There are 135 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

People need to forget Spiller

  • KRS-1
  • Hall of Fame
  • Posts: 26,979
Originally posted by WINiner:
Originally posted by KRS-1:
Originally posted by WINiner:
I all but guarantee that Scott will NOT choose Spiller, even if available at 17, in the 1st round. For the same reason he will not draft Iupati in the 1st.

Scott makes selections in the draft based on his preconceived formula. He doesn't choose Guards until the 2nd at earliest. Scott also stays away from RB's in the 1st few rounds as well.

Scott will stick to his formula regardless of what makes sense. The 1st is for QB's, Dlinemen, OT's, CB's.

Picks like Vernon Davis were all Nolan, when he had final say. I don't believe Scott likes taking skill positions early, and only chose Crabtree lastyear because of his slide.

I am calling it, Scott will pass twice on Spiller.

Based on what ? Can you tell me which OG's that we could have drafted in the 1st in the past ?

Scott has come out and stated that interior linemen have a lower value in his mind, and that he would not likely ever pay a FA of our own looking for a large payday (IE let Smiley walk when he was playing at a PB lvl with us), that he was unlikely to ever bring in a FA starting Guard unless it was for a deal, and that the position did not warrant a 1st round selection.

It's rumored Scot had pushed for Hutch when the Hawks took him and that was a Ted Thompson pick, one of Scot's mentors. While Scot does not believe in paying OG's 50 million dollar contracts, if he think Iupati can be every bit as dominant IMO he would strongly consider him.
  • 4ML
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 28,484
Scot drafted Baas with the first pick of 2nd round - and he drafted another guard couple years ago early in the 2nd round. Neither of those guys were even close to the player Iupati is - so if Scot feels Iupati is the BPA at 17, I'm confident he will pull the trigger.

People are over-looking the most common factor Scot uses in his draft choices. He looks for passionate guys, he looks for guys who will tough it out and play with injuries, he looks for guys who can be leaders. Willis, Staley, Lawson, Vernon, and Crabtree all fit in with that.

And...when Scot says production matters and combine numbers don't - he is lying. Almost everyone we drafted in the first round has been a combine studs. Crabtree may not have run the 40 - but his size, arms length and hand size played a factor as well.
Originally posted by WINiner:
I all but guarantee that Scott will NOT choose Spiller, even if available at 17, in the 1st round. For the same reason he will not draft Iupati in the 1st.

Scott makes selections in the draft based on his preconceived formula. He doesn't choose Guards until the 2nd at earliest. Scott also stays away from RB's in the 1st few rounds as well.

Scott will stick to his formula regardless of what makes sense. The 1st is for QB's, Dlinemen, OT's, CB's.

Picks like Vernon Davis were all Nolan, when he had final say. I don't believe Scott likes taking skill positions early, and only chose Crabtree lastyear because of his slide.

I am calling it, Scott will pass twice on Spiller.

You could be right, but I beg to differ. If he follows the pattern at GB then he will certainly recall that it was not the talent of Farve or the late great Reggie White that put them over the hump in the 90's. It was Desmond Howard who took them to the SB and won it and the MVP award.

Given all of the circumstances, Spiller is not only the pick with the most upside, and fills a need that STATISTICS AND GAME FILM demonstrates as this team's greatest need, but he is also the safest. I don't think that the question is if he will pick Spiller, it is however, will Spiller be there for him to pick?
Originally posted by KRS-1:
Originally posted by WINiner:
Originally posted by KRS-1:
Originally posted by WINiner:
I all but guarantee that Scott will NOT choose Spiller, even if available at 17, in the 1st round. For the same reason he will not draft Iupati in the 1st.

Scott makes selections in the draft based on his preconceived formula. He doesn't choose Guards until the 2nd at earliest. Scott also stays away from RB's in the 1st few rounds as well.

Scott will stick to his formula regardless of what makes sense. The 1st is for QB's, Dlinemen, OT's, CB's.

Picks like Vernon Davis were all Nolan, when he had final say. I don't believe Scott likes taking skill positions early, and only chose Crabtree lastyear because of his slide.

I am calling it, Scott will pass twice on Spiller.

