Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
PapaShogun

2019 Draft Talk

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

The thing with Street is, I didn't like the prospect BEFORE the injury. And I haven't watched Harris so I can't comment, but not sure if he is a high potential type of guy I'd have preferred at that spot like Jullian Taylor for example. 

Edited by J-ALL-DAY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

The thing with Street is, I didn't like the prospect BEFORE the injury. And I haven't watched Harris so I can't comment, but not sure if he is a high potential type of guy I'd have preferred at that spot like Jullian Taylor for example. 

Yeah, that’s fair. I liked him as a player but really didn’t care for drafting a 5t until the 6th or 7th. And not over guys like Fitts or ogo 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, John232 said:

Yeah, that’s fair. I liked him as a player but really didn’t care for drafting a 5t until the 6th or 7th. And not over guys like Fitts or ogo 

And we get to face Obo twice a year, if he makes the roster. I was pleased he was picked, but not who picked him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, DirtyJersey9er said:

Fill holes?  They added a WR which if we wanted them to sign a WR we cant be mad they drafred one.  It was their best chance to get a current replacement for Trent(not a full System fit) and future replacement for Joe Staley(ya know the guy who is 34).

Also got a LB who will play Mike while Foster is out but can play Sam as well.  Added CB depth(which we badly needed, probably much more than edge rusher).  They have taken care of some key positions since Shanahan and Lynch took over.  They are rebuilding while cleaning Baalke's mess.

Also Malcolm Smith, who thrived in this scheme before going for the money in oakland, is back.  Next year is far better in Edge rusher draft depth.

Last year's draft was good enough for people to at least wait a year before bringing our the pitchforks.  But guess I'm wrong.

You know what Drafting for need gets you?  Drafting for need gets you Denzyl Ward over Bradley Chubb.

Did we want them to sign a WR?? That was a positional group where most people on this forum felt we had 4 serviceable players. Most of us would have preferred to get a TE who was also a redzone threat. I get that Pettis scored a lot of TDs, but I'm not sure he is a 'redzone threat'. I'm not upset that we added a WR, I'm upset that we traded a high third to move up to take a WR when there were about 3 or 4 other WRs on the board that could have been comparable. That high third could have been used on an edge rusher. Pettis will probably be a very good player here, and I'm sure down the road ill be happy hes here, but hes walking into a crowded room so it may take two years before he becomes a starter. 

From every scouting report I have read, McG will probably stay on the right side even after Staley retires. The way OLs are constructed in today's NFL, RT is an equally as important position, so I don't have a problem with spending a first on a RT in a vacuum. Its a weak T class, so we made sure we got the one T we liked. It 

No one is doubting the Fred Warner pick. We obviously needed a LB, and we got a guy who can start now and possibly take someone else's job later. That was a good pick. We will see how Malcom Smith does. In Seattle, he was a good player, but he was surrounded by all-pros. That certainly makes a difference

The CB 'depth' we got are projects. Rather than just drafting a corner, we decided to draft a FS in the third round who wasn't invited to the combine to move him to corner. He very well may end up being a great player, but it will take time. He has the exact build we look for in our corners, so from a physical standpoint, its a great pick, but can he actually play corner? I hope so. I don't feel as though CB will be a need going into 2019, which is why I didn't list it on my 2019 needs. 

You know what would have made our corner play better? An edge rusher. Its not that I wanted them to draft a specific player, its the complete disregard of our most pressing need that has me worried. It was painfully obvious to everyone that we needed an edge player, at least someone to develop for the long run, but instead we take fliers on injured players or guys that will probably never see the roster? I just don't get it. That is probably the main reason I am feeling this way. 

An interesting thing I thought about last night: Last year, by the time Lynch was hired, a lot of the scouting leg work had been done by scouts that are no longer in the building. Tom Gamble was essentially running the show last year until about mid February. Lynch was brought in late in the process last year. From everything we can tell he is a 'team player' who I'm sure in his first year was going to defer some decisions to guys who have been scouting for a long time. It appears this year that shanahan and lynch both took a larger role in these decisions this year. That's why they don't get an automatic passing grade for this year because last year worked out so well. 

@Ninerholic I typically don't read anything Grant Cohn writes, but someone sent that to me and I think it fits with how I am feeling about this draft at the moment. I reserve the right to change my opinion if new information presents itself. Right now I am feeling a little underwhelmed with the overall HAUL. 

 

GO NINERS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

The thing with Street is, I didn't like the prospect BEFORE the injury. And I haven't watched Harris so I can't comment, but not sure if he is a high potential type of guy I'd have preferred at that spot like Jullian Taylor for example. 

