Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
We need better production out of the passing game, and that production needs to come from the WR position. That's my point. NE lost because they had to rely on a hurt TE. Why? BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T HAVE A TRUE WR THREAT TO GO TO!! Look, I didn't create this thread to - again - get into the weeds with a Fleener-in-the-1st crowd. I've come to conclude that that's lost time I won't get back. If you think the WR position is not important then that's your right to think it, I disagree but it's your right. If you want to trade out of the first if your boy Fleener isn't there then that's your opinion, bless your heart. If you think we can build on last year with this crop of WR's or a bunch of second tier just-good-enough WR's then that's your business. I for one don't. I think we need to get a WR in the first because it's our biggest hole. I happen to think this team is but a piece or two away from the SB, so trading down for picks is unnecessary. I happen to think the WR position is still important in this league and has yet to be surpassed by the TE. I happen to think the 1st round is when you draft for were you need starters, not luxury.
Dude, there's absolutely no need to take such a superior stance or to butcher my argument to suit your needs. "Getting in the weeds with the Fleener-in-the-1st crowd" is a risk you take when you choose to post a mock. I also said, in the post that you quoted, that I would be just as happy with Hill or Wright at #30 as I would with Fleener, as I believe they are all game-changing playmakers in the passing game (It has been well documented that Fleener has split out wide and run the three-step route tree very succesfully, btw). I think #30 is too early for Randle (lankier, less sudden Crabtree), Sanu (Delanie walker w/more height and better hands, but less speed, weight, and route running precision), or Jeffery (immense talent, but scary risk to go fat kid once he gets paid). There are many
good receivers that would still be left, but I think it would be a waste to take a guy at 30 that we could probably get at 62. You want to take a WR at #30, no matter what? That's your perogative. That reasoning got us Rashaun Woods. That reasoning (need over BPA in the 1st) is why the Cardinals have Levi Brown instead of Adrian Peterson. That reasoning got Matt Millen a job as a commentator. If Baalke decides that one of those guys is worth the pick at 30, I will be surprised and disappointed, but I will trust him. I would prefer to trade back if Hill, Wright, and Fleener are ALL gone
. I never reccomended taking Fleener instead of a WR, just instead of reaching for one at 30. That can't be as far-fetched or difficult to understand as you are making it seem. But, whatever; keep talking to me like I'm a child because because I haven't bought into your rigidly simplistic views on the draft and offense.