Based on what ? Can you tell me which OG's that we could have drafted in the 1st in the past ?

Scott has come out and stated that interior linemen have a lower value in his mind, and that he would not likely ever pay a FA of our own looking for a large payday (IE let Smiley walk when he was playing at a PB lvl with us), that he was unlikely to ever bring in a FA starting Guard unless it was for a deal, and that the position did not warrant a 1st round selection.

It's rumored Scot had pushed for Hutch when the Hawks took him and that was a Ted Thompson pick, one of Scot's mentors. While Scot does not believe in paying OG's 50 million dollar contracts, if he think Iupati can be every bit as dominant IMO he would strongly consider him.

I will place emphasis on an actual quote from Scott, and not a Rumor from 5+ years ago. Scott said, paraphrased, that any big body off the street can be coached into being an adequate G and that it is the C and T positons that are difference makers up front and that as such, he was unwilling to spend greater resources on the G position. That was his excuse for letting Smiley walk when he was obviously playing at a PB lvl for us (which was why the Tuna snatched up and had a contract rdy and signed within minutes).

It doesn't make sense to me that Scott lets a PB guard go because he doesn't want to pay 1 and then go and sign an unproven rookie G to a 1st round contract.

I personally would LOVE to see our 1st 3 picks spent on Olinemen (T, G, T), I just don't see Scott going G till 2nd round, and other than Iupati, there aren't I know much about.
He might not even be there at 13 when we pick
Originally posted by ttime1:
Originally posted by WINiner:
I all but guarantee that Scott will NOT choose Spiller, even if available at 17, in the 1st round. For the same reason he will not draft Iupati in the 1st.

Scott makes selections in the draft based on his preconceived formula. He doesn't choose Guards until the 2nd at earliest. Scott also stays away from RB's in the 1st few rounds as well.

Scott will stick to his formula regardless of what makes sense. The 1st is for QB's, Dlinemen, OT's, CB's.

Picks like Vernon Davis were all Nolan, when he had final say. I don't believe Scott likes taking skill positions early, and only chose Crabtree lastyear because of his slide.

I am calling it, Scott will pass twice on Spiller.

You could be right, but I beg to differ. If he follows the pattern at GB then he will certainly recall that it was not the talent of Farve or the late great Reggie White that put them over the hump in the 90's. It was Desmond Howard who took them to the SB and won it and the MVP award.

Given all of the circumstances, Spiller is not only the pick with the most upside, and fills a need that STATISTICS AND GAME FILM demonstrates as this team's greatest need, but he is also the safest. I don't think that the question is if he will pick Spiller, it is however, will Spiller be there for him to pick?

LOL if you say so, however my and your interpritations of what made the Packers so dangerous that year differ greatly, and I lived about 30 minutes from the stadium at that point.

What exactly did Desmond do the next year? And what exactly did GB do when Desmond was all set to cash in?

Desmond did nothing ever again by comparison, and GB let him walk cause they knew it was more about the blocking ahead of him, than it was about Desmond's return skills.
Originally posted by WINiner:
Originally posted by ttime1:
Originally posted by WINiner:
I all but guarantee that Scott will NOT choose Spiller, even if available at 17, in the 1st round. For the same reason he will not draft Iupati in the 1st.

Scott makes selections in the draft based on his preconceived formula. He doesn't choose Guards until the 2nd at earliest. Scott also stays away from RB's in the 1st few rounds as well.

Scott will stick to his formula regardless of what makes sense. The 1st is for QB's, Dlinemen, OT's, CB's.

Picks like Vernon Davis were all Nolan, when he had final say. I don't believe Scott likes taking skill positions early, and only chose Crabtree lastyear because of his slide.

I am calling it, Scott will pass twice on Spiller.

You could be right, but I beg to differ. If he follows the pattern at GB then he will certainly recall that it was not the talent of Farve or the late great Reggie White that put them over the hump in the 90's. It was Desmond Howard who took them to the SB and won it and the MVP award.

Given all of the circumstances, Spiller is not only the pick with the most upside, and fills a need that STATISTICS AND GAME FILM demonstrates as this team's greatest need, but he is also the safest. I don't think that the question is if he will pick Spiller, it is however, will Spiller be there for him to pick?

