There are 149 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Alright, who now at #13?

Alright, who now at #13?

We have to take Davis if he is still available, then take the BPA at #17..

A couple of weeks ago we were all debating Williams v Bulaga, now it is all but certain that they are both long gone.

As long as Davis passes the Sing eyeball test and doesn't have herpes, he should be the pick.

With #17 we should take either Iupati, Haden, Graham or Thomas assuming they are on the board.
  • mayo49
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 21,105
I would cream my pants if we ended up with Davis and Iupati.
It will be between Haden and Spiller. If McCloughan was still GM it would've been Haden in a heartbeat, but with Baalke it could go either way.
Originally posted by mayo63:
It depends if Seattle takes a tackle at 6. If Davis is there at 13, but Seattle hasn't taken a tackle then you have to take him at 13 because Seattle will take him at 14. If Seattle does take a tackle at 6 then Davis should make it to us at 17, thus allowing us to take BPA at 13. Seattle is the key to everything, not to mention if Buffalo goes QB or OT at 9.

i agree.
Originally posted by mayo63:
It depends if Seattle takes a tackle at 6. If Davis is there at 13, but Seattle hasn't taken a tackle then you have to take him at 13 because Seattle will take him at 14. If Seattle does take a tackle at 6 then Davis should make it to us at 17, thus allowing us to take BPA at 13. Seattle is the key to everything, not to mention if Buffalo goes QB or OT at 9.

This.
Originally posted by ghostrider:
Originally posted by mayo63:
It depends if Seattle takes a tackle at 6. If Davis is there at 13, but Seattle hasn't taken a tackle then you have to take him at 13 because Seattle will take him at 14. If Seattle does take a tackle at 6 then Davis should make it to us at 17, thus allowing us to take BPA at 13. Seattle is the key to everything, not to mention if Buffalo goes QB or OT at 9.

This.

IF Davis is there at #13 and we want him, draft him with #13. Don't get cute and wait to #17, he could be gone, someone behind us could trade up and get him and then we are left wondering who will play OT again.
  • mayo49
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 21,105
Originally posted by DaveWilcox:
Originally posted by ghostrider:
Originally posted by mayo63:
It depends if Seattle takes a tackle at 6. If Davis is there at 13, but Seattle hasn't taken a tackle then you have to take him at 13 because Seattle will take him at 14. If Seattle does take a tackle at 6 then Davis should make it to us at 17, thus allowing us to take BPA at 13. Seattle is the key to everything, not to mention if Buffalo goes QB or OT at 9.

This.

IF Davis is there at #13 and we want him, draft him with #13. Don't get cute and wait to #17, he could be gone, someone behind us could trade up and get him and then we are left wondering who will play OT again.

This
Originally posted by DaveWilcox:
Originally posted by ghostrider:
Originally posted by mayo63:
It depends if Seattle takes a tackle at 6. If Davis is there at 13, but Seattle hasn't taken a tackle then you have to take him at 13 because Seattle will take him at 14. If Seattle does take a tackle at 6 then Davis should make it to us at 17, thus allowing us to take BPA at 13. Seattle is the key to everything, not to mention if Buffalo goes QB or OT at 9.

This.

IF Davis is there at #13 and we want him, draft him with #13. Don't get cute and wait to #17, he could be gone, someone behind us could trade up and get him and then we are left wondering who will play OT again.

Unless a player that we also covet dropped to 13 that we know wouldn't be there at 17 but we expect Davis would be. You're probably right, though. Chances are, if we like Davis, we take him at 13.

[ Edited by ghostrider on Apr 6, 2010 at 14:25:56 ]
  • mayo49
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 21,105
Originally posted by ghostrider:
Originally posted by DaveWilcox:
Originally posted by ghostrider:
Originally posted by mayo63:
It depends if Seattle takes a tackle at 6. If Davis is there at 13, but Seattle hasn't taken a tackle then you have to take him at 13 because Seattle will take him at 14. If Seattle does take a tackle at 6 then Davis should make it to us at 17, thus allowing us to take BPA at 13. Seattle is the key to everything, not to mention if Buffalo goes QB or OT at 9.

This.

IF Davis is there at #13 and we want him, draft him with #13. Don't get cute and wait to #17, he could be gone, someone behind us could trade up and get him and then we are left wondering who will play OT again.

