Were at 30, and Stephen Hill and Fleener are on the board

Originally posted by jreff22:
And remember Crabs is running out of time on his contract as well...and he will not be back, that I can say with certainty.

No, you can't.

Originally posted by jreff22:
agree but that is what this thread is generally about

#1 WR vs #2 TE

That's if you see Hill as a #1 receiver.

Not everybody does. When we selected Crabtree with the 10th pick we were kind of hoping that he would be a #1 receiver too.

Originally posted by tjd808185:

Originally posted by jreff22:
agree but that is what this thread is generally about

#1 WR vs #2 TE

That's if you see Hill as a #1 receiver.

Not everybody does. When we selected Crabtree with the 10th pick we were kind of hoping that he would be a #1 receiver too.

with his college numbers and awards he really should be

Originally posted by JimmyMcnulty:

Originally posted by jreff22:
And remember Crabs is running out of time on his contract as well...and he will not be back, that I can say with certainty.

No, you can't.

We will not pay him what he will want, he will not offer a team discount, and he has been a lack luster player during his tenure. I wouldn't pay him any more money then he is making now and considering Morgan is making more then he is, he will look to cash in big. Would you pay him 6-10 million per year for what he is doing...I sure wouldn't.

Originally posted by jreff22:
with his college numbers and awards he really should be

lol, really? Who cares what he did in college, he isn't living up to his first round draft pick in the NFL.

College production doesn't always translate to the NFL.

Originally posted by Alkasquawlik:
lol, really? Who cares what he did in college, he isn't living up to his first round draft pick in the NFL.

College production doesn't always translate to the NFL.

Especially with WR's. That triple option really doesn't use WR's much.

Originally posted by jreff22:
We will not pay him what he will want, he will not offer a team discount, and he has been a lack luster player during his tenure. I wouldn't pay him any more money then he is making now and considering Morgan is making more then he is, he will look to cash in big. Would you pay him 6-10 million per year for what he is doing...I sure wouldn't.

You are the biggest dips**t on this forum.

Josh Morgan 5 years 12 mil
Michael Crabtree 6 years 30 mil with incentives that could make it 5 years 40 mil.

Originally posted by Alkasquawlik:

Originally posted by jreff22:
with his college numbers and awards he really should be

lol, really? Who cares what he did in college, he isn't living up to his first round draft pick in the NFL.

College production doesn't always translate to the NFL.

1. Teams draft players based on what they do in college, or else how could perspective draftees be gauged on how they might play in the NFL.

2. This is why many like myself would love to see his butt packaged for picks. Going into his 4th year and we are still waiting.......... I for one am done giving Crabs excuses.

3. True, but that fear isn't used as a metric by which teams draft players. If it were no team would want to draft no earlier than round 3.

The fact is that players are drafted largely because what they did on the field. Other things are strongly considered in conjunction, e.g. the combine and pro days when on-field production don't tell the whole story (Hill).

Originally posted by Engleburger:

Originally posted by Alkasquawlik:
lol, really? Who cares what he did in college, he isn't living up to his first round draft pick in the NFL.

College production doesn't always translate to the NFL.

Especially with WR's. That triple option really doesn't use WR's much.

Originally posted by jreff22:
We will not pay him what he will want, he will not offer a team discount, and he has been a lack luster player during his tenure. I wouldn't pay him any more money then he is making now and considering Morgan is making more then he is, he will look to cash in big. Would you pay him 6-10 million per year for what he is doing...I sure wouldn't.

You are the biggest dips**t on this forum.

Josh Morgan 5 years 12 mil
Michael Crabtree 6 years 30 mil with incentives that could make it 5 years 40 mil.

And he hasn't played nowhere near that.

Originally posted by jreff22:

Originally posted by tjd808185:

Originally posted by jreff22:
agree but that is what this thread is generally about

#1 WR vs #2 TE

That's if you see Hill as a #1 receiver.

