There are 52 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

9ersLiferInChicago updated Mock Draft - Post Combine

Originally posted by ninerlifer:
Lets not give up on Kilgore who we drafted last year, who impressed in TC this year, for the ones that want to go high and draft a OG.

This. I'm not on board with taking a WR or G in the 1st. We should go with BPA and/or Fleener if he is there. It just makes too much sense.
Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
[Highlighted]
So I guess Hill can't catch a cold. I Like Fleener. For us, the TE position is a luxury pick. We just don't need one - not in the first. Its not just Hills speed. Blocking. Strength. Hands. And yes, speed. Doug Martin is no Stephen Hill. It amazes me how so many are satisfied with just "filling the bill" when
it comes to WR (a real need) but seem to want to draft the Cadillac of TE's, a position we don't need and where we are already strong. Amazing.

You can stop banging your head against that wall. There are a lot of intelligent people that watch a lot of football that realize that inproving a passing game can be done in different ways. Foe decades, you needed special outside threats to make the passing game go. Then, the rules changed and you basicaaly need to let the guy catch the ball before you hit him. That creates an advantage in putting the ball up to tall targets who can go up for it safely now. Belichek recognized this quickly and got two brand new tight ends who tore up the league without any outside threat. The only other major contributer to the passing game was Welker, who has never been an outside threat. Throws to TEs are the easiest downfield throws to make, since they naturally box-out their position with sheer size, and they are normally in between the numbers, creating a more advantageous angle of delivery (easier throw). When that TE is tall and catches with his hands, that advantage is extended (and amplified, due to the new rules). Having two means that one is open. It also forces the defense to play honest against run and pass, which means they are limited in their ability to specifically play call or adjust personnel against either of the two. An athletic, tall TE with dependable hands and an aggresive tendency to snatch the ball makes that possible. Delanie, for all he does, is not that guy. I am a fan of Fleener at the pick because of his talents, intelligence, and familiarity, and because the TE class is limited, and it may be in every subsequent draft, due to the evolution of the college game. I am also a fan of Hill or Wright at the pick, because I find nothing wrong with the conventional passing approach. I just think it is narrow-minded and short sighted to believe that there is only one way to improve a passing game. Referencing Belichek again, everyone worried about their offence when Moss walked. He had a chance to bring in new WRs, and he got minor role players, and it worked out fine.
The "closed minded" thing is really getting old. If you don't agree that's fine. But there is a concept called "disagree". Use it, its free. I know its a hard concept for some people to grasp at first. But give it a shot. You'll see it won't hurt you one bit. You might even like it and come to use it yourself.
[ Edited by 9ersLiferInChicago on Mar 2, 2012 at 8:28 PM ]
Originally posted by WRATHman44:
You can stop banging your head against that wall. There are a lot of intelligent people that watch a lot of football that realize that inproving a passing game can be done in different ways. Foe decades, you needed special outside threats to make the passing game go. Then, the rules changed and you basicaaly need to let the guy catch the ball before you hit him. That creates an advantage in putting the ball up to tall targets who can go up for it safely now. Belichek recognized this quickly and got two brand new tight ends who tore up the league without any outside threat. The only other major contributer to the passing game was Welker, who has never been an outside threat. Throws to TEs are the easiest downfield throws to make, since they naturally box-out their position with sheer size, and they are normally in between the numbers, creating a more advantageous angle of delivery (easier throw). When that TE is tall and catches with his hands, that advantage is extended (and amplified, due to the new rules). Having two means that one is open. It also forces the defense to play honest against run and pass, which means they are limited in their ability to specifically play call or adjust personnel against either of the two. An athletic, tall TE with dependable hands and an aggresive tendency to snatch the ball makes that possible. Delanie, for all he does, is not that guy. I am a fan of Fleener at the pick because of his talents, intelligence, and familiarity, and because the TE class is limited, and it may be in every subsequent draft, due to the evolution of the college game. I am also a fan of Hill or Wright at the pick, because I find nothing wrong with the conventional passing approach. I just think it is narrow-minded and short sighted to believe that there is only one way to improve a passing game. Referencing Belichek again, everyone worried about their offence when Moss walked. He had a chance to bring in new WRs, and he got minor role players, and it worked out fine.

