Hill and ? or Fleener and ?

I don't get why Hill has been bumped up to the 1st round. I am not saying that he isn't worthy of a good pick, but weeks ago, he was talked about in the 2nd or 3rd round. He runs super fast at the combine and that boosts him into the 1st round??? I know people are in love with speed, but we already knew this stuff about him. He's fast, he blocks good, etc...
I actually like the guy but in the beginning it was Blackmon #1 and then Wright for sure #2. Then it was Jeffery and Floyd. Wright has a slower time at the combine and now he is a "slow smurf"????
I like the combine, but the over-analyzing is CRAP! Football players all have to run in pads when they play and no one is going to get off the line of scrimmage in a sprinter's stance. Hill looks good, but is resume is soooo small. If we took him I would be fine with the pick. I just think it's funny how he gets talked about being the best wr now.

I like Fleener and Hill. But for me, there is nothing to worry about with Fleener... no Question marks??? You now exactly what you are going to get with him. With Hill there is tremendous upside but if he doesn't workout, then we will be right back here next year wondering what super fast wr we want to draft.

Originally posted by WRATHman44:
I said I wasn't gonna look it up and post it here; I never said I didn't watch them. Gailey's offensive scheme has always been funky. Dude, Chan Gaily doesn't even run a pro offense in the pros. Watch a Bills game sometime. Just because the guy coaches in the NFL (for a joke organization), it doesn't make him a sophisticated offensive coach. They hired him because he had exciting numbers, not complex or impressive ideas. When he first came to the Bills, he wanted a mobile QB so the could run the zone-read scheme, for crying out loud! He runs a fun-to-watch, college-type spread scheme for the passing game, and his pro receivers STILL don't run the complete route tree. I have yet to see any evidence of sight adjustments in their route progressions (like when a frontside 3 combination converts to a 7 combo vs cover 2), so yeah, I'd be pretty comfortable in saying that if his pro receivers aren't doing it, his college WRs weren't, either.

Your second paragraph makes it obvious that we have wildly different definitions of "polished." I take polished to mean that a receiver has refined his game, disciplined his routes, and learned to read coverages and convert routes on the fly. Based on your evidence, polished means the same thing as accomplished. Those are completely different viewpoints, and I will leave you to yours. There doesn't seem to be any point in debating this much more, as we are clearly not even speaking the same language. Good day.


and go Niners

The guy succeeded in the NFL with quarterbacks like Jay Fieldler, Kordell Stewart, Neil O' Donnell, and Mike Tomzack. Made the playoffs as OC/HC for 6 straight years with 3 different teams. I'm going to state he's better offensive mind than you're giving him credit for.

Here's my actual point btw. I don't care how you classify my view of polished but Gailey's offense is heck of alot closer to a pro offense then Paul Johnson's. If Gailey's offense is 85% pro well that's a good 45% more of a pro passing attack than Paul Johnson's. If I pull up Hill's scouting report you better believe route running is going to be listed as a concern on every single one of them.

Calvin Johnson entered the draft as the #1 rated person on pretty much everyone's board before he blew it up at the combine. He wasn't viewed as a work in progress or a workout warrior like Hill is by anyone. Sorry, it's just not the case.

You want me to talk about route trees which you obviously know a heck of alot more than I do all I'm looking for is any proof that Calvin wasn't polished and you've yet to come up with anything other hypothetically breaking down routes. I know what your definition of a good route runner is but you've to let to put up anything showing that Calvin wasn't that. But go ahead keep talking about the 3 combination converting to the 7 on a cover 2. I'm just guessing but that's going to be hard to find on Youtube.

Originally posted by NinerBuff:

Originally posted by aman49:

Fleener isn't getting drafted by us. Frankly it's a huge waste of time to discuss it.

I agree. I think he would be a reach at our pick, and TE is far from our most pressing need. At 30, we are perfectly situated for a RG, WR, or CB.

Taking a RG in the 1st would be something of a surprise. I suppose BPA could legitimately cause it to happen but I think the odds are heavily against it.

Originally posted by English:
Taking a RG in the 1st would be something of a surprise. I suppose BPA could legitimately cause it to happen but I think the odds are heavily against it.

i dont see a scenario that lkonz or glenn fall to us (decastro definitely wont)

all other RG would be raches

Originally posted by tjd808185:

The guy succeeded in the NFL with quarterbacks like Jay Fieldler, Kordell Stewart, Neil O' Donnell, and Mike Tomzack. Made the playoffs as OC/HC for 6 straight years with 3 different teams. I'm going to state he's better offensive mind than you're giving him credit for.

Here's my actual point btw. I don't care how you classify my view of polished but Gailey's offense is heck of alot closer to a pro offense then Paul Johnson's. If Gailey's offense is 85% pro well that's a good 45% more of a pro passing attack than Paul Johnson's. If I pull up Hill's scouting report you better believe route running is going to be listed as a concern on every single one of them.

Calvin Johnson entered the draft as the #1 rated person on pretty much everyone's board before he blew it up at the combine. He wasn't viewed as a work in progress or a workout warrior like Hill is by anyone. Sorry, it's just not the case.