Not everybody does. When we selected Crabtree with the 10th pick we were kind of hoping that he would be a #1 receiver too.

with his college numbers and awards he really should be

That exactly proves his point. Crabtree was the HANDS DOWN best WR in the draft class (well, nearly, stupid Raiders ), and a sure thing #1, but it didn't turn out that way. How the hell is the number 3-6 WR off of the board at #30 a greater certainty? Wanting a situation to turn out a certain way doesn't make it so.

9erlifer: watch the games, dude. We've been over this. We WERE in 2 TE (or more) sets for more than half of the offensive plays. You might not like it, but the numbers hold true on this. That is not a fluke, as that has been Harbaugh's offensive tendency in Stanford, too. The 2nd TE plays more snaps than the 3rd WR. If you think a WR like Hill (tons of talent, but raw) will displace Moss and/or Crabtree for starting snaps in his first season, I think you are taking a greater leap than assuming that Fleener will displace Walker.

Originally posted by WRATHman44:
That exactly proves his point. Crabtree was the HANDS DOWN best WR in the draft class (well, nearly, stupid Raiders ), and a sure thing #1, but it didn't turn out that way. How the hell is the number 3-6 WR off of the board at #30 a greater certainty? Wanting a situation to turn out a certain way doesn't make it so.

9erlifer: watch the games, dude. We've been over this. We WERE in 2 TE (or more) sets for more than half of the offensive plays. You might not like it, but the numbers hold true on this. That is not a fluke, as that has been Harbaugh's offensive tendency in Stanford, too. The 2nd TE plays more snaps than the 3rd WR. If you think a WR like Hill (tons of talent, but raw) will displace Moss and/or Crabtree for starting snaps in his first season, I think you are taking a greater leap than assuming that Fleener will displace Walker.

I think you summed it up perfectly right there. Tight ends are becoming more prominent and you can make a legitimate argument that your 2nd tight end is more important than your 3rd receiver and in New England's case Hernandez is more important than their 2nd receiver.

It's not a stretch to say that Crabtree, Davis, and Fleener can result into a much improved offense.

Originally posted by jreff22:

Originally posted by WRATHman44:

Originally posted by jreff22:
I for one do not want any DL this year because they wont see the field. If we go OL it would be at OG/C and that kid could walk into the starting job. I fully believe that if we draft a WR he would have the potential to be the #1. Everybody knows Crabs is not that guy, and Moss is on a 1 year deal...if we take a WR its because we have a glaring whole that needs filling.

By your definition of #1, Crab IS that guy. He had the most receiving yards, so he is the #1 receiver. Is he a guy who consistently gains separation from #1 CBs and defeats double teams? No, he hasn't shown that, and there is no guarantee that Hill would do that either, especially in his rookie year. Your argument opposes your argument.

How does my argument that Vernon is a locked in starter and Crabs is holding down a spot waiting for it to be taken oppose any argument? Crabs does not act or play like a #1. A team can have 5 scrubs and 1 will be the leader, should that team not look for a replacement because thy have a guy that leads in stats...that is stupid. He had 0 competition and received the benefit of that outcome. I am fully aware that any rookie might not "do it" but I really think the right kid will...is that Hill, maybe maybe not.

Look at what you are writing. You say that Crabtree is not a #1, then you state that a rookie could be the #1. In an earlier post you implicitly define the #1 WR as the guy with the most talent and dominant stats on his team. As of the end of the 2011 season, that was Crab for us. Taking a WR in the 1st round doesn't make them good. Ask Miami about Ted Ginn. If Crab is as bad as you say, a 2nd round pick would still be an upgrade. There is NO WAY that anyone we pick at 30 will be a higher-rated prospect than Crabtree was coming out. Drafting a can't miss number one would certainly trump a sure thing #2 TE, but there are no sure thing WRs available after Blackmon, and I still question whether his height/speed combo will allow even him to take over games, like a true #1 should. With a team that most commonly lines up with two TEs, and whose next most common formation is 2 WR, 1 TE, 1 FB, it seems unlikely that the #3 WR (the most likely slot a drafted WR would play at) would make more of an impact than a #2 TE.

I said it before, I would be happy to get Hill or Wright, but I don't think either of them would make a greater immediate impact than Fleener. Incidenally, a C/G would not be walking into a starting role at RG, as the Matts have reported numerous times that the 49ers are very high on Kilgore, and would like for him to win the job in TC.