You know, I have been around football my whole life. Grew up playing it and football is how I make my living, not the NFL, I admit though. And I've been around a lot of men with a wealth of football knowledge. I've even had the opportunity a few times to kick around a little strategary with some of the smartest men in football. I'd be lying if I said I agreed with everything they said or vise versa. But I was never called closed minded because of it. Now I know this is a fan forum, and I'm sure there are a few true NFL guys lurking around here with inconspicuous screen names. But mostly we're fans with opinions and a little spare time to post them. True, there are a lot of intelligent men who believe – and rightly – that the passing game can succeed in a lot of different ways. But there are equally intelligent men who believe it would be abysmally naïve to think that after just a year or so of the TE resurgent that the NFL game itself is poised to demote the importance of the NFL WR. Yes, the rules of the NFL favors the offense (and shamefully I might add), which is precisely why NFL receivers have gotten much bigger, faster, and more importantly, much more physical at the line of scrimmage and short yardage situations. Today's WR's are yesterday's TE's. Now, the game of football is a game of evolution, but it has its constants no matter what level you play it on. And one of those constants is that if your TE(s) are your main offensive weapon in the passing game, either by design (NO) or lack of WR production (SF & NE), at some point you will be exposed. You, and others who want Fleener in the first, often mention Belichek, NE, and NO as proof that this TE takeover of the NFL passing game is underway. Correct me if I'm wrong but did not NE lose the SB? Did not NO get beat by us? Didn't we ourselves get beat by a team with better WR's? And, oh yeah, did not the same team that beat us and NE win the SB? I'm sorry, but I hope to God that our beloved 49ers aren't going to use 2011 playoff losers as models of success for 2012. Bottom line, this team needs WR's, and not a just-good-enough guys either – if no one has noticed we have enough of those on our roster as it is. And I'm getting damned tired of getting called closed mined simply because there's a different viewpoint. Its juvenile.
Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
You know, I have been around football my whole life. Grew up playing it and football is how I make my living, not the NFL, I admit though. And I've been around a lot of men with a wealth of football knowledge. I've even had the opportunity a few times to kick around a little strategary with some of the smartest men in football. I'd be lying if I said I agreed with everything they said or vise versa. But I was never called closed minded because of it. Now I know this is a fan forum, and I'm sure there are a few true NFL guys lurking around here with inconspicuous screen names. But mostly we're fans with opinions and a little spare time to post them. True, there are a lot of intelligent men who believe – and rightly – that the passing game can succeed in a lot of different ways. But there are equally intelligent men who believe it would be abysmally naïve to think that after just a year or so of the TE resurgent that the NFL game itself is poised to demote the importance of the NFL WR. Yes, the rules of the NFL favors the offense (and shamefully I might add), which is precisely why NFL receivers have gotten much bigger, faster, and more importantly, much more physical at the line of scrimmage and short yardage situations. Today's WR's are yesterday's TE's. Now, the game of football is a game of evolution, but it has its constants no matter what level you play it on. And one of those constants is that if your TE(s) are your main offensive weapon in the passing game, either by design (NO) or lack of WR production (SF & NE), at some point you will be exposed. You, and others who want Fleener in the first, often mention Belichek, NE, and NO as proof that this TE takeover of the NFL passing game is underway. Correct me if I'm wrong but did not NE lose the SB? Did not NO get beat by us? Didn't we ourselves get beat by a team with better WR's? And, oh yeah, did not the same team that beat us and NE win the SB? I'm sorry, but I hope to God that our beloved 49ers aren't going to use 2011 playoff losers as models of success for 2012. Bottom line, this team needs WR's, and not a just-good-enough guys either – if no one has noticed we have enough of those on our roster as it is. And I'm getting damned tired of getting called closed mined simply because there's a different viewpoint. Its juvenile.

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't one of New England's elite tight ends playing at 60% and was a non factor due to the injury?
Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:
verenon davis calvin johnson to name 2

Being a Biletnikoff winner generally disqualifies you as a workout warrior.
Originally posted by tjd808185:
Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't one of New England's elite tight ends playing at 60% and was a non factor due to the injury?
Yep. You are not wrong there my friend.

