We should not take a 1st round O-lineman in the draft!

Need to examine the Niners recent ability to judge OL draft talent by regime:

Pre-McCloughan Era (2003-2004):

1st-rounder Harris had some good run-blocking skills, but not the feet to be a pass-protection OT. Never understood why Harris wasn't tried at OG.

2nd-rounder Smiley was probably the best OL drafted with a high pick by the Niners this decade. Outstanding puller from the OG position and very tough, often playing through injuries that sidelined Jennings. A real loss when McCloughan decided not to pay him, and Parcels did.

7th-rounder Heitmann was well-coached at Stanford, very cerebral, and responsive to prro coaching. Filling the void between Newberry's collapse and the development of Baas, Heitmann developed his body, used his PT experience at OG, and grabbed the starting C job. Heitmann's secret is that he continued to develop in a major way, after being drafted.

McCloughan Era:

McNolan admittedly had Jacksonville envy. They coveted size above other traits, and Warhop was a straight ahead blocking OL coach. Draft picks were made to fit this vision.

2nd-rounder Baas was a spur-of-the-moment, on-the-clock pick, when NE selected Logan Mankins with the preceeding pick. Selected primarily as Center insurance for the debilitating Newberry, Baas has really never played the position for which he was drafted. He has been injury-prone, but somewhat effective as a straight-ahead blocker. His pass protection and pulling performance at OG have been more spotty. Is Baas starting-OG quality? I'm not sure. Is he playing out of his best position? Is he starting C quality? I have no idea.

3rd-rounder Snyder was an all Pac-10 LOT at Oregon, who was drafted with being an NFL OG in mind. His versatility has been a valuable team asset, but he has played more games at OT than OG. Is he playing out of his best position? Who knows?

1st-rounder Staley was the "last true 1st rounder" on the Niner draft board when he was selected at #27. Staley seems to have the right stuff to surpass Smiley as the best Niner OL draft pick of the decade. He is tough and has natural leadership ability. He did a fine job at RT, before being moved to LT. If the club drafted a LT in the 2010 draft, moving Staley back to RT, would not seem to involve much risk.

4-rounder Wallace was selected as Heitmann's back-up, after the club decided that Baas was going to be an OG only. Great college stats in the Big 12, but not a good Senior Bowl. The fact that Wallace has only suited-up for 1 of 32 eligible games, seems reason enough to call him a bust.

2nd-rounder Rachal was a raw player, with a rather high waist for an OG. I first thought that he might start at OG and eventually be moved to RT, because of his body type. Clearly, Rachal is not responding to Foerster's coaching. I would like to see how Rachal would develop under a different OL coach, in order to really make a judgement on him.

FA Wragge has been a good interior OL complement to Snyder, in that he is versatile enough to play 3 positions, C, LG or RG. Wragge is strong, but slow, more of a straight-ahead guy, not quick enough to pull effectively. He earned Nolan's respect and a place on the team with his toughness and durability

Many other OL have passed through the Niner ranks via FA and UDFA signings over recent years. The current "stickees" include OT Pashos and OT Boone. Carolina was considering switching Pashos from RT to OG, before he left there to sign with the Niners as an OT. Pashos might be better used by the Niners as an OG. Who knows? Boone seems to be a lot like Harris. Nice kid, hard worker, slow feet.

So, lot of questions here about evaluating talent in the pre-draft period, even with a lot of close-up Senior Bowl observation advantage. Also lots of questions about whether guys are being used at their best positions. Also lots of questions about the lack of skills being taught to these guys by the OL coach. Also a fundamental question of whether the "size" criteria will continue to rule, or whether a different specification needs to be used to select OL (for example, mobility). I support re-defing the criteria with a new OL coach in the McKittrick mold (Mike Solari?).

And, yes, my recollection is the same as yours. The Jets did bring-in a veteran OG from the Steelers to compelment the rookies in re-building their OL. Don't remember the name or know if he is still there.

[ Edited by jimbagg on Jan 13, 2010 at 13:24:28 ]

Let's review the three players on the team, and how it relates to your philosophy.

Staley: Was a late first rounder, and has been pretty good value with the selection. He's not a Pro-Bowler, not a great player, but is pretty reliable, and is a player of starting quality in the NFL.

Baas: Was the first player selected in the second round of the 2005 draft. The Niners were targetting the player selected before him....Logan Mankins. I don't think anyone would complain if the Niners had him on the roster, and the Niners were simply beat to the pick by one selection. Baas became a reach., but Mankins would have been a great selection.

Rachal: The Niners made a ridiculous reach with this early 2nd rounder. The issue in this 2008 Draft: There was a massive rush on OL in the first round, and that caused the Niners to select a player earlier than expected. In this draft, the Niners probably will not see a mad rush for OT's, and will be able to select a player of reasonable value.