Unless a player that we also covet dropped to 13 that we know wouldn't be there at 17 but we expect Davis would be. You're probably right, though. Chances are, if we like Davis, we take him at 13.

Yeah, if Haden or Spiller is staring us at 13 it be tough to pass on them and wait on Davis to get to us at 17. Especially, Spiller who Seattle would probably take at 14 if we don't take him. There are several scenerio's that could unfold. We'll just have to trust that Baalke makes the right decision.
  • TX9R
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 8,184
Originally posted by Draftology:
Originally posted by TX9R:
Originally posted by Gavintech:
Originally posted by Draftology:
This was really difficult. To me, it was between Anthony Davis and Joe Haden. I chose Joe Haden because we would be picking Anthony Davis out of need and kind of out of value. Haden is the best player here. The reason taking the BPA is the philosophy most teams go with in the draft is because if you reach for a need, the likelihood that it doesn't work out on that player is higher than the BPA. And if it doesn't work out, you still have that need. Right tackle is a major issue for us, but I think we can wait until the second round to address this. Plus if the Seachickens pick a tackle @ #6, Davis will most likely make it to #17. So we could probably end up with Haden and Davis, and we get good value for each of them.

I don't think it's even close. Taking the 4th OT in the draft at #13 is only a need pick, not value at all. Especially a guy with the question marks by his name that Davis has. 1st/best CB in the draft or 4th OT in the draft? Value pick = Haden every time. Not to mention I'm not so sure Davis would be starting at RT this year, even for the 49ers.

The flaw in that logic is this is pre-draft rankings. What if Davis turns out to be the best of the bunch and Haden only average? I don't think this class of OTs is all that seperate as propects. There's no Joe Thomas or Jake Long this year. I don't think any of these guys will be dominant, decade long pro bowlers, but all have the potential to be very solid. The same could be said for Haden, solid, not spectacular. There is great value for CBs later in the draft, not so much for OTs.
I definitely feel like there is good value for tackle in the 2nd round. But if the Seahawks pick a tackle @ 6, they won't pick one at 14 and the Giants and Titans don't need a tackle, so if Davis lasts until 13, I think he'll be there @ 17.

The problem with that is you don't know that the value will actually be there in the second. If the top 4 OTs go top 10, that will push everyone else up the boards. There are several teams in the late 1st that need OTs and will likely reach for those 2nd round values. You also have the teams at the top of the 2nd that if they don't take OT in the first will take one in the 2nd. And lastly, the extra day will allow for mnore trades by teams moving up to get the OTs left. I wouldn't roll the dice and hope.
Originally posted by TX9R:
Originally posted by Draftology:
Originally posted by TX9R:
Originally posted by Gavintech:
Originally posted by Draftology:
This was really difficult. To me, it was between Anthony Davis and Joe Haden. I chose Joe Haden because we would be picking Anthony Davis out of need and kind of out of value. Haden is the best player here. The reason taking the BPA is the philosophy most teams go with in the draft is because if you reach for a need, the likelihood that it doesn't work out on that player is higher than the BPA. And if it doesn't work out, you still have that need. Right tackle is a major issue for us, but I think we can wait until the second round to address this. Plus if the Seachickens pick a tackle @ #6, Davis will most likely make it to #17. So we could probably end up with Haden and Davis, and we get good value for each of them.

I don't think it's even close. Taking the 4th OT in the draft at #13 is only a need pick, not value at all. Especially a guy with the question marks by his name that Davis has. 1st/best CB in the draft or 4th OT in the draft? Value pick = Haden every time. Not to mention I'm not so sure Davis would be starting at RT this year, even for the 49ers.

The flaw in that logic is this is pre-draft rankings. What if Davis turns out to be the best of the bunch and Haden only average? I don't think this class of OTs is all that seperate as propects. There's no Joe Thomas or Jake Long this year. I don't think any of these guys will be dominant, decade long pro bowlers, but all have the potential to be very solid. The same could be said for Haden, solid, not spectacular. There is great value for CBs later in the draft, not so much for OTs.
I definitely feel like there is good value for tackle in the 2nd round. But if the Seahawks pick a tackle @ 6, they won't pick one at 14 and the Giants and Titans don't need a tackle, so if Davis lasts until 13, I think he'll be there @ 17.