LOL if you say so, however my and your interpritations of what made the Packers so dangerous that year differ greatly, and I lived about 30 minutes from the stadium at that point.

What exactly did Desmond do the next year? And what exactly did GB do when Desmond was all set to cash in?

Desmond did nothing ever again by comparison, and GB let him walk cause they knew it was more about the blocking ahead of him, than it was about Desmond's return skills.

Hmmmm. I remember Howard being the difference in a 49er loss to them during the play-offs. Did Green-bay win a subsequent Superbowl withgout Desmond being the MVP? Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think so.

Howard became a free agent after the season and used his status to collect a hefty contract from the Oakland Raiders. He led the NFL in kickoff returns (61) and kickoff return yards (1,381); without the Packer's blocking.
They broke down some of the top RBs on the NFL network today... they had some interesting things to say about Spiller at the end:

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-draft/09000d5d816fcac0/Scouting-report-RBs
Originally posted by RedWaltz24:
They broke down some of the top RBs on the NFL network today... they had some interesting things to say about Spiller at the end:

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-draft/09000d5d816fcac0/Scouting-report-RBs

That is interesting, especially the part about him making it past the Chargers in the 1st round
  • cupcheck
  • Info N/A
A lot of guaranteeing going on, so I'll throw one out. I guarantee Spiller is the #1 ranked RB. in the draft, #1 ranked returner, one of the most productive football players to be available to the 9ers in a NEED position, [ COP back & RS ] in a long time. And if he is HALF as good in the pro's as he was this yr. while playing with turf toe , and we pass on him ,no one will be happy!!
[ Edited by cupcheck on Mar 17, 2010 at 3:47 PM ]
  • BobS
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 7,580
Spiller will be long gone by the time the 49ers pick, moot point.
Originally posted by ttime1:
Originally posted by WINiner:
Originally posted by ttime1:
Originally posted by WINiner:
I all but guarantee that Scott will NOT choose Spiller, even if available at 17, in the 1st round. For the same reason he will not draft Iupati in the 1st.

Scott makes selections in the draft based on his preconceived formula. He doesn't choose Guards until the 2nd at earliest. Scott also stays away from RB's in the 1st few rounds as well.

Scott will stick to his formula regardless of what makes sense. The 1st is for QB's, Dlinemen, OT's, CB's.

Picks like Vernon Davis were all Nolan, when he had final say. I don't believe Scott likes taking skill positions early, and only chose Crabtree lastyear because of his slide.

I am calling it, Scott will pass twice on Spiller.

You could be right, but I beg to differ. If he follows the pattern at GB then he will certainly recall that it was not the talent of Farve or the late great Reggie White that put them over the hump in the 90's. It was Desmond Howard who took them to the SB and won it and the MVP award.

Given all of the circumstances, Spiller is not only the pick with the most upside, and fills a need that STATISTICS AND GAME FILM demonstrates as this team's greatest need, but he is also the safest. I don't think that the question is if he will pick Spiller, it is however, will Spiller be there for him to pick?

LOL if you say so, however my and your interpritations of what made the Packers so dangerous that year differ greatly, and I lived about 30 minutes from the stadium at that point.

What exactly did Desmond do the next year? And what exactly did GB do when Desmond was all set to cash in?

Desmond did nothing ever again by comparison, and GB let him walk cause they knew it was more about the blocking ahead of him, than it was about Desmond's return skills.

Hmmmm. I remember Howard being the difference in a 49er loss to them during the play-offs. Did Green-bay win a subsequent Superbowl withgout Desmond being the MVP? Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think so.

Howard became a free agent after the season and used his status to collect a hefty contract from the Oakland Raiders. He led the NFL in kickoff returns (61) and kickoff return yards (1,381); without the Packer's blocking.

I like to think We lost that game cause of Youngs broken ribs more than we did Howards returns, but I digress.

He NEVER hurt teams the way he did with the Packers, and that was because he had superior blocking with the Packers. Scott will know this.