One note: The Niners may want to be careful in selecting an underclassman OL with their selection. Rachal probably would not have entered the draft early if his mother was in better health at the time. He clearly was not ready for the NFL in 2008, and the case may be the same with a raw player like Bruce Campbell. Campbell may have a gigantic upside, but he is going to struggle in his adjustment to the NFL. And, I think the Niners want a guy ready to roll from Day One.

Originally posted by glorydayz:

Originally posted by kronik:

Originally posted by glorydayz:

Originally posted by kronik:

Originally posted by glorydayz:

Quote:
So if you fail at something you should just give up? that's the worst logic I've ever heard. If anything, the odds are in our favor to hit this time.

Originally posted by Overkill:
Scot hasn't had a ton of success getting OL in the first two rounds, so we should just assume he can find talent later in the draft?

How in the world does that make sense?

Because you have other ways to aquire O-linemen via trade or the draft. Not to mention we have had more success in the past with FA O-linemen than drafted O-linemen.

I say if you aren't good at something you should give up and focus on what you are good at until you turn that weakness into a strength. You don't just keep making the same mistakes over and over again when there is more than one way to skin a cat.

If that's your approach to life, I feel sorry for you. If you have kids, I feel sorry for your kids' future.

This is my approach to building an oline, I feel sorry for your kids as you are probably raising them with the thought of "what would sing or any other football coach do in this situation".

Keep your kids out of nut cracker drills buddy...

That's the most lame comeback I've seen in the zone for a while. Keep it up with your philosophy. There are plenty of bums living on the street with that mentality. Get yourself a nice warm blanket when u get a chance.

I will get a nice warm blanket to keep me warm in my 24 person suite at the stick for 49ers home games. I guess if things get worst I can always live at the lake house. Raise some kids with out your nut cracker drill and then talk to me about a philosophy on life little fella.

Trust fund baby?

Originally posted by lamontb:

Originally posted by kronik:

Originally posted by glorydayz:

Quote:
So if you fail at something you should just give up? that's the worst logic I've ever heard. If anything, the odds are in our favor to hit this time.

Originally posted by Overkill:
Scot hasn't had a ton of success getting OL in the first two rounds, so we should just assume he can find talent later in the draft?

How in the world does that make sense?

Because you have other ways to aquire O-linemen via trade or the draft. Not to mention we have had more success in the past with FA O-linemen than drafted O-linemen.

I say if you aren't good at something you should give up and focus on what you are good at until you turn that weakness into a strength. You don't just keep making the same mistakes over and over again when there is more than one way to skin a cat.

If that's your approach to life, I feel sorry for you. If you have kids, I feel sorry for your kids' future.

dam that was harsh, funny , and true all at the same time.

this might be the dumbest thread of the year so far considering the Niners o line, and the reasoning presented for not drafting one in the 1st round.

Actually, during the glory years, the team's line mostly consisted of later round picks and undrafted players. Moreover, it is highly unlikely that a 1st rounder spent on the OL will be able to immediatly contribute at a level much higher than the current line. There are too many other areas where 1st round impact talent is needed including the secondary and a offensive/special teams play maker.

Originally posted by GEEK:
We have no luck with any drafted lineman.

Rachal - ewww
Baas - double ewwww
Staley - The Joe Show was worth it though...
Snyder - herpes ewwwww
Wallace - who?

I respectfully disagree with the premise of this thread.

We absolutely should draft O-Lineman with our 1st rounder, and I would advocate using both 1st rounders on O-Lineman.

Originally posted by jimbagg:
Need to examine the Niners recent ability to judge OL draft talent by regime:

Pre-McCloughan Era (2003-2004):

1st-rounder Harris had some good run-blocking skills, but not the feet to be a pass-protection OT. Never understood why Harris wasn't tried at OG.

2nd-rounder Smiley was probably the best OL drafted with a high pick by the Niners this decade. Outstanding puller from the OG position and very tough, often playing through injuries that sidelined Jennings. A real loss when McCloughan decided not to pay him, and Parcels did.

7th-rounder Heitmann was well-coached at Stanford, very cerebral, and responsive to prro coaching. Filling the void between Newberry's collapse and the development of Baas, Heitmann developed his body, used his PT experience at OG, and grabbed the starting C job. Heitmann's secret is that he continued to develop in a major way, after being drafted.

McCloughan Era:

McNolan admittedly had Jacksonville envy. They coveted size above other traits, and Warhop was a straight ahead blocking OL coach. Draft picks were made to fit this vision.

