Consensus Mock Draft II - Post Combine - Pick 13 - San Francisco 49ers

[49ersfan]

23 minutes ago, Forge said:

And just as a tangent to this comment, that isn't to say that I don't like Kinlaw. I think he's a strong pick here. But I think he's a inconsistent, raw, and probably needs a year + to cook, and I think for a team in a super bowl window, immediate impact could absolutely be a deciding factor and big thing to consider when making the pick. 

IMO, while they definitely want to win now, they're also thinking long-term. If they really wanted immediate impact i think we would have kept Buckner + Sanders

Another poster also made a good note that we address the trenches in the 1st. 3/4 of our first round picks in this regime have been in the trenches - Thomas, McGlinchey, Bosa (Foster was the 4th). 

I think it'll be a WR or DL. I haven't followed the draft much this year....are there any DE worth picking at 13? Or is Kinlaw the best DL available?

[Forge]

25 minutes ago, 49ersfan said:

IMO, while they definitely want to win now, they're also thinking long-term. If they really wanted immediate impact i think we would have kept Buckner + Sanders

Another poster also made a good note that we address the trenches in the 1st. 3/4 of our first round picks in this regime have been in the trenches - Thomas, McGlinchey, Bosa (Foster was the 4th). 

I think it'll be a WR or DL. I haven't followed the draft much this year....are there any DE worth picking at 13? Or is Kinlaw the best DL available?

Those aren't the same thing though because money comes into play. We have no money, and you're talking about adding on 20+ million dollars to keep those two guys (and that's before you consider long term contract for Buckner). Teams have to triage, its unavoidable. Then you have the value of securing a top 13 pick. 

Secondarily, looking at prior drafts, eh, context matters. We were damn near an expansion team under this regime, and building trenches makes sense..but the only one of those that was a surprise was McG. Lots of people mocked Solly and a lot of fans wanted him because we had no pass rush at the time. AA was a bust. We though Thomas could play end and we seriously had no end. Pass rush was an issue. Had we drafted #1, we would have taken MG.  Bosa was arguably the #1 player in the draft in his year, and again, we had no pass rush. Were we expected to go in another direction there? So were we drafting because we like the trenches, or drafting because we had a need there? The McG was surprising because a lot of people thought that Brown was a good enough tackle...obviously the team and staff didn't like him (which is not a surprise when you heard all the scuttle) and didn't think he fit well. Does that mean the team is looking to trenches first and foremost all the time? I don't know about that (though Barrows says we have been studying tackles). 

 

[indifference]

1 hour ago, Forge said:

And just as a tangent to this comment, that isn't to say that I don't like Kinlaw. I think he's a strong pick here. But I think he's a inconsistent, raw, and probably needs a year + to cook, and I think for a team in a super bowl window, immediate impact could absolutely be a deciding factor and big thing to consider when making the pick. 

Kinlaw will bust. Niners should go WR

[SmittyBacall]

1 hour ago, Forge said:

And just as a tangent to this comment, that isn't to say that I don't like Kinlaw. I think he's a strong pick here. But I think he's a inconsistent, raw, and probably needs a year + to cook, and I think for a team in a super bowl window, immediate impact could absolutely be a deciding factor and big thing to consider when making the pick. 

I hear ya. But by the time playoffs roll around and they need Kinlaw the most, he won’t really be a rookie anymore with almost a full season under his belt. Rookies typically find their game down the stretch of the season and especially into the playoffs.

[J-ALL-DAY]

1 hour ago, SmittyBacall said:

I hear ya. But by the time playoffs roll around and they need Kinlaw the most, he won’t really be a rookie anymore with almost a full season under his belt. Rookies typically find their game down the stretch of the season and especially into the playoffs.

Kinlaw has the freakish traits and raw talent to be really good. But I still wouldn't want to take him at #13. Just because we lost Buckner doesn't mean we have to fill that spot at #13. The DL is still really good without him and we have some in house replacements for him. Sanders is a bigger loss everything considered. Replacing him with a young stud WR makes sense. Getting Staley's replacement makes sense as well as drafting one of the top 3 corners in the draft. 

[Mr Raider]

10 hours ago, jetjuice said:

Our OL is already vastly improved from last year where our WR's are worse. Part of having a functioning QB is having weapons that can get open. We can't throw to Crowder every play.

The depth in this class at WR is ridiculous. You can look at it as the 4th best OT or the best WR, but there's a bigger drop off after the top 4-5 tackles than there is from wideouts. I can certainly see the Jets taking a WR. But you can get a starter at WR in this draft in the second or third round, I feel confident in that. I feel less confident in the OT in the second or third coming in immediately and contributing. 