But that fact proves another thing: had NE had better WR options they would not have had to rely on a hobbled TE and just might have fared a tad bit better against NY.
  • Kolohe
  • Hall of Fame
  • Posts: 31,116
Picks 1-5....awesome!!!! Really doubt LaMichael James will be there in the 3rd though, its pretty much a no brainer if he is. The last two picks, I can't say that I know them.
Originally posted by Kolohe:
Picks 1-5....awesome!!!! Really doubt LaMichael James will be there in the 3rd though, its pretty much a no brainer if he is. The last two picks, I can't say that I know them.
I'd put our chances at 50-50 we can get him in the 3rd. Whatever team drafts him is going to want him to gain at least 10lbs. But if he's not available I still say we get a RB here. Ronnie Hillman will be good value here. At 5'9 200lbs he is a very good "one cut" runner. He hits the hole very good and often runs between the tackles. Has a lot of Gore in him in that he is a tough runner, so I'd like to see him put on about 10lbs as well. His blocking is ok. Not at all shy about blocking but needs work on his technique. Tank Carder is one of those I can see Baalke taking a chance on here. He has a very high motor, plays the game with open aggressiveness and tackles with meanness, tackles with textbook technique, and has high character. At 6-4 338 Wilkins is a monster of a OG. Good run blocker but will have to get better at pass blocking. I admit he will be a project but he is a 7th rounder.

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
Originally posted by tjd808185:
Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't one of New England's elite tight ends playing at 60% and was a non factor due to the injury?
Yep. You are not wrong there my friend.

But that fact proves another thing: had NE had better WR options they would not have had to rely on a hobbled TE and just might have fared a tad bit better against NY.

Conversely, If we had another threat at tight end, we would not have been limited by WRs that could not get open.


Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
You know, I have been around football my whole life. Grew up playing it and football is how I make my living, not the NFL, I admit though. And I've been around a lot of men with a wealth of football knowledge. I've even had the opportunity a few times to kick around a little strategary with some of the smartest men in football. I'd be lying if I said I agreed with everything they said or vise versa. But I was never called closed minded because of it. Now I know this is a fan forum, and I'm sure there are a few true NFL guys lurking around here with inconspicuous screen names. But mostly we're fans with opinions and a little spare time to post them. True, there are a lot of intelligent men who believe – and rightly – that the passing game can succeed in a lot of different ways. But there are equally intelligent men who believe it would be abysmally naïve to think that after just a year or so of the TE resurgent that the NFL game itself is poised to demote the importance of the NFL WR. Yes, the rules of the NFL favors the offense (and shamefully I might add), which is precisely why NFL receivers have gotten much bigger, faster, and more importantly, much more physical at the line of scrimmage and short yardage situations. Today's WR's are yesterday's TE's. Now, the game of football is a game of evolution, but it has its constants no matter what level you play it on. And one of those constants is that if your TE(s) are your main offensive weapon in the passing game, either by design (NO) or lack of WR production (SF & NE), at some point you will be exposed. You, and others who want Fleener in the first, often mention Belichek, NE, and NO as proof that this TE takeover of the NFL passing game is underway. Correct me if I'm wrong but did not NE lose the SB? Did not NO get beat by us? Didn't we ourselves get beat by a team with better WR's? And, oh yeah, did not the same team that beat us and NE win the SB? I'm sorry, but I hope to God that our beloved 49ers aren't going to use 2011 playoff losers as models of success for 2012. Bottom line, this team needs WR's, and not a just-good-enough guys either – if no one has noticed we have enough of those on our roster as it is. And I'm getting damned tired of getting called closed mined simply because there's a different viewpoint. Its juvenile.

Submitting your resume doesn't make you right. Just because people don't toot their own horn doesn't mean they don't know what they are talking about. I'm pretty comfortable w/my base of football knowledge, experience, and contemporaries. Mike Singletary could state that he was a star player and head coach at the highest level, and that he has shared ideas with the best minds in football. That doesn't make anything he said or implemented on the offensive side of the field logical or effective.