2nd-rounder Baas was a spur-of-the-moment, on-the-clock pick, when NE selected Logan Mankins with the preceeding pick. Selected primarily as Center insurance for the debilitating Newberry, Baas has really never played the position for which he was drafted. He has been injury-prone, but somewhat effective as a straight-ahead blocker. His pass protection and pulling performance at OG have been more spotty. Is Baas starting-OG quality? I'm not sure. Is he playing out of his best position? Is he starting C quality? I have no idea.

3rd-rounder Snyder was an all Pac-10 LOT at Oregon, who was drafted with being an NFL OG in mind. His versatility has been a valuable team asset, but he has played more games at OT than OG. Is he playing out of his best position? Who knows?

1st-rounder Staley was the "last true 1st rounder" on the Niner draft board when he was selected at #27. Staley seems to have the right stuff to surpass Smiley as the best Niner OL draft pick of the decade. He is tough and has natural leadership ability. He did a fine job at RT, before being moved to LT. If the club drafted a LT in the 2010 draft, moving Staley back to RT, would not seem to involve much risk.

4-rounder Wallace was selected as Heitmann's back-up, after the club decided that Baas was going to be an OG only. Great college stats in the Big 12, but not a good Senior Bowl. The fact that Wallace has only suited-up for 1 of 32 eligible games, seems reason enough to call him a bust.

2nd-rounder Rachal was a raw player, with a rather high waist for an OG. I first thought that he might start at OG and eventually be moved to RT, because of his body type. Clearly, Rachal is not responding to Foerster's coaching. I would like to see how Rachal would develop under a different OL coach, in order to really make a judgement on him.

FA Wragge has been a good interior OL complement to Snyder, in that he is versatile enough to play 3 positions, C, LG or RG. Wragge is strong, but slow, more of a straight-ahead guy, not quick enough to pull effectively. He earned Nolan's respect and a place on the team with his toughness and durability

Many other OL have passed through the Niner ranks via FA and UDFA signings over recent years. The current "stickees" include OT Pashos and OT Boone. Carolina was considering switching Pashos from RT to OG, before he left there to sign with the Niners as an OT. Pashos might be better used by the Niners as an OG. Who knows? Boone seems to be a lot like Harris. Nice kid, hard worker, slow feet.

So, lot of questions here about evaluating talent in the pre-draft period, even with a lot of close-up Senior Bowl observation advantage. Also lots of questions about whether guys are being used at their best positions. Also lots of questions about the lack of skills being taught to these guys by the OL coach. Also a fundamental question of whether the "size" criteria will continue to rule, or whether a different specification needs to be used to select OL (for example, mobility). I support re-defing the criteria with a new OL coach in the McKittrick mold (Mike Solari?).

And, yes, my recollection is the same as yours. The Jets did bring-in a veteran OG from the Steelers to compelment the rookies in re-building their OL. Don't remember the name or know if he is still there.

We were posting about the same time, so I wanted to say that your analysis is brilliant. There have been a combination of events that have occured which have created the situation in which we reside.

Losing even one talented OL is significant. Scot's lack of interest in signing Smiley goes down as one of the biggest boners in his administration. This team would be significantly better, a helluva lot better than Baas and Rachal.

Originally posted by ttime1:

Originally posted by lamontb:

Originally posted by kronik:

Originally posted by glorydayz:

Quote:
So if you fail at something you should just give up? that's the worst logic I've ever heard. If anything, the odds are in our favor to hit this time.

Originally posted by Overkill:
Scot hasn't had a ton of success getting OL in the first two rounds, so we should just assume he can find talent later in the draft?

How in the world does that make sense?

Because you have other ways to aquire O-linemen via trade or the draft. Not to mention we have had more success in the past with FA O-linemen than drafted O-linemen.

I say if you aren't good at something you should give up and focus on what you are good at until you turn that weakness into a strength. You don't just keep making the same mistakes over and over again when there is more than one way to skin a cat.

If that's your approach to life, I feel sorry for you. If you have kids, I feel sorry for your kids' future.

dam that was harsh, funny , and true all at the same time.

this might be the dumbest thread of the year so far considering the Niners o line, and the reasoning presented for not drafting one in the 1st round.

Actually, during the glory years, the team's line mostly consisted of later round picks and undrafted players. Moreover, it is highly unlikely that a 1st rounder spent on the OL will be able to immediatly contribute at a level much higher than the current line. There are too many other areas where 1st round impact talent is needed including the secondary and a offensive/special teams play maker.

You can find 1st round o lineman making contributions to there teams all over the NFL. And the glory years were 20 years ago you gotta progress with the game.

Originally posted by DaveWilcox:
I respectfully disagree with the premise of this thread.

We absolutely should draft O-Lineman with our 1st rounder, and I would advocate using both 1st rounders on O-Lineman.

Why be respectful? I think the premise of this thread is f**king ridiculous.

I honestly would prefer FA signing to fill those O holes.

