There are 218 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

First & Second Round Priorities

For me, the glaring need for our 49ers was at WR. Losing Morgan was a big lose, and I think it might have exposed us a little. So I think drafting a big physical WR with good hands in the firat round is a must. And fortunately this years draft class is deep with those types. Mohamed Sanu, Alshon Jeffery, and Nick Toon will probably still be there for us in the first. I like Tommy Streeter but I think he will be there for us in the 3rd unless theres a major run on WR's. Bottom line is that we need a big physical guy to come in to compete for that number 1 WR spot. A healthy Morgan beats Crabs to me for #2. (Crabs is approaching bust status.) We have a speedy WR in Kyle Williams who can stretch the field (but schould never return kicks). We have a returner in Ginn, who we should be re-signing forthwith. We're just missing that lagit #1 guy at WR. If we can't sign Colston (who I think we should pursue hard) then our first round - and purhaps some later round - pick should be on a WR.

The 2nd should be either CB or FS. Of the two I'd say that FS is the higher priority. The good thing was that Goldston isn't injury prone. But behind him we have nobody. Now I see him coming back because the 49ers will franchise him if they cannot re-sign him. I don't know anout other fans but I think that Carlos Rogers will resign. So drafting a FS will be important. This draft class isn't deep at all with safties so we should really be targeting Antonio Allen in the second round out of South Carolina, even move up to get him if have to. After him there's a big dropoff at safty. If we don't go FS then we have to go CB. Trumaine Johnson out of Montana and Leonard Johnson of Iowa St. should be there in the 2nd.

Thoughts?
I agree, but actually feel Safety is a bigger concern than corner. The 49ers will have Rogers resigned, and have Brown, Culliver, Brock, and an up and comer in Nelms.

At safety, Goldson will more than likely be franchised and there's Whitner starting along side of him. But There is no depth. Williams may leave in FA and Reggie Smith is kind of whack. I believe they have got to find solid depth at FS/SS and possibly Goldsons replacement if the 49ers can't lock him down with a new contract.
In no particular order our top priorities for the first two rounds is depth in the Secondary and in the Wide Recieving corps.
Originally posted by goodthings19:
In no particular order our top priorities for the first two rounds is depth in the Secondary and in the Wide Recieving corps.
I disagree. Your first rounder needs to be a guy who can come right in and probably start year one, but definately start year two. You generally don't look for depth in the firat two rounds.
My priorities for the first 3 rounds are people who will lead to the offense scoring the maximum amount of points possible and depth either at FS or OLB.


1-Fleener
2-Streeter or Hill
3-FS/OLB or even Kendall Reyes for DL rotation.
Biggest Needs:

RG, CB, WR, S and OLB

That could change with starters at those spots free agents.
Mark LeGree is probably much better than almost all S in this draft and he is already on the 49ers PS...Gworge Ilota is a huge physical presence in the secondary. He would be great addition to the 49er secondary
[ Edited by Orlando49erfan on Jan 29, 2012 at 5:05 PM ]
Top priorities in this draft for the 49ers are CB WR OG
The secondary gives up too many big plays
Snyder did great for us but he is best as a backup for any position in the OL not as a starter
WR has been a problem for how long now?
Well I think Rogers walks and we sign a top FA WR. (Bowe or Colston)

Smith, Morgan will re-sign

Goldson gets the tag

Brooks and Snyder can go either way but they are the two easiest positions to replace.

In the first two rounds we need to get players who can contribute right away. WR for sure. CB, OLB and OG will be given consideration if Rogers, Brooks and Snyder leave.
Both picks need to be used on the offense IMO. Only way that changes is if we lose Ahmad Brooks, then maybe we spend one of those picks on an OLB. I think Rogers will re-sign and Goldson will be franchised, so the secondary should be okay.

1- Coby Fleener TE Stanford
2- Rueben Randle WR LSU
[ Edited by SofaKing on Jan 29, 2012 at 6:04 PM ]
Originally posted by SofaKing:
Both picks need to be used on the offense IMO. Only way that changes is if we lose Ahmad Brooks, then maybe we spend one of those picks on an OLB. I think Rogers will re-sign and Goldson will be franchised, so the secondary should be okay.

1- Coby Fleener TE Stanford
2- Rueben Randle WR LSU

I just don't think TE was our weakest link. In fact it was a strength for us. I think it would be unwise to use any of our 1st 3 (at least first 3) on anything other than a real nead. TE isn't a need for us. Again, our most glaring needs are WR and FS/CB
[ Edited by 9ersLiferInChicago on Jan 29, 2012 at 6:26 PM ]
BPA
Originally posted by SteveYoung:
Well I think Rogers walks and we sign a top FA WR. (Bowe or Colston)

Smith, Morgan will re-sign

Goldson gets the tag

Brooks and Snyder can go either way but they are the two easiest positions to replace.

In the first two rounds we need to get players who can contribute right away. WR for sure. CB, OLB and OG will be given consideration if Rogers, Brooks and Snyder leave.

Disagree about Brooks. Effective edge rushers who also play tough against the run and pursue backside are the 2nd toughest position to find, after franchise QB.


Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
Originally posted by SofaKing:
Both picks need to be used on the offense IMO. Only way that changes is if we lose Ahmad Brooks, then maybe we spend one of those picks on an OLB. I think Rogers will re-sign and Goldson will be franchised, so the secondary should be okay.

1- Coby Fleener TE Stanford
2- Rueben Randle WR LSU

I just don't think TE was our weakest link. In fact it was a strength for us. I think it would be unwise to use any of our 1st 3 (at least first 3) on anything other than a real nead. TE isn't a need for us. Again, our most glaring needs are WR and FS/CB

Think of Fleener as a down-field and redzone threat. He runs his routes, adjusts to the ball, and catches like a WR. At 6'6, possibly running a 4.5-4.6, he is probably a better big WR than whatever else we would get at the spot. Imagine him being used more like a Jimmy Graham or Aaron Hernandez than a classic TE. He was used frequently as a WR at Stanford, too. If we are still looking for that burner, Joe Adams should be available at the end of the second, and he could still be there for us at the end of the third, even though he destroyed the Senior Bowl today. If Adams is gone at 62, Streeter has loads of speed to go with his height (not real sure about his hands), and he would have time to develop if the Niners already have Fleener on board. There are several other little speedy dudes (Rainey is having a tough time showing that he can convert to WR, but he is nasty w/screens, swings, and underneath routes) that can be picked up later on.
So, to summarize this long-winded post, I wouldn't feel great about going out and getting any tight end in the first, but Fleener offers more than that.
Originally posted by WRATHman44:
Disagree about Brooks. Effective edge rushers who also play tough against the run and pursue backside are the 2nd toughest position to find, after franchise QB.



Think of Fleener as a down-field and redzone threat. He runs his routes, adjusts to the ball, and catches like a WR. At 6'6, possibly running a 4.5-4.6, he is probably a better big WR than whatever else we would get at the spot. Imagine him being used more like a Jimmy Graham or Aaron Hernandez than a classic TE. He was used frequently as a WR at Stanford, too. If we are still looking for that burner, Joe Adams should be available at the end of the second, and he could still be there for us at the end of the third, even though he destroyed the Senior Bowl today. If Adams is gone at 62, Streeter has loads of speed to go with his height (not real sure about his hands), and he would have time to develop if the Niners already have Fleener on board. There are several other little speedy dudes (Rainey is having a tough time showing that he can convert to WR, but he is nasty w/screens, swings, and underneath routes) that can be picked up later on.
So, to summarize this long-winded post, I wouldn't feel great about going out and getting any tight end in the first, but Fleener offers more than that.
Ok, cool. Lets make Fleener a WR (but 4.6 is too slow). But he would be too high to take in the first. So I still say take a WR in the 1st. That position was such a glaring need that we can ill-afford not to take one in the first. Nothing against Fleener, but we have enough TE's. If we take a TE anywhere in this draft I have to think the coaching staff looks to convert him to WR.
Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
Originally posted by WRATHman44:
Disagree about Brooks. Effective edge rushers who also play tough against the run and pursue backside are the 2nd toughest position to find, after franchise QB.



Think of Fleener as a down-field and redzone threat. He runs his routes, adjusts to the ball, and catches like a WR. At 6'6, possibly running a 4.5-4.6, he is probably a better big WR than whatever else we would get at the spot. Imagine him being used more like a Jimmy Graham or Aaron Hernandez than a classic TE. He was used frequently as a WR at Stanford, too. If we are still looking for that burner, Joe Adams should be available at the end of the second, and he could still be there for us at the end of the third, even though he destroyed the Senior Bowl today. If Adams is gone at 62, Streeter has loads of speed to go with his height (not real sure about his hands), and he would have time to develop if the Niners already have Fleener on board. There are several other little speedy dudes (Rainey is having a tough time showing that he can convert to WR, but he is nasty w/screens, swings, and underneath routes) that can be picked up later on.
So, to summarize this long-winded post, I wouldn't feel great about going out and getting any tight end in the first, but Fleener offers more than that.
Ok, cool. Lets make Fleener a WR (but 4.6 is too slow). But he would be too high to take in the first. So I still say take a WR in the 1st. That position was such a glaring need that we can ill-afford not to take one in the first. Nothing against Fleener, but we have enough TE's. If we take a TE anywhere in this draft I have to think the coaching staff looks to convert him to WR.
I think we need playmakers wherever we can find them Fleener already knows Harbaugh's system, has good hands, and would be a matchup nightmare because of his size. Aside from VD and Gore(maybe Crabtree) we're lacking playmakers. Fleener was a big weapon for Stanford look at what VD does for us, all having Fleener would do is help Davis because the opposing defenses won't be able to put double coverage on both of them. Delanie Walker is good but no one will mistake him for an elite TE or playmaker, he's a good blocker but he's inconsistent when he's passed the ball. I think Fleener could block but also become the playmaker if VD is getting covered whereas Walker isn't that type of player, he would be a consistent threat to take it to the end zone like VD. Another advantage Fleener has over Walker is his size he would automatically create problems alone for that.
...