Agreed. The only two picks that I truly "hated", and gave an F for were Street and Harris, pretty much for that exact reason. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

It's funny how I view injured guys. If they're not first rounders then you only have them locked up for 4 years. If you know you're going to lose one of those years to IR then you're giving up 25% of what you would normally get from a guy. Now if a guy is seen as a much higher round pick and he's dropped a lot because of the injury then there comes a point where the value is there that makes it worth losing that year. But if a guy is seen as a 4th round pick when he's healthy, but he's not healthy and you'll lose a year with him then where's the value in taking him unless you're getting him a round or so later?. Furthermore of course, you never know if he'll ever get back to being the player he was before the injury.  Lots of guys never come back to what they were. So in addition to losing a year his chances for success are lower because of the injury. I think you can only afford to take guys like that if you are truly getting them discounted by a round or so. Heck, you can often trade a current year pick in some round for a future pick at the next higher round. If you're not getting anything out of a guy anyway why not trade the pick for a higher pick the next year.  Better pick and you eliminate the risk the guy won't recover fully, or that it might be a recurring injury.

Edited by big9erfan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

McGlinchey is an upgrade over Brown in the run game, and a pretty big one, but can't you say he is just as big of a downgrade in pass protection?

Jimmy never played with Trent Brown on the line, did he? So I'm considering McGlinchey's improvement over Zane Beadles to be huge. And his run blocking is also huge. Ever since we started playing Jimmy, I felt like the focus of the OL would clearly turn to run blocking. Not that we shouldn't protect our 27m/yr franchise QB against the pass rush. More that we need to give him a solid-to-great running game in order to protect him. He is good enough to make the passing game work even without a great pass protecting OL (as we saw in the last five weeks of the season). But he can't make the running game better by himself. The only thing he can do for the running game is to audible in and out of play and get the runningbacks favorable match-ups. The rest is in the hands of the RBs and, yes, the OL. So the better the OL is a run blocking, the better the RBs will look, and the easier the passing game will be for Jimmy. And with a great pass catching RB like McKinnon, we can implement more ways of slowing down the pass rush. We can run more screens (and to the receivers too. Guys like Goodwin, Pettis, Taylor and James look tailormade to that.. I haven't watched Garçon as much, so I don't know, but he might be as well). In order words, I think we're protecting Jimmy by giving him a running game. Last year, I feel like we threw more at times just because we had little confidence in our running game. Hopefully next year is different. Hopefully we don't get the pass-happy-for-no-reason Shanahan that we've seen while he was an OC, at times. Hopefully we have a well-balanced offense that makes Brown's loss negligible. And who knows... maybe we're underrated McGlinchey. Who's to say he won't be a stud pass protector sooner rather than later?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, big9erfan said:

It's funny how I view injured guys. If they're not first rounders then you only have them locked up for 4 years. If you know you're going to lose one of those years to IR then you're giving up 25% of what you would normally get from a guy.

A player who lands on NFI list because of an injury before the draft and doesn't get activated does not accrue a season. Street, for example, will still have 4 years remaining on his contract next year so long as he is not activated. He also won't count against the 90 or 53 man rosters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, y2lamanaki said:

A player who lands on NFI list because of an injury before the draft and doesn't get activated does not accrue a season. Street, for example, will still have 4 years remaining on his contract next year so long as he is not activated. He also won't count against the 90 or 53 man rosters.

Good info. I didn't know that. Thanks for that little tidbit 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just some early watch prospects for the 2019 draft.

 

Anthony Johnson, WR, Buffalo

AJ Brown, WR, Ole Miss

Gary Jennings, WR, West Virginia 

Ross Pierschbacher, OL, Alabama 

Alex Bars, OL, Notre Dame

Beau Benzschawel, OL, Wisconsin 

Montez Sweat, DE, Miss State

Brain Burns, DE, Florida State 

DJ Wonnum, DE, South Carolina

Charles Wright, LB, Vanderbilt 

Khalil Hodge, LB, Buffalo

Devin White, LB, LSU

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know a ton about this class yet, but my positional priorities to focus on in the draft would be EDGE, WR, CB, RB, TE, and OG. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/30/2018 at 12:33 AM, N4L said:

Next year I expect we will need a running back, a TE, a FS, a SAM backer, and obviously an edge rusher. But with the way we went about this draft, obviously we won't draft any of these positions and draft a bunch of injured players for depth or trade up multiple times to get 'our guy' even if 'our guy' is in a position group where we actually have some depth. 

 

We aren't trying to make the playoffs, so that's fine right? Why bother filling holes on the roster? It's not like those holes will ultimately cause us to miss the playoffs *rolls eyes*

 

http://www.pressdemocrat.com/sports/8276557-181/grant-cohn-49ers-multiple-draft?artslide=0&sba=AAS 

Oviously you, me and Grant are thinking the same way about this draft - although saying that me and Grant are in synch on something makes me question what I'm thinking. I loved this quote from the article

"They had to draft offensive tackle Mike McGlinchey, because they had to fill a need they were about to create the following morning ...The 49ers didn’t upgrade by trading Brown, who has more raw talent than McGlinchey. Some consider Brown best right tackle in the NFL."