Originally posted by ttime1:

Originally posted by lamontb:

Originally posted by kronik:

Originally posted by glorydayz:

Quote:
So if you fail at something you should just give up? that's the worst logic I've ever heard. If anything, the odds are in our favor to hit this time.

Originally posted by Overkill:
Scot hasn't had a ton of success getting OL in the first two rounds, so we should just assume he can find talent later in the draft?

How in the world does that make sense?

Because you have other ways to aquire O-linemen via trade or the draft. Not to mention we have had more success in the past with FA O-linemen than drafted O-linemen.

I say if you aren't good at something you should give up and focus on what you are good at until you turn that weakness into a strength. You don't just keep making the same mistakes over and over again when there is more than one way to skin a cat.

If that's your approach to life, I feel sorry for you. If you have kids, I feel sorry for your kids' future.

dam that was harsh, funny , and true all at the same time.

this might be the dumbest thread of the year so far considering the Niners o line, and the reasoning presented for not drafting one in the 1st round.

Actually, during the glory years, the team's line mostly consisted of later round picks and undrafted players. Moreover, it is highly unlikely that a 1st rounder spent on the OL will be able to immediatly contribute at a level much higher than the current line. There are too many other areas where 1st round impact talent is needed including the secondary and a offensive/special teams play maker.

You forget, we had Bob McKittrick(sp?) then.

Originally posted by DaveWilcox:
I respectfully disagree with the premise of this thread.

We absolutely should draft O-Lineman with our 1st rounder, and I would advocate using both 1st rounders on O-Lineman.

Agree. Although Jacksonville struggled this year to break .500, they surely had a battle plan going into the draft: replace both OT's with draft choices. So, they picked up Monroe and Britton and let them run right away with the first team.

The Niners need to have the same urgency with their OL. I have advocated the drafting of Iupati at 13, and the best OT on the board at 16/17, and let them start right away.

Originally posted by kstolai:
I honestly would prefer FA signing to fill those O holes.

I wouldn't expect much OL quality in this years crop of Free agents. With the additional tags available to teams due to CBA expiring, it's a bad year to be looking upgrade a team via free agency.

I sure am glad we have that extra 1st rounder..

Originally posted by ttime1:

Originally posted by lamontb:

Originally posted by kronik:

Originally posted by glorydayz:

Quote:
So if you fail at something you should just give up? that's the worst logic I've ever heard. If anything, the odds are in our favor to hit this time.

Originally posted by Overkill:
Scot hasn't had a ton of success getting OL in the first two rounds, so we should just assume he can find talent later in the draft?

How in the world does that make sense?

Because you have other ways to aquire O-linemen via trade or the draft. Not to mention we have had more success in the past with FA O-linemen than drafted O-linemen.

I say if you aren't good at something you should give up and focus on what you are good at until you turn that weakness into a strength. You don't just keep making the same mistakes over and over again when there is more than one way to skin a cat.

If that's your approach to life, I feel sorry for you. If you have kids, I feel sorry for your kids' future.

dam that was harsh, funny , and true all at the same time.

this might be the dumbest thread of the year so far considering the Niners o line, and the reasoning presented for not drafting one in the 1st round.

Actually, during the glory years, the team's line mostly consisted of later round picks and undrafted players. Moreover, it is highly unlikely that a 1st rounder spent on the OL will be able to immediatly contribute at a level much higher than the current line. There are too many other areas where 1st round impact talent is needed including the secondary and a offensive/special teams play maker.

Actually, the notion that McKittrick had only late-round picks and UDFA's to get the job done, is a common misconception on this board. McKittrick had considerable high draft pick talent, with which he could mix-in a lower pick or two, but never the whole OL. Here are the facts: on the "glory" years:

Niner 1st round OL pick: OT Barton (87).

Niner 2nd round OL picks: OT Paris (82), OT Fahnhorst (74), C/G Cross (76), OG Bregel (87).

Niner 3rd round OL picks: OG McIntyre (84).

Niner 4th round OL picks: OT Wallace(86).

Niner 5th round OL picks: OG Collie (85).

Niner 6th round OL picks: none

Niner 7th round OL picks: C Quillan (78).

Niner 8th round OL picks: OG Ayers (76).

Niner 11th round OL picks: C/G Sapolu (83).

Additionally, FA signings like OT Audick, OT Gragg and OG Stone, were drafted by other teams and not "off the street" guys.

McKittrick was an outstanding coach, but even he could not make wine from simple water.

Originally posted by GEEK:
We have no luck with any drafted lineman.

Rachal - ewww
Baas - double ewwww
Staley - The Joe Show was worth it though...
Snyder - herpes ewwwww
Wallace - who?

holy s**t you just convinced me, we should draft spiller and hayden in the first rnd and sign a free agent RT and OG.