Im Not Sure if ether of these guy would be a starter year one. plus both could be drafted before pick 30. Yes NE had 2 TE and one of the best QB throwing to them. also Gronk played almost every down while Hernandez came in and out of game Hernandez played more off the line like the 49er used Walker. I think Fleener is more like Gronk not Hernandez so are they going to move Vernon off the line more. I could see that working. There is alot more to this then Fleener is the #1 TE and Hill is the # 3 or 4 WR. first off some do not think Fleener is the #1 TE. Moss is not a sure thing at WR. but the biggest thing about this draft is what happen in the last one. I never saw Aldon Smith being pick and look how he turn out. He was not a starter year one but should be a starter yr 2. Glad im not a GM. I could see the 49er picking one of these guy or going somewhere els all together. picking the DB or a OL. The OL line pick would be hard to take having 4 first round OL wow. Im not going to be upset if they draft Fleener or hill. If they go somewhere els in the draft thats ok too. Im just excited about next year.

Originally posted by tjd808185:

Originally posted by WRATHman44:
That exactly proves his point. Crabtree was the HANDS DOWN best WR in the draft class (well, nearly, stupid Raiders ), and a sure thing #1, but it didn't turn out that way. How the hell is the number 3-6 WR off of the board at #30 a greater certainty? Wanting a situation to turn out a certain way doesn't make it so.

9erlifer: watch the games, dude. We've been over this. We WERE in 2 TE (or more) sets for more than half of the offensive plays. You might not like it, but the numbers hold true on this. That is not a fluke, as that has been Harbaugh's offensive tendency in Stanford, too. The 2nd TE plays more snaps than the 3rd WR. If you think a WR like Hill (tons of talent, but raw) will displace Moss and/or Crabtree for starting snaps in his first season, I think you are taking a greater leap than assuming that Fleener will displace Walker.

I think you summed it up perfectly right there. Tight ends are becoming more prominent and you can make a legitimate argument that your 2nd tight end is more important than your 3rd receiver and in New England's case Hernandez is more important than their 2nd receiver.

It's not a stretch to say that Crabtree, Davis, and Fleener can result into a much improved offense.

One of the reasons to pick Fleener is that he would be the best play maker at that spot regardless of position (if he is). Another reason is that the new rules against DB contact make tall TEs and WRs much more valuable than previous years. This change, was it last year?, along with Harbaugh's love for playing three TEs would increase any TEs value to the team. Still a lot of jockeying to do before the draft, so we have to see what settles...like the QB posiiton. Painful sweet agony of fandom!

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:
1. Teams draft players based on what they do in college, or else how could perspective draftees be gauged on how they might play in the NFL.

2. This is why many like myself would love to see his butt packaged for picks. Going into his 4th year and we are still waiting.......... I for one am done giving Crabs excuses.

3. True, but that fear isn't used as a metric by which teams draft players. If it were no team would want to draft no earlier than round 3.

The fact is that players are drafted largely because what they did on the field. Other things are strongly considered in conjunction, e.g. the combine and pro days when on-field production don't tell the whole story (Hill).

Agreed, my point is that college production numbers doesn't always mean they will produce in the NFL.

Originally posted by Engleburger:

Originally posted by Alkasquawlik:
lol, really? Who cares what he did in college, he isn't living up to his first round draft pick in the NFL.

College production doesn't always translate to the NFL.

Especially with WR's. That triple option really doesn't use WR's much.

Originally posted by jreff22:
We will not pay him what he will want, he will not offer a team discount, and he has been a lack luster player during his tenure. I wouldn't pay him any more money then he is making now and considering Morgan is making more then he is, he will look to cash in big. Would you pay him 6-10 million per year for what he is doing...I sure wouldn't.

You are the biggest dips**t on this forum.

Josh Morgan 5 years 12 mil
Michael Crabtree 6 years 30 mil with incentives that could make it 5 years 40 mil.

Have fun getting banned..

and by the way
Michael Crabtree
2012: $3.5 million

Josh Morgan
2012: $6.0 million