Question for the "draft for need" people

If Suh falls to the Niners, I'd immediately call for the heads of every GM that picked in front of us.

And then crack a beer in celebration.

[ Edited by Nuns on Dec 9, 2009 at 08:52:01 ]

For all the southerners out there, I'd yell "Yes Suh".

If we don't take BPA, the opposition will. Tough to get to the Super Bowl that way.

Originally posted by MadDog49er:
You have to pick the best player avaliable. The only exception would be a position where the team feels there is no need to upgrade (QB, TE, Mike backer, C).

The bottom line is that if there is a great player on the board that can help your team, you pick that player over a good player who fits a need.

The league is all about impact players, so if they are on the board, pull the trigger.

almost agree with you MD, but I would remove QB from that list. If the real deal is there, this draft or others, we take him. We're not in position to miss out on the most important player on the team because of the flashes Smith has shown. Top need? Perhaps not. But definitely not a position to feel great about either

Originally posted by GoFD74:
If a man named Suh drops to us, we take him. End of story.

I suppose lightning might strike twice sometimes! If he does drop to us, the year after Crabtree dropped, divine intervention must be considered!

If by some miracle Suh did fall to us, we should draft him, no question. This won't happen of course since most every team ahead of us would take him.

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by GEEK:
Most likely, you'll see Franklin franchised - and not outright extended.

If Suh becomes available, we'll have our "Warren-Seymour" combo in the 3-4 defensive scheme that will greatly benefit our outside linebackers.

If we draft Suh, then Sopoaga will most likely shift to NT and rotate with Franklin at the position.

LE: Smith/McDonald
NT: Franklin/Sopoaga
RE: Suh/Balmer

I agree wih SanDiego--I can not believe I just wrote that, but it is true.


That will be one of the best, if not the best, 3-4 DLs in the NFL. Should we convert back to a 4-3, our interior will be HUGE.

In Summary: Yes you draft Suh because he'll be an instant starter and he can play in a 3-4 or 4-3.

Suh is long gone by the time we pick. He is top 3 material. But sure I would pick him if available.

I think this is the year that the BPA theory is going to be tested. From what I have heard, this draft is loaded with DT/DE. If you hold to the BPA theory, then you pick DT with your first 2 picks in the draft. Most likely, though, unless a top 5 player falls in our lap, we will be picking need this draft. Do this too much and you will wreck your team, but if we could solidify our OL some, this team should be able to make the playoffs next year.

Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:

Originally posted by marshniners24:

Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:

Originally posted by marshniners24:
Trade the pic

if Suh is there you trade the pick? What would you get? Two lesser players? Suh would instantly make us a DOMINANT defense. Suh--Franklin--Smith. With Willis and an improved Lawson behind them? You can pretty much put Andy Lee as our OLB and watch him get 10+ sacks behind that D-line

Im saying I pick for need over BPA. Yes two lesser player, but players we need. Thats like saying the Colts trading for Tom Brady.

The one exception is QB. If you hae a QB that has 5+ years left, and he's really the real deal (Manning in your example) then you certainly don't go for a QB. But let me ask you, what do you see as not a position of need for us?

LB obviously, and OL>DL. If you have a need player available and a BPA you go with the need IMO.

Originally posted by marshniners24:

Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:

Originally posted by marshniners24:

Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:

Originally posted by marshniners24:
Trade the pic

if Suh is there you trade the pick? What would you get? Two lesser players? Suh would instantly make us a DOMINANT defense. Suh--Franklin--Smith. With Willis and an improved Lawson behind them? You can pretty much put Andy Lee as our OLB and watch him get 10+ sacks behind that D-line

Im saying I pick for need over BPA. Yes two lesser player, but players we need. Thats like saying the Colts trading for Tom Brady.

The one exception is QB. If you hae a QB that has 5+ years left, and he's really the real deal (Manning in your example) then you certainly don't go for a QB. But let me ask you, what do you see as not a position of need for us?

LB obviously, and OL>DL. If you have a need player available and a BPA you go with the need IMO.

So let me ask you this. If you could hypothetically see into the future and see how good these prospects will be in their careers, and you could choose between an O-lineman who will be the next Joe Staley. Good OT, can play on the left or right side. Maybe will be a pro-bowler one day...maybe not, but a good player non-the-less, or the next Ray Lewis (basically another PW next to PW) at LB. This guy is going to be the best MLB in the league not named Patrick Willis, maybe even better, and he'll play right next to Patrick Willis and be an instant impact player. You say go with the OT instead? Perhaps if we were a 4-3 team and only had room for one MLB then it would be different, but we definitely have room for 2.

Originally posted by GEEK:
Most likely, you'll see Franklin franchised - and not outright extended.

If Suh becomes available, we'll have our "Warren-Seymour" combo in the 3-4 defensive scheme that will greatly benefit our outside linebackers.

If we draft Suh, then Sopoaga will most likely shift to NT and rotate with Franklin at the position.

LE: Smith/McDonald
NT: Franklin/Sopoaga
RE: Suh/Balmer

That will be one of the best, if not the best, 3-4 DLs in the NFL. Should we convert back to a 4-3, our interior will be HUGE.







This we would be crazy not to pick Suh

In Summary: Yes you draft Suh because he'll be an instant starter and he can play in a 3-4 or 4-3.

Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:

Originally posted by marshniners24:

Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:

Originally posted by marshniners24:

Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:

Originally posted by marshniners24:
Trade the pic

if Suh is there you trade the pick? What would you get? Two lesser players? Suh would instantly make us a DOMINANT defense. Suh--Franklin--Smith. With Willis and an improved Lawson behind them? You can pretty much put Andy Lee as our OLB and watch him get 10+ sacks behind that D-line

Im saying I pick for need over BPA. Yes two lesser player, but players we need. Thats like saying the Colts trading for Tom Brady.

The one exception is QB. If you hae a QB that has 5+ years left, and he's really the real deal (Manning in your example) then you certainly don't go for a QB. But let me ask you, what do you see as not a position of need for us?

LB obviously, and OL>DL. If you have a need player available and a BPA you go with the need IMO.

So let me ask you this. If you could hypothetically see into the future and see how good these prospects will be in their careers, and you could choose between an O-lineman who will be the next Joe Staley. Good OT, can play on the left or right side. Maybe will be a pro-bowler one day...maybe not, but a good player non-the-less, or the next Ray Lewis (basically another PW next to PW) at LB. This guy is going to be the best MLB in the league not named Patrick Willis, maybe even better, and he'll play right next to Patrick Willis and be an instant impact player. You say go with the OT instead? Perhaps if we were a 4-3 team and only had room for one MLB then it would be different, but we definitely have room for 2.

I thought we were talking about a DE/NT

[ Edited by marshniners24 on Dec 9, 2009 at 21:29:08 ]

Originally posted by marshniners24:

Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:

Originally posted by marshniners24:

Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:

Originally posted by marshniners24:

Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:

Originally posted by marshniners24:
Trade the pic

if Suh is there you trade the pick? What would you get? Two lesser players? Suh would instantly make us a DOMINANT defense. Suh--Franklin--Smith. With Willis and an improved Lawson behind them? You can pretty much put Andy Lee as our OLB and watch him get 10+ sacks behind that D-line

Im saying I pick for need over BPA. Yes two lesser player, but players we need. Thats like saying the Colts trading for Tom Brady.

The one exception is QB. If you hae a QB that has 5+ years left, and he's really the real deal (Manning in your example) then you certainly don't go for a QB. But let me ask you, what do you see as not a position of need for us?

LB obviously, and OL>DL. If you have a need player available and a BPA you go with the need IMO.

So let me ask you this. If you could hypothetically see into the future and see how good these prospects will be in their careers, and you could choose between an O-lineman who will be the next Joe Staley. Good OT, can play on the left or right side. Maybe will be a pro-bowler one day...maybe not, but a good player non-the-less, or the next Ray Lewis (basically another PW next to PW) at LB. This guy is going to be the best MLB in the league not named Patrick Willis, maybe even better, and he'll play right next to Patrick Willis and be an instant impact player. You say go with the OT instead? Perhaps if we were a 4-3 team and only had room for one MLB then it would be different, but we definitely have room for 2.

I thought we were talking about a DE/NT

i'm just trying to debate the BPA/draft for need strategies. You pointed LB (I assume you meant ILB) as a position that we don't need, and OT is a position that we do need. So I ask, if the LB is on the level of Willis/Lewis/Singletary etc and the OT is on the level of Joe Staley (good player, but not great), who would you rather draft?

If Suh is there, the Niners should sprint to the podium with their card. No hesitation, no listening to trade offers, and no "what ifs".

Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:

Originally posted by marshniners24:

Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:

Originally posted by marshniners24:

Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:

Originally posted by marshniners24:

Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:

Originally posted by marshniners24:
Trade the pic

if Suh is there you trade the pick? What would you get? Two lesser players? Suh would instantly make us a DOMINANT defense. Suh--Franklin--Smith. With Willis and an improved Lawson behind them? You can pretty much put Andy Lee as our OLB and watch him get 10+ sacks behind that D-line

Im saying I pick for need over BPA. Yes two lesser player, but players we need. Thats like saying the Colts trading for Tom Brady.

The one exception is QB. If you hae a QB that has 5+ years left, and he's really the real deal (Manning in your example) then you certainly don't go for a QB. But let me ask you, what do you see as not a position of need for us?

LB obviously, and OL>DL. If you have a need player available and a BPA you go with the need IMO.

So let me ask you this. If you could hypothetically see into the future and see how good these prospects will be in their careers, and you could choose between an O-lineman who will be the next Joe Staley. Good OT, can play on the left or right side. Maybe will be a pro-bowler one day...maybe not, but a good player non-the-less, or the next Ray Lewis (basically another PW next to PW) at LB. This guy is going to be the best MLB in the league not named Patrick Willis, maybe even better, and he'll play right next to Patrick Willis and be an instant impact player. You say go with the OT instead? Perhaps if we were a 4-3 team and only had room for one MLB then it would be different, but we definitely have room for 2.

I thought we were talking about a DE/NT

i'm just trying to debate the BPA/draft for need strategies. You pointed LB (I assume you meant ILB) as a position that we don't need, and OT is a position that we do need. So I ask, if the LB is on the level of Willis/Lewis/Singletary etc and the OT is on the level of Joe Staley (good player, but not great), who would you rather draft?

Well I said to trade the pick for more picks, so really the question would be, say... A good OT and a good S over the next star MLB I take the 2 good players over the star. IMO