The problem with that is you don't know that the value will actually be there in the second. If the top 4 OTs go top 10, that will push everyone else up the boards. There are several teams in the late 1st that need OTs and will likely reach for those 2nd round values. You also have the teams at the top of the 2nd that if they don't take OT in the first will take one in the 2nd. And lastly, the extra day will allow for mnore trades by teams moving up to get the OTs left. I wouldn't roll the dice and hope.
If all four tackles go in the top ten, then the teams at the beginning of the 2nd round will have already picked a tackle. I think Vlad Ducasse will be there at 49 and I think he is a great fit at right tackle. He will go behind Bruce Campbell, Saffold, and Charles Brown. If he's not there Capers and Veldheer will be.
Originally posted by LasVegasWally:
I don't think Davis will be there either. Haden and Iupati and Vlad Ducasse in the 2nd.

I like the way you think my man....
  • TX9R
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 8,184
Originally posted by Draftology:
Originally posted by TX9R:
Originally posted by Draftology:
Originally posted by TX9R:
Originally posted by Gavintech:
Originally posted by Draftology:
This was really difficult. To me, it was between Anthony Davis and Joe Haden. I chose Joe Haden because we would be picking Anthony Davis out of need and kind of out of value. Haden is the best player here. The reason taking the BPA is the philosophy most teams go with in the draft is because if you reach for a need, the likelihood that it doesn't work out on that player is higher than the BPA. And if it doesn't work out, you still have that need. Right tackle is a major issue for us, but I think we can wait until the second round to address this. Plus if the Seachickens pick a tackle @ #6, Davis will most likely make it to #17. So we could probably end up with Haden and Davis, and we get good value for each of them.

I don't think it's even close. Taking the 4th OT in the draft at #13 is only a need pick, not value at all. Especially a guy with the question marks by his name that Davis has. 1st/best CB in the draft or 4th OT in the draft? Value pick = Haden every time. Not to mention I'm not so sure Davis would be starting at RT this year, even for the 49ers.

The flaw in that logic is this is pre-draft rankings. What if Davis turns out to be the best of the bunch and Haden only average? I don't think this class of OTs is all that seperate as propects. There's no Joe Thomas or Jake Long this year. I don't think any of these guys will be dominant, decade long pro bowlers, but all have the potential to be very solid. The same could be said for Haden, solid, not spectacular. There is great value for CBs later in the draft, not so much for OTs.
I definitely feel like there is good value for tackle in the 2nd round. But if the Seahawks pick a tackle @ 6, they won't pick one at 14 and the Giants and Titans don't need a tackle, so if Davis lasts until 13, I think he'll be there @ 17.

The problem with that is you don't know that the value will actually be there in the second. If the top 4 OTs go top 10, that will push everyone else up the boards. There are several teams in the late 1st that need OTs and will likely reach for those 2nd round values. You also have the teams at the top of the 2nd that if they don't take OT in the first will take one in the 2nd. And lastly, the extra day will allow for mnore trades by teams moving up to get the OTs left. I wouldn't roll the dice and hope.
If all four tackles go in the top ten, then the teams at the beginning of the 2nd round will have already picked a tackle. I think Vlad Ducasse will be there at 49 and I think he is a great fit at right tackle. He will go behind Bruce Campbell, Saffold, and Charles Brown. If he's not there Capers and Veldheer will be.

No guarantees, half those guys will likely go late first. Capers is the only one I would fully expect to be there, but I don't think he's any good.
Originally posted by TX9R:
Originally posted by Draftology:
Originally posted by TX9R:
Originally posted by Draftology:
Originally posted by TX9R:
Originally posted by Gavintech:
Originally posted by Draftology:
This was really difficult. To me, it was between Anthony Davis and Joe Haden. I chose Joe Haden because we would be picking Anthony Davis out of need and kind of out of value. Haden is the best player here. The reason taking the BPA is the philosophy most teams go with in the draft is because if you reach for a need, the likelihood that it doesn't work out on that player is higher than the BPA. And if it doesn't work out, you still have that need. Right tackle is a major issue for us, but I think we can wait until the second round to address this. Plus if the Seachickens pick a tackle @ #6, Davis will most likely make it to #17. So we could probably end up with Haden and Davis, and we get good value for each of them.

I don't think it's even close. Taking the 4th OT in the draft at #13 is only a need pick, not value at all. Especially a guy with the question marks by his name that Davis has. 1st/best CB in the draft or 4th OT in the draft? Value pick = Haden every time. Not to mention I'm not so sure Davis would be starting at RT this year, even for the 49ers.

