door on trying to improve on him. Maybe they didn't want to invest too much in a veteran at the position (Thomas). Maybe they didn't like the fit (others). And maybe they actually do believe in Colbert and just want to keep bringing him along. But there's still a chance we luck into getting someone in the draft who turns out to outplay his draft position. It happens, sometimes. Sure, you don't count on that to build a roster. You do have to invest to shore up your units, you can't count on luck. But if they think the free agent options offer marginal improvement on Ward/Colbert, maybe they'll take a shot in the dark (the draft) and see if they can find a corner stone for the next decade.

[Forge]

Quote

As for Sweat, it’s interesting that the 49ers both coached him at the Senior Bowl and hosted him on one of their official 30 visits. That either signals strong interest or a prospect who has a lot of question marks. Maybe both.

 

[John232]

I hope it's doing our due diligence and not considering a trade back just to take Sweat. 

[Forge]

8 minutes ago, John232 said:

I hope it's doing our due diligence and not considering a trade back just to take Sweat. 

I don't think that we'd be considering a trade back just for him, but I've said for a while now that I wouldn't be surprised if he were high on our board. In case the raiders come at us with a really good offer to move down (4+24 or 6+17 for 2 + 3rd or something or 6 + seconds + 2020 second?), I think we are doing due diligence. Also, he did have previous of the field concerns from MSU, so may require a little more attention

[J-ALL-DAY]

Nick Bosa said he took a step back from social media and doesn't talk politics as much anymore because "There is a chance I might end up in San Francisco" LOL. 

[Forge]

6 hours ago, rudyZ said:

I agree that it is more likely that Ward is the guy they actually want, for whatever reason. I'm just not ready to close the door on trying to improve on him. Maybe they didn't want to invest too much in a veteran at the position (Thomas). Maybe they didn't like the fit (others). And maybe they actually do believe in Colbert and just want to keep bringing him along. But there's still a chance we luck into getting someone in the draft who turns out to outplay his draft position. It happens, sometimes. Sure, you don't count on that to build a roster. You do have to invest to shore up your units, you can't count on luck. But if they think the free agent options offer marginal improvement on Ward/Colbert, maybe they'll take a shot in the dark (the draft) and see if they can find a corner stone for the next decade.

This is a happy accident though. My stance is basically that I don't see us drafting a safety in the first three rounds to compete for the starting role. I'm not saying that we won't draft one at all, and I'm not saying that we wouldn't add depth to compete with Colbert. But I don't think that we are looking at improving the top of the depth chart - I think that we are happy with Ward there.  Could we draft one in round 6 and he happens to outplay Ward and earns the starting spot? Absolutely. But I'm not going to give the team credit for "looking to improve on ward" by lucking out and finding a gem in round 6. They should not be drafting guys in round 6 with the thought that they are immediately going to come in and start lol. I'm not saying that I don't think we draft a safety at all...I'm saying that I think the team is happy with the Ward / Tartt duo starting, and won't press for a current year potential starting safety early in the draft. 

[Fureys49ers]

8 hours ago, Forge said:

This is a happy accident though. My stance is basically that I don't see us drafting a safety in the first three rounds to compete for the starting role. I'm not saying that we won't draft one at all, and I'm not saying that we wouldn't add depth to compete with Colbert. But I don't think that we are looking at improving the top of the depth chart - I think that we are happy with Ward there.  Could we draft one in round 6 and he happens to outplay Ward and earns the starting spot? Absolutely. But I'm not going to give the team credit for "looking to improve on ward" by lucking out and finding a gem in round 6. They should not be drafting guys in round 6 with the thought that they are immediately going to come in and start lol. I'm not saying that I don't think we draft a safety at all...I'm saying that I think the team is happy with the Ward / Tartt duo starting, and won't press for a current year potential starting safety early in the draft. 

I agree with this line of thinking, unfortunately, because I really like the hypothetical safety choices at the top of round 2. However it looks as if we are pretty content with our safety depth seeing as how we changed nothing which is disappointing to me but maybe the decision makers believe two, or atleast one, difference maker will emerge from Ward, Colbert; Tartt, and Harris. 

I think our first three picks are EDGE, IOL, WR in no particular order other than EDGE being priority. Unless of course we trade back from 2, then we might see a safety added in the first two days of the draft. 

[J-ALL-DAY]

I know most here are pretty much set on taking a WR or FS in round two, but what IF Tillery and/or Simmons fall to our pick? What do we do then? These guys are legitimate MONSTERS rushing the passer like Q-Williams. Are their talents too much to pass on even if they aren't the most pressing needs? 

[J-ALL-DAY]

My WR rankings of who I want in round 2 at #36:

1. Hollywood Brown (duh)

2. Andy Isabella

3. AJ Brown

4. JJ Arcega Whiteside

5. Deebo Samuel 

6. N'keal Harry

7. Riley Ridley

Legitimately would be fine with either of those guys but I think Ridley could be had in the 3rd round. 

Could flip 3 and 4, that's how close those two are for me.

Obviously Butler to me is a round 1 WR or else he would be high on the list. 

[48 1/2ers]

1 hour ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

I know most here are pretty much set on taking a WR or FS in round two, but what IF Tillery and/or Simmons fall to our pick? What do we do then? These guys are legitimate MONSTERS rushing the passer like Q-Williams. Are their talents too much to pass on even if they aren't the most pressing needs? 

I basically brought this up with Dexter Lawrence, though most brushed him off as exclusively a 1tech - I disagree. 

As a pure value pick, I'd be good with Tillery or Simmons since AA is in a contract year they could be his eventual replacement past 2019. 

[49erurtaza]

9 minutes ago, 48 1/2ers said:

I basically brought this up with Dexter Lawrence, though most brushed him off as exclusively a 1tech - I disagree. 

As a pure value pick, I'd be good with Tillery or Simmons since AA is in a contract year they could be his eventual replacement past 2019. 

I like the idea but we have huge need at WR, FS and our Dline will be the strongest group on the team. 

[48 1/2ers]

5 minutes ago, 49erurtaza said:

I like the idea but we have huge need at WR, FS and our Dline will be the strongest group on the team. 

taking an elite talent at pick 36 doesn't mean we avoid addressing those other needs in the later rounds. There will be plenty of WR talent available then. This is the classic BPA vs Need dilemma. 

[John232]

I don't think taking a safety is out of the question. I think they like Ward because of his versatility but that can kind of work against him too as a starter. I would imagine it comes down to specific scheme fits but players like: Thompson, Adderly or CGJ (doubtful to be there) and even Savage or Thornhill would give them serious consideration. Whereas Rapp, Collins, Hooker and some second round corner prospect..not so much. 

 It just really comes down to how the draft breaks down, if Deebo, AJ Brown and Butler are all off before 36 which is very possible..I don't see us reaching on a receiver because odds are, a good DB prospect just dropped to us.