We got impatient with our desire to dump Brown which "focrced:" us into taking a pick that was not a good value at the spot we took him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/30/2018 at 7:27 AM, y2lamanaki said:

See, I don't think I ever saw Baalke trying to fit square pegs in round holes - I saw him as deeply lacking an understanding of value. He had to get his guys, value be damned. And the only value he knew to find were great prospects falling because of injury. That first year he did it (2013), it made sense. The only need we had coming off a Super Bowl appearance was FS. So we had the luxury of drafting guys like Carradine and Lattimore. But that became a yearly strategy. 

As for this class, depth is great, but we really needed to pull starters out of this class, given that we don't expect to pick as highly as this again. We got one in McGlinchey, but it was at a spot where we didn't necessarily need a starter. The rest were all depth/roleplayers when we have some really weak starters at SAM, LEO, and OG, and could really use redzone help. As good as Pettis might be, it is unlikely that he'll help out there (though it is nice the team had playmaker on their needs list). Now, we're basically at the same point we would have been next year, only with some depth at DB and WR. 

I think Basalke's biggest flaw was not failing to recognize "value", although I readily he agree that he didn't. His biggest problem was that he just flat out was bad at evaluating talent. The overall quality of talent on our team went down almost every year he was in charge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/30/2018 at 10:59 AM, N4L said:

Did we want them to sign a WR?? That was a positional group where most people on this forum felt we had 4 serviceable players. Most of us would have preferred to get a TE who was also a redzone threat. I get that Pettis scored a lot of TDs, but I'm not sure he is a 'redzone threat'. I'm not upset that we added a WR, I'm upset that we traded a high third to move up to take a WR when there were about 3 or 4 other WRs on the board that could have been comparable. That high third could have been used on an edge rusher. Pettis will probably be a very good player here, and I'm sure down the road ill be happy hes here, but hes walking into a crowded room so it may take two years before he becomes a starter. 

From every scouting report I have read, McG will probably stay on the right side even after Staley retires. The way OLs are constructed in today's NFL, RT is an equally as important position, so I don't have a problem with spending a first on a RT in a vacuum. Its a weak T class, so we made sure we got the one T we liked. It 

No one is doubting the Fred Warner pick. We obviously needed a LB, and we got a guy who can start now and possibly take someone else's job later. That was a good pick. We will see how Malcom Smith does. In Seattle, he was a good player, but he was surrounded by all-pros. That certainly makes a difference

The CB 'depth' we got are projects. Rather than just drafting a corner, we decided to draft a FS in the third round who wasn't invited to the combine to move him to corner. He very well may end up being a great player, but it will take time. He has the exact build we look for in our corners, so from a physical standpoint, its a great pick, but can he actually play corner? I hope so. I don't feel as though CB will be a need going into 2019, which is why I didn't list it on my 2019 needs. 

You know what would have made our corner play better? An edge rusher. Its not that I wanted them to draft a specific player, its the complete disregard of our most pressing need that has me worried. It was painfully obvious to everyone that we needed an edge player, at least someone to develop for the long run, but instead we take fliers on injured players or guys that will probably never see the roster? I just don't get it. That is probably the main reason I am feeling this way. 

An interesting thing I thought about last night: Last year, by the time Lynch was hired, a lot of the scouting leg work had been done by scouts that are no longer in the building. Tom Gamble was essentially running the show last year until about mid February. Lynch was brought in late in the process last year. From everything we can tell he is a 'team player' who I'm sure in his first year was going to defer some decisions to guys who have been scouting for a long time. It appears this year that shanahan and lynch both took a larger role in these decisions this year. That's why they don't get an automatic passing grade for this year because last year worked out so well. 

@Ninerholic I typically don't read anything Grant Cohn writes, but someone sent that to me and I think it fits with how I am feeling about this draft at the moment. I reserve the right to change my opinion if new information presents itself. Right now I am feeling a little underwhelmed with the overall HAUL. 

 

GO NINERS

I never thought about this before. It's what I always said about the only really good draft class Baalke had. That was the year he took over when somebody else already almost certainly had a board ;put together. It will never be clearf to any of us how much of that draft was purely Baalke as opposed to his predecessor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
42 minutes ago, big9erfan said:

Oviously you, me and Grant are thinking the same way about this draft - although saying that me and Grant are in synch on something makes me question what I'm thinking. I loved this quote from the article

"They had to draft offensive tackle Mike McGlinchey, because they had to fill a need they were about to create the following morning ...The 49ers didn’t upgrade by trading Brown, who has more raw talent than McGlinchey. Some consider Brown best right tackle in the NFL."

We got impatient with our desire to dump Brown which "focrced:" us into taking a pick that was not a good value at the spot we took him.

Oh for the love of....! That horse is not only DEAD, it's roadkill. OLD roadkill. ¬¬

And no, it is never a good sign when you agree with a Cohn. Disasters in print is what they are.

Edited by Chrissooner49er
Had another thought..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  



×