49ers Select Mike McGlinchey, OT, Notre Dame #9 Overall

[49erurtaza]

 

[the-catch]

5 minutes ago, Ronnie's Pinky said:

Meh...based on what, amateur mock drafts? The "experts" don't know a thing; you know that Forge. The last time the 49ers "reached" on a guy this high, it was Aldon, who was a great player before the bottle sucked him in (a problem he developed in the pros, not college). Sounds like the Raiders were hot for McGlinchey at #10, and they did just draft an OT at #15, so we know they were looking hard at that position. So it looks like at least two teams thought he was a top-10 talent.

Need to stay humble when it comes to the draft, and remember that we know f-all about these players. If McGlinchey ends up being good, then it was a good pick. It's not like the team is set for years at tackle, and it's a position that takes a year or so for the transition to the pros, anyway.

Lots of people with the knee-jerk reaction. Maybe they're right, maybe they're wrong. But I agree, we should all wait and see. Not my top choice, but I've been wrong more than I've been right. 

[Ronnie's Pinky]

2 minutes ago, Forge said:

Well, the only way we can have reactions is if we are basing it on how we feel lol. Otherwise there's no reason to enjoy it! lol. I mean, as J said - he wouldn't have been there if we traded down. the Raiders were a lock to have taken him, will guarantee that. But just based on my ameteurish scouting and dratnik nonsense he's a reach. But that's why I'm having the reaction I am, of course. If I didn't have my own opinion on him, on it, then I wouldn't have any reaction at all. 

Does that make any sense whatsoever? LOL

Yeah, it makes sense. We all fall in love with certain guys in the draft, which is a lot of what makes the process fun. I was in love with Landry, and he's still on the board at #19, so I guess the NFL evaluators didn't like him as much as I did.

Still, gotta move on. The players, as always, have to prove it on the field.

[John232]

I mean, regardless of him being better than Brown, which I think he will be. Brown is a bit overrated..it's just so not worth it at the cost of other players available. We also tanked Browns value. 

 

 

[JIllg]

Just now, Ronnie's Pinky said:

Yeah, it makes sense. We all fall in love with certain guys in the draft, which is a lot of what makes the process fun. I was in love with Landry, and he's still on the board at #19, so I guess the NFL evaluators didn't like him as much as I did.

Still, gotta move on. The players, as always, have to prove it on the field.

Agreed.

[dan77733]

Very surprised by the pick. Was thinking starting RT and moved to LT once Staley is done but going by you guys, guess not. Hope he ends up being good though. Can he play OG? What about Brown, can he play OG?

[Ronnie's Pinky]

I think one thing this pick shows is that the FO is not building for this season with the plan of being a contender. This is a classic "long game" pick. That doesn't mean it will work out; McGlinchey could suck, but it does tell you that Kyle and John are punting on being a contender this season (which I think is wise), and looking further down the road.

[the-catch]

If he turns out to be as good as Staley then it won't be a reach at all. But it'll take a few years to find that out. It's not about the best player, but more the best fit.

I see him starting at guard. I don't buy the argument he's too tall. Alex Boone was 6'7" and did just fine for us for the few years we had him at G.

[Forge]

1 minute ago, Ronnie's Pinky said:

I think one thing this pick shows is that the FO is not building for this season with the plan of being a contender. This is a classic "long game" pick. That doesn't mean it will work out; McGlinchey could suck, but it does tell you that Kyle and John are punting on being a contender this season (which I think is wise), and looking further down the road.

I will agree with that. I Know some have playoff aspirations. I had middle of the road aspirations lol

[John232]

I don't have an issue with player or picking a tackle in the 3rd/4th round. But this a huge reach on a guy they had a crush on and I commend them for thinking super long term with this pick. My issue is it's a bit too long term because we still have glaring holes and we have the time to still find replacements for Brown and Staley in the coming years. 

 

Maybe Shanny didn't want to worry about not having a seasoned guy to step in at LT post staley and they hate Brown. 

 

 

[Justone2]

Just now, John232 said:

I don't have an issue with player or picking a tackle in the 3rd/4th round. But this a huge reach on a guy they had a crush on and I commend them for thinking super long term with this pick. My issue is it's a bit too long term because we still have glaring holes and we have the time to still find replacements for Brown and Staley in the coming years. 

 

Maybe Shanny didn't want to worry about not having a seasoned guy to step in at LT post staley and they hate Brown. 

 

 

On what basis is this a huge reach? The Raiders 100% would have taken him at 10 if we didn't pick him. 

 

They are still working on getting the locker room the way they want not only on the field but also off the field. McG is from all i heard a great locker room guy.

[J-ALL-DAY]

It won't be a long-term play if Brown is moved. It may be heading into that direction. 

[John232]

2 minutes ago, Justone2 said:

On what basis is this a huge reach? The Raiders 100% would have taken him at 10 if we didn't pick him. 

 

They are still working on getting the locker room the way they want not only on the field but also off the field. McG is from all i heard a great locker room guy.

Based on our current needs. Specifically Tackle not being one of them. The fact that a fair amount of pundits didn't have them in and around the same value. I mean..its just pundits so I get that.

 

I think the line of thinking that might be adopted to see it from their perspective is that they might be staring down both tackles leaving next off-season and don't want to kill Jimmy G by not having a guy ready. 

 

 

[N4L]

11 minutes ago, John232 said:

I don't have an issue with player or picking a tackle in the 3rd/4th round. But this a huge reach on a guy they had a crush on and I commend them for thinking super long term with this pick. My issue is it's a bit too long term because we still have glaring holes and we have the time to still find replacements for Brown and Staley in the coming years. 

 

Maybe Shanny didn't want to worry about not having a seasoned guy to step in at LT post staley and they hate Brown. 

 

 

This is exactly the way I feel. Well put 

[Justone2]

Just now, John232 said:

Based on our current needs. Specifically Tackle not being one of them. The fact that a fair amount of pundits didn't have them in and around the same value. I mean..its just pundits so I get that.

 

I think the line of thinking that might be adopted to see it from their perspective is that they might be staring down both tackles leaving next off-season and don't want to kill Jimmy G by not having a guy ready. 

 

 

Well looking at who went after our pick the only guys i feel would have been more "fitting" our current needs are Edmunds and Davenport(SAM and LEO). I really think OT was more of a need than S. Especially when you hear about Brown's conditioning problems and his should problems.