EVEN if you put ALL of Howards accomplishments on him, I STILL would'nt even think of paying a 1st for him, especially when I could get someone with his abilities in later rounds.


Argue with me all you want. We will see who's right come draft day, when Scott passes on Spiller, and doing so twice if he is still there at 17. If not I'll eat crow for sure.
[ Edited by WINiner on Mar 17, 2010 at 5:42 PM ]
I'm not sure he passes on Iupati...reason is because they (he and Singletary) may see him as an OT in the future. I'd be thrilled if he gets one of the top OT's and Iupati in the 1st rd. They both know OL's the biggest problem area...and to get two of the best is a great way to upgrade it. Remember...new OL sheriff in town now. Solari's not like Warhop and Foerster...he likes OL who're very mobile, OT's who can play both positions, and can zone block. He's a Mckittrick disciple...and he learned all those things from that legendary OL coach. Whatever RB they acquire will benefit greatly from an improved OL...and I agree, he's not that likely to take Spiller that early. Two OL or at least an OT and a top DL make the most sense...you build up your lines to championship caliber...and your offense and defense both benefit for years to come. If he passes on Iupati, Mac/Sing can still get a quality OG in 3rd rd in Mike Johnson.
Originally posted by RedWaltz24:
I am on the "pass on Spiller" bandwagon.

The Niners desperately need to fix their OL and their holes on defense. You can get a KR/PR in later rounds.

I'm all for the best OL or Haden (he ran a 4.43 today) at 13, or the best OL, Graham, or Thomas at 17.

Isn't calling Spiller a PR/KR a bit simplistic? He does happen to have other skills like running and catching the football from the line of scrimmage. Nobody wants to draft a KR/PR with the 13th or 17th pick.
  • KRS-1
  • Hall of Fame
  • Posts: 26,979
Originally posted by WINiner:
Originally posted by KRS-1:
Originally posted by WINiner:
Originally posted by KRS-1:
Originally posted by WINiner:
I all but guarantee that Scott will NOT choose Spiller, even if available at 17, in the 1st round. For the same reason he will not draft Iupati in the 1st.

Scott makes selections in the draft based on his preconceived formula. He doesn't choose Guards until the 2nd at earliest. Scott also stays away from RB's in the 1st few rounds as well.

Scott will stick to his formula regardless of what makes sense. The 1st is for QB's, Dlinemen, OT's, CB's.

Picks like Vernon Davis were all Nolan, when he had final say. I don't believe Scott likes taking skill positions early, and only chose Crabtree lastyear because of his slide.

I am calling it, Scott will pass twice on Spiller.

Based on what ? Can you tell me which OG's that we could have drafted in the 1st in the past ?

Scott has come out and stated that interior linemen have a lower value in his mind, and that he would not likely ever pay a FA of our own looking for a large payday (IE let Smiley walk when he was playing at a PB lvl with us), that he was unlikely to ever bring in a FA starting Guard unless it was for a deal, and that the position did not warrant a 1st round selection.

It's rumored Scot had pushed for Hutch when the Hawks took him and that was a Ted Thompson pick, one of Scot's mentors. While Scot does not believe in paying OG's 50 million dollar contracts, if he think Iupati can be every bit as dominant IMO he would strongly consider him.

I will place emphasis on an actual quote from Scott, and not a Rumor from 5+ years ago. Scott said, paraphrased, that any big body off the street can be coached into being an adequate G and that it is the C and T positons that are difference makers up front and that as such, he was unwilling to spend greater resources on the G position. That was his excuse for letting Smiley walk when he was obviously playing at a PB lvl for us (which was why the Tuna snatched up and had a contract rdy and signed within minutes).

It doesn't make sense to me that Scott lets a PB guard go because he doesn't want to pay 1 and then go and sign an unproven rookie G to a 1st round contract.

I personally would LOVE to see our 1st 3 picks spent on Olinemen (T, G, T), I just don't see Scott going G till 2nd round, and other than Iupati, there aren't I know much about.

Can you post a link to that ? The 49ers as I remember it let Smiley test the market because they could not agree on an extension. We would have kept him but at the right price, they place a value on him and when his value exceeded what we though it was he was allowed to test the open market.