So we should model ourselves after the Giants because they happened to win this year? I think this is a weak argument. This would require us to give up on the running game, find an elite QB and make him carry every drive of every game, win or lose, and get incredibly lucky with official rulings and loose ball bounces. None of those propositions are ever certainties, or even high proababilities. I also believe that the Giants would jump at the chance to have Vernon or draft Fleener, as their redzone offense often runs through a lesser TE.

Those playoff losers have also won Superbowls lately, their average season has been better than that of NY, and both of their offenses are MUCH more impressive than the Giants'.

NE lost because their best receiving threat was hurt. That would happen to most offenses. Do you honestly think we would have progressed in the playoffs w/out Vernon? Do you think the giants would have beat us w/out Cruz killing Rogers in the first half?

As far as NO, the pass rush was the main story, and we were uniquely capable of covering Graham because we have the most athletic LB in the world. He was still toasted for to huge plays in the game.
[ Edited by WRATHman44 on Mar 3, 2012 at 8:24 AM ]
Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:
Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:
So are you basing your first round pick exclusively on workout numbers? Can you think of many examples where that has worked out well?

No, I am not going off combine numbers, but it did push it over the top for me. I am still big on Sanu, but I think Hill would present more problems for the defense than can Sanu in my mind.

Then why DO you like Hill? I only ask because I'm not sure that I've seen anything outside of workout numbers that suggest he's a first rounder


Better take a look at his avg. yards per catch bro. On limited opportunities
Originally posted by WRATHman44:
Conversely, If we had another threat at tight end, we would not have been limited by WRs that could not get open.



Submitting your resume doesn't make you right. Just because people don't toot their own horn doesn't mean they don't know what they are talking about. I'm pretty comfortable w/my base of football knowledge, experience, and contemporaries. Mike Singletary could state that he was a star player and head coach at the highest level, and that he has shared ideas with the best minds in football. That doesn't make anything he said or implemented on the offensive side of the field logical or effective.

So we should model ourselves after the Giants because they happened to win this year? I think this is a weak argument. This would require us to give up on the running game, find an elite QB and make him carry every drive of every game, win or lose, and get incredibly lucky with official rulings and loose ball bounces. None of those propositions are ever certainties, or even high proababilities. I also believe that the Giants would jump at the chance to have Vernon or draft Fleener, as their redzone offense often runs through a lesser TE.

Those playoff losers have also won Superbowls lately, their average season has been better than that of NY, and both of their offenses are MUCH more impressive than the Giants'.

NE lost because their best receiving threat was hurt. That would happen to most offenses. Do you honestly think we would have progressed in the playoffs w/out Vernon? Do you think the giants would have beat us w/out Cruz killing Rogers in the first half?

As far as NO, the pass rush was the main story, and we were uniquely capable of covering Graham because we have the most athletic LB in the world. He was still toasted for to huge plays in the game.
Come now, I know I didn't say that we should be like the Giants. Yes, those teams have won recent SB's, but they won with good WR's. It was only the 2011 season that they put so much emphases on the TE, and thats because they had to adapt into it, especially NE. I don't think for a minute that we would have gotten to the playoffs without V. Davis; please don't read too deep into my opposition of a TE in the 1st. But have we had better production out of our WR's we would not have lost to NY either. And thats my position. The last highlight, BTW, go right into why I think we need WR's.
[ Edited by 9ersLiferInChicago on Mar 4, 2012 at 4:39 PM ]
I saw an interview with him at the start of the school year, and he was asked what needed to be worked on. He said getting the playbook down and building chemistry with the QB, of course. And he was asked what he personally needed to work on, he quickly said his route running. He said it had been bad the years before, and he knew he had to improve that. I like that, kid sees his weakness and is humble enough to admit it.
This draft is heavy with recievers fleener is a great option at 30. Besides with HILLS speed Oakland will grab him.
Originally posted by RDB4216:
I saw an interview with him at the start of the school year, and he was asked what needed to be worked on. He said getting the playbook down and building chemistry with the QB, of course. And he was asked what he personally needed to work on, he quickly said his route running. He said it had been bad the years before, and he knew he had to improve that. I like that, kid sees his weakness and is humble enough to admit it.
Who is the "he" you are referring to?