The flaw in that logic is this is pre-draft rankings. What if Davis turns out to be the best of the bunch and Haden only average? I don't think this class of OTs is all that seperate as propects. There's no Joe Thomas or Jake Long this year. I don't think any of these guys will be dominant, decade long pro bowlers, but all have the potential to be very solid. The same could be said for Haden, solid, not spectacular. There is great value for CBs later in the draft, not so much for OTs.
I definitely feel like there is good value for tackle in the 2nd round. But if the Seahawks pick a tackle @ 6, they won't pick one at 14 and the Giants and Titans don't need a tackle, so if Davis lasts until 13, I think he'll be there @ 17.

The problem with that is you don't know that the value will actually be there in the second. If the top 4 OTs go top 10, that will push everyone else up the boards. There are several teams in the late 1st that need OTs and will likely reach for those 2nd round values. You also have the teams at the top of the 2nd that if they don't take OT in the first will take one in the 2nd. And lastly, the extra day will allow for mnore trades by teams moving up to get the OTs left. I wouldn't roll the dice and hope.
If all four tackles go in the top ten, then the teams at the beginning of the 2nd round will have already picked a tackle. I think Vlad Ducasse will be there at 49 and I think he is a great fit at right tackle. He will go behind Bruce Campbell, Saffold, and Charles Brown. If he's not there Capers and Veldheer will be.

No guarantees, half those guys will likely go late first. Capers is the only one I would fully expect to be there, but I don't think he's any good.
You think 9 tackles will be taken before pick 49?? Thats a fifth of all players drafted at one position.
Originally posted by Draftology:
Originally posted by TX9R:
Originally posted by Draftology:
Originally posted by TX9R:
Originally posted by Draftology:
Originally posted by TX9R:
Originally posted by Gavintech:
Originally posted by Draftology:
This was really difficult. To me, it was between Anthony Davis and Joe Haden. I chose Joe Haden because we would be picking Anthony Davis out of need and kind of out of value. Haden is the best player here. The reason taking the BPA is the philosophy most teams go with in the draft is because if you reach for a need, the likelihood that it doesn't work out on that player is higher than the BPA. And if it doesn't work out, you still have that need. Right tackle is a major issue for us, but I think we can wait until the second round to address this. Plus if the Seachickens pick a tackle @ #6, Davis will most likely make it to #17. So we could probably end up with Haden and Davis, and we get good value for each of them.

I don't think it's even close. Taking the 4th OT in the draft at #13 is only a need pick, not value at all. Especially a guy with the question marks by his name that Davis has. 1st/best CB in the draft or 4th OT in the draft? Value pick = Haden every time. Not to mention I'm not so sure Davis would be starting at RT this year, even for the 49ers.

The flaw in that logic is this is pre-draft rankings. What if Davis turns out to be the best of the bunch and Haden only average? I don't think this class of OTs is all that seperate as propects. There's no Joe Thomas or Jake Long this year. I don't think any of these guys will be dominant, decade long pro bowlers, but all have the potential to be very solid. The same could be said for Haden, solid, not spectacular. There is great value for CBs later in the draft, not so much for OTs.
I definitely feel like there is good value for tackle in the 2nd round. But if the Seahawks pick a tackle @ 6, they won't pick one at 14 and the Giants and Titans don't need a tackle, so if Davis lasts until 13, I think he'll be there @ 17.

The problem with that is you don't know that the value will actually be there in the second. If the top 4 OTs go top 10, that will push everyone else up the boards. There are several teams in the late 1st that need OTs and will likely reach for those 2nd round values. You also have the teams at the top of the 2nd that if they don't take OT in the first will take one in the 2nd. And lastly, the extra day will allow for mnore trades by teams moving up to get the OTs left. I wouldn't roll the dice and hope.
If all four tackles go in the top ten, then the teams at the beginning of the 2nd round will have already picked a tackle. I think Vlad Ducasse will be there at 49 and I think he is a great fit at right tackle. He will go behind Bruce Campbell, Saffold, and Charles Brown. If he's not there Capers and Veldheer will be.

No guarantees, half those guys will likely go late first. Capers is the only one I would fully expect to be there, but I don't think he's any good.
You think 9 tackles will be taken before pick 49?? Thats a fifth of all players drafted at one position.

Minimum of 8 will be gone, maybe 9 .. I know that sounds crazy but that is just how the NFL values OTs these days.