Now if the OT doesn't have the talent to justify being selected there then sure, but you cant simply look at his ranking among tackles, especially in this loaded class at the top that's among the strongest I have seen in recent memory (probably the best in the lack 5 years at least). 

[N4L]

9 hours ago, Forge said:

And just as a tangent to this comment, that isn't to say that I don't like Kinlaw. I think he's a strong pick here. But I think he's a inconsistent, raw, and probably needs a year + to cook, and I think for a team in a super bowl window, immediate impact could absolutely be a deciding factor and big thing to consider when making the pick. 

I agree. Kinlaw is very very raw. His physical ability would cause him to flash though. He got doubled a lot in college. He would never get double on our line. I think he can overwhelm NFL OL if he gets his hands on them and plays with good leverage. He would do very well in a rotation with limited snaps in year 1 so he can be developed

His ceiling is so damn high though. I like our DL coach to get his technique to be consistent and to add some moves other than a bull rush. 

I don't think kinlaw is plan A for us, but I could see a scenario where we take him. It depends on what else happens. I do think Kyle would love to have juedy on his roster but I do like the idea of getting good value on a WR at 31. 

1 hour ago, Mr Raider said:

The depth in this class at WR is ridiculous. You can look at it as the 4th best OT or the best WR, but there's a bigger drop off after the top 4-5 tackles than there is from wideouts. I can certainly see the Jets taking a WR. But you can get a starter at WR in this draft in the second or third round, I feel confident in that. I feel less confident in the OT in the second or third coming in immediately and contributing. 

Now if the OT doesn't have the talent to justify being selected there then sure, but you cant simply look at his ranking among tackles, especially in this loaded class at the top that's among the strongest I have seen in recent memory (probably the best in the lack 5 years at least). 

I agree 100% which is why I would hope the niners go OL or DL first in a vacuum. 

Hard to pass up on juedy though! 

[Ragnarok]

Here's what I, as a Packers fan, would hate the most.  49ers go Kinlaw at 13, trade back a bit with their 2nd 1st, add Isaiah Wilson with that pick after they slide back, and then add a WR with the pick they added from trading back.

McG can play LT imo, and he and Wilson would be a bruising OT tandem, Kinlaw would get to shine, and they still get a solid WR(maybe KJ Hamler) due to the depth of the class.

[Mr Raider]

1 hour ago, N4L said:

I agree. Kinlaw is very very raw. His physical ability would cause him to flash though. He got doubled a lot in college. He would never get double on our line. I think he can overwhelm NFL OL if he gets his hands on them and plays with good leverage. He would do very well in a rotation with limited snaps in year 1 so he can be developed

His ceiling is so damn high though. I like our DL coach to get his technique to be consistent and to add some moves other than a bull rush. 

I don't think kinlaw is plan A for us, but I could see a scenario where we take him. It depends on what else happens. I do think Kyle would love to have juedy on his roster but I do like the idea of getting good value on a WR at 31. 

I agree 100% which is why I would hope the niners go OL or DL first in a vacuum. 

Hard to pass up on juedy though! 

Definitely. I wouldn't be upset if the Raiders went OT or DL if the value was right and there was a glaring need. Im a firm believer in building through the trenches. 

Our biggest need is at the WR position and having all of them being there would be a dream come true. 

And yeah it'd be real tough to pass on Jeudy for the niners. Such a pefect fit. The defense is still going to be ridiculously good, losing Buckner isn't nothing. But they can overcome it. Adding a playmaker like Jeudy could do wonderful things for that offense. I had Lamb slightly ahead of him, but if the Raiders took Jeudy I would not at all be upset. 

[jetjuice]

11 hours ago, Mr Raider said:

The depth in this class at WR is ridiculous. You can look at it as the 4th best OT or the best WR, but there's a bigger drop off after the top 4-5 tackles than there is from wideouts. I can certainly see the Jets taking a WR. But you can get a starter at WR in this draft in the second or third round, I feel confident in that. I feel less confident in the OT in the second or third coming in immediately and contributing. 

Now if the OT doesn't have the talent to justify being selected there then sure, but you cant simply look at his ranking among tackles, especially in this loaded class at the top that's among the strongest I have seen in recent memory (probably the best in the lack 5 years at least). 

I already explained that. I should've been more specific in my context.

I do not see this WR class as deep as most and definitely do not see us getting someone on Lamb/Jeudy/Ruggs level at 48.