You want me to talk about route trees which you obviously know a heck of alot more than I do all I'm looking for is any proof that Calvin wasn't polished and you've yet to come up with anything other hypothetically breaking down routes. I know what your definition of a good route runner is but you've to let to put up anything showing that Calvin wasn't that. But go ahead keep talking about the 3 combination converting to the 7 on a cover 2. I'm just guessing but that's going to be hard to find on Youtube.

Re: Chan Gailey's offense. I never said it didn't produce, in fact I said it had exciting numbers. What I said was that it did not have the complexity or demand the precision of a typical NFL offense. The list of QBs does not impress me, as Spread schemes are notorious for getting great stats out of mediocre QBs. You are right, it is extremely tough to find sight adjustments on YouTube, since most highlight films do not show the coverage scheme. I did, however, find some draft analysis on CJ that supports my point. There were not many available from 2007, and you would be surprised how many evaluators did not discuss route-running as either a positive or a negative. The two I included are well-respected evaluators, outinely break down technical play, and do discuss route-running.

From Matt Miller at New Era Scouting Comparing Alshon Jeffery and CJ (both when they entered the draft) . Of course, megatron dominates the overall analysis, but he came up short in this particular area:

Route-Running

Jeffery: 9.3 | Johnson: 8.7

Johnson was used on a number of screen plays and bubble routes designed to get him the ball as fast as possible, and to allow him to work in space. As far as being a true technician in route-running, Johnson was more of an unfinished product when he entered the NFL. Of course, having massive size and speed definitely helped mask some weaknesses here. A common knock on Johnson coming out of Georgia Tech was that he couldn't, or wouldn't, run over the middle. This was something that plagued his pre-draft visits and workouts.

Jeffery is used as more of an all-around receiver. He will run more deep routes than anything and works particularly well on comeback routes. Jeffery also works in a more complex passing system under Steve Spurrier, making him more NFL-ready to devour a playbook and passing tree. Jeffery does a great job setting up cornerbacks. See his performance against potential Top 10 draft prospect Dre Kirkpatrick of Alabama for examples where Jeffery torched him for two touchdowns.


From Rob Rang at CBS Sports:

Negatives: Has good overall body control, but sometimes does not play up to his timed speed … Even though he has good leaping ability, his timing is sometimes off, as he doesn't win as many jump ball battles as you would expect from a player of his size and arm extension … Demonstrates good toughness battling for the ball, but he has also left quite a few passes on the field, perhaps due to poor passing precision from the quarterback position, but he has caught only 127 of 271 passes thrown to him … For a player over 6:04 and with his jumping skills (45 inches) along with his long reach, it is hard to imagine the smaller cornerbacks having success in batting away 21 of those passes thrown to him the last two-plus years … Better down field than on deep routes, as he tends to lose sight of the ball over his head … Has some hip stiffness when trying to change direction and this will sometimes prevent him from making sharp cuts (takes wasted steps) … Needs to show better hip sink on his cuts … Tends to lose concentration working in a crowd, leading to several missed opportunities (hears defender's footsteps) … Gets his feet down properly when working along the side-lines, but must be more alert to the quarterback scramble … Despite his strength, he will struggle and get frustrated by a physical jam.


Underlined text is specific to route-running, while the italicized just seemed interesting, because it was news to me. I'm not trying to kill the guy, as I think he was and is an absolute stud. I would have taken him top 3 if we could have. I just think his game was rough coming out of college. HUGELY productive and amazing to watch, mind you, just rough.

Originally posted by WRATHman44:
Re: Chan Gailey's offense. I never said it didn't produce, in fact I said it had exciting numbers. What I said was that it did not have the complexity or demand the precision of a typical NFL offense. The list of QBs does not impress me, as Spread schemes are notorious for getting great stats out of mediocre QBs. You are right, it is extremely tough to find sight adjustments on YouTube, since most highlight films do not show the coverage scheme. I did, however, find some draft analysis on CJ that supports my point. There were not many available from 2007, and you would be surprised how many evaluators did not discuss route-running as either a positive or a negative. The two I included are well-respected evaluators, outinely break down technical play, and do discuss route-running.

From Matt Miller at New Era Scouting Comparing Alshon Jeffery and CJ (both when they entered the draft) . Of course, megatron dominates the overall analysis, but he came up short in this particular area:

Route-Running

Jeffery: 9.3 | Johnson: 8.7

Johnson was used on a number of screen plays and bubble routes designed to get him the ball as fast as possible, and to allow him to work in space. As far as being a true technician in route-running, Johnson was more of an unfinished product when he entered the NFL. Of course, having massive size and speed definitely helped mask some weaknesses here. A common knock on Johnson coming out of Georgia Tech was that he couldn't, or wouldn't, run over the middle. This was something that plagued his pre-draft visits and workouts.

Jeffery is used as more of an all-around receiver. He will run more deep routes than anything and works particularly well on comeback routes. Jeffery also works in a more complex passing system under Steve Spurrier, making him more NFL-ready to devour a playbook and passing tree. Jeffery does a great job setting up cornerbacks. See his performance against potential Top 10 draft prospect Dre Kirkpatrick of Alabama for examples where Jeffery torched him for two touchdowns.


From Rob Rang at CBS Sports:

Negatives: Has good overall body control, but sometimes does not play up to his timed speed … Even though he has good leaping ability, his timing is sometimes off, as he doesn't win as many jump ball battles as you would expect from a player of his size and arm extension … Demonstrates good toughness battling for the ball, but he has also left quite a few passes on the field, perhaps due to poor passing precision from the quarterback position, but he has caught only 127 of 271 passes thrown to him … For a player over 6:04 and with his jumping skills (45 inches) along with his long reach, it is hard to imagine the smaller cornerbacks having success in batting away 21 of those passes thrown to him the last two-plus years … Better down field than on deep routes, as he tends to lose sight of the ball over his head … Has some hip stiffness when trying to change direction and this will sometimes prevent him from making sharp cuts (takes wasted steps) … Needs to show better hip sink on his cuts … Tends to lose concentration working in a crowd, leading to several missed opportunities (hears defender's footsteps) … Gets his feet down properly when working along the side-lines, but must be more alert to the quarterback scramble … Despite his strength, he will struggle and get frustrated by a physical jam.


Underlined text is specific to route-running, while the italicized just seemed interesting, because it was news to me. I'm not trying to kill the guy, as I think he was and is an absolute stud. I would have taken him top 3 if we could have. I just think his game was rough coming out of college. HUGELY productive and amazing to watch, mind you, just rough.

I think both of those reports illistrate your point very well. The 1st one does state that Johnson was used primarily on screens and deep passes and didn't work the middle of the field much either.

Like you said it's very hard finding scouting reports from back then and alot of my opinion was based off the jock fest that I remember from this site from 07.

Originally posted by tjd808185:
I think both of those reports illistrate your point very well. The 1st one does state that Johnson was used primarily on screens and deep passes and didn't work the middle of the field much either.

Like you said it's very hard finding scouting reports from back then and alot of my opinion was based off the jock fest that I remember from this site from 07.

I think the Jock-fest was absolutely warranted. He was an insane prospect, based on production and talent. My initial point was that his game was not significantly more refined and developed than Hill's, but he had significantly more opportunities to perform. There was still some degree of risk/projection when it came to assessing CJ's future as a do-everything receiver, een though he was a can't-miss deep threat. I think Hill's limited production is the only thing giving us any shot at him. I would be very happy with Hill or Fleener at #30, and I would be cool w/trading out of that pick if both wee already gone.

Originally posted by WRATHman44:
I think the Jock-fest was absolutely warranted. He was an insane prospect, based on production and talent. My initial point was that his game was not significantly more refined and developed than Hill's, but he had significantly more opportunities to perform. There was still some degree of risk/projection when it came to assessing CJ's future as a do-everything receiver, een though he was a can't-miss deep threat. I think Hill's limited production is the only thing giving us any shot at him. I would be very happy with Hill or Fleener at #30, and I would be cool w/trading out of that pick if both wee already gone.

For what's I worth I've read that Hill is actually seen as a better route runner than Demarious Thomas coming out of college. I have no problem with taking him I just din't think Calvin is fair example to use for him.

Depends on FA. If we pick up Meechum or someone better then I'd go with Fellener and Quick.
If we don't get a WR in FA then Fleener or Green & Hill.

Gut feeling tells me we're gonna trade up in the second to get a WR. -Baalke usually trades up with our 4th pick to do this (in either the first or second round), then gets the 4th pick back on the second day of the draft (trading next years 4th), and works a deal on day three trading a 5th or 6th (or both) to get that 4th pick back the following year.

Originally posted by SnakePlissken:
Gut feeling tells me we're gonna trade up in the second to get a WR. -Baalke usually trades up with our 4th pick to do this (in either the first or second round), then gets the 4th pick back on the second day of the draft (trading next years 4th), and works a deal on day three trading a 5th or 6th (or both) to get that 4th pick back the following year.

who would you trade up to get in 2nd?

Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:

Originally posted by SnakePlissken:
Gut feeling tells me we're gonna trade up in the second to get a WR. -Baalke usually trades up with our 4th pick to do this (in either the first or second round), then gets the 4th pick back on the second day of the draft (trading next years 4th), and works a deal on day three trading a 5th or 6th (or both) to get that 4th pick back the following year.

who would you trade up to get in 2nd?

Depends who's there, but IF we go receiver in the 2nd, then Alfonzo Dennard, Andre Branch, Vinny Curry or Chase Minnifield is who I'd trade up for.

Jefferey very well may fall as i have projected.If he fell to the mid second, he would have to be worth a look at trading up for.

WTF do those numbers mean on the poll?

Originally posted by Ether:
WTF do those numbers mean on the poll?

This is from the original post: Following the player's name is his height, projected round (c/o CBS) and where Niners